Started By
Message
re: The NCAA's latest statements just encourage
Posted on 10/14/09 at 8:55 am to Schwaaz
Posted on 10/14/09 at 8:55 am to Schwaaz
quote:
Why in the world would I tell you anything specific? Do you really think I'm going to name names of people I know on a message board? You can't be this dumb.
Believe it or not, makes no difference to me.
0
Posted on 10/14/09 at 8:57 am to Schwaaz
When Scott Hunter was being recruited for Bama; It was a well known fact around the Mobile Area (Prichard especially) That Bama Boosters bought his Family a home and Daddy got a hard to get job with the City of Prichard. Nothing new here this was "Buisness as usual" back in the 60's and probably even today. There is no SEC school not guilty of stuff like this.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:00 am to arrakis
quote:
Did you report the facts and names to the NCAA?
He knows Auburn and others schools gave out money in paper bags. I bet Alabama wasn't one of those "other" schools.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:02 am to AUriptide
hey, at least you are still bowl eligible. they could kill your program with penalties. i wouldn't worry so much about the penalties this time, as i would if bama has another major infraction in the next few years.
This post was edited on 10/14/09 at 9:03 am
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:04 am to Schwaaz
quote:
Bama has bent over backwards to self report and all it's gotten them are more violations that the NCAA can use against them in the future.
You don't say!
Bama "self reported"...VIOLATIONS. And this means, they have more....VIOLATIONS?
Wow....just wow
"Sure, officer. I have turned myself in for 200 felonies. But, don't I get credit for admitting to FELONIES?"
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:05 am to arrakis
Put quite simply, it's damned if you do, and damned if you don't self report.
Alabama was in the wrong in the situation, but it did not seem intentional... and it sure as hell wasn't "cheating" because no advantage was gained on or off the field.
That being said, the athletic department is clearly at fault here for not having certain checks and balances in place. The punishment simply did not fit the crime so Alabama does have a case, but what other punishment could you possibly give? That's the question...
Alabama was in the wrong in the situation, but it did not seem intentional... and it sure as hell wasn't "cheating" because no advantage was gained on or off the field.
That being said, the athletic department is clearly at fault here for not having certain checks and balances in place. The punishment simply did not fit the crime so Alabama does have a case, but what other punishment could you possibly give? That's the question...
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:08 am to RollTideATL
quote:
Put quite simply, it's damned if you do, and damned if you don't self report.
Or you could just not cheat......?
quote:
Alabama was in the wrong in the situation, but it did not seem intentional... and it sure as hell wasn't "cheating" because no advantage was gained on or off the field.
It wasn't illegal running that red light because no one else was around. Yea, I went 20 mph over the limit.....but no one else was around to be put in danger.........see where I'm going with this?
quote:
the athletic department is clearly at fault here for not having certain checks and balances in place
This. And you are being punished because of it.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:10 am to volmeister
"The Antonio Langham Case"
Yea and "Dudley Doright" AKA as Fat Phil Fulmer was the one who blew the whistle out of jealousy because this kid was from Tennessee and Bama got him. True a Bama booster paid the bucks to swing Antonio our way (Wrong thing to do) But Phil played Devil's advocate and had to go squeal to the NCAA out of Jealousy. Bama never forgot this. Suck Arse tactics shows what kind of person Fulmer was.
Yea and "Dudley Doright" AKA as Fat Phil Fulmer was the one who blew the whistle out of jealousy because this kid was from Tennessee and Bama got him. True a Bama booster paid the bucks to swing Antonio our way (Wrong thing to do) But Phil played Devil's advocate and had to go squeal to the NCAA out of Jealousy. Bama never forgot this. Suck Arse tactics shows what kind of person Fulmer was.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:12 am to arrakis
quote:
Did you report the facts and names to the NCAA?
You are really naive when it comes to college athletics aren't you?
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:14 am to RlTde2
sorry guys if not for our history in the 90's this textbook thing would have amounted to nothing, they would have told us good job for finding it and reporting it but considering we wwere just off of probation the year before I am sure the mind set was how can you be here again. But I agree textbooks offered no competitive advantage which is why the penalties were not harsher. The univ should have let this die. I am just glad they cant go back and change their ruling.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:15 am to pankReb
quote:
It wasn't illegal running that red light because no one else was around. Yea, I went 20 mph over the limit.....but no one else was around to be put in danger.........see where I'm going with this?
Why should 21 wins be vacated over a three year span for the actions of seven individuals? The amount of textbook/supplies used was as little as 35 cents for some of those games.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:16 am to pankReb
quote:
pankReb
quote:
It wasn't illegal running that red light because no one else was around. Yea, I went 20 mph over the limit.....but no one else was around to be put in danger.........see where I'm going with this?
Do I seriously have to explain the difference between breaking rules and cheating???
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:19 am to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Why should 21 wins be vacated over a three year span for the actions of seven individuals? The amount of textbook/supplies used was as little as 35 cents for some of those games.
They cheated(which rules them ineligible to play) and they played in those games(which used ineligible players).
Tell you what. Go to the campus bookstore. Steal a pack of pens and if you get caught........just say, "but they were only just a pack of pens. They didn't cost much."......then see what happens.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:24 am to labamafan
I think the NCAA needs to investigate USC Trojans. Look at Rivals.Com Top 100 Recruits. See how many are going to USC. Not saying there is any Hanky Panky going on but the Reggie Buch Fiasco never openly resolved makes me wonder...
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:30 am to Schwaaz
quote:
You are really naive when it comes to college athletics aren't you?
Not all all. Just wanted to find out if you were running your mouth or actually did something to combat the problem. Sounds like the former.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:30 am to RlTde2
(no message)
This post was edited on 10/14/09 at 9:34 am
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:32 am to labamafan
quote:
our history in the 90's
Exactly. Bama has a reputation for cheating...and they earned it. Any violation by Bama is going to be highly scrutinized.
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:36 am to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Why should 21 wins be vacated over a three year span for the actions of seven individuals? The amount of textbook/supplies used was as little as 35 cents for some of those games.
Because the NCAA is a voluntary, member organization. Institutions agree to abide by rules and to submit to enforcement by the NCAA committee on Infractions. Simple as that.
Bama has the right to appeal. Its unlikely to work.
ETA: I do not, nor have I ever, believe that this case it horrific. Its not a GIANT issue, but it is a real issue. The punishment is probably about right. Repeat offenders often get stiffer penalties. It could have been worse.
This post was edited on 10/14/09 at 9:38 am
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:38 am to arrakis
quote:
Any violation by Bama is going to be highly scrutinized.
that's kind of the problem though. other schools have done a great job building their reputation as cheaters as well, but Alabama is the FALL boy... and if you have an institution that's going to judge, be it a state or federal legal/judicial system or not, they need to be equal, fair, and consistent about how they give out punishments... and THAT's the case that Alabama brought to them. i think it's a very valid argument. it's not like Alabama is saying "if you punish us, punish everyone..." their case is "don't punish us, if you're not going to punish everyone else."
MAKING an example out of someone is inconsistent and unjust. It's wrong.
Alabama does have a case, it's just not one that should get us off the hook. it's one that should show they're not treating everyone the same, which is bs.
(i know i just said the same thing over and over... but i think it's necessary.)
This post was edited on 10/14/09 at 9:41 am
Posted on 10/14/09 at 9:43 am to m2pro
Here's a thought .....Don't break the rules. If you dont you wont have anything to self report and the rest of the SEC might not be a quick to call your school a bunch of cheaters. Until then.........
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News