Started By
Message

re: Reggie Bush is getting his Heisman Back

Posted on 4/24/24 at 2:37 pm to
Posted by pankReb
Defending National Champs Fan
Member since Mar 2009
64886 posts
Posted on 4/24/24 at 2:37 pm to
quote:

SMU would have utilized NIL to purchase players.


But they didn’t. They pay-for-played. It doesn’t matter what they “would have done”. It only matters what they did.

And what they did was pay-for-play.

quote:

Reggie Bush was given improper benefits and stripped of his trophy.


The benefits were from marketing agents looking to represent him. You are correct in that this falls under NIL and is the reason why he is being given his trophy back. That, once again, is not pay-for-play.

quote:

Your argument is nothing more than being pedantic. If we can retroactively repair an infraction because the new rules no longer apply, we should do so for all who have been damaged by an unconstitutional rule.


And your argument is dogshit because you can’t understand the fact that pay-for-play is not legal under NIL rules. Thus, SMU has no leg to stand on because what they did is still against current rules.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter