"We're doing some soul searching ourselves right now. To the best of my knowledge no one has ever had a Heisman Trophy revoked,"--Rob Whalen, Director of Heisman Trophy Trust.
This is the reaction of the director of the Heisman Trophy Trust. Because of a new investigation of the Pac-10 that will look into allegations that USC running back Reggie Bush's family lived in a house set-up by a potential agent last year, there is talk that Bush will be forced to give back the Heisman Trophy.
Obviously, if and only if, these allegations turn out to be true, then Bush certainly won't be looked at in the same manner-and USC would possibly be forced to forfeit their wins from last season.
Bush will get to move on to NFL millions and possible superstardom as one of the top picks in the NFL Draft, while USC will simply wait and will have an investigation looming over the post Leinart-Bush Era.
Suddenly, if true, this makes Pete Carroll not quite so squeaky clean as a fun-loving college coach.
That's a worst case scenario, if all these accusations are true.
Either way, I don't know what the Heisman Trophy Trust has to do with it. Why do they care? Since when did the Heisman Trophy get on a high horse?
Isn't this the same organization that profits every year by large donations, national and worldwide media attention and has a voting process that takes longer to discern the winner than Bush v. Gore?
I guess the Heisman Trophy Trust expects us to believe that no one ever cheated to win the Heisman-or that voters didn't vote begrudgingly or with any kind of agenda.
Whalen continued his statement by saying the Trust would " see what happens and how this plays out."
Um, can I ask why? Did you see how Gino Torretta panned out as an NFL quarterback? Don't you have a laundry list of NFL busts like him? Aren't there criminals and addicts who won your trophy-even one who was an accused murder? Didn't O.J. eventually sell off his Heisman?
Don't talk to us about the character of the Heisman Trophy-nearly a quarter of the winners from the past twenty-five years are selling insurance or working at the local Shell.
Why not just say that there isn't anything that will make you revoke Bush being the 2005 Heisman winner, because the Trophy has nothing to do with NCAA regulations and never has-it's about the most talented and popular athlete in the country every year. The Heisman isn't even really endorsed by the NCAA officially, is it? So why do you care? Because you've got Texas fans that've got nothing better to do than scream for Vince Young to win?
Based on the Rose Bowl game, sure-but based on an entire season, no. And if you're looking for the right back-up winner, this isn't like Miss America-there are skeletons in probably all of their closets, whether it's for illegal contact with agents, classes or grades in general.
I'm not condoning Bush or his family accepting this-with or without USC knowledge-but I've got a problem when the snooty Heisman people try to act innocent in the corruption that is college football. I've got a problem when an organization that supports a winner and sings his praises decides only later that someone isn't worthy of "their" award.
This is life-we don't get redo's, we don't get mulligans and there are no do-over's. You give an award, as you can see with past winners, it sticks. The investigation hasn't even begun-nor is it guaranteed to prove or find anything, but Bush is already being called upon to turn over Mr. Heisman.
Though I'm sure that club president Judge Smails and the other Heisman Trust members believe they're entitled to take back whatever they want whenever they want; but this isn't a Lexus-it's just a Trophy that really doesn't mean all that much in the grand scheme anyway.
Leave the trophy where it's at-you've done it every other time it's been disgraced.
Coming off the massive disappointment of somehow missing out on National High Five Day on Thursday-yes, I went without knowing about it and without so much as a "low-five"-I'm in an interesting frame of mind. The weekend is upon us, I found out my wife is being induced to have our daughter next Thursday and the NBA playoffs are here, so I'm happy. But there's nothing that will get me "riled" up more than Pat Riley.
For some strange reason (or multiple ones), I can't stand the head coach of the Miami Heat.
This in itself is amazing, considering the Los Angeles Lakers are my favorite team; I still salivate over footage from the Showtime Lakers of the 80's, of which Riley was the architect of.
In a way, Riley is everything 80's-even still-from the suits, to the hair right down to the yuppie attitude.
After forcing out Stan Van Gundy (whom we haven't heard from since he left the Heat and can now be presumed to be lost in the Bermuda Triangle), Riley took over as Heat coach on "an interim basis". In January, he went went so far as to say he wouldn't coach past this year.
But yesterday, through a spokesman, he announced he's returning to the Heat bench for the '06-'07 season.
Look, I understand he was tending to his ailing mother-and I wish the Riley family the best-but you tell everyone your coaching back to coach through a spokesman, after indicating heavily back in December that it was most likely a short term gig, that you would look for someone long term?
The way Riles announced it reminds me of an episode of The Office. Steve Carell was trying to help Dwight prepare for a speech and he was explaining sometimes it's not what you say, but when and how you say it. It prompted Dwight to announce to the office that Brad Pitt had been killed in a horrifying car accident. Softly, before leaving the room, he also said that the bonuses promised to everyone weren't happening. No one asked about it, they all were too worried about Brad Pitt.
