T1B

Posted: **Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:08 pm**

According to the article, Bush's family resided in a home, owned by a businessman looking to do business with Bush.

Web Page Name

Hmmmmmmm... gee, i sure do wonder....

Evidence and connections all there...

Naw, couldn't be. there's going to be a minor slap on the wrist at most here...

but then again. . . this is yahoo sports reporting. . so the validity is pretty questionable

m2

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:04 am**

We all do it. This is no story. They were only living there while they "arranged financing". I saw kids at other schools who lived in beachfront condo's. I'm not saying it's right, but it's done everywhere.

Sin.
CFB board homers.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:05 am**

A win is finding this shit out after their eligibility....

Sincerely,

Pom Pom Pete

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:07 am**

You guys are just jealous....

...because:

1. Your players families don't live in big houses.
2. Your players didn't get favors from agents
3. You didn't win the Heisman and have 5 like us
4. You haven't won all those NC's like us
5. You don't have our great football tradition
6. We now have great academics too.....

Fight ON.....

the truth

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:27 am**

This sounds like a pretty serious offense and one that is probably pretty easy for the NCAA to pin down. All they have to do is find out who owns the house and if the Bush family lived there.

Now if his family did take money from an agent does that mean that USC forfits all their games from Last year? And does Bush lose his Heisman?

Not that it really matters at this point since he is no longer in school.

I expect the NCAA to turn a blind eye just like with the spooners.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:48 am**

The Heisman isn't a NCAA award so I would assume any NCAA ruling wouldn't have any effect on that.

I guess it would be up to the Dowtown Athletic Club.

EDIT: Weren't there questions about eligibility type stuff after Woodson (or someone else) won the Heisman and entered the draft where the DAC said that they weren't going to get involved?

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:18 pm**

Water under the bridge.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:25 pm**

If this was at tOSU, ESPN would be all over this story.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:51 pm**

I understand it wouldn't be very smart, but if the Bush family rented this house at market value, where is the problem? Yes the guy who owned it was an agent, but Bush didn't sign with him and it would be very hard to prove if the family took any money from him, unless they could prove they lived rent free or at an extreemly reduced rate.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:58 pm**

I just hate that we look for the shades of gray to dance in. It's contact with an agent. It's fucking wrong. Goddamn, can they fucking wait until he reaps the reward of the NFL? What's one more year?

The family moved out immediately after being contacted by Yahoo sports. Nope, nothing to see here.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:06 pm**

There is something very fishy about this situation, but my point was if they rented a house and it was owned by an attorney, that is potential contact with an agent. They have contact with agents all the time, but the issue is when they take money.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:56 pm**

I thought you couldn't have ANY contact with an agent while a college football player, let alone let your family live in the house owned by an agent. Renting or no rent, this is a huge infraction because it would be like an agent giving the family a car to drive while Bush is a student. It's like a gift.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:07 pm**

It was a 3000 square foot house. Hmmm.....I'm going to go way out n a limb here and say that the Bush family can't afford that house anywhere near market value.

How this isn't a major infraction would be beyond me.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:30 pm**

It's not an infraction because it's OK.
Sin,
SC fan

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:09 pm**

It was only a matter of time right? :P

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:14 pm**

Umm...it was a $750,000 house and the Bush family had had financial problems. Unless banks are offering 250 year mortgages these days, I'd say they weren't paying market value for the house.

As for the Heisman, there is a clause on the ballot that the athlete must be an eligible recipient for the award. If Bush is deemed ineligible by the NCAA and USC is forced to forfeit every game he played in this past year, the DAC can, in fact, retract the award and it would then be given to the guy in my avatar.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:22 pm**

Well then, if that is the case, fuck them.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:27 pm**

IndyFrisco wrote: As for the Heisman, there is a clause on the ballot that the athlete must be an eligible recipient for the award. If Bush is deemed ineligible by the NCAA and USC is forced to forfeit every game he played in this past year, the DAC can, in fact, retract the award and it would then be given to the guy in my avatar.

Jesus Christ?

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:35 pm**

Have you not been reading this forum since the Rose Bowl?

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:38 pm**

I have. Guess you didnt get it.

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:38 pm**

Oh, and Bush now claiming he had no idea his parents and brother were living in a 750k house in San Diego for the past year is REALLY believeable. :roll:

Posted: **Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:48 pm**

what excatly does it have to do with USC? The house wasnt owned by a USC booster or anybody who had any ties to USC. Had this been done while Reggie was still in High School and was a "perk" of him going to USC and playing for the Trojans, then I can see how USC would be brought up but until there can be a tie to this guy leasing Reggies family that house and the school the school didnt do anything wrong.

