re: MSU, Ole Miss rivalry takes interesting turn with message board poster (Coach34)

I set that up just for you :thumps up:

Your dumbass said it on this site.

quote:

---

Use some sense man.

---

In all seriousness, listen to HottyToddy7. This is just a sports message board. Go play some golf, it should be a nice day.

I truly do wish you well

If rustling jimmies was his job then C34 deserves a lifetime achievement award.

quote:

---

It's ironic seeing OM fans up in arms over racial bigotry.

---

yes that is what they hang this whole argument on that C34 said "snicker licker" even though he got that term from a Miss ReBear coach.

Yeah because he stated that with no proof it must be true. It is all BS made up by a guy that is a clear lier. Unless you have a link proving that is why he was fired?

But State is consistent down playing a 280 lbs man repeatedly beating a women on the ground why wouldn't State be ok with thinking it is ok to publicly calling any white women that dates black guys that name. He said it on a public form and wanted to be a educator and mentor to young people. Please

Actually if you look at the NOA 12 and 13 are things Saunders and Vaughn did after they left Ole Miss. They committed those infractions on there own. Ole Miss has as much to do with committing those infractions as Vaughn has to do with Tunsil's loaner car infractions.

If you want an actual example of this look at the ULL case where ULL was responsible for what Saunders did as a coach but he was solely held accountable for the action of lying to the NCAA and refusing to meet with them after caught lying.

So yes saying that Ole Miss got 8 level 1 infractions is twisting the facts. Ole Miss didn't even respond to those 2 infractions obviously with the agreement of their law firm. But let me guess you know more then them.

quote:

---

Not counting what may be discovered in the new investigation, if anything.

---

Keep hope alive good doggie.

quote:

---

So the fact that ULL didn't get hit for Saunders lying and refusing to meet with the NCAA and the law firm that Ole Miss paid over a million dollars stated to the NCAA that Ole Miss is not subject or responsible for 12 and 13.

What are you basing your opinion off of that Ole Miss will be responsible that confers those two points? Just wondering.

---

I just went over the ULL allegations and response, and ULL did get hit for Saunders lying and refusing to meet with the NCAA after his termination. The NCAA put that in Allegation 4, and in their response, ULL acknowledged that former employees have a duty to assist.

(The 15 minutes I spent going over this was probably too much, but it was interesting and I learned something about NCAA allegations and responses, as well as this specific rule.)

From the ULL response to allegations: page B4-2 LINK

"The University acknowledges that former institutional staff members have an 'affirmative obligation' to cooperate and assist the enforcement staff in 'furthering the objectives of the Association and its infractions program' (Bylaw 19.2.3) and, further, that a 'failure to cooperate' in an NCAA enforcement investigation is specifically identified in Bylaw 19.1.1 as a Level 1, Severe Breach of Conduct".

Then why if you look at the NCAA final decision they only punished Saunders for that violation if ULL get hit????

Core Penalties for Level I – Aggravated Violations by the Former Assistant Football Coach (NCAA Bylaw 19.9.5)
In this case, the panel concluded that the former assistant football coach committed multiple severe violations, engaged in unethical conduct, and failed to cooperate in the investigation. Therefore, the former assistant football coach will be informed in writing by the NCAA that should he be employed or affiliated in an athletically related position at another NCAA member institution during an eight-year period, from January 12, 2016, through January 11, 2024, within 30 days of the former assistant football coach's hiring, that employing institution shall ask for a date to appear before a hearing panel to show cause why the restrictions on all athletically related duties should not apply.

NCAA

If they got hit that means that they would have been punished for it right? All you quote shows is that ULL agreed Saunders did commit this infractions. How is ULL agreeing that Saunders committed a infraction and then ULL not getting punished them getting hit?