I doubt Renardo Sidney ever plays a minute of basketball for us. If only Veazey weren't so negative in his reporting we might have had a chance to get him
eligible.
0 Kudo
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 patdog
|
Veazey's latest blog doesn't look good at all. |
Lead | ||
|
Posts: 11692 06/25/09 05:24 PM |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
DynamicDawg |
I never understood the optimism. | #1 | ||
|
Posts: 684 06/25/09 05:28 PM |
I never thought there was more than a 10% chance that he ever would make it to campus.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
patdog |
I initially thought it was more like 50-50. | #2 | ||
|
Posts: 11693 06/25/09 05:38 PM |
And I figured it was kind of an all upside and no downside deal. If he's eligible, we get a great player for a year, maybe even two. If not, we've
lost nothing.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
maroonmania |
I still think there is an excellent chance that Sidney plays... | #3 | ||
|
Posts: 809 06/25/09 05:48 PM |
at SOME point next season, however, the NCAA has set this up perfectly for them. By asking for something they know the Sidneys will never disclose, that being
personal bank records, they have essentially set this up to hold Sidney hostage for as long as they see fit. All they have to keep saying is that Jackson has
not provided all the documentation asked for and then keep dragging this out as long as they see fit.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
DawgNsuds |
Don't know if he will get in or not | #4 | ||
|
Posts: 469 06/25/09 05:49 PM |
But no way would I give the NCAA access to my bank records. Athletic Scholarships are not based on financial need. To me the NCAA should have the burden of
proof. It should not be incumbent upon the family to prove it's innocence here. What will they ask for next?
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
2thdoc44 |
A question for the attorneys here... | #5 | ||
|
Posts: 303 06/25/09 06:56 PM |
Speaking of burden of proof, who has it here?...the NCAA or the Sydney family? Especially when it comes to disclosing info that they may not have to legally
provide.
I don't know anything about the law when it comes to personal info that one party "requires" or requests before a decision can be made. Can they just say he's ineligible because they didn't get what they requested or can they just wait forever before making a ruling? |
|||
|
|
||||
|
goindhoo |
#6 | |||
|
Posts: 112 06/25/09 07:05 PM |
I would venture to guess that anyone seeking to play collegiate sports agrees to the terms and conditions of the NCAA which probably includes furnishing them
with any information they request which would be relevant to the eligibility of the athlete. As long as they could provide a reasonable basis for why the info
would be pertinent to determining eligibility, they are probably entitled to it.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
GroveHard |
The NCAA is ridiculous... | #7 | ||
|
Posts: 110 06/25/09 07:23 PM |
but unfortunately this is not a court of law and there is no presumption of innocence. Courts have consistently held that there is no right to participate in
intercollegiate athletics. If you want to play, you have to play by their arbitrary, disproportionately applied, archaic, hypocritical rules.
 |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Homer J Simpson IV |
While the NCAA is ridiculous on several levels... | #8 | ||
|
Posts: 19 06/26/09 12:45 AM |
please correct me if I am mistaken on some of the things I've heard about Sydney.
1. Dirt poor in Mississippi 2. Move to California from Mississippi and father is given job with Reebok while Renardo is still in high school, presumably to ensure Reebok has the inside track to sign him when the time comes. 3. Sydney is dead set on USC (the same school O.J. Mayo committed with a phone call to a coach he never spoke with and a campus he never visited) or UCLA before both back off, paving the way for him to commit to and sign with MSU. Seems to me where there is smoke there is fire. I say this not as an Ole Miss fan, but as a sports editor that sees two high profile schools (one with arguably the best basketball tradition in the country) run for the hills screaming from a top, national, difference-making, prized recruit. All things even and on the level, every coach at every school in the country, including Pat Summit, would give their left to nut to have him for a year. Let me also add, I could buy that everything was on the level right up until USC (mainly for the same reason I listed above) and UCLA backed off at the end. My money says he already has a deal with Reebok and an agent to boot, and it may be best not to fight the NCAA on this one. It's kind of like Alabama appealing its slap on the wrist. Not smart enough to take the small punishment and move on. Keep backtalking, and five across the eyes and a belt quickly enter the picture.
Last Edited By: Homer J Simpson IV 06/26/09 12:51 AM.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
TBonewannabe |
You are wrong about it not being worth it. | #9 | ||
|
Posts: 700 06/26/09 05:17 AM |
If he lives up to potential, he could be the difference in the Sweet Sixteen and the Final Four. We lose nothing either way, either he is eligible or not. I
don't think him not going to USC is that suspicious since they might have had a clue about USC possibly not being eligible for the tourney his freshman
year (which could be his only year). Who is to say that he liked UCLA better than MSU. It is pretty much a given that Stans has been recruiting him longer
than any other coach in the country. All that said I could understand people being suspicious about the whole situation but I would guarantee that it
isn't as close to being as wrong as Tee Martin getting a couple thousand dollars from a UT booster and the NCAA having the wire transfer and giving them a
free pass.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
patdog |
I don't think there's any doubt he's taken a lot of money from a lot of people. | #10 | ||
|
Posts: 11697 06/26/09 08:15 AM |
Agents, USC boosters, UCLA boosters, and who knows who else. But I don't see how any of that could really hurt us. If all that stuff makes him
ineligible, what have we lost? Nothing. And if we get lucky, well that would be great.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
8Dog |
Agree... | #11 | ||
|
Posts: 6578 06/26/09 08:36 AM Message Board Hero |
at the very least, we open up a scholarship to sign one of the rising MS guys (may do that anyway if Sidney is one and done).
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
fishwater99 |
I think the NCAA hopes to get USC or UCLA through Sidney... | #12 | ||
|
Posts: 2488 06/26/09 08:58 AM Lives and Dies by Repeat Posting
|
Floyd has already taken the fall for USC. No way Sidney rats them out b/c he would then be ineligible to play in college. The NCAA is on a fishing
expedition, if they had anything at all, they would have already ruled on him. I see them dragging this out as long as possible. Not looking good for him
playing at MSU ever. The good thing is that we are clean on this one.
MSU Basketball: No longer living and dying by the 3 ball.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
lawdawg02 |
and, those rising MS guys... | #13 | ||
|
Posts: 2898 06/26/09 09:09 AM One Call, That's All
|
have been quoted as saying "wow - state signed sidney. that's huge."
even if sidney never plays a game at the hump, his signing has shown the rising stars that we are serious players in NCAA basketball (except in march...). we need to have a good run this year to show success on the court. call me overly optimistic, but we could have one of the top classes in the country in 2011 by just signing players from our home state. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
GroveHard |
They will drag it out.. | #14 | ||
|
Posts: 111 06/26/09 10:33 AM |
My guess is that they delay long enough to prevent him from enrolling thereby avoiding having to actually render a decision on his eligibility at least until
they can dig up/invent a violation. See the Powe saga.
Edited: Nevermind. The delay tactic probably only works in an academic dishonesty scenario, and I'm assuming State will admit him even though he's being questioned. Anybody know whether there will be a hang up in his admission?
Last Edited By: GroveHard 06/26/09 10:37 AM.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