That's how Riley did it, how he's always done it, with trickery. It's always been a magic act with Pat Riley. Don't pay attention to the right hand while he's doing something with the left. The Heat are on the verge of the playoffs, possibly their best chance to win a title ever. Riley was gone tending to family business, and Larry Brown was taking headlines for his disappearing act in New York, the MVP debate-boom-that's when Riley gets us, a little one sentence blurb from a spokesman; "oh, yeah, um, I'll be back next season."
If you don't believe this hasn't been planned with extreme effort and caution, you're sadly mistaken-and you'd be playing right into Riley's hands. From the moment he realized Shaquille O'Neal was available in the summer of 2004, Riley wanted in. He wanted Shaq, and then he wanted the sideline. But you can't do that all at once-it has to be planned.
Or you could be forgetting that Riley could sell a ketchup popsicle to a woman in white gloves. He's the ultimate motivator, the button pusher and 80's yuppie. He's the Gordon Gecko of coaching, and the NBA is his Wall Street.
He's so good, he even convinced Stan the Man to smile and defend you as he quit. He even got Stan to disappear.
First, land Shaq, then, somewhere down the road; oust Van Gundy by using back channels with the players you brought in and the media to undermine his authority. Heck, float a rumor in the dead of summer, just to see what the reaction is.
Let yourself be quoted saying something like, "I may take a little bit more of an active, I think, participation in some of the things, but for the most part I'm content at doing what I'm doing." Then, when the time presents itself, whisper in Van Gundy's ear about "family" and "pressure". For a top-off, act shocked that Van Gundy resigned. Five months later, announce your coming back for another season on the bench. It's masterful; it's brilliant.
If that's not how it happened, he must have had some dirt on Stan being a double for Ron Jeremy, threatened to expose him and that was that.
See, Van Gundy was on the verge of making Riley obsolete; forgotten. In just two seasons as Heat head coach, Van Gundy had won 17 postseason games, 2nd all-time in Heat history to only Riley's 18. His postseason and regular season win percentages, .605, are Miami's best all-time. Riles can't have that-he's a legend, remember?
Now what I want to know is why doesn't Riley just admit who he is and take a little credit for it-c'mon, it is impressive. Just tell us the truth, Riles, you know you want to. Maybe if you come clean about this scheme, you'll get some belated high fives.
UPDATE: Since this was posted, Pat Riley's mother has passed away. With deepest simpathies to him and his family, let me clarify this is not a personal attack on Riley during this difficult time, just my assessment of the way he's handled his position with the Heat.
Two years ago, my dad and other Yankee fans were telling me that they got the best deal in the world-Randy Johnson, one of the most imposing pitchers ever, had been traded to the New York Yankees. My dad went on and on about how this was a better move than the Red Sox getting Curt Schilling the season before, that this bolstered the pitching staff of the Yankees and gave them a shut-down stopper when they faced Boston's (then) imposing line-up.
I'm pleased to announce that the Big Unit is playing like the Big Sweat Sock. Maybe that's not even completely honest: I'm ecstatic to the point I've heavily debated calling my Yankee loving father and left him some taunting messages. The only thing that stops me? I keep thinking it's no way to repay the man who raised me-I already crushed when I told him I was a Red Sox fan eleven years ago.
Stupid parenting allegiances.
Now Johnson's certainly a Hall of Famer. His career has been impressive throughout, what with 263 wins, both a no-hitter and a perfect game, 4,313 strikeouts (3rd best ever), an incredible 11.12 strikeout-per-nine-innings ratio (1st all-time), 10 All-Star appearances and a World Series win with Arizona in 2001, along with a host of other awards.
I'm not debating his legendary status or his Hall of Fame credentials. I'm not debating the Yankees-Red Sox rivalry and how many championships each has. What I'm talking about is the present and the future. What I'm saying is Johnson's career is closing in on him. What I'm saying is this: you can't hide it anymore, Randy Johnson is no longer an ace-and the Yankees are in trouble.
For years, teams and fans have been jealous of the Yankees and their ability to go out and sign the expensive players. Funny thing is, they didn't start really doing that full-fledged until early this decade. Most of their talent came through the system and was supplemented year after year by a couple big name free agents.
About a month after the Red Sox heartbreaking loss to the Yankees in the '03 ALCS, I made a prediction to my dad: that one day, the Yankees would run out of something. Money, talent, time, trades, options-something. Well, it's finally happening.
They've got hardly any talent left in the minors. You can only trade so many young talented prospects away before the cupboard's bare. And the few that New York does have left have already been called up and are playing, like Robinson Cano and Bubba Crosby.
They're running out of time-Torre, Steinbrenner and Cashman aren't getting any younger (nor are any of the players)-or any less annoyed with one another.
They've got no one they can trade with. Think about it-there are few, if any, teams out there willing to take on the big contracts that the Yankees are saddled with from some of their expendable/trade-able players.
Worst yet (or best yet, as I see it), the Yankees are struggling now. An early 3.5 games back of Boston-and at the bottom of the AL East, if it weren't for a three game home sweep of the lowly Royals, the Yankees would be sitting at somewhere in the neighborhood of 4-9.
