Does anyone wish we would just play Sidney? Even if there is some punishment laid down, you would think that his school-imposed 19 game suspension would cover it. And I don't think that there is any way that any of these supposed offenses could be linked to MSU. So the worst-case scenario is that State would have to forfeit games retro-actively. Who cares? You've seen how that effects Calipari's reputation, he loads up on recruits and gets calls from the president. College sports are such a farce it just doesn't matter anymore. To me, it makes us look worse that we have a guy on our team that can't play and the announcers bring it up during EVERY game. Just let the guy play and they will shut up about it.
At this point.....
- Thread starter Liverdawg
- Start date
%%%# the NCAA.. I went to the Memphis Tigers game Saturday... Guess what... they have 2 (YES TWO) Final Four Banners from seasons where the results were stripped away later... they advertise those Final Fours like crazy... Buy a Memphis T-**** and it says 3 Final Fours on it... The NCAA can't do **** about it. I'm sure they had to repay the cash but we can handle that for the pub.
Sure Ole Miss fans would give us hell just like we do on their fake *** National Titles but who gives a %%%#... Nationally it would always show up. Look at the 2007 (right?) Final Four on ANY website and Memphis still shows up. They aren't going to take the name out and leave it blank.
Just play Sidney.
Sure Ole Miss fans would give us hell just like we do on their fake *** National Titles but who gives a %%%#... Nationally it would always show up. Look at the 2007 (right?) Final Four on ANY website and Memphis still shows up. They aren't going to take the name out and leave it blank.
Just play Sidney.
part of me really wants us to play him and take our chances that we may have to forfeit whatever games we play him in....
the other part of me is affraid that IF we did play him, and it caused the NCAA to rule against sidney, that he and his family might have a case against the university that we caused the NCAA to rule that way because of us playing him before he was cleared.
i dont know....im just ready for it to all end....good or bad, just end.
the other part of me is affraid that IF we did play him, and it caused the NCAA to rule against sidney, that he and his family might have a case against the university that we caused the NCAA to rule that way because of us playing him before he was cleared.
i dont know....im just ready for it to all end....good or bad, just end.
We should definitely play him. They can't touch the 15 wins that we have already posted. The worst thing that can happen is having around 8-12 games taken away from us. It would be well worth it if we could make a deep run in the tourney with Sidney. It won't happen though, we play by the rules.</p>
How many times does it need to be said that Sidney HAS NOT BEEN DECLARED ELIGIBLE? If Rendardo so much as plays one second in any game before he is deemed eligible we will forfeit the game IMMEDIATELY. There won't be a damn thing retroactive about it. A lot of you seem to be confusing Renardo's situation with one in which a player is certified as eligible and violations are found later. This also completely ignores the repercussions of openly disregarding the NCAA's authority, as someone discussed in an earlier thread.
R
Rabid
Guest
When we joined, we agreed to follow NCAA rules and their decisions.
Sidney is and will be a great player who should have never handled his housing situation in California the way he handled it (the word he includes his mom and dad).
If anyone else did this, we'd be screaming for their heads if they played him. We need to.
1 - Leave it alone
2 - Let the school (MSU) do their job
3 - Cooperate with the NCAA
4 - Remember that Stans admitted it was a roll of the dice when he signed Sidney
5 - Do everything we can do to get him ready to play, short of hurting the team to help him.
6 - There is no#6
7 - Understand he is not going to play anytime in the next several weeks per the NCAA statement
8- Understand that those who saywe should play him regardlessare real dummies. I have often found that telling anyone to 17 themselves settles about anything.
9 - Work with the NCAA to hopefully get a resolution so that he will geton the floor by tournament time
10 - Wish him well for next year, because regardless, he will be somewhere else at the end of this season.
Sidney is and will be a great player who should have never handled his housing situation in California the way he handled it (the word he includes his mom and dad).
If anyone else did this, we'd be screaming for their heads if they played him. We need to.
1 - Leave it alone
2 - Let the school (MSU) do their job
3 - Cooperate with the NCAA
4 - Remember that Stans admitted it was a roll of the dice when he signed Sidney
5 - Do everything we can do to get him ready to play, short of hurting the team to help him.
6 - There is no#6
7 - Understand he is not going to play anytime in the next several weeks per the NCAA statement
8- Understand that those who saywe should play him regardlessare real dummies. I have often found that telling anyone to 17 themselves settles about anything.
9 - Work with the NCAA to hopefully get a resolution so that he will geton the floor by tournament time
10 - Wish him well for next year, because regardless, he will be somewhere else at the end of this season.
I thought that he was declared "Ineligible due to non-response" before the season started or very early in the season. That was the same time that the NCAA said that he could practice with the team but could not travel or play in games. If that's the case, playing him would result in an immediate loss. Even still, the fact remains that a player has to be ruled eligible before participating in games. It's not a situation where Sidney is eligible to play simply because he hasn't been ruled ineligible. He must be cleared before playing. This isn't a Derrick Rose type case. Rose was cleared to play, so he was "eligible" at the time of all the games that he played in. The NCAA then learned of new evidence, and went back and ruled that he should not have been eligible.