Boom!! Sports by Brooks new stuff

[tig1961er 0]

shows asst. coach Bobby Williams in T-Town with Tom, so coaches new all about this. Julio, Ingram, Richardson, Coty would all be ineligibil for 2009 and 2010 by NCAA rules

[around4ever 4,139]

shows asst. coach Bobby Williams in T-Town with Tom, so coaches new all about this. Julio, Ingram, Richardson, Coty would all be ineligibil for 2009 and 2010 by NCAA rules

Still no smoking gun that proves the players received anything from the store or Albetar.  The REC has these tracks covered so well the Detectives on "Take the Money and Run" wouldn't stand a chance.  The only thing there is for sure is that the likenesses and autographs of current players were used by TTMW to advertise in a round about way. 

[tig1961er 0]

so if the likeness and the autographs were used by Tom to advertise, and also we now see that a coach new about the stuff being advertised, and you know the players new, then it would not matter if they got anything or not. By NCAA bylaw 12.5.2.1 the players are ruled ineligibil and also by the coach or coaches knowing wouldn"t that fall under failure to monitor. Just asking. War Eagle!!!

[watsontiger98 9]

Isn't Bobby Williams the coach that was involved in the Albert Means case? Interesting.

[aufan57 922]

Isn't Bobby Williams the coach that was involved in the Albert Means case? Interesting.

Nope, Williams took over Michigan State in 2000 after weeman left for lsu.

[around4ever 4,139]

so if the likeness and the autographs were used by Tom to advertise, and also we now see that a coach new about the stuff being advertised, and you know the players new, then it would not matter if they got anything or not. By NCAA bylaw 12.5.2.1 the players are ruled ineligibil and also by the coach or coaches knowing wouldn"t that fall under failure to monitor. Just asking. War Eagle!!!

It's not cut and dried if the displays are used for advertising or if the signed jerseys were used in any advertising.

Isn't Bobby Williams the coach that was involved in the Albert Means case? Interesting.

No.  I think his name was Ivy Williams.

[auburntiger77 0]

Too much smoke.  This is enough.  Someone has to ask, why have so many players given so much to one person.

[around4ever 4,139]

I agree.  If it looks like a turd and smells like a turd, it is probably a turd.  But the question is how much does it have to look and smell like a turd before the NCAA says it is a turd?

[Elephant Tipper 430]

NCAA bylaw 12.5.2.1. states:

“After becoming a student-athlete, an individual shall not be eligible for participation in intercollegiate athletics if the individual accepts any remuneration for or permits the use of his or her name or picture to advertise, recommend or promote directly the sale or use of a commercial product or service of any kind.”

OUCH !  May be a problem.

[around4ever 4,139]

Yeah, it looks like it could be a problem.  But I still feel like the NCAA will see it as a gray area as to how the items were used as advertising for the store. 

[Elephant Tipper 430]

[GoCrazyAuburn 0]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

[around4ever 4,139]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

Good point.  But was it for sale or just a display?    If it is just a display the advertising gets gray again. 

[Elephant Tipper 430]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

Good point.  But was it for sale or just a display?     If it is just a display the advertising gets gray again. 

The word "is" shall be redefined for yet a third time. 

[DM8 0]

shows asst. coach Bobby Williams in T-Town with Tom, so coaches new all about this. Julio, Ingram, Richardson, Coty would all be ineligibil for 2009 and 2010 by NCAA rules

Still no smoking gun that proves the players received anything from the store or Albetar.  The REC has these tracks covered so well the Detectives on "Take the Money and Run" wouldn't stand a chance.  The only thing there is for sure is that the likenesses and autographs of current players were used by TTMW to advertise in a round about way. 

