04-22-2015, 02:13 PM
The whole situation seems logical. The "employee" probably did want to supply stuff to Jameis, but likely went beyond his ability to slide goods to friends when dealing with the crab legs and the seafood department.
The "investigation" must have been hilarious. A theft would be a small fine, easy community service, etc. The employee gift path, while probably less damaging in a criminal sense, would have been a clear NCAA infractino. That would have been a bigger problem, that might have exposed a longer term improper benefit trail similar to the one that FSU players had with Dillards in the late 90s.
I am confident that in some way the Publix employee understood that it was best to deny, deny, deny as it would be better for Jameis AND FSU. In some ways, the real hook up was to deny the free food as that protected Jameis and FSU from bigger NCAA problems.
The "investigation" must have been hilarious. A theft would be a small fine, easy community service, etc. The employee gift path, while probably less damaging in a criminal sense, would have been a clear NCAA infractino. That would have been a bigger problem, that might have exposed a longer term improper benefit trail similar to the one that FSU players had with Dillards in the late 90s.
I am confident that in some way the Publix employee understood that it was best to deny, deny, deny as it would be better for Jameis AND FSU. In some ways, the real hook up was to deny the free food as that protected Jameis and FSU from bigger NCAA problems.