Big B Texan Fan said:
As well as you cannot call it rent if it's free. If every player did this.........you know what I'm getting at.
The article I read was wrong, my bad should have checked more than 1.
Does Barry Bonds desreve a free pass? Should Pete Rose have already been in the Hall of Fame? Should Ricky Williams be allowed to "twist one" on the sideline when the going gets tough? Should Bob Knight be allowed to choke all of his players?
Getting a perk for being an athlete and being aloud to artificially enhance your ability is completely different. I don't really care what Ricky does in his spare time, but using illegal substances on national TV is probably a bad message to send to the children.
BigBull17 said:
And the NCAA rules are crappy in these circumstances. The NCAA makes gobbs of money off of these kids and some of them live in down right poverty. It does look bad, but its not roids, he didnt wave a gun at people, he didnt beat and rape a stripper, he isnt a drug addict or drug dealer, his parents ALLEGEDLY accepted a house from a guy who wanted his buddy to be Bushes agent. I just dont think its that big of a deal.
Strippers are not part of their fraternity of the educated elite.

They would rather cover that up than face alittle embarrassment. If the stripper being assaulted is the daughter of a school alumni it's even easier to hide. But accepting free stuff needs to be brought to light and the guilty crusified, and maby even tickled with feathers.
Haams said:
The NCAA also gives them a free education and an opportunity to make gobs of money.
Some of them get a free education, and alot of them don't finish it because they need money and declare for the draft A.S.A.P.
The NCAA's primary goal should be to graduate athletes, not inforce stupid rules to insure the "purity" of college sports. Sadly that isn't the case. In a perfect world athletes would be criticised for wasting the schools tuition money by dropping out to join the NFL. It's like marijuana. It doesn't affect anyone except the smoker, and if it wasn't illegal no one would care or even notice.
Kaiser Toro said:
Yes cheater may not be the operable word. Maybe we can use the following to placate your semantic palate- rulebreaker, dishonest, trickster, deceiver, beguiler, slickster.
I prefer "Evil Overlord from the 5th Dimension!" It's the only suitable title for some one so vile and evil as to accept free gifts.
Superstar said:
Didnt Vince Young cheat his way through college and teachers just pass him because he was doing good for the football team? How does vince deserve the trophy in the first place? You have to wonder with such a low IQ score Vince has how the hell did he pass through college....
That's kinda harsh don't you think? Not to mention slander.
It's generally a good idea not to accuse people of things until there's some evidence. Things go smoother that way. I'm sure Vince got lots of perks as the chosen son, but I doubt if it went as far as cheating to keep him eligible. In any case, I'm a firm believer that a mentaly handicapped person could get a masters degree if they worked hard enough. College is 90% effort and 10% intelligence.
I just don't see what the uproar is all about. Having a house didn't make him a better athlete, it didn't make him do better in school, and it didn't affect anyone else. "The N.C. double A-Holes" (Paraphrase from "The Program") have tons of rules that get broken every day. They just don't care unless there is publicity involved. Why is it OK for law firms to give gifts and free trips, even token jobs to students in order to attract the best talent, but if it's an athlete they suddenly get angry?But rule makers love to pass as many rules as possible, it makes them feel like they're doing something. Kind of like the NFL competition commity. How long before the game is so bogged down in rules that we have a flag thrown every play?

"Touching an opposing player, 15 yard penalty, automatic 1st down!"
Give me a break. Until he's actually proved guilty of something no team is going to change his draft stock. It's like the allegations against the Texas players before the Rose Bowl, they were not proven yet, and so they played. But in this day and age it's guilty until proven innocent in the eyes of the media(Duke scandal).