Did T-Town Menswear Cause an NCAA Violation For Alabama? (UA says no)

[TideEngineer08]

That was the reasoning Travis used it for his site as well.

Travis could have married a mule and still outkicked his coverage...

 

[RTR91]

And when I say "promotional," I mean in the sense that George from Vinyl Solutions would have an autographed poster on the wall behind the counter. Not for sale, but just because he liked it.

That is what I do not understand. If I own a business and get a jersey signed by all players and coaches on fan day, can I not hang it up in my business? Is that against the rules? If so, like others have said - there are no eligible players.

Side note - a few weeks ago my dad received an e-mail from the athletic department about buying schedules through the athletic department. He would be able to personalize them if he'd like. The e-mail did say that he would not be able to sell them, HOWEVER, he could give them away for promotional use for a business.

 

[GulfCoastTider]

Maybe so. If compliance issued the letter "as soon as they became aware," then how did they ask him to remove it twice before they sent it? Also, if nothing the guy did was wrong and had no bearing on our players' eligibility, why did they tell him to stop (I know you're not saying this, but others are)?

To clarify that rule:

If the student-athlete knowingly allows his likeness, image, autograph, whatever to be sold or used for commercial purposes, he is ineligible.

If the student-athlete's likeness, image, autograph, whatever is being used for commercial purposes without his knowledge, then as soon as he becomes aware of the matter he (or the school) must take steps to end the practice.

A player who knows that the memorabilia will be sold or used has eligibility problems. A player who did not know the memorabilia would be sold or used is not ineligible simply because he's found out that he's been used by an unscrupulous business owner.

Also, look at the timeline of events, here. tOSU's memorabilia scandal broke in early December. I have no direct information about this, but I'd be willing to bet that a proactive UA compliance staff learned about the deal and decided to make sure our own noses were clean. So they look into potentially troublesome relationships between players and local businesses and "Oh, yeah... This T-Town Menswear Shop has stuff all over the place." Compliance looks into it, finds no violations, and asks the store to comply with regulations. In an abundance of caution, compliance also sends the store a C&D order to tie it all off and make sure there won't be future problems.

Coaches and players are then reminded about NCAA bylaws regarding impermissible benefits, and absolutely nothing the store or the players have done since the C&D order indicates an ongoing problem.

 

[bamagump]

This story will die soon (OKTC is the only site writing about it). Can we all move back to the MEGAthread now?

 

[TIDE-HSV]

The way some folks (and apparently Travis - I refuse to click on his rag) are interpreting the rule, every mall signing would generate ineligibility for all the signing athletes, since a large portion of those items are sold. Or maybe you're only ineligible if you happen to look on eBay and and learn that someone's selling something you signed...

 

[punchdrunkpanic]

The other thing that irritates me is that a 2 bit hack like Travis can plaster this stuff out there, sit back and watch other people have to go and do the leg work to prove it right or wrong while claiming that he "broke the story".

It's like he's firing a machine gun into the forest. Eventually he may actually hit something worthwile.

 

[tidehawk]

Man, I will be so glad when practice and the season starts so we can quit worrying about needless crap.

 

[crimsonaudio]

The other thing that irritates me is that a 2 bit hack like Travis can plaster this stuff out there, sit back and watch other people have to go and do the leg work to prove it right or wrong while claiming that he "broke the story".

It's like he's firing a machine gun into the forest. Eventually he may actually hit something worthwile.

Considering this was handled >7 months ago, all he's creating is message board fodder.

 

[TideEngineer08]

The way some folks (and apparently Travis - I refuse to click on his rag) are interpreting the rule, every mall signing would generate ineligibility for all the signing athletes, since a large portion of those items are sold. Or maybe you're only ineligible if you happen to look on eBay and and learn that someone's selling something you signed...

I heard him on the radio Friday evening, and that is how he is interpreting it. He's not quite as intelligent as he thinks he is.

 

[RTR91]

I heard him on the radio Friday evening, and that is how he is interpreting it. He's not quite as intelligent as he thinks he is.

He might be proof that one doesn't have to be a genius to graduate from Vandy or George Washington.

 

[DiamondDust]

And Travis just said on WJOX that he didn't pursue this until the middle of the week when his email got flooded with tips (Read: In response to the initial Auburn story he ran)

 

[RTR91]

And Travis just said on WJOX that he didn't pursue this until the middle of the week when his email got flooded with tips (Read: In response to the initial Auburn story he ran)

I had an AU fan tell me that is what he figured what happened - after the story on Cam's suits was published, AU fans got upset and decided to dig and find whatever they could.

Travis says in the article he got back to his hotel room after partying at a bar and found the emails sent by AU fans, so he wrote the story. Could he have not waited until he gotten up Friday morning and looked back over the emails and discussed with other people at Media Days? Probably not because that would have been too easy.

 

[RollTide2U]

Rule of thumb: If you jump on anything put forth to you by Barn fans and don't check it out thoroughly, you'll wind up looking stupid. That's why not many ran with the Jeffrey Lee/Brent Calloway story. The Barners who throw these stories out are hysterical, delusional idiots. Travis doesn't like Bama anyway, so he ran with it. He's not helping his credibility. He'll get readership and hits on his blog, but he won't have credibility. That sort of thing generally works itself out.

