Wednesday, September 15, 2010


Reggie Bush Returns His Heisman

Yesterday, Reggie Bush returned the Heisman he won in 2005 as the best player in college football. He had received hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of benefits from sports agents, a mistake that has led to his school, USC, being sanctioned by the NCAA.

Don't worry about Reggie. He has a Super Bowl ring as a member of the Saints and a good career.

Should he have returned the trophy? After all, his taking money for agents did not affect his play. He was still the best player that year, by most accounts. USC has already taken the hit for the violations they allowed.

What if he had taken steroids? Then should the Heisman have been returned or revoked?

I've had the same thoughts about players who take money. His play wasn't impacted, obviously.

But - the Heisman trust's rules require that a player be eligible under NCAA rules. And Bush wasn't. So, bottom line, he wasn't eligible for the award, and he shouldn't have received it.

But I'm with you with regard to the idea that it doesn't change that he "earned" the award based on his play. He just isn't eligible to be considered.

And, if he had taken steroids, I'd say he definitely would have to give it back, because then his play wouldn't even qualify him, as it would be enhanced by the drugs. Of course, that's not the issue here, but regardless, I think he is right to give it back (even if he's only doing it because it 'looks' right to do so).
He did the right thing; not that it matters (as you've said, he hasn't lost his job, his Super Bowl ring, or his ability). But he didn't win the trophy while complying with the rules.

Not that many people have; but the fact that some people get away with flaunting the rules is no excuse for his breaking them either.
I think he did the wrong thing. Do we really think that Reggie Bush is the only Heisman winner to take money? Are we going to start making the winner sign an affidavit swearing under penalty of perjury that he didn't take any money or break any other NCAA rules? Then, maybe we can take his trophy back and prosecute him to boot.

No, I think Reggie Bush messed it up. By giving the award back (and by the Heisman Trophy Trust accepting it) everybody is trying to say that everything's fine and nobody ever breaks the rules (except the guys who get caught). The truth is that college football is not the pristine play-for-the-love-of-the-game institution everybody pretends. It is a corrupt money-making machine (just like college basketball).

I don't believe in empty gestures (e.g., excluding Mark McGwire and Pete Rose from the MLB Hall of Fame); I think they do more harm than good by distracting us from the existence of the problem. That's exactly what this is, an empty gesture.

Either the NCAA should figure out a way to make everybody play by the rules, or they should tweak the rules to conform to reality.
They should also let McGwire and Rose into the baseball Hall of Fame. Not because performance-enhancing drugs or gambling is OK. But McGwire was definitely not the only druggie. I think the evidence suggests that enough other people were doing it that the drugs may not have helped him that much. You still have to have a good eye.

And Charlie Hustle got 4,256 hits for goodness sake! The man's a machine! A machine that cries! Let him in!
I should have said "for Pete's sake." That would have been awesome.
Reggie Bush is a loser! I’m glad he forfeited the Heisman, but somehow I don’t think he cares because he was able to earn a Super Bowl ring in the NFL.
He should be ineligible for dating Kim Kardashian.
USC's star running back and Heisman Trophy winner made bad decisions.

What's the big deal? It's not like he killed anyone.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?