In defense of the NCAA
by WindyCityDawg on Sep 8, 2010 9:45 PM EDT
Email
PrintLet me be clear: I love AJ Green. In my humble opinion, he is the best receiver in Georgia history and is likely to go on to be one of the top 25 receivers in NFL history. There are few individuals playing on Saturday here in this great nation that have more talent than AJ. To top it off, he sacrifices his body for the better of the team every Saturday, without hesitation, without reserve, and without any thought towards his NFL future.
AJ Green sold a game jersey. To an agent. There is no way that AJ thought this was okay. In fact, he undoubtedly knew or should have known this was a violation of NCAA rules. After the 2003 debacle wherein a number of our past heroes sold their SEC CG rings, AJ absolutely knew this type of transaction was against the rules. He knew the rules and he violated the rules. And he deserves to be suspended.
To top it off, the sale was not to some random person on eBay. It wasn’t to some fan like….me….or any of my friends. It was to an agent. Frankly, the reports out now don’t even make it sound like it was that much of a mystery: it wasn’t a go-between or a friend of an agent. The sale was to an individual defined as an agent under NCAA rules.
The NCAA took a long time to reach a decision on this. That’s because the infraction involved a) an improper benefit received by a player; b) that stemmed from an improper transaction; c) that involved an AGENT. My guess is they investigated the sale, the method of sale, and the individual (who turned out to be an AGENT). They probably spent another week figuring out the punishment. I think this is an appropriate, albeit frustrating amount of time to reach a just conclusion and result. Sale without an agent = 2 games. Agent interaction, no money in hand = 2 games. Sale + agent interaction = 4 games. I don't see any problem with this.
I wish AJ was playing this week, but he isn’t and he shouldn’t be. He shouldn’t play week 3 or week 4 either. What he should do is apologize to his family first, his teammates second, and his fans third. I hope he stays; he doesn’t owe anybody anything, but it’d be nice to have a full season of AJ Green before we see him off to his profitable and, hopefully, glorious NFL career. I love watching AJ play, but this is an appropriate consequence of a poor decision.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
On agents...
“To top it off, the sale was not to some random person on eBay. It wasn’t to some fan like….me….or any of my friends. It was to an agent. Frankly, the reports out now don’t even make it sound like it was that much of a mystery: it wasn’t a go-between or a friend of an agent. The sale was to an individual defined as an agent under NCAA rules.”
You’re aware that an “agent” can be anyone who promotes the athlete’s career in exchange for benefits, right? Though I have no inside information about how this went down, from the press release given by the NCAA AJ could very well have sold the jersey to someone who then sold it on Ebay. He could have sold it to a pawn shop; once the jersey is paid for and subsequently marketed as valuable because it is x athlete’s jersey, the re-seller is an agent.
So the NCAA definition of an agent COULD be
me if I had in fact gotten either by paying or showing up at picture day, a t shirt or something similar autographed by one of the players and then selling it for more money than said t shirt is actually worth without the signature? Or does it have to be something purchased from the player?
Tough to define
I’m not entirely up to speed on the definitions but the statement says an agent is “anyone who markets or promotes a student-athlete.” One would think the re-sale of a jersey by a collector or pawn shop owner would be a the promotion or marketing of a piece of memorabilia rather than the individual athlete themselves — at least that’s how I’ve understood it. I could be completely wrong on this though. I also have no inside information.
by WindyCityDawg on Sep 8, 2010 10:09 PM EDT up reply actions
My guess is that the NCAA believes that is a distinction without a difference
because they are trying to stop players from individual promotions outside the team that involve improper benefits. Every one of these players is constantly surrounded by a group of friends and family that at any time can and do act as promoters of the player, just -if they are on the legal side of the NCAA-not in a way geared to create benefits to the player/player’s family.
The thing that is illegal is the benefit to a player regardless who it comes from (think job or car from program donor), but in this case it was in exchange for the promotion. The potential to get a benefit in exchange for lending your name to something of value—ANY UGA jersey does not go for $1K, but AJ GREEN’S does—that potential is constantly there, and as soon as the thing is resold as “AJ GREEN’S JERSEY,” it is an act of career promotion.
it is an act of career promotion
precisely because the value is in the name of who owned it, not the jersey itself.
I'm confused.
I think the fundamental distinction would be this: the (hypothetical non-agent) owner of the AJ Green jersey wants AJ Green to succeed professionally so that the AJ Green jersey increases in value. The promoter of AJ Green that (happened to purchase the AJ Green jersey) wants AJ Green to succeed, without giving much weight to how that success increases the value of the jersey.
My dream job is to be a compliance director and I am at a loss as to how define an agent. I will not succeed in my dream job.
by WindyCityDawg on Sep 8, 2010 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions
NCAA definitions = IRS definitions, and they suck
Speaking from my tax background – I can tell you what income is according to the IRS – simply put – unless we say it isn’t, it is income. Income is not limited to earnings, or payments received in cash, or income in exchange for a good or service. Unless the IRS specifically says something is not income, it is income and thus taxable income.
