SHOCKADELICA1 said:

SCNDLS said:

Although, I'm laughing at his dumb ass for getting caught, let me be perfectly CLURRRRR:

Reggie is one foine muthafucka and I'd fuck him down to a low gravy. And really, isn't that THE most important thing we should all take from this thread???

[img:$uid]http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii143/Sexy_Italian_Gurl/reggie-bush.jpg[/img:$uid]

[img:$uid]http://www.blackfitnessblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/reggieb4.jpg[/img:$uid]

yes LAWD....

I guess the boys didn't appreciate my last post cuz it's been ever since

yep! We musta ran 'em off!!

Dauphin said:

namepeace said:

Cap.

Come on, now.

He didn't earn anything from Floyd Flake.

He was given this stuff on the side in exchange for promised signings and endorsements once he got to the pros.

And he took it in violation of NCAA rules.

Surely you're not saying his (now meaningless) exploits on the field justify him breaking the rules off the field.

You see, NOW we are getting somewhere!!!!

The Heisman Trophy is simply a PROMOTIONAL TOOL.

USC gets promotion and $$$ because they have a program that creates/features Heismen candidates. The NFL gets promotion and $$$ because they have a team/draft of Heismen winners/candidates.

What does a nice car or a swag house have to do with averaging 5 yards a carry, or 2 sacks a game?

Eligibility has fuck all to do with guys who Juice. It's a completely separate issue. If Reggie didn't play at USC, he might have played at LSU or Florida or Texas or Ohio State or some other monster school because HE WAS GOOD WITH THE ROCK.

By complaining that he made money when other people didn't, well... now you have to ask about the people who make money OFF college players and nobody says a thing.

We're talking the ethical and moral issues with what a player who knew the rules did to break them. No one doubts Bush's talent but no one can reasonably hold him accountable had he juiced, but look the other way when he took money under the table (or dubs, if you'd prefer).

When you break a rule in such an egregious way that could and should keep you off the field, it has EVERYTHING to do with your skills on the field because it disqualifies you. Lord knows there are tons of potential hall of famers on the streets or working at UPS because they did much less than what Bush did.

As for USC and the NCAA, they have their own issues, which I discussed at the outset, but their compromised positions do not constitute a pass for a rulebreaker. Even though the NCAA is not going far enough in punishing USC, hundreds of players will be impacted by what Bush did, USC will lose up up to 8 figures in lost bowl revenue, and also watch dozens of would-be Trojans walk. They'll hurt far more than Bush will. Giving back the Heisman -- by your own admission, a symbolic award -- won't inflict much direct pain.

The NCAA's issues go beyond one case. Structurally, they're in serious need of reform.

phunkdaddy said:

Like i said Southern Cal was the mecca of college football during Carroll's tenure. I'm not

downplaying what Bush did but if the school is going to take a mural of him down at the school

and play holier than thou then they should clean their shit up all the way around and the NCAA needs to set some consistencies into what is legal and what is not because they also consider minor shit that don't make any sense a rules violation. The bottom line no matter what Bush was the best player in college football that year period and for the record i don't like Southern Cal. He was just as much Mr. College Football those years as Tim Tebow was when he played at Florida.

But as I said in response to Dauphin, what USC and the NCAA need to do are completely different from what Bush did himself.

USC (which was forced to take down the Bush mural per NCAA order, incidentally) is getting a pretty stiff punishment given their high profile. But if you're going to say Bush was ineligible then it stands to reason that their wins and nat-chips need to be wiped out too. But the system will allow them to retain those things. Wittingly or unwittingly, USC's lineup those years was illegal and they shouldn't retain any of the benefits from that.

The NCAA does have some issues with consistency. They make untold millions off of sales of jerseys whose numbers were made famous by kids who can't afford to buy them, but if a kid accepts a plane ride or says hello to someone with an NFL agency license then their eligibility and prospects to make millions are trampled. See Dez Bryant. Georgia and the NCAA makes tons of money off A.J. Greene jerseys, but A.J. Greene sells a game-worn jersey for a grand to an agent and he loses half a season and maybe draft positioning (i.e., millions). It's not fair.

What Bush did, however, was so clearly and massively illegal under NCAA rules. He took so many assets behind the team's back (or under the team's nose) that the NCAA had to punish his school, and do what they could to wipe him out of the history books.

Yes, Bush provided good memories. But he never should have been allowed to playin, and he knew it. But he took the field anyway and his team ignored the warning signs.

