The **** just hit the fan at USC....Know why Sidney is here now........
- Thread starter 99jc
- Start date
....and I am thinking Shmuley is probably right. People act like nothing bad can come of this for State, and if there is anything to find, it will be found on the front end, and he simply won't be cleared. I think it's just as likely that something comes out two years after the fact (i.e. Mayo) and we get some type of punishment, forfeiture of games being the likely outcome if State is totally clean, and obviously much worse if we are found to not be clean. Neither would suprise me, considering the reputation of the Sidneys. I don't know how I feel about that.
but I don't think that State has anything to worry about. Worst case, Sidney never gets to play a game of college basketball. I truly believe that Stansbury hasn't given the Sidney family a dime because if he did, he just single-handedly gave the NCAA a hand written invitation to come to Starkville and bust us by signing Renardo. It just doesn't add up. If clean, all Stansbury and his team can do is be honest during the investigation and as long as they don't hide anything, I don't see how MSU could get penalized for anything down the road.
Unfortunately, though, I think the chances of ever seeing Sidney in an MSU uniform just dropped to about 20/80.
Unfortunately, though, I think the chances of ever seeing Sidney in an MSU uniform just dropped to about 20/80.
They could have had an interest-only mortgage. That would actually make sense knowing that they would be there for a short period of time.
You guys are assuming too much. You really don't know anything.
You guys are assuming too much. You really don't know anything.
...depending on how you look at it. Sidney could get cleared to play and then it comes out two years later that he compromised his amateur status beforehand by taking money from somebody. That's not far fetched at all. The question is, what are the consequences of that? I know forfeiture of games is a part of the equation. If that's it, that's one thing. If there's more to it, that's something else.
it seems grossly unfair for us to forfeit games if Sidney is initially cleared, we've done nothing wrong (other than allow him to play), and it later turns out someone at USC or eslewhere gave him money. I know at that point they probably wouldn't be able to punish him, but why punish us when they told us he was OK on the front end.
Before I get the obvious response, I know they're the NCAA and they can do whatever they want, especially if it doesn't make any sense.
Before I get the obvious response, I know they're the NCAA and they can do whatever they want, especially if it doesn't make any sense.
but I don't believe that State would get penalized for it because they weren't the ones that caused the loss of amateur status. The only other way that MSU would be in trouble is if they knew that Sidney shouldn't have been eligible but played him anyway. If MSU plays by the rules from here out, I don't think they have anything to lose.
I think the case with Sidney is similar to the case with Albert Means a few years back. It eventually came out that hundreds of thousands of dollars changed hands during his recruitment. Kentucky and Alabama were the primary schools at fault, but UT, Ole Miss, and at least one other school were allegedly involved but they backed off much like UCLA. Once the **** hit the fan, a couple schools got in trouble, but Means went on to sign with Memphis and played 4 years there. As long as Stansbury hasn't done anything wrong, MSU is much like Memphis in this case in that we really have nothing to lose if we play by the rules.
I have a bad feeling, though, that the NCAA is primed to make a statement with this one. It's going to get nasty and it's probably going to drag out for another year at least. I wouldn't be surprised if Sidney doesn't play this year simply because the NCAA drags out the clearing process for that long.
I think the case with Sidney is similar to the case with Albert Means a few years back. It eventually came out that hundreds of thousands of dollars changed hands during his recruitment. Kentucky and Alabama were the primary schools at fault, but UT, Ole Miss, and at least one other school were allegedly involved but they backed off much like UCLA. Once the **** hit the fan, a couple schools got in trouble, but Means went on to sign with Memphis and played 4 years there. As long as Stansbury hasn't done anything wrong, MSU is much like Memphis in this case in that we really have nothing to lose if we play by the rules.
I have a bad feeling, though, that the NCAA is primed to make a statement with this one. It's going to get nasty and it's probably going to drag out for another year at least. I wouldn't be surprised if Sidney doesn't play this year simply because the NCAA drags out the clearing process for that long.
With this news coming out, I am betting the NCAA does not clear Sidney for a very long time if ever. Like has already been said, I think it will come down to either Sidney never playing for State or being cleared after a long battle with the NCAA. There is no question in my mind that his family has taken money from someone (most likely third party....one of these handlers). It is just a matter if the NCAA can find the money trail.
I'm enjoying the banter back and forth on this deal. I'm not arguing with you about your Means example, just seeking clarification. I think the Means-to-Memphis example may not be an appropriate example for comparison. Here's what I lifted from the Memphis Athletic Dept Football site under Means' Bio:
Memphis didn't play his big *** UNTIL the NCAA cleared him. My point was that Sidney has not been cleared to play anywhere yet and it's highly possible that the NCAA will drag this **** out. Any attempt to play him before his eligibility status is determined, even if the NCAA told Byrne "y'all can sign him," is risking later forfeits.
