Reggie Bush and his family received over 100k in illicit aid from Agents

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Feldenak

Lifer
Jan 31, 2003
14,090
2
81
Absolutely nothing will come from this. USC is too much of a sacred cow for the NCAA right now.
 

chambersc

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2005
6,247
0
0
Originally posted by: Pastore
What does his performance on the field, and his resulting Heisman, have to do with receiving illicit aid?

Absolutely nothing but the argument will be made that he shouldn't have been elligible to play in the upcoming games/season and/or he was willfully disregarding the rules of the NCAA and must be punished justly. $100,000 punishment would need to come from his ability and not his pocket -- see where the argument could go?
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Beat me to it, I smell a Heisman removal here.. looks like the player who really deserved it for last year will actually get it!
I'm going on record right now that USC will not lose their AP or BCS/AP championships and Reggie Bush will not have his Heisman trophy taken from him.
I'm going on the record right now that USC will have at least 1 championship yanked. As far as the Heisman, Reggie will keep it.

Someone's going to be right :)
It sounds like this all went down in the 2005 season. Since USC didn't win back in January, can the NCAA take away the Championship from a previous year?
Can the NCAA take away Ohio State's victory against Michigan in 2004 after it was found that Troy Smith took $500 cash from a booster during the season?
Did it happen in the before or after the game?
 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
31
91
Anyone who thinks a program like USC can rise from the dead so quickly without this type of thing happening is delusional. The fact is that this happens at pretty much any successful school in the country.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Beat me to it, I smell a Heisman removal here.. looks like the player who really deserved it for last year will actually get it!

I'm going on record right now that USC will not lose their AP or BCS/AP championships and Reggie Bush will not have his Heisman trophy taken from him.

USC can't lose the AP championship because the NCAA has no control over that. The AP could rescind it but who knows if they would.

The NCAA also can not take the Heisman trophy away from Bush because they do not award it. That whatever club up in NY does.

The BCS is organized by the major conferences so the NCAA could theoretically force them to remove the BCS championship if it can be shown that Bush received illegal benefits when USC won it.
 

doze

Platinum Member
Jul 26, 2005
2,786
0
0
Originally posted by: Pastore
What does his performance on the field, and his resulting Heisman, have to do with receiving illicit aid?

Thank you ... if he was offered money then it was because of his performance on the field

(LSU fan and USC hater by the way but still can't deny that he is a great player)
 

chuckywang

Lifer
Jan 12, 2004
20,133
1
0

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
81
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: mpitts
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Beat me to it, I smell a Heisman removal here.. looks like the player who really deserved it for last year will actually get it!
I'm going on record right now that USC will not lose their AP or BCS/AP championships and Reggie Bush will not have his Heisman trophy taken from him.
I'm going on the record right now that USC will have at least 1 championship yanked. As far as the Heisman, Reggie will keep it.

Someone's going to be right :)
It sounds like this all went down in the 2005 season. Since USC didn't win back in January, can the NCAA take away the Championship from a previous year?
Can the NCAA take away Ohio State's victory against Michigan in 2004 after it was found that Troy Smith took $500 cash from a booster during the season?
Did it happen in the before or after the game?

It happened in April 2004. The game was in November 2004.
 

DayLaPaul

Platinum Member
Apr 6, 2001
2,072
0
76
WTF kind of parent names their kid Michael Michaels? His testimony should be stricken from the record just on principle.
 

herkulease

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2001
3,923
0
0
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: mpitts
It's going to be interesting to see what happens. I wonder how (or if) they will punish USC since it was prospective agents and not boosters or the school itself.

It will be very interesting. But why did Carroll and his staff show such naiveté by allowing agents or people like agents into the locker room or sideline? Who has access should be vetted.

Regardless, if he was ineligible USC should have to forfeit their games.

Its probably because the coaches are part of the larger picture, the NFL.

besides Carroll and other coaches that have been int eh NFL in one way or another.

letting agents access gets them to hype the player up. Hopefully with legit ability, the guy would get drafted high and the coach would have the cancel to recruit more top players coming out of high school.

a better team could get more wins, allows coach to keep is job longer or even let him jump ship to another school for more pay.
 

Gunslinger08

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
13,234
2
81
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: Pastore
What does his performance on the field, and his resulting Heisman, have to do with receiving illicit aid?

Absolutely nothing but the argument will be made that he shouldn't have been elligible to play in the upcoming games/season and/or he was willfully disregarding the rules of the NCAA and must be punished justly. $100,000 punishment would need to come from his ability and not his pocket -- see where the argument could go?

Why does this rule exist? How does it hurt the college or the sport for players to be getting paid?
 

mpitts

Lifer
Jun 9, 2000
14,732
1
81
Originally posted by: joshsquall
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: Pastore
What does his performance on the field, and his resulting Heisman, have to do with receiving illicit aid?

Absolutely nothing but the argument will be made that he shouldn't have been elligible to play in the upcoming games/season and/or he was willfully disregarding the rules of the NCAA and must be punished justly. $100,000 punishment would need to come from his ability and not his pocket -- see where the argument could go?

Why does this rule exist? How does it hurt the college or the sport for players to be getting paid?

The $64,000 (or in this case $100,000) question..
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: joshsquall
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: Pastore
What does his performance on the field, and his resulting Heisman, have to do with receiving illicit aid?

