The NCAA’s position at the beginning of the season was that playing these guys under injunctions would open schools up to eligibility problems if they were later overturned. It remains to be seen if they pursue that, but the NCAA has maintained that they were not eligible and that they would ultimately prevail (which has happened on most appeals).
If I were a coach, I wouldn’t play them unless you had nothing to lose.
It absolutely should happen. TT knew the rules that they were participating under and chose to violate them (@uhlaw97 is “with malice a foresight” appropriate? ).
Why should they be rewarded for flaunting the rules when we’ve held out Boogie and the AZ State safety to stay within the rules? Would we have beaten the sand Aggies with them on the field? We’ll never know.
In 1988 I was playing high school football for Langham Creek. We had a salty team that year and made a deep run. We lost in the semifinals at College Station to Waco High. They weren’t big, but their defensive tackles were small and fast, and they blew us up.
A week later we were at the end-of-year banquet, and there was more news media in the room than usual. Word came out that Waco had started several players who were ineligible. They had to forfeit. We advanced to the area round against Plano and lost by a touchdown, back in Waco.
Side note from that College Station trip: Jackie Sherrill walked into the locker room we were using and pulled our star quarterback aside to talk to him.
1 Like
Bultokid
("I've Done More With Less, My Whole Life")
33
ZERO chance they will have to forfeit. He was legally eligible at time of game. This is a courts issue not him having someone takes tests etc