Letter to Mark and Scott Please join me.

[SheltonChoked]

Please follow me in writing to Mark and Scott.

Dr. Keenum,

As an alumnus of Mississippi State the recent punishment handed down by the NCAA to Texas A&M and Johnny Manziel disturbs and infuriates me. Before I go further, this is not a personal attack in our compliance department, or any individuals employed there. That being said, all appearances from the outside seems we are too cooperative, strict, and compliant with our dealings with the NCAA.

In the Texas A&M case, Johnny Manziel was caught, on video, signing items for a dealer to sell for profit in violation of an NCAA rule. For this Texas A&M?s compliance department negotiated a two quarter suspension in a time period of 2 months from the initial public report. The reported estimated monetary value of the rule violation by Johnny Manziel is over $10,000.

Contrast that with the Mississippi State handing of the Will Redmond case. With a similar start of the case in public and not public video evidence, the Mississippi State compliance department negotiated a 72 quarter suspension of the player in a time period of about a year from the initial public report. The reported estimated monetary benefit to Will Redmond was $2,000.

As an MSU fan and alumni, we have been punished eighteen times more for a violation of five times less. This seems to be a fundamental flaw in our dealings with the NCAA. By no means am I suggesting or condoning cheating, rule violations, or any other events that may cause our athletics department violations. I just believe we have to be less cooperative and protect the eligibility and integrity of our Student Athletes.

Thanks you and Hail State!

Sincerely,

Shelton Choked​

 

[seshomoru]

Ours involved a coach.

So there is a very big difference right there. Johnny Football got away with what he did because the NCAA decided the heat it would take for a light penalty would be far less than the heat of actually punishing him. The cases really aren't similar at all.

 

[FirstPoetsThenSunDoggy]

So there is a very big difference right there. Johnny Football got away with what he did because the NCAA decided the heat it would take for a light penalty would be far less than the heat of actually punishing him. The cases really aren't similar at all.

I want to give Shelton credit for expressing the way many of us feel, regardless of the difference in the cases. I am outraged by the finality of the settlement and the included "fact" that JM received no money. It's mind blowing. And for me, it makes all of college football less credible. As I posted yesterday, I may give up the game totally. Pro football is awesomer anyway.

 

[oldawg]

^^^^^This^^^^^

Additionally, a letter such as this needs to be signed before it is taken seriously.

 

[oldawg]

My reply is to Seshomoru. Sorry if any confusion.

^^^^^This^^^^^

Additionally, a letter such as this needs to be signed before it is taken seriously.

 

[SheltonChoked]

I did sign it, but I'm not putting my real name on a message board Mr olddawg.*******

Secondly, so becasue there was a coach involved, Will should have 100x the punishment vs someone caught on video signing items given to a known broker who sells things for money. Johnny said "he didn't know" the guy was making money off of it. Yeah, right Johnny. But that was good enough for the NCAA. After only a month.

This is contrasted with our evaluation that the car was sold at a $2000 discount. Why would we admit to that? Why did we not say, "well it looked like he got it for what it is worth, Mr. NCAA"? What are they going to do? In light of the A&M case, nothing.


And the coach involved was FIRED and has a SHOW CAUSE. He was punished as he should have been. It's the athlete that got more than he deserved.

If you dont see the link there, I cannot help you.

 

[FirstPoetsThenSunDoggy]

I did sign it, but I'm not putting my real name on a message board Mr olddawg.*******

Secondly, so becasue there was a coach involved, Will should have 100x the punishment vs someone caught on video signing items given to a known broker who sells things for money. Johnny said "he didn't know" the guy was making money off of it. Yeah, right Johnny. But that was good enough for the NCAA. After only a month.

This is contrasted with our evaluation that the car was sold at a $2000 discount. Why would we admit to that? Why did we not say, "well it looked like he got it for what it is worth, Mr. NCAA"? What are they going to do? In light of the A&M case, nothing.


And the coach involved was FIRED and has a SHOW CAUSE. He was punished as he should have been. It's the athlete that got more than he deserved.

If you dont see the link there, I cannot help you.

You are 100% correct and the nitpicking in this thread is ridiculous. Makes me wonder who on this board is helping our athletic department screw this stuff up for a paycheck.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Sesh,
I disagree. One case has a coach. The coach was fired and has a one year show cause. That means he is unemployable at an NCAA institution for a year, maybe more. OK. Now, both cases involve publicly reported "improper beneifits" on more than $1000 in value. Both were reported in by a reputable media source and referenced as a source a person of questionable reputaion, with something to gain from the story coming out.

Now are they identical, No. But they are close enough that the punishments should be at least in the same ballpark.


And if that is too far out there for you. How much did Sydney have to repay as an Illegal benefit? $12,000. How much did the broker, WHO HAS A VIDEO OF HIM SIGNING THINGS FOR HIM, say he gave Manziel? $10,000+. How much proof did they have on Sydney? Nothing. How long did it take to review the case and the punishment?

How long was Fant suspended? One game. For borrowing money for AN HOUR. Not signing 4000 items to sell.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

Where's the video? I haven't seen it.

 

[57stratdawg]

They don't have anything on JFF. They have some dealers that TOLD ESPN that they paid JFF, but there isn't a video of the exchange, and the dealers didn't talk with the NCAA. They didn't speak with other news outlets other than ESPN either.

Contrast that with us, where they had Devinner giving first hand accounts, saying he saw Redmond getting $100 handshakes, and they had the car being bought at less than it's "true market value".

