Sidney didnt even make the All-Freshman SEC team

[Coach34]

.</p>

 

[Shmuley]

nm

 

[jeremyrbrown]

nmnm

 

[Sutterkane]

[No message]

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

lolku

 

[Coach34]

this thread will probably get longer</p>

 

[dawgatUSM]

.

 

[GloryDawg]

bd

 

[msudeltadawg1971]

since he was on suspension, he lost a year of eligibility, he is considered a sophmore.

 

[drt7891]

fight hard for rebounds (by rebounds, I mean the Little Debbie Cakes in the locker room).

 

[dawgstudent]

don't you have 5 years to play 4? Or is just because he was suspended, it counts. Which to me is ridiculous.

 

[RocketCityDawg]

On his weekly TeeVee show. Answering an Ellis question, the coarch just referred to #1 as a freshman, a couple of times.

 

[msudeltadawg1971]

cost him 1 year, since he was suspended that counted as his first year or freshman year. This is his sophmore year, that is the way it was explained to me, I may not have understood everything correctly, but that's what I got from it. If he hadn't of been suspended he could have redshirted and had 4 more years but under suspension that is all null and void. I think!

 

[drt7891]

1) Some kind of "passive aggressive" move where he knows Sidney is not "considered" a freshman, but Stans will play stupid and say he is so he can try to keep him an extra year. Or 2) maybe he really doesn't have a clue.

 

[dawgstudent]

the NCAA and Donald Jackson had us by the nads. Nothing the university could do. They suspended him for the 2009-2010 season after the season ended. I think that is ********.

 

[fishwater99]

[No message]

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

nm

 

[tenureplan]

and followed that up with by all intents and purposes, he is really a freshmans.

 

[drt7891]

by the NCAA, it stated he would not get last year back in terms of eligibility. I figured Stans knew that, but I thought maybe he was trying to get around that.