Diagne | Page 40 | Syracusefan.com

Diagne

Day2 said:
If they were made aware, then why hasn't there been a ruling? Seems like those events should be one and the same, or at least within a few hours of each other.

When did he enroll?
Expand...

Why indeed?
 
jordoo said:
Why indeed?
Expand...

This is spinning into a da vinci code situation.

The di agne code.

And we can guess who would be cast as the perverted clergyman.

All roads lead to Rome.
 
Day2 said:
I couldn't disagree more. I think what we know does line up with the information. Pretty well, actually. Doesn't mean there aren't other possibilities, but the coach's story fits.
Expand...
what do we know that lines up with the information? The only information out there has been the coach. And he and PJ have a horse in this race and have another JUCO kid in their stable. That's what we know.
 
RF2044 said:
Just to be clear, I've qualified that by acknowledging that it was based upon what was being reported. I strongly believe that there must be other issues that just aren't being expressed by SU or the HS coach. Otherwise, if it was really just about one course, he would bang it out at a prep school and be here in December. Something doesn't add up. And I'm guessing it has to do with information that isn't public.
Expand...
Bingo!
 
That makes more sense to me. If the rumors are true, I can't understand why the ncaa would rule a 14 year old inelgible 4 years later for a class he took in Africa, and why we wouldn't be fighting alot harder if that was the case.

I was always under the assumption we fought alittle for Obokoh, Roberson, and Fab. I haven't heard any news of us fighting for Diagne.

I remember that old story a few years back where a 4 star 20-25 year old recruit posed as a highschool player.
All kind of crazy things happen.
 
Last edited:
I''m not sure i understand the objections to the NCAA being responsible for clearing high school athletes. If not them, then who? Shirley, no one's suggesting it should be up to the individual (self-serving, corrupt/corruptible) colleges. Right?

The $70 fee... A big deal? We should probably expect the organization has enough money to not need to have hands in the kids' pockets. They could simply pass the expense over to the advertisers and venues, but $70 isn't really that significant.

As for the 'timeliness' of their responses, i would think it's not really all up to them. They're likely dealing with back-and-forth stuff between the student, the school, etc., and each party involved probably has to be given a certain amount of time to respond and comply. Add up all those 'deadlines' and you have a protracted wait for the fans who probably really have no justification for demanding to know what's going on (specifically) with a kid's transcripts.
 
Zelda Zonk said:
I''m not sure i understand the objections to the NCAA being responsible for clearing high school athletes. If not them, then who? Shirley, no one's suggesting it should be up to the individual (self-serving, corrupt/corruptible) colleges. Right?

The $70 fee... A big deal? We should probably expect the organization has enough money to not need to have hands in the kids' pockets. They could simply pass the expense over to the advertisers and venues, but $70 isn't really that significant.

As for the 'timeliness' of their responses, i would think it's not really all up to them. They're likely dealing with back-and-forth stuff between the student, the school, etc., and each party involved probably has to be given a certain amount of time to respond and comply. Add up all those 'deadlines' and you have a protracted wait for the fans who probably really have no justification for demanding to know what's going on (specifically) with a kid's transcripts.
Expand...
 
jsshap said:
On the first point, I have no idea, but I applaud you for being one of the few people who can beat the drum on point #1 while at the same time acknowledging the likelihood of point #2.

The mass of posters who are willing to discard common sense and quickly find comfort in the notion that anything bad that happens to SU is solely attributable to the inept, vindictive NCAA rather than the school or the player is really quite amazing.
Expand...

Jsshap... have you lost your mind son? The Cuse can do no wrong... EVER. period.

Thank you very much for entertaining the merits of this PSA.

signed,
ForeverCuse4evrRight!
 
Flacusian said:
Jsshap... have you lost your mind son? The Cuse can do no wrong... EVER. period.

Thank you very much for entertaining the merits of this PSA.

signed,
ForeverCuse4evrRight!
Expand...
Right, cuz there's all kinds of information available substantiating what exactly has prevented Diagne from being at SU this year.
 
rrlbees said:
Here's a fact you forgot. The NCAA isn't screwing the kid.
Expand...
Is your feeling primarily based on things you have heard or because he enrolled in JUCO (i.e. equals more than one class involved)?
 
It makes me sad that this is now the most posted in thread in this board's history
200.gif
 
jordoo said:
Bold section one is hearsay and I would ask by who's standards and then wonder if that is not exactly what is being questioned by the NCAA.

Bold section two has no way of being verified and is not information from SU, Diagne nor the NCAA.

These two bases for forming your conclusions are unable to be verified by us that I know of. I think a case can be made for what you are saying but I don't think that there is any actual verified information backing that up.
Expand...

And Bold Section One is not consistent with the hearsay I received.
 
pearl31 said:
I'm glad you're honest about what you received actually is.
Expand...

95% of the information on this board is hearsay, as that term is defined. Hearsay is not admissible in court for a variety of reasons, namely the lack of opportunity to cross examine the person who made the statement being offered, but that does not mean most hearsay is not reliable in everyday life, contrary to popular opinion that it is like a black mark on the validity of the information.
 
Orangezoo said:
He was deemed ineligible to participate in any board activities by the NCAA. The NCAA claims that it is possible his email address could possibly be spam but they are still investigating.
Expand...

Didn't he cut a deal with the PPP and get a new handle. rrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

(Poster Protection Program)
 
jordoo said:
Didn't he cut a deal with the PPP and get a new handle. rrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

(Poster Protection Program)
Expand...

Not unless he changed allegiances to Kentucky.
 
jsshap said:
95% of the information on this board is hearsay, as that term is defined. Hearsay is not admissible in court for a variety of reasons, namely the lack of opportunity to cross examine the person who made the statement being offered, but that does not mean most hearsay is not reliable in everyday life, contrary to popular opinion that it is like a black mark on the validity of the information.
Expand...
Agreed.
And unsubstantiated hearsay can be countered with other unsubstantiated hearsay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
    • Like
One interesting McCord thought
2 3
Replies
71
Views
5K
bnoro
bnoro
JJReddawg
    • Don't Like
    • Wow
This Seems Concerning
Replies
3
Views
602
Trueblue25
Trueblue25
U
The new FB rules
Replies
0
Views
324
upperdeck
U
CuseTroop
    • Like
OT- Northern Lights
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
Eric15
Eric15
stuckinbig11
    • Wow
    • Like
    • Don't Like
OT: update on Asheville
Replies
6
Views
952
Cusefan0307
Cusefan0307

Forum statistics

Threads
170,310
Messages
4,884,081
Members
5,991
Latest member
Fowler

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
21
Guests online
1,051
Total visitors
1,072
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom