Wilfork Issues Statement on NCAA Investigation

Wilfork Issues Statement on NCAA Investigation
By: Derek Havens

New England Patriots defense lineman Vince Wilfork issued a statement via Twitter on Wednesday evening regarding a Yahoo! Sports report on Tuesday that named Wilfork as one of several University of Miami players who received improper benefits from booster...

CLICK HERE TO READ THIS STORY​

It must be pretty hard for a young kid from an economically disadvantaged background to be confronted with a chance to take that kind of money and other benefits from a big shot with the tacit or whatever backing of the University. I'm not looking to make excuses for Vince if he did something that he should have known was wrong, but that's a lot of temptation. I guess I'm saying I'd come down a lot harder on the University than I would on Vince and his teammates.

What makes it more understandable is not only had the kid lost BOTH his parents within the last year, with more that 70 other players taking money, it was obviously the "culture" down in Miami. Its a lot harder for a kid in THAT situation to say no, when everyone else is saying YES.

Wilfolk's decision making can be questioned, but not his character. The way he carries himself and his MANY charitable endeavors are MUCH greater indicators of his true nature, than what happened in Miami.

Its a black eye for him, but its one that will heal

I refuse to watch the NCAA just as I would boycott any other business that uses coerced labor. Everyone gets rich off the kids but the the kids themselves. Good for Vince, good for Reggie Bush, and anyone else who got away with one.

Pujo said:

I refuse to watch the NCAA just as I would boycott any other business that uses coerced labor. Everyone gets rich off the kids but the the kids themselves. Good for Vince, good for Reggie Bush, and anyone else who got away with one.

Click to expand...

The whole point of the university is coerced labor. The vast majority of labor at a university is exploited. They all agree to it willingly. Not just the athletes.

But who is getting rich? The students pay an absurd sum to athletics. The schools lose a ton of money. Only the coaches are getting rich off it.

I do not see taking money as 'wrong'. Was Mark Zuckerberg wrong to launch Facebook while attending Harvard for computer science?

It's not like being in college prevents you (ethically) from making money off of your talents, skills, or whatever. Sure, the NCAA has rules against this sort of thing, but that does not make it "wrong" (to me anyways).

The NCAA needs to change its ways. Money is there for college athletes, let them reap some benefit.

Like others have said, it is difficult to blame Vince for whatever happened, given his family situation at the time. I bet none of the coaches, university big wigs or now the self-righteous people investigating ever had to worry how they were going to pay for an apartment next month, attend school next semester, or even put food in their stomachs next week. Survival of the fittest applies in every aspect of life.

The rules say "College athletes can't accept money." So if a Wilfork takes money, he is wrong...until the rules get changed. He accepted the scholarship, knew the criteria involved. Why bother with rules then. Just let the U boys brawl on the fields under their own system...because rules are made to be ignored...right.

U of Miami is a day school...a very large day school that happened to accept a certain type of athlete ...physically superior but academically disinterested. All of a sudden, U of M is on the map. Attending Miami became a business decision for many players only interested in obtaining a degree in the NFL. Is it a surprise that they conducted business off the field as well.

For all of the "Luv of the U" crap that has permeated over the airwaves over the years, clearly these players valued cash more than the U because their actions are about to take down the U.

As far as the ridiculous Facebook example, Harvard doesn't have rules against students operating businesses while enrolled.

I heard on Mike and Mike that the Trustees are going after the $$$. How can they legally do this?


2 Escalades given 1 to Vince the other 1 to his Girlfriend.

I wonder if wilfork will be suspended by the league for conduct detrimental...doesn't sound fair but they can do anything they want.

SanAngeloState said:

I wonder if wilfork will be suspended by the league for conduct detrimental...doesn't sound fair but they can do anything they want.

Click to expand...

what happens in college doesn't effect status in NFL, so I have thought

TheSolderKing said:

what happens in college doesn't effect status in NFL, so I have thought

Click to expand...

Tell that to my ugh idiot qb Terrell Pyror. But I don't feel for him. My feelings towards the idiot qb are same damn feeling towards that green inbred team led by Jaba the hutt.

borg said:

As far as the ridiculous Facebook example, Harvard doesn't have rules against students operating businesses while enrolled.

Click to expand...

There are two concepts at play here. "Wrong", as in against the rules and "wrong" as in unethical. Yes, taking money violates NCAA rules and is "wrong" in that regard. I do not think it is unethical. I do not have a moral judgement about any college player who takes money while in college.

My Facebook example was meant to illustrate (like the Music major putting out an album analogy in another thread) a double standard. Certain classes of students are allowed to make money while in school without jeopardizing their participation in that school or that program. Certain classes of students (NCAA athletes) are not.

I think it is absolutely terrible that the NCAA prevents these young athletes from making money while in college. College football is a big business. Coaching, TV contracts, gambling, video games, commercials, you name it. Everyone is allowed to make a dollar on college football except the athletes.

xmarkd400x said:

There are two concepts at play here. "Wrong", as in against the rules and "wrong" as in unethical. Yes, taking money violates NCAA rules and is "wrong" in that regard. I do not think it is unethical. I do not have a moral judgement about any college player who takes money while in college.

My Facebook example was meant to illustrate (like the Music major putting out an album analogy in another thread) a double standard. Certain classes of students are allowed to make money while in school without jeopardizing their participation in that school or that program. Certain classes of students (NCAA athletes) are not.

