Bryce Brown is Apparently Not Eligible. UT is Appealing.
Well, this is frustrating.
The University of Tennessee is appealing the initial ruling over Bryce Brown. Details themselves are a little scant, but reading between the lines implies that Bryce Brown is not eligible to play at the moment. It is important to note that this is an 'initial ruling', whatever that means in their parlance, and not a 'final ruling', which leaves the appeal process open.
From the GVX article linked above:
UT officials wouldn't comment on the specifics of the ruling, however, a repayment of any extra benefits Brown may have received when he was in high school and a one- or two-game suspension at UT are possible, but that is considered a worst-case scenario.
UT officials reiterated that the NCAA investigation has nothing to do with the Vols' recruitment of Brown, who was ranked the No. 1 prospect by Rivals.com in 2009. The investigation began early this year, before Brown signed with UT in March.
Things we already knew: UT did absolutely nothing wrong, and this is centered around the fundraising that Brian Butler did to get Bryce (and others) out to college camps.
From Mike Hamilton:
"Our hope is that sometime in the next two-and-a-half weeks we'll get a more favorable ruling as to what his amateur status is and what he has to do to make sure that he is able to be eligible to play."
That tells us that the ruling is currently not favorable, which must mean that Brown's eligibility as an amateur was lost due to the fundraising, and that he is therefore not eligible to play.
Out of 6 running backs, we are now down to 3, having lost Creer to departure, Williams to injury, and Brown to the NCAA's probing into his highly felonious and criminal activities as a 15-16 year old kid in the streetwise hood of Wichita. Yes, I'm venting a bit. Steady as she goes, and we'll see when the details come out, but this really feels stupid.
Oh, and Reggie Bush does not approve.
0 recs |
24 comments
|
Comments
Oh No!
A man helped a kid fulfill his dreams. THE KID MUST BE BURNED!!!
It’s sick, in this case, because I really don’t think that Brown is in the wrong here. Butler, maybe but the fact that we are talking about this shows that the NCAA really doesn’t know. I think it’s a fair deal to prohibit fundraising to send a kid to a camp in the future but you shouldn’t punish people for breaking a rule when they really didn’t know they were breaking it, which I think is the case here.
by bobo_the_vol on Aug 19, 2009 9:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m hanging on to the fact that I don’t know the details. But the outward appearances all point to this as being unreasonable. If, at 16 years old, Bryce Brown had been smoking week and getting drunk, the NCAA wouldn’t have anything to say about it. Now, because somebody helped him get to college camps, he’s ineligible. I realize those are two entirely different issues, but the scales are imbalanced.
Wait for the facts. Wait for the facts.
(I’m reminding myself, btw.)
by Hooper on Aug 19, 2009 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just realized that when I wrote this:
Brown’s eligibility as an amateur was lost due to the fundraising
I should have written this:
Brown’s eligibility as an amateur waslostcompromised due to the fundraising
It’s more accurate. For what it’s worth.
by Hooper on Aug 19, 2009 9:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Ugh this makes me want to pull my hair out
Simple fact is this is a gray area. Together they have flirted with the rules, and while not outright against them, my feeling is that the NCAA does not like the precedent set. So of course they are going to try and make an example of it all to prevent anyone getting similar ideas. Of course, this at the cost of a kid’s life.
We could get into the issue of other people making money off of student-athletes and the hypocrisy of the NCAA doing just that themselves, but it won’t bring an end to anything.
RIP Steve McNair (1973 - 2009) Retire #9!
Member of the Committee to Keep Keith Bulluck.
Eric Berry for Heisman!!
by Pride of the Southland on Aug 19, 2009 10:05 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Agreed that this is splitting hairs...
but if a two game suspension is the worst possible outcome, I feel much better about the whole thing
Will - Rocky Top Talk
by Will on Aug 19, 2009 10:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The lost practice time is a bigger deal, I think.
He can’t practice, right?
