Started By
Message
re: Source says Ole Miss tape has NOTHING on other schools....
Posted on 3/1/17 at 6:13 pm to Tidemeister
Posted on 3/1/17 at 6:13 pm to Tidemeister
Where is MButterfly?
1
Posted on 3/2/17 at 8:34 am to joshua2571
quote:
SEC Country fake news
Correct. In fact, weren't they the ones defending Ole Miss and doing articles recently that Ole Miss should not get hammered hard? I worry about a website like that.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 9:02 am to Cdawg
quote:
sniff, sniff, but it's all Leo Lewis fault we got another round of allegations... sniff, sniff.
I mean you can read the allegations again if you need a refresher but the hardest allegations have to do with player b, which is leo. No one is saying other players weren't given immunity. In fact our side has said Leo, Kobe, and Austin were given immunity for months now.
I mean have you seen the guy's twitter? If you're going to defend him defend him in taking down your rival instead of this narrative of "Leo didn't snitch" or "Leo wasn't the reason OM got hammered harder than they would have been". You can't mock OM fans for believing there is a tape of Leo's mom mentioning other schools offers and then say, "Leo's name isn't mentioned so he didn't do anything" or "Leo isn't the only/main snitch".
This post was edited on 3/2/17 at 9:51 am
Posted on 3/2/17 at 9:31 am to Whereisomaha
If you look at it from another perspective, Ole Miss should not have committed NCAA violations. It was not the kids fault and one of Ole Miss's biggest narratives is that it was. The school committed the violation and they,along with all of the fans, need to take responsibility for their frick up and stop blaming the kids.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 9:47 am to tb27688
Regardless of wayward boosters getting involved w/o the coaches knowledge (the NCAA has shown to let this slide when the university takes proactive steps) the fact remains the coaches and boosters were together hand and hand at 0M.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 9:51 am to Razorback Reverend
Ok first of all you don't understand the NCAA process, he didn't work a deal. The NCAA has the beans on him and Ole Miss already. He is given immunity only if he testifies and what he says is not found to be lies. If he lies about it he loses his eligibility. Before you start going after a kid you need to first understand all the details. But you continue to believe the OM lies about all of this.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 9:53 am to tb27688
quote:
If you look at it from another perspective, Ole Miss should not have committed NCAA violations.
That perspective can only be looked upon if you believe OM is the only one cheating. That OM is doing things others aren't. That perspective can only be used if OM fans are saying they shouldn't be punished. We aren't saying that. We aren't saying we didn't cheat. We aren't saying we shouldn't be punished for it. We are simply arguing that we aren't SMU and that Leo didn't go to state for free. Yet comments like those get turned into us believing we did nothing wrong.
The only reason we blaim Leo is because he took money from multiple programs yet stuck it to his rival. And because of that we may get a multiple year bowl ban and lose our coach. If the NCAA found out the information from another method than a snitch at our rival who took money from them and other programs, then yeah, we were the last one caught in the bank robbery. It's our fault we got caught and it doesn't change the fact we weren't the only ones robbing the bank, we were the ones caught and deserve the punishment.
This post was edited on 3/2/17 at 10:06 am
Posted on 3/2/17 at 9:58 am to SamuelClemens
quote:
the fact remains the coaches and boosters were together hand and hand at 0M.
Yep. And this is bad. And we should be punsished for it. No one is disputing that. Just disputing that we aren't the only one where this happens. We wouldn't constantly lose our top target to Starkville if this were the case. Hell state just got off probation for the exact same thing.
This post was edited on 3/2/17 at 10:05 am
Posted on 3/2/17 at 10:01 am to martbaker1
quote:
The NCAA has the beans on him and Ole Miss already.
This is a lie to make y'all feel better about being snitches. First the lie was Leo didn't snitch and now that it's out there it's he was forced to snitch. If this was so they wouldnt need his testimony. If they could prove Leo took money enough to suspend him they don't have to open Pandora's box by giving a rival schools player immunity. Leo also wouldn't be acting the way he is on social media if he was forced to do this. I know this is a he said she said type deal and you'll probably never look at it honestly but it is common sense. It's who y'all are. First Cam and now Leo.
