|
Title: Sports Illustrated Post by: hscoach on November 06, 2017, 04:37:59 PM Reporting Bama players in 2009 took money for autographs/ signing memorabilia.
Title: Re: Sports Illistrated Post by: 2Stater on November 06, 2017, 04:57:27 PM Barrett Sallee on Finebaum said that it won't amount to anything, even though there will be those who try to make a big deal out of it. Hope he's right.
Title: Re: Sports Illistrated Post by: McBaman on November 06, 2017, 07:44:41 PM A little more info...
http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2017/11/ex-alabama_player_tells_alcom.html#incart_river_index Title: Re: Sports Illistrated Post by: 2Stater on November 06, 2017, 07:58:44 PM Quote Even if true, these alleged violations occurred outside the NCAA's four-year statute of limitations. Yep, nothing to see here. Move along. Title: Re: Sports Illustrated Post by: XBAMA on November 07, 2017, 07:27:58 AM SI sucks , just trying to boost their pitiful rag magazine out of the gutter ... :lol2:
Title: Re: Sports Illustrated Post by: McBaman on November 07, 2017, 08:09:12 AM SI sucks , just trying to boost their pitiful rag magazine out of the gutter ... :lol2: To me, just another example of the ongoing erosion of journalistic skills and standards. It isn't hard to find that these charges, even if true, are outside the 4-year NCAA window. But the lazy reporter didn't check on that factoid, and the editor didn't push him (or her??) to do it. Title: Re: Sports Illustrated Post by: XBAMA on November 07, 2017, 09:12:34 AM SI sucks , just trying to boost their pitiful rag magazine out of the gutter ... :lol2: To me, just another example of the ongoing erosion of journalistic skills and standards. It isn't hard to find that these charges, even if true, are outside the 4-year NCAA window. But the lazy reporter didn't check on that factoid, and the editor didn't push him (or her??) to do it. exactly ! :worship: trying to ride Bama's coat tails again .... maybe if they would start firing some of the halfazz reporters we could get some better ones ... Title: Re: Sports Illustrated Post by: 2Stater on November 07, 2017, 09:20:03 AM SI sucks , just trying to boost their pitiful rag magazine out of the gutter ... :lol2: To me, just another example of the ongoing erosion of journalistic skills and standards. It isn't hard to find that these charges, even if true, are outside the 4-year NCAA window. But the lazy reporter didn't check on that factoid, and the editor didn't push him (or her??) to do it. ESPN was on it like me on a biscuit earlier this morning. Headline read something like, "Bama embroiled in autograph for pay scandal". Looks like they've since pulled it. The only thing I can find now is the one from yesterday. Title: Re: Sports Illustrated Post by: XBAMA on November 07, 2017, 09:42:55 AM SI sucks , just trying to boost their pitiful rag magazine out of the gutter ... :lol2: To me, just another example of the ongoing erosion of journalistic skills and standards. It isn't hard to find that these charges, even if true, are outside the 4-year NCAA window. But the lazy reporter didn't check on that factoid, and the editor didn't push him (or her??) to do it. ESPN was on it like me on a biscuit earlier this morning. Headline read something like, "Bama embroiled in autograph for pay scandal". Looks like they've since pulled it. The only thing I can find now is the one from yesterday. if espn didn't have ball games on I would never watch their sorry azz's Title: Re: Sports Illustrated Post by: 2Stater on November 07, 2017, 09:57:34 AM SI sucks , just trying to boost their pitiful rag magazine out of the gutter ... :lol2: To me, just another example of the ongoing erosion of journalistic skills and standards. It isn't hard to find that these charges, even if true, are outside the 4-year NCAA window. But the lazy reporter didn't check on that factoid, and the editor didn't push him (or her??) to do it. ESPN was on it like me on a biscuit earlier this morning. Headline read something like, "Bama embroiled in autograph for pay scandal". Looks like they've since pulled it. The only thing I can find now is the one from yesterday. if espn didn't have ball games on I would never watch their sorry azz's You and me both, X! Title: Re: Sports Illustrated Post by: pmull on November 07, 2017, 12:21:16 PM SI sucks , just trying to boost their pitiful rag magazine out of the gutter ... :lol2: To me, just another example of the ongoing erosion of journalistic skills and standards. It isn't hard to find that these charges, even if true, are outside the 4-year NCAA window. But the lazy reporter didn't check on that factoid, and the editor didn't push him (or her??) to do it. ESPN was on it like me on a biscuit earlier this morning. Headline read something like, "Bama embroiled in autograph for pay scandal". Looks like they've since pulled it. The only thing I can find now is the one from yesterday. if espn didn't have ball games on I would never watch their sorry azz's You and me both, X! Their 30 for 30 series are pretty good. I love the ESPN Watch app. I watched the Bama exhibition basketball game last night. Last weekend I watched West Alabama play a Division II football game. In the spring you can watch all SEC baseball and softball games. I like ESPN. I just do not watch Sports Center and I am not sure when poker became a sport. |