Auburn investigation uncovers more offenses...

#101
#101
99gator said:
sanctions can follow the coach....not the school.

so, as another example, lane kiffin could have gotten in trouble for what occurred at tennessee even though he is now at southern cal......but, southern cal would not get in trouble for what kiffin did at tennessee.

the only thing that could happen, in theory, is a punishment of muschamp not the university of florrida.

based on your previous posts, you should be cheering for nothing to happen to muschamp so the idiot stays at florida
Click to expand...

One more time... Joe Schad, someone that covers college football and knows the rules said, "Florida could receive recruiting sanctions if this news on Muschamp is proven true!"
 
#102
#102
VolMaster14 said:
One more time... Joe Schad, someone that covers college football and knows the rules said, "Florida could receive recruiting sanctions if this news on Muschamp is proven true!"
Click to expand...

well, look, i'm not worried about any of this anyway.

but, i would like to know the examples and precedent for where the school was punished for the actions of a current coach based on actions, that are/were unknown to the university when making the hire and even since that time.

i trust joe schad, but i don't remember that happening somewhere.

i can only remember situations like kelvin sampson being hired by indiana despite his transgressions being known by indiana.

not surprisingly, muschamp has denied any of this
 
#103
#103
99gator said:
well, look, i'm not worried about any of this anyway.

but, i would like to know the examples and precedent for where the school was punished for the actions of a current coach based on actions, that are/were unknown to the university when making the hire and even since that time.

i trust joe schad, but i don't remember that happening somewhere.

i can only remember situations like kelvin sampson being hired by indiana despite his transgressions being known by indiana.

not surprisingly, muschamp has denied any of this
Click to expand...

Well I don't claim to be Joe Schad, I was just posting what he said today at 3:30 est.
 
#104
#104
VolMaster14 said:
Did you read my entire post? Joe Schad said today on CFL that precedence has already been set and sanctions can follow the coach to the school they currently coach at. And who cares where the story originated from, the reporter got his info from a forme Auburn player. Cheesecake is denying any wrong doing on his part as well. That's what cheaters do, lie and cover up!
Click to expand...

What argument are you trying to make? Anyone that denies an accusation is automatically guilty, a liar, cheater and covering up?

I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find out Chiz and AU are dirty. But your logic there is hard to rationalize.
 
#105
#105
Orange_Crush said:
What argument are you trying to make? Anyone that denies an accusation is automatically guilty, a liar, cheater and covering up?

I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find out Chiz and AU are dirty. But your logic there is hard to rationalize.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying all people who deny accusations of wrong doing are lying. I posted what I did because I believe Chiz did cheat and is lying about it cause the accusations have been there since day one and even when the NCAA doesn't do anything about it, things just keep popping back up. Although I said "that's what cheaters do, lie and cover up" I wasn't referring to every person accused of something.
 
#109
#109
Its not like an ex player said Muschamp gave him a car or a suitcase full of cash. Its $400. Not sure why that's so hard to believe. And just to clarify, I think Chiz is a much bigger lying, cheating POS than Muschamp, Muschamp is just a lunatic.
 
#112
#112
Back then, synthetic pot was not illegal. Nothing will come from that. Plus we all knew about that when Dyer left the team. As for the article, it definitely has some plot holes. Dre Kirkpatrick denies the allegations as well as Muschamp and Chizik, and the players quoted say that she either misquoted them or that they did not say it. She also says Michael Dyer was academically ineligable for the MNC, but Dyer was not in any sort of grade trouble. Plus, the only evidence she has is from a felon claiming stuff.
 
#113
#113
AuburnEagle said:
Back then, synthetic pot was not illegal. Nothing will come from that. Plus we all knew about that when Dyer left the team. As for the article, it definitely has some plot holes. Dre Kirkpatrick denies the allegations as well as Muschamp and Chizik, and the players quoted say that she either misquoted them or that they did not say it. She also says Michael Dyer was academically ineligable for the MNC, but Dyer was not in any sort of grade trouble. Plus, the only evidence she has is from a felon claiming stuff.
Click to expand...

I agree that nothing much may come from any of this. Still, it's a bit disturbing that in both reports, officials at Auburn didn't feel it necessary to inform the parents of the failed drug tests, or that a son had been arrested. As a parent, that s#!^ wouldn't fly with me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#115
#115
vol66 said:
I agree that nothing much may come from any of this. Still, it's a bit disturbing that in both reports, officials at Auburn didn't feel it necessary to inform the parents of the failed drug tests, or that a son had been arrested. As a parent, that s#!^ wouldn't fly with me.
Click to expand...

Another thing that is really disturbing is that cheating allegations against Auburn are like a record stuck on repeat. I would say where there's smoke, there's fire, but that's too cliche, so I'll just insinuate.
 
#116
#116
volprof said:
Another thing that is really disturbing is that cheating allegations against Auburn are like a record stuck on repeat. I would say where there's smoke, there's fire, but that's too cliche, so I'll just insinuate.
Click to expand...

Obviously, I agree with you, it is disturbing. However, like what happened at UNC, the NCAA can't seem to pull it's head out of it's collective arse when it comes to academic fraud.

Of course, Mark Emmert , in his time at LSU had an opportunity to address a situation and chose to cover it up instead. Even though it's a level 1 offense, the NCAA doesn't seem to care much about it, or they just don't know how to go about it.

Credibility is the issue here. If Jay Jacobs won't tell the parents of players that they have failed a drug test, or have been arrested, would he tell them that the school has changed some grades?
 
#117
#117
AuburnEagle said:
Back then, synthetic pot was not illegal. Nothing will come from that. Plus we all knew about that when Dyer left the team. As for the article, it definitely has some plot holes. Dre Kirkpatrick denies the allegations as well as Muschamp and Chizik, and the players quoted say that she either misquoted them or that they did not say it. She also says Michael Dyer was academically ineligable for the MNC, but Dyer was not in any sort of grade trouble. Plus, the only evidence she has is from a felon claiming stuff.
Click to expand...

how much more s*** needs to come out before Auburn fan can finally just come out and say "well, f*** me"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#120
#120
It anyone thinks nothing will happen their crazy. The NCAA has no choice, they will investigate. If this was Tennessee I would be scared to death.
 
#124
#124
vol66 said:
I agree that nothing much may come from any of this. Still, it's a bit disturbing that in both reports, officials at Auburn didn't feel it necessary to inform the parents of the failed drug tests, or that a son had been arrested. As a parent, that s#!^ wouldn't fly with me.
Click to expand...

These were all legal adults. You would have no real right to know.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top