MiloMoon
- 70 comments
- 5 likes given
- 6 likes received
Bio not provided
I expected TN to lose this game or luck out with a win. The coach and team spent the last three days complaining about the NCAA, and getting prepared for Mercer. Mercer came in focused and ready to play, which is more than I can say for the Vols.
I love the people asking why the other plays did not result in a suspension. That is the decision of the league office, not a impartial website. I felt the hit should have resulted in a penalty, but anyone watching the NFL right now knows that officials blow calls, and I believe that they missed calling a penalty there. Full game suspension - I don't know. I am not the one making the decisions. However I look at the video and see the breakdowns and it is clear that there is helmet to helmet contact, which is what ALL levels of football are trying to stop. So if this suspension keeps another event like Tulane this past weekend from happening, then it is worth it.
I have no issue with the rule, and it will be a good thing in the long run. To many players are playing with lose helmets. This will drive the coaching staff to make sure players are wearing properly fitting helmets.
The Arkansas program is just snake bit right now. I feel sorry for them. I know we Vol Fans have paid our dues with Karma the past few years.
I have been calling for this for years. If all of the bowls would not sign on, I don't see why a group of mid level bowls could not get together and for some type of partnership with the conferences to create more interesting match ups. We can dream.
Memphis has always been a dirty city. This is nothing new.
Just goes to show that it does not matter if you are a football player, coach, or student - Geeks cannot dance.
@John at MrSEC I see both sides of the story. If this was just about horseplay on a jet ski, then it would be a non-issue. However Bray has a history going back three years of showboating and juvenile behavior. This is another just another non issue in a chain of non issues with Bray. This attitude will effect his paycheck at the next level. If he goes pro after this year, there will be a team or two that will pass on him because they don't want the next Ryan Leaf.
I am sorry. I see this whole PSU mess differently. I don't really see Paterno and the other powers to be as putting "program and school" first, but protecting themselves. There is evidence that there was claims against Sandusky before '98. There are people that were on record from '92, and now claims from before then. The Clery Act was passed in '91. If there was a claim against Sandusky from '92-98, which there is a good chance, and JoePa helped Sandusky cover it up, then Joepa would be in violation of state and federal laws and looking at jail time. JoePa might have thought he was helping his friend cover up a one time mistake, misunderstanding, false claim, etc. Then in '98 when another claim hit the fan - Sandusky had JoePa trapped. If JoePa turned him in, the Sandusky would have ratted him out and both of them would have gone to jail. If you were 70+ years old, knowing you should only have a few more years left on this earth, would you speak up and spend the rest of those years in jail, losing the fortune that you have built a lifetime building and see your beloved school raked through the mud, or would you try and cover up the mess one more time? We all hope that we would protect the kids, and suffer the fates, but we were not in JoePa's shoes at that moment in time. So in '98 he convinces the Powers to Be to help make the issue go away. JoePa stays out of jail (which he would have faced at that time) and PSU builds a fence around Sandusky to protect him, the kids, and the school. Then in '01 Sandusky strikes again. This time he not only has JoePa, but the school President, AD and many others caught in the cover up. Now it is not JoePa facing jail and losing everything they built, but most of the power structure at the school. Any wonder why Sandusky was able to keep all of those perks that we wonder why? He was blackmailing everyone to protect his turf. While people want to say that they were protecting the program and putting athletics before honor, it just does not ring with me. These men put themselves before the school, program and most importantly the kids. They not only protected Sandusky, but provided him the tools to continue his perverted acts. I have no love loss for PSU, Paterno and the other men that had a chance to stop Sandusky and put their own personal gain and power before the safety of kids.
On the other hand, the move the NCAA did worries me. I don't have issues with the actual punishments. I have issues with how fast they were handed out, and the appearance of bullying from the NCAA president to accept these penalties or else. What happens is more evidence comes out that is more damning that the Freeh report. The Freeh report is one team's investigation. There are still several trials to come. If more damning evidence comes out, will the NCAA pile on more punishments? What would constitute more punishment? We hope that this is a one of a kind case that will never be repeated on any scope, but where is the line drawn for the NCAA? I would have had no issue with the NCAA doing a starting point punishment like a post season ban for the up coming year and allowing all incoming recruits the chance to change their commitments without sitting out. They could let everyone know that the investigation is on going and more punishments are expected.
