As a BYU fan who could care less about USC, but appreciated Reggie’s talent when he played, I cannot understand anyone who would argue that Reggie shouldn’t be recognized as the Heisman winner at this point.

Maybe it’s just a misunderstanding of the facts, so I’ll share them I see them below. But I guess the facts won’t be very convincing to the “obedience and consequences” crowd who often have trouble seeing the massive beams in their own eyes while slinging judgements at kids. So this post isn’t really for those folks. But if you simply don’t know the whole story, here are the highlights that inform my perspective…

1. Bush’s family (who by all reports was a hard working blue collar family) received improper benefits while at USC, not as an incentive to go to USC.

2. Allegations were that Bush's family took 100’s of thousands of dollars in gifts from donors who were trying to gain influence in his NFL future. 

3. The former USC star running back won the award in 2005 after amassing 2,218 total yards from scrimmage along with 18 touchdowns. He was clearly the best player in the game that year and I loved watching him play.

4. Reggie Bush voluntarily decided to hand over his Heisman Trophy. 

5. This is what he humbly said when he gave the award back. “One of the greatest honors of my life was winning the Heisman Trophy in 2005, for me, it was a dream come true...Each individual carries the legacy of the award and each one is entrusted with its good name. It is for these reasons that I have made the difficult decision to forfeit my title as Heisman winner of 2005."

6. Bush then said he would like to work with the Heisman Trustees to establish an educational program which would assist student-athletes and their families to help avoid the mistakes that he made.

7. Fast forward 9 years and almost everyone has admitted that the prior rules were unfair and actually not legal. Players deserve to be paid what they are worth, just like the rest of us.

8. At this point the sponsoring organization of the Heisman award made the decision to give it back to Reggie.

So my question is, given the facts, how does anyone explain or justify their opposition to the decision. Either way, Reggie was the best college football player in the game that year, and that fact is undeniable. It just seems petty to call him a cheater and argue against him having the trophy on a shelf in his trophy room.