Matt Leinart's violates NCAA rule

[paynomind]

Matt Leinart's appearance in a promotional spot for ESPN violated an NCAA rule, but the USC quarterback had his eligibility restored Tuesday, an NCAA spokesman told the Los Angeles Times.

USC declared Leinart ineligible this month after the spot -- a "SportsCenter is next" promo that was taped after the Trojans' Dec. 3 victory over UCLA -- aired on ESPN. The Trojans reported the violation to the NCAA and petitioned for Leinart's reinstatement.

"Whenever we are aware that media outlets ask student-athletes to do these kinds of tags, we immediately cut them off," Tim Tessalone, USC's sports information director, told the Times. "Unfortunately, this one slipped by."

According to the NCAA's Kent Barrett, Leinart's actions were "unintentional and inadvertent. This was the type of thing where it was obvious the student-athlete was not attempting to become an endorser of a network."

Leinart, who finished third in this year's Heisman Trophy balloting and won the award last year, has practiced three times in preparation for the Jan. 4 Rose Bowl against Texas.

Barrett told the Times athletes may take part in practice and team and school activities while reinstatement petitions are considered by the NCAA. Leinart's situation came to light when USC's sports information staff turned down post-practice interview requests for the senior, who is made available to the media only on Tuesdays.

Tessalone said Leinart had been barred by USC from participating in media activities until after Christmas.

[TFoA]

Just another example of how ridiculous these NCAA rules are. You can get punished for anything.

[WSU151]

Where does it say he is "ineligible for month"??

USC declared Leinart ineligible this month after the spot

Translation:

USC made the ineligible declaration during the month of December...That's how it is supposed to read. It's worded weird, but trust me, he wasn't declared ineligible for a month, otherwise it would say "ineligible for this month", or "ineligible for the month of December".

[yh]

I, for one, laud the NCAA for their policy. If it's one thing I can't stand it's the utilization of everyone and everything for some commercial purpose. Why must everything in the media be tied to some promotional gimmick or product placement? I am sick and tired of it and certainly happy that the NCAA is attempting to keep its student-athletes away from this practice.

On a related subject, I feel that Kraft Deli Deluxe American Singles is without a doubt the finest American cheese available today.

[NJTank]

What will be a bitch is if he si inellegable for teh Rose Bowl man taht would be greta USC would lose and everyone would hate the NCAA

[Jigga]

What will be a bitch is if he si inellegable for teh Rose Bowl man taht would be greta USC would lose and everyone would hate the NCAA

Did you see the part in the original post that said, "but the USC quarterback had his eligibility restored Tuesday..." that kinda ruins your scenario.

[Grish]

If this was anyone else but USC in the Pac 10, there would be no appeal or consideration given.

Claiming, "It slipped by" is not valid... and USC should be on two year bowl ban for it..

[PeytonManningRocks]

What will be a bitch is if he si inellegable for teh Rose Bowl man taht would be greta USC would lose and everyone would hate the NCAA

Inglés, por favor

Seriously, some of these NCAA rules are just stupid. I mean, I heard that Georgia fans couldn't pay for a military family of a Boise State football player because they would be Boise state boosters. Boosters, my ! It was just fans trying to do something nice for a member of the military, but thanks to Myles Brand and the "Numbskulls of Collegiate Athletics" Association, Georgia fans couldn't do it.

[NJTank]

Brian Bosworth when he was suspended for roids in 1987 wore a T-Shirt at the Orange Bowl that sid National Communist Against Athleetes it still holds true.

[Squeaks4]

If this was anyone else but USC in the Pac 10, there would be no appeal or consideration given.

Claiming, "It slipped by" is not valid... and USC should be on two year bowl ban for it..

Amen to that. Pac-10 (minus SC) gets no respect. Just look at the bowl Oregon is playing in

[Cujo]

I would just like to thank the NCAA for not suspending Leinart, leaving the Rose Bowl as the greatest game of this century.

[NJTank]

Come on it would have been fun if they suspended him the fire storm on the NCAA would have forced many necessary changes.

[Cyclopsis Joe]

I would just like to thank the NCAA for not suspending Leinart, leaving the Rose Bowl as the greatest game of this century.

Of course you want Leinart off the hook, if he wasn't in the Rose Bowl you'd have a lot of words to eat.

[bhambruiser]

If this would have happened to and Alabama player they would have shut the program down

[eastcoasthusky]

Wasn't the Tide involved with a booster basically paying a high school coach to get a player and they still didn't get the death penalty. Not saying the didn't get hurt, but the NCAA ain't ever gonna shut anyone down for football.

Last and I think only team to have it happen (SMU) has never recovered and giving the death penalty to any school in football would probably kill the athletic dept as a whole.

The sad thing with the NCAA is that it is overregulated. Things like steriods, boosters giving money, I understand but everyone is worried about someone else getting the upperhand esp. with recruiting that they keep on making rules.

[Thad]

Only thing is, it wasn't the UA that paid the recruit. It was a booster. Totally different story there. I'm surprised we didn't get the death penalty considering Miles and his goons hate Alabama. There's a reason its called the National Coalition Against Alabama ya know.

[See Red]

Only thing is, it wasn't the UA that paid the recruit. It was a booster. Totally different story there. I'm surprised we didn't get the death penalty considering Miles and his goons hate Alabama. There's a reason its called the National Coalition Against Alabama ya know.

It's my understanding that schools are responsible for the actions of their boosters, no? If that's the case, then it makes no difference if it was a booster or the school itself.