Started By
Message
re: As the jar cracks - Johnny Manziel's downfall is upon us
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:26 pm to TwelfthMan
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:26 pm to TwelfthMan
i have always felt no paper trail then nothing serious will happen. but I do have an opinion of whether money changed hands. Cam is a classic opinion is that money was never proven to have changed hands
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:36 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
ITT right now: Gumps are scared
Damn right I'm scared. I'm scared that JFF won't be allowed to play in week 3 and we will miss our opportunity to put him in his rightful place. At the bottom of a pile of Alabama defenders.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:37 pm to MMB5DAP
quote:One more time. You do realize that the NCAA does not have to prove that Nate or Manziel accepted cash, right?
which is gonna make proving Manziel (Or Uncle Nate) accepting cash for autos that much harder
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:37 pm to Sargentwinslow9
quote:
Rebuilt to what? The one good season in 10 years that they bought? Ill be waiting years before that program sniffs any kind of SEC success again
Auburn football 2003-2012
Two undefeated seasons, two SEC titles, one national title. Eight bowl appearances (winning seven of them). 84-40 overall record. Finished ranked 5 times.
TAMU during the same period
One conference title (tied for it). Best season has two losses. 2-5 in bowls. 68-60 overall record. Finished ranked twice.
Tell me again who spent the last decade being irrelevant?
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:37 pm to ThaKaptin
quote:
ITT right now: Gumps are scared
Of what?
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:37 pm to mrbroker
The way i am kind of seeing it is this.
1. They have to prove that money was paid to (uncle nate, JFF, his family etc.)
2. They have to prove that JFF knew that Uncle Nate or his family was receiving money.
The fact that every media outlet is making Uncle Nate look like an irresponsible douchebag (almost as much as JFF) May actually help Manziel if they find a paper trail leading to Uncle Nate.
I could see Manziels lawyers "sueing" Uncle Nate in an attempt to make it look like he betrayed "his best friend JFF"
Just think that manziels lawyers are playing every aspect of how this could unfold and I believe he will be on the field this season.
1. They have to prove that money was paid to (uncle nate, JFF, his family etc.)
2. They have to prove that JFF knew that Uncle Nate or his family was receiving money.
The fact that every media outlet is making Uncle Nate look like an irresponsible douchebag (almost as much as JFF) May actually help Manziel if they find a paper trail leading to Uncle Nate.
I could see Manziels lawyers "sueing" Uncle Nate in an attempt to make it look like he betrayed "his best friend JFF"
Just think that manziels lawyers are playing every aspect of how this could unfold and I believe he will be on the field this season.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:37 pm to ThaKaptin
quote:
Damn right I'm scared. I'm scared that JFF won't be allowed to play in week 3 and we will miss our opportunity to put him in his rightful place. At the bottom of a pile of Alabama defenders.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:37 pm to mrbroker
Assuming they don't have a business record of the cash they paid Johnny (which is an interesting way to run a business) then they would have records of the sale of the thousands of Johnny autos, right? As it is you have them talking about these thousands of autos but only a few hundred seem to be around on EBay and other sites.
Of course since those guys won't do a legit interview or cooperate with the NCAA I don't really see why their "word" is given much weight at all.
Of course since those guys won't do a legit interview or cooperate with the NCAA I don't really see why their "word" is given much weight at all.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:39 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
One more time. You do realize that the NCAA does not have to prove that Nate or Manziel accepted cash, right?
One more time. You do realize that they do, right?
LINK
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:39 pm to aggressor
if there are a number of them that are not related to each other that say the same thing then I think the NCAA has to give it some credence during their investigation.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:39 pm to 3andOut
quote:
1. They have to prove that money was paid to (uncle nate, JFF, his family etc.)
2. They have to prove that JFF knew that Uncle Nate or his family was receiving money.
The fact that every media outlet is making Uncle Nate look like an irresponsible douchebag (almost as much as JFF) May actually help Manziel if they find a paper trail leading to Uncle Nate.
I hope that Johnny can't use the Rogue Employee Defense on Nate.
Also, the NCAA cleared ALabama to play players in the Textbook issue of 2007 and then later said "LOL Vacate those games."
Don't trust a word of what the NCAA says.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:41 pm to MagicCityBlazer
uncle nate now is associated with JFF and if he did something wrong then the cecil newtonrule will come into play and I doubt JFF can avoid being in trouble
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:43 pm to mrbroker
The Cam comparisons don't completely match up either. Cam was accused of taking money to play at a school, Johnny is accused of making money off his auto. Both are violations but they are viewed very differently by the public and the press. What Johnny did or didn't do didn't help A&M win or give them an advantage in any way. The same can't be said for the Cam situation. There also has been no connection made whatsoever to the brokers and anyone from A&M or who was a booster.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:43 pm to mrbroker
Even though I can provide many links that say the NCAA needs to prove Manziel (or someone acting as his agent) accepted cash for autos.
Can someone provide one NCAA player who was suspended without one shred of evidence other than "unnamed sources" and their testimony.
Can someone provide one NCAA player who was suspended without one shred of evidence other than "unnamed sources" and their testimony.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:45 pm to MMB5DAP
quote:
Can someone provide one NCAA player who was suspended without one shred of evidence other than "unnamed sources" and their testimony.
The NCAA never proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that any Alabama player got money for lending textbooks.
""not one athlete pocketed one dollar""- Mal Moore
"LOL vacate those games." -NCAA
This post was edited on 8/14/13 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:47 pm to aggressor
correct but it appears accusations are coming out daily so we just may have to let the whole thing play out and until that time, TAMU compliance and big dawgs have a tough decision to make. Wouldn't you agree?
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:48 pm to MagicCityBlazer
they got suspended 4 games I think and had to vacate all wins that season in which they played..And to the TAMU posters on here this situation sure did not create an unfair competitive advantage on the field as y'all claim the JFF signing also did not create an unfair advantage
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:51 pm to MagicCityBlazer
quote:
The NCAA never proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that any Alabama player got money for lending textbooks.
So there was no evidence of wrongdoing? Why did Alabama self-sanction themselves then?
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:52 pm to aggressor
quote:
The Cam comparisons don't completely match up either. Cam was accused of taking money to play at a school, Johnny is accused of making money off his auto. Both are violations but they are viewed very differently by the public and the press.
If JFF took money, it does not matter if he did so to play football or for his autograph. The NCAA doesn't give a frick what the public or the press thinks.
Posted on 8/14/13 at 2:52 pm to MMB5DAP
quote:Who arranged the alleged signing sessions and would that person not fall under the NCAA definition of agent?
One more time. You do realize that they do, right?
Popular
Back to top



2