As for the death penalty, I don't see the NCAA ever handing it down again. Why? it punishes to many people and programs beyond the actual school. Think about how many business in Happy Valley are built around PSU 7/8 home games a year. Plus what of all the teams on their schedule having to replace a game at the last minute and the costs involved. What if OSU ended up losing a home game. The economic impact in Columbus (or Ann Arbor, Madison, Lincoln, etc.) would run in the 10's of millions of dollars. Why should those towns and economies be punished for a Penn St. matter? Do you think that there would be some major lawsuits against not only PSU, but the NCAA directly? What PSU received is the modern day version of the death penalty. It prevents teams from having to do last minute rescheduling. It will cripple the PSU program for a decade at least. But as a whole, will keep the economies in place and minimize the economic impact that a canceled season would impose on schools and cities that had no part in this mess.
Most people miss the entire timeline here and some of the logic behind JoePa's failed decisions. Sandusky did not just start in '98. If Joepa was aware of child abuse by Sandusky between '91 and '98 when the know actions were hitting the fan, then there was a known violation of the Clery Act. At that point, JoePa was not trying to protect his football program, but protecting himself and the school at large. Sandusky would have sold JoePa up the river. The Clery Act would have put JoePa in jail and could have brought sanctions on the school from the DOE. When it came up again in 2001 - Sandusky then not only had JoePa bent over a barrel, but also the whole school because the President, AD and more were now involved in the cover up. Were these men willing to spend 6-10 years in federal prison and bring sanctions by the DOE on PSU, just to what every claims that they would have done in the same situation. Joepa loved PSU more than anyone - He was PSU. He would never knowingly hurt PSU, so he stayed silent. He hoped that all of this would just blow over. It was not until Sandusky volunteered to coach at a local high school that he stepped out of PSU web of protection that he got caught. And once the thread was pulled the entire house of cards came down. So was there a competitive advantage gain? Depends on how you look at the matter. If PSU had been hit be DOE sanctions back in 98 or even 01 - would acredidations have been lost? PSU has had record growth over the past decade into one of the largest public research schools in the nation. That allowed Paterno to recruit great scholar athletes. I believe he was 2 B10 titles since 98, and several BCS bowl games in that same time frame. If Paterno had been fired in 98 or 01, like he should have been, would that have ever happened? If PSU was not the stellar rep school that it was up until Nov11, then would it have a recruiting advantage. Question - was it easier to recruit to PSU last year or this year. This covering up this crimes did give PSU and advantage. While I agree - the NCAA is stepping onto a slippery slope and needs to choose their words carefully not to be expected to rule on every major issue that pops up on campus.
IF I remember correctly, Paterno never wanted statues and the stadium named after him. He said he was not worthy. Of course we took that for him being a simple humble man. Now we know that he was telling the truth. He knew that he had to many Sanduskys in his closet and eventually the truth would come out.
I have no issues with the demotion. UT has lost it's shine over the past decade. We had trouble hiring and keeping coaches. Were not on the top of the list for most of the top recruits, and had generally stopped performing or acting like a top ten program. That said, I think it is just a temporary demotion. His - 100 football fans in North Dakota - argument would still be the same today as it was 5 years ago, and it will be five years from now. However saying that Tennessee is not one of the shining stars in college football is not hating, but truthful. We were also down in the late 70's and early 80's. Cycles happen, and hopefully we hit rock bottom last year and are on our way back up.
I remember the same thing being said about Addias a few years back at UT. I doubt it is the shoes.
John, there is a difference between the haves and have nots in the SEC. Most of the major have schools in the SEC try and schedule at least one high profile game OOC. I was one of the upset at buying out UNC group. It reeked of us running from a team. In hindsight, that game was winnable - which made it worse. Of course I was also one of the UT fans that understood how low the program was and that this up coming season was the best option for success over the past couple of years. Miss St. is one of the have nots in the SEC. As long as they have to climb over Bama, LSU, ARk, Auburn and now TAMU, they are going to schedule for a winning record. They are not going to be concerned with winning championships. That attitude would not fly at UT, Bama, UF, and the other big dog schools, but it does at Ole Miss, Miss St., KY, and Vandy. I would love to see Florida and UGA play outside of the Southeast sometime in my life.
