11/05/24
October 07, 2009
OSU wideout Dez Bryant ineligible: Oklahoma State Big XII title hopes takes a huge hit today as the Cowboys lose star receiver Dez Bryant. Bryant is in the top 10 on Kiper's big board.
posted by sgtcookzane to football at 08:51 PM - 21 comments
Wow, as a big 12 fan this is tough for OSU. Although it does make it less likely (in tandem with OU's losses in noncon) that there will be a 3-way tie in the South again.
posted by brainofdtrain at 10:41 PM on October 07, 2009
Ouch...being suspended for the entire season for lying? I know lying's wrong and could understand a few games, but rest of the season seems a little harsh.
posted by jmd82 at 10:58 PM on October 07, 2009
Way too harsh. This is all to protect the charade of amateurism as well, which is a bunch of bollocks. Just pay the frickin' players as if they were Research Assistants or something and dump all this completely phony concern with "ethics". The current approach is part of the over-determined, over-disciplined, over-authoritarian football culture and it is complete stupid and in light of the people running the sport completely hypocritical. So this young man take a huge career hit and the jerks enforcing this feel like they are lighting a candle in the darkness. What a bunch of assholes. It's like the "if you're not with us you're against us" philosophy -- a bunch of iron clad rules to support a system that is rotten at the core.
posted by rumple at 12:48 AM on October 08, 2009
Quoting Bryant: "I lied to ...them and I shouldn't have"
Seems pretty clear that Bryant is accepting the blame for what he did and not blaming the over-determined, over-disciplined, over-authoritarian football culture.
As the John Rohde article in the sidebar says, getting caught in a lie is a teachable moment for anyone. Getting caught in a lie when there was no reason to lie is a much harder lesson to learn.
Also, Neon ain't doing these kids any favors if ya ask me.
posted by mjkredliner at 10:48 AM on October 08, 2009
The time for Bryant to find out whether this was an NCAA violation was before he went, not when the NCAA asked him about it.
posted by bperk at 11:50 AM on October 08, 2009
Seems pretty clear that Bryant is accepting the blame Well yeah but what is he saying about the punishment? What can he say? Can he say what I said without kissing off his football career? There's a difference between "yes I stole a loaf of bread" and "I agree I should be hanged for it".
Regardless, the whole point of the rule is to enable the image of NCAA football. To ban someone for a whole year for violating a technicality is complete bullshit in my books. Since the NCAA has an effective monopoly on player development for professional football then they have a responsibility not to be capricious dicks and not to throw players under the bus to satisfy there unbelieveably complex rules designed to keep the house of cards "Amateur Football" standing. They should do a little more on college player with long term disability resultant from game injuries and a little less on sanctimony.
posted by rumple at 12:24 PM on October 08, 2009
To ban someone for a whole year for violating a technicality is complete bullshit in my books.
I'm sure Pete Rose agrees with you.
posted by mjkredliner at 12:39 PM on October 08, 2009
To ban someone for a whole year for violating a technicality is complete bullshit in my books.
I'm sure Pete Rose agrees with you.
With the minor detail that Rose was lying about something strictly forbidden in the sport.
posted by jmd82 at 12:47 PM on October 08, 2009
With the minor detail that Rose was lying about something strictly forbidden in the sport.
And,obviously, Bryant did something strictly forbidden by the NCAA. Namely, lie to them.
When he didn't need to. Heck, it's starting to strike me as funny now.
posted by mjkredliner at 02:16 PM on October 08, 2009
Rules are rules. Google the bylaw`he broke, NCAA bylaw`10.1 (d), and you will see that the athletes sign a form acknowledging the rule, so the premise that the rule is obscure doesn't fly, either.
The punishment for the violation of NCAA bylaw 10.1 (d) can range from anywhere to a suspension of a few games to banishment from the field of NCAA competition, and OSU has begun the process of applying to the NCAA for reinstatement on the matter.
So, hopefully, the kid won't be banned for his entire senior year.
posted by mjkredliner at 02:16 PM on October 08, 2009
Well here is the thing not being addressed. A baseball manager betting on games which he is managing is fundamentally bad for the sport. Even so, he was banned after his playing career was over and the main effect is he can't get into the Hall of Fame
banning a kid because of a violation of some rule designed to maintain a fig leaf of amateurism over what is in any other respect a highly profitable sports league, where coaches get paid millions of dollars, and not, say, the salary of an Associate professor, is hypocrisy of the highest order.
