re: Bama’s AD slyly refuses to answer THE QUESTION twice in same interview

If Byrne and oats are so sure about him having no wrong doing (as they have stated before), so why with the massive amount of negative press against the university have they not detailed it?

Ie “he did not read the text before, he did not drive them away, he did not transport a gun on campus, etc”

From the get go it feels like they have been doing damage control to keep their star player on the court. Early on they were emphatic that they had enough information to determine he had nothing to do with it and for him to keep representing the university then just now they said they had no idea about the text. So which is it?

It would be very easy for them to detail why he has no wrongdoing. So why aren’t they doing it? There has to be something negative or else they would not be going to the lengths that they are to prolong the situation with Miller.

Are they just choosing to not defend their star player or is there more to come and they are just trying to see if they can last beyond the tournament?