Update on Dez Bryant situation
by silky51 on Oct 13, 2009 7:40 PM CDT
38 comments
link to espn article:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4557113
From what I am reading, there appears to be a timeframe for Dez Bryant to get reinstated by the NCAA in the article:
Bryant's apology accompanies Oklahoma State's formal reinstatement request to the NCAA, in which associate athletic director for compliance Scott Williams asks the NCAA to consider "unique circumstances" and hand down a lighter punishment for Bryant.
Williams notes that "the threshold penalty for a violation of this nature is 50 percent withholding," apparently referring to a standard punishment that Bryant would be forced to miss half of the No. 15 Cowboys' games for his rules violation.
Based upon the last statement, it appears Oklahoma State is hoping to have Dez eligible for at least half of the 12 games they play during the regular season. He played the first 3 games, but sat out the last 2 games......which means he could be forced to sit out at least the next 4 games (yes, this includes missing the Texas game) and perhaps could become eligible once again on November 14 against Texas Tech.
Then again when it comes to the NCAA......who knows.
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
0 recs |
38 comments
| Add comment
Email
Print
Comments
True about youneverknow
Also, if the punishment is “half the games” does the school have any say as to which games that might be?
by edsp on Oct 13, 2009 7:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
From ESPN
As a precedent, the NCAA suspended another player 6 weeks for lying to authorities. However, in that case the player actually lied as a coverup to an illegal benefit (PC). Call me a pessimist – but I would guess 3 weeks – including A&M game and that would bring him back in time for the Halloween game.
by realmccoy on Oct 14, 2009 12:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
so it sounds like..
okla. st is saying you made another player ineligible for 6 games for lying about illegal benefits, so since Bryant lied about nothing (allegedly) then he should miss 6 games at the max, but okla st believes that number should be less than 6 games considering the circumstances.
Knowing this, I agree with you, he’ll miss at least 3 games when all is said and done…..maybe 4 (which would be the Texas game).
by silky51 on Oct 14, 2009 7:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I think it’d be a relief to not face Dez Bryant, I think time served plus the AtM game would be about right.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 14, 2009 7:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Time served
that’s what I think,kinda like that little kid that brought the pocket knife to school(all over the news).You have to look at each case for what it is.
by cpabis on Oct 14, 2009 8:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Whenever I see cases like this I always like to ask, “what if this player/situation was happening to my team?” Doing that usually elicits a more honest opinion.
No doubt if this were happening to Jordan Shipley or Colt McCoy or any starter for the Horns for that matter, we’d be upset with the kid for lying, but we’d be all for reinstatement as soon as possible provided it was really as simple as a lie to cover up nothing.
Now if it was lie to cover up a meeting with potential agents, that is a whole other issue. And I still don’t understand why the NCAA was asking questions in the first place. Did the NCAA call Colt McCoy to ask him about his meeting with Roger Staubach last summer?
Though it will be tempting to throw the race card here, let’s leave it in the deck…but I would like to find out why the NCAA was investigating in the first place. Because if all they were trying to do is shake Dez down, screw them…they’ve got better things to do like getting us a friggin’ play-off system already.
Be nobody but yourself in a world that desperately wants you to be like everybody else.
by 54b on Oct 14, 2009 8:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
There hasn’t been anything resembling closure on the Bush administration. It really warrants some deep investigation and, in my opinion, prosecution, but so far it’s been swept under the rug by the investigators.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 14, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
NCAA
Bryant got turned in by a former Ag player, Gary Oliver, who is now Director of Operations for some organization called Fieldhouse USA. See link.
see Oliver bio below
Gary Oliver, Aggie Doucher
The NYTimes article has an update with a denial from Oliver, but Sanders was the one who reported that Oliver called and turned Bryant in. The timing of it happening during the aTm game week is suspicious though.
by 6th street on Oct 14, 2009 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
additionally
note the author of the NYTimes article and take it with a grain of salt.
by 6th street on Oct 14, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've said this before...
But didn’t it take the NCAA 3-4 weeks to rule on UT’s appeal? Beasley wasn’t cleared until the UTEP game right?
