re: As the jar cracks - Johnny Manziel's downfall is upon us

quote:

---

If JFF took money, it does not matter if he did so to play football or for his autograph. The NCAA doesn't give a frick what the public or the press thinks.

---

The difference comes where the institution is concerned. If A&M paid $100,000 for JFF to sign with A&M, that would have very different repercussions than Johnny selling his autographs of his own accord for $100,000

5900. Can we make 6000 in the next 2 hours?

quote:

---

Who arranged the alleged signing sessions and would that person not fall under the NCAA definition of agent?

---

n July 5, 2012, the NCAA released an educational column regarding the definition of an “agent” under NCAA legislation. Specifically, the column noted, pursuant to NCAA Bylaw 12.02.1, an agent is “a person who directly or indirectly represents or attempts to represent an individual for the purpose of marketing his or her athletics ability or reputation for financial gain or seeks to obtain any type of financial gain or benefit from securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment at an educational institution.” The column also answered several common questions regarding the definition of an agent. Important points to consider include:
•An individual who organizes showcase events for prospective student-athletes to be evaluated by college coaches and receives a payment for participation at the event is not an agent if the individual did not seek or obtain a benefit from securing a prospective student-athlete’s enrollment at an educational institution;
•This legislation does not apply to a prospective student-athlete’s parents or legal guardians or high school and nonscholastic coaches unless they are seeking a financial gain for placing the prospective student-athlete at a particular school; and
•An individual is permitted to have an advisor assist him or her in reviewing a proposed professional sports contract, provided the advisor does not represent the individual directly in contract negotiations. The advisory may discuss the merits of a proposed contract with an individual and provide suggestions about the type of offer the individual should consider. The advisor cannot make direct contact with the professional team or be present during discussions of a contract offer with a professional team.

quote:

---

But if he is no longer eligible and plays knowingly then those games are vacated.

Is that so hard?

---

I'm going to try to explain this so your little brain can comprehend. If A&M were found to have paid Manziel money to attend the university, A&M would receive MAJOR sanctions including scholarship reductions, bowl bans, etc. If Manziel was found to all by his lonesome sell his autographs all A&M has to do is vacate the wins. No other penalties to the school, assuming we actually did an investigation and didn't pretend to and lie about it.

my little brain has been saying all along that you asshats would have to vacate..I never said anything about being put on probation or receive sanctions.

thought you were referring to me.

if TAMU finds out he took money but decides to play him until the ncaa rules and it comes out what TAMU knew then yes you guys may get hit with sanctions.

If I recall in the Antonio Langham thing with BAMA they found out he signed a napkin as a contract and then played him and tried to cover it up

quote:

---

Can you please point me to an NCAA player who was suspended on nothing but hearsay

---

Cam Newton was suspended for 15 minutes even though "he didn't know". :shrug:

The evidence that he "knew" is all hearsay.

TAMU officials won't make that choice at the beginning of the season..AU made that choice because 10 games had gone by and they were in a no lose situation to keep on playing him

quote:

---

quote:
The Cam comparisons don't completely match up either. Cam was accused of taking money to play at a school, Johnny is accused of making money off his auto. Both are violations but they are viewed very differently by the public and the press.



If JFF took money, it does not matter if he did so to play football or for his autograph. The NCAA doesn't give a frick what the public or the press thinks.

---

Sure it does. The NCAA is a ridiculously corrupt an biased organization, always has been. It absolutely matters to them that they have no real benefit in suspending JFF and no one really wants it. It will cost a LOT of people a LOT of money, and that includes the SEC and the TV Networks. The NCAA is afraid of the OBannon case and that the SEC and other conferences may break away as it is.

The NCAA acts when they feel forced to act or if they are pressured to act. Right now there is an awful lot of pressure on the NCAA to not suspend Johnny but very little going the other direction. Even ESPN doesn't want Johnny suspended, what they want is a story to drive ratings and interest. JFF is ratings gold for them, people either love him or hate him but either way they can't help but want to watch him (whether it is to succeed or fail).

The best case for them is for Johnny to get off or to serve a suspension that doesn't involve the Bama game. That way they can have an even juicier storyline, win or lose for him, for the rest of the season. If A&M wins they can call it tainted or villify him still. If A&M loses they can keep up the "Johnny wasn't focused" storyline. You could also argue they would like him to be suspended I suppose and then hope for an A&M loss to Bama only to go undefeated the rest of the year. All ESPN cares about is ratings and money, they are a business.

The NCAA is in a no win situation though as they have less credibility now than at any other time and they have less power than ever.