How the Manziel thing is different from AJ Green's thing

AJ got 4 games. We can debate the NCAA's rationale, methods, reasoning, and/or approach, but AJ got four games...for selling a jersey to someone he didn't know was an agent. Even though the NCAA knew AJ didn't know the dude he was selling his jersey to was an agent. Selling his jersey gets him the time:

"If the value of the benefit ranges from greater than $100 to $300 = 10 percent withholding condition and repayment."
... between $300 and $500 it is 20 percent withholding (assuming that is number of contests) and repayment.
More than $500, 30 percent withholding.
That probably explains Marcell Dareus'  situation. The NCAA originally considered suspending the star defensive tackle for four games after Dareus was found to have accepted approximately $1,800 in improper benefits. The NCAA said mitigating circumstances reduced the suspension to two games.
Four games would fit into the NCAA's mathematical guidelines (four out of 12 regular-season games = 33 percent).
A Wednesday report surfaced that Georgia receiver A.J. Green had been suspended because he sold a game-worn jersey for less than $1,000. Given the NCAA formula, Georgia better hope it is way less than $1,000. Green could be suspended three more games if the price was more than $500.

Now, the Manziel thing is different. He didn't sell a jersey. He sold autographs.* For a lot more money. Plus, he won the Heisman. And has been in the news non-stop since January. Not to mention, there is a lot more money involved. Basically, it would be as if Rev. Cecil Newton had told Auburn they could get Cam to sign a bunch of stuff for $250K. In fact, I think that this is where all of the Manziel thing is going.

Look, Texas A&M isn't going to suspend Manziel unless they have a smoking gun, a body, and multiple pictures of Manziel standing over the body with the smoking gun yelling "I shot him!" The risk on many levels is too great for their program and school. If the NCAA doesn't find anything, he'll play. Why? Look at the scenarios.

A&M has no information beyond what you and I know
If they sit Manziel and there turns out to be no reason to sit him, they'll get the ire of A&M fans, national media, local media, and the Manziel's attorney. Plus, vacated wins are wins, as long as their program is in the clear. Just ask Pete Carroll.

A&M has more information than we do, but no smoking gun
They've given that to the NCAA and will await word from the NCAA about Manziel's eligibility. See above for why.

A&M knows all
They'll declare him ineligible. I think they'll not take the risk that other institutions did by turning a blind eye to what they know and allowing the NCAA to come down hard on them for transgressions of their son, especially considering how much Manziel's family and A&M are not playing nice now. Plus lying and obfuscating really pisses the NCAA off.

There is nothing I've seen to think A&M will soft sell this OR do more than cooperate with the NCAA. Still, the NCAA has a way out here, which I think they'll take. They' find Uncle Nate took money, without the knowledge of Manziel. They'll wrist slap A&M for lack of compliance awareness (think increased training on 'personal managers'). Uncle Nate will be barred from being around A&M's program. Manziel will play this year, but won't have a Heisman season. We won't see Uncle Nate again until he shows up in the crowd at the Cotton Bowl wearing a Manziel Jersey with "$" instead of "2" on it making it rain for some Laker Girls wannabes in the club section of Jerry World.
TD

*all parties are presumed guilty by the court of public opinion and the NCAA until they graduate. Then they are still presumed guilty by Texas and Alabama fans. 

Tweet