The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Is it, what is it?
Is it, what is it?
You want it all, but you can't have it.

Yes, LSU can demolish UAB, but it likely won't for most of the game anyways. Les Miles is probably thinking of his own approaching conference schedule and wants, like UAB, to not get anyone hurt that he values for SEC play. I expect him to substitute early and often if LSU gets ahead by 2 scores. Who does LSU play the next 2 weeks?

In 2000, the LSU coach played a retread QB (Josh Booty) who probably never saw the field again that season and LSU won all, or nearly all, of their remaining conference games that year.

(09-03-2013 12:41 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  Yes, LSU can demolish UAB, but it likely won't for most of the game anyways. Les Miles is probably thinking of his own approaching conference schedule and wants, like UAB, to not get anyone hurt that he values for SEC play. I expect him to substitute early and often if LSU gets ahead by 2 scores. Who does LSU play the next 2 weeks?

In 2000, the LSU coach played a retread QB (Josh Booty) who probably never saw the field again that season and LSU won all, or nearly all, of their remaining conference games that year.

They play Kent State after us, then they host Auburn.

(09-01-2013 09:10 AM)WesternBlazer Wrote:  Does Backman have to sit the 1st half of the LSU game?

From what I understand about the new rule, is yes he'll have to sit the first half. I was watching some game (I thin Cal/NW) Sat night & they were talking about some other ejection that happened that day & what the player will have to do. There might be more to it but I think you have to sit out a "game" meaning if you're done early in one game you get time served from that game subtracted from the next. Not positive as I've not fully heard an explanation on the rules for it just what I mentioned above.

(09-01-2013 01:06 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  I think we will play LSU tough and if we are hanging around late who knows? Maybe lightning does strike twice.

Les Miles, with all of his successes, one (potential) documented loss to UAB.

Would anyone--even your average drooling SEC homer--would anyone be totally surprised at this man having several losses on his record that should have probably been wins?

#TheyArentPlayedOnPaper

(09-03-2013 01:01 PM)blazerwkr Wrote:  

(09-01-2013 09:10 AM)WesternBlazer Wrote:  Does Backman have to sit the 1st half of the LSU game?

From what I understand about the new rule, is yes he'll have to sit the first half. I was watching some game (I thin Cal/NW) Sat night & they were talking about some other ejection that happened that day & what the player will have to do. There might be more to it but I think you have to sit out a "game" meaning if you're done early in one game you get time served from that game subtracted from the next. Not positive as I've not fully heard an explanation on the rules for it just what I mentioned above.

So, illegally blocking a player = signing 100's of autographs for payment in the eyes of the NCAA

Depends. Are you a serious revenue generator?

It's a half unless I am grossly mistaken. He does not have to sit out. His suspension was the second half of the Troy game. If he would have committed the penalty in the second half of the Troy game he would have to sit the first half of LSU.

2. Targeting fouls: automatic ejection, part II

A player is at great risk of being ejected for a launch (leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make contact in the head or neck area); a crouch (followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with contact at the head or neck area); leading (with helmet, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with contact at the head or neck area); or lowering (the head before attacking by initiating contact with the crown of the helmet). Should a player be ejected in the second half or overtime, he also is suspended for the first half of the next game.

(09-01-2013 01:06 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  I think we will play LSU tough and if we are hanging around late who knows? Maybe lightning does strike twice.

if it does I bet they never play us again

I found this article out there today. Should he be reinstated after a review of the play or was the play reviewed in game???

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/least-6-tar...ncaaf.html

(09-03-2013 03:00 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 01:01 PM)blazerwkr Wrote:  

(09-01-2013 09:10 AM)WesternBlazer Wrote:  Does Backman have to sit the 1st half of the LSU game?

From what I understand about the new rule, is yes he'll have to sit the first half. I was watching some game (I thin Cal/NW) Sat night & they were talking about some other ejection that happened that day & what the player will have to do. There might be more to it but I think you have to sit out a "game" meaning if you're done early in one game you get time served from that game subtracted from the next. Not positive as I've not fully heard an explanation on the rules for it just what I mentioned above.

So, illegally blocking a player = signing 100's of autographs for payment in the eyes of the NCAA

So you have proof that Manziel was paid to sign autographs? I keep telling everybody with this proof to provide it to the NCAA.

