Roll 'Bama Roll: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Once A Metro covering Red Bull New York!

Perspective on the Textbook "Scandal"

I've just finished my second read of the NCAA's Notice of Allegations and the University's 67-page response. Now that our rival fans are all atwitter with anticipation about scholarship reductions, bowl bans, and probation, it's time to take a look at some of the minor details that seem to have been passed over.

Major Violations

A lot of (digital) ink has been spilled about how these are major violations (for proper effect, use your "serious mom" voice). While that word is certainly a loaded one, it really doesn't mean a great deal. The NCAA Bylaws (19.02.2.1-2) define a major violation as anything that's not a secondary violation, and it defines a secondary violation as follows (emphasis supplied):

A secondary violation is a violation that is isolated or inadvertant (sic) in nature, provides or is intended to provide only a minimal recruiting, competitive or other advantage and does not include any significant recruiting inducement or extra benefit. Multiple secondary violations by a member institution may collectively be considered as a major violation.

Whereas things like extra phone calls can either be major or secondary depending on their perceived benefit, one reading of that rule makes (literally) any "extra benefit" a major violation. As an aside, this is one of the reasons that the NCAA's enforcement history is so nonsensical -- their legislation is rife with subjective qualifiers and there's little in the way of direction as to what "significant" means.


That having been sorted out, let's take a look at what actually happened and what we can expect going forward from the NCAA. (Lots, lots more below the fold)

Star-divide

Failure to Monitor

In addition to the extra textbooks, the NCAA has alleged, and the University subsequently admitted, to a "failure to monitor". The interesting thing about this charge is how easy it is to get. Virtually any major violation is a candidate either for a "failure to monitor" charge or a "lack of institutional control" charge because neither of them require the level of severity that fans tend to assume. In this case, the University hasn't been charged with failing to monitor compliance in general, but failing to monitor a textbook distribution system.

In reading the document, it seems like the only thing the University could have done to properly monitor the system is to actually cross check the actual book purchases with the actual course schedule after the add/drop period has ended.  That doesn't seem like an unreasonable thing to do, but when you stop to consider how many student athletes there are, it's not a trivial undertaking. Instead the University had devised a system that they believed would be compliant, and a few student athletes found a way around the system and spread that info to others.

As much as I think Mal Moore is a blind squirrel of an A.D. who found his proverbial nut with Saban, I'm not sure all the breathless "Thank God we have Jay Jacobs!" nonsense from the Plains is really all that compelling. Think about it this way, behind door number one, you have a "textbook scandal" but a coach with numerous trips to the SEC Title game and a National Championship on his resume. Behind door number two, you've got a coach with a 5-12 record and a buch of athletes who not only aren't buying extra textbooks, they might not need to buy any at all!

Yeah, y'all can keep Door #2. We're good here.

Required Materials

Almost nothing has been written about the fact that fully half of the reported violations are a direct result of bookstore personnel pre-packaging "recommended" or "optional" materials for the athletes, and not the athletes intentionally violating the book policy.

The basic process for athletes getting their books is something like this: the Athletic Department sends the bookstore a list of athletes. The bookstore pulls their schedules and then puts all of the books for that schedule in a bag. At pick-up time, the athletes show up and are given their bag of books.

Unfortunately, the NCAA has deemed that Universities can only pay for required textbooks, which means optional and "recommended" materials are out of bounds, so when the stressed-out, work-study employee is busy pulling books from the shelves, they were expected to actually look to see if each book was required or not. What was going on, instead, was that those kids were just going to the section where a particular class's books were and dropping one of everything into the bag.

The smallest reported violation, according to the documents, was $0.35 for a test booklet. Talk about a major violation.

Nothing but Textbooks

Every single item purchased outside of the NCAA rules was a legitimate educational item. Not always for the right people, but never anything like clothing, ipods, or computers. Which is to say that, even if these books were going to people who weren't eligible for them, the most they could really do is learn something with them. Thank God the NCAA is protecting us from that.

"But Pete!" you might exclaim, "I bet they took those extra books and sold them for a straight cash profit!"

Don't you worry your pretty little head about that, dear reader. As was stated numerous times in the documents, nobody made a single penny from the system. Because of the University's book loan system, any textbooks which weren't returned had to be paid for by the student athlete who "borrowed" them, which is to say that it would be basically impossible to even break-even on the deal.

Many Programs Affected

While much is being made about the half-dozen football players who were suspended last season for their involvment, this actually spans sports programs and was actually discovered because a bookstore employee noticed a female athlete with a $1,600 text-book bill. Turns out that she was buying for herself and two non-eligible (probably non-scholarship) athletes.

Before anyone gets too excited, it's important to keep in mind that any athlete found to have gotten more than $100 in extra textbooks, was withheld from competition pending a reinstatement petition to the NCAA. All such petitions were granted, which suggests that even (that branch) the NCAA doesn't really think this is a huge deal.

While some might argue that it's worse to have more programs involved, put me on the side of the argument that suggests that this is just more evidence that this was irresponsible kids taking advantage of a hole in the system rather than some special treatment the football team was getting.

