Thoughts on USC's return of Reggie Bush's Heisman

but he took illegal benefits…

You have to register to read this but it is simple to do…

Byline: Drew Sharp

DETROIT _ Michigan can’t bow to its institutional arrogance or paranoia this time. It can’t appease its loyalists by invoking the code of silence, nor can it cry that these latest charges are the fabricated fruit of a supposedly hostile media.

Charles Woodson left a paper trail.

Once again, Michigan finds itself under the NCAA microscope with evidence that Woodson probably compromised his eligibility for the 1997 football season. He has thrown into question the validity of his Heisman Trophy-winning efforts and the Wolverines’ share of the national championship.

Under the NCAA’s skewed vision of due process, the accused are guilty until proven innocent. So the onus is on Woodson to clear his name, and he will get a fair opportunity to dispute accusations he took clothes and a trip from an agent.

But if he did place himself and his teammates at risk by associating with a now-disbanded Columbia, S.C., sports management firm, then Michigan should forfeit the games directly affected by Woodson’s actions _ the season-opening victory over Colorado and the 1998 Rose Bowl triumph that earned the Wolverines the Associated Press national championship.

This ridiculous notion that you can’t punish a team for the actions of an individual is naive. The essence of collegiate competition is the team concept, and it’s understood that an individual’s errors come with a collective consequence.

It’s not clear whether Michigan plans on hiring an outside law firm to oversee its internal investigation. Calls Wednesday to athletic director Bill Martin were not returned.

NCAA rules are broken everywhere by everyone. But this argument isn’t about cheating, it’s about accountability.

It doesn’t matter what wasn’t known then, but what’s known now. There’s no statute of limitations on ethics and integrity, and if the accusations are verified without suitable punishment, then U-M no longer can assume moral authority. Its credibility as an athletic entity bound by a code of conduct will be seriously compromised.

What’s honorable about winning a piece of the national championship with your star player ineligible? If true, it forever taints the merits of a season that captivated the country, largely through the dazzling performance of a two-way star who proved that the Heisman shouldn’t exclude defensive players.

If the charges are true, there should be an asterisk with U-M’s name attached.

Understandably, the NCAA would prefer that this unseemly episode disappear. But isn’t the NCAA guilty of rushing to judgment by suggesting that Michigan probably need not worry about penalties before an investigation even begins? And doesn’t it appear to the skeptical eye that the NCAA is opening the door for this to be swept under the carpet, mostly to avoid the embarrassment of stripping a national title from one of its most notable schools?

Documents uncovered by Columbia’s newspaper, the State, suggested that Woodson and then-teammate David Bowens violated NCAA rules when they flew to South Carolina on Memorial Day weekend 1997 at Summit Management’s expense. They stayed at the Myrtle Beach Hilton Oceanfront Golf Resort. A May 29, 1997, letter from Summit co-founder James Brown thanked Woodson for visiting. And there’s also an invoice showing that Woodson later received $13,777.10 worth of suits, sport coats and a tuxedo from a Columbia clothier _ just days before the Heisman ceremony in December.

Everyone eagerly awaits Woodson’s side of the story, the ramifications of which could be costly.

The NCAA vacated Massachusetts’ 1996 Final Four appearance when it was learned a few years later that Marcus Camby had accepted gifts and services from an agent. It didn’t matter that the school pled ignorance of Camby’s involvement or that the player had long since left. UMass had to forfeit the games Camby played.

Penn State suspended running back Curtis Enis from the 1998 Citrus Bowl when it learned that he accepted a suit from an agent. The school’s action was twofold. If it didn’t discipline Enis, it could have exposed itself to future NCAA scrutiny. And it risked having to forfeit the bowl if the violation came to light, regardless of whether it had prior knowledge of the infraction.

Safety Marcus Ray, Woodson’s former roommate, was suspended for six games in 1998 when U-M and the NCAA learned of his dealings with a Cincinnati agent. Ray played in the first two games that season, but forfeiture wasn’t considered because the Wolverines lost those games.

U-M apologists think forfeiting games four years later would serve little purpose, but they’re more interested in excuses rather than answers. They would prefer to join the masses and concede that college athletics has a sordid underbelly, instead of sending a strong message to future stars that irresponsibility comes at a high price.

But if neither the NCAA nor its schools care about accountability, then how can they demand the same standard from their athletes?

X X X

© 2001, Detroit Free Press.

Here is part of another….

Michigan received copies of the documentation implicating Woodson _ a receipt for an airline ticket to South Carolina; a letter dated May 29, 1997, from Summit co-founder James Brown thanking Woodson for visiting over Memorial Day; and invoices from a clothier in Columbia, S.C., suggesting that Woodson received more than $13,000 worth of suits, sport coats and a tuxedo just days before the Heisman Trophy ceremony in December, 1997.

And, according to reports, a credit card number used by Summit is on the receipts.

Yet Michigan found no reason to further pursue, opting once again to erect a stone wall.

“The current climate of conduct involving those agents who cross the line makes it even more difficult for a head coach today,” Carr said. "I want to be able to protect the integrity of our program, and that means when we get information from the newspapers, we look into it to determine if there was any impropriety. We found no evidence of that.

“But you have to deal with the reality today that kids from certain financial backgrounds are going to be influenced. And all we can do as coaches is to show kids these examples and warn them of the dangers.”

But what lesson does silence teach? If you ignore it long enough, it’ll go away because nobody wants to talk about it?

If, indeed, the Woodson episode is over before it could even gain traction, its legacy is a continuation of the don’t-ask, don’t-tell mind-set that further corrupts college athletics. Such duplicity only erodes the credibility of those who blindly and steadfastly believe their institutions rise above the morass. But, in reality, they wallow in the mud like everyone else.

The bolded part in the first article sounds a lot like USC’s situation. So, if Woodson didn’t admit to it as you state (and I will go with what you say for now) then he is no different than Bush right? The paper trail is there…so should he be held to the same standard?

I will keep looking for this I know I saw it some where…but Woodson is dirty…just like Bush.