So the scrutiny on Bush doesn't relieve the NCAA or USC of responsibility, and the problems with USC and the NCAA doesn't give Bush a pass.

namepeace said:

What Bush did, however, was so clearly and massively illegal under NCAA rules. He took so many assets behind the team's back (or under the team's nose) that the NCAA had to punish his school, and do what they could to wipe him out of the history books.

I agree with a great deal of what you've said in your last two posts, but this is really all that matters. He brought this on himself.

I had to google him as I had no idea who this dude was.

He's hot. That's about all I can contribute to the conversation.

Cerebus said:

namepeace said:

What Bush did, however, was so clearly and massively illegal under NCAA rules. He took so many assets behind the team's back (or under the team's nose) that the NCAA had to punish his school, and do what they could to wipe him out of the history books.

I agree with a great deal of what you've said in your last two posts, but this is really all that matters. He brought this on himself.

Gotcha.

What's crazy about this whole situation is the allegations against

Bush started in 2004 or 2005 while he was at USC. So it took the

NCAA and USC 5 years to do something about it. Yeah right. The NCAA and USC

milked the cash cow as long as they could.

phunkdaddy said:

What's crazy about this whole situation is the allegations against

Bush started in 2004 or 2005 while he was at USC. So it took the

NCAA and USC 5 years to do something about it. Yeah right. The NCAA and USC

milked the cash cow as long as they could.

The NCAA has no subpoena power. So it had to rely on the Floyd Flake proceedings in federal court to gather evidence. Bush stonewalled discovery in that case for years. That helped USC get by for a long time!

Cerebus said:

namepeace said:

What Bush did, however, was so clearly and massively illegal under NCAA rules. He took so many assets behind the team's back (or under the team's nose) that the NCAA had to punish his school, and do what they could to wipe him out of the history books.

I agree with a great deal of what you've said in your last two posts, but this is really all that matters. He brought this on himself.

Same here. namepeace and others do hit the core issues dead on. My major bone of contention is that he got caught WELL AFTER the crime, and the way that the NCAA is dealing with it is to "rewrite history?"

Dauphin said:

Cerebus said:

I agree with a great deal of what you've said in your last two posts, but this is really all that matters. He brought this on himself.

Same here. namepeace and others do hit the core issues dead on. My major bone of contention is that he got caught WELL AFTER the crime, and the way that the NCAA is dealing with it is to "rewrite history?"

Thanks, just found a longer way to say what had been said well before!

If Bush had just given his doggone deposition years ago, the case could have been resolved much sooner. But you put your finger on it. So much time passes that the result reached in 2010 is going to be different from the one that could have been reached in 06 or 07.

Reggie Bush -- I'm Forfeiting My Heisman Trophy

45 minutes ago by TMZ Staff

Reggie Bush is gonna have a lot of free space on his mantle -- because the disgraced former USC running back says he's decided to "forfeit" his 2005 Heisman Trophy.



Bush just released a statement through the New Orleans Saints in which he explains, "Each individual carries the legacy of the award and each one is entrusted with its good name ... It is for these reasons that I have made the difficult decision to forfeit my title as Heisman winner of 2005."

Bush added, "The persistent media speculation regarding allegations dating back to my years at USC has been both painful and distracting. In no way should the storm around these allegations reflect in any way on the dignity of this award, nor on any other institutions or individuals. Nor should it distract from outstanding performances and hard-earned achievements either in the past, present or future."

FYI -- Bush is the first player to ever return the award.

Reggie's decision comes in the wake of a report that the Heisman committee was going to strip him of the title in the near future.

Story developing ...

http://www.tmz.com/2010/09/14/reggie-bush-im-returning-my-heisman-trophy-usc-football-award/

Not surprisingly, nowhere in his statement does he take responsibility for his actions.

NEW YORK (AP)—Reggie Bush says he is forfeiting his Heisman Trophy.

The New Orleans Saints’ running back released a statement Tuesday saying he would give back the award that he won in 2005 while he was at Southern California.

It’s the first time college football’s top award was returned by a recipient.

“While this decision is heart-breaking, I find solace in knowing that the award was made possible by the support and love of so many,” Bush said. “Those are gifts that can never be taken away.”

USC was hit with heavy sanctions by the NCAA this summer after it determined Bush had received improper benefits. The NCAA ruled that Bush was ineligible for the 2005 season, which opened the possibility that the Heisman Trophy Trust would take back the award.

One of the few guidelines given to Heisman Trophy voters is that a player must be in compliance with NCAA rules to be eligible for the trophy.

The eight-member Heisman Trophy Trust, based in New York, had said it would have to consider what to do about Bush, who won in a landslide vote over Texas quarterback Vince Young.

There was no immediate word from the Heisman Trust if the award would be vacated or given to Young.