Started By
Message
re: This is no longer about Auburn, it is about the next university...
Posted on 12/1/10 at 11:53 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
Posted on 12/1/10 at 11:53 pm to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
You know, I'm pretty tired so I probably need a second opinion. You'll help me out, right Freep? At what point in my discussion with Dr Drunkenstein was I talking about what fricking Mr. Lennon said? I seem to remember talking about the risks boosters run by paying players.
#1 This whole thread was created because of and revolved around what Mr Lennon said. If you went off on some personal tangent, bully for you.
#2 Yes, you did make the shocking and earth-shattering observation that boosters run some degree of risk by paying players. Of course, these risks have always existed, and boosters continue to pay players, so you really hit the cover off the ball, didn't you?
This post was edited on 12/1/10 at 11:54 pm
1
Posted on 12/1/10 at 11:54 pm to cyde
quote:
cyde
Ol' Doc Drunk is stuck defending his ridiculous assertion that all the NCAA cares about is whether or not Cam knew Cecil was pimping him out.
Maybe he'll act on this assumption and see if it works for his school of choice. It'd be fun hearing him use the "Kevin Lennon didn't talk about it, so that means it must be okay" defense.
Posted on 12/2/10 at 12:02 am to FearlessFreep
quote:
Ol' Doc Drunk is stuck defending his ridiculous assertion that all the NCAA cares about is whether or not Cam knew Cecil was pimping him out.
To that I say:
quote:
Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president for academic and membership affairs, said: "In determining how a violation impacts a student-athlete's eligibility, we must consider the young person's responsibility. "
Dude, just let it go. You keep talking about other reasons Cam was exonerated. Of course, you won't share the reasons with the rest of us. You claim to have posted them, but you didn't. Either post a quote of why Cam was exonerated or let it go......
Posted on 12/2/10 at 12:07 am to Dr Drunkenstein
quote:
#1 This whole thread was created because of and revolved around what Mr Lennon said. If you went off on some personal tangent, bully for you.
Yeah, the "personal tangent" was because of something you fricking said.
quote:
. Where I disagreed with the OP was that it will open the floodgates to pay players either from the schools directly or from big money boosters fo the schools. I think that as long as the institutions can be held responsible and punished, that will continue to be a big enough deterrent to keep it from expanding.
I called bullshite on it, because there's more at risk than the fricking players involved in that decision.
Now I just think you're fricking stupid and I don't want to talk to you anymore.
This post was edited on 12/2/10 at 12:08 am
Posted on 12/2/10 at 12:10 am to PJinAtl
quote:
That was my initial point, even if it doesn't impact the player's eligibility, it still is a violation on the part of the institution if money changes hands and that is where the schools would be playing with fire.
So be smart about it. the person that pays can in no way be tied to the university.
Maybe even a booster who the university has already cut ties with.
Posted on 12/2/10 at 12:11 am to cyde
quote:
Now I just think you're fricking stupid and I don't want to talk to you anymore.
I'm with you cyde.
Congrats, Doc. You managed to bring at least one Bammer and Barner to total agreement on at least one important issue. SALUT!
Posted on 12/2/10 at 12:13 am to FearlessFreep
quote:
I'm with you cyde.
Congrats, Doc. You managed to bring at least one Bammer and Barner to total agreement on at least one important issue. SALUT!
And on that note, I bid y'all good night.
Posted on 12/2/10 at 12:29 am to Hook Em Horns
quote:
so you really dont think cecil wanted money for cams services?? then tell me why was he declared INELIGIBLE..monday or tuesday...please explain that one..
Because they knew he would be cleared the next day.
Do you really think he is ruled ineligible if they know it will take more than a week to clear him.
One of the biggest points is that AU did not play an ineligible player.
Posted on 12/2/10 at 12:39 am to D500MAG
Good Lord Dr. Drunk, If Auburn even agrees to pay for
Cam, but the cash has not changed hands, and even if Cam knew nothing - he (Cam) is toast at Auburn.
Why are you being obtuse?
Cam, but the cash has not changed hands, and even if Cam knew nothing - he (Cam) is toast at Auburn.
Why are you being obtuse?
Posted on 12/2/10 at 8:35 am to gatorubet
quote:
If Auburn even agrees to pay for Cam, but the cash has not changed hands, and even if Cam knew nothing - he (Cam) is toast at Auburn. Why are you being obtuse?
I'm not being obtuse. Kevin Lennon said that a player's eligibility in relation to a violation (he doesn't specify a specific violation, he is talking about any violation.....asking for money, getting paid money, etc.) is considered relative to the student-athlete's responsibility (what the student-athlete knew). Per the NCAA VP.....if Cam's dad got paid and Cam didn't know, Cam would still be free and clear.
Do I think this is right? No.....but unlike you and several other posters, I am not allowing my OPINION to trump what the NCAA VP ACTUALLY SAID.
Posted on 12/2/10 at 8:45 am to Dr Drunkenstein
Give UNLV the right basketball coach, and they will be able to host player representatives like kings. Getting them comped at local hotels and restaurants will be easy for every home game, and it wouldn't surprise me of the representatives got a small line of credit at the casino paid for by anonymous sources. Since the casino companies will not be officially connected with UNLV, and the players won't know that their representatives are being paid (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) there won't be any NCAA violations.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News