knapplc
International Man of Mystery
First of all, estimates range between $100,000 and $300,000 that Bush received from various sources, which is not a paltry sum, but that's not the point. The point is that Bush received benefits DIRECTLY from the agent. I'm not giving USC a pass here - they're guilty too. But because they are also guilty does not mean Bush isn't guilty, nor does it mean that Bush shouldn't face consequences.Southern Cal benefited way more than whatever paltry sum Bush received from the the agents, see the thread on top earners in CFB. They knowingly and intentionally allowed illegal money to flow to their players because it got them back on top of totem pole.You don't punish someone by letting them keep a prize they won under illicit circumstances. Bush wasn't a victim here - he knew he was getting illegal benefits. What is it about Reggie Bush that makes you think he should get to keep the trophy? Why not strip the wins and championships? I'm all for that, too. They cheated, and they should e punished. But this tangent about USC making Bush the fall guy... USC didn't receive illicit benefits, Reggie Bush did. Bush's actions were a direct violation; USC benefited indirectly. If anyone should be punished first, it's Bush. Personally, I think they should both be punished.Or, you keep the Heisman at USC and use it as a reminder to never do what this kid did.Stripping Bush of the Heisman makes perfect sense. Would Bush have gone to USC without the illegal perks he got? Without the team surrounding him at USC, does he perform half as well as he did?I might be in the minority with this opinion, but I don't see how stripping Bush's Heisman does anything for you. Sure, the "university" doesn't deserve it, but Reggie Bush does at the very least. Whatever benefits he received, they didn't make him a physically gifted athlete.
There are Heisman-worthy players all over the country, but since many of them play on weaker teams, they don't stand out as much. Bush stood out because he was on a team of all-stars, a team that may not have been put together without those impermissible benefits.
Taking away his Heisman also sends a message to other top-tier athletes that there are consequences for violating NCAA rules. You don't get to take the illegal perks without losing your benefits.
The problem I see with this is that EVERYBODY still knows who Reggie Bush is, and they will continue to know who he is for a very long time. If you're going to strip the Heisman, why not strip the wins and the championships? It seems like USC is making Bush a fall guy for their mistakes, rather than making everybody responsible for the mistakes as a collective whole. Plus, if you're going to strip the Heisman, then why not take away the revenue that he supplied the school? IMHO, taking away the Heisman doesn't change anything and it makes Bush out to be the fall guy, when the university itself isn't innocent.
Distancing themselves from Bush doesn't change the fact that he was still the best player in college football that year. If you strip the Heisman, then strip everything else you benefited from as a university. Don't just take away a Heisman so you feel better about yourselves.
And no, Bush wasn't the best player in college football that year, Vince Young was. Bush was the most popular player on the most popular team, that's all. Vince was the better player, and proved it on the field.
I don't understand why this concept is so hard for people to grasp. There are so many excuses being made for Reggie Bush.... it's baffling.