Shamateurism and Reggie Bush

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Shamateurism and Reggie Bush

Post by Oskeet on Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:10 pm

Why is Reggie Bush giving his Heisman Trophy back? He did nothing wrong. He didn't use performing enhancing drugs. His play wasn't altered because by taking 100k from an agent. I get that the rules state that in order to be up for the award you have to be eligible to play in the first place. Nevertheless, the award is given to the Most Outstanding Player. Not the MVP, not the Best Player on the Best Team. The Heisman is given out to the Most Outstanding Player of the year.

The hypocrisy by the NCAA and USC is amazing to me. While Bush was in school he made both the NCAA and USC tons of money. And now because he took a mere payment of 100k they want to wag their finger at him and act like they're above such behavior. How about USC give back all the money they made from his jersey sales. How about the NCAA give back all the money they made off of him and his teammates.

It seems to me that these institutions have forgotten their place in this sham of a system. Reggie Bush is valuable. He is the most valuable one in this equation involving the athletes, schools, and NCAA. Without athletes like Bush, the NCAA and USC don't make as much money as they do. Athletes in general have a discernible value and skill set that most other students/employees don't have. By being able to run a sub par 4.3 40 and make the cuts he can, and have the hands he does out of the back field, Bush is infinitely more valuable to them (NCAA/USC) than they are to him. Schools recognize this and give athletes a full ride. NCAA knows this but wags their finger when he takes 100k.

Athletes are not the average students. They have the ability to make your school/product more valuable instantly. USC could have the next Bill Gates in their ITS program, but he is of no value to them until he fulfills his potential. It is not until that ITS student graduates and becomes the next Bill Gates that he becomes valuable to that school. What follows is that that student becomes a booster, and oddly enough gives back to the athletics program. Athletes are so valuable that when they become professionals, not only do they not work for a given employer, they're partners of the company. The NFL is a partnership with the players. Goodell isn't they're boss, as much as he likes to think he is.

A surgeon isn't in the same tax bracket as a carpenter or steelworker. God bless the carpenters and steelworkers, but they're replaceable. A surgeon has a given set of skill set that makes him more valuable hence he gets paid more. Same goes for athletes. Bush should have just stuck the middle finger out at the NCAA and USC for being hypocrites.

Oskeet

Posts : 3
Join date : 2010-01-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Shamateurism and Reggie Bush

Post by Deacon420 on Fri Sep 17, 2010 6:15 pm

"Why is Reggie Bush giving his Heisman Trophy back? He did nothing wrong. He didn't use performing enhancing drugs. His play wasn't altered because by taking 100k from an agent. I get that the rules state that in order to be up for the award you have to be eligible to play in the first place. Nevertheless, the award is given to the Most Outstanding Player. Not the MVP, not the Best Player on the Best Team. The Heisman is given out to the Most Outstanding Player of the year.

Well, you answered your own question. He violated the rules that were in place. You can argue that a rule should be changed, but until that rule is changed then everyone has to abide by what is in place. I don't necessarily know if he should have been required to give it back. But it is not the NcAA that would judge that. It would be the Downtown Athletic club, at least that is my understanding. It is their award, so they should be the one to determine the status of that award. If anything, maybe John Saunders said it best, they should have held a a vote to determine that, one is which he made it clear he would have voted to allow Bush to keep the trophy. I agree it is for the play on the field, however if it were known what was done at the time, he would not have been on the field.

The hypocrisy by the NCAA and USC is amazing to me. While Bush was in school he made both the NCAA and USC tons of money. And now because he took a mere payment of 100k they want to wag their finger at him and act like they're above such behavior. How about USC give back all the money they made from his jersey sales. How about the NCAA give back all the money
they made off of him and his teammates.


I don't understand the hypocrisy argument. You have to understand the purpose of an entity, and view whether it is serving its purpose effectively. The NCAA is a semi- voluntary association of 1,281 institutions, conferences, organizations and individuals that organizes the athletic programs of many colleges and universities. It is the over-site committee, that is necessary for anything of this nature. Any group has a ruling body. And that body has to enforce its rules as they have dictated
them. Of course, there should be an ability to voice displeasure, and change rules should they not be effective. But one of the primary purposes of the NCAA is to ensure safety of a student athlete along with ensuring there are no unfair advantages gained, aside from the the normal benefits of a scholarship.

It seems to me that these institutions have forgotten their place in this sham of a system. Reggie Bush is valuable. He is the most valuable one in this equation involving the athletes, schools, and NCAA. Without athletes like Bush, the NCAA and USC don't make as much money as they do. Athletes in general have a discernible value and skill set that most other students/employees don't have. By being able to run a sub par 4.3 40 and make the cuts he an, and have the hands he does out of the back field, Bush is infinitely more valuable to
them (NCAA/USC) than they are to him. Schools recognize this and give athletes a full ride. NCAA knows this but wags their finger when he takes 100k.


You interpretation of how valuable an individual is to his school, is opinion that is
subject to scrutiny. For starters, you have to establish what makes an individual valuable. Sure he may be a star, but is not having him going to result in not having as many seats in the stands for a game? Winning, and ticket sales are not always synonymous! A perennial losing school may have poor sales and benefit from a boost in winning percentage. But a school with a strong fan base, will buy tickets to a game regardless. Look at Tennessee, or Alabama when they were down. Even Tx in the 90's. Answer this question, did you know what
USC was before Reggie Bush? What about the Longhorns, did you know who they were before Vince Young. Those individuals are not more valuable than that institiution! They may be more valuable to that particular team they are on, but that should not be equated to adding value to a school overall. Those schools were going to sell out their venues regardless.


Regarding a persons implied value... For starters you need to realize that a student athlete receiving a scholarship is being paid. Saying it again for effect, he is being paid! He is benefiting from value of his scholarship, that includes tuition, room and board, books, and other education related fees. How much do you pay for semester? Is that your average cost or is this semester higher or lower? Multiple that by the amount of semesters and athlete would be in school. that is how much they are being paid!

I am not ignorant of the fact that football teams make large amounts of money. However the athletic programs are tied together. It is not football and everyone else. So, profits from the football program are going to be spread amongst the other sports for the school. This is a school managing its assets to best provide the best overall experience for the Student. This is one of their purposes! Provide an education, and the best experience possible to enable them to have a full life. Very few athletes go on to a professional career, so it should not be a minor league system for pro sports!

As I said earlier, this is something that would be needed to be researched thoroughly to have a definitive answer. All of what was said here is opinion with not substantial numbers supporting either argument. But I will always argue that there is larger money in Universities besides athletics. We only see the athletic side of things because we (as sports fans) focus primarily on sports and it is a sexier subject than say a grant of an anthropolical study...

Deacon420

Posts : 11
Join date : 2010-02-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum