“Why would they be punished if they weren’t involved in the scandal or the situation?”

Maybe it’s just me, but

The SEC also voted to allow players to transfer from one league school to another and become immediately eligible if the former program is facing an NCAA-mandated postseason ban.

That scenario is currently in play, as Ole Miss will be banned from a bowl game for a second consecutive season.

“If a kid goes to a school and gets caught up in doing something that is not of his doing, he should not be punished for something that the school did wrong,” first-year Texas A&M coach Jimbo Fisher told reporters in Destin. “He ought to have the ability to go out. I know that’s controversial, but those kids only have a four-year window.

In what other world besides the cloistered one SEC head football coaches inhabit does it seem controversial to let a kid out of a situation like that?

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under SEC Football

4 responses to ““Why would they be punished if they weren’t involved in the scandal or the situation?”

  1. Carter Burer

    I like to think of it as part of the punishment to the school doing wrong.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Uglydawg

    The players should have representation, and I mean effective representation and not just a figurehead or a lackey…on the NCAA board of asshats or whatever body makes decisions and rules.
    And since it’s really the players that necessitate even having an NCAA, then they should have at least 50% of the say on that board. They could vote in their own reps…lawyers, ex-college jocks, politicians, etc.

    Like

  3. The one controversial thing about it might be the whole Dan Mullen coaching his players to get Ole Miss put on probation thing…

    Like