What's Going To Happen

While our good friends at Track 'em Tigers have predicted that this will be the event that causes Saban to leave the Capstone (no, sadly, I'm not kidding -- hope springs eternal, I guess), the odds that this amounts to anything significant is slight.

For starters, we're talking about a self-discovered and self-reported violation, the ensuing investigation of which turned up absolutely no other wrong-doing whatsoever, and you can bet that the dozens of interested parties were looking as hard as they could. Further, the violations took place over the course of just three semesters.

Secondly, for better or for worse, the handful of athletes who knew they were breaking the rules didn't realize they were breaking NCAA rules, and you can see their point: what "benefit" did they get from getting a book they either had to return or pay for out of their own pocket? Sure, they skipped to the front of the line and probably got first dibs on hotly contested textbooks, but in the grand scheme of things, is that really a big deal?

This all to say nothing of the athletes who didn't know they were breaking anyone's rules because some over-worked bookstore student employee got a little lazy with their compliance manual reading and gave them more than they were entitled to. Don't forget that this last type of violation comprised half of the dollar value and more than half of the participants.

This is not to say that the athletes who rang up more than $1,500 in book charges weren't doing anything wrong. They very clearly were, and, trivial though the benefits might have been, they were exta benefits. That said, if we're going to try to keep this in context, let's remember that not all extra benefits are created equal, and the NCAA still hasn't moved on the Reggie Bush issue.

I would be truly astounded if this amounted to more than a few years probation (which is not the same thing as a bowl ban) and some minor scholarship reductions. For football, this would probably come as a reduction of the 85-player cap rather than the 25 grant-in-aid maximum per year, just because the sheer number of players brought in over the last two seasons means that next year will probably be a smaller class.

The One Caveat

The one thing that Alabama fans should be weary of, and our rival fans can hope for, is that the NCAA is nothing if not completely absurd when it comes to punishments for violations. The only thing you can really count on them to do is exactly what you think they shouldn't.

Which isn't to say that they never get anything right, but the number of their infractions decisions that have made me scratch my head and wonder what they were thinking is pretty high.

Add to that the fact that there are a number of members of the Committee on Infractions with potential conflicts of interest here (See, e.g., the fact that Miami's Athletic Director is on the committee) and you wind up with a formula for some very confusing rulings.

Conclusion

While I'm sure that what punishment is handed down will span a number of sports, I really don't anticipate anything more than probation and the loss of a handful of scholarships (3-5 in football, would be my guess). I think that, despite the "failure to monitor" charge, the fact that we're talking about textbooks that were either returned or paid for out of pocket is really going to soften the blow here.

If it doesn't, one has to wonder how bringing the hammer down for something like this is going to impact future infractions hearings.

0 recs  |  Comment 58 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Violations

Great job Pete. I only disagree with one of you assertions:

In reading the document, it seems like the only thing the University could have done to properly monitor the system is to actually cross check the actual book purchases with the actual course schedule after the add/drop period has ended.

I think would be relatively easy to implement a system that would cross check the purchases with the classes. All that takes is a small computer program that does not add up to much money.

As far as the punishment I think that is really going to be determined by how far back the violations went to. Obviously, if they go back to when Alabama was on probation that is where things get tricky. We all know Alabama’s history with the NCAA, so all we can do is wait.

Lastly, Track em Tigers is pathetic. They really do reinforce the stereotype of an Auburn homer, which is to say someone who viciously hates Alabama, more than they could ever love Auburn.

by Kenny483 on Mar 6, 2009 11:32 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

One other thing

The other thing that bothers me about this situation is that it means almost certainly Alabama will be under probation for an extended period time. I think I speak for a lot of fans when I say I was relieved greatly last year when our time under probation came to end. I do not particularly look forward to our university being under NCAA scrutiny for any period of time.

by Kenny483 on Mar 6, 2009 11:40 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

A computer program isn’t going to account for creative use of add/drop to get extra text books, and there’s absolutely nothing about a computer program like the one you’re describing that would be cheap.

Assuming a program like that could even be worked into the current IT solution the bookstore is running, the interactions with other systems would be numerous, the number of test-cases and one-offs to consider would be massive, and you’d easily spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to make sure it was done properly.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 11:49 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You guys can get over yourselves with all this "Bama against the world" nonsense.

As an Auburn fan, the only time I wish ill will toward Bama is when we are in competition. Otherwise, I could don’t care at all what happens in Tuscaloosa or with your football team.

As a citizen of the state of Alabama, I am as curious about news like this as anyone. I doubt that anymore punishment will be handed down by the NCAA, but in light of recent history at UA as a repeat offender, I don’t think it is out of the question.

by Jumpn_JackFlash on Mar 6, 2009 11:46 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

Are you even responding to the article you’re commenting on, or did you just have something you wanted to get off your chest and felt like this was your best chance?

“’Bama against the world?” Heh.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 11:47 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

it’s less bama vs the world than the fact the profile of the football program invites more intense scrutiny. if we were… say, ball state, i imagine most folks outside of our conference wouldn’t even be aware any infraction had occured.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 11:50 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

These are your words, not mine.

“Now that our rival fans are all atwitter with anticipation about scholarship reductions, bowl bans, and probation, it