Yesterday Reggie Bush announced that he would be returning his 2005 Heisman Trophy because of all the sanctions handed down to the University of Southern California for his actions. The Heisman Trophy is awarded to the best collegiate football player of the year and it is highly coveted by players, often more so than the national title. Click the link if you want to know the gory details but basically Reggie and his family were given gifts by outside influences while he was at USC and this is against NCAA regulations. The money, car and plane tickets were all given to the Bush family and this gave Reggie an unfair advantage over other players. Because he went against regulations he has been deemed ineligible and now technically anything he did doesn’t count.
The investigation into Reggie’s college career began years ago and from the beginning Reggie adamantly denied any wrong doing and ignored requests to answer questions by investigators. When it became clear that there were indeed infractions, the NCAA pounced on the opportunity to teach other universities that they would not be tolerated. They sanctioned USC with a two-year post season ban, the loss of scholarships and other program hindering punishments. The NCAA hit hard because there was no cooperation from Reggie and they wanted to show that they were in power. They don’t have any sway over the Heisman Trophy because that is from a provate foundation. It was speculated the the Heisman Trust would vote to take the award back and I would imagine that Reggie did this to save whatever face he has left.
But I think Reggie still deserves the award. It is given to the best athlete on the field and gifts given to the family or player does not affect his abilities on the field. If someone gives me or my family cash and cars it is not going to make me any better of an athlete. Sure I’ll be more comfortable but my ability to run, jump or catch is not affected in any way. Having my family at away-games would be nice but besides a little confidence, what else does it give the player?
I agree that he broke the rules set down by the NCAA and while I don’t agree with the rules themselves, they should still be followed because it attempts to even the playing field for everyone. But if the NCAA was worried about players with access to money and the ability to have their families taken care of, then why haven’t they done anything to keep rich families from giving their children money? Not every athlete comes from the same background. Some come from poor economic conditions while others come from much more lavish lives. If money and gifts made for better players then how come Yale and Harvard don’t have the best athletic programs in the country?
There will always be players that have more than others but that doesn’t necessarily make them better athletes. Reggie earned that award with his football skills, nothing more. If his back-up was given the same things would he have been better than Reggie?
Don’t get me wrong, Reggie deserves to be punished. He broke the rules, refused to help investigators and then lied about it to us all. If he had fessed up or in the least cooperated with investigators these sanctions and the backlash against him wouldn’t be as bad. The NCAA took personal offense to Reggie’s actions and brought down the hammer. The Heisman Trust would have undoubtedly voted to take the award back. Public outcry was just too much against Reggie.
We are not talking steroids here, just money. Because college sports are supposed to be considered amateur sports, there is no compensation allowed for players at that level. This is supposed to keep the sport pure and while it may have worked 50 years ago, it doesn’t now. I don’t have a better solution so until then I will agree with the rules and according to NCAA rules he cheated. But the Heisman Trust is not part of the NCAA. They could vote me the Heisman winner and the NCAA could do nothing about it. This is one of those occasions where the athletes on the field actions are outweighed by his off the field actions. The spirit of the award is that it goes to the best on the field athlete and if you took strictly what Reggie did on the field then he deserves the award.
What do you think? Does what an athlete does off the field affect awards given for on the field actions?