Sure, rules are rules lying is bad blah blah but this case is a window into the asylum of venal, crass, hypocritical sanctimony that is the organizational side of College Football.
posted by rumple at 02:58 PM on October 08, 2009
Sure, rules are rules lying is bad blah blah but this case is a window into the asylum of venal, crass, hypocritical sanctimony that is the organizational side of College Football
all NCAA sanctioned sports.
Same rule applies to the athletes of the least profitable (and most subsidized)sports at OSU and other universities as well. If your beef is with the amount that college coaches are paid, I suggest you boycott (ie: not watch) the captalistic spectacle called college football.
posted by mjkredliner at 03:29 PM on October 08, 2009
The problem is not capitalism, it's hypocrisy by an unholy alliance of TV networks and Universities. And, by the way, I don't watch, but I am interested in University hypocrisy.
If you seriously think that College Football players have the same experience as, say, water polo players, then, ummm, LOL. The rules are written vis a vis agents and recruitment and so forth precisely towards Football and the other athletes will never ever be invited for lunch at Deion Sanders house.
posted by rumple at 04:24 PM on October 08, 2009
I just read that the University of Florida spends $89 million a year on its football program. For an amateur sport, run by an institution of higher learning.
Give me $89 million a year and I could run the entire tertiary education system of the country I'm now in. And here they need education, not football.
posted by owlhouse at 06:18 AM on October 09, 2009
And, by the way, I don't watch
I had that figured out.
I just read that the University of Florida spends $89 million a year on its football program. For an amateur sport, run by an institution of higher learning.
Cite, please. Seems odd since they only generated 66 million in football revenues last year, and gave 6 million to their academics department. I guarantee they are not operating the football program in the red.
posted by mjkredliner at 03:16 PM on October 09, 2009
The University of Florida's athletic program turns a profit (as high as $7.8 million in 2008) on revenue of around $60 million a year, has an endowment of $42 million and receives no money from the school or the state (though it does receive some student service fees). It shares in the SEC's massive new $3 billion TV deal and has its own $8.6 million TV and sponsorship deal with Sun Sports and a marketing company. It makes so much money it has donated $45 million to the university since 1990.
Calling SEC football an amateur sport is a little silly given this kind of number. It's a pro sport in which the main participants are excluded from the financial benefit but everybody else makes serious jack.
posted by rcade at 03:38 PM on October 09, 2009
$7.8 million divided by 80 or so players is nearly a $100k each. But that would blow the self-image of boosters and trustees and create a worse race condition than exists now (to be clear, I mean race as in to the bottom, not color of skin).
posted by billsaysthis at 09:28 PM on October 09, 2009
And, by the way, I don't watch
I had that figured out.
What, exactly, did I say that would be remedied or changed by watching the game? Please be precise.
posted by rumple at 11:01 PM on October 09, 2009
Cite, please.
I read it on a linked article on Deadspin. You will forgive me if I can't find it immediately, as the connection here in Kalaymyo doesn't allow me to access many parts of the interwebs right now.
The University of Florida's athletic program turns a profit (as high as $7.8 million in 2008
Good for them, however my point was more about the opportunity cost of pouring money (whether from sponsorship, endowments, ticket revenue) into 'amateur' sports, which is more or less just a form of entertainment. I don't blame the university, but there's a bigger problem out there.
posted by owlhouse at 09:56 AM on October 12, 2009
Maybe I am underestimating Florida boosters, but I don't think that most of the money goes into the school without the high-profile football program. It just stays under mattresses and in cans buried in backyards.
My alma mater, the University of North Texas, has only 7,000 fewer students than Florida, is in a much bigger market, and isn't paying that "opportunity cost." If there's a benefit to UNT because of this opportunity savings, I haven't seen it.
posted by rcade at 11:10 AM on October 12, 2009
Dumb move on Bryant's part to lie, particularly since the contact wasn't illegal. Since Deion Sanders checked beforehand with the school to make sure it was OK for Bryant to visit him, he or the team should have told this to Bryant during the visit.