UT has always had the largest recruiting budget in the SEC, that has never been a secret. There is a hidden cost. How are the scholarships handed out. UTAD pays for the full cost of scholarships. Since the majority of the athletes are out of state kids - the UTAD is paying out of state rates for scholarship. When schools that can recruit the majority of kids in state - LSU, UGA and UF recruit in state and are able to pay in-state rates for the scholarships. That in addition to the fact that UT does recruit nationally more than other programs in the SEC. Remember Washington DC is closer to Knoxville than Memphis.
@John at MrSEC John, I liked the ACC idea that you floated. Though I would prefer to see UT play Pitt instead of BC, but that is splitting hairs. However most of the SEC programs have and will be playing 9-10 BCS level schools a year. The same as other conferences. So we don't have a scheduling problem, we have a perception problem. It does not help the cause that UGA, USC, UF, and others rarely venture out of the south to play a game. I think that hurts the SEC perception worse than the actual schedules being played. It is going to be hard lining up a PAC school in the future. They are already committed to at least 10 BCS level games. Very few AD's are going to be willing to add number 11. So we either have to push to play more outside the conference or play more inside the conference. If we play more inside the conference, I don't see how that helps the over perception. I remember the old Big 8 days. You had Colo, Neb, and OU all top ranked and praised. They rarely played any tough games out of conference, even against now BCS level foes. A lot of times they would head off to the orange bowl and get beat. People would claim it was because they only played the other teams in conference and no one else. I can see the same perception happening to the SEC regardless if they play 9 conference games or schedule regional rivalries with ACC teams. At least some of the ACC teams would get them across the Mason-Dixon line.
John,
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the B1G has backed off going to nine conference games. The B1G is counting their 9th game the scheduled game with the PAC. I don't see how that is any different than the schedules put out by the SEC. 8 conference games and usually one BCS level OOC game. Some are built in like USC/Clem, FSU/UF and UGA/GT, but most of the big 6 football programs schedule at least one BCS level OOC every year.
I am personally not happy with the basketball schedule. I am wondering when the backlash will start regarding the Kentucky basketball fans will start. In the past month they have now ended to of their most popular rivalries - UT and Indiana. Also don't forget that they will not always be playing Vandy twice a year either, and I am sure that Kentucky fans were looking forward to playing Mizzou also. I wonder how long until there are complaints from the supporters that there are less and less big games in Rupp and more big games on neutral sites. When I was in school, it was the Wade Houston years. I never attended basketball games because the product was so bad on the court, except Kentucky. I would go to see a miracle (which did happen), and to experience what TBA could be if the team would actually win. Though it was usually filled with more Kentucky fans than UT fans during those times. The place was still electric and it made you want for more out of our basketball program.
Do you think that they might do the 1 permanent game, and the 4 home and home are based upon perceived strength for the upcoming year, not a set rotation? Coach Cal was talking about doing something close to the Big East does every year to make sure the better teams play each other more during the season and the weaker teams play each other to increase the chances of landing more teams in the tournaments, and increase the overall RPI of the conference.
Regardless, I am not happy about not playing UK in basketball every year.
@buddha22 I think the whole 6-1-1 is also a bridge until the next re-alignment wave hits in a year or two. The presidents know it is likely to happen, so why blow up the house and rebuild it this year, when you will just have to do it again in a couple of years. A big deal is being made out of not having a team visit but once every 12 years. I personally don't care how often we play LSU, ARK, Ole Miss, MSU (though I would like to play TAMU more, but that is just because I live in Houston). UT and LSU and Miss st. rarely played before 1992, and permanent rotations were started. As far as I am concerned, not playing the other division so much increases the chance that we will not have a repeat in the SECCG. That is a good thing in my book.
It could have been that Dooley and the UTAD stayed quite on the matter because of an on going police investigation. It could also be that Dooley just did not want bad press right now. The bigger question to character is how Dooley deals with Clear.