forums

Matt porter source says regarding the rental car situation

brock said:
A UM source tells me resolution in rental car situation (involving Stacy Coley, Quan Muhammad, Jermaine Grace) is expected this weekend.

I'm hoping for no more than 1 or 2 games
Click to expand...


Of course it was going to be at the beginning of next week. You don't make your suspension known to the public until game week.
 
Advertisement
IMissCoker said:
so a kid accepting benefits ruins the "amateur" status of the game, not the coach making millions, not the TV deals worth hundreds of millions, but a kid accepting benefits

I hate this rule and anybody who supports it
Click to expand...

Try looking at the donut and not the hole?
 
It takes a sauce to know we will have conclusion to this issue sooner or later?

Great work Porter.
 
Us...Ole Miss...UGA...Louisville...it's always some scumbag with a story to sell, or some vindictive ***** that gasses up these investigations.
 
Jeeperaf said:
IMissCoker said:
so a kid accepting benefits ruins the "amateur" status of the game, not the coach making millions, not the TV deals worth hundreds of millions, but a kid accepting benefits

I hate this rule and anybody who supports it
Click to expand...

Excellent points. Keep in mind though, it isnt the NCAA who came up with these "rules", but rather the member institutions that make up the NCAA.

Im not defending the the NCAA in any way, shape, or form, but when the schools get fired up over enforcement of this rule or that, they only have themselves to blame for not working to change the rules.

Its wholly disingeneuous for these kids to play and generate the revenues they do for very adult businesses, and then get their eligibility put into question because a car dealer gave them a "brother-in-law" discount on a car rental.

Utter garbage.
Click to expand...

No, rules like this make sense. If there weren't rules in place like this, collegiate athletics would be a free for all with the large state schools dominating in a fashion like the days prior to scholarship limits. The reason schools instituted those limits was so the big state schools couldn't offer more scholarships than those smaller or less funded institutions. Prior to such limits, big schools would not only get the best talent, but the third and fourth best as well. They would get so many players the small schools were basically competing with today's D2 kids or whatever it's called.

You open up benefits and they will dominate big again. You could come here for a Chevy or go to UF, FSU, and even other state schools and get a luxury car. Oh, they give you a couple hundred at Miami, peanuts, here's a grand for the month.
 
Advertisement
At this point I would
Imagine we are waiting on the ncaa to agree if the punishment is good enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
canestim said:
The Franchise said:
I'm usually very upbeat while other poor-mouth UM, but I've got a terrible feeling on this.
Click to expand...

If they felt it was going to be significant suspensions they would have probably put the other guys as starters to get reps?
Click to expand...

Cling to that, friend.

This won't end well. Exotic car rental charges add up quickly at $500+ per day. "Rent" those fckers several times over the course of a period of time, and you can run up a crazy tab. Might be really tough for a guy from a financially disadvantaged background to pay back several g's in impermissible benefits.

The hope is they "test drove" a car for a day. Or that they impermissibly "rented" one for a day or two and just have to pay back a thousand or two thousand bucks and sit for a few games. Bad feeling here.

Also, I wouldn't be that surprised if there was more than the 3 guys mentioned involved. This is smelling like Butch Davis's opener with UNC a few years ago against LSU.
 
Just dont speak of it dont read it and let it gk away...the more attention the more steam it picks up.

Lock thread
 
Advertisement
The UNC case was an NCAA investigation and it hasn't gotten to that point here as far as we know. Six of those players were suspended for academic stuff not benefits as well
 
fincane said:
The UNC case was an NCAA investigation and it hasn't gotten to that point here as far as we know. Six of those players were suspended for academic stuff not benefits as well
Click to expand...

NCAA will have to be involved in an impermissible benefits case. UM will conduct its investigation, make its findings and present proposed penalties to the NCAA. UM will not under any circumstances mess around and punish the players on its own. If they ***** up and play guys that the NCAA thinks should be ineligible, then UM will have to forfeit any wins they have with those guys playing.

This isn't a case of a dude getting arrested for smacking a girl where there's no NCAA rule on it, and the school determines the penalty. This is an impermissible benefits case, and you lose eligibility when you're determined to have taken impermissible benefits. In order to re-instate that eligibility you need to get the NCAA involved. UM would be complete idiots to act on its own in determining the length of the suspension or restoration of eligibility.
 
I work two blocks away from that car rental service in South Beach that is no longer in business btw; the rates vary but a Lamborghini rental is about $200 for half an hour.
 
The Franchise said:
fincane said:
The UNC case was an NCAA investigation and it hasn't gotten to that point here as far as we know. Six of those players were suspended for academic stuff not benefits as well
Click to expand...

NCAA will have to be involved in an impermissible benefits case. UM will conduct its investigation, make its findings and present proposed penalties to the NCAA. UM will not under any circumstances mess around and punish the players on its own. If they ***** up and play guys that the NCAA thinks should be ineligible, then UM will have to forfeit any wins they have with those guys playing.

This isn't a case of a dude getting arrested for smacking a girl where there's no NCAA rule on it, and the school determines the penalty. This is an impermissible benefits case, and you lose eligibility when you're determined to have taken impermissible benefits. In order to re-instate that eligibility you need to get the NCAA involved. UM would be complete idiots to act on its own in determining the length of the suspension or restoration of eligibility.
Click to expand...

Good news is we will get an answer on who is playing the first game no later than the end of the first game. Per Porter Sauce
 
Back
Top