 

[rhm54]

I think these tweet from Aaron Shuttles sum up Clay Travis

When @ClayTravisBGID was just a columnist, being a huge UT homer wasn't a problem. Now that he's trying to go 'hard news', it's a huge prob.

Remember, in this brave new world in which we live, perception is reality. Clay's heart and motives may be pure. To fans, it won't matter.

His stories are fascinating and intriguing. But his blatant UT fandom will hurt his credibility with all SEC stories. @ClayTravisBGID

 

[DiamondDust]

I think it's telling when Finebaum discounts it.

 

[bamaman07]

Rule of thumb: If you jump on anything put forth to you by Barn fans and don't check it out thoroughly, you'll wind up looking stupid. That's why not many ran with the Jeffrey Lee/Brent Calloway story. The Barners who throw these stories out are hysterical, delusional idiots. Travis doesn't like Bama anyway, so he ran with it. He's not helping his credibility. He'll get readership and hits on his blog, but he won't have credibility. That sort of thing generally works itself out.

He lost any credibility with me when he asked Tebow if he was a virgin two years ago. That and the fact that he's a Tennessee man is enough for me not to consider anything he says. He has no credibility. I hope Saban runs the score up on Tennessee again this year.

 

[Hamilton]

*sigh*

There's no NCAA rule that states you have to send a C&D to stop someone from doing something - UA compliance told them to stop twice, when they didn't, they went legal on them. The initial notification - whether a 'legal document' or not - is sufficient for the NCAA.

The NCAA knows this stuff happens and cannot be stopped (heck, in this thread alone you find even unknown players with autographed stuff for sale), the rule says the university has to attempt to stop the issue, which UA compliance did.

I'm not going to argue with you about it - if you want to believe it's an issue despite the facts presented, go right ahead.

I was just asking for clarification. Did UA send the C&D as soon as they were aware of the issue, or did they ask him to remove the items twice before sending the C&D? I think the latter would be best for us because it would mean that the University did notify the shop immediately (soon after it started...October or whenever), and since he refused to act on the notification, they then resorted to the cease and desist letter. This is problematic though, because it means that the university had plenty of time to notify the players to stay away from him and if the players continued anyway, the relationship would be viewed with a very high degree of suspicion by the NCAA.

Also, look at the timeline of events, here. tOSU's memorabilia scandal broke in early December. I have no direct information about this, but I'd be willing to bet that a proactive UA compliance staff learned about the deal and decided to make sure our own noses were clean. So they look into potentially troublesome relationships between players and local businesses and "Oh, yeah... This T-Town Menswear Shop has stuff all over the place." Compliance looks into it, finds no violations, and asks the store to comply with regulations. In an abundance of caution, compliance also sends the store a C&D order to tie it all off and make sure there won't be future problems.

Coaches and players are then reminded about NCAA bylaws regarding impermissible benefits, and absolutely nothing the store or the players have done since the C&D order indicates an ongoing problem.

If what you say is correct, there's no way these athletes could have gone without knowing that their autographs were being used--especially the ones who were repeat visitors. I hope you're wrong. That's why I'm concerned.

The way some folks (and apparently Travis - I refuse to click on his rag) are interpreting the rule, every mall signing would generate ineligibility for all the signing athletes, since a large portion of those items are sold. Or maybe you're only ineligible if you happen to look on eBay and and learn that someone's selling something you signed...

If that interpretation is incorrect--that an athlete's autograph can be used with the athlete's knowledge and the athlete not be ineligible unless he had received a benefit--then I feel much better about the situation.

 

[REBELZED]

 

[FloridanBlogger]

Rule of thumb: If you jump on anything put forth to you by Barn fans and don't check it out thoroughly, you'll wind up looking stupid. That's why not many ran with the Jeffrey Lee/Brent Calloway story. The Barners who throw these stories out are hysterical, delusional idiots. Travis doesn't like Bama anyway, so he ran with it. He's not helping his credibility. He'll get readership and hits on his blog, but he won't have credibility. That sort of thing generally works itself out.

The problem with that is, not very many people know it considering not very many people know what *ubarn is. I have a feeling they're going to eventually get to Clay Travis' nerves and that's when he's going to shift his focus back to them to get them off his back.

 

[bamaman07]

I was just asking for clarification. Did UA send the C&D as soon as they were aware of the issue, or did they ask him to remove the items twice before sending the C&D? I think the latter would be best for us because it would mean that the University did notify the shop immediately (soon after it started...October or whenever), and since he refused to act on the notification, they then resorted to the cease and desist letter. This is problematic though, because it means that the university had plenty of time to notify the players to stay away from him and if the players continued anyway, the relationship would be viewed with a very high degree of suspicion by the NCAA.



If what you say is correct, there's no way these athletes could have gone without knowing that their autographs were being used--especially the ones who were repeat visitors. I hope you're wrong. That's why I'm concerned.



If that interpretation is incorrect--that an athlete's autograph can be used with the athlete's knowledge and the athlete not be ineligible unless he had received a benefit--then I feel much better about the situation.

You sound like some of the people on 247 who keep going on about this. Bama found nothing wrong. Let it go. The only people who continue to harp on this are barners.