Ohio State’s Chase Young’s two-game suspension

Army+West+Point+vs.+The+Ohio+State+University+at+Ohio+State%2C+Sept.+16%2C+2017.++%28U.S.+Army+photo+by+Michelle+Eberhart%29
Back to Article
Back to Article

Ohio State’s Chase Young’s two-game suspension

Army West Point vs. The Ohio State University at Ohio State, Sept. 16, 2017.  (U.S. Army photo by Michelle Eberhart)

Army West Point vs. The Ohio State University at Ohio State, Sept. 16, 2017. (U.S. Army photo by Michelle Eberhart)

Army West Point vs. The Ohio State University at Ohio State, Sept. 16, 2017. (U.S. Army photo by Michelle Eberhart)

Army West Point vs. The Ohio State University at Ohio State, Sept. 16, 2017. (U.S. Army photo by Michelle Eberhart)

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Heisman candidate Chase Young received a two-game suspension after admitting that he accepted a loan last year from someone he described as a “family friend.”

Although Young repaid the loan, the NCAA considers it an extra benefit because Young didn’t meet this friend until after his recruitment to Ohio State.

When asked about the suspension, Ohio State fan and senior Harrison White disagreed with the NCAA’s decision to suspend Young. 

“I think the NCAA is super hypocritical in the sense that they want to institute a policy where players are allowed to make money off of their image and likeness but in the same instance, Chase Young cannot get a loan and pay off the loan for his girlfriend to watch the most important game of his life,” White said. 

With the recent passing of California’s ‘Fair Pay to Play’ law for college athletes, players will be allowed to hire agents and be paid for endorsements. But current NCAA regulations do not allow student athletes from accepting any payments for the use of their images.

The evidence that Young received the loan due to his status as a player has some Ohio State fans frustrated with the NCAA.

“I do not think this was a fair suspension. I think he broke the rules as they are but the rules are what we have to look at. The rules are outdated and they are not a good representation of what college athletics should be nowadays,” White stated.

Having the ‘Fair Pay to Play’ act go into effect in the 2023 season, a lot of controversy has begun to arise revolving around the new law.

It is easy to see how an Ohio State fan may get upset with the NCAA’s ruling but how are fans of rival teams reacting? 

“With the new ‘fair pay to play’ law, this problem would clearly have been eliminated and Young cleared of any penalty. In my opinion however, I think this law is a very big mistake by the NCAA, due to the fact that paying college students, classified as ‘amateurs’ will lead to many more problems and inconsistencies down the road for college sports.  Furthermore, while the Young case may have been a reasonable exception, I cannot put my support behind the overall decision to begin paying college athletes,” stated Michigan fan and senior Cameron Owen.

The big question is whether or not Young was deserving of this suspension and in the eyes of Owen, this situation could have been an exception to the current laws.

Besides Owen’s disagreement with the NCAA, he cannot help but sympathize with Young.

“I think it’s a bit harsh to punish a college kid for taking a loan to pay for a ticket for his girlfriend to watch him play in the Rose Bowl, clearly a once in a lifetime experience.  Not to mention the fact that he fairly paid the money back, I think the punishment for such a seemingly innocent act may not have been necessary,” said Owen.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email