NCAA Finds Trojan Receiver Gets "Extra Benefits"

by Nestor on Jun 20, 2006 9:19 AM PDT in Football

We haven't mentioned this story yet. Looks like the NCAA found that Trojan wide receiver Dwayne Jarrett violated an "extra benefit" rule because of the sweet rent deal he was enjoying thanks to Matty Lienart's dad. What, a story about Trojies cheating off the field? Shocking I know. From the LA Times (emphasis mine throughout):

USC receiver Dwayne Jarrettt, who last season shared an expensive apartment with quarterback Matt Leinart, violated an "extra benefits" rule and must apply for reinstatement of his eligibility, the NCAA said Thursday.

An NCAA committee made its determination after USC's compliance office sought assistance in determining whether a violation had occurred because Jarrettt paid less than half of what Leinart's father said was a $3,866-a-month lease.

"The information submitted by the University of Southern California regarding the living arrangements of two football student-athletes represents a violation of NCAA extra benefit rules," the NCAA said in a statement.

Again just what kind of "extra-benefit" Dwayne Jarrettt was enjoying from Matt's pops. From the LA Times again:

The situation became widely known April 29, the first day of the NFL draft, when Leinart's father Bob told The Times that he had been told Jarrettt might have to repay him as much as $10,000.

Leinart's parents said they leased the apartment for their son in a secured building of the Medici complex in downtown Los Angeles because fans started showing up at the 2004 Heisman Trophy winner's previous residence near campus.

Matt paid $650 a month, Jarrettt paid $650 and Bob paid the difference, Bob said.

So the difference here was about $2,566(3,866-1300), which is about $1,283 per person? Do I have this right? So Jarrett was getting about $1,283 a month on free rent (reported from the LA Times)? Again Bob Leinart himself reportedly told the Times Jarrett may have to pay as much as $10,000 back. Oh, and in case anyone wants take a peak into this Medici Apartment complex where Matt and Dwayne had their post pad, take a peak:

Photo via the Medici

Oh to take a full virtual photo tour go here. Pretty nice. Ain't it?

So how does NCAA deals with this kind serious infractions on extra-benefit?:

In general, this kind of situation can be resolved in three ways, NCAA spokesman Erik Christianson said. The student-athlete can be denied reinstatement, regain his eligibility with no conditions attached or might be required to miss games and/or pay back the extra benefit.

Again that is all from the Times report. Of course the Trojan PR machine led by Peter Carroll is in full effect insisting that Jarrettt "won't lose a game." Someone should call the NCAA if that is case?

Here is the information from NCAA concerning extra-benefit violations, offenses identified in Bylaws 16 (taking advantage of a scholarship) and 12 (accepting impermissible benefits from an outside source):

Those extra-benefit guidelines, prescribed by the committee during its June and December 1999 meetings, specify that when an extra benefit of $100 or more is received as a result of a student-athlete acting independently, the violation may warrant withholding the student-athlete from competition, in addition to requiring repayment from the student-athlete. With that in mind, the committee established the following reinstatement guidelines for Bylaw 16 extra-benefit cases and violations of Bylaw 12.1.1.1.6 for enrolled student-athletes: $100-$299 -- 10 percent withholding and repayment; $300-$500 -- 20 percent withholding and repayment; and more than $501 -- a minimum of 30 percent withholding and repayment.

So if I am reading these guidelines right, Jarrettt's case would fall in the last category since according to reports he received more than $501 and should be subjected to minimum of 30 percent witholding (3-4 games) and repayment of the difference in rent. So according to the guidelines posted on the NCAA site Jarrett should be missing at least 3-4 games? Do you have the same questions? If you do, call these numbers and ask them why Pom Pom is spinning that Jarrettt should not missing a single game:

NCAA 317-917-6222
Pac-10 925-932-4411 - Compliance person Mike Matthews

Maybe those guys can clear all this up and make sure no one gets away without paying thousands of dollars in free rent just because he is a football player at USC.