DynamicDawg said:
Seeing as how its been documented that they were renting...you dont know anything either. Super, we all know nothing.
The mortgage talk was, for me, an easy way to explain what most likely the monthly house payments would be. The greater point is that they would have to be able to afford 75Kish/year for house payments alone. And thats a lot of money for what they have been known to work as.
If he was supported by USC, then why did Sidney commit to UCLA? If UCLA gave him money and USC didn't then he might get cleared since UCLA is not being investigated.
...I am almost sure I've read somewhere where it is at least partially MSU's responsibility to investigate whether or not he is an amateur, a job that falls on Brackey Brett's shoulders. If we investigate, deem him to be an amateur and apply for him to be cleared, I think we bear some responsibility later if evidence comes out that he was not an amateur and we made the wrong determination. I think that is how it comes back to bite State, fair or not. From the NCAA's perspective, they have no way of knowing whether or not we really investigated the situation and found nothing or whether or not we found something and hid it. That's why we are somewhat responsible.
At the end of the day, Sidney's father has failed him. I realize that we are talking about two totally different high school players, but Winston Varnado seems to me to be a prime example of how a father should handle things. In all of the draft talk, it has been "Jarvis's decision." There's no "we." A father with a prospect should work with their son to ensure that he is healthy, in shape, and has a good attitude. Instead, Sidney Sr. has pimped Renardo all over the country with his hand out the whole time. In the end, there is a pretty good chance that Sidney's college eligibility will be compromised, because of the actions of his father. By extension, that could end up costing Sidney millions. He should've understood that as long as Sidney developed and worked hard, one day his son would be a millionaire, and by extension, he would too. Instead, he got greedy, and shopped his son all around the country taking money from shoe companies. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
At the end of the day, Sidney's father has failed him. I realize that we are talking about two totally different high school players, but Winston Varnado seems to me to be a prime example of how a father should handle things. In all of the draft talk, it has been "Jarvis's decision." There's no "we." A father with a prospect should work with their son to ensure that he is healthy, in shape, and has a good attitude. Instead, Sidney Sr. has pimped Renardo all over the country with his hand out the whole time. In the end, there is a pretty good chance that Sidney's college eligibility will be compromised, because of the actions of his father. By extension, that could end up costing Sidney millions. He should've understood that as long as Sidney developed and worked hard, one day his son would be a millionaire, and by extension, he would too. Instead, he got greedy, and shopped his son all around the country taking money from shoe companies. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
is from Veazey's blog entry on 05/04/09
My question: Why? If this situation is totally clean, why lawyer up? And why do it 5 months before all this happens?
One needs to simplify this argument. What drove Sidney to USC in the first place?
Money.....more than likely.
Money.....more than likely.
No buying.. Who where they renting from might be the better question, and how much were they paying??
USC or UCLA alumni ?
USC or UCLA alumni ?
That may be true. But I do know that prospective student athletes have to complete an amateur declaration on the NCAA website to become eligible. To me, this suggests that the amateur status of an athlete is largely left up to his or her honest representations. If they complete the form and do so in a way that indicates they are an amateur, I think it would be hard for the NCAA to ignore that. However, if a school has reason to know that an athlete may not be an amateur, I doubt that school can point to this declaration and say "see - he's an amateur." That school probably has to do some level of due diligence to make sure that athlete is an amateur. What that is, I don't know. I suspect that is the situation with this player.
But given the NCAA's pace on the USC investigations, Sidney will be in the NBA long before they ever get around to getting serious about it. Not to mention that there's no obvious source who's going to come forward and tell the NCAA about Sidney's payoffs. So, while I'm definitely a little concerned about it, I'm not exactly staying up nights worrying about it. And even in the worst case, all that would happen to us would be that Sidney wouldn't play for us next season. We'll still be a pretty decent team without him.
Before graduating, I flew out to San Diego for a job interview with a certain company. I was offered the job to start at $31,000+commission. After looking into the housing market, and the overall COL, I decided San Diego was not the place for me. Well, not going out right after college into an entry level position. I took a job the SAME COPMANY in Birmingham and my salary was $28000+ same commission split. I dont think that extra $3K was going to help me get over the COL hump.
When I was out there, I also came across the fact that only 40% or less of people in that area onw their homes. Housing is too expensive to qualify for such a mortgage.
I dont know what the percentage is in this area, but I would assume it is slightly higher than 40%.</p>
When I was out there, I also came across the fact that only 40% or less of people in that area onw their homes. Housing is too expensive to qualify for such a mortgage.
I dont know what the percentage is in this area, but I would assume it is slightly higher than 40%.</p>