Again, the NCAA did not suspend Manziel, A&M recommended it and the NCAA agreed to close the case. I don't think anybody doubts that Manziel did this, but the NCAA can't just go around suspending players based on suspicions.

I don't have to provide any proof, but common sense tells me what was going on. If a player gets off of a plane, meets a total stranger and goes to his motel room to sign autographs, either he is getting paid or something else much more sordid is going on.

If its the latter, I'm sure that story would have broken by now.

Another indication is how Manzell seems to be thumbing his nose at the entire system. He's made it clear that he thinks he is above all rules and Texas A$M and the NCAA has made it clear he is right.

(09-03-2013 03:43 PM)blazerwkr Wrote:  I found this article out there today. Should he be reinstated after a review of the play or was the play reviewed in game???

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/least-6-tar...ncaaf.html

They reviewed the play as soon as it happened.

(09-03-2013 03:52 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:00 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 01:01 PM)blazerwkr Wrote:  

(09-01-2013 09:10 AM)WesternBlazer Wrote:  Does Backman have to sit the 1st half of the LSU game?

From what I understand about the new rule, is yes he'll have to sit the first half. I was watching some game (I thin Cal/NW) Sat night & they were talking about some other ejection that happened that day & what the player will have to do. There might be more to it but I think you have to sit out a "game" meaning if you're done early in one game you get time served from that game subtracted from the next. Not positive as I've not fully heard an explanation on the rules for it just what I mentioned above.

So, illegally blocking a player = signing 100's of autographs for payment in the eyes of the NCAA

So you have proof that Manziel was paid to sign autographs? I keep telling everybody with this proof to provide it to the NCAA.

Again, the NCAA did not suspend Manziel, A&M recommended it and the NCAA agreed to close the case. I don't think anybody doubts that Manziel did this, but the NCAA can't just go around suspending players based on suspicions.

Or even if there was proof. God! What would the advertisers do?

(09-03-2013 03:52 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  I don't think anybody doubts that Manziel did this, but the NCAA can't just go around suspending players based on suspicions.

The NCAA has put teams on probation and suspended players for a lot less than they have on Manzell.

(09-03-2013 08:44 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  

(09-03-2013 03:52 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  I don't think anybody doubts that Manziel did this, but the NCAA can't just go around suspending players based on suspicions.

The NCAA has put teams on probation and suspended players for a lot less than they have on Manzell.

Elaborate sir.

And with that said, I don't doubt for a minute Manziel is guilty.

Well even though it is hard to admit it, one example is Memphis in 2008. They had no proof that Rose didn't take his entrance exam, just a suspicion because there were some irregularities. Even though they had no direct proof and had even cleared him to play, they vacated the entire season.

The NCAA could have played "hardball" and suspended Manziel for the season or at least withheld a decision until the season was virtually over (See O'Brien @ UAB) keeping him sidelined for many games. The risk in doing that was that the Manziel family might have filed law suits against the school and the NCAA and forced testimony by all parties UNDER OATH (as in perjury for lying carrying fines and/or jail). Since the loud-mouth brokers had already admitted they had no objective evidence that they paid Johnny any money, they might be asked why they had made the charges in public in the first place. What if they said "Because this booster from Bama , or Texas or wherever paid me $200,000 to say that". What does the NCAA do then?

It was much better to end it all with a symbolic punishment and shut down the whole mess before any more "cans of worms had been opened". Neither did this "for Johnny", but for their own self interests and to stay out of legal quicksand.

(09-03-2013 10:23 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  Well even though it is hard to admit it, one example is Memphis in 2008. They had no proof that Rose didn't take his entrance exam, just a suspicion because there were some irregularities. Even though they had no direct proof and had even cleared him to play, they vacated the entire season.

That player was Rose, the only player who fits the description in the NCAA's findings. The committee ruled Rose ineligible because the Educational Testing Service invalidated his SAT score. The score was canceled in May 2008, a year after Rose took the test and after he finished his freshman season. The report said Rose did not cooperate with the NCAA and twice did not reply to requests to meet with the ETS.

That's a little different. We know what happens if you refuse to cooperate with the NCAA.