In all of my years of being fanatically obsessed with football, the only player I've despised and insulted enough to make me question my own ethics is Reggie Bush.

I know, I know. He's one of the greatest college football players of our era, and we will probably never again see a running back as electrifying and innovative as he was. Trust me, I've lived through plenty of Reggie Bush superlatives to know just how great he was. (Thank you, Tony Kornheiser.)

You see, I grew up in Southern California as a UCLA fan, right during the apex of USC's dominion over the college football world. I couldn't walk three feet without seeing USC hats, USC license plates, USC car flags, USC "I just broke a leg jumping on the bandwagon" shirts. (OK, I made that last one up.) USC fandom was in full force, and sitting at the top of it all was Bush, a player who undoubtedly passed Brett Favre and Peyton Manning on my list of "Football Players Who Crush My Soul."

That is why I'm about to hate myself for defending him.

If you've been trapped under a rock for the past four months, I'll give you the footnotes: Reggie Bush isn't exactly college football royalty anymore. Following a summer that exposed Bush's illegal acceptance of monetary gifts during his USC career, the Heisman Trust decided to begin its own investigation into the scandal surrounding the 2005 Heisman winner. Rumors surfaced in early September 2010 that the Trust would revoke Bush's award, but a spokesperson has since denied that claim. On Sept. 14, Bush voluntarily surrendered his copy of the Heisman Trophy.

Now let's get one thing straight: nothing has given me greater joy than to see the touted Trojans' dynasty come tumbling down into a pile of corruption and dishonesty. I'm not ashamed to admit that, after hearing about USC's punishments, I paraded through my house chanting "SC sucks," did three or four happy dances and then proceeded to call every USC fan I know to shell out insult after insult.

It wasn't until recently that I found myself sympathizing for Bush and researching his case. As much as it pains me to say, he doesn't deserve to be publicly defamed and humiliated for something that hundreds of college football players have done in the past.

Much like the steroids scandal in baseball or videotaping opponents' practices in the NFL, receiving gifts from recruiters is a ubiquitous aspect of college sports that, although illegal, most players find hard to resist. In Bush's case, his family could barely afford to live comfortably and needed "immediate and significant financial assistance to support their respective lifestyles," according to a 2007 report by ESPN.

Excuse the upcoming cliché, but put yourself in Bush's shoes. You're an 18-year-old kid coming out of high school with an incredible talent. Your parents have low-income jobs and are struggling to survive. You have the option to provide your family with something that has always been out of their reach: money. Would you honestly pass that up?

Sure, there's the risk of being caught and serving the rest of your life known as one of college football's delinquents, but how many times has a player been exposed? Ten times, maybe a dozen? Wouldn't you take those odds?

We all like to think that we are immune to "bad" decisions like these, that we would say no every time and never look back. But when your mom can barely pay rent every month, it blurs the boundaries of right and wrong. Bush clearly decided that the risk was worth it and has since endured the scandal of a lifetime in which people have demanded that his legitimacy as a football player be called into question and that Bush should be exposed for the cheater he is. That idea is just ludicrous.

This "scandal" is so different from anything we've ever seen in sports. Reporters and fans usually associate the word "cheating" with gaining a competitive edge by using unlawful tactics. Such forms of cheating make people question a team or player's accomplishments based on the decisions they made for their sport, not for their family.

Did Barry Bonds repeatedly stick syringes into his body to provide for his family? No, he did it because he wanted to be the best, and it was the only way to compete in a steroids-infected sport.

The money that Bush accepted didn't give him any sort of competitive edge when he played every Saturday, nor did it heighten his reputation as the best running back in college football. He broke a rule completely unrelated to his performance on the field, a rule that countless other Heisman winners have probably broken as well. And it's time that people stop crucifying him for it.

Although the UCLA fan in me has relished every minute of this Bush investigation, the sports fan in me wants it to stop. I love college football far more than I hate USC, and it's a shame that something this trivial has nullified Bush's accomplishments.

And now that I'm done defending a former Trojan, excuse me while I throw myself off a cliff.</p>