Clinton-Dix vs Redmond. I'm looking at YOU, Bracky!

[FlabLoser]

They say it was a loan. It doesn't matter.

Clinton-Dix's violation was orders of magnitude worse than Redmond's. Getting paid by a coach vs getting paid by a rouge booster. There is NO comparison.

Redmond got EIGHTEEN GAMES!!! Buzz around the internet is that Clinton-Dix gets one to four games.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--...002539592.html

Stricklin, Keenum, FIRE BRACKY BRETT. NOW!!!

[Rick Danko]

Hard to be a State fan sometimes

[Bo Darville]

NCAA will go easy on Bama for publicity purposes. Bama is a golden child and the national media will cover the story. Because Clinton-Dix got his car broken into and stuff stolen, he will appear destitute, needy, desperate, and in a bind. That makes him a sympathetic character. That makes the coach look like the good guy father figure who helped out a kid in need. The NCAA doesn't want the bad publicity that comes with hammering someone for something like that. Everyone gets off easy.

While our stuff was also minor, it comes off to the public as a booster buying a player. A booster giving a guy benefits not because the player needed it, but rather because he wanted to buy the player. That is the public opinion, regardless if it is accurate or not. The NCAA is more willing to hammer you for that. Then it doesn't help when you voluntarily give yourself up.

[smootness]

How is what Clinton-Dix did worse than Redmond, exactly? It was a loan of less than $500, and it was repaid.

It's essentially the Kevin Fant deal, except it was a staff member rather than a booster.

[Jacksondevildog]

And people want to bitch about Mullen's recruiting with this hack in our compliance department.

[FlabLoser]

A school cannot control a rouge booster who gives impermissible benefits. There is NCAA precedent that acknowledges schools are at a huge disadvantage in trying to be responsible for boosters.

A school is directly 100% responsible when a coach gives a player an impermissible benefit. OSU got hit real hard not because tatoos are a big deal, but because coaches were involved with it.

Thats the difference.

Regardless of your opinion, there MSU very clearly penalized itself in a grossly disproportionate manner. Redmond get 18 games. Clinton-Dix is going to get a few games at most.

And don't tell me Redmond wasn't a sympathetic figure. Redmond's father was murdered and he was taken advantage of by a 7 on 7 coach who was pimping him around. MSU gets off light, while Redmond got the most harsh penalty I've ever heard of.

Name another player who got more than 18 games.

[Bo Darville]

How is what Clinton-Dix did worse than Redmond, exactly? It was a loan of less than $500, and it was repaid.
.

It is not worse than what we did. There was no advantage gained because Clinton-Dix was already signed and on campus, rather than the money convincing him to sign. The money was repaid before they were caught.

Now on the other hand, no booster has a contract prohibiting him from a giving money, nor has a recruit signed anything prohibiting him from accepting money. In the case at Bama, the coach has a clause in his contract prohibiting stuff like this, and the player has agreed in his scholarship papers not to accept money like this.

I think this Bama stuff is minor, but I also think our stuff was minor as well.

[FlabLoser]

How is what Clinton-Dix did worse than Redmond, exactly? It was a loan of less than $500, and it was repaid.

It's essentially the Kevin Fant deal, except it was a staff member rather than a booster.

a

Not much difference in the benefit. The huge difference is the benefit was paid by a coach vs paid by a rouge booster. World of difference there in terms of what the school is expected to control.

The point is that MSU grossly disproportionately penalized itself due to the incompetence of Bracky Brett. Other schools have lawyers and former NCAA compliance people in their compliance director position. We have a former high school employee.

Also consider that our coach was immediately fired, whereas Bama's coach is just on administrative leave.

[Bo Darville]

a

The point is that MSU grossly disproportionately penalized itself due to the incompetence of Bracky Brett.

Agree and disagree.

I agree that we penalized ourselves too harshly. If I've got a car I would like to sell for $10,000 and guy walks up and makes me an offer of $12,000 without asking what I want for it, I'm going to take the $12,000. I think we offered the NCAA a harsher punishment than they would have given us.

