Alabama Crimson Tide

[AlabamAlum]

Why is this on the Bama thread?

[Professor Tiger]

Give PSU a couple of years to let the sanctions take their full effect. Then they will be sufficiently castrated to fit right into UGA's schedule.

[GBJs]

Auburn corrupt? We got a clean bill of health from the NCAA two years ago. We are squeaky clean.

A clean bill of health, and a brand new definition of "agent" to include a father.

[AlabamAlum]

Most people view Auburn as the beneficiary of a loophole (that's now been closed). As Greg Doyle said (and I'm paraphrasing): 'Auburn is not guilty like OJ is not guilty.'

[Professor Tiger]

"Most people" (i.e. Bama fans) just wish that, when they were investigated by the NCAA in 2009, and in 2002, and in 1995, they had been exonerated like Auburn was last year. Pure jealousy.

[AlabamAlum]

Bama fans have nothing to do with Cecil shopping his son or what Greg Doyle said or what NCAA president Mark Emmert said when discussing the loophole:

"It's wrong for parents to sell the athletics services of their student-athletes to a university, and we need to make sure we have rules to stop that problem. And today, we don't," Emmert said. "We have to fix that."

[AlabamAlum]

And Alabama was not investigated in 2009.

Really, in none of those years. That's when the punishments were handed out.

Although AU is no longer the most prodigious cheaters in the SEC now that TAMU has been allowed to join.

[Professor Tiger]

When will Bama's current NCAA probation expire?

[AlabamAlum]

Bama is not under probation.

[AlabamAlum]

"if Cam did not admit, you must acquit!"

[Professor Tiger]

Bama is not under probation.

You may be right. Your most recent probation was announced on June 11, 2009, and was supposed to last 3 years. It appears you've been free and clear for a little over a month. Enjoy.

RE: "Auburn is not guilty like OJ is not guilty":

Bama players are not guilty of violating NCAA bylaw 12.5.2.1 which states:

“After becoming a student-athlete, an individual shall not be eligible for participation in intercollegiate athletics if the individual accepts any remuneration for or permits the use of his or her name or picture to advertise, recommend or promote directly the sale or use of a commercial product or service of any kind.”

... like OJ is not guilty.

[AlabamAlum]

What are you talking about?

[AlabamAlum]

Second thought, never mind. You're sinking rapidly. Best just drop it.

[10ac]

Why must the Irish always bicker?

[Professor Tiger]

What are you talking about?

Do the words "Tom's T-town Menswear," "Bama football players," "autographs," and especially "photographs" ring a bell?

[AlabamAlum]

LMAO! You HAVE been on ITAT (with some Clay Travis for extra hilarity).

Anyhooo....

None of the players permitted their photo to be used to promote sale or service of any kind. Once it was reported that Abdul had displayed the items/photos, a cease and desist was sent and he wasnt even allowed to buy season tickets anymore. You do realize that's why we didn't even get a secondary on that, don't you? Don't you? Now if you have some proof that the players did permit their picture to be used for that purpose and can prove that they were paid, you've got a stellar case. Submit it to the NCAA forthwith! I have no doubt that we'll get hammered if you do. Otherwise, it's more like slander.

Anyway, not sure what any of the above has to do with anything we were discussing....

Finally, you won't believe this, but I'm glad Auburn got off. The SEC has too many black eyes, and I do not want us to become the SWC. And when I say Auburn got off, I'm really saying Cam - it's not been proven that Auburn coaches did anything wrong. Cam, however, remained eligible through a loophole that is now being closed.

[Professor Tiger]

The T-town story was on al.com, B'ham News, ESPN and plenty of sites, especially this one.

http://sportsbybrooks.com/another-curre ... pens-29815

You can say that SBB is like tigerdroppings, ITAT and other homer sites, and you'd be right. But it's hard to deny the photos, regardless of where they're posted.

The T-town menswear situation is at least as questionable as the Cam situation, and it is certainly understandable that some homers (including me) might question the NCAA's determination of either. My point is that, if you are going to say "Auburn is not guilty like OJ is not guilty" then it is just as true that Bama is not guilty like OJ is not guilty.

[AlabamAlum]

1) They're not the same. Not even close. There was no T-Town case. If you have any evidence, I encourage you to contact the NCAA.

2) Even if they had, what does this have to do with what we were discussing?

3) Sports by Brooks? Heh. Want me to pull some Auburn stuff from that site?

4) Read item #2.

5) In the end, despite being shopped for cash by his dad, Cam was cleared. That's all the really matters re: Auburn. Cleared via loophole is still cleared- but portraying Cecil and Cam as pure as the driven snow does not play well. That's why the OJ comparisons happened.






6) there is no number 6.

[GBJs]

honestly, I'm tickled Cam was cleared to play. Only one thing pissed me off and that's the SEC not having the balls to enforce their own bylaw...

"If at any time before or after matriculation in a member institution a student-athlete or any member of his/her family receives or agrees to receive, directly or indirectly, any aid or assistance beyond or in addition to that permitted by the Bylaws of this Conference (except such aid or assistance as such student-athlete may receive from those persons on whom the student is naturally or legally dependent for support), such student- athlete shall be ineligible for competition in any intercollegiate sport within the Conference for the remainder of his/her college career."

if they had, we would not have had 6 championships in a row in our conference...

[DooKSucks]

Greg Doyle? Damn, AA, there are plenty of credible columnists/journalists out there, and Doyle isn't one of them. That hack was chased out of town by the Charlotte Observer because he sucks so bad.