Some Bush Balance

We've had a lot of great discussion about the Reggie Bush book, but one recent comment caught my eye that put a different perspective on things, and I don't want Steven Smith's insight to get lost in the shuffle:

The proper historical analogy is Jim Thorpe. Thorpe was stripped of his two gold medals for playing semipro baseball, which in 1912 was the moral equivalent of a college athlete receiving an under-the-table payment. In time, the IOC had a change of heart, and Thorpe was eventually given his medals back, some three decades after his death. It would tarnish the credibility of the Heisman Trophy if the Downtown Athletic Club were to make the malum prohibitum regulations of the NCAA a criteria for whether someone was the best college football player in the country.

A number of other people discussed the concept of amateurism and there were some grumblings about how schools profit off of NCAA athletes. Thorpe is the first example I've heard of in which prevailing attitudes changed. Though the scale of Thorpe's compensation was small compared with what is alleged in the Bush case (and in an environment in which he might not have understood the offense), it'll be interesting to see what people think in a few decades ... or whenever athletes are allowed to drive school-issued flying cars.

Marc Isenberg also has some interesting criticisms in his blog, Money Players:

The book relies heavily on secretly taped conversations that took place between Lake and Bush and Lake and Bush's stepfather, LaMar Griffin. Yaeger on the tapes: "Frankly, without the tapes, I don't think you do this book." Under California Penal Code 632 it is a crime to record a conversation without all other parties' consent.

I'm not a lawyer, I'm not interpreting the law, and I'm not accusing Lake of a crime (I'd probably have to take a number, anyway). Isenberg's blog contains more discussion about some loopholes, but that was something that made me go, "hmmmmm."

Finally, if you're just looking to laugh about the whole thing, there's a hilarious Onion-esque post over on Every Day Should Be Saturday.

Comments

[Gerrrg]

I read USA Today's interview with Lake and his family, and I have to say that while I feel sorry for his family, his story still doesn't make sense.

I don't get it why his mother was allowing phone calls to come in and out of her non-profit clinic. If that was for business-related calls, isn't that illegal? And if what he says is true, that all he wanted from day 1 was to get his money back, why did he sue for over $3 million? That's not what I'd call 'trying to get your money back', I'd call that extortion, since he says that he's out just under $300,000. And speaking of the money he says he is owed, where did the rest of the money come from? My math may be bad, but what his sister and mother gave him in 'loans' doesn't amount to the nearly $300,000 he's claiming.

You know, the more Lake talks, the more questions I have.