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:10 am**

My first reaction when I saw this story was to wonder if the Adrian Peterson helped the Griffins move out. After all, I hear he's got a large SUV that you can fit a lot of stuff in. Once I was done making bad jokes, my reaction was more sadness.

I have no love for USC but I wouldn't want to see the game tainted this way. I'm certainly not naive enough to believe that "extras" aren't given out at most programs and it's next to impossible to police it all. Personally, I think college athletes in revenue producing sports should be paid but that's a discussion for another time.

This story should be pretty easy to figure out. Either the Griffins paid something close to market rent or they didn't. If they didn't, Reggie is not stupid enough to think that them getting a break wasn't due to his status as a football player and he would've had to have known that any extra benefits connected to football for him or his family was forbidden. I would also speculate that USC didn't know anything about this. No player, not even Reggie Bush, is worth bringing down an entire program and that's what complicity in something like this would risk.

We'll have to wait and see how this plays out. I hope this is a non-story but somehow I doubt that it is.

m2

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:53 am**

This is the same as tha Peterson thing, at a lesser level (from a dollar standpoint) . Same preferential treatment. This should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Props to those who said SC couldn't achieve this without cheating. They're dirty, OU is dirty for the Peterson thing.

PS. I'm drunk right now... I reserve the right to rescind, and or retract all statements, at such time that I'm capable of forming rational thoughts.

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:04 am**

WolverineSteve wrote:This is the same as tha Peterson thing, at a lesser level (from a dollar standpoint) . Same preferential treatment. This should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Props to those who said SC couldn't achieve this without cheating. They're dirty, OU is dirty for the Peterson thing.

PS. I'm drunk right now... I reserve the right to rescind, and or retract all statements, at such time that I'm capable of forming rational thoughts.

That's OK brother... 4/5/--

Since you put forth a quality effort this evening , I'll show you something.

How to beat a football factory when you have to actually attend classes.

CLICK HERE

Note: the movie soundtrack may not be suitable for children

If you have headphones... and you're young at heart/ turn the fucker up to 10!

Enjoy!

m2

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:41 pm**

Believe the Heupel wrote:I'm going to go WAY out on a limb here and say that nothing will come of this.

That would open doors for others. Punish and punish hard both Reggie(take the h-man away) and USC(sanctions). Start policing your own or get severely whacked by the NCAA.

As a school who was on the wrong side of it.........

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:15 pm**

SoCalTrjn wrote:what excatly does it have to do with USC?

BtH is right on his response. It is called lack of institutional control. Although USC may not have known, it is their job TO know these things. If USC had no idea, well, that sucks for them. If he was ineligible, they WILL forfeit all those games he played in.

BtH, I know you prefaced your prediction with "going way out on a limb", but I just don't see any way, shape or form this will be tolerated. Had USC wont he whole thing, this would be even a bigger story. Can you imagine the possible forfeit of the BCS NC Game? Would that mean Texas would get the ADT Trophy? That would have definitely been an interesting scenario.

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:01 pm**

Again, Michael Michaels (the gentleman who owned this house that Bush's family was renting) has no ties to USC, he's also not an agent and his tie to an agent is that he contacted a San Diego based agent about Reggie when he heard Reggie was going to turn pro. So how can the school be held responsible? I have rental properties, one of the families who rent one of the homes I have has a daughter who's a student/athlete at Cal-Santa Cruz, should I raise their rent even though they have been in the house for a couple years and have been great tennants? Is not raising their rent a violation of NCAA rules, I have no ties to that school but allowing a nice family to live in a rental property where Im still making money over the Mortgage payment has to be wrong, especially since the family has a student athlete whogoes to school a few hundred miles away and has never lived in the home

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:50 pm**

And the water gets a little muddier...

BUSH HAD AGREEMENT WITH NEW ERA?

In what could be the next big step toward a finding that USC tailback Reggie Bush was ineligible for all or part of the 2005 football season and that USC knew or should have known about Bush's ineligibility, Liz Mullen of the SportsBusiness Journal reports that sworn testimony from two hearings regarding a parole violation indicates that New Era Sports & Entertainment had an agreement of some sort with Bush.

Michael Michaels and Lloyd Lake founded New Era in 2005. Earlier this year, Lake faced the revocation of his parole from federal prison. At one of the hearings, Lake's lawyer, Marc Carlos, testified that "Mr. Bush — or through his associates — had made some type of agreement with Mr. Lake's group."

