- Thread starter
- #21
rolltide14_0
~V--I--P~
- 10,491
- 70
- 48
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Location
- Pensacola
- Hoopla Cash
- $ 1,833.33
- Fav. Team #1
- Fav. Team #2
- Fav. Team #3
Here's an article from Tidesports by Cecil Hurt, hopefully I don't get in too much trouble for posting it.
"In the initial stages of a breaking story such as the one involving former University of Alabama offensive lineman D.J. Fluker and four other Southeastern Conference players accused of accepting money and gifts from agents via a middleman, there is always more rhetoric than fact. There are more questions than answers. But if you can avoid the hysteria, the quest for information boils down fairly simply, except - as always - when the future is involved.
What happened? Yahoo Sports alleges that Fluker took compensation from suitors looking to represent him in the NFL.
Whether there is proof that the NCAA can access is another question, but in the world of common sense, the story is entirely plausible, so much so that investigative reporter Armen Keteyan, said that agents paying top players is "the rule not the exception these days."
In Fluker's case, it appears that he went with a different agent for representation and hard feelings (or a desire to be repaid) ultimately led to someone going public, which is the usual way such matters see the light of day - because an aggrieved party wants them to.
Combine that with Alabama's high profile in the college football world - does anyone think this story would have been a blip on the ESPN/Twitter radar screen if it involved only Tennessee and Mississippi State? - and, as Shakespeare says, thereby lies a tale.
So let's be clear on what it is not: "Alabama paying players." No one is making that accusation, at least not the authors of the Yahoo story or anyone who carefully reads it. It is an agent story, not the first nor the last. So the question, as far as UA is concerned, is not just what happened, but when it happened and whether Alabama should have known about it or could have prevented it.
The NCAA has dealt with such cases before. A few - notably at Southern California and North Carolina - have made it all the way to the Committee on Infractions, albeit as part of cases that also included broader issues. On the specifics, however, the COI has spoken with notable consistency in both cases. We will use the language from the 2012 North Carolina case, Finding No. 4: "This committee reiterates, as it has done in the past, that institutions must do more than just educate their student-athletes regarding agent and amateurism issues. Institutions must be particularly vigilant in monitoring those student-athletes who demonstrate potential as top professional prospects."
That is a high standard, but a couple of points need to be made. The NCAA cannot make a standard so high that it is unreachable. And in the USC/Reggie Bush case, and in the North Carolina case, the NCAA found significant involvement at the coaching staff level. Assistant coach Todd McNair in the USC case and assistant coach John Blake at North Carolina were cited. There has been no allegation on indication of similar involvement at Alabama.
With that said, the matter must be investigated and Alabama needs to demonstrate that it was, in Nick Saban's words from Wednesday, "completely above board." Prediction is never safe, but if Alabama demonstrably did everything it could, the NCAA likely will not proceed vindictively. "
"In the initial stages of a breaking story such as the one involving former University of Alabama offensive lineman D.J. Fluker and four other Southeastern Conference players accused of accepting money and gifts from agents via a middleman, there is always more rhetoric than fact. There are more questions than answers. But if you can avoid the hysteria, the quest for information boils down fairly simply, except - as always - when the future is involved.
What happened? Yahoo Sports alleges that Fluker took compensation from suitors looking to represent him in the NFL.
Whether there is proof that the NCAA can access is another question, but in the world of common sense, the story is entirely plausible, so much so that investigative reporter Armen Keteyan, said that agents paying top players is "the rule not the exception these days."
In Fluker's case, it appears that he went with a different agent for representation and hard feelings (or a desire to be repaid) ultimately led to someone going public, which is the usual way such matters see the light of day - because an aggrieved party wants them to.
Combine that with Alabama's high profile in the college football world - does anyone think this story would have been a blip on the ESPN/Twitter radar screen if it involved only Tennessee and Mississippi State? - and, as Shakespeare says, thereby lies a tale.
So let's be clear on what it is not: "Alabama paying players." No one is making that accusation, at least not the authors of the Yahoo story or anyone who carefully reads it. It is an agent story, not the first nor the last. So the question, as far as UA is concerned, is not just what happened, but when it happened and whether Alabama should have known about it or could have prevented it.
The NCAA has dealt with such cases before. A few - notably at Southern California and North Carolina - have made it all the way to the Committee on Infractions, albeit as part of cases that also included broader issues. On the specifics, however, the COI has spoken with notable consistency in both cases. We will use the language from the 2012 North Carolina case, Finding No. 4: "This committee reiterates, as it has done in the past, that institutions must do more than just educate their student-athletes regarding agent and amateurism issues. Institutions must be particularly vigilant in monitoring those student-athletes who demonstrate potential as top professional prospects."
That is a high standard, but a couple of points need to be made. The NCAA cannot make a standard so high that it is unreachable. And in the USC/Reggie Bush case, and in the North Carolina case, the NCAA found significant involvement at the coaching staff level. Assistant coach Todd McNair in the USC case and assistant coach John Blake at North Carolina were cited. There has been no allegation on indication of similar involvement at Alabama.
With that said, the matter must be investigated and Alabama needs to demonstrate that it was, in Nick Saban's words from Wednesday, "completely above board." Prediction is never safe, but if Alabama demonstrably did everything it could, the NCAA likely will not proceed vindictively. "
