Started By
Message
re: When Bama's best two players received improper benefits
Posted on 12/3/10 at 6:13 pm to LSU8932
Posted on 12/3/10 at 6:13 pm to LSU8932
quote:
Isnt that exactly what happened in AU's case?
Not exactly.
Mark and Julio played in ZERO games while their eligibility was in question. The NCAA reinstated them prior to the season.
The NCAA stated that the investigation was done in the fishing trip incident and that was that.
Nowhere has the NCAA stated that they were done investigating the Cam Newton matter and he played in 12 games.
This post was edited on 12/3/10 at 6:14 pm
2
Posted on 12/3/10 at 6:15 pm to BamaChick
quote:
Isnt that exactly what happened in AU's case?
Not exactly.
Mark and Julio played in ZERO games while their eligibility was in question. The NCAA reinstated them prior to the season.
The NCAA stated that the investigation was done in the fishing trip incident and that was that.
Nowhere as the NCAA stated that they were done investigated the Cam Newton matter and he played in 12 games.
Either way the NCAA came out and cleared him. If they used your logic they would have made us forfeit the games.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 6:16 pm to BamaChick
quote:
Mark and Julio played in ZERO games while their eligibility was in question. The NCAA reinstated them prior to the season.
The NCAA stated that the investigation was done in the fishing trip incident and that was that.
Nowhere has the NCAA stated that they were done investigating the Cam Newton matter and he played in 12 games.
All of that is irrelevant according to you bama fans. For the last week you've been saying "who cares what the NCAA says, SEC by law states if you receive an improper benefit, you should be ruled ineligible to play SEC football."
But of course, it's totally different now.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News