» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: I don't agree with this

Written By: Lifesunfair on 08/06/06 at 8:42 pm

Two young men from the University of Oklahoma who play football for the Sooners will not be allowed to play this year or ever again in the NCAA.  The reason being? They both worked at a car dealership, which I have just found out recently is against NCAA regulations.  However drinking is against NCAA regulations if caught so many a number of times and drugs are against NCAA regulations period, no second chances.  Funny thing is though I know other athletes who have been caught for exessive drinking, even drunk driving who will still be hitting it up on the basketball court this year and others who have had troubles with marijuana who will be showing there natural ability on the football field. 

To think that working at a car dealership is going to get the same punishment as the abuse of alcohol and/or drugs just to me seems ridicously unfair.  I mean I believe in rules and regulations, but sometimes they're stupid.  Any thoughts?

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Davester on 08/06/06 at 8:47 pm

   Do you know of any linkies to articles on this..?  Just so I can read-up groove ;) on...

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: GoodRedShirt on 08/06/06 at 9:09 pm

Err... why would working at a car shop be grounds for banishment? I don't understand... obviously there must be something else in this story...?

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 08/06/06 at 11:49 pm

I can't imagine it's exclusive to automobile dealerhsips.  I'm guessing it has something to do with commercial promotions and conflict of interest. 

Anyway, isn't that the career trajectory for most college ball players?  If not the pro's, the Ford dealership!

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Lifesunfair on 08/06/06 at 11:51 pm


I can't imagine it's exclusive to automobile dealerhsips.  I'm guessing it has something to do with commercial promotions and conflict of interest. 

Anyway, isn't that the career trajectory for most college ball players?  If not the pro's, the Ford dealership!


It does seem that way doesn't it?  Elway has one of the nicest ones. 

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Lifesunfair on 08/06/06 at 11:53 pm

This was actually not something I read on the internet.  I heard it on the radio the other day. 

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Davester on 08/07/06 at 12:12 am

   "Their hours at the car dealership sometimes coincided with Sooners practices..."

   College football: Bomar incident at Oklahoma takes spotlight off SEC

   Ahhh...moonlighting will get'cha every time groove ;) on...

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Lifesunfair on 08/07/06 at 12:40 pm


   "Their hours at the car dealership sometimes coincided with Sooners practices..."

   College football: Bomar incident at Oklahoma takes spotlight off SEC

   Ahhh...moonlighting will get'cha every time groove ;) on...


yeah but why then are they not allowed to quit working at the car dealership and play football? To my understanding on the radio they are not allowed back into the football program at Oklahoma or anywhere else period, end of story.  That to me is unfair. If a guy can stop shooting up crack to play basketball for 5 months out of the year why can't these boys be allowed to play football during football season and then work at the car dealership during there breaks?

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: CatwomanofV on 08/07/06 at 1:19 pm

From that article, it sounds like there is a bit of shannanigans going on-not just working at a car dealership but working at THAT car dealership. The article was a bit sketchy to say the least.



Cat

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 08/07/06 at 1:58 pm

College sports are like politics--to much money and too many perks involved.  Sometimes there's a scandal, but when all quiets back down, things go on as just like they did before!
::)

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: 80s_cheerleader on 08/07/06 at 1:59 pm


yeah but why then are they not allowed to quit working at the car dealership and play football? To my understanding on the radio they are not allowed back into the football program at Oklahoma or anywhere else period, end of story.  That to me is unfair. If a guy can stop shooting up crack to play basketball for 5 months out of the year why can't these boys be allowed to play football during football season and then work at the car dealership during there breaks?
Why are they not allowed to quit?  Because they weren't actually WORKING there.  If you read the story, they were getting paid around $500 (no, that's not a typo-2 0's) an hour and the hours they were "working" were the same hours they were at practice.  In other words, they were getting $$ for nothing (and their chicks for free, I'm sure) and this particular dealership had a history of "questionable" employment/business practices where the OU players were involved.....I'd bet that if you look into the ownership of the dealership, you'd find either an alumni (or 2) from OU or some BIG football fans.  It's against NCAA guidelines to get "perks" while you're a player on a team.....you violate the guidelines, you're out for good.