Carlos also testified that, after Bush signed with another group, there was a dispute over "representations made by Bush and his family to Mr. Lake's group" and that "they were going to discuss potential litigation — or a settlement involving Mr. Bush's involvement with that agency."

David Caravantes, an NFLPA-certified agent who reportedly was being lined up by New Era to handle the negotiation of Bush's football contract, testified as well. Caravantes confirmed his arrangement with New Era: "Lloyd [Lake] and I had got together in October [2005] to start a new sports management company with Sycuan. . . . Since October, Lloyd was a viable part of the company, helping recruit players, and in the process of merging this New Era Sports with Sycuan. In the process of this happening, you know, it obviously hurt the company because he had some relationships with certain players who ended up not signing."

Lake gave the following testimony: "I had a sports agency that we had formed, and we had a guy in, Winston Justice, from USC. . . . Reggie Bush came into town. And at that time he was going to go out with us."

The initial significance of this testimony is that it removes any credible doubt that, at some time after Bush's family moved into the house owned Michaels but before the completion of the 2005 football, Michaels was an "agent" within the meaning of the relevant NCAA bylaws. Thus, if it ultimately is shown that Bush's family paid anything less than fair market rent after Michaels became an "agent," then Reggie was necessarily ineligible under the NCAA rules for each subsequent game.

More importantly, the reference to "potential litigation" suggest that New Era had (or at least thought it had) some type of binding commitment with Bush. If such an agreement was reached prior to the completion of the 2005 football season, Bush was ineligible regardless of whether his mother and stepfather were paying fair value for the house owned by Michaels.

Also intriguing is Caravantes' reference not to Michael Michaels, but to his tribe -- Sycuan. The Sycuan tribe previously has denied involvement in Michaels' sports venture. The testimony from Caravantes potentially muddies the water.

Folks, this thing has gotten a lot uglier over the past 48 hours, and we've got a feeling that it will get uglier long before it gets un-ugly. As more evidence of the ties between Bush and New Era is revealed, it will be harder and harder for USC to claim that it didn't know -- and shouldn't have known -- that Bush had forfeited his eligibility either by striking a deal with New Era or through the receipt of benefits from New Era by his family.

Link

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:00 pm**

m2 wrote: CLICK HERE

its 2006, live in the now.

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:52 pm**

Yes, somethings definitely going to happen here. At least it gives us something to debate in the offseason besides best conference, etc.

Posted: **Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:58 pm**

Hopefully something will go down.

We need more drama in the football world.

When I found out logan cracked his own dome open, I was pissed. I was hoping a secret Vol or Tide agent came and took him out.

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:06 am**

What happened to all the USC fans that were here before the Rose Bowl? Anyone hear crickets churping where there should be SC fans?

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:25 pm**

Vito Corleone wrote:What happened to all the USC fans that were here before the Rose Bowl? Anyone hear crickets churping where there should be SC fans?

In fairness to them, GreginPG and Jimmy typically don't post in the offseason. Not sure about Van.

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:54 pm**

Van typically doesn't post until the BCS game if USC is in the game.

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:44 pm**

Van is my favorite bandwagoner. He definitely makes it interesting.

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:54 pm**

The guy that owned the house wasn't an "agent," I thought. I thought I heard that he was a "marketing agent." (Like endorsements and shit solely... not contracts.)

But, either way, to the guy with the girl with the fake boobs in his av... Whether or not USC knew about this has absolutely 0% to do with anything. Bush PLAYED for USC, and if Bush knew about it, then, as their signed representative, USC knew something about it, and, since he DID play every game for them, they would have to forfeit the games in which he played...

I mean, except the one that they lost and all.

the_ouskull

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:25 pm**

the_ouskull wrote:Bush PLAYED for USC, and if Bush knew about it, then, as their signed representative, USC knew something about it, and, since he DID play every game for them, they would have to forfeit the games in which he played...

Bush didn't even have to know about it. Of course, with his family living in a 750k house for almost a year, he no doubt knew about it. It will sort itself out.

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:32 pm**

If Bushs family paid rent, even if it was bellow the 1700 average for homes that size in that neighborhood, then there is no violation. Show that they lived there for free and then maybe you have something

Posted: **Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:38 pm**

Believe the Heupel wrote:Incorrect. If they did not pay fair market value, then they received an illegal benefit. Otherwise they could (say) go to a Lexus dealership and buy an RX300 for $1.

Or just wait a few weeks while you figure out financing.

T1B

USC brings in NCAA to investigate Bush family living sit...

USC brings in NCAA to investigate Bush family living sit...