Collegiate Times

The saga that is LeBron James? senior year in high school took a turn for the worse Friday when the Ohio High School Athletic Association ruled James ineligible for the remainder of the season.

At issue was a pair of throwback jerseys, valued at over $800, which the owner of a sporting goods store gave James as a gift.

That?s two jerseys, a Wes Unseld and a Gale Sayers, priced at $845 total. Instead of punishing James for the expensive gift, shouldn?t we be looking into the rationale behind that pricing structure instead?

According to the ruling, James broke bylaw 4-10-1, which states, ?An amateur forfeits his or her amateur status by capitalizing on athletic fame by receiving money or gifts of monetary value.?

The ruling comes just four days after James was cleared of any wrongdoing for accepting a Hummer outfitted with three televisions and a video game system as a present from his mother for his 18th birthday. In order to keep her son on the court, Gloria James was forced to prove she took out a loan to buy the car.

Situations like these always prompt debates among fans and sportswriters, and the most common question is usually, ?What were they thinking??

Shouldn?t Gloria James know her son is under intense media scrutiny ? it would be easier for her family to keep a low profile if they weren?t driving $50,000-plus cars. Shouldn?t James know better than to accept expensive gifts in violation of eligibility rules?

My answer: not really.

Imagine your son is a few months away from signing a guaranteed contract for around $25 million dollars. Then add the endorsement deal from whoever wins the bidding war between Nike and Adidas. With a huge signing bonus about to boost the family coffers, what?s a lousy $50,000 loan?

Or picture yourself as a high school senior headed to a store to check out some new shoes. The owner of the store tells you to take whatever you like for free ? you?re supposed to turn him down?

James might be a basketball phenom, but athletic ability doesn?t make a teenager any more responsible. James is learning very quickly that fame and fortune will cost him the freedom to act as he pleases.

He did make a mistake in accepting the jerseys. But ending a kid?s high school career because of what appears to be an honest mistake seems overzealous.

If every athlete lost their eligibility for the little perks they receive, who would be left to play?

I was allowed to wrestle in the district tournament my senior year despite receiving a number of questionable discounts at a local deli where my friends work, but no one is asking my team to forfeit the title.

Of course, my discounts never exceeded $100 at a time. But then again, I didn?t have people following me around detailing my every move.

The main issue at stake here is money. If James had accepted a jersey worth less than $100, there would have been no problem. The kid chooses the two most overpriced jerseys in the store though, so he?s done for the season.

Meanwhile, St. Vincent-St. Mary?s has made a ton of money off the James hype this season. They?ve been traveling to games around the country, playing to packed arenas filled with fans who paid jacked-up ticket prices to see James play.

Without James, there would have been no television deal with ESPN. The OHSAA is profiting, indirectly, from the James hype as well, which begs the question, ?Why try so hard to get rid of him??

What is lost in all the hype is the effect this situation has on James? teammates. They might have benefited all year from having an NBA-caliber player on the squad, but they have worked hard together to become the No. 1 team in the country.

Take the best player off any high school basketball team this close to the playoffs and it?s hard to recover.

James returned the jerseys to the store and has apologized for an honest mistake. This week he will file an appeal. Hopefully the OHSAA will be able to see through the hype and recognize their responsibility to allow James and his teammates the chance to compete for a state title.