OSU players getting free tatoos for autographs?

• charliehustle14

  ts1227;610466 wrote:Assuming the artist is a fan, college football fans aren't exactly known for their brainpower. If you've been on JJ before and here now, you should know that firsthand

  
  Yeah no kidding. I still can't comprehend it though. $200 in income this week or an autograph? Seems like a no brainer to me.
• charliehustle14

  Blanket;610465 wrote:"One source indicates that there might be some official comment made by Thursday, including notice of possible suspensions."

  
  An unnamed source and the words 'might' and 'possible' isn't much of anything new.
• that_guy

  This is hilarious. Cats Gone Wild getting his jollys off on some completely unsubstantiated rumors, and Gibby talking about the NCAA needing to hammer Ohio State.
  Those two make me hate the SEC more and more everyday...
• charliehustle14

  that_guy;610473 wrote:This is hilarious. Cats Gone Wild getting his jollys off on some completely unsubstantiated rumors, and Gibby talking about the NCAA needing to hammer Ohio State.
  Those two make me hate the SEC more and more everyday...

  
  Cats wouldn't even touch the Oversigning thread. Go figure.
• wildcats20

  

  Blanket;610468 wrote:If this is proved to be true, the NCAA really needs to set an example and hammer Ohio State with suspensions.
  
  If they do not, this opens up all kinds of flood gates with these types of violations

  
  You mean like they did for Auburn and Cam Newton?
• Ty Webb

  

  Now there is a report from an ESPN affiliate in Tennessee that Pryor and 4 others are going to be suspended for the Sugar Bowl for this and selling their bowl gifts
• dat dude

  Rumors are flying around. I've heard everything from 8 players to 4. Most rumors say its Pryor, Posey and Boom.
  
  The game is still on the board in Vegas. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets taken off this evening for precaution.
• charliehustle14

  Ty Webb;610504 wrote:Now there is a report from an ESPN affiliate in Tennessee that Pryor and 4 others are going to be suspended for the Sugar Bowl for this and selling their bowl gifts

  
  Link?
• dwccrew

  

  cats gone wild;609361 wrote:I havent even posted on that thread, and no its not right for oversigning......and its not right for people to get improper benefits either (even though being minor).

  I really don't see how getting tatoos amounts to receiving improper benefits. Sounds like a bunch of BS to me. Not only that, this will be very difficult to prove. What Columbus tatoo artist is going to substantiate the evidence? They do that and they have effectively killed their business in Columbus.
  

  Blanket;610468 wrote:If this is proved to be true, the NCAA really needs to set an example and hammer Ohio State with suspensions.
  
  If they do not, this opens up all kinds of flood gates with these types of violations

  
  
  GTFO, you're serious? Over tatoos? I don't even view this as a violation. If the tatoo artist required an autograph as payment, who's to say that is not adequete compensation? It is at the sole discretion of the artist. Now if they were just giving them tats because they play football, that's an entirely different issue. But they've received compesation that they asked for, being the autographs, therefore there is no violation.
  
  This is probably the dumbest non-issue I have ever heard of in college football.
• ts1227

  

  dwccrew;610647 wrote:GTFO, you're serious? Over tatoos? I don't even view this as a violation. If the tatoo artist required an autograph as payment, who's to say that is not adequete compensation? It is at the sole discretion of the artist. Now if they were just giving them tats because they play football, that's an entirely different issue. But they've received compesation that they asked for, being the autographs, therefore there is no violation.
  
  This is probably the dumbest non-issue I have ever heard of in college football.

  
  While it is a non-issue in the grand scheme of things compared to other violations, I'm pretty sure the NCAA views receiving any service in exchange for something where you are capitalizing on your athlete "celebrity" as problematic. In their eyes, you still got it for free because you play football; autographs are not acceptable payment.
  
