TSSAA visits Signal Mtn

[smeagle1]

This rule is in effect for educational needs, I would think that Tssaa rules are in place to overrule that regarding participating in athletics. I don't know the rules so maybe I'm wrong.

 

Pirate_Mike I don't know the TSSAA rule concerning this but I would love to be a lawyer for a kid that the TSSAA denied the opportunity to play while seeking a better education that is afforded to him by federal law. I would call it a retirement suit.

[smeagle1]

Didn't they lose this year?? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I beleive I already said he is at UT on an academic scholarship and made the roster as a walk on. Hence he isn't at SM this year he is at UT.

[PiRaTe._.MiKe]

Pirate_Mike I don't know the TSSAA rule concerning this but I would love to be a lawyer for a kid that the TSSAA denied the opportunity to play while seeking a better education that is afforded to him by federal law. I would call it a retirement suit.

Absolutely right!

[HatersHateTheEagles]

Well Notre Dame(The school who contacted TSSAA) is a private school. They don't play by the same rules so they don't have a complete understanding of the NCLB or transfer rules. Along with most of the posters on CoachT. They are sore losers and if they can't beat you on the field they are going to whine and cry about it somewhere else. In this case, SM would have to be oblivious to not make sure a kid like the one in question is legit. Keep Hatin!!! Heresay and rumors are nothing but an excuse so you can accept why you got beat. Keep Hatin and SM will keep winnin!! Haters Hate!

Edited October 7, 2011 by HatersHateTheEagles

[TheAmbassador]

If S.P. can play players that live in Ala. Then S.M. should be able to play players from Georgia!

 

South Pittsburg has ZERO players from Alabama. Please name just ONE. I'm waiting? Hello? Call em out and tell us who they are.

[rlh]

Pirate_Mike I don't know the TSSAA rule concerning this but I would love to be a lawyer for a kid that the TSSAA denied the opportunity to play while seeking a better education that is afforded to him by federal law. I would call it a retirement suit.

 

The argument would be that TSSAA doesn't have rules against him attending class at SM. That doesn't automatically make him eligible to play football. It comes down to residency and zoning.

Edited October 7, 2011 by rlh

[Anon20]

Wouldn't jump to conclusions about Notre Dame. Seems to me that this must have been an issue within TSSAA since the beginning of the year. Don't know why this is being adressed as late as game 7 though. Isn't the first time the TSSAA has made questionable decisions..

[PiRaTe._.MiKe]

South Pittsburg has ZERO players from Alabama. Please name just ONE. I'm waiting? Hello? Call em out and tell us who they are.

We are all waiting!

[smeagle1]

Well Notre Dame(The school who contacted TSSAA) is a private school. They don't play by the same rules so they don't have a complete understanding of the NCLB or transfer rules. Along with most of the posters on CoachT. They are sore losers and if they can't beat you on the field they are going to whine and cry about it somewhere else. In this case, SM would have to be oblivious to not make sure a kid like the one in question is legit. Keep Hatin!!! Heresay and rumors are nothing but an excuse so you can accept why you got beat. Keep Hatin and SM will keep winnin!! Haters Hate!

 

Well if it was ND it would be par for the course. Last year the week our girls played them in soccer they turned us in for an intelligible player. Funny thing is the player transferred from ND to SM. ND did the paperwork and filled out the athletes last participation date. SM turned all of this in and the TSSAA determined when she became eligible based off the information given by ND. Well the week of the game they called and told the TSSAA we were playing her and she shouldn't be eligible because she played for them the year before and ND gave them a different last participation date. The girl had to sit and the TSSAA finally determined it wasn't SM's fault or the girls and she was allowed to return to the team. But she had to sit out a few games and it was a distraction.

 

Guess next year our principle will let our kids have a Notre Lame day.

[Anon20]

Well if it was ND it would be par for the course. Last year the week our girls played them in soccer they turned us in for an intelligible player. Funny thing is the player transferred from ND to SM. ND did the paperwork and filled out the athletes last participation date. SM turned all of this in and the TSSAA determined when she became eligible based off the information given by ND. Well the week of the game they called and told the TSSAA we were playing her and she shouldn't be eligible because she played for them the year before and ND gave them a different last participation date. The girl had to sit and the TSSAA finally determined it wasn't SM's fault or the girls and she was allowed to return to the team. But she had to sit out a few games and it was a distraction.

 

Guess next year our principle will let our kids have a Notre Lame day.

 

Bit different situation though from what it looks like. If ND was playing Signal and they knew the girl had played the year before for them it's kind of obvious, whereas this really doesn't concern ND. With or without McClendon Signal dominates ND, or to be honest the rest of the teams they play.

[smeagle1]

The argument would be that TSSAA doesn't have rules against him attending class at SM. That doesn't automatically make him eligible to play football. It comes down to residency and zoning.

 

Sorry this argument is very weak and doesn't hold water.

[barb]

Well if it was ND it would be par for the course. Last year the week our girls played them in soccer they turned us in for an intelligible player. Funny thing is the player transferred from ND to SM. ND did the paperwork and filled out the athletes last participation date. SM turned all of this in and the TSSAA determined when she became eligible based off the information given by ND. Well the week of the game they called and told the TSSAA we were playing her and she shouldn't be eligible because she played for them the year before and ND gave them a different last participation date. The girl had to sit and the TSSAA finally determined it wasn't SM's fault or the girls and she was allowed to return to the team. But she had to sit out a few games and it was a distraction.

 

Guess next year our principle will let our kids have a Notre Lame day.

well if you had played an unintelligible player they wouldn't have understood...