I think you are missing an obvious point on this stuff. T town tom wasn't just using the signed stuff to advertise, he was selling large volumes of stuff at a kiosk located right in front of TTMW in the mall and via other outlets. (vice memorabilia) There is no way the players could possibly not have known the items were being sold (because they were signing piles of stuff) and thus, they violated NCAA bylaw 12.5.2.1. There's no grey area at all on this point. Its a blatant violation and its extremely well documented. bama admitted in their C&D that they knew tom was selling the items in the kiosk so they really have no defense on this point.

[Guest jojo1515]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

as was stated in the cam suit deal, it is allowed for a player to receive a free suit for awards ceremonies.  As for the advertising, its very hard to prove his involvement and when the suit was advertised.  That being said, the rest of the info out there looks really bad

[wdeexit310 0]

WOW, he really had some damaging material on them....If the NCAA doesn't investigate they should just be done

away with in my opinion.  If they can go after us for just emails by bama fans, and not go after this with actual

proof their credibility will be on the line.

[dpwspringer 0]

Has anyone asked the players involved about what they signed, where they signed it, how many items, how many times, if they got anything in return, about free dinners from Tom and the other boosters, etc.  Same questions to Tom Albetar and the other boosters... and did they pass a lie detector test by an independent source? 

[Elephant Tipper 430]

12/22/10  UpDykes letter to Albetar (backdated according to media ???)

12/25/10  Jim Tressel resignation rumors

3/31/11    UpDykes letter to Albetar (original date of letter ???)

If the compliance letter by UpDykes was backdated the 12/22/10 date makes sense, ie, action taken before the events of OSU.  

Have fun Gumps !

WDE !!!

PS Could Saban be forced to resign over this memorabilia issue ?

SBB posted 12 Tweets in past 24 hours about UpDykes....heating up  "Bama fans: Stop asking me questions. Ask UA compliance. They agree current player store display items against NCAA rules. READ THE LETTER."

[pologuy24 0]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

Good point.  But was it for sale or just a display?     If it is just a display the advertising gets gray again. 

He was using Mark Ingrams name and Signature to Sell suits Identical to what Mark wore at the Heisman Ceremony! That's against the Bylaws if Mark was still a current NCAA athlete... The Heisman Ceremony is before the BCS Championship game. Question is when did he start advertising this "suit"

[Ed_ 3]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

Good point.  But was it for sale or just a display?     If it is just a display the advertising gets gray again. 

He was using Mark Ingrams name and Signature to Sell suits Identical to what Mark wore at the Heisman Ceremony! That's against the Bylaws if Mark was still a current NCAA athlete... The Heisman Ceremony is before the BCS Championship game. Question is when did he start advertising this "suit"

If they are going to get nailed on the advertising side of the regulation it will be that Heisman suit and the facebook comment he posted saying "We've got Mark Ingram's gloves, come on down to TTown Mensware to see them".  Both of those are blatantly using a player's likeness or name to bring customers into his store or get them to buy one of his products.

As for just loading up the store with Bama merchandise, I used to think you could make an argument that that was advertising but I did see a Gump comment on one of the articles that actually was a pretty good point.  They pointed out that if just having a bunch of memorabilia around a store was a violation the NCAA would have nailed OSU over the same thing with the signed jersey's at that car dealership.  You'd also have about an 8th of the D1 football players ruled ineligible due to all the signed jersey hanging up in applebee's, chili's and hooters' around the country.

[Newbomb 193]

shows asst. coach Bobby Williams in T-Town with Tom, so coaches new all about this. Julio, Ingram, Richardson, Coty would all be ineligibil for 2009 and 2010 by NCAA rules

Still no smoking gun that proves the players received anything from the store or Albetar.  The REC has these tracks covered so well the Detectives on "Take the Money and Run" wouldn't stand a chance.  The only thing there is for sure is that the likenesses and autographs of current players were used by TTMW to advertise in a round about way. 

