I find it hard to believe that every single one of them even knows about this, let alone has the same opinion.

They do according to Experts.

So that doesn't particularly impress me...

There is no substance here. It's meant to cause trouble.

"state taxpayers ..." is not any different than Fox News saying "some people say ..." or "people are saying ..."

What taxpayer?

What people?

"Some people say" that those behind this Yahoo story are trying to stir up juicy controversy with the child of a rich black entertainment artist to see how the Democrats react.

The goal: Hoping to cause not only hard feelings but some good old fashioned embarrassment - as well as waste our time & media time discussing this to our peril as the GOP pillages America & it's upcoming elections.

"Some people say" not to fall for this crap.

And now the school want's the money back because his DADDY is rich?

Why did they grant him the damn thing in the first place?

I'm usually not sympathetic to the plight of the rich… But they usually have to do some bad shit to be called on it.

Why is UCLA trying to scam this kid out of the money that they promised him in the first place, after he upheld his side of the bargain?

In any case, I think it's tacky as hell for someone with his resources to accept a scholarship? Ugh.

None of that specifically belongs to the son.

Perhaps the son would like to make his way in the world on his own merits, not on the money of his father.

Besides, this is the very first time I can ever recall hearing of such outrage when a rich person's child gets a scholarship.

How many rich people have you ever known to turn down free money? Besides, it's a merit based scholarship for student athletes. If he works hard enough to earn it, then it should be his, despite what his daddy makes.

Anyway, UCLA will more than likely get a nice hefty return on their gift from whatever they earned from his football playing.

Sounds like the scholarship was granted a year ago but hasn't been used yet. Which would make more sense.

But he still earned it. I still think that it's unfair to ask for the money back based on who his daddy is.

HIs daddy isn't going to play football for UCLA.

Your daddy is a multi millionaire yet you let the taxpayers pay for your education, especially when another person with far fewer assets could have used that scholarship.Why do people have to be so greedy and thoughtless.

into the school and state. Those kids practice AT LEAST 40 hours a week to play a dangerous sport in front of thousands of fans. You're saying he should pay UCLA?? Are you serious?

My objection is that daddy is rich and the son is going to school on a scholarship.

guy has the grades, has the ability he should learn that he CAN make it on his own, he shouldn't have to lean on his father to do so. The kid earned it the hard way, by doing the work himself, if UCLA wants to give his a sports scholarship and that furthers their sports program, then by all means he should get the sports scholarship.

His father is rich and has the ability to pay to send his son to school, he should be paying. I could care less what kind of scholarship it is. I am wondering how he even qualified for a scholarship with his dad having the kind of money he does. One of the issues we are having in this country today is that people are not paying their fair share or when they have the ability to pay they defer it to someone else, this is another example as far as I am concerned. If the money for the scholarship didn't come from tax dollars where did it come from? Somebody somewhere provided that funding.

Whether or not his son is trying to prove something is irrelevant.

The fact that his dad's rich doesn't change his GPA, or that he busted his ass to get the scholarship.

Good for him for working hard!

I can't believe I typed "Diddy"--it just feels silly!--or that I defended an athletic scholarship--because I think it's unfortunate that so much money is spent on college athletics while funding is being cut to other aspects of university life, like, um, education. (But I also realize that college athletics is a business.) But in this case, I'm really impressed that someone like Justin Combs who could surely just coast through life is making his own name for himself.

I'm really torn about this. He earned that scholership. I don't think he should be punished because his dad is rich, but it would be easier to deal with if it was going to a needy student. So, yeah, donating it would probably be for the better.

He graduated with a GPA of 3.75. The scholarship was merit-based.

qualify for admission to UCLA, let alone a scholarship.

Check out the stats here:

http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/Prospect/Adm_fr/Frosh_Prof12.htm

from a rigorous high school also taken into account.