If suddenly Bryant is reinstated tomorrow, UT officials would rightly be pissed off.
by Orangechipper on Oct 14, 2009 11:22 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Plus, you’d think it would take more time to investigate something like this than it would to verify academic compliance, which is generally pretty cut-and-dry.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 14, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lying
What’s the difference between lying about something which is against the rules, and lying about something you only thought was against the rules, but really isn’t? This is why Martha Stewart went to jail, if i remember correctly. Lying to authorities, absent an underlying crime/infraction.
by rchorns on Oct 14, 2009 5:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It doesn't matter what he lied about
He had the opportunity to tell the truth, and he didn’t. I can’t very well expect the NCAA to come down on USC and other schools and players who cheat if I say the NCAA should give Bryant a pass because he was “scared.” Rules are rules. If the punishment for lying to the NCAA is 6 games, then he should sit his ass on the bench for 6 games and be glad he didn’t lose the rest of his eligibility.
I am so unbelievably sick of these privileged athletes who think they are so far above the rules that they can lie and get away with it by writing an apologetic letter after the fact. I’m not saying make an example of Dez Bryant. I am saying enforce the rules. The NCAA needs to start thinking about the message their actions (or lack thereof) are sending.
by bassale47 on Oct 14, 2009 7:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The difference is that the conduct Bryant was covering with the lie was not against the rules. What Bush (allegedly) did was very much against the rules.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 14, 2009 7:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Allegedly is the key word
I think Reggie Bush and OJ Mayo and USC are as guilty as sin, but I can’t prove it, and neither can the NCAA. USC has completely refused to cooperate with the investigation, and the NCAA doesn’t have anything that directly links USC to any of what was going on with those guys. All they have are accusations. How do you punish a school for something they allegedly did?
Dez Bryant’s falsehood is not alleged. It has been confirmed, and it is clearly a violation of NCAA rules. The nature of his “crime” compared to what was happening at USC is not the point.
by bassale47 on Oct 15, 2009 12:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How do we know...
He wasn’t covering something up. He IS A PROVEN LIAR, you know. Suddenly we can believe every excuse he throws out with only Deion being his verification?
by Orangechipper on Oct 15, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s right! Guilty until proven innocent!
Grab your torches, Nation!
by burntorangehorn on Oct 16, 2009 8:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He admitted...
He lied. That’s what he’s guilty of. The rest is irrelevant because you can’t trust anything out of his mouth now.
by Orangechipper on Oct 16, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, so what is the appropriate punishment for lying in response to an inquiry? Are you familiar with the NCAA penal policy for lying?
by burntorangehorn on Oct 16, 2009 10:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
These privileged athletes?
Do you know anything about Dez Bryant? That kid has been through some tough times. Perhaps I just have a soft spot for him since he’s from my hometown. Some insight about him:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/25/sports/ncaafootball/25okstate.html?_r=1&ref=sports
by 2Cor12:9 on Oct 14, 2009 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's another good point
Dez Bryant was anything but privileged. He barely made it into college, academically or otherwise.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 15, 2009 7:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
All college athletes are privileged.
The dude was having dinner at Deion Sanders’s house, for crying out loud. I don’t care what his childhood was like. He has been given the opportunity to create one hell of a life for himself and his family, and he goes and lies to the NCAA about doing something as simple as being in the home of Deion Sanders. Come on. At some point we have to stop blaming a rotten childhood for our actions or assuming that it excuses us from playing by the same rules as everyone else.
by bassale47 on Oct 15, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was a college athlete, and I sure as heck wasn’t privileged. What on earth is the basis for your statement that all college athletes are privileged?
by burntorangehorn on Oct 15, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Author
I see an anecdotal story written by Thayer “the bricklayer” Evans and I stop reading. It may be a great read and totally true, but he has lost all credibility here.
by Jhal2315 on Oct 14, 2009 9:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm sorry,
but saying he should get a lighter sentence because it wasn’t actually a violation he lied about doesn’t cut it.
If he thought it was a violation at the time he was doing it, and he still did it and then he lied about it, that’s as bad as if the action had been a violation.
If he didn’t think about it until the NCAA asked him, then he got scared that it might be a violation and lied, it shows he’s willing to lie to the NCAA to cover up what he thinks is an inadvertent violation instead of admitting it as such and letting the chips fall. It also shows he’s not smart enough to consult his compliance attorneys before answering an inquiry from the NCAA.
Either way, should be same punishment for lying to the NCAA, but at least no punishment for the underlying violation if there wasn’t one (if the six game suspension in the other case was for both the lying and the underlying violation together, then they might have a point).
Kind of reminds me of the drug cases where the drug buyers claim they didn’t actually buy drugs b/c the undercover cops gave them bags of sugar instead of actual drugs.