  If it happened, it's a self reported minor thing, life goes on.
• dwccrew

  

  ts1227;610652 wrote:While it is a non-issue in the grand scheme of things compared to other violations, I'm pretty sure the NCAA views receiving any service in exchange for something where you are capitalizing on your athlete "celebrity" as problematic. In their eyes, you still got it for free because you play football; autographs are not acceptable payment.
  
  If it happened, it's a self reported minor thing, life goes on.

  I think an easy solution would be to pay $1 for each tatoo. The NCAA can't dictate what reasonable pricing for tatoo services are; as long as money has changed hands, it should be out of the NCAA jurisdiction. Players go back and pay $1 for each tatoo, finalizing the transaction.
• dat dude

  dwccrew;610647 wrote:GTFO, you're serious? Over tatoos? I don't even view this as a violation. If the tatoo artist required an autograph as payment, who's to say that is not adequete compensation? It is at the sole discretion of the artist. Now if they were just giving them tats because they play football, that's an entirely different issue. But they've received compesation that they asked for, being the autographs, therefore there is no violation.
  
  This is probably the dumbest non-issue I have ever heard of in college football.

  
  Although I agree it should be a small issue, it doesn't work like that. Permitting autographs in lieu of payment of any item would be a violation. What would stop a car dealership from doing the same to a big name player? If true, this would definitely qualify as a violation.
• charliehustle14

  dwccrew;610660 wrote:I think an easy solution would be to pay $1 for each tatoo. The NCAA can't dictate what reasonable pricing for tatoo services are; as long as money has changed hands, it should be out of the NCAA jurisdiction. Players go back and pay $1 for each tatoo, finalizing the transaction.

  
  That's exactly what a friend and me were saying.
• ts1227

  

  dwccrew;610660 wrote:I think an easy solution would be to pay $1 for each tatoo. The NCAA can't dictate what reasonable pricing for tatoo services are; as long as money has changed hands, it should be out of the NCAA jurisdiction. Players go back and pay $1 for each tatoo, finalizing the transaction.

  
  NCAA would probably do something like send someone in on their behalf to ask for a similar tattoo, and get a price quote. If they didn't get it for something reasonably close to that $1 amount, it turns into an investigation, etc.
  
  So while they can't set the market value, they can prove favoritism to some extent (obviously not foolproof, but there are ways they can go about it)
  
  Sure, this shit happens everywhere, but it's still a violation if they get caught. If OSU had a bunch of people getting tats from one place, word will spread as it continues to happen. As mentioned... it's minor. If it happened, self-report it, maybe issue some suspensions, move on.
• dat dude

  ts1227;610671 wrote:NCAA would probably do something like send someone in on their behalf to ask for a similar tattoo, and get a price quote. If they didn't get it for something reasonably close to that $1 amount, it turns into an investigation, etc.
  
  So while they can't set the market value, they can prove favoritism to some extent (obviously not foolproof, but there are ways they can go about it)
  
  Sure, this shit happens everywhere, but it's still a violation if they get caught. If OSU had a bunch of people getting tats from one place, word will spread as it continues to happen. As mentioned... it's minor. If it happened, self-report it, maybe issue some suspensions, move on.

  
  Tattoos aren't that difficult to price, are they? I would almost guarantee it would be over a $1 charge, considering the USC player (Dillon Baxter) paid $5 for riding a golf cart around campus. I heard Kiffin say they reached that $5 amount by estimating the fmv of the ride.
• dwccrew

  

  dat dude;610665 wrote:Although I agree it should be a small issue, it doesn't work like that. Permitting autographs in lieu of payment of any item would be a violation. What would stop a car dealership from doing the same to a big name player? If true, this would definitely qualify as a violation.

  
  Apples and oranges when comparing the tatoo artist to a car dealer. A car dealership has to purchase the vehicle and then given a suggest retail price by the manufacturer. A tatoo artist can name any price they choose. I have had different tatoo artists give me different prices that are way off from each other. It is much more subjective to price a tatoo than a car.
  
