Started By
Message
re: Manziel recommendation from NCAA on Wednesday
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:03 pm to NYCAuburn
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:03 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
They actually had precedent for that, with the severity of the offense known at the time. Some schools choose to take the punishment during post season.
What was the precedent?
Also, didn't UNC in 2010 get a recommendation to sit their players and they too were later found guilty of major violations. It seems like it happens ALL the TIME.
This idea that they would suspend John Football on Wednesday if they met the "tangible evidence standard" is nonsense.This post was edited on 8/27/13 at 5:05 pm
3
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:09 pm to therick711
quote:
Also, didn't UNC in 2010 get a recommendation to sit their players and they too were later found guilty of major violations. It seems like it happens ALL the TIME. This idea that they would suspend John Football on Wednesday if they met the "tangible evidence standard" is nonsense.
Oh, I agree with you. The NCAA may make a recommendation to sit JFF without ANY basis at all for it, just because they can. That's why I hate those MFers and want them all to die of face aids and rot in hell. EFF the NCAA.
I will say this. The NCAA is playing with fire big time on this one. I think A&M is daring them to make a move to intimidate without rock solid proof. I think A&M will be leading the charge out of the NCAA if they so much as vacate a single game without something more substantial than a bunch of signatures. Those effers have cost A&M a lot of success, thanks to their bias, unfair treatment of A&M in the past. They don't know what kind of shite storm they are about to stir up if they sit JFF.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:19 pm to therick711
quote:
Also, didn't UNC in 2010 get a recommendation to sit their players
Not even remotely similar.
That had to do with academically ineligible players and Butch Jones.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:26 pm to Roger Klarvin
I am not mad , I think your univeristy is setting a bad example and remember who told you , 3 years probation and 25 to 30 scholarship reductions , because when you play him you just broke the rule.
See Auburn 2 years after Cam , 0-8 in the SEC , go ahead , instil in everyone of those young men a double standard , whilst big mouth JFF brags about the money he got to teamates, no wonder you guys haven't been a major power since the 1930s.
HONOR ABOVE GLORY.
See Auburn 2 years after Cam , 0-8 in the SEC , go ahead , instil in everyone of those young men a double standard , whilst big mouth JFF brags about the money he got to teamates, no wonder you guys haven't been a major power since the 1930s.
HONOR ABOVE GLORY.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:32 pm to KaiserSoze99
I am sure the NCAA is quaking in its boot out of fear of the aggies. Good Lord but my UT friend is right about these morons. And I can just see the aggies leading the charge out of the NCAA'. They don't move a foot without SEC approval & that will never happen until/if all the other major conferences advocate that kind of move. As to any problems the NCAA has caused the aggies in the past?? When you have an outlaw coach in an outlaw conference, you make your own problems & the aggies did that in spades.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:38 pm to therick711
quote:
What was the precedent?
I don't remember the exact cases from before, now. But they had done it several times before, more in basketball. It was related to post season play, severity of infraction and knowledge. It's not routine, but has happened. A lot of schools given the option have chosen to also not play because of possible outcomes like what happened at Ohio state.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:41 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
See Auburn 2 years after Cam
Pretty sure that had more to do with Gene Chizik having 5 career wins as a head coach (in 3 years at Iowa State) prior to going to Auburn.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:42 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
That had to do with academically ineligible players and Butch Jones.
False. At that time, Butch Jones had not been implicated. Also, they are similar, it was a recommendation to sit Robert Quinn, Marvin Austin and Greg Little and the NCAA had already ruled on Kendric Burney and Deunta Williams.
LINK
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:43 pm to NYCAuburn
quote:
I don't remember the exact cases from before, now. But they had done it several times before, more in basketball. It was related to post season play, severity of infraction and knowledge. It's not routine, but has happened. A lot of schools given the option have chosen to also not play because of possible outcomes like what happened at Ohio state.
Interesting. I just know that Florida State took a massive penalty before finally succumbing to Georgia in the 2003 Sugar Bowl. I had never heard of the OSU treatment. If you remember the cases, be sure to pass them on. I'd love to check them out.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:48 pm to Keltic Tiger
quote:
I am sure the NCAA is quaking in its boot out of fear of the aggies. Good Lord but my UT friend is right about these morons.