Seems to me the NCAA’s definition of “agent” is basically the same, unless we say someone is not your agent, they are. The broadness of the definition quoted above, “anyone who markets or promotes a student-athlete.” says I am AJ Green’s agent. I promote AJ Green as an athlete. I even do it publicly on this blog. So if I give AJ Green anything AJ has received an improper benefit.
Maybe that’s the way the definition should read, but in my mind, it is overly broad. Even the IRS has limits, they are simply covering themselves by stating “unless we say otherwise, include it.” This limits potential arguments of those seeking to evade taxes. The NCAA has done the same thing, instead of say requiring sports agents to register with some licensing board prior to marketing an athlete (hey there’s an idea) and then imposing sanctions against the agents for breaking the rules, they do stupid shit like suspending a player for 8% of his ENTIRE college career.
Apparently, if any player sells a jersey at a yard sale to any fan who tells another person – hey check out our player, they should forfeit 8% of their entire college career – yeah, i don’t think so.
No AJ should not have sold the dang jersey to anyone, fine I got it. Yes there has to be consequences for violating the rule that he dang well should have known better than to violate. But as Kyle said far more eloquently than I did or could, this punishment doesn’t fit the crime.
"Never refuse to do a kindness unless the act would work great injury to yourself, and never refuse to take a drink- under any circumstances." Mark Twain
Worst post ever on this blog. EVER. BY FAR.
This was not an agent in the real sense of the word. Please do some research.
Enlighten me.
I have no reliable information on the buyer. As I posted in response to TKK’s original post, if this is a friend of a friend with some distant relationship with an agent, fine, perhaps the suspension should be two games. The handful of sketchy posts/info I saw naming the buyer had the buyer identified as a relatively well known agent. If you know something different, please let me know. I’d love to have some faith restored.
by WindyCityDawg on Sep 8, 2010 11:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks, WindyCityDawg.
Do you have a link to that? I’m mostly going by Seth Emerson, who didn’t seem to have that level of detail. Where did you see it that the jersey was purchased directly by someone who is actually, rather than technically, an agent?
That’s not a challenge; I’m just trying to get as much good information as I can. Much obliged.
Go 'Dawgs!
Trying to find it
It was just garbage message board stuff — nothing at all reliable. I haven’t really seen much reliable information on the identity of the person (a collector, agent, or otherwise). I thought it was on dawgpost but I’m having trouble finding it.
by WindyCityDawg on Sep 9, 2010 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
My Objections:
1) the nature of the buyer has not been made clear to the public, nor has AJ’s knowledge of that nature. The accounts that I’ve seen say that the buyer was a memorabilia collector or dealer, which is a far cry from being an actual agent, but counts due to the vagaries of the rule.
2) the nature of the buyer in this particular instance seems, as Kyle pointed out, to be completely irrelevant, as this seems to be a one-off transaction that was – very importantly – at market value (rather than an underhanded way to sneak money to AJ).
3) I really don’t think there would be as much of an uproar about this if the NCAA had suspended Dareus for say, 6 games. But for him to let someone else pay his way to an agent-hosted party TWICE, receiving straight-up benefits worth at least $1,800, and to be suspended for only 2 games, while AJ receives $1,000 (from a buyer whose nature is still publicly ambiguous) and gets suspended for 4 seems fundamentally inconsistent and unfair.
I personally feel that 4 games is excessive on its face; however, in light of their treatment of the Dareus situation, it’s indefensible.
History
Dareus probably flipped on everybody at North Carolina at the instruction of Nick Saban and Alabama’s lawyers and got some leniency. I feel for AJ, but unless he sold this to a relative (which would still be wrong), I think he had to know this was an NCAA violation and, as such, he set himself up for a punishment. It’s tough to know if the punishment fits the transgression given the lack of public information.
My guess is someone gets a FOIA over to UGA soon regarding the “facts submitted by the institution” and we can pass judgment following review of the submission.
by WindyCityDawg on Sep 8, 2010 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Folks, it doesn't matter what an agent is to you.
Podunkdawg is right about how they’re defining it, IMO.
But the reason it is broad is, again, it kinda has to be because of all the potentlal improper profiting that can happen with that everyone really is a potential agent to a market commodity (college athlete) who is mandated OFF the market. With the blanket “everyone is a potential agent” approach registration is unnecessary and the burden falls on the player and program to recognize that you don’t sell your jersey. At all. EVER. To anyone.
In this case (not in the IRS’), being broad means being simple.
And that is the only time I will take the NCAA’s side in this, because I think the penalty is way too severe and very inconsistent with other NCAA actions (Dareus, Masioli).
NCAA NAZIS
Sorry, I just don’t buy it. Yes, AJ broke yet another idiotic NCAA rule and YES he should have known better. But how about the punishment fitting the crime.? Get the jersey back or donate the $ to charity, serve a one game suspension and if the NCAA really wants blood, let AJ run stadium steps for an hour and let’s get on with life and football.
J. Keith Contarino
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