  A tatoo artist can price the same exact tatoo for one person at $100 and the next person at $500 if they wanted and not get in trouble. However, if a car dealer tried to sell a car to one person for $10,000 and the next $50,000, there would be legal issues I assume.
  
  So if the players went and paid $1, $5, $10 for the tatoo, I don't see how the NCAA can pursue the issue; even if they sent someone in to get a quote on a tatoo because, as I stated, they can quote however they'd like.
• ytownfootball

  

  Hot chick $7
  Fat stinky chick $87.50
  
  OSU football guy $1
  NCAA investigator $137
• dwccrew

  

  ytownfootball;610681 wrote:Hot chick $7
  Fat stinky chick $87.50
  
  OSU football guy $1
  NCAA investigator $137

  
  LOL, exactly. There is no MSRP when it comes to tatoos, the artist can pick whatever number they'd like.
• ts1227

  

  Had they only paid $1, they actually could get out of it easier. Pull a Cam Newton and say that you never identified yourself as a player and the artist took it upon himself to charge a price that was below market value. However, they're screwed on exchanging for autographs.
• charliehustle14

  I've been bored waiting for my girlfriend to get off work so I've been searching the depths of the intranetz for any extra info. From what I gathered, the players in question are Pryor, Herron, Posey, Brewster, Newsome, Adams, Howard, J. Hall, Fields, and Oliver.
  
  http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/multiple-buckeyes-inked-at-same-tattoo-parlor-29361
  
  I don't know much about the site or how credible it is.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  These guys would have better off selling their commitment for 6 figures and paying cash for the tats. No doubts about their eligibility then.
• dwccrew

  

  ts1227;610691 wrote:Had they only paid $1, they actually could get out of it easier. Pull a Cam Newton and say that you never identified yourself as a player and the artist took it upon himself to charge a price that was below market value. However, they're screwed on exchanging for autographs.

  
  I would think that they could still pay the $1 and just say the tat was not finished. I have not paid for work until the finished product was done before. Of course you have to have a good relationship with the artist though.
• dat dude

  dwccrew;610679 wrote:Apples and oranges when comparing the tatoo artist to a car dealer. A car dealership has to purchase the vehicle and then given a suggest retail price by the manufacturer. A tatoo artist can name any price they choose. I have had different tatoo artists give me different prices that are way off from each other. It is much more subjective to price a tatoo than a car.
  
  A tatoo artist can price the same exact tatoo for one person at $100 and the next person at $500 if they wanted and not get in trouble. However, if a car dealer tried to sell a car to one person for $10,000 and the next $50,000, there would be legal issues I assume.
  
  So if the players went and paid $1, $5, $10 for the tatoo, I don't see how the NCAA can pursue the issue; even if they sent someone in to get a quote on a tatoo because, as I stated, they can quote however they'd like.

  
  Regardless, you can't pay for a service with an autograph as a college athlete. Therefore, there would be a violation if true. What the NCAA deems to be the fmv, is another discussion.
• ts1227

  

  dwccrew;610705 wrote:I would think that they could still pay the $1 and just say the tat was not finished. I have not paid for work until the finished product was done before. Of course you have to have a good relationship with the artist though.

  
  They still have paid for the finished portion with the autograph, regardless of if they have cash in hand for the rest of it.
  
  That's where they are screwed no matter what, if it happened. They have at least some of a tattoo, and a tattoo artist has an autograph.
• charliehustle14

  ts1227;610710 wrote:They still have paid for the finished portion with the autograph, regardless of if they have cash in hand for the rest of it.
  
  That's where they are screwed no matter what, if it happened. They have at least some of a tattoo, and someone else has an autograph.

  
  Maybe the artist said he could pay for the tattoo once it was finished, but by the way, while you're here, can you sign me something?
  
  Just so much gray matter here. Which is why I have a hard time thinking this will materialize into suspensions.