There are no allegations regarding payment for these additional signing sessions. ESPN just trying to keep the narrative alive as long as possible.
No allegations of payment? ESPN conspiracy? Wow.
I don't think anybody will believe a player who just won the heisman would sit down and sign thousands of items for a stranger to sell - but receiver no benefit. Just because nobody videotaped somebody handing him money while JF saying it was for NCAA violations does not mean common sense doesn't apply.
Players like Bridgewater and Clowney have tons of items very similar to Manziel. Sitting down and signing autographs is not illegal. The two new "sources" saying Manziel signed memorabilia for them made no mention that they payed Manziel. Soooooooooooo we are just to assume that he got payed? No, that's not right. Lets just assume everyone who sits down and signs their signature in bulk is getting payed then..
One of the brokers who Manziel reportedly signed bulk items for already came out and said that he DID NOT pay Manziel to do the signings. All the article does is set out to make him look guilty without any proof. Is he guilty? I don't know, probably, but sitting down and signing things is not against the rules. So the article is once again nothing but nothing.
I never said it's some ESPN conspiracy against A&M but they are just trying to capture headlines at Manziels expense at this point. Just keeping the narrative alive for viewers.
The NCAA doesn't need proof of Johnny getting paid to suspend him over the autographs.... according to bylaw 12.5.2.2, memorabilia being "sold or promoted under a student's name" is enough to cons ute a violation, and that's exactly what's being done here, tbh....
That being said, common sense dictates Johnny was clearly taking money to sign that much ....
Unless he is getting paid to come out and out JF why would that broker admit to receiving income. Chances are if he did pay JF to do autographs he doesn't report the income from those sales and would essentially be publiclly admitting to tax fraud. Sports memorabilia dealers are notorious for under reporting their income. See it all the time.
So just because a broker says he didn't pay JF doesn't mean he didn't. Brokers are strange breed of people so it is hard to either believe what they say or don't admit to.
Common sense says that if someone asked you to sit down and sign X amount of autographs you would say what is in it for me. I mean JF has been going to finals games, frat parties and the like so for him to sit down and take time to sign autographs and based upon how he has acted I would think he would respond with, "What is in it for me?" Maybe he didn't I don't know, but common sense and my gut feeling are he did get paid in some way or another. Proving it is up to the NCAA, which has limited authority so tha could be very difficult to prove.
Hate to see the evidence mounting against Johnny football cause I enjoy watching the kid play. I also have to laugh at all the ATM fans who want concrete evidence of a payment between Johnny and the brokers (like a videotape, seriously, a videotape). Look, this case is in no way similar to other college athletes just because of the massive amount of autographs provided by Johnny. There are fans of every program who will always ignore the facts of every case if there program is involved regardless of the amount, but in talking to alot of ATM alumni most believe that the Manzeil days could be a thing of the past.
http://deadspin.com/the-long-con-how...ica-1040593220
interesting read about his family.
Last edited by The Reckoning; 08-13-2013 at 09:43 AM.
From that article:
None of the sources has told "Outside the Lines" that they saw Manziel take money.
12.5.2.1 -- accepting money for promoting or advertising the commercial sale of a product or service -- he could be ruled ineligible
Why are you laughing at fans who want to see evidence? That is all that matters.
Are you a fan that wants to see evidence?
Even without evidence of him taking money, I think it's pretty clear at this point he got paid.
Which shouldn't even be an issue to begin with. It's all ridiculously and hypocritically stupid.
The bottom line is that unless there is concrete proof that money exchanged hands there is no story here. Yes, common sense tells us that he probably got paid a bit. But that is still an assumption, not a proven fact. We don't go taking away people's football scholarships because of assumptions.
I just want these brokers to or get off the pot. Tired of the same story about him signing with absolutely no proof he got paid. Do I personally think he took money? Yes. But my personal opinion doesn't matter. The public's opinion doesn't matter. Johnny trademarked his name. Sent a cease and desist letter to eBay. Did what was "within his power" to prevent the profiting off of his signature (which is an ABSURD rule in the first place, even more than prohibiting players from profiting off of their name).
Some people in this thread don't seem to get that when you accuse somebody of something the burden is on you have to have 100% proof to back your claim. That is how reality works.
Legalizing polygraph tests could put an end to this. Are polygraphs 100% accurate? Of course not. But make him take 3 different polygraph tests from 3 different independent companies. If he fails all 3, then he is guilty as . But if he passes just 1 out of 3, throw all of the test results out.
Polygraph tests are worthless.
Some people don't understand they can suspend him based on cir stantial evidence and burden of proof isnt the same as it is in court.
oh yeah, no doubt. The NCAA has absolutely nothing and Johnny autograph will be playing every game this year.
...100% not needed here people, this is the NCAA...
the NCAA doesn't need to be suspending anyone without concrete proof.
Common sense is lacking in alot yalls post..Honestly, do you believe Manzeil went to florida and signed thousands of autographs to a broker with no compensation? Again, evidence of him taking cash is not needed for a suspension..
Players who are undergoing investigations do not need to be playing either..
I'm just saying it's possible since the rule does exist. I don't think they have the balls to do it.
Are you reading this thread? I just said I believe he took money.
So we are going to suspend people on su ion alone? Then they miss a number of games or a season, found innocent, missing all of those games for nothing?
I know the rule exists. If the NCAA's history says anything, they do not have the balls to do this. Not to a reigning Heisman Trophy winner. The only thing that scares me in this case is the NCAA wanting to finally show it has some balls and taking action.
Some people don't understand that after Scam Newton and Miami the NCAA has no credibility and won't do jack unless presented with undeniable evidence.
lol wut
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
"Yet another sip/Bama conspiracy!" 