I think you are missing an obvious point on this stuff. T town tom wasn't just using the signed stuff to advertise, he was selling large volumes of stuff at a kiosk located right in front of TTMW in the mall and via other outlets. (vice memorabilia) There is no way the players could possibly not have known the items were being sold (because they were signing piles of stuff) and thus, they violated NCAA bylaw 12.5.2.1. There's no grey area at all on this point. Its a blatant violation and its extremely well documented. bama admitted in their C&D that they knew tom was selling the items in the kiosk so they really have no defense on this point.

Also if it can be connected that Saban and the other coach were there from the date stamps it is clear LoIC.

[Charleyrogers24 0]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

Good point.  But was it for sale or just a display?     If it is just a display the advertising gets gray again. 

He was using Mark Ingrams name and Signature to Sell suits Identical to what Mark wore at the Heisman Ceremony! That's against the Bylaws if Mark was still a current NCAA athlete... The Heisman Ceremony is before the BCS Championship game. Question is when did he start advertising this "suit"

If they are going to get nailed on the advertising side of the regulation it will be that Heisman suit and the facebook comment he posted saying "We've got Mark Ingram's gloves, come on down to TTown Mensware to see them".  Both of those are blatantly using a player's likeness or name to bring customers into his store or get them to buy one of his products.

As for just loading up the store with Bama merchandise, I used to think you could make an argument that that was advertising but I did see a Gump comment on one of the articles that actually was a pretty good point.  They pointed out that if just having a bunch of memorabilia around a store was a violation the NCAA would have nailed OSU over the same thing with the signed jersey's at that car dealership.  You'd also have about an 8th of the D1 football players ruled ineligible due to all the signed jersey hanging up in applebee's, chili's and hooters' around the country.

My 2 cents worth on this above quote:  There is a difference in signing "ONE" item to put into Applebees and places and signing 10 to 20 of the same item that "SELL" just outside of store and in other areas...but again I stress this whole heartly-----Until the NCAA says anything...then nothing is going to happen and that is how I look at it...no matter what we or anyone else says or writes...UNTIL NCAA does anything then all this is MOOT!!!  Just my Opinion!

     

[Ed_ 3]

The "Mark Ingram Heisman Suit" is pretty blatant how that is used as advertising.

Good point.  But was it for sale or just a display?     If it is just a display the advertising gets gray again. 

He was using Mark Ingrams name and Signature to Sell suits Identical to what Mark wore at the Heisman Ceremony! That's against the Bylaws if Mark was still a current NCAA athlete... The Heisman Ceremony is before the BCS Championship game. Question is when did he start advertising this "suit"

If they are going to get nailed on the advertising side of the regulation it will be that Heisman suit and the facebook comment he posted saying "We've got Mark Ingram's gloves, come on down to TTown Mensware to see them".  Both of those are blatantly using a player's likeness or name to bring customers into his store or get them to buy one of his products.

As for just loading up the store with Bama merchandise, I used to think you could make an argument that that was advertising but I did see a Gump comment on one of the articles that actually was a pretty good point.  They pointed out that if just having a bunch of memorabilia around a store was a violation the NCAA would have nailed OSU over the same thing with the signed jersey's at that car dealership.  You'd also have about an 8th of the D1 football players ruled ineligible due to all the signed jersey hanging up in applebee's, chili's and hooters' around the country.

My 2 cents worth on this above quote:   There is a difference in signing "ONE" item to put into Applebees and places and signing 10 to 20 of the same item that "SELL" just outside of store and in other areas...but again I stress this whole heartly-----Until the NCAA says anything...then nothing is going to happen and that is how I look at it...no matter what we or anyone else says or writes...UNTIL NCAA does anything then all this is MOOT!!!   Just my Opinion!

     

I agree that if you're using a "reasonable standard" there is a big difference, however, the NCAA has never been known to be reasonable and they look at this stuff as black and white.  If there's a reg that states you cant use a student athletes name, image, or likeness to promote a business or product it doesn't matter to them whether its one item or a thousand. Its still a violation of the rules.

[bigbird 60,575]

It'd be interesting to see if they decide each article is a separate infraction or rather one all lumped together.