Is the NCAA just gonna roll over and let this obvious travesty of the rules slide by unpunished? Haven't heard a thing in days except his atty saying he's innocent which is what he's being paid to say. We just need a couple of games banned to kill any Heisman repeat BS from possibly taking place.

Tiernan;1487828 wrote: . We just need a couple of games banned to kill any Heisman repeat BS from possibly taking place.

I don't think this will even be necessary-any chance of him repeating went away months ago.

vball10set;1487832 wrote:I don't think this will even be necessary-any chance of him repeating went away months ago.

Do people really believe this?

Rotinaj;1487835 wrote:Do people really believe this?

Yup...imo the voters are nervous enough now, and the last thing they want is Reggie Bush 2.0

I guess I could see that happening. I still think if they find nothing on him and he has another amazing season he'll win.

Many of the voters won't want to make this guy the person who joins Archie on the top step. Proof or not, there's way too much smoke to realistically believe there's no fire.

queencitybuckeye;1487845 wrote:Many of the voters won't want to make this guy the person who joins Archie on the top step. Proof or not, there's way too much smoke to realistically believe there's no fire.

How could you possibly know this? They had no problems giving Cam the Heisman.

Rotinaj;1487847 wrote:How could you possibly know this? They had no problems giving Cam the Heisman.

One. Had he been going for his second, the voting would likely have been quite different.

I don't think most people aside from OSU fans care about someone winning 2.

Rotinaj;1487853 wrote:I don't think most people aside from OSU fans care about someone winning 2.

I think many of the voters care very much.

Everyone else see the video of the Texas A&M Chancellor all but admitting guilt but just trying to say the rule was bad?

Looks like he's been taking some of Gee's classes regarding sticking your foot in your mouth.

queencitybuckeye;1487854 wrote:I think many of the voters care very much.

What makes you think this? You do realize that people like Dan Lebatards dad have a Heisman vote right?

Rotinaj;1487856 wrote:What makes you think this? You do realize that people like Dan Lebatards dad have a Heisman vote right?

How would that disprove my opinion?

Fly4Fun;1487855 wrote:Everyone else see the video of the Texas A&M Chancellor all but admitting guilt but just trying to say the rule was bad?

Looks like he's been taking some of Gee's classes regarding sticking your foot in your mouth.

He's right of course on the latter, but people need to keep the discussion separate as to what the rules should be vs. did someone break the rules as they currently exist.

queencitybuckeye;1487858 wrote:How would that disprove my opinion?

Im just trying to figure out why you think most people care so much about giving someone a 2nd Heisman, especially people like the guy I listed. I do think SOME would feel that way, but most? No way.

Rotinaj;1487862 wrote:Im just trying to figure out why you think most people care so much about giving someone a 2nd Heisman, especially people like the guy I listed.

Don't care about "most people", I'm talking about the voters, who are sportswriters, who as a group tend to be cynical and negative.

You don't think heisman voters, a lot of them being heisman winners themselves, care about someone winning it twice? Especially if that someone is a scumbag lying POS rich boy douche?

There are 928 voters. A lot of them are NOT Heisman winners.

queencitybuckeye;1487863 wrote:Don't care about "most people", I'm talking about the voters, who are sportswriters, who as a group tend to be cynical and negative.

You have absolutely nothing to base your argument on. Its all you just guessing.

Rotinaj;1487872 wrote:You have absolutely nothing to base your argument on. Its all you just guessing.

As is your apparent opinion to the contrary. You're absolutely right. As for myself, this punk could break every record in the books and cure cancer, and he would not receive my vote, and in my opinion, a significant number of the voters would feel exactly the same.

queencitybuckeye;1487879 wrote:As is your apparent opinion to the contrary. You're absolutely right. As for myself, this punk could break every record in the books and cure cancer, and he would not receive my vote, and in my opinion, a significant number of the voters would feel exactly the same.

lol, good thing you don't have a vote then.

Rotinaj;1487882 wrote:lol, good thing you don't have a vote then.

Just as well, the idea of what it's supposed to be is a fraud (best player vs. best QB/RB). They at least arguably got the school right last year.

queencitybuckeye;1487860 wrote:He's right of course on the latter, but people need to keep the discussion separate as to what the rules should be vs. did someone break the rules as they currently exist.

Right in what way specifically? Right that players should be able to sell their autographs?

If players are still amateur but not paid (besides scholarship) all the boosters of big schools that have money to throw away on sports will just have a bidding war on athletes under the guise of paying autographs.

If players become a true professional athlete and schools are allowed to pay, are there restrictions? Is it like the professional sports where there is a cap? How is that cap designed calculated as there are gross discrepancies in cash flow of NCAA FBS schools. There are very few schools that make enough $$ to keep their athletic department in the black.

Is there some kind of pay system which sets rates for certain positions, or is there a minimum and maximum amount regardless of position? I can guarantee you that while there might be a few kids on a team who do draw a lot of attention and have a shot at the NFL and are the cash cows, that's not the majority of NCAA athletes.

The real problems come in when you begin to think about other non football or men's basketball athletes. Those sports generally derive very little revenue and are supported by football/basketball. Do those kids get paid? Or do only the sports get paid that earn money? If money is then being funneled to only those players of football and basketball the scholarships (as little as they are sometimes) for other sports will certainly go away as most schools wouldn't be able to afford that.

