Woodson ALLEGEDLY took $$ while playing at U of M?

Submitted by hailhail97 on

Listening to Colin Cowherd and he just compared the Reggie Bush situation to Charles Woodson saying that Charles Woodson took money and they didn't take his Heisman trophy away.  Cowherd said they didn't take Woodson's Heisman away because UofM wasn't going through what USC is going through now.  Saying Woodson took money while playing at Michigan like it's common knowledge..... am I missing something?

hailhail97

July 21st, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^

that Woodson took money and Cowherd said the reason Woodson's Heisman wasn't taken away was because Michigan wasn't going through what USC is going through now. 

That, to me, seems that Cowherd is saying "Yes, Woodson took money but it's different from Bush because...."  That seems very irresponsible for a national sports personality to do without some knowledge of it.

jvick9006

July 21st, 2010 at 12:29 PM ^

I had never heard anything about this Woodson situation before today but, honestly, I would not be surprised. I know of multiple players who are currently in college that are with an agency. One guy will definitely be drafted next year, one other will be drafted either next year or the year after and the other will be drafted in the next 3 years. This is nothing new and nothing surprising. Many guys have been talking to agents for years, if they have potential.

The Original Seth

July 21st, 2010 at 10:59 AM ^

The details are unclear from the standpoint of a paper trail and testimony, but it is likely something happened. Here is a quote from a Yahoo! article:

The only comparable situation is 1997 winner Charles Woodson, who in 2001 was alleged to have taken almost $14,000 in improper benefits from an agent during his Heisman campaign. Woodson denied taking benefits, and the University of Michigan and NCAA were never able to substantiate claims of impropriety.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=ys-heisman061010

VaBeach Wolverine

July 21st, 2010 at 10:59 AM ^

If you run a google search for it all that comes up are USC forums with people comparing the Bush situation to Woodson. I havent seen anything concrete to back up these claims.

PurpleStuff

July 21st, 2010 at 8:50 PM ^

You should know from my constant presence and over-abundance of MGoPoints that I don't have time to frequent any other forums.

Aside from checking my email and trying to download the latest Holly Rowe videos, this site is my only home on the internet.

JeepinBen

July 21st, 2010 at 10:59 AM ^

I can't listen to that blowhard anymore. I'm amazed that he was given a TV show. 

That said, the reggie Bush thing is not like woodson... The NCAA investigated USC because of bush. Bush was not implicated in "everything else that's going on there" he was the MAJOR thing going on there

JeepinBen

July 21st, 2010 at 11:30 AM ^

He's on the record as saying "Michigan is done" and I'm sure after ND last year he said "Michigan is BACK!"

He just sucks. I heard him with all this LeBron BS, he'd make the case for another city every other day. He's a big NY/LA guy, and went on and on about how LeBron better go to New York... etc. I really just don't understand how people listen to him. Of course, "Mall Cop" was the #1 movie in america for a while... can't explain that either

QVIST

August 21st, 2010 at 1:33 PM ^

Last summer Cowherd was talking about how RR was going to be successful here, saying "once Michigan gets the athletes they're used to for his system, they will be unstoppable" or something of the sort. That was actually good to hear from him for once.

The Original Seth

July 21st, 2010 at 11:03 AM ^


A 2001 Free Press article covered the improprieties, which came out in the Marion Darnell Jones / SC Talent Agency hearings:

Since then, quite a few people have paid dearly for Woodson's relationship with Summit and its associates. A big chunk of Woodson's pro earnings were misused, federal investigators say. Jones, Summit partner James E. Brown, a real estate agent and a credit union president have all been indicted in what appears to be an elaborate fraud scheme.

And, because Woodson apparently violated NCAA rules before and during his Heisman-winning season, Michigan has seen its most celebrated season tarnished in the eyes of some fans.

 

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-121018415/woodson-and-agents…

PurpleStuff

July 21st, 2010 at 5:55 PM ^

Did you expect Carr to say, "Yeah, we are guilty as shit!"?

Note that he doesn't deny anything but just says, "Nobody wants to talk about that."  If any other coach in the country did that (four years after the fact, mind you) would we have the same trusting reaction? 

What could possibly have been done by a U-M investigation?  I'm sure they didn't have access to Jones' financial records or receipts.  They likely had zero access to or interaction with Jones at all.  My guess is any investigation consisted of asking Charles Woodson if he took money, him saying no (Why would he want to give back his Heisman or tarnish his national title season?), then everybody looking around to make sure no one was really watching and concluding that this would suffice.  I'm sure OSU conducted a similar "investigation" into Maurice Clarett's activities and turned up no evidence of wrongdoing as well.

The fact is, this case got extremely limited scrutiny years after Woodson had already left campus and it was easily swept under the rug because nobody really cared enough to look into it at that point (save guys like Sharp scrounging for a story) and because the NCAA lacked the enforcement power or the whistle blower to adequately investigate on their own.  Carr's comments sound a hell of a lot like Pete Carroll's when the Bush story broke, but Carr didn't have to deal with an ongoing Yahoo Sports investigation or have the guy who paid his player testifying to the NCAA.

