Shariff Floyd - $2700 = 2 game suspension

• se-alum

  

  How about this question. Where does the kid come up with $2700 to pay back to charity, in one week?
• ytownfootball

  

  enigmaax;888244 wrote:It would be hypocritical if all situations were the same. You just can't compare every situation and expect the punishment to be the same. OSU's players got the same ban as Georgia's player for selling memorabilia. Clearly the NCAA doesn't want students to have an open season to make money off school-related products. Still, those OSU guys basically got a favor by being able to trade an additional game for the Sugar Bowl, which they should've missed.
  
  The NCAA doesn't like agents being involved. They don't like recruiting advantages being gained.
  
  This doesn't fit any of those situations. I don't know of any off the top of my head, but if you can find a similar case and compare it to what the NCAA did here, you might have a point about hypocrisy. The OSU situation isn't a valid point-of-reference, though.

  Ok, maybe not hypocritical in the purest sense of the word. Let's just go ahead and call it unfair, flat out. Unfair that one amateur athlete received more than twice the amount of "benefit" than five others and only gets 2 games where as the five other amateur athletes get 250% more punishment.
  
  F all the circumstances. The point is that the NCAA has become a damn kangaroo court with rules that are more difficult to follow than the IRS tax code.
• j_crazy

  

  se-alum;888284 wrote:How about this question. Where does the kid come up with $2700 to pay back to charity, in one week?

  
  I was thinking this but didn't know it was paid already.
• Scooter1369

  

  So between Floyd and Rainey, I'm guessing UF is the standard destination for high school kids who receive impermissible benefits?
• Speedofsand

  

  se-alum;888271 wrote:Nobody has brought up UF, except you and Speed. NOBODY has said anything about UF. Good lord man.

  You brought OSU into the OP and compared it to Floyd's UF susp., but we can't mention UF in this thread?
• wildcats20

  

  se-alum;888284 wrote:How about this question. Where does the kid come up with $2700 to pay back to charity, in one week?

  Donors? Alumni? More illegal benefits?
• Speedofsand

  

  http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/6944931/ncaa-says-florida-dt-sharrif-floyd-sit-another-game
  
  He just has to make arrangements to pay $2700 to charity. He does not have to pay the money now. I guess he will have to stop sending his Pell Grant money to his grandmother to pay her bills and send it to the NCAA.
  Then we give $200,000 to grandma and don't tell Sharrif about it.
• Fab1b

  

  No one is saying UF did anything wrong here! What is being said is that you are taking up for the kid and defending him because he plays for the team you like, UF. I agree what this kid got vs Miami is straight BS. Also what OSU got compared to the Miami players is BS, AJ Green's was BS too compared to Miami! But let's not forget the kid here did take 2700, correct nothing to do with any Univ. however it is still 2700 in extra benefits and compared to what others got for far less than this, this should be more!
• lhslep134

  

  Illegal benefits are illegal benefits. If the NCAA thought it was more serious they would have suspended him for more than 2 games. Forget the BS Miami case for a second. I'm not defending Florida right now (I never have on here), but I think the NCAA is trying to make a point by suspending AJ Green for 4 games for selling his jersey to an agent (using his name for money), and 5 games to the OSU players for trying to profit on their name. It doesn't appear that Sharif Floyd used his name to sell himself, moreso just received improper money. Don't get me wrong, I think the NCAA rulebook is whack, but at the same time I can see why the OSU players/AJ Green got more of a suspension than Floyd.
  
  I know OSU fans are understandably upset, but at the same time the nature of the crime must be taken into account IMO.
• j_crazy

  

  lhslep134;888446 wrote:Illegal benefits are illegal benefits. If the NCAA thought it was more serious they would have suspended him for more than 2 games. Forget the BS Miami case for a second. I'm not defending Florida right now (I never have on here), but I think the NCAA is trying to make a point by suspending AJ Green for 4 games for selling his jersey to an agent (using his name for money), and 5 games to the OSU players for trying to profit on their name. It doesn't appear that Sharif Floyd used his name to sell himself, moreso just received improper money. Don't get me wrong, I think the NCAA rulebook is whack, but at the same time I can see why the OSU players/AJ Green got more of a suspension than Floyd.
  
  I know OSU fans are understandably upset, but at the same time the nature of the crime must be taken into account IMO.

