WhiteMamba
John: 8:36
Was the money for tacos?
I could go for a mess of tacos.
Was the money for tacos?
It aint good. So much for somebody actually beating Alabama on the field in the NATTY.
Pretty damning evidence.
Nope, it was a loan and he paid it back and provided evidence.
It's not a big deal.
Why did I think you would make this comment...
Nope, it was a loan and he paid it back and provided evidence.
It's not a big deal.
Because it's not a big deal? Why are you so badly wanting it to be a big deal? Scared to play Alabama so hope the NCAA takes them down?
Nope, it was a loan and he paid it back and provided evidence.
It's not a big deal.
Nope, it was a loan and he paid it back and provided evidence.
It's not a big deal.
NCAA Bylaw 16.11.2.2, which states that “an institutional employee or representative of the institution's athletics interests may not provide a student-athlete with extra benefits or services, including, but not limited to ... a loan of money.”
-Nope, it was a loan and he paid it back and provided evidence.
It's not a big deal.
Nope. If Oregon were to be fortunate enough to get a shot at the NATTY I would like them to play the best.
Its just time after time this kind of crap lands on Bama's doorstep and they get off because of lack of evidence...
Welp, there is your evidence.
-
coaches giving loans gets you NCAA sanctions. It is a very big deal.
And as far as being scared of Bama???? Nervous as fuck would be moar like it.
None the less. To be the best you would have to beat the best.
And if you are disqualified from post season play, you cant be the best.
And if you now anything about how these things work, all a player has to do is pay it back and they will be reinstated and compliant. Alabama then fired the guy who did it, which shows institutional control.
It's not like this is the first time this has happened in college football. It's happened before, we know what to expect.
-1. Provide link and I will believe you and dismiss my comments.
2. They may not have LIC. But they may have violated a rule on a one time basis. These are completely unrelated as far as this particular alleged violation suggests.
1. Provide link and I will believe you and dismiss my comments.
2. They may not have LIC. But they may have violated a rule on a one time basis. These are completely unrelated as far as this particular alleged violation suggests.
-
bigger deal is it is at least 2 minor violations discovered in the last 60 days. NCAA has no choice, but to do a proctology exam of Alabama.