It takes a huge leap of faith to believe that nothing happened here, but plenty of people seem happy to do it when U-M players/coaches are implicated while quickly condemning anyone who plays/coaches elsewhere. 

Huntington Wolverine

July 21st, 2010 at 7:17 PM ^

If any other coach in the country did that (four years after the fact, mind you) would we have the same trusting reaction?

Nope but there's a lot of classy things about Carr that most other coaches don't share.  I trust the guy.  I can't imagine him looking the other way in light of how focused he was on building character in his players.

oriental andrew

July 21st, 2010 at 11:08 AM ^

it was investigated, nothing ever came of it.  OTOH, even early on in the Bush investigation, there were clear improprieties.  Very different from the Woodson case.  Did Charles take money/benefits?  Maybe, but nothing was ever proven and the NCAA seemed satisfied with the result.  Perhaps the links were just far too tenuous to make a case, unlike with Bush. 

jmblue

July 21st, 2010 at 1:23 PM ^

The bigger difference between Bush and Woodson's cases is that in Bush's the FBI got involved, forcing him to testify.  (This is also what finally got us in trouble for Ed Martin.)  The NCAA doesn't have that kind of clout, so the large majority of the time it can't prove its allegations. 

PurpleStuff

July 21st, 2010 at 1:27 PM ^

The difference is that Bush didn't sign with the guys advancing him money and then refused to pay them back.  They responded by going to the press and testifying in front of the NCAA.  None of the evidence against USC is based on anything Bush did/said to them.

Woodson signed on with Jones and as a result Jones had no reason or incentive to run to the NCAA and spill the beans.

Bryan

July 21st, 2010 at 11:09 AM ^

How dare they. Do you not think the NCAA would have found something if this were to have happened during the basketball investigation?

Bush took cash, Woodson saves lives. 

Geaux_Blue

July 21st, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^

OLUMBIA, S.C. _ Heisman Trophy winner Charles Woodson testified Thursday that he did not take money or anything else of value from a Columbia sports agent during his college career at the University of Michigan. Woodson, testifying in the trial of Columbia banker Andre Lewis, said he _ not Summit Management Group Ltd. _ paid for a trip to Myrtle Beach in the spring of 1997, before his Heisman-winning season. He also denied accepting a fur coat for his mother while still in college, saying, "I don't know when that was bought." A receipt obtained by The State newspaper lists a $5,215 purchase from Henig Furs in Montgomery, Ala., on Dec. 11, 1997 _ two days before the Heisman awards ceremony and three weeks before the 1998 Rose Bowl, Woodson's final college game. The receipt,

psychomatt

July 21st, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^

Investigators found a receipt for a fur coat. The receipt is dated December 11, but does not indicate if or when that coat was given to Woodson's mother.

This was a trial, with testimony by many people under oath. Not one person testified either to the fact that Woodson did not pay for the trip to Myrle Beach or if or when Summit gave the coat to his mother. Very different than USC / Bush & Mayo.

PurpleStuff

July 21st, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^

They were vastly different trials.  Jones was on trial for ripping off his clients once they got to the NFL while Bush was sued by the agents for not paying back the money they gave him while he was at SC.  The lawyers in the Jones case tap-danced around the issue of college eligibility and only focused on the facts relevant to their case (one of the articles posted says a lawyer told Stephen Davis they wouldn't get into eligibility issues and he says basically, "I don't care, I'm not in college any more.")

Erik_in_Dayton

July 21st, 2010 at 11:18 AM ^

No one ever showed that Michigan, as program, should have known that Woodson took anything (not that I know if he even did)...This doesn't have anything to do with the Heisman issue, but it speaks to comparing USC to Michigan. 

Tim

July 21st, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^

Uh, nobody is "taking" Bush's Heisman away. USC is giving it back voluntarily. Also, yes, it's fairly common knowledge that Woodson took agent cash before the Rose Bowl. I don't want to play degrees of "we're not quite as bad," but that game came after Woodson won the Heisman, so he wouldn't have been ineligible in any of the relevant games.

Njia

July 21st, 2010 at 11:28 AM ^

According to federal records made public during the 2001 trial of Andre Lewis, (who was being tried for fraud and had a relationship with Summit Management, Woodson's agents) the firm's records showed that it had paid for a trip made by Woodson in May 1997 to South Carolina, and for a tuxedo two weeks before the Heisman Trophy was awarded, (and a month before the 1998 Rose Bowl).

Bryan

July 21st, 2010 at 11:31 AM ^

Unless there are facts by either Woodson, the NCAA, a court of law, or the University, it is nothing more than rumors that have creeped into the 'common knowledge' because they have been discussed to death on USC and UT message boards over the past decade. 

I guess this begs the question of what is fairly common knowledge and how much of it are we willing to believe. 

Lastly, if Woodson or any other player for that matter were to have taken money between the final game and the bowl, are they retroactively ineligible for the entire season, or just the bowl game?

jamiemac

July 21st, 2010 at 11:23 AM ^

Marcus Ray was also suspended for a couple games to start 1998 for agent contact, iirc.

Agents. Tricky business. Luckily, Woodson was cooperative and the NCAA couldnt prove anything.