70% of applicants with an unweighted GPA of 3.70-3.99. Those are not great odds. And scholarship money is very hard to come by. (Disclaimer - I'm the parent of a UC student who had a 4.0 GPA going in and was offered zip, zero, nada, zilch in terms of university sponsored scholarships.) I suspect Diddy's son got in because he's a good football player and, well, he's Diddy's son. The scholarship must be for football. With a 3.75, I doubt it's strictly for academic merit.

I don't care if the son gets the scholarship if he met the criteria, but....

I tend to believe anything connected to "diddy" is rigged & fake, considering his family origins and career. My bias.

The kid earned it. The kid deserves it. If Diddy donated $54K to a scholarship fund that is based on need then good on him, too.

but it's still his father's money. Maybe Diddy Senior would donate to UCLA's scholarship fund if he was asked nicely instead to resorting to this non-scandal.


rocktivity

I wasn't aware that mean's testing was part of the scholarship process.

thanks, but no thanks, and enable the funds to go to another deserving student athlete without the means.

he would attend UCLA and not another school.

Don't know why it had to be a football scholarship. Don't those words sound odd together? Football scholar. That's like a being a Kick the Can scholar or a Freeze Tag scholar. But I digress. He earned it fair and square. His daddy has nothing to do with it.

Yes, his father is quite rich but who says he should not accept a scholarship he earned? He played sports and kept his grades up. Is there this much flack over other kids who get scholarships and have wealthy parents? This is a non-story.

a freshman much less earn him a merit based scholarship. The admit rate for Fall 2012 for students with a 3.75 fully weighted GPA was less than 5% and many student with a GPA above 4.0 are turned away. Scholarships of any kind are extremely difficult to obtain at UC campuses which are seeing severe cutbacks of late.

I realize that exceptions are made for athletes. Nevertheless, something smells here.

Something is not right with this and I do think he should have declined to accept it and let someone that actually needs it have it.

It's the talent that matters most anyway.

For one, diddy is a taxpayer. Secondly, it looks like many of taxpayers here don't agree with the headline. So it just as easily could have read "Taxpayers Want Diddy's Son to Keep the Scholarship He Earned".

in a different state, but still... SO THERE!

This was back in the 80's when things like college costs were a lot less than they are now. And the university was a lot less prestigious (athletically and academically) than UCLA.

Should he have given the money back just because we could afford the costs?

As it turned out he was injured and transferred after a year to a better school and he wound up paying the tuition, fees, room and meals with money he earned as a seasonal firefighter with the forest service.

Personally I'm with those who say the kid earned the scholarship, let him keep it.

school, but not necessarily an athletic scholarship.

This blog does a good job of summarizing the situation...

http://www.bruinsnation.com/2012/6/1/3056476/topics-in-shoddy-journalism-justin-combs-p-diddy-ucla-football#storyjump

This topic was discussed on the local public radio station yesterday, and it was emphasized that these scholarships are totally funded by private sources. I'm just guessing here, but I think any one making a donation to a merit based-NOT needs based-athletic scholarship knows for what their money is being used. If Combs didn't take this money, it would not go to some other student that wasn't able to afford to attend college. It would go to some other applicant that met the requirements. Like Jerry Rice Jr, or John Elway's son, both of whom received this kind of scholarship and I'm pretty sure could have paid their own expenses.

And it was also mentioned that several other schools have offered the same type of scholarship to Combs, so UCLA is not doing anything unusual in this case. It sounds like colleges that have/want winning teams also have donors with deep pockets that are willing to pay the expenses to get the better players.

If not, he's not as PR savvy as I thought.

I completely agree with means testing scholarships. Way too much money is spent on athletics that could be used for athletes that could actuallly use it.

...but nothing prevents Daddy Diddy from donating a like sum back to the scholarship fund.

I wonder if "some taxpayers" pay as much attention to taxpayer-funded merit-based scholarships that go to the children of other wealthy people, venture capitalists who scored big, for instance? Naaaaaaahhh.