If Reggie Bush Should Lose His Heisman Why Should Pete Rose Get The HoF
Pete Rose Bet on baseball. Do what you will with that statement. It is a fact. Rose admitted it years after he was banned. The ban was expected. The evidence was overwhelming. You can check these sources at your leisure. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/espn25/story?page=moments/5 ©2009 ESPN Internet Ventures http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2004-01-05-rose_x.htm Copyright 2008 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
The only question is did he bet on the Cincinnati reds to win. I think normally he did. Sometimes to get the juices flowing he might not have. It doesn't matter.The fact he bet and bet on baseball begs the question. As manager of the Reds when he bet he gives the impression that he "could have been" influenced, to control the game in ways not conducive to the best interests of the team. Whether the betting itself was illegal is between him and the justice system. The fact that it might have influenced his decisions on the field. Well, that's between him and every sports fan in the world.
He managed the Reds from 1984 to 1989.He played baseball from 1963 until 1986. He claims he bet on baseball as a manager of the Reds. I "bet" he did it while he was playing.
Now Reggie Bush while a top flight hybrid back with the University of Southern California (USC) took money and gifts from boosters and other sources, for himself and his family. The NCAA has a problem with this type of deportment. I have a way to solve these problems and you can read "NCAA MEANS Not Competent At All" and "Pay College Students-Athletes? Let's Define OUR Terms" to find out what they are. Bush played for USC from 2003 to 2005. He won the Heisman trophy in 2005.
The problem is that after some obfuscation by Reggie and or USC, the NCAA had a "smoking gun" in the guise of sports agent Lloyd Lake. He agreed to cooperate with the NCAA to implicate Reggie in the gift receiving. The NCAA which doesn't take these things lightly, fined USC, took away games in regular season and bowls. It also took away scholarships and made them bowl ineligible for 2010 and 2011. Further it forced them to disassociate themselves from Reggie Bush. One more thing. it made Reggie Bush ineligible to play NCAA football from 2004. That last thing made Reggie's Heisman null and void.
Listen I have no opinion on the Heisman fiasco. Let the Downtown Athletic Club or the Heisman Trophy Trust take the trophy back it they want it. This situation should never have happened. There were too many ways to avoid it. However the only rules Reggie broke were the unnecessary ones imposed by the NCAA. I don't see how Reggie did anything on the field to taint USC. He also did nothing off the field, except take money and gifts, before, according to the NCAA, he had actually EARNED them.
Returning to Pete for a moment. I think he did indeed do things off the field that should have led to great shame. Yet the same people calling Reggie Bush's actions insidious, seem to have no problem with letting bygones-be-bygones for Rose. They want Rose forgiven and allowed into the Hall of Fame. After all what did he do? He simply bet on baseball. Lied for years about it. Said it did not affect his decisions on the field.
Hey what not let it go?
You don't let it go because the second there is the hint that every thing in a sporting event is not one hundred percent proper, it invalidates the event itself. If people can not trust that there is no bias against the team from the player, then all sports fall out of favor. People need to believe that players and the system are above board. Pete Rose does not show that. He in fact is the poster child for the exact opposite.
Bush on the other hand, is the poster child for greed. Yet that greed in no way affected his performance. People never doubted his "veracity" for the team and fans. He appeared to give his all. He never was reported as a problem on campus at that time and hasn't had any problems since he left..... Except for that NCAA sanctions thing, which now affects anything he touched while he played football from 2004 to 2005 for USC. His greed hung all the players, coaches and fans "out to dry"at this college.
So knowing this, I guarantee "you" still want Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame. "You" also still want Reggie Bush put in some penitent state and made to read mea culpa. What Reggie did affects an institution. What Pete did affects the institution of sports.
So tell me again why you want Pete in the Hall of Fame? After you finish please call the NCAA and tell them to "lay off" Reggie and USC.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?