LSU8932
| Favorite team: | LSU  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 377 |
| Registered on: | 8/6/2009 |
| Online Status: |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Jeremy Hill
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/19/10 at 10:32 pm
quote:
You mean that relies solely on the QB 90% of the time?
Sure.
Cam had 1400 yds rushing
AU had an additional 2300 yds rushing by players other than Cam
We had a total of 2100 yds rushing last year.
3
re: Jeremy Hill
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/19/10 at 10:26 pm
quote:
So is Hill afraid of the depth
If you were Hill, would you rather play in a sub par offense that is 8 deep at RB
Or would you rather play in a high octane offense that is only 2 deep at RB?
re: LSU Self Imposes Football Recruiting and Scholarship Restrictions
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/17/10 at 8:04 am
BOOsters?
re: FBI complicit in the NCAA/SEC conspiracy to let AU off the hook?
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/10/10 at 10:45 pm
quote:
He's #71. They are looking for where the money is coming from, THAT is the reason they are involved. They could care less about athletes being shopped. Their main interest in this is who is doing the paying and where is that money coming from
IMO, if that was the case, Cecil would be a good source of where the money is coming from if he got paid 200k
Cecil's door would've been the first door I knocked on if i were an investigator
re: FBI complicit in the NCAA/SEC conspiracy to let AU off the hook?
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/10/10 at 10:22 pm
quote:
Multiple media sources are saying the lid is getting ready to blow off of this thing.....
Just sitting back and watching how it all plays out..
yeah yeah we know. The bomb is going to drop by the end of the week....haven't heard that before from you tuna.
re: Gus to Vandy for $3 mill?
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/9/10 at 10:47 pm
With so many inaccurate reports coming out about coaches/jobs, it's hard for me to blindly believe Vandy is throwing 3 Mil at Malzahn
re: The NCAA's handling of Cam Newton's situation vs. UNC player(s)
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/9/10 at 10:37 pm
quote:
I read about the first 135 pages of that thing over the last couple of weeks
Wow
re: So do Auburn fans beleive Newton when he said he...
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/9/10 at 9:49 pm
Funny how people in this thread seem to be outraged over somebody lying.
Tad bit hypocritical IMO. Honestly, the only way you can shite on somebody for being a "liar" is to say
a) You have never lied in the past
and
b) You will never lie in the future.
If you can't say that, you're basically a liar calling another person a liar.
re: Why Auburn will win the 2010 National Title
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/5/10 at 1:21 pm
quote:
If he hadn't just bumped another one I wouldn't have said anything. Auburn is obviously a surprise team this season. Even your own fans didn't expect you to do so well. Do we really need multiple threads like this bumped every single day
Meh, I've never understood why it is such a crime to bump old threads. It's what makes messageboards fun.
If someone has the balls to make a thread about something that turns out to be wrong. Why not bump it?
re: Cam Newton won't make a good NFL quarterback
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/5/10 at 10:08 am
quote:
Cam does not have a good throwing motion
WTF?? There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with his throwing motion. Where do you guys get this from??
Dude has one of the smoothest, short and compact throwing motion a QB can have.
re: Cam: "I'm the SEC Champion"
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/4/10 at 8:55 pm
quote:
And he called his team "my supporting cast".
Absolutely wow at how you guys hang on every word hoping to find something to be outraged about.
re: When it comes to dollars, the NCAA makes no sense
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 8:32 pm
quote:
Which program is that, exactly
Your football program
re: When it comes to dollars, the NCAA makes no sense
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 8:31 pm
quote:
A program that's been on probation 17 consecutive years
Your football program
re: When it comes to dollars, the NCAA makes no sense
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 8:26 pm
I still find it hilarious Bama fans of all people are being the NCAA moral police.
A program that's been on probation 17 consecutive years, an institution that hsa 15+ teams currently on probation.
funny
A program that's been on probation 17 consecutive years, an institution that hsa 15+ teams currently on probation.
funny
re: When Bama's best two players received improper benefits
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 8:04 pm
quote:
I just think it's apples and oranges.
No, it's not apples and oranges. Julio and Ingram broke the same exact by law that Bammers claim Cam broke.
The by law states if you receive an improper benefit, like Julio and Mark did, you should be permantly ineligible.
Bama fans have been using this by law as proof of why Cam should've been ruled ineligible.
Now that I point out Mark and Julio broke the SAME by law, all of a sudden Bammers ar trying to make the argument as to why they shouldn't have been ineligible.
So the bottom line according to Bammers, when AU breaks the by law, Cam should permantly be ineligible, but when Bama players broke the same by law, they shouldnt be ineligible permantly.
re: When Bama's best two players received improper benefits
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 6:46 pm
quote:
Again, if you think hundreds of thousands of dollars to secure a recruit's signature = a $500 one day fishing trip, then I'm done with you.
Did Mark and Julio receive an improper benefit?
Yes
Have bama fas been pointing this by law that states if you receive an improper benefit, you should be permantly ineligible?
Yes
Are Bama fans now saying, if we break this same by law,it's ok that a player isnt ruled ineligible. But if Cam broke the By law he should be ineligible?
Yes
re: When Bama's best two players received improper benefits
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 6:39 pm
quote:
No - I already posted the difference including the statement from the NCAA on both cases.
With all due respect Bamacick, Bama fans have totally ignored the NCAA's ruling on Cam being eligible for now.
The reasoning was b/c of this SEC by law that states a player should be ineligible permantly. You guys broke the same by law. So using Bama's logic, Julio and Mark should've been permantly ineligible regardless of what the NCAA ruled.
Like I said, this is what Bama fans have been saying since NCAA made a ruling. That's undeniable.
re: When Bama's best two players received improper benefits
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 6:18 pm
quote:
It's not perceived as an impermissible benefit if the individual who offers the gift has a long standing relationship with the player...like Julio did.
So why did they have to pay the money back if it was totally permissible?
re: When Bama's best two players received improper benefits
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 6:16 pm
quote:
Mark and Julio played in ZERO games while their eligibility was in question. The NCAA reinstated them prior to the season.
The NCAA stated that the investigation was done in the fishing trip incident and that was that.
Nowhere has the NCAA stated that they were done investigating the Cam Newton matter and he played in 12 games.
All of that is irrelevant according to you bama fans. For the last week you've been saying "who cares what the NCAA says, SEC by law states if you receive an improper benefit, you should be ruled ineligible to play SEC football."
But of course, it's totally different now.
re: When Bama's best two players received improper benefits
Posted by LSU8932 on 12/3/10 at 6:13 pm
quote:
You don't know this
Evem though it's small, they received improper benefits. That's whythey had to pay back the money.
You guys have been saying Slive should adhere to this by law. But it's totally ok that he didnt adhere to it when involving Bama players
Popular
25