If you want to complain about the timing (a year vs. a few months) then that's fine, but there is a large difference in the amount of evidence in the two scenarios which makes them apples to oranges, IMO. If you want to compare Redmond to a prior case, Tyrelle Pryor is a much more apples to apples comparison.

What the NCAA needs is a whistleblower to say "yes, I was there. I saw this. Here's the credit card receipts, here's my cell phone records.." They didn't have that with JFF and they had that in Devinner.

 

[FirstPoetsThenSunDoggy]

They don't have anything on JFF. They have some dealers that TOLD ESPN that they paid JFF, but there isn't a video of the exchange, and the dealers didn't talk with the NCAA. They didn't speak with other news outlets other than ESPN either.

Contrast that with us, where they had Devinner giving first hand accounts, saying he saw Redmond getting $100 handshakes, and they had the car being bought at less than it's "true market value".

If you want to complain about the timing (a year vs. a few months) then that's fine, but there is a large difference in the amount of evidence in the two scenarios which makes them apples to oranges, IMO. If you want to compare Redmond to a prior case, Tyrelle Pryor is a much more apples to apples comparison.

What the NCAA needs is a whistleblower to say "yes, I was there. I saw this. Here's the credit card receipts, here's my cell phone records.." They didn't have that with JFF and they had that in Devinner.

What bothers me is the hasty resolution of the case. How hard did they look for the things you rightly point out that they need? How can it be believed that he signed 4000 items without compensation? I'm confused.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Seriously?, it was OTL.

Try google.

 

[futaba.79]

You might want to have somebody proof it......

before you send it. Too many errors to count.

 

[DerHntr]

What's more sickening is our student athlete lost a year and a half and our former PAID coach lost a year. Until coaches are held more accountable than the athletes nothing will change. The coaches will always look the other way when it isn''t their checkbook being hindered.

 

[SheltonChoked]

They had more on him than they did Sydney. And they have him on cell phone video signing the items for a broker, that is the violation. It's another violation for him to be paid for it.

 

[HardyStreetAlumniClub]

If they didn't have anything then why did they suspend him for a half? I don't get it. If they suspended him AT ALL they would have had to find something to justify the grounds for suspension.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Thanks for you input.

 

[57stratdawg]

If they didn't have anything then why did they suspend him for a half? I don't get it. If they suspended him AT ALL they would have had to find something to justify the grounds for suspension.

Because he violated the "Spirit of the rule" knowing that other people were going to profit off of his signature. And, him being the outstanding young man that he is, he agreed to a half game suspension just so they could put the matter behind them and "get back on the field and quickly as possible".

Look I think that's all ********. I fully believe he got paid the $8,500 to sign some autographs. I would point out that the Dealer's video was made to validate that he signed them, not that he got paid to sign them. That's important point.

 

[Arloguthrie]

Not bad, but I would go with a more direct approach, something like,

Dr. Keenum,

As an alumnus of Mississippi State, after the recent punishment handed down by the NCAA I wanted to say Bracky. Before I go further, Bracky. That being said, Bracky.

In the Texas A&M case, Johnny Manziel was caught, on video, signing items for a dealer to sell for profit in violation of an NCAA rule. Contrast that with Bracky. With a similar Bracky, Bracky Bracky’d a 72 quarter Bracky for a mere two thousand Brackys.

As an MSU fan and alumnus, Bracky. This seems to be a fundamental Bracky in our Bracky. By no means am I Bracky. I just believe we have to be less Bracky.

Thanks you and Hail State!

Sincerely,

(Not Bracky)

 

[FirstPoetsThenSunDoggy]

before you send it. Too many errors to count.

I've seen worse. "seems" in paragraph one and the ? instead of ' in the second paragraph. Some style issues to quibble with in paragraphs 3 and 4. You could argue that these interfere with the clarity of meaning, but Shelton's message comes through regardless. Great job imo.

 

[Shamoan]

my issue is this, since when did the ncaa start requiring evidence? and since when did the ncaa become known for investigations that lasted a matter of weeks? these are both very new phenomena in ncaa athletics and its clear to me that the ncaa is changing significantly...so why should our compliance department not change as well? this is a very different era and we need to lawyer up like everyone else is doing and quit prostrating ourselves in front of a governing body that only has power through our cooperation with them.

 

[FormerlyHighLifeRebel]

I understand that Joe Schad saw the video and that the video supposedly exists, but has it ever been made public? I don't want Joe Schad or anybody else to tell me what's on the video, I want to see the video. Until then, I don't know what's on the video and neither does anybody else who hasn't seen it.

 

[Center Z]

I'm just glad that someone realizes that it's more about Stricklin/Keenum.

I understand the frustration. Our players do seemingly tame **** compared to the Newtons/Manziels of the world, and we get hammered while they get wrist slaps. But the idea that Bracky Brett is totally at fault for what we receive is absurd - I think he is doing what he is told to do. I think Stricklin/Keenum tell him to run however stringent a ship they want to run, and he takes it from there. So all this "FIRE BRETTKY BRACK!!!1" **** is misguided from my perspective. I do agree that we could get away with the more ticky-tack **** if we tried, but it would have to start from the top.

 

[olblue.sixpack]

They had more on him than they did Sydney. And they have him on cell phone video signing the items for a broker, that is the violation. It's another violation for him to be paid for it.

The smoking gun is evidence that he got paid for it. Do they have that yet?