Omniscience Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Troll, was the AD at the TSSAA meeting in Sept. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smeagle1 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Guys I was watching FOX 61 tonight "The Fifth Quarter" it came on at 10:30. They were talking about the SM situation and had an interview with Childress. The entire interview can be viewed (listened too) on FOX 61 website. Now from what I got out of it you guys are totally on the wrong issue. Childress said rumors had pointed TSSAA at SM because of a assistant coach from LFO had recently took a job at SM and had RECRUITED (he actually said) the kid in question. The part of the interview I heard, mentioned absolutely nothing about what you guys are talking about, TSSAA main focus seemed to be on the recruitment of this kid by an ex-LFO assistant. With everything you guys are argueing answer me one question- If the kid played all year at LFO I would not think it would matter because that is not a TSSAA school and they would have no jurisdiction over the athletes of a Georgia school and as that goes this would have been the first athletic record he would have had with SM in the state of Tennessee. RIGHT OR WRONG Not sure the that SM wants to stir much more up because it sounded like TSSAA gave a minor reason but has much more behind it not to mention he was asked about TSSAA looking into more than this one case both present and past. Well this isn't a surprise. People have been accusing us of recruiting since we opened. Believe me when I say if they could have hung us on recruiting they would have. The fact that they didn't and only charged us with the zone/territory issue should tell you and everyone that they found no evidence of recruiting or other wrong doing. We clearly have a disagreement with the TSSAA on this players eligibility. But the TSSAA didn't find any evidence of recruiting and for him to open his remarks like he did IMO was wrong. Also IMO by introducing the recruiting aspect now he was trying to make it look like there was more than there was. Notice he also made an attempt to justify the timeline and notification to us. Oh, he also clearly said they are not looking at us for anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PurpleGrad Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Furthermore, one would hope that an administrator or AD, who had concerns of this severity, would notify their counterpart and give them an opportunity to internally investigate and self report if they concurred. Considering who was involved and what their alterior motive was, I'm not suprised. Little flecks of chicken litter abound. I agree with you again. Common professional courtesy would dictate that SMMHS should have been given an opportunity to self-report. You sound like you know who reported SMMHS... care to share? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smeagle1 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Do you really think that they decided on the 22nd that they were going to investigate? They are meeting in Chattanooga, someone gives them some information and they immediately decide they are investigating???? I don't buy it. Gillespie said that they receive 100's of complaints and accusations each year. Do you really want it to be as simple as calling TSSAA on Thursday to make an accusation about a stud player that you are opposing the next night and the TSSAA calling your opponent to tell them that there is an investigation and the stud should sit? I don't. I think that they may have known early the following week that they had enough information to warrant an investigation and they should have notified SMMHS at that point. I don't understand why it took two weeks, even with the Golf State Tourney and West Tn admin meetings.. No I don't think they decided on the 22nd I know they did and you would also know if you have been keeping up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MountainTroll Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Troll, was the AD at the TSSAA meeting in Sept. ? My understanding is that she was. The three accusers pulled Bernie aside to make the accusations, then none of them even discussed it with her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barb Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 say it barb... "if signal mountain had an open enrollment policy, such as greenevilles, no one would have had the grounds to file a complaint about an ooz player. therefore, a simple clerical error wouldn't have been found, buried in the paperwork, that got signal caught with their pants down." ... say it barb. If they believed he was recruited by one of his former coaches(as has been alluded to by Childress) they could complain. A complaint would at least have caused someone to review his file. Even if SM had open enrollment, (a)the paperwork was still wrong (b)he would have been required to sit out for 12 months because of his participation in spring football at LFO...which after all is the reason for his ineligibility in the first place. Faulty paperwork aside, McClendon is ineligible because he played football in the spring at LFO and does not live in SM. TSSAA was denied the opportunity to rule on his hardship waiver because none was submitted. It does not matter how the student comes to be enrolled ooz, the eligibility requirements are still the same. SM seeks to have them applied differently to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlh Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Guys I was watching FOX 61 tonight "The Fifth Quarter" it came on at 10:30. They were talking about the SM situation and had an interview with Childress. The entire interview can be viewed (listened too) on FOX 61 website. Now from what I got out of it you guys are totally on the wrong issue. Childress said rumors had pointed TSSAA at SM because of a assistant coach from LFO had recently took a job at SM and had RECRUITED (he actually said) the kid in question. The part of the interview I heard, mentioned absolutely nothing about what you guys are talking about, TSSAA main focus seemed to be on the recruitment of this kid by an ex-LFO assistant. With everything you guys are argueing answer me one question- If the kid played all year at LFO I would not think it would matter because that is not a TSSAA school and they would have no jurisdiction over the athletes of a Georgia school and as that goes this would have been the first athletic record he would have had with SM in the state of Tennessee. RIGHT OR WRONG Not sure the that SM wants to stir much more up because it sounded like TSSAA gave a minor reason but has much more behind it not to mention he was asked about TSSAA looking into more than this one case both present and past. LFO is in the Georgia association. All 50 state agencies are members of the National Federation of Highschool Sports Associations. The odd thing about what you are saying is that the facts are SM vacated 6 wins for playing an ineligible player. Recruiting is a whole different animal with more serious penalties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smeagle1 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Troll, was the AD at the TSSAA meeting in Sept. ? I'm not the Troll but the answer is YES, she was there all day and never heard a peep out of anyone on this issue. And just to be clear Mr. Childress just said in his interview that it was multiple AD's and Principles that accused us of recruiting this kid. And then went on to say the calls continued to come in a week later. Funny I thought he was quoted before as saying they complained about us playing an OOZ player, now it's complaining about recruiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barb Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Haven't you been maintaining all along that all administrators, AD's, and coaches are supposed to be able to do this or they are incompetent? Maybe just pretending to be to cover up a more serious problem... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MountainTroll Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Do you really think that they decided on the 22nd that they were going to investigate? They are meeting in Chattanooga, someone gives them some information and they immediately decide they are investigating???? I don't buy it. Gillespie said that they receive 100's of complaints and accusations each year. Do you really want it to be as simple as calling TSSAA on Thursday to make an accusation about a stud player that you are opposing the next night and the TSSAA calling your opponent to tell them that there is an investigation and the stud should sit? I don't. I think that they may have known early the following week that they had enough information to warrant an investigation and they should have notified SMMHS at that point. I don't understand why it took two weeks, even with the Golf State Tourney and West Tn admin meetings.. If you listen to Bernie's crawfishin on the Fox61 video, he says they had been hearing "rumors" for a "long time". Then ... at the Sept 22 meeting, the accusations were formally made. He said they had to wait until they got back to the office to "look into it". "Looking into it" is investigating. He knew where this was going Sept 22. How do you sit in a room with someone after these accusations and not even mention it. Chicken litter, smells like bull excrement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlh Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 You're thinking of McMinn County - we're better known for banjos and disappearances. Wanna go camping? I thought that was the county south of you near Blue Ridge, Ga. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MountainTroll Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 (edited) Maybe just pretending to be to cover up a more serious problem... No ... you have implied that any administrator or AD who doesn't fully understand the T$$AA by-laws and constitution are incompetent. Edited October 13, 2011 by MountainTroll Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.