Sure, they're going to overpower teams and win a bunch of games scoring 10-12 runs-they're line-up has more All-Stars than an actual All-Star roster with A-Rod, Jeter, Damon, Giambi, Sheffield, Matsui and Williams. It looks like what you get right after buying MVP Baseball and then trading for all the superstars you want at the start of your dynasty's 1st season.
It's the pitching that's going to be their downfall. Start with Johnson, who in four starts has pitched the most innings of anyone on the team-at age 42. Johnson has the most strikeouts, but he's also given up the most hits, the most home runs and the most runs per game.
It doesn't get much better-Mike Mussina, Jaret Wright and Chien-Ming Wang are struggling, while Carl Pavano's butt still hurts from riding so much pine from spending two seasons on the DL.
It makes you wonder: are the Yankees actually one of the worst front offices in all of baseball?
Meanwhile, the Red Sox are starting the season by making themselves look like Theo Epstein is the baseball equivalent of Ken Jennings-in other words, really, really good at his job.
Over the past couple years, while the Yankees have Pavano doing nothing and collecting $9.7 million a season, Johnson picking up $16 million a season and Mussina for a cool $19.6 million last year, the Red Sox have picked up Schilling-who helped deliver their World Series, nabbed the young Josh Beckett and have generally overhauled their World Series roster-mixing veteran stars like Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz with young talent like Coco Crisp, Jonathan Papelbon, Mark Loretta and Kevin Youkilis (who I used to refer to as You-Kill-Us, I admit).
And here's what's strange about it all: Boston and New York have switched roles. Boston's done with chasing the championship for one season-they're now about staying in contention for a long time, while the Yankees appear to be going after just one more title for the Old Man.
This build-up of money, pressure and talented superstars in New York has to take its toll eventually. It already is, in a way. While Red Sox fans won't care that we lost Pedro, Damon, D-Lowe and Arroyo if it means we're in contention for the next 5-7 years.
I changed my mind-I'm going to give my dad a call.
Send Message
Add Friend
Block User
Invite to Group
Report User 
This is the reaction of the director of the Heisman Trophy Trust. Because of a new investigation of the Pac-10 that will look into allegations that USC running back Reggie Bush's family lived in a house set-up by a potential agent last year, there is talk that Bush will be forced to give back the Heisman Trophy.
Obviously, if and only if, these allegations turn out to be true, then Bush certainly won't be looked at in the same manner-and USC would possibly be forced to forfeit their wins from last season.
Bush will get to move on to NFL millions and possible superstardom as one of the top picks in the NFL Draft, while USC will simply wait and will have an investigation looming over the post Leinart-Bush Era.
Suddenly, if true, this makes Pete Carroll not quite so squeaky clean as a fun-loving college coach.
That's a worst case scenario, if all these accusations are true.
Either way, I don't know what the Heisman Trophy Trust has to do with it. Why do they care? Since when did the Heisman Trophy get on a high horse?
Isn't this the same organization that profits every year by large donations, national and worldwide media attention and has a voting process that takes longer to discern the winner than Bush v. Gore?
I guess the Heisman Trophy Trust expects us to believe that no one ever cheated to win the Heisman-or that voters didn't vote begrudgingly or with any kind of agenda.
Whalen continued his statement by saying the Trust would " see what happens and how this plays out."
Um, can I ask why? Did you see how Gino Torretta panned out as an NFL quarterback? Don't you have a laundry list of NFL busts like him? Aren't there criminals and addicts who won your trophy-even one who was an accused murder? Didn't O.J. eventually sell off his Heisman?
Don't talk to us about the character of the Heisman Trophy-nearly a quarter of the winners from the past twenty-five years are selling insurance or working at the local Shell.
Why not just say that there isn't anything that will make you revoke Bush being the 2005 Heisman winner, because the Trophy has nothing to do with NCAA regulations and never has-it's about the most talented and popular athlete in the country every year. The Heisman isn't even really endorsed by the NCAA officially, is it? So why do you care? Because you've got Texas fans that've got nothing better to do than scream for Vince Young to win?
Based on the Rose Bowl game, sure-but based on an entire season, no. And if you're looking for the right back-up winner, this isn't like Miss America-there are skeletons in probably all of their closets, whether it's for illegal contact with agents, classes or grades in general.
I'm not condoning Bush or his family accepting this-with or without USC knowledge-but I've got a problem when the snooty Heisman people try to act innocent in the corruption that is college football. I've got a problem when an organization that supports a winner and sings his praises decides only later that someone isn't worthy of "their" award.
This is life-we don't get redo's, we don't get mulligans and there are no do-over's. You give an award, as you can see with past winners, it sticks. The investigation hasn't even begun-nor is it guaranteed to prove or find anything, but Bush is already being called upon to turn over Mr. Heisman.
Though I'm sure that club president Judge Smails and the other Heisman Trust members believe they're entitled to take back whatever they want whenever they want; but this isn't a Lexus-it's just a Trophy that really doesn't mean all that much in the grand scheme anyway.
Leave the trophy where it's at-you've done it every other time it's been disgraced.
