JimsaDuck wrote: "If Lyles is a booster (probability fairly high)  that's certain a possiblity if you're being honest.   Though clearly not a slam dunk."


What's an 80% chance, a layup?

bennybeaver wrote:

JimsaDuck wrote: "If Lyles is a booster (probability fairly high)  that's certain a possiblity if you're being honest.   Though clearly not a slam dunk."


What's an 80% chance, a layup?

That's Jimmy from 3 point land

bennybeaver wrote:

oreduk wrote: Silly beenis,  you forgot to mention the 34 vacated wins,

If Lyles is a booster (probability fairly high)  that's certain a possiblity if you're being honest.   Though clearly not a slam dunk.

you know, the crap you post all over the rest of the PAC12 forums????

It's funny though, you've been asked numerous times to divulge the benefits that players received in order for them to be declared ineligible which is the only way any wins would be vacated,..

So you think there is no way that the NCAA will simply enforce the NCAA booster rules which have been on the books since 2000?  

NCAA 13.2.14C

You become a booster if you are:

(c) assisting or to have been requested (by the athletics department staff) to assist in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes;

and the penalty for that.
 

13.01.1 Eligibility Effects of Recruiting Violation. The recruitment of a student-athlete by a memberinstitution or any representative of its athletics interests in violation of the Association’s legislation, as acknowledged by the institution or established through the Association’s enforcement procedures, shall result in the student-athlete becoming ineligible to represent that institution in intercollegiate athletics.

So you can rather obviously become ineligible without personal benefits if the school clearly benefiited

...Answer the question or you're nothing more than a liar like your bff bm.

As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster.

oreduk wrote: What if any benefits did any player receive?  that's how your fantasy of 34 vacated wins is based upon,......answer the question.

bennybeaver wrote:

oreduk wrote: Silly beenis,  you forgot to mention the 34 vacated wins,

If Lyles is a booster (probability fairly high)  that's certain a possiblity if you're being honest.   Though clearly not a slam dunk.

you know, the crap you post all over the rest of the PAC12 forums????

It's funny though, you've been asked numerous times to divulge the benefits that players received in order for them to be declared ineligible which is the only way any wins would be vacated,..

So you think there is no way that the NCAA will simply enforce the NCAA booster rules which have been on the books since 2000?  

NCAA 13.2.14C

You become a booster if you are:

(c) assisting or to have been requested (by the athletics department staff) to assist in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes;

and the penalty for that.
 

13.01.1 Eligibility Effects of Recruiting Violation. The recruitment of a student-athlete by a memberinstitution or any representative of its athletics interests in violation of the Association’s legislation, as acknowledged by the institution or established through the Association’s enforcement procedures, shall result in the student-athlete becoming ineligible to represent that institution in intercollegiate athletics.

So you can rather obviously become ineligible without personal benefits if the school clearly benefiited

...Answer the question or you're nothing more than a liar like your bff bm.

As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster.

bennybeaver wrote:

oreduk wrote: Silly beenis,  you forgot to mention the 34 vacated wins,

If Lyles is a booster (probability fairly high)  that's certain a possiblity if you're being honest.   Though clearly not a slam dunk.

you know, the crap you post all over the rest of the PAC12 forums????

It's funny though, you've been asked numerous times to divulge the benefits that players received in order for them to be declared ineligible which is the only way any wins would be vacated,..

So you think there is no way that the NCAA will simply enforce the NCAA booster rules which have been on the books since 2000?  

NCAA 13.2.14C

You become a booster if you are:

(c) assisting or to have been requested (by the athletics department staff) to assist in the recruitment of prospective student-athletes;

and the penalty for that.
 

13.01.1 Eligibility Effects of Recruiting Violation. The recruitment of a student-athlete by a memberinstitution or any representative of its athletics interests in violation of the Association’s legislation, as acknowledged by the institution or established through the Association’s enforcement procedures, shall result in the student-athlete becoming ineligible to represent that institution in intercollegiate athletics.

So you can rather obviously become ineligible without personal benefits if the school clearly benefiited

...Answer the question or you're nothing more than a liar like your bff bm.

As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster.

tessiem wrote: Not only that, but it appears the NCAA may end restrictions on text messages and the number of coaches allowed to recruit at one time.

oreduk wrote: "As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster."


Exactly, but that doesn't stop you does it?  "perceived benefit"  lol,  and just an FYI,  redacted material is part of the FERPA, but of course you knew that but ignored it to further your BS posts,.....liar

Perhaps you can link the FERPA rule which required redaction for us then.

FERPA laws were designed to protect student academic records from becoming public against their wishes.

There are no academic records at risk here. 

Green85 wrote: While it is frustrating, I try to take the tact that pity for ignorance tempered with some patience might actually help the ill-informed reduce the number of times they expose their laziness when it comes to acquiring knowledge.

Posters like beavermobile and bennybeaver have yet to figure out how to apply themselves to become more knowledgeable on a topic ... they prefer presumption and assumption without a basis in fact for the content of their posts.

---------------------------------------------
--- FirstDuck wrote:

85, I have a ton of respect for your continuing effort to maintain a civil, but accurate, discourse with some of these nimrods. I admit that I would hve given up long ago, because it is painfully obvious that they either don't want facts, of cannot deal with them.

---------------------------------------------
--- Green85 wrote:

Wow!
Please take some time to educate yourself on the application of FERPA that has evolved over time. MANY institutions have extended the protections of FERPA to all kinds of student records on the adivce of legal counsel for those institutions. I spent time last Summer researching this topic and found more than a dozen articles and white papers explaining how FERPA had evolved in practical application. Several of the aritcles spoke specifically about student-athletes and their privacy rights. In some instances the institutions were pro-active to prevent exposure for laibility for sharing information, in other instances the concerns were raised by parents on behalf of their kids to understand application of the privacy.

You can easily find out about things by spending some time ... and it would prevent you from spewing inaccurate characterizations of the actions of people that have the authority and legal counsel to make appropriate decisions.

The University of Oregon is no "hiding" behind FERPA. In fact, the University of Oregon has an obligation to both the students and the public to err on the side of caution where privacy issues are involved.

---------------------------------------------
--- bennybeaver wrote:


<blockquote dir="ltr"><strong>oreduk wrote:</strong> <strong>"As for benefits, unless you are Mullens or work in compliance how can you make an informed opinion?  Every one of the Lyles student related potential violations was redacted by the university

We do know the school may have gotten a perceived benefit (Doak Walker winner) if Lyles is declared a booster."


Exactly, but that doesn't stop you does it?  "perceived benefit"  lol,  and just an FYI,  redacted material is part of the FERPA, but of course you knew that but ignored it to further your BS posts,.....liar

</strong>Perhaps you can link the FERPA rule which required redaction for us then.

FERPA laws were designed to protect student academic records from becoming public against their wishes.

There are no academic records at risk here. 


</blockquote>

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------