Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I mean how does the NCAA not investigate Tx Tech at this point after these comments and actions. Did they intentionally try to cover up their acquisition of someone who bet on his own team (the Pete rose sin), and now is the institution trying to circumvent the NCAA on protecting the literal integrity of sports? This is lowkey worse than what SMU did. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

How would you feel if you learned that some Texas starting player had bet on that NC game against Alabama? Not good at all. This cannot be allowed to stand.

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, TexTheHorn24 said:

I mean how does the NCAA not investigate Tx Tech at this point after these comments and actions. Did they intentionally try to cover up their acquisition of someone who bet on his own team (the Pete rose sin), and now is the institution trying to circumvent the NCAA on protecting the literal integrity of sports? This is lowkey worse than what SMU did. 

I feel like you have to include IU AND Cincy in that too. There’s no way they didn’t know about this.
I agree it’s worse than SMU especially in the day and age of NIL and rev share. They broke the rules and deserved to be punished, but they weren’t the only ones doing exactly the same thing. Ahem, Miami, Florida State, OU, TAMU to name a few. 
This isn’t tampering or giving someone’s mom a house this is one individual who screwed up and Tech is willing to risk all credibility and integrity they have trying to get a player back that should be banned for life. 
It’s not about the kid at this point it’s about what their actions show the world and the other players. Take care of the kid if he’s really struggling that bad, but the best live and care is accountability for your actions. You committed a cardinal sin in sport, and you must suffer the consequences. At no point has anyone ever argued that the NCAA’s stanch on gambling is too harsh or antiquated. 

Edited by Alex Butler
Posted

Genuinely if I was a Tech fan I would boycott/never root for Tech football after their statement today saying they’re going to appeal the decision. 
This dude bet on his own team, this is a absolute joke.

Posted
1 hour ago, Alex Butler said:

I feel like you have to include IU AND Cincy in that too. There’s no way they didn’t know about this.
I agree it’s worse than SMU especially in the day and age of NIL and rev share. They broke the rules and deserved to be punished, but they weren’t the only ones doing exactly the same thing. Ahem, Miami, Florida State, OU, TAMU to name a few. 
This isn’t tampering or giving someone’s mom a house this is one individual who screwed up and Tech is willing to risk all credibility and integrity they have trying to get a player back that should be banned for life. 
It’s not about the kid at this point it’s about what their actions show the world and the other players. Take care of the kid if he’s really struggling that bad, but the best live and care is accountability for your actions. You committed a cardinal sin in sport, and you must suffer the consequences. At no point has anyone ever argued that the NCAA’s stanch on gambling is too harsh or antiquated. 

I’m going to laugh until I wet myself if IU and Cincinnati self-report, issue statements in support of the NCAA’s gambling bylaws, and pledge to cooperate with any NCAA investigation.

Posted
4 hours ago, TexTheHorn24 said:


sorsby does the “I’m magically cured now” act to save face and try and keep his 5+ Million dollar deal

Not to pile on the guy, but you don't fix addiction in 30-40 days. I've seen it in my own life with people around me, they relapse all the time, have to fight the addiction daily, etc. He's just going to magically "heal" in a short time frame and then jump straight back into the beast with zero temptation? I don't think so. 

Posted
5 hours ago, Hank South said:

President Schovanec, your letter does one thing with absolute clarity: it proves the NCAA was right.

You describe a quarterback who needs clinical care, digital monitoring, blocked gambling access, and financial supervision - and then you frame his ineligibility as some kind of injustice.

You didn’t argue against the ruling. You validated it.

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.