By the way just how crucial is Dwayne Jarrettt? Well he just happens to be most experienced receiver in Trojan offense and the only superstar left after the departures of their entire backfield and starting TE. So you can see why Peter Carroll and his Trojan ass kissers are insisting Jarrettt shouldn't be missing a single game and his reinstatement should not be a problem. Anything for college football over at South Central. Typical.

GO BRUINS.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Again

What troubled me once again was the way Carroll handled this. After Jarrett was ruled to be in violation, the VERY first thing Carroll does is say, "Don't worry! He won't miss a game!"

He continues to foster a culture of unaccoutability at worst, poor image management at best. At the very least, his first comments should have been something like, "We take rule violations very seriously and will look long and hard about how we may sanction Dwayne Jarrett."

Instead we get the coddling. It's a mistake, and speaks to the culture of leniency he's created. If I were a USC fan, I'd be concerned and disappointed.

by HornsFan @ Bruins Nation on Jun 20, 2006 9:29 AM PDT reply actions

Well said*

by Nestor on Jun 20, 2006 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions

what does it mean

"a student-athlete acting independently"

by cv on Jun 20, 2006 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions

Not an expert in NCAA regs ..

but the way I read that portion I interpreted the provision as when a student athlete is acting independently, he or she is acting independent of the insitutition (in this case USC). But that's just the way I am reading it for now.

by Nestor on Jun 20, 2006 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions

It seems to be cut and dry

Maybe that's why the NCAA spokesman said they would deal with the reinstatement application quickly.

by cv on Jun 20, 2006 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions

cut and dry

yeah it's cut and dry that DJ should be missing at least 3 regular season games if not more.

by bluestreet on Jun 20, 2006 10:21 AM PDT up reply actions

cut and dry

Does the article says that Jarrett still lives there?

by cv on Jun 20, 2006 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions

Minor infraction?

Are Trojans actually claiming getting thousands of dollars of free rent is minor infraction?

by bluestreet on Jun 20, 2006 9:33 AM PDT reply actions

Buying a used car at market price

...that is a HUGE deal. But basically being handed thousands of dollars as a gift from an outside source? Small potatoes. The hypocrisy of the trOJans knows no bounds.

by scittles on Jun 20, 2006 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions

Medici

Did you say Leinart & Jarrett or Donald Trump was living there.

by artybruin on Jun 20, 2006 11:58 AM PDT reply actions

Donnie Edwards

If I remember correctly, Donnie Edwards received some groceries (I believe about $200 worth) and he was suspended for a game and had to make restitution. If Jarrett gets off with no suspension, the $C double standard would rear it's ugly head once again.

by bruinwinna on Jun 20, 2006 12:13 PM PDT reply actions

What I find crazy is...

that his violation is so far beyond the scope of the NCAA rules. Their Highest tier is $501 dollars or more. Jarrett owes 20 times that. Incredible! They have the nerve to say it is minor and Jarrett won't miss a game.

The good thing whether they suspend him or not is that he won't be suspended for our game. It will be during the beginning of the season. Plus $C can't try and say it was a BS win because of the NCAA robbing them. (BTW KD better win!) That means we, the fans, alumni and students can make Jarrett's day a living hell chanting Pay Your Rent or Deadbeat along with calling their QB a rapist (allegedly).

Wow! My dislike for SC is really high right now and football season isn't even close.

by isodore on Jun 20, 2006 1:01 PM PDT reply actions

Does the NCAA pick and choose?

I find it baffling that the NCAA lets some of this stuff slide. They are totally inconsistent with how they dole out punishment.

As for SC, how does PC state that DJ won't miss any games without the NCAA's final ruling? Don't they have the final say? This housing arrangement was not a big secret so why wasn't the school more thorough in making sure it was on the up and up.

by Paragon SC on Jun 20, 2006 7:26 PM PDT reply actions