Damn it Jay...way to ruin my Friday.
If it's that cut and dry, then why even apply. I watched justin venable play football here for 8 years, I'll let the appeal pley out.
I never hear anything about Scott Austin. He was a highly touted 3 star receiver out of high school and was a prior Mississippi State commit. He seems to have good size and speed. Obviously he must not be ready to play but I never hear anything about him.
CJ Bates is going to get every opportunity to play more in Robinson's position this week. Bates is quick enough, physical because he has played defense and has good hands. He will not replace Jamal Robinson at this point of his development by himself, but he is their best bet to help right now. Austin played well in the spring, but it hasn't translated into the fall Jared Johnson will be able to do a few things outside that Robinson has done, but he plays faster in practice than he does in the games. He's thinking too much once he gets in the game and he slows down.
Justin Venable was injured for basically four years. His case was the first time in NCAA history a student athlete was given up to eight years and it hasn't happened since.
If someone wants to give me an example of what might be an extenuating circumstance in which an exception would be made for Robinson, let me know.
so why did you not call bullsht when hud said it? why is there even an appeal process? not saying he will or wont but if its that cut and dry then they would know the answer. maybe they take into account where he is with regards to graduation, his nfl career etc. was rodney gillis an extenuating circumastance? l'marcus gibson?
I'd say that if an expectation was to be made, the fact that he played just barely over the % of games and barely played in 1/2 of those games ... that at least makes for a case I'd say.
But I agree that HUD would say that either way. Let things play out down the road and him being "disappointed" is better than if he said he didn't think Jamal would get it and be "pleased" when he did.
I honestly think he will get a fifth year of eligibility. The fact that he didn't red shirt will play a factor imo
OK guys. Go ahead. But the rule is clear. The question then becomes, is there an extenuating circumstance that might help him out.
Because "barely over the percentage" isn't going to fly.
And, the fact he didn't redshirt makes no difference because he's over 30 percent. He's played four years. That's all you're allowed unless one of those years is under 30%
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)