I second this. Glad he didn't waffle on what he told the NCAA. And much as I hate to compliment the NCAA for anything, I appreciate the NCAA recognizing and "rewarding" his forthrightness by not suspending him for as long as they could have.I would like to congratulate Marcell Dareus, on being a stand up guy with the integrity to be completely forthcoming on exactly what happened. ...
Agree! And, because there were two trips or as HSV says--maybe three involved, the suspension seems pretty light. Since mitigating circumstances obviously would vary from player to player, it will really be interesting to see how many games the others get.:conf2:Either way, I'm happy to have a decision. One game or two, either is better than four.
Silentsam, check your sarcasm meter......Actually, thats the one thing they can't do. The committee that hears the appeals can do pretty much anything besides increase the penalty.
I agree. In fact, with the amount being $1700, I see this being a very fair ruling.The Committee on Appeals can only modify a sanction by a finding that the Committee on Infractions has abused its discretion in reaching the conclusions. It's really hard for me to see "abuse of discretion" in this finding...
It could. But it seems that $1700 or so almost had to represent some kind of benefits received from at least an additional trip.The Opening Drive's lawyer said today he thinks the appeal is Saban's way of being coy. He suggested that Saban was doing it to make Penn State game plan for him even if he doesn't play.
Also, just a thought but could he have gone to Miami a time (or two) to hangout with Austin. The final time was the party in which he realized it wasn't what he thought it was.