You first mistake was listening to your idiotic, butthurt sip friends.
I have made bold claims on positions of power and have been called out, only to dance in the faces of the dipshites who doubted me. But, for certain, some dumbshites like you will spout your hate-filled diatribe like the statement above. With that in mind, consider this:
The NCAA is in a MASSIVE lawsuit right now for exploiting/using players' names and likeness for profit while not sharing with players because of their "ameture" status (O'Bannon lawsuit). All of this JFF stuff leads RIGHT THE EFF into a more evidence against the NCAA in that lawsuit. The NCAA is going to stand aside on JFF because if they don't, he will join the O'Bannon suit as a class rep. Read THIS and tell me that the NCAA is going to rule JFF ineligible. That, coupled with the NCAA's shop selling Johny Football jerseys and the NCAA will not likely survive. If I am representing the NCAA, I drop the JFF crap RIGHT NOW and let him play or my client may not be relevant to make such a decision in the future.
Now, you can go ahead and continue with your longhorn loving butthurt.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:55 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
KaiserSoze99
You're too good of a poster to get this riled up over someone obviously trolling you.
None of us know for sure what's going to happen, but fans of teams not named A&M view it as a win/win. Most want him to play so their team can hopefully beat A&M with him on the field (win). However, if he doesn't play then fans will enjoy the meltdown from some A&M fans (win).
Don't let it be too big of a deal, though.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 5:56 pm to bamasgot13
quote:
You're too good of a poster to get this riled up over someone obviously trolling you. None of us know for sure what's going to happen, but fans of teams not named A&M view it as a win/win.
Most want him to play so their team can hopefully beat A&M with him on the field (win). However, if he doesn't play then fans will enjoy the meltdown from some A&M fans (win).
Don't let it be too big of a deal, though.
This is exactly how I view it
Win win either way
I think A&M loses 2 or 3 games with him
Posted on 8/27/13 at 6:12 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
I will say this. The NCAA is playing with fire big time on this one. I think A&M is daring them to make a move to intimidate without rock solid proof. I think A&M will be leading the charge out of the NCAA if they so much as vacate a single game without something more substantial than a bunch of signatures. Those effers have cost A&M a lot of success, thanks to their bias, unfair treatment of A&M in the past. They don't know what kind of shite storm they are about to stir up if they sit JFF.
You're starting to sound a lot like an LSU fan.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 6:20 pm to therick711
No , it had more to do with no discipline , and a slack attitude by the coaches.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 6:22 pm to King Crimson
quote:
You're starting to sound a lot like an LSU fan.
We're just alike. That's why we hate each other so much. Let the Gulf War resume.
It's true that the O'Bannon case is causing all sorts of problems for the NCAA and it's JFF investigation.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 6:24 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
I think A&M will be leading the charge out of the NCAA if they so much as vacate a single game without something more substantial than a bunch of signatures
You seriously think this? I am sure that the decision makers at A&M will not lead a charge anywhere outside the NCAA. How many millions of losses would this be to A&M? And other schools will not want to be seen as stampeding away from the NCAA because of a student athlete who is perceived as a rule breaker (rightly or wrongly).
A group of schools may eventually break with the NCAA, but it will not because of some perceived injustice to a image-challenged QB. Rather it will be over who controls the money generated by TV, merchandise, etc.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 6:25 pm to King Crimson
quote:
You're starting to sound a lot like an LSU fan
Nope, sounds like Bama fans talking about Albert Means.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 6:26 pm to tigerinridgeland
LSU fans talk on a message board. Bama fans try to serve you with process at SEC Media days.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 7:03 pm to tigerinridgeland
quote:
I am sure that the decision makers at A&M will not lead a charge anywhere outside the NCAA
You haven't yet figured out Kaiser's schtick have you.
Read the link he provided. It's likely that the NCAA is letting him skate in return for him not joining the O'Bannon suit.
Posted on 8/27/13 at 7:07 pm to King Crimson
quote:
You're starting to sound a lot like an LSU fan.
Page 18 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News