Eric Berry for sending the guy who wins the Heisman spinning 720 degrees in the air at the podium - or for intercepting it and returning it to where it rightfully belongs
by Graysnail on Aug 20, 2009 6:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
We can have a fundraiser for him to practice with a nearby football team. ;-)
by bobo_the_vol on Aug 20, 2009 7:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And how does USC continue to march on unscathed?
Official MCM Hater!
Retire #9!
by gramsey712 on Aug 20, 2009 8:56 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Please...
I understand your frustration but…
If the NCAA had any tangible proof re: Bush, SC would have been hammered by now.
A school can’t monitor what goes on 150 miles away between the parent of a player and a wanna be agent. That is where the NCAA has problems, how do you punish a school for something a parent of a player did? The player may have found out later about it but do you expect the kid rat his parents out???
The fact that NCAA acted this quickly in regards to Brown shows they had some pretty solid evidence.
by Paragon SC on Aug 20, 2009 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Solid evidence of what exactly?
_________________________________
Eric Berry is better at football than you
by kidbourbon on Aug 20, 2009 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's the million dollar question
What did BB do wrong that all of these other guys/prospects involved in the same stuff didn’t do?
Tennessee WILL beat Georgia on the way to 9+ wins in '09!!!
Eric Berry For Heisman!!!
by VolBrian on Aug 20, 2009 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair point...
I should have said “alleged solid evidence” but they didn’t act on rumor they had to have something to acted this fast…
by Paragon SC on Aug 20, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wasn't necessarily fast
The investigation started before he even committed…
Tennessee WILL beat Georgia on the way to 9+ wins in '09!!!
Eric Berry For Heisman!!!
by VolBrian on Aug 20, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"A school can't monitor what goes on 150 miles away between the parent of a player and a wanna be agent"
But they should monitor what a kid does when he is a sophomore in high school?
USC is going down man. As soon as they get ol’ Reggie on the stand under oath. But I didn’t mean to start anything with ya’ll. It’s just frustration.
College football does more and more every year to lose me as a fan.
Official MCM Hater!
Retire #9!
by gramsey712 on Aug 20, 2009 9:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That was supposed to be a reply.
I am sure I hit the reply button. Shoot.
Official MCM Hater!
Retire #9!
by gramsey712 on Aug 20, 2009 9:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No UT should not have to...
the problem here is UT is the injured innocent bystander here…they won the Bryce Brown sweepstakes but they should not be punished.
They were doing their own thing but now that Brown is on UT’s roster they have to carry the paper. It is absolutely wrong, but tell me when the NCAA has done anything with consistency…
As for SC going down…until the NCAA actually produces a document with alleged infractions it is a minor distraction…I will worry about it then.
We’re cool… no offense taken
by Paragon SC on Aug 20, 2009 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wording
I don’t mean to mince words here, as I can certainly understand how Tennessee suffers from and is injured by the loss of a prized recruit. However, I think that framing this as “punishment” on Tennessee is a bit of a liberal application of semantics and misrepresents the issue. I don’t think Tennessee is being fined, censured, or slapped on an administrative level.
Tennessee is not being punished here. Bryce Brown is the entity being punished, and Tennessee is suffering as collateral damage.
by Garfield3d on Aug 21, 2009 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very true. And it’s a distinction worth noting.
by Hooper on Aug 21, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which is what I said...
the problem here is UT is the injured innocent bystander here…
I see your point re: semantics… but punishment or collateral damage take your pick- either way UT gets handed a S*** sandwich they do not deserve.
by Paragon SC on Aug 21, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fortunately, it doesn’t appear to be a very big sandwich. All the talk says 2 games and repayment as a maximum. And for the $7000 cost of the trip with 13 students, Bryce’s portion is in the ballpark off $500. Given that not all of the $7k was from the donors, something slightly less than $500 is probably the final figure. That’s a pretty low number for a loss of amateur status.
by Hooper on Aug 21, 2009 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 













