Reggie Bush Is Getting His Heisman Back
- Thread starter king_kong_
- Start date
. Just because today players can get the same benefits permissible under the rules he got doesn’t change the fact he broke the rules. This just shows how soft the Hiesman trust has become just like society in general.
Finally. This was some of the dumbest shit of all time.
this isn't how anything works
if you're convicted of a crime that later becomes legal, your record is expunged
sorry your feelings are hurt by justice being served
after Penn State and MSU's scandal, I can't be bothered to care about anyone else's.
USC won those games and Reggie put up those numbers.
kid was a stud athlete, of course he got favorable treatment. I'm not upset that TO let LP play either.
USC won those games and Reggie put up those numbers.
kid was a stud athlete, of course he got favorable treatment. I'm not upset that TO let LP play either.
Pete Rose deserves in Hall of Fame, as a player.
He is arguably top 5 player all-time.
Reggie got his family a house,
Crouch got a ham sandwich.
It becomes a matter of changing the standards. It was wrong at that time and he and others knew it. USC probably should have received the death penalty for everything they did.
So does everyone who broke a rule during that time get a letter of apology and some financial reward for it being accepted now?
So does everyone who broke a rule during that time get a letter of apology and some financial reward for it being accepted now?
Complete bullshit. Not how it works but I’m not shocked you would think so.
Kong has been taking a hit here today.
Completely cheesed out on a confessional, then loaded a poll about likability, when half the board cannot read it.
He says feelings should not apply in an argument, but he interjects his in every argument.
He is a hard pill to swallow.
enlighten me, friend.
because I'm under the impression amnesty exists in this beautiful country we call home
My rudimentary Carpenter's opinion is that any amnesty must be applied for first? Yes?
Then myriad requirements ensue?
do you know that Bush didn't apply for Heisman reinstatement, citing requirements that clearly satisfied the committee's terms?
So is anyone who broke the rules back in the day and was punished going to get made whole? Is SMU going to get reparations from the NCAA for the death penalty? What SMU did is totally allowed now, so if Bush gets his award back, why not make SMU whole? This can be said for many schools and players who were involved in getting money or giving money to players in the past.
But the bigger issue isn't whether a person might think that a rule is bullshit, but rather whether someone cheated when the rules were agreed to. Bush, his people, and Pete Carroll knew what was happening involving him was against the rules, and they decided to break them anyway. A slap in the face to anyone who followed the rules.
all vacated wins due to players receiving payment should be reinstated.
SMU got railroaded compared to the non-punishment doled out for actual criminal activity perpetrated in state college, PA.
a slap in the face, perhaps. a hard lesson learned, indeed.
You're supposed to follow the rules in existence at the time the rules are in place. It's about being honest and fair. You shouldn't be rewarded for being neither of the two.
Maybe we should go back and change the outcome of the 1984 Orange Bowl because by today's rules, Nebraska kicks the extra point and almost certainly wins a short field game in OT. Miami was on the ropes at the end of both the 1st half and 2nd half, and there's no way they win in OT against our running game.
While we're at it, let's add another NC in 1982 because instant replay would have shown the Penn State receiver out of bounds on 4th down at the end of the game. With that win, we finish undefeated.
UPDATE: Add another one because in the 1994 Orange Bowl, Floyd's TD would have been ruled a fumble today and we would have been ahead by 8 at the end of the game before the winning FG instead of 1. Now that's 3 NC trophies I want in our case!
Last edited:
I don't think it's an either/or outcome for every situation.
Program sanctions vs player sanctions.
For a program, you have adults in the room toeing the line or flat out breaking the rules to gain an advantage for the program.
For players, you have young adults being persuaded to do things by adults. Yes, they should know better, but they're still kids and the adults are the ones who are effing it up for the players.
Reggie Bush - Had an award taken away by receiving benefits. Those benefits didn't affect his play. It's not like he took steroids to get buffer, faster, stronger in order to win the Heisman. Does he play worse had his parents not been given a house?
SMU - Again, adults making bad decisions.
A performance award (Bush / Heisman) is much easier to reconcile than some sort of financial reparation (SMU). Maybe you can make SMU whole again, but it's much more complicated than giving an award back.
With college sports, I'm okay with unpunishing kids/players while at the same time keeping the adults/programs punished.
Why do people try and make comparisons that aren't remotely the same?
This is the exact reason the Hypesman Trophy is over rated and totally irrelevant today. Bush needs to be removed from the records like Pete Rose
Google can be your friend. I know it’s hard to imagine but when you commit a crime and break the law at the time it is against the law, you broke the law. You don’t just automatically get released and an apology. You can be released, maybe. But you’re not just going to get released and all be good because a law changed years later. Doesn’t work that way.
It does work that way, though.
All the time for tons of then-crimes that are now not crimes.
Tens of millions of criminal records have been expunged/pardoned for that exact reason, retroactive more than 50 years.
Perhaps it’s you who needs a bit of education on the topic? Happy to help if you’d like.
Last edited:
You’re a complete tool. I don’t need education on the topic. I’ve worked in a prison as a corrections officer. I have read criminal justice websites and books. It doesn’t work that way. Good day to you.
An example:
If you were arrested for weed possession of less than 2oz in Colorado anytime before it was legalized, you received a blanket pardon and that “crime” no longer appears anywhere on your record
I guess working in a prison and reading a book + websites does qualify you as the definitive expert on the matter, though
You got me there.
😂 you’re a complete jacka$$.
Since the legalization of recreational marijuana in Michigan, you wouldn’t believe how many people call us up to ask this question. Or maybe you would. After all, practically everyone knows, or knows of, someone who’s serving time for a drug-related crime in Michigan. And given the fact that many of those drug crimes involve marijuana, it stands to reason that people would assume this: because weed is legal now, the people who were put away for selling or using it when it was illegal should get out of prison.
Except it doesn’t work that way, in Michigan or anywhere else.
We’re sorry to be the bearers of bad news, especially if you were anticipating the speedy release of a loved one doing time for a pot crime, but these are the facts. If something was illegal when you did it, and you were convicted under the law at that time, then that conviction stands. The fact that the law was later changed has no bearing on your sentence.
I will choose my legal advice over your foolish statements every day of my life.
You should seek you own legal advice. Everyone should. I’m not giving and won’t give legal advice.
Fun!
On May 20, 2021, Governor Jared Polis signed into law HB 21-1090(opens in new window), thereby legalizing the possession of two (2) ounces of marijuana or less in the State of Colorado. An Executive Order (C 2021 019)(opens in new window) was signed on December 30, 2021, which grants "full and unconditional pardons for the State of Colorado convictions for possession of two (2) ounces or less of marijuana."
Reading a criminal justice book is a big deal, though. You should tell more people about that.
But you seem to in a most arrogant, or obnoxious way.
Cheers, go back to the Pay Board.
No one will miss you here.
