Ok, if a player takes money from an agent or from a booster or from anyone really he loses his amateur status and is ineligible to play in college. Generally speaking, teams that use ineligible players are breaking a rule.

In other words, even if the program has no knowledge of what happens should they vacate their accomplishments because they were playing with an ineligible player?

There are two situations that have come up in the past 12 years or so off the top of my head that conflict with each other. First, Marcus Camby was ruled ineligible after the fact and UMass vacated their Final 4 appearance. Second, Corey Maggette was ruled ineligible after the fact but the NCAA did not press the matter with Duke.

I guess what I'm asking is what is the OFFICIAL NCAA ruling on this? I don't see how the NCAA can differentiate b/t taking money in high school to lose your status and college because it seems pretty black and white to me that if a player is ineligible, and a team plays him (knowingly or not), they are breaking a rule. Is this simply a case of turing the blind eye to the big programs? I'm very interested in seeing how the USC and Reggie Bush thing turns out..

[Edited on February 27, 2007 at 2:58 PM. Reason : x]

2/27/2007 2:57:43 PM

did the ncaa demand that umass give up their final four appearance? i always thought schools did that on their own to avoid further penalties from the ncaa

2/27/2007 2:59:29 PM

in high school it can be assumed that you are a dumbass and unaware of all ncaa regulations. But in college the coaches and athletic dept. have probably drilled it into you that if you are given anything other than a candy bar you are breaking the rules.

2/27/2007 3:00:41 PM

^^

Quote :

"When Missouri turned in its case in the spring of 1996, it took the NCAA less than four months to find the Tigers guilty, strip them of their 1994 NCAA Elite Eight appearance and demand the repayment of $97,000 in revenue. In March of 1997 UMass turned over its case, and just seven weeks later the NCAA vacated the school's 1996 Final Four appearance, took away 35 victories and asked for restitution of $160,000 in revenue. In both cases, the schools and its coaches were exonerated of any wrongdoing. "

[Edited on February 27, 2007 at 3:02 PM. Reason : ^ that's weak. they know the rules from the time they are first recruitied.. which is likely FR year]

2/27/2007 3:02:25 PM