Recent Comments
Let them play UVa every year
Indeed. Anyone jagoff can hate over twitter, it's nice to see that Shai already knows that responding with negativity won't get him anywhere.
Welcome to the family Shai.
A few of the guys undoubtably will have to prep or some would be willing to grey shirt, numbers always workout
Obviously they are either #MARSHAWN4HEISMAN, FORD4HEISMAN, ROGERS4HEISMAN, THEFABFIVE4HEISMAN (would VT get 5 trophies?), or even #FORTHDOWNQB4HEISMAN.
This Chris Spera guy needs to have the shit kicked out of him for saying something like that. Hope someone is already on that.
Does that mean we can now blame Glennon for that miserable LSU-Bama rematch MNCG??????
Kevin Bronson, DE out of FLA visiting in January. Good offer list. Bronson
look man. I apologize if I was condescending or insulting. But if you had read my comments you would have seen that I agree with all of this. My point was and remains that the NCAA has no right to limit me to speak to recruits and would never be able to police this. However, I always said they could punish those members of the NCAA. You just said the same thing. We agree. I think we can leave it at that.
My dad was stationed (edit: at Fort Hood, not Bliss) in the late 60s, and he pretty much said it's as bleak as can be for an installation. But being stationed in Texas, he did get to see the Longhorns beat Notre Dame to claim the National Championship that year.
"YOU!" -- macraw83
"They never went to court because the NCAA ended up barely punishing them." - You
Incorrect. Miami did in fact use the court to fight the NCAA. the threat of court is still using the court. The threat to take the NCAA to court is what avoided more severe punishment. It was, however, not that the NCAA was considering only minimal punishment so Miami didn't need to go to court.
Yes, what I said was poor wording. you can call me out on that, but it doesn't mean you are right or that what you are arguing about Miami avoiding penalties is accurate.
The NCAA has said that tweeting recruits is a violation. You disagree. I think the NCAA is better suited to analyze their own rule book. The "free speech" canard is exactly that. You're certainly free to tweet whatever you want but there may be consequenes for the school.
You are not a member of the NCAA. Schools are members. Schools are expected to monitor their athletes and intervene if they find out violations are occurring involving the athletes. Whether or not the NCAA actually wants that fight is another story, but the point is that you shouldn't tweet recruits and should instead leave it to the coaches. When boosters, fans, etc. break rules the schools are held accountable.
I'll add this before I bow out. I appreciate the factual nature of everyone's arguments, but tensions are starting to rise and I'd rather continue talking about football.
We do not, as Americans, have a right to say anything we want to anyone without consequence. The only protection we have is that the government cannot punish us for our opinions. If you believe you can say whatever you want, whenever you want, to whomever you want, that is simply not true and there is no protection anywhere for that. If you walk up to me and say, "I'm going to beat your face in," and expect that the police won't show up and arrest you for harrassment, making threats, and even assault, you'd be wrong, because you do not have an absolute right to say anything to anyone.
The NCAA has some boneheaded rules, and nothing will ever come of this.
Who's watching some bowl games today?
You could have saved yourself an aneurysm by understanding what was being said. NCAA has no power to stop my right to speech to any recruit as I am not a member of the NCAA nor have I ever signed a contract with them. And to save you further aneurysms I can also inform you that recent decisions in legal cases have supported employees that have received punishment from employers after posting something on Social Media during off-work hours. You can see this here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/22/technology/employers-social-media-poli...
and here:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/07/07/free-speech-righ...
and here:
http://www.convinceandconvert.com/social-media-policy-2/is-your-social-m...
and here:
http://hightalk.net/2011/02/09/can-companies-restrict-employees-use-of-s...
what you are talking about is employers restricting employees during work hours, which the they have every right to do. But not beyond that. And they certainly have no right to limit the freedom of speech of anyone not working for them.
So the questions you should be asking are these:
1) Are athletes always on the clock and not subject to normal work hours?
2) Are recruits, who have yet to sign into any contractual relationship with the NCAA, able to be limited at all?
I would say the answer to both is in face, NO.
Well, quantum mechanics tells me anything is possible...
"look at how Miami is fighting back against the sanctions the NCAA is handing to them. It's through the courts."- You
They did nothing through the courts. They never went to court because the NCAA ended up barely punishing them. The self-sanctions were laughable; the NCAA decided that they didn't want to draw more attention to their own incompetence.
"What you are attempting, and failing miserably, to argue is that Miami accepted the full sanctions that the NCAA proposed. "- You
http://college-football.si.com/2013/10/22/miami-hurricanes-ncaa-sanctions/
"The NCAA has been told Miami accepts its sanctions. No appeal from Hurricanes. This saga, by and large, ends today."
Please stop making things up.
So, there's still a chance then, right?
(sarcastika)
And before you try insulting someone you should do a more thorough google search on the subject you clearly don't understand:
Given her stance, if the Committee on Infractions does eventually hammer Miami ... will it lead to Miami v. NCAA?
"Reading between the lines, they've made it clear they're going to fight this after the hearing," said B. David Ridpath, a sports administration professor at Ohio University and outspoken critic of the NCAA's enforcement process. "It wouldn't surprise me if Shalala is positioning herself for a post-sanctions lawsuit, or, she may get them hauled up to Capitol Hill. I don't think it would take her more than a couple phone calls to make that happen."
Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130222/ncaa-mia...
and here:
http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2013/02/university_of_miami_recei...
and here:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/21733498/sha...
For now, the case seems to be headed for court -- or higher. Don't forget that Shalala is a powerful Democrat who was a former Secretary of Health and Human Services. Who knows how much NCAA damage that she could wreak with a second-term Democrat in the White House who has shown more than a passing interest in sports?
In fact, Miami consulted with there own legal offices as well outside counsel. What you are attempting, and failing miserably, to argue is that Miami accepted the full sanctions that the NCAA proposed. They did not. In fact, they largely escaped major sanctions by self-imposing sanctions in the interim, as stated here:
Thanks to "unprecedented" self-imposed sanctions, the Miami Hurricanes escaped additional harsh penalties from the NCAA as the Nevin Shapiro scandal presumably drew to a close Tuesday.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/9861775/miami-hurricanes-av...
and precisely because Miami fought back and threatened to go to court and even beyond to Supreme Court.
There's a chance, sure, but VT really doesn't take JUCO players. There was a thread all about it months ago. With the influx of quality RB recruits that we've got, I'd say the ship has absolutely sailed on Harris. Our class is filling up as it is.
Believe they beat Penn State no? With Hershel?
He received a five year ban from coaching in the NCAA in the fall-out from Tattoo-Gate.
My statement wasn't pointed specifically toward us, it was more on the entire history of Beamer's career (all the way back to Murray St). But in any case, commence "hug it out bitch."
Nah, it ain't that.
We all know why you were called a Debbie downer. I think it was in jest on both sides. Anyone here who doesn't know we have not pulled 12-0 is new or something.
No biggie.
As neither am I. I am pro upvote/gobbler leg (though I have on occasion tard fingered accidentally) and very much anti downvote/down gobbler leg. But it seems their are a few trolls that still won't come out of hiding.
I'm not sure if I love the uniforms or just have good memories of the guys that wore them.