I disagree on the suspension length, because I though that was the NCAA reinstatment committee, not MSU or the NCAA enforcement folks. Am I right or wrong? I didn't think we had anything to do with that. I honestly don't know, so someone feel free to correct me or clarify.

[FlabLoser]

The net length of Redmond's suspension is on Bracky. Bracky suspended Redmond a full year. Brackey recommended an additional 6 games.

All of Redmond's punishment begins and ends with Bracky.

Bracky, Bracky, Bracky.

[smootness]

A coach was involved in ours as well. He didn't actually provide the benefit himself, but he facilitated it and had knowledge of it.

It's essentially the same thing. We fired the coach, Bama may do the same thing. But Clinton-Dix was already on campus and it was a repaid loan. Redmond was not on campus, and it was something given to him; it wasn't a loan.

The two are night and day in terms of intent. One was intended to give a gift to persuade a kid to sign. The other was a loan to, I suppose, help the kid out for a little while. There was no real benefit gained.

Just as we were ticked that Fant was suspended at all (and I assume we would have been even if it was a coach who did it, because who cares?), I don't think it's a big deal that Clinton-Dix won't get much.

Redmond should get more, though I agree that 18 games is far too many. I'm just not sure how much of that Bracky Brett was responsible for.

I'm not a Bracky Brett fan. But I don't know enough (and essentially everyone on here is in the same boat) to pin everything on him, and I'm a little uncomfortable with doing that. It just seems like an easy scapegoat. Saying Mullen doesn't have the ability to recruit because we have Bracky Brett? That seems like easy excuse-making.

[FlabLoser]

[Schultzy]

Hard to be a State fan sometimes

Doug Buckles from Madison Central turned us in for giving him twenty dollars on an official visit. I'm still glad they didn't give us the death penalty.
There's always a silver lining!

It's why we love college football.

[smootness]

What about my post, specifically, did you take such issue with?

[Original48]

Shouldn't we at least appeal to...ourselves I guess...and try to reinstate Redmond's redshirt season? That way he will have served half a season suspension and still have 3 to play. What would it hurt to try?

[maroonmania]

How is what Clinton-Dix did worse than Redmond, exactly? It was a loan of less than $500, and it was repaid.

It's essentially the Kevin Fant deal, except it was a staff member rather than a booster.

Man, don't see much hope for you if don't see the difference between someone who is EMPLOYED by the university handing out money versus some random MSU fan on the street handing out money. Its not a "what Clinton-Dix did was worse than Redmond" its all about where the source of the money came and institutional control.

[cheewgumm]

Shouldn't they get just a little worse than what we got for fant?

It's the same thing except with them a coach did it.

[FlabLoser]

Man, don't see much hope for you if don't see the difference between someone who is EMPLOYED by the university handing out money versus some random MSU fan on the street handing out money. Its not a "what Clinton-Dix did was worse than Redmond" its all about where the source of the money came and institutional control.

[Jack Lambert]

How is what Clinton-Dix did worse than Redmond, exactly? It was a loan of less than $500, and it was repaid.

It's essentially the Kevin Fant deal, except it was a staff member rather than a booster.

Is that what happen? I thought he asked the guy who sold him the tires to hold the check until his mom put the money into the account. Goes to show how sometimes you memory is tanted.

[engie]

NCAA will go easy on Bama for publicity purposes. Bama is a golden child and the national media will cover the story. Because Clinton-Dix got his car broken into and stuff stolen, he will appear destitute, needy, desperate, and in a bind. That makes him a sympathetic character. That makes the coach look like the good guy father figure who helped out a kid in need. The NCAA doesn't want the bad publicity that comes with hammering someone for something like that. Everyone gets off easy.

While our stuff was also minor, it comes off to the public as a booster buying a player. A booster giving a guy benefits not because the player needed it, but rather because he wanted to buy the player. That is the public opinion, regardless if it is accurate or not. The NCAA is more willing to hammer you for that. Then it doesn't help when you voluntarily give yourself up.

And that's how ONE compliance/PR department is light years ahead of the other.

Guessing these people that "come off as the public" never watched Undefeated and saw where and what Will Redmond has come from.... because if ANYONE had a sympathy card, it was us.

But we were too busy eating our own to play it...and that is on Bracky.