re: I've changed my mind...

Whatever you say CC Scholar.

quote:

---

Whatever you say CC Scholar.

---

I'm a CC scholar.

quote:

---

I have a poem for you.

---

Roses are red, and violets are blue
It happened to SMU, and it will happen to you.

Oh...so citing examples of past NCAA rulings, posting articles from Forbes, picking apart your argument and your assumptions, asking pointed questions, and waiting for specific answers that you haven't yet answered is a lack of substance. I tried to ask if what you said was what you meant, and I asked you to consider alternate possibilities, other than your idiotic and misinformed opinions. You have not once responded with anything to back up your points, except incorrect paraphrasing that you have erroneously concluded...

Meanwhile, paraphrasing me wrong, misunderstanding what I am saying, using your misunderstood interpretation as an argument against me, not understanding the widely accepted account of the NCAA ruling, assuming implied flawed logic, and then saying you are a lawyer, telling me to google things that have absolutely nothing to do with the argument at hand in defense of the fact that you can't answer anything I've asked without losing your argument, and then calling me a typical bammer is just chock full of substance.

Arguing the point further with you is futile. You haven't tried to ask how you might have misunderstood what I was saying; rather, you hurl insults when you are caught with no response.

Your ability to argue effectively rivals one of the biggest idiots on this site, which, frankly, I find to be a bit of a coincidence.

Thankfully, your opinion is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things in the evolution of the matter at hand, so why don't you just shut up, and in 3 years, when you are right, you can come back and tell us.

Boom

Looking back, I think I've covered most of what you asked at some point and will address anything left out that I missed.

If winning this contest is your goal then I will concede now as the point is futile understanding that neither one of us can draw a definitive conclusion from the facts at hand.

Your Forbes article and use of the Bama text book example have little to nothing in common with this case as those infractions were admitted and remained within the school at which they occurred. Bravo for posting a link but the relevance is weak and only serves to illustrate that players can be retroactively made ineligible. I don't contest that fact. What you're failing to acknowledge is that the NCAA declared Cam ineligible and immediately reinstated him with 'no conditions'. If you refer to past NCAA cases 'conditions' or 'vacated wins' were issued as a penalty. Its been stated that NCAA investigations typically remain open after eligibility is granted to said player. If this is status quo then why are you hanging your theory on it as if its something unique to the Cam case? Again, I'm following your line of logic above and you seem to have contradicted yourself there. I understand that the NCAA statement states that the enforcement body and reinstatement body act independent of one another but a passive browse of any given NCAA investigation will clearly illustrate that the two bodies are not mutually exclusive. For your benefit, please search Donald Maurice Jackson's NCAA cases and/or recent interviews. His work will illustrate this in vivid detail. I'm not sure why you are so adamant about that point. That may not have been you so my apologies if I paraphrased incorrectly yet again. By suggesting that the two bodies are totally mutually exclusive infers that the enforcement body's ultimate determination trumps the reinstatement process's position with no dialogue taking place prior to the decision. Unlikely in most cases. Highly improbable in this one given the high profile and inherent stakes on the table if they make a mistake.

I'd really like some insight into why you feel the NCAA was forced to act in the time frame the ruling came down as opposed to kicking the can further down the road. Also, what do you believe the NCAA or process gains in stating a ruling if the investigation is in full throttle?

I can do without the pissing contest if you're up for it.

I guess in the end it really doesn't matter what I think but to have thought any different from the outset of this discussion makes one seem mentally small. We're two anonymous posters on a site called Tigerdroppings and its all in good fun. If I wanted to discuss the issue in a non hostile environment then I would go to an Auburn site but what fun would that be?

I know I haven't covered all of the points here that you believe I'm dodging but I will gladly address anything you've got and hopefully you'll provide some perspective on the points I issued to you.