Jump to content

Possible Aggie NCAA Violations


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, horndawg said:

Only a violation of corroborated. Kid wants to run to daddy Sumlin for more DJ jam sessions. Only way to transfer and not sit out is to bring dirt out. I don’t think Sumlin really wants to be bringing skeletons out, but will be interesting. 

Not good optics either way. 

So are you saying Sumlin was cheating too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone text their parents like this?  

Hey dad for the past three days now the involvement with the coaching staff has not vanished, like it should have, but rather increased as they are now full-on coaching us during a full practice. We are not allowed to meet/practice at all and the coaches are doing it every day and telling us not to say anything. How ridiculous is that.”

 

It’s almost like he decided to transfer and they are trying to figure out a way for him to not lose a year of eligibility.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhatMack19 said:

Does anyone text their parents like this?  

Hey dad for the past three days now the involvement with the coaching staff has not vanished, like it should have, but rather increased as they are now full-on coaching us during a full practice. We are not allowed to meet/practice at all and the coaches are doing it every day and telling us not to say anything. How ridiculous is that.”

 

It’s almost like he decided to transfer and they are trying to figure out a way for him to not lose a year of eligibility.  

Ya think? This is the age we live in. Cheating is going to get harder. Sorry bout that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bandwagon Ranger said:

What does a drunk Sumlin have to do with paying recruits and illegal practices?

I was speaking to hurting the image of the program.

Also, are you going to believe a kid that wants to find a loophole to not lose eligibility with no evidence of said payments? I know you want so bad for it to be true, but I still believe in innocent until proven guilty. It’s unfortunate that this is what the NCAA has created. Any athlete, for any reason, can come up with any excuse to give them the immediate transfer. They need to axe this quick before it gets out of hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, horndawg said:

I was speaking to hurting the image of the program.

Also, are you going to believe a kid that wants to find a loophole to not lose eligibility with no evidence of said payments? I know you want so bad for it to be true, but I still believe in innocent until proven guilty. It’s unfortunate that this is what the NCAA has created. Any athlete, for any reason, can come up with any excuse to give them the immediate transfer. They need to axe this quick before it gets out of hand.

It would be the funniest thing ever if the NCAA laid the wood to Jimbo and his $75 million your school guaranteed him before he even plays a. game. Funniest ever!

Do I believe the kid? 100% yes.  Every school is doing the same crap and worse. The pressure to win is too big and there's too much money involved. 

We have reached a point where "if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin' " If you need a great example of how schools are selling their souls for a chance to "win", look no further than College Station.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go ahead and believe one kid that couldn’t cut it. Or, as I said earlier in the discussion, wait and see if there are more that step forward. By this article below, you know, since you guys love posting articles, you have many others that disagree and say there is a tougher mentality and they are eating it up. So which kid(s) will you choose to believe?

I’ll let your blind hatred lead you down the path you were already going. 

This is the hidden content, please
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/23/2018 at 9:01 PM, horndawg said:

I was speaking to hurting the image of the program.

Also, are you going to believe a kid that wants to find a loophole to not lose eligibility with no evidence of said payments? I know you want so bad for it to be true, but I still believe in innocent until proven guilty. It’s unfortunate that this is what the NCAA has created. Any athlete, for any reason, can come up with any excuse to give them the immediate transfer. They need to axe this quick before it gets out of hand.

Image of the Texas A&M program:

1) Johnny Football

2) thrill hill passed out with the football whisperer stumblin who could not run an offense without Kliff 

3) Greatest home field advantage in CFB and still can’t win consistently 

4) Attendance records set on Temporary Seating

5) The Chicken Ranch

6) Sabers drawn

7) the great institution of higher learning who improved hybrid figs and “cold fusion”

et al....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, horndawg said:

Go ahead and believe one kid that couldn’t cut it. Or, as I said earlier in the discussion, wait and see if there are more that step forward. By this article below, you know, since you guys love posting articles, you have many others that disagree and say there is a tougher mentality and they are eating it up. So which kid(s) will you choose to believe?

I’ll let your blind hatred lead you down the path you were already going. 

This is the hidden content, please
 

I can't stand Aggie, but this is ridiculous. It is a flawed new rule that tempts players to air out dirty laundry so they can play. I imagine their will be several schools thrown under the bus, whether accusations are true or false. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, horndawg said:

Came here to post this...wanted to know if people still believe the kid? 

This is the hidden content, please

 

It's not a case of believe him or not believe him. I think the majority of big time programs commit some sort of violation in terms of workouts and what not. It is more of a case of who cares. This kid is a TOOL (got that from Aggiesweare)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...