By John Sittler, September 24, 2010
Throughout the 2005 college football season, there was no doubt who the best player was on the field.
Reggie Bush, a running back from the University of Southern California, thrilled fans and befuddled defenses with his ridiculous moves and blazing speed. He gained over 1,700 rushing yards to go along with almost 500 receiving yards and 18 total touchdowns.
At the end of the season he was awarded the Heisman Trophy, the annual honor for the best player in college football. He did not just win the Heisman, he won in a landslide. There was no question as to whether or not he deserved it.
Flash forward to early in the summer of 2010. USC was rocked by allegations of recruiting violations surrounding Bush and USC basketball standout OJ Mayo. The results of a four-year investigation revealed that Bush and his family had received benefits amounting to approximately $300,000.
The NCAA responded with swift punishment by banning the Trojans from post-season play for two years, placing them on four years of probation, and enforcing the loss of 30 football scholarships.
Also, they have been forced to forfeit their 14 victories from the 2005 season, including their National Championship Orange Bowl victory. The most controversial result, however, revolved around Reggie Bush and his Heisman.
In early September, reports were published saying that the Heisman Trophy Trust was going to strip Bush of his honor. While the Trust denied these reports, Bush eventually made the decision to return the trophy on his own. But it appears he was pressured into it. Many fans agreed with this, as they were haters of USC, or simply wanted to see “justice” done.
I am not so sure. While I completely agree with the sanctions imposed on the Trojan football program, what exactly did Bush gain by receiving those benefits? Did a night in a hotel make him faster? Did that new suit allow him to make those stop-on-a-dime cuts that left defenders groping air?
No.
Regardless of how much money he and his family received, he was still the best player in football.
This scandal has been compared to Barry Bonds and steroids, but the two situations are actually radically different. While Bonds has only “allegedly” taken steroids, let’s assume for the sake of argument that he did. Without the steroids and increased muscle size it seems unlikely he would have broken Hank Aaron’s home run record.
If he is allowed to keep his record, it is safe to say without a doubt that Bush should keep his. As I stated above, the benefits Bush received in no way, shape or form affected his on-field play.
Another argument for Bush forfeiting this trophy is that he would not have been as good without the tremendous supporting cast he had at USC.
This might be partly true, although I believe that he still would have put up huge numbers had he played for a lesser team. He proved this by making a large portion of his plays in the open field, just him one-on-one (or one-on-two, one- on-three, etc.) against defenders.
His talent is so rare, so once-in-generation that Reggie Bush without a doubt should be allowed to keep his Heisman Trophy as the best collegiate football player of the 2005 season.
No comments:
Post a Comment