"And only Auburn, with its long and storied tradition of athletic dysfunction, could turn a potentially positive compliance decision into a potentially massive negative."
"Situational ethics have long been an Auburn hallmark, and it might end up biting an oft-penalized school again."
What they handed down is pretty significant. It's a lot different running with 11 than 13; now do it several years in a row. Pearl can't miss on his recruiting evaluations.
What they handed down is pretty significant. It's a lot different running with 11 than 13; now do it several years in a row. Pearl can't miss on his recruiting evaluations.
What you're saying adds up to 8 total scholarships (2 per year for each of the next 4 years), meaning as you say - we'd only have 11 scholarship players rather than 13 in each of those years.
What was clarified later was that it's 2 total scholarships that can be imposed any time in the next four years. So for instance, we could carry just 12 for the first two years, then have the full 13 the last two. Or we could take the full hit in year one and only carry 11, but have the full allotment the final three years.
What you're saying adds up to 8 total scholarships (2 per year for each of the next 4 years), meaning as you say - we'd only have 11 scholarship players rather than 13 in each of those years.
Let me be clear...I can get verbose to an extreme.
Over the next four years Auburn will lose a total of eight scholarships. It'll be two, per year, for the next four years leaving the Tigers with 11 scholarshipped players for said years (until probation is concluded.)
A reduction of one scholarship during the 2020-21 academic year (self-imposed). The program must reduce the total number of scholarships by two during the term of probation.
What they handed down is pretty significant. It's a lot different running with 11 than 13; now do it several years in a row. Pearl can't miss on his recruiting evaluations.
It's why I selfishly wanted more. Infractions aside, hiring Pearl while he was under a show cause was brazen. But then ending up mired in a major infractions case while he's the HC... if that had been Alabama, I'd have been having NCAA hammer PTSD issues. But, I get that the NCAA isn't what it used to be in terms of its bite, and Sankey doesn't want his teams on postseason bans or getting their clocks cleaned (which helps). The LSU case is the one I'm really interested in, in terms of punishment. IMO, they deserve the worst.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.