OT-Former Oregon Duck FB Player says he was promised house/car

Submitted by MGoBrewMom on
I think this is okay for in-season. If not, apologies and please delete. I ran across this story and did not see it posted. It will certainly garner some attention while they sort out the validity of the claims. Colt Lyerla, former TE from Oregon claims he was offered expensive things from a booster while he was being recruited by the University. He ultimately played three years at Oregon, and never received the gifts. http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/story/colt-lyerla-former-oreg…
MGoBoard
Football

gord

September 3rd, 2014 at 11:27 PM ^

Some people seem to think that coaches of successful programs are successful because they pay players.  I've seen it posted about Saban and Calipari recently and it's usually met with upvotes, not ridicule.  It's just a weak excuse for losing.  A story like this just proves that coaches and schools aren't doing anything wrong.  Enough athletes would spill the beans when they are at a party or after they leave a program and it would be obvious to everyone on campus.  Would the students keep it quiet?  Maybe, but fans of opposing teams wouldn't and a simple instagram of a star Alabama player getting out of a Range Rover by a visiting Auburn fan could take down the entire program.  Saban isn't paying players.  Calipari isn't paying players.  No coach or school is paying players.  If a team wins it's because they are better.

Joined: 11/02/2013

MGoPoints: 8104

gord

September 3rd, 2014 at 11:44 PM ^

Ok, so maybe some kind of agree with me that the coaches don't pay players but the boosters are working behind the scenes.  Why does Alabama get the best recruits then?  They certainly don't have the richest boosters.  Why didn't they get recruits before Saban?  Why will recruiting drop off when Saban leaves?  If the players are going there just because the boosters are paying then Alabama would be consistent.  What schools have the richest alumni?  From the power 5 it would be Stanford.  Some of those alumni have insane Silicone Valley money.  I could probably name dozens of rich Stanford grads and not one Alabama grad.  I mean really, Auburn hates Alabama.  If word got around that Alabama football players were flaunting money you don't think they would take it down in a weekend?

Joined: 11/02/2013

MGoPoints: 8104

Reader71

September 3rd, 2014 at 11:50 PM ^

This is ridiculous. Just because people have money does not mean they are willing to give it to football players. Alabama doesn't have the richest alumni, but if they are paying players, they are able to do so because they have more people willing to pay. The Stanford grads with their Google money don't care about football. The Bama grads with their McDonalds money do care about football, and are willing to break the rules. You are not thinking clearly. Take a minute and regroup.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

GoBLUinTX

September 4th, 2014 at 12:09 AM ^

years before Saban arrived, the problem is they kept getting into trouble and so remained ineligible for post season play.  Saban went undefeated in 2009 with players recruited by the Mike Shula regime and more importantly has kept the program, if not clean, then clean enough for the self-blinded NCAA.  Not to say Saban isn't a good coach, but the fact is recruting was doing okay before he arrived and there is no indication that it will fall off with his eventual retirement. 

Joined: 12/02/2013

MGoPoints: 5895

Reader71

September 4th, 2014 at 12:19 AM ^

The guys above me have made good points. Here's another. Boosters often pull their support when they lose confidence in the coach and bump it up when they are confident in the new guy. Would you spend your money on defensive players if you knew Greg Robsinson was going to be their coordinator? I just used Bama because you brought them up. I have no idea if they are clean or not. But USC went through years in the desert before Pete Carroll showed up and there is proof that they were giving guys houses.

Joined: 08/30/2009

MGoPoints: 22968

mgo한국

September 4th, 2014 at 4:54 AM ^

Let's not forget to include the possibility that recruits are dynamic people who come from a wide range of backgrounds and respond to a variety of different factors. Benefits deemed to be illegal by the NCAA are certainly one documented way for recruits to be enticed to attend programs. Coaches with proven track records of preparing their players to earn millions professionally should not be excluded from consideration. There are many more factors and idiosyncrasies to be considered in an athlete's recruitment, some of which may even seem contrary to the recruit's best interests to the third party observer (See where Karl Malone played his college ball despite the other programs after him.).


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 01/12/2010

MGoPoints: 733

JamieH

September 4th, 2014 at 10:11 AM ^

Boosters may be willing to spend money on players, but they aren't stupid.  They aren't going to waste their money if they don't have faith in the head coach.

 

When the program gets a coach in place that they trust can deliver the goods, the spigot gets turned on to "full corruption". 

Joined: 09/05/2009

MGoPoints: 28331

WestQuad

September 4th, 2014 at 10:56 AM ^

Despite an insane game from Tom Brady and a victory from Michigan, I am still scared of the talent on the 2000 Alabama team.  Those guys were crazy good.  That was the first time I heard the term SEC speed, or at least the first time it registered.  Not saying they were paid, but Alabama has always had good recruiting.  To other people's points, performance on the field does effect the recruiting (and booster payments). 

Joined: 07/22/2011

MGoPoints: 31020