Also, Once you're paying the athlete any chance of them being "students" is gone as the primary focus is on the play as they are being rewarded for that with cash instead of being rewarded with their play for a college education (you know the student aspect of student-athlete). Or does pay somehow also factor in GPA and graduation track to keep it student oriented as well? Or do the schools drop any idea of them being students and have these players associated with the University by name only as a different football and basketball league apart from the NFL and NBA.

How well do you think a second rate professional football league will be supported by the American public? A lot of what people say they love about college football is about tradition, loyalty (you pick a school and 90%+ of people stay their for their "career" as opposed to free agency, trades, etc.), playing for the love of the game instead of the all mighty $$ which would possibly be lost in a professional version of college football. And to note, other professional football leagues haven't worked in any other attempts previously.

There are a lot of questions ranging from viability of another professional league to what to do with the other non-revenue sports that would have to be answered or at least thought about before you can all of the sudden start chipping away at the current system.

People act like just letting players sell their autograph wouldn't be a big deal or exploited in any way besides a player earning some money. We've all seen what boosters have done at various institutes even when doing such things has always been against the rules.

People act like switching to a payment system for athletes would be an easy transition and not disrupt and possibly jeopardize the continuance of not only non-revenue college sports but the revenue sports as well.

"If players are still amateur but not paid (besides scholarship) all the boosters of big schools that have money to throw away on sports will just have a bidding war on athletes under the guise of paying autographs."

This is 100% correct part 1, and why all of the arguments that Pryor, Manziel, or whoever should be able to use their personas for profit while in school are ridiculous. If a collegiate athlete takes a job in the summer, it has to be a real job (see Rhett Bomar at Okie), not a front for being paid by boosters. The "outrage" over Manziel not being able to sell his autograph is moronic. What if he sold his underwear to a booster for $500,000. Opening up this Pandora's box will kill college athletics.

"How well do you think a second rate professional football league will be supported by the American public? A lot of what people say they love about college football is about tradition, loyalty"

This is 100% correct, part 2. It won't, which is why Manziel is such a putz. Troy Smith could show up at a 5 Guys in Columbus now and probably might draw a few hundred people. Because people didn't care about Troy Smith, they cared about Buckeye Troy Smith. The emphasis on Buckeye. In college sports people root for the uniform, not the players.

Fly4Fun;1487886 wrote:Right in what way specifically? Right that players should be able to sell their autographs?

Yes.

If players are still amateur but not paid (besides scholarship) all the boosters of big schools that have money to throw away on sports will just have a bidding war on athletes under the guise of paying autographs.

So?

If players become a true professional athlete and schools are allowed to pay, are there restrictions? Is it like the professional sports where there is a cap? How is that cap designed calculated as there are gross discrepancies in cash flow of NCAA FBS schools. There are very few schools that make enough $$ to keep their athletic department in the black.

I'll be the first to admit that I don't know all of the answers of how to administer a different system, but have every confidence that a workable system could be created. The current one is working very well. Said no one ever.

The real problems come in when you begin to think about other non football or men's basketball athletes. Those sports generally derive very little revenue and are supported by football/basketball. Do those kids get paid? Or do only the sports get paid that earn money? If money is then being funneled to only those players of football and basketball the scholarships (as little as they are sometimes) for other sports will certainly go away as most schools wouldn't be able to afford that.

I've never seen a decent answer to the question of how a national-class rifle or fencing team enhances the status of a university in any measurable way. If the sport can support itself, by all means have the sport. Otherwise, participating at the club level isn't a sin.

Also, Once you're paying the athlete any chance of them being "students" is gone as the primary focus is on the play as they are being rewarded for that with cash instead of being rewarded with their play for a college education (you know the student aspect of student-athlete). Or does pay somehow also factor in GPA and graduation track to keep it student oriented as well? Or do the schools drop any idea of them being students and have these players associated with the University by name only as a different football and basketball league apart from the NFL and NBA.

I'm personally done playing along with the group hypocrisy that these "student-athletes" are just like the rest of their classmates. They are not, what is the motivation to keep pretending that they are?

How well do you think a second rate professional football league will be supported by the American public? A lot of what people say they love about college football is about tradition, loyalty (you pick a school and 90%+ of people stay their for their "career" as opposed to free agency, trades, etc.), playing for the love of the game instead of the all mighty $$ which would possibly be lost in a professional version of college football. And to note, other professional football leagues haven't worked in any other attempts previously.

Same answer as the one above. We already have that, and have a group pretend session every Saturday that it is not so.

There are a lot of questions ranging from viability of another professional league to what to do with the other non-revenue sports that would have to be answered or at least thought about before you can all of the sudden start chipping away at the current system.

People act like just letting players sell their autograph wouldn't be a big deal or exploited in any way besides a player earning some money. We've all seen what boosters have done at various institutes even when doing such things has always been against the rules.

People act like switching to a payment system for athletes would be an easy transition and not disrupt and possibly jeopardize the continuance of not only non-revenue college sports but the revenue sports as well.

No question. Nothing easy is worth a damn (W.W. Hayes). Something being difficult is never a valid reason not to try. What's easy is to continue to pretend that these athletes are just the kids next door whose primary goal is a college education and they just happen to have a special skill that we've decided for some reason to reward with free tuition. It's nonsense, and we all know it.