Basically Braxton appeared on social media supporting Advocare, one of those nutrition pyramid schemes like Herbalife and Visalus.
This is admittedly a minor violation, but might provide a cheap excuse if Urban needs one to edge out Miller from the crowded QB competition in Columbus.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Minor? Reading the rule makes it seem like supporting a product = ineligible.
Only until he repays any remuneration received.
Here's the rule:
Allowing his name and picture to be used for advertising means loss of eligibility, even if he doesn't accept money.
Right but I think he'd be covered there by the fact that it was removed. He could argue that he insisted on its removal when he realized it was being used for advertising. I mean, this is the NCAA we're talking about. I don't see them coming after this with teeth unless there was a full ongoing advertising campaign Braxton was complicit in. But like I said, enough to give Urban am easy out if he's looking for one by siding with your interpretation.
Yeah, I could see that. Of course, logically you can say why else would he be posing with a product if he wasn't advertising it, but we all know that the NCAA doesn't operate on logic.
See, what had happened was, I was sitting there, and all this Advocare stuff was just scattered all over the table, and I'm a neat freak so I stacked it up all nice, then my buddy says hey smile and then they snap this picture...
Ah but this is also Ohio State with a history of NCAA violations. Aren't they still on probation?
No I think that ended the year they had the bowl ban or the year after that.
Minor or not, I just don't see how someone could be so dumb.
Now there we completely agree.
You missed many of the QB's anOSU has had the last few years and the things they have done?
Stupid is as stupid does
Clearly this is a case of Urban Meyer self reporting so he doesn't need to decide who the QB starter is himself. making someone else the bad man, smart. /s
also pretty stupid
Urban making sure Miller isn't eligible to play for anyone else that might make it to the playoff
Your saying that if he loses eligibility from this, Urban will no longer care where he transfer to?
This is coming from the same guy who tweeted something like "We don't come to play no school." right? If so let me prepare my shocked face for you...
not that was cardale not braxton. If anything I think its a two horse race between Cardale and J.T... Braxton is an injury machine baby.
Ah my mistake. Man they have a stable of wise QB's dont they...
Nah, that was Jones I think. So 2/3 of their QBs aren't interested in following rules and 2/3 are injured. Miller just wanted to one-up the other 2 by being both at the same time.
There's an inception joke somewhere here but I cant think of a good one
EDITED: Yeah, nevermind. It's already been said...
So an application for the supplemental draft coming soon?
OSU deja vu
Nothing will happen before Labor Day.
Can an NCAA athlete own a business, and if so can they use their own likeness in support of that business?
The reason I ask is for a lot of these multi-level marketing schemes (the new pyramid schemes) the people selling the product are considered business owners, I believe. They are basically subcontract distributors of the product. I would consider this an endorsement of his business as a subcontractor, not as an endorsement of the product itself. That's why he says he's "on a mission".
Maybe that's still not allowed, I don't know, the NCAA rules are idiotic either way. NCAA athletes should be allowed to sell pictures of their own faces.
No, there was an athlete not too long ago who had a clothing company prior to going to college and he could not keep using his name and likeness.
One of the articles actually included a briefing from Advocare on what players and coaches could and could not do as distributors. Using your own picture was a big NO. So he knew what he was doing was against the NCAA rules if he read the guidance from Advocare.
I don't think you are allowed to use your name, image, or likeness for profit as an NCAA amateur athlete. Essentially, your athletic celebrity status, if you will, is the property of the school and NCAA. They give you a scholarship and opportunity to pursue collegiate athletics as consideration for them profiting from your abilities.
Take the Terrelle Pryor situation from a few years back; he used his status as an athlete in allegedly selling or trading athletic memorabilia for personal gain. It wasn't necessarily his selling something for profit that was the issue, but rather his image and celebrity gave the items he exchanged their value. You can see why even an NCAA athlete appearing as a pitchman or spokesman for a business is a big no no.
So Booster BigBucks says to Athlete 5 Star, you do this business, or sell this product, or put your face here, and 50 boosters will buy your $5 widget for $100 each. Problem with letting them sell their faces is then it become hard to tell what people are really paying for. Athlete 5 star has a local "business" pay $100,000 for his likeness if he goes to school LOL in case he becomes a star there. NCAA is idiotic, but not that stupid.
Saw this yesterday on BR. Regardless of the fact that we face OSU on Labor Day, this rule really does need to change. I know the whole paying college athletes debate is one side vs. the other, but if a kid can make money like this in college by marketing himself in a way that does not harm the university, what's the purpose of the rule? If any other college kid that wasn't a varsity athlete was caught doing this, they'd probably have an article written about them in Forbes or something and be praised for their entrepreneurial spirit. Nonetheless, despite what people say about OSU, I have confidence they will handle this appropriately. They have done so in the past, and at this point I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see Braxton come September anyways.
I think this analysing illustrates the absurdity of the NCAA rule. It's one thing to say you can't be paid to play. It's also one thing to say got can't license your own image for profit. But to say that you cannot have a JOB (or in this case, I suppose technically own your own business) if your notoriety from playing a college sport would benefit your performance in the job, is patently absurd. The NCAA is trying to put its student athletes in a vacuum that does not exist in reality.
As a fan of TheOSU I'll admit a bias but this seems to be a minor infraction. He became a distributor for Advocare and posted a picture of him and the distributor he was under, and quickly pulled it when he realized it could be an NCAA violation. Advocare apparently uses athletes to sell their products, and at one point at least sponsored a bowl game.
Personally, I'd never get involved in an MLM scheme but I could see where it could be attractive to an athlete wanting to make a few bucks on the side. I could also see it getting out of hand, where boosters are buying large amounts of the stuff as an "legal" way of paying a kid; though given the small cut he'd get that'd be a very inefficient way to pay a kid.
To me, a dumber move was posting an email address to reach him.
I think the NCAA really needs to revisit their entire rulebook with respect to what is allowable in terms of athletes selling stuff or booster interaction. For example, a friend of mine is like a dad to a neighborhood kid who was a scholarship athlete. If he took him, along with his kids, out for pizza he potentially was committing an NCAA violation and the kid could lose his scholarship.
.
if he took him out for pizza when he was growing up, he can do it now.
but yes, stupid rules
NCAA needs to allow athletes to do what any other student can do...or drop the notion that they are student athletes and not in some way indentured. we had an excellent snow skier on the football team who couldn't earn money relative to skiiing...stupid.