I think it is absolutely terrible that the NCAA prevents these young athletes from making money while in college. College football is a big business. Coaching, TV contracts, gambling, video games, commercials, you name it. Everyone is allowed to make a dollar on college football except the athletes.

Click to expand...

It's strictly because the business major and the music major don't have a corrupt ruling body with jurisdiction over them that's raking in cash hand over fist for their efforts. If they did, then the first thing that that ruling body would do would be to take away the right to monetize their own skills.

Look at the NCAA football video game series that gets released every year. Sam Keller (ex-college QB) is suing EA right now because it's so clearly a case of the NCAA profiting off of players' likenesses.

Pivotal EA Sports Lawsuit Goes Back To Court This Week

xmarkd400x said:

My Facebook example was meant to illustrate (like the Music major putting out an album analogy in another thread) a double standard. Certain classes of students are allowed to make money while in school without jeopardizing their participation in that school or that program. Certain classes of students (NCAA athletes) are not.

I think it is absolutely terrible that the NCAA prevents these young athletes from making money while in college. College football is a big business. Coaching, TV contracts, gambling, video games, commercials, you name it. Everyone is allowed to make a dollar on college football except the athletes.

Click to expand...

This would be a totally fair argument if the music students had accepted a hugely valuable college music scholarship which not only paid their tuition and expenses but gave them access to special tutoring and other services unavailable to other students -- and which came with the clear understanding that they wouldn't accept money from talent agents during their college years.

You just can't talk about the special restrictions placed on college athletes without acknowledging the special privileges given them. Besides, they're not "prevented from making money" as you said. (Think of the NCAA football players who spend their summers in minor league baseball.) They're prevented from taking bribes from agents and boosters and profiting from their student-athlete status.

But IMO the whole enterprise of big-time college sports is bizarre and pretty much unjustifiable at this point.

patchick said:

This would be a totally fair argument if the music students had accepted a hugely valuable college music scholarship which not only paid their tuition and expenses but gave them access to special tutoring and other services unavailable to other students -- and which came with the clear understanding that they wouldn't accept money from talent agents during their college years.

You just can't talk about the special restrictions placed on college athletes without acknowledging the special privileges given them. Besides, they're not "prevented from making money" as you said. (Think of the NCAA football players who spend their summers in minor league baseball.) They're prevented from taking bribes from agents and boosters and profiting from their student-athlete status.

But IMO the whole enterprise of big-time college sports is bizarre and pretty much unjustifiable at this point.

Click to expand...

Agree with everything you write.

As someone who has signed a legal document that agreed to limitations on my right to work during the school year in exchange for special privileges, I think people are naive to say this doesn't apply to other students. It does.

The school that gave me that money invested in my academic abilities, and was thereby interested in having me apply myself to them to the fullest. If I were working while also accepting the money given to me, I would have been breaking the contract.

I was allowed to work in summer however, just like athletes are given bogus jobs washing cars at dealerships.

patchick said:

This would be a totally fair argument if the music students had accepted a hugely valuable college music scholarship which not only paid their tuition and expenses but gave them access to special tutoring and other services unavailable to other students -- and which came with the clear understanding that they wouldn't accept money from talent agents during their college years.

You just can't talk about the special restrictions placed on college athletes without acknowledging the special privileges given them. Besides, they're not "prevented from making money" as you said. (Think of the NCAA football players who spend their summers in minor league baseball.) They're prevented from taking bribes from agents and boosters and profiting from their student-athlete status.

But IMO the whole enterprise of big-time college sports is bizarre and pretty much unjustifiable at this point.

Click to expand...

It is true that NCAA athletes receive benefits that other students do not, and it is part of the tradeoff of participation. This is a good point and it is something I did not consider.

I will offer the counter point that all NCAA athletes, scholarship & benefits or not, are required to abide by these rules. It doesn't matter if the player is a Notre Dame blue chip or UMass JAG.

I do have a problem with bribes. I do not have a problem with somebody getting a cushy job due to their status. If somebody wants to pay a collegiate athlete $10k to sign autographs at their dealership, I think that should be allowed.

I don't think he did anything wrong personally, these guys do all the work and everyone else makes all the money and gets all the benefits? There's a word for that.

This problem will not be solved until players are given adequate money to live.

I have zero problem with these guys taking money even with a signed agreement.

However, these universities cannot let these situations degenerate into a situation where gamblers can fix games. It's also worth noting that it's basically football and basketball that make money. The vast majority of sports (think Title IX) are money pits.

If they provided a very generous stipend with scrict rules and penalties, many of these problems can go away.

patsfaninpittsburgh said:

This problem will not be solved until players are given adequate money to live.

I have zero problem with these guys taking money even with a signed agreement.

However, these universities cannot let these situations degenerate into a situation where gamblers can fix games. It's also worth noting that it's basically football and basketball that make money. The vast majority of sports (think Title IX) are money pits.

If they provided a very generous stipend with scrict rules and penalties, many of these problems can go away.

Click to expand...

Just a Q: since TAs and others bring far more money to a university, will they also be provided with extras? Or is this money only for athletes?

I for one don't buy the idea that they make not enough money to live on. When all your books and food and housing is paid for, including a transportation allowance for getting to school, then surely you can get a 10-15 hour a week summer job to give you more cushion (the vast majority of players do get that summer job). Or heck, they are eligible for subsidized student loans.

It should be lost on no one that one of the chief complainers about not receiving money enough to live on was Chris Webber, complaining while he was raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars.