Jump to content

Fayetteville to forfeit 6 wins


MidTennFootball
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Southtowner said:

Per Tom Kreager:  They are in executive session. Ineligible player had a hardship request. Says he was bullied in Alabama.  Will determine that before the territory issue. That part is open to the media I believe. 

Personally, I don't see how bullying in Alabama has any relevance.

He moved from out of state. The reason why shouldn't matter.

It seems tbe territory issue is wbat rules him eligible or ineligible. Focus on that and wrap this up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Southtowner said:

When was the hardship filed?  Today?  

I know nothing at all about it.  But the tweet says 'had', and that implies it was done sometime in the past. 

Could've been in the background all along, I don't know.  Even if it existed from day one, it would've been rendered moot by the original 'all-clear' letter, and therefore never considered until now.  Just a theory.  I assume you couldn't file it now, but don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PullinGuard said:

I know nothing at all about it.  But the tweet says 'had', and that implies it was done sometime in the past. 

Could've been in the background all along, I don't know.  Even if it existed from day one, it would've been rendered moot by the original 'all-clear' letter, and therefore never considered until now.  Just a theory.  I assume you couldn't file it now, but don't know.

If I were to guess at this,  I'd say the hardship being ruled on before the territory issue is key.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Southtowner said:

Surely this hardship hasn't been filed at the beginning of all this and just now coming to the forefront.  

I could easily imagine it given the initial clearance under normal rules.  Hardships are much harder to consider than an address only ordinarily, and if Childress says he's good to go under the normal transfer rules, I don't think anyone would have any interest in considering the hardship (and lots of reasons not to).  From either side. 

The hardship application would serve no purpose if he's ruled good without it -  that's my point.  So it would be no surprise if it were filed from the start but then never considered. 

Again, 100% a theory.  I know nothing at all about it. 

Edited by PullinGuard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PullinGuard said:

I could easily imagine it given the initial clearance under normal rules.  Hardships are much harder to consider ordinarily, and if Childress says he's good to go under the normal transfer rules, I don't think anyone would have any interest in considering the hardship.  From either side. 

The hardship application would serve no purpose if he's ruled good without it is my point, so no surprise if it were never considered. 

Again, 100% a theory.  I know nothing at all about it. 

Another theory would be the TSSAA pulled this hardship out of thin air today to save face and therefore not have to rule on the territory issue at hand.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


×
  • Create New...