Confused

[PauliePeppas]

Espn is saying we played ineligible players like its a fact, so does this mean its only a matter of time wins are vacated bc ineligible is ineligible right? Or is espn clueless as usual

 

[jdubs30]

No, it doesn't. Ignore ESPN.

 

[Marsh01]

Espn is saying we played ineligible players like its a fact, so does this mean its only a matter of time wins are vacated bc ineligible is ineligible right? Or is espn clueless as usual

Wins are not going to be vacated because guys played after smoking pot. Gary McClain played the 85 FF against Memphis State zonked on coke and then SI did a 10 page story on it. Banner is still hanging. Take it easy...

 

[Garbs]

ineligible according to our own in house policy

 

[PauliePeppas]

Wins are not going to be vacated because guys played after smoking pot. Gary McClain played the 85 FF against Memphis State zonked on coke and then SI did a 10 page story on it. Banner is still hanging. Take it easy...

I am taking it easy, im simply asking why espn continues to say they were ineligible and i dont see how wins arent vacated if its true...i mean those are the rules correct?

 

[Marsh01]

I am taking it easy, im simply asking why espn continues to say they were ineligible and i dont see how wins arent vacated if its true...i mean those are the rules correct?

They are reporting based on what the story said. They are not making any words up and that wasnt an opinionated response.

 

[SourShoes]

pfft

 

[PauliePeppas]

Ok so than theres nothing to worry about i take it

 

[Orangemen]

ESPN is restating the salicious parts of someone else's reports.

I wouldn't start worrying about violations just yet.

Especially if SU reported this 'years ago' as Gross stated.

 

[Marsh01]

Ok so than theres nothing to worry about i take it

Nothing as far as I can see.