**After looking into this a bit more, it appears the dealership had a contract with the university to supply vehicles to coaches & athletic department staff.

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 08/07/06 at 2:25 pm


Why are they not allowed to quit?  Because they weren't actually WORKING there.  If you read the story, they were getting paid around $500 (no, that's not a typo-2 0's) an hour and the hours they were "working" were the same hours they were at practice.  In other words, they were getting $$ for nothing (and their chicks for free, I'm sure) and this particular dealership had a history of "questionable" employment/business practices where the OU players were involved.....I'd bet that if you look into the ownership of the dealership, you'd find either an alumni (or 2) from OU or some BIG football fans.  It's against NCAA guidelines to get "perks" while you're a player on a team.....you violate the guidelines, you're out for good.


**After looking into this a bit more, it appears the dealership had a contract with the university to supply vehicles to coaches & athletic department staff.

Ain't that a hoot?  I wish I could've gotten in on a deal like that when I was in college, but I din't have the physique to play no foot-bawl!
;D

It reminds me of what went down with UMass basketball in the '90s.  We (I see we 'coz the Minutemen are the home team)--we won the championship in '97, I think it was, but the victory is astarisked in the books.  Players were getting illegal perks, such as luxury cars, gold chains, and hookers sent right to their dorm rooms.  There was one alleged orgy--well, I won't go into details--but look at the size of UMass dorm rooms and the size of UMass basketball players.  How you fit three basketball players, five hookers, and a sleazy lawyer into one dorm room for carnal acts is a geometric brainteaser on its own!  That feat alone should have gotten their second tier math requirement waived!
:P

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Lifesunfair on 08/07/06 at 5:18 pm


Why are they not allowed to quit?  Because they weren't actually WORKING there.  If you read the story, they were getting paid around $500 (no, that's not a typo-2 0's) an hour and the hours they were "working" were the same hours they were at practice.  In other words, they were getting $$ for nothing (and their chicks for free, I'm sure) and this particular dealership had a history of "questionable" employment/business practices where the OU players were involved.....I'd bet that if you look into the ownership of the dealership, you'd find either an alumni (or 2) from OU or some BIG football fans.  It's against NCAA guidelines to get "perks" while you're a player on a team.....you violate the guidelines, you're out for good.


**After looking into this a bit more, it appears the dealership had a contract with the university to supply vehicles to coaches & athletic department staff.


Alright then it makes more sense to me now. It's a perks thing now and it is completely fair. I don't feel bad not reading the story because it's not my reponsibility or problem that the news ancor on the radio didn't give the story clearly and clarified.    Nice reference to Dire Straights by the way. 

As far as violate guidelines and being out for good, I'll have to agree more along with Maxwellsmart and say that politics plays much more into it than rules ever did or ever will.

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Lifesunfair on 08/07/06 at 5:21 pm


Ain't that a hoot?  I wish I could've gotten in on a deal like that when I was in college, but I din't have the physique to play no foot-bawl!
;D

It reminds me of what went down with UMass basketball in the '90s.  We (I see we 'coz the Minutemen are the home team)--we won the championship in '97, I think it was, but the victory is astarisked in the books.  Players were getting illegal perks, such as luxury cars, gold chains, and hookers sent right to their dorm rooms.  There was one alleged orgy--well, I won't go into details--but look at the size of UMass dorm rooms and the size of UMass basketball players.  How you fit three basketball players, five hookers, and a sleazy lawyer into one dorm room for carnal acts is a geometric brainteaser on its own!  That feat alone should have gotten their second tier math requirement waived!
:P


Stuff like that goes on all the time.  There are so many scandels and wrong doings within atheltics both pro and amateur.  I mean take Bobby Knight, any other coach would have been that abusive towards his players he woulda been history but God forbid, Bobby was a winner and isnt' that all that matters anyway?  Please hence the sarcasm, I'm junior Varsity coach, winning isn't my top priority. 

