Probably going to look at recent NCAA “decisions”, like allowing Cam Newton and the Ohio State players to play. It sure seems to me–someone who pays pretty close attention to sports–that the NCAA decides on the outcome they want, then looks for some way to justify the outcome.
Cam Newton: “There’s no rule against a parent shopping his son to multiple teams for money.” Ok, yeah, the rule doesn’t specifically ban a “parent” but it does ban a 3rd party.
Ohio State: “The team failed to educate the players that what they were doing was against the rules.” But in a press conference THE NEXT DAY Pryor said he knew beforehand that what he’d been doing was a violation of the rules, and the other players have said the same. Oh, and the rule they broke? Selling used equipment (jerseys and such) which was their personal property. Yet those same jerseys–not worn by a player–are sold on Ohio State’s web site and in their gift shop, with the money going to the school. Oh, well then it’s OK.
The Ohio State theory was that those items were still university property. If so, why were the athletes not charged if they did not turn them back in, so that they were then their personal items, and they were merely regaining what they paid for them?
As for the family shopping the athlete, tell that to SoCal.
Like NA$CAR, make it up as you go along for maximum benefit to the sport.
autumnfire1957 over 13 years ago
Happy 16th Day Of Xmas
Charles Evans Premium Member over 13 years ago
What now?
Itsjustb over 13 years ago
Probably going to look at recent NCAA “decisions”, like allowing Cam Newton and the Ohio State players to play. It sure seems to me–someone who pays pretty close attention to sports–that the NCAA decides on the outcome they want, then looks for some way to justify the outcome.
Cam Newton: “There’s no rule against a parent shopping his son to multiple teams for money.” Ok, yeah, the rule doesn’t specifically ban a “parent” but it does ban a 3rd party.
Ohio State: “The team failed to educate the players that what they were doing was against the rules.” But in a press conference THE NEXT DAY Pryor said he knew beforehand that what he’d been doing was a violation of the rules, and the other players have said the same. Oh, and the rule they broke? Selling used equipment (jerseys and such) which was their personal property. Yet those same jerseys–not worn by a player–are sold on Ohio State’s web site and in their gift shop, with the money going to the school. Oh, well then it’s OK.
gofinsc over 13 years ago
The Ohio State theory was that those items were still university property. If so, why were the athletes not charged if they did not turn them back in, so that they were then their personal items, and they were merely regaining what they paid for them?
As for the family shopping the athlete, tell that to SoCal.
Like NA$CAR, make it up as you go along for maximum benefit to the sport.