Active Users:273 Time:26/06/2024 07:56:58 PM
i think you meant "eligible" not "illegible".... moondog Send a noteboard - 17/09/2010 01:27:24 AM
It isn't that they took the reward back to punish him, they took all of his wins and stats off the record books to do that. He is required to be an illegible player to win the award. He was ruled to be ineligible after he was caught taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from busters. Since he was no longer an illegible player he was no longer eligible for the award.

No one is getting the award. Despite moon’s statement Young never even ask for it. The trophy will go unrewarded for 2005. Young should have won it outright as he proved on the field but that is a different argument.


also, vince young "jokingly" said he wanted it during an interview on espn. but he didn't say he was joking until after the fact. so, yes he did say he wanted it, and yes he definitely proved he should have been in the running. but the heisman voters didn't make him the winner, it wasn't even close.
"The RIAA has shown a certain disregard for the creative people of the industry in their eagerness to protect the revenues of the record companies." -- Frank Zappa

"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman
Reply to message
reggie bush gives back his heisman award; pete carroll and vince young are major douchebags - 15/09/2010 04:19:31 AM 638 Views
What's wrong with Vince Young wanting the trophy? *NM* - 15/09/2010 04:48:39 AM 213 Views
There's nothing wrong with him wanting it - 15/09/2010 04:59:53 AM 598 Views
Why it isn't like Bush is a vicitim of fate or anything *NM* - 15/09/2010 02:14:46 PM 171 Views
imho, it makes it look like he only cares for his personal glory... - 15/09/2010 07:17:50 AM 471 Views
No Bush is the douchebag - 15/09/2010 02:13:58 PM 480 Views
innocent until proven guilty - 15/09/2010 04:16:16 PM 465 Views
he didn't own up he got caught - 15/09/2010 05:40:31 PM 537 Views
It's about time you realized that. - 16/09/2010 10:28:29 PM 460 Views
- 16/09/2010 10:43:55 PM 444 Views
I've never understood this. - 16/09/2010 09:42:09 PM 403 Views
he didn't meet the minimum qualification for the award - 16/09/2010 10:00:10 PM 446 Views
i think you meant "eligible" not "illegible".... - 17/09/2010 01:27:24 AM 459 Views
they ask him if he would take it if they offered it to him and he said yes - 17/09/2010 03:16:26 PM 419 Views
This is a technicality. - 17/09/2010 10:19:56 PM 440 Views
they don't have the power to fine him and it is more then a technicality - 18/09/2010 12:46:01 AM 398 Views

Reply to Message