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Davester on 08/07/06 at 7:11 pm

  This is interesting...

  Here's the cryptic message that blew the lid off...

  Aggiegrant06, Oklahoma's Deep Throat groove ;) on...

  http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2006-6/1193336/icon_ip2.gif

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Mushroom on 08/08/06 at 8:45 am

Any time you participate in school sports, you have to take care that you do not violate any of the rules.

When I was in school, I was on the school Ski Team.  And I was also an avid bowler, and wanted to get onto a league with my father.  However, it was not a father-son league, but a typical adults mixed doubles league.

Hpwever, this was an ABC/WABC league, bot a YABA league.  And participating in ABC/WABC can disqualify you from "amateur standing" in some sports.  My dad and I sat down with both the ABC, and then the school sports superintendent.  He urged me to try out for the school bowling team, but I said it was bowling with my dad that was important.  Finally a compromise was reached, in that I was a member of ABC (at this time, they almost never took somebody under 16), but was not allowed to participate in any of the pots and prize money splits at the end of the season.

Our team came in dead last, which was no problem there.  However, I did win for Most Improved Average.  I kept the belt buckle that went along with it, but had to decline the prize money that went along with it.

However, we had a great time, and I did not jeopardize my ability to participate in other High School sports.  And if I had gone to College, my status there would have been unaffected as well.  I had also been in several different skiing competitions, and had to turn down cash prizes to protect my status.  If you participate in sports (pro or amateur), you have to protect your ststus by following the rules.

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: freeridemt on 08/10/06 at 11:22 am

yes now that more is known about what the dealership did for those players I say about time.. When collage players receive money for not working, doesn't that make them pro's? Also remember the dealership is own and run by boosters. I mean I wish when I was in school I had someone giving me money and cars...Don't we all? :P

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: Mushroom on 08/10/06 at 11:50 am


yes now that more is known about what the dealership did for those players I say about time.. When collage players receive money for not working, doesn't that make them pro's? Also remember the dealership is own and run by boosters. I mean I wish when I was in school I had someone giving me money and cars...Don't we all? :P


It does not make them Pro's, but it does violate many NCAA rules.

In the 1980's there were a lot of scandals around things like this.  They would do thing like give cars to prospective players to get them to go to their college, arrange free apartments, give them "allowances", and many other things to bribe the players to their school instead of a rival.  There were also grade fixing deals, where a student would be guaranteed to get nothing less then a C in every calss, in order to keep their eligability.

This was simply a more subtle form of bribery.  The student would be "employed" at a job they did not have to show up to, and be given a larger then usual salary.  These guys can basically kiss their pro careers goodbye now though, because there are probably not any teems that would be willing to take a chance on them.  If they would break rules to do this, what would prevent them from breaking rules in reguards to gambling when they were pros?

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: freeridemt on 08/10/06 at 11:54 am


It does not make them Pro's, but it does violate many NCAA rules.

In the 1980's there were a lot of scandals around things like this.  They would do thing like give cars to prospective players to get them to go to their college, arrange free apartments, give them "allowances", and many other things to bribe the players to their school instead of a rival.  There were also grade fixing deals, where a student would be guaranteed to get nothing less then a C in every calss, in order to keep their eligability.

This was simply a more subtle form of bribery.  The student would be "employed" at a job they did not have to show up to, and be given a larger then usual salary.  These guys can basically kiss their pro careers goodbye now though, because there are probably not any teems that would be willing to take a chance on them.  If they would break rules to do this, what would prevent them from breaking rules in reguards to gambling when they were pros?

Can't say that. 96 players that have been suspended at one time or another have made the NFL. Go to Espn they have the research.. In the last 12 years alone 96 players.  I don't know what the total is for all time.. But you are right about everything else. :)

Subject: Re: I don't agree with this

Written By: freeridemt on 08/10/06 at 11:58 am

Ok my bad 34 of those where for Steroids. But those are the known ones that got busted for roids. How many did not? I am going off track sorry.

Check for new replies or respond here...