This post was edited on 3/2/17 at 10:03 am
Posted on 3/2/17 at 10:09 am to Whereisomaha
Tears, all that nonsense is tears.
Is the official ammended NOA relseased yet? I haven't read it. I've only seen a summary of of the video your school released. Call me skeptical on why they did that and why Leo's incident is being highlighted.
No, even when it's posted here I can't really translate most of those @ and #'s.
Leo's a snitch boo hoo. Leo wasn't the main or only reason. No, your fricking assistant AD was setting up recruits with boosters. ASSISTANT AD. sniff, sniff but if Leo didn't snitch.
Maybe you're too young to remember when it happened to State about 15 years ago when rival recruits were granted immunity and it was for a lot less moeny too.
quote:
I mean you can read the allegations again if you need a refresher but the hardest allegations have to do with player b
Is the official ammended NOA relseased yet? I haven't read it. I've only seen a summary of of the video your school released. Call me skeptical on why they did that and why Leo's incident is being highlighted.
quote:
I mean have you seen the guy's twitter?
No, even when it's posted here I can't really translate most of those @ and #'s.
Leo's a snitch boo hoo. Leo wasn't the main or only reason. No, your fricking assistant AD was setting up recruits with boosters. ASSISTANT AD. sniff, sniff but if Leo didn't snitch.
Maybe you're too young to remember when it happened to State about 15 years ago when rival recruits were granted immunity and it was for a lot less moeny too.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 10:17 am to Whereisomaha
quote:
and that Leo didn't go to state for free
This. Weren't Ms State fans the ones screaming that if cam asked them for money that he had to have asked Auburn for money?
When will state fans accept that their coach is a crybaby rat bastard?
Posted on 3/2/17 at 10:18 am to Whereisomaha
quote:
Just disputing that we aren't the only one where this happens.
True or not, you keep posting this to make only yourself feel better. So do you feel better now?
Posted on 3/2/17 at 10:18 am to Whereisomaha
quote:
If they could prove Leo took money enough to suspend him they don't have to open Pandora's box by giving a rival schools player immunity.
OK Yancey, this has gone far enough. Your university is going to get hammered because the Football Staff "initiated and facilitated.....impermissible contact" between 2 boosters and a prospective student athlete.
This is in no way a "he said, she said type deal. This is a Former Staff Member A testified and Prospective Student-Athlete B corroborated
type deal.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 10:49 am to Tidemeister
fricking with the Tide and the REC already cost McCready his job one time. If he does it again he might find himself tripping upstairs while eating a salad. Bloody stuff, that salad.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 10:49 am to Whereisomaha
quote:.
The only reason we blaim Leo is because he took money from multiple programs yet stuck it to his rival. And because of that we may get a multiple year bowl ban and lose our coach. If the NCAA found out the information from another method than a snitch at our rival who took money from them and other programs, then yeah, we were the last one caught in the bank robbery.
This equates to one level I violation. Ole Miss has 15 level I violations. If Lewis had not testified, Ole Miss still has 14 level I violations that were not related to Leo Lewis. What part of this do you not understand?
Posted on 3/2/17 at 11:00 am to Tidemeister
Posted on 3/2/17 at 11:51 am to Vecchio Cane
quote:
OK Yancey, this has gone far enough. Your university is going to get hammered because the Football Staff "initiated and facilitated.....impermissible contact" between 2 boosters and a prospective student athlete.
Yancey sucks coke covered cock. He means it when he says he's "doing blow".
Posted on 3/2/17 at 12:54 pm to Whereisomaha
This isn't opening a Pandora's box. The NCAA has been granting immunity for years. Your school and 3 or 4 others ratted on state not that long ago when Sherrill was the coach.
Posted on 3/2/17 at 1:03 pm to Jjdoc
quote:And TampaReb? Where the hell is TampaReb to fight for the Rebel cause like he did ALL of last year?
Where is MButterfly?
Posted on 3/2/17 at 1:55 pm to Tidemeister
They said on a message board that $tate offered 80,000 and LSU offered 60000.00 Kid is under immunity by way of SEC office and OM offered 13-15000 and OM got turned in. Investigator did not care that he was offered 80,000 by $tate and that is who he plays for. Just wanted dirt on OM...SEC is behind the witch hunt.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News