  
  I can't understand why OSU guys got more than green. Or why Trent Richardson Julio Jones mark ingram et al. Got nothing when they did the same thing.
• lhslep134

  

  j_crazy;888466 wrote:I can't understand why OSU guys got more than green. Or why Trent Richardson Julio Jones mark ingram et al. Got nothing when they did the same thing.

  Well I think the OSU guys should have gotten the same suspension as Green. I was shocked when they got more than Green. I would assume the reason 'Bama got away with it was they were not able to be proven guilty. Believe it or not the NCAA doesn't pick and choose who to punish. They are handcuffed by proof. There was overwhelming proof in the OSU case. Overwhelming proof in the Green case. Not so much in the 'Bama case, much to the dismay of other teams' fans.
  
  
  For those clamoring for Auburn, Oregon, etc. to be busted, their time will come. The NCAA needs to wait until they have undeniable proof. Look how long it took them to punish USC. It sucks, but it's the nature of the beast.
• ytownfootball

  

  Not upset...just am really tired of the effin' NCAA showing absolutely zero consistency. Zero. Don't really care if any of those guys play another down in the Scarlet and Grey, if they valued their time in the uni they should have kept their shit in a shoe box 'till they graduated.
• wildcats20

  

  j_crazy;888466 wrote:I can't understand why OSU guys got more than green. Or why Trent Richardson Julio Jones mark ingram et al. Got nothing when they did the same thing.

  The OSU players got the same suspension as AJ Green, 4 games. The university and the football program then suspended them the 5th game.
• j_crazy

  

  wildcats20;888535 wrote:The OSU players got the same suspension as AJ Green, 4 games. The university and the football program then suspended them the 5th game.

  
  Yes I keep forgetting that. Regardless there is plenty of evidence for the Alabama stuff. Sbb posted tons of it.
• lhslep134

  

  wildcats20;888535 wrote:The OSU players got the same suspension as AJ Green, 4 games. The university and the football program then suspended them the 5th game.

  Wrong?
  

  INDIANAPOLIS -- Five football student-athletes from The Ohio State University must sit out the first five games of the 2011 season for selling awards, gifts and university apparel and receiving improper benefits in 2009, the NCAA has determined.

• j_crazy

  

  lhslep134;888546 wrote:Wrong?

  
  Shit. what? My question remains then.
• wildcats20

  

  lhslep134;888546 wrote:Wrong?

  It was said everywhere after the suspensions were announced that it was 4+1 from the university.
• LJ

  

  wildcats20;888570 wrote:It was said everywhere after the suspensions were announced that it was 4+1 from the university.

  
  Thought it was 4 + 1 for not reporting it or some shit?
• lhslep134

  

  wildcats20;888570 wrote:It was said everywhere after the suspensions were announced that it was 4+1 from the university.

  Everywhere? I'm not trying to be combative but I couldn't find a single article that said that. Can you find one?
• wildcats20

  

  lhslep134;888579 wrote:Everywhere? I'm not trying to be combative but there's no article that says that. Find one.

  I'm looking. And I know I and others posted several quotes when it all happened.
• wildcats20

  

  LJ;888571 wrote:Thought it was 4 + 1 for not reporting it or some shit?

  Yeah, that was it.
• lhslep134

  

  wildcats20;888587 wrote:Yeah, that was it.

  Still can't find an article saying that.
• enigmaax

  LJ;888571 wrote:Thought it was 4 + 1 for not reporting it or some ****?

  The whole explanation is lame, but ^^this is correct.
  
  Remember the premise for being able to play in the Sugar Bowl was that the players were not adequately educated on the rules. So once they became aware of the rules (ha ha), they should have immediately reported the violations. Refers to Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president of academic and membership affairs:
  

  Lennon said a game was added to the usual four-game penalty because the players did not "immediately disclose the violations when presented with the appropriate rules education."

  http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5950873
• se-alum

  

  Speedofsand;888400 wrote:You brought OSU into the OP and compared it to Floyd's UF susp., but we can't mention UF in this thread?

  Absolutely you can bring up UF, but you guys were making it sound like we were attacking the University, when in reality, nobody had mentioned it. I think Floyd being suspended is ridiculous, if what we're hearing is true. However, if you make the decision that he received impermissable benefits, the punishments should be in line with others that received impermissable benefits.
• stroups

  

  j_crazy;888542 wrote:Yes I keep forgetting that. Regardless there is plenty of evidence for the Alabama stuff. Sbb posted tons of it.

  
  I agree, that Alabama shit quietly got swept under the rug