MrSEC, I just wanted to stop by and commend you on a first class blog and really impressive journalism. I'm an AU fan, but I'm reading your take on the Menswear story and its spot on as well. There is definitely something worth investigating there, but no proof of guilt. To date tho, there is far more 'proof' in that story than there has ever been in the AU investigation, which I realize you understand but wanted to say it anyway for the mini-horse-humpers.
*There's also a story by MyFoxAl concerning the lack of anything to do with AU football or Cam Newton on those Bingo trial tapes. They reportedly scoured the case information and concluded that was all a bunch of hooey. And bammers, I know it was that wacko LSU fan who started that mess, but you guys had 1,200+ page threads in three of your forums about it. That is just sad.
Danny Sheridan was an epic failbot yesterday - there is no getting around it. What a toolbox.
Contrary to statements made on gossip blogs and internet message boards, "we discussed this matter with the SEC Office," Ward said. "We always do in matters of this nature."
Ward cites by-law 184.108.40.206, but also refers to by-law 220.127.116.11, which requires the university to "take steps to stop or prevent activity that could result in an NCAA violation and a loss of eligibility. The University of Alabama took at least two such steps, issuing a cease and desist letter to T-Town Menswear owner Tom Al-Betar on December 22, 2010. Then, out of an "abundance of caution," the university disassociated Al-Betar for a period of three years.
"18.104.22.168 is not intended to prohibit businesses from displaying memorabilia, nor is it intended to prohibit current student-athletes from signing autographs. It is intended to prevent current student-athletes from jeopardizing their eligibility by selling their autographs or receiving remuneration for endorsing a particular product or service," said another NCAA source who asked not to be identified.
"Student-athletes can't endorse or recommend a particular business and can't be paid for using that business' product or service. If a student-athlete's image or representation is used by a business to imply endorsement without the knowledge or permission of the student-athlete, the student-athlete or the institution must take steps to protect his/her eligibility."
"It is not a violation for student-athletes to sign autographs and it is not a violation for a business to display photos, jerseys or other items depicting current student-athletes. We found no evidence that any student-athlete received any extra benefits," said a statement from Mike Ward, University of Alabama Associate Athletics Director for Compliance.
you mean these rules?
"NCAA by-law 22.214.171.124 states that:
After becoming a student-athlete, an individual shall not be eligible for participation in intercollegiate athletics if the individual:
(a) 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; or
(b) Receives remuneration for endorsing a commercial product or service through the individual's use of such product or service.
By the simplest interpretation of this legislation, it would appear that T-Town Menswear is in violation of NCAA rules and the eligibility of the players involved in the story is in question. But interpretations of the rules permit student-athlete names and pictures to appear in an advertisement of a particular business as long as "the promotion or advertisement does not include a reproduction of the product with which the business is associated or any other item or description identifying the business or service other than its trademark," says Stacey Osburn, NCAA spokesperson.