(08-07-2013 10:35 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  NCAA probably ticked off because They didn't receive a cut of the pie if there was some.

Yeah, they would be more ticked if the merchandise signed was unofficial Chinese knock off product. That might get him in trouble alright!

I say he plays. But if I was A&M I'd put a body guard on him, not to protect Manziel, but to stop him when his idiot button is pushed.

(08-07-2013 04:34 PM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 12:54 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 11:56 AM)jml2010 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 11:07 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  He's going to **** the bed this year. It was a mistake giving the Heisman to a freshman.

aggie t-shirt fans won't like that one bit.

How did Tech handle it when their freshman QB won the Heisman?

Oh but wait, they didn't...remind me again how many Heisman winners Tech has?

As a grad of Texas Tech University, I'm glad we don't have to deal with a drama queen even it means no Heisman. I want players who have integrity and respect for the school. Most t-shirt fans could care less about that as long as they get to brag about W's and Heisman's.

10th, are you alive???

oh yes, but what is there to say when we've reached "I'm glad he doesn't play for us" and "our players have integrity and respect for the school"

I still enjoyed it though!

My question is the timing. If he starts any games this year and then is determined to be ineligible, that creates a forfeiture of games, in a year that they might be on top. That would worry me as a coach.

As a Longhorn fan it is amusing to watch this little drama unfold, as it always does at the aggie. However, I wouldn't mind something like this becoming the final straw in the proverbial camels back when it comes to getting rid of the NCAA.

The Big Ten is going to have a lot of reservations to allow it to become a true free for all. After all, they were the ones who pushed back on the recruiting rules that were supposed to take effect this year.

He won't play until the NCAA makes a ruling on way or the other. A&M is in the between the proverbial rock and a hard place.

Drama is all it is.

When ESPN is openly saying "We have absolutely no proof of any of this and neither does anyone else but are going to keep this going based on rumor, hearsay and conjecture because our ratings desperately need a story right now"...drama is all it is.

ESPN is acting like this happened last week.

It happened back in February and A&M investigated and cleared him in March and there was never any formal NCAA investigation (nor is there one going on now).

You have to ask yourself then why ESPN is bringing it up now when they know nothing will happen as a result of this story because the story was finished 5 months ago

I imagine that Slive will have a say. Newton was cleared to play by the SEC prior to being cleared by the NCAA. In other words Slive had to be satisfied that no wrong doing could be found or proven before he wanted Newton in a game. The reason is simple. Let's say the Aggies play with Manziel and beat Alabama. Then Manziel is declared ineligible and the Aggies must forfeit. That's fine for the record books but in the minds of the pollsters and selection committee it stands in their minds as a loss. Such a happening could preclude an SEC team from playing in the NC game thereby costing each member team almost 2 million in revenue. So if Slive feels nothing will come of this Manziel will play. Otherwise, the conference office will tell A&M to hold him out. If A&M doesn't comply the SEC will tell them they are on their own meaning no help with the charges from the conference office will be forthcoming and therefore A&M will be subject to full penalties if they are found guilty. Such an action would also kill good will from other conference schools. That is why when Newton was essentially given a green light by the SEC we knew the allegations could not stick. And yes, that means SEC investigations are frequently more thorough than the NCAA's.

(08-08-2013 02:44 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I imagine that Slive will have a say. Newton was cleared to play by the SEC prior to being cleared by the NCAA. In other words Slive had to be satisfied that no wrong doing could be found or proven before he wanted Newton in a game. The reason is simple. Let's say the Aggies play with Manziel and beat Alabama. Then Manziel is declared ineligible and the Aggies must forfeit. That's fine for the record books but in the minds of the pollsters and selection committee it stands in their minds as a loss.

It's also possible Rice could run the table (Houston, Kansas and Tulsa being the toughest other games on the schedule) after losing to A&M. How would the BCS look at a forfeit win when deciding who from the non-AQ gets the big payout game?

Also, I think the thing to watch as more of a thing about getting rid of the NCAA frankly is the Penn St situation. Delaney just yesterday praised how Penn St has handled themselves and was coy when asked about getting the penalties reduced.

It's a big roll of the dice and time is running out. Seems like new revelations are coming out all the time. Did the NCAA and A&M know about these supposed cell phone videos and audio?

Unless there is a money trail, Johnny will play. So will Bridgewater, Clowney, Miller and Hill.