Anyone else think OK ST. is being slimy by saying the game he supposedly missed b/c of injury was actually missed b/c of this in order to get it as part of his punishment. Either they lied about him being injured when he was actually under investigation or they’re lying now to shorten his punishment. Either way, kind of slimy.
by tdwalsh on Oct 15, 2009 11:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think there’s any way we’d see people making this same argument if it were a Texas Longhorn involved.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 16, 2009 8:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
I would be suspicious of a Longhorn who lied about meeting with a pro athelete when asked. I have always supported Mack keeping our program as clean and up front as possible. I hated to see Ramonce Taylor go in 2006—spectacular talent—but given the choice I would rather have a clean program and risk losing than have questionable characters on our team. It is what makes us different from ousux and usc. Plus, I don’t buy his story. I think there is more to the situation – I posted earlier that Doug Gottlieb has said Dez would disappear for days at a time to workout with Deion. Hopefully we will learn more.
by Orangetower87 on Oct 16, 2009 10:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I support keeping the program clean, but what I’m saying is that I don’t think you and many others would be taking such a hard line against a lie that was intended to cover up something that didn’t even turn out to be a violation.
In big person law, there’s such a thing as obstruction of justice. I’m not sure such a statute exists in NCAA rules. Are you?
by burntorangehorn on Oct 16, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
for some reason you think you know how i would react to a hypothetical better than i would, on the presumption that i am unable to apply the same standard of behavior to Longhorns as to players from other teams. i am telling you as plainly as i can that i want Texas players held to the same standards as everyone else. if we lost Shipley for six games or more for hanging out with a pro, then so be it. yes, i really feel that way and i am not just saying that. accept it or don’t. but you have no grounds for claiming i am a hypocrite.
by Orangetower87 on Oct 16, 2009 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it does exist
I recall seeing in one of the first articles about his suspension that it was based only on his providing false information during an investigation.
Per the 09-10 NCAA Div I Manual (pdf):
10.1 UNETHICAL CONDUCT
Unethical conduct by a prospective or enrolled student-athlete or a current or former institutional staff member (e.g., coach, professor, tutor, teaching assistant, student manager, student trainer) may include, but is not limited to, the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 1/9/96, 2/22/01)
(d) Knowingly furnishing the NCAA or the individual’s institution false or misleading information concerning the individual’s involvement in or knowledge of matters relevant to a possible violation of an NCAA regulation;
by gwh65 on Oct 16, 2009 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There you have it...
And BTW… i think a whole season is excessive. My main gripe is that it took the NCAA 4 weeks to reinstate Beasley after his appeal when it wasn’t even a NCAA violation issue. In this case, it better not take less that that. If the NCAA decides 4 weeks in plenty, no problems here.
But lets not pretend that this is NOTHING. Lying prevents the NCAA from policing anyone or anything. If you can’t expect the truth, then the NCAA is impotent to enforce any rule at all.
by Orangechipper on Oct 16, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Academic non-compliance isn’t a violation issue?
by burntorangehorn on Oct 16, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, so what’s the prescribed penalty? And have players who have actually been found to be in violation, who also lied to the NCAA in the course of investigation of those violations, been punished not just for the violation, but also the lying? If not, and they’ve ONLY been punished for the violations themselves, then I would argue that the standard is set for no punishment for the lie itself, and since there was no violation except for the lie, no punishment for that either. If players have generally been punished for both the lies and the underlying conduct, then the standard would have to be parsed proportionally based on how much of the punishment was based on the lie, and how much on the underlying conduct.
by burntorangehorn on Oct 16, 2009 12:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
consistency
seems like what we all want. BOH wants Dez treated the same way others have been treated in a similar situation; Orangechipper wants a ruling that takes as long to reach for Dez as for Beasley; I want both; and we all want stoops to lay another big fat egg on saturday.
by Orangetower87 on Oct 16, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's fair
I guess what troubles me is this assumption that we know all the facts. This “it was just a lie” mess and “he wasn’t even doing anything wrong”. If he truly wasn’t doing anything wrong than I agree that the penalty is harsh… but the guy in lying has lost any kind of reputation. He has lost the benefit of the doubt… That’s why the NCAA has this rule in place.
Now a whole season does seem harsh. Maybe even 6 games is harsh, but it should be SOMETHING.
by Orangechipper on Oct 16, 2009 1:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree that we may not know all the facts
and that there should be a penalty.
by Orangetower87 on Oct 16, 2009 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