Absolutely nothing but the argument will be made that he shouldn't have been elligible to play in the upcoming games/season and/or he was willfully disregarding the rules of the NCAA and must be punished justly. $100,000 punishment would need to come from his ability and not his pocket -- see where the argument could go?

Why does this rule exist? How does it hurt the college or the sport for players to be getting paid?

Because that's called the NFL, silly.
 

KLin

Lifer
Feb 29, 2000
29,543
156
106
I'm sure he doesn't really care about it. As long as he produces for the Saints, he'll make the money. USC and Pete Carroll will be the losers, but probably just a slap on the wrist kind of penalties I imagine.
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
Originally posted by: Compton
I doubt anything will become of this.

Same. They don't do anything to the past records of anything, they only punish whomever was involved.
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Anyone who thinks a program like USC can rise from the dead so quickly without this type of thing happening is delusional. The fact is that this happens at pretty much any successful school in the country.

And this is exactly why I don't care one bit about the college game. If I'm going to watch professional athletes play a sport, I'm going to watch the ones who admit they do it for money (the ones who play on Sunday) and not the ones pretending they're amateurs or, even worse, 'students' (the ones who play on Saturday). Please - the college game is just such a fraudulent joke. [Speaking, of course, only about the 'big-time' programs which get shown on TV. Lots of smaller schools aren't rife with this sort of rule-breaking, but then, no one cares but alumni of that school anyway.]
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Originally posted by: Compton
I doubt anything will become of this.

Same. They don't do anything to the past records of anything, they only punish whomever was involved.

Anytime a player plays after receiving a benefit like this he is considered ineligible. The NCAA will then strip the school of all victories in games the player participated in after he started receiving the benefit. If the NCAA thinks the school was trying to cover up the player's ineligibility, they'll punish the school as well with scholarship reductions/probation/etc.

This happened to the Michigan basketball program because of the Fab Five and it happened to the Alabama football program for the '93 season because a player signed on a cocktail napkin with an agent in New Orleans after the 93 Sugar Bowl.
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,504
2
81
wow, way to stay objective folks.....

"Anyone who thinks a program like USC can rise from the dead so quickly without this type of thing happening is delusional. The fact is that this happens at pretty much any successful school in the country."

That is an IDIOTIC statement. Do you really think agents pour money at every Joe Schmoe with a helmet on? Bush was a surefire top draft pick, a marketing dream - look at all the commercials he's already in - agents wanted a piece of that, period. It's not like they showered all the USC players with cash.

Mpitts, do you live in Ann Arbor or something? 500 dollars vs. 100k - similar? Troy Smith was still at OSU when that incident happened - but he paid the cash back and was suspended for two games, and his suspension may very well have cost OSU at shot at the title last season since he wasn't ready to go 100% of the Texas game last year. How about worrying about Lloyd Carr's decline, and the lack of Michigan to get any good assistant coaches - or the way they treated Pierre Woods costing them a shot at recruiting any players from Glenville HS, which currently has 7 players on OSU's roster? Two words for you, sir - Fab Five.



 

krunchykrome

Lifer
Dec 28, 2003
13,413
1
0
Originally posted by: Baked
Another blackman under investigation just 'cause he's black.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to try to place the race card, please choose another game

Anandtech moderator

:laugh::roll:
 

BlancoNino

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2005
5,695
0
0
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Originally posted by: Compton
I doubt anything will become of this.

Same. They don't do anything to the past records of anything, they only punish whomever was involved.

Anytime a player plays after receiving a benefit like this he is considered ineligible. The NCAA will then strip the school of all victories in games the player participated in after he started receiving the benefit. If the NCAA thinks the school was trying to cover up the player's ineligibility, they'll punish the school as well with scholarship reductions/probation/etc.

This happened to the Michigan basketball program because of the Fab Five and it happened to the Alabama football program for the '93 season because a player signed on a cocktail napkin with an agent in New Orleans after the 93 Sugar Bowl.

That's not true. The University of Washington had problems like that too a few times in the past 20 years. They either warned or made them bowl ineligible.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Originally posted by: Compton
I doubt anything will become of this.

Same. They don't do anything to the past records of anything, they only punish whomever was involved.

Anytime a player plays after receiving a benefit like this he is considered ineligible. The NCAA will then strip the school of all victories in games the player participated in after he started receiving the benefit. If the NCAA thinks the school was trying to cover up the player's ineligibility, they'll punish the school as well with scholarship reductions/probation/etc.

This happened to the Michigan basketball program because of the Fab Five and it happened to the Alabama football program for the '93 season because a player signed on a cocktail napkin with an agent in New Orleans after the 93 Sugar Bowl.

That's not true. The University of Washington had problems like that too a few times in the past 20 years. They either warned or made them bowl ineligible.

Which part is not true?
 

Jawo

Diamond Member
Jun 15, 2005
4,125
0
0
The USC coaches HAD to know at least SOMETHING was going on with RB. I suspect that at the very least USC will be made bowl ineligable for this season and possible reduction of scholoships for the next season(s). I doubt they will erase past wins.

RB might have to pay the money back, but he's rich now so who cares. But seeing him stripped of his Heisman might be nice.....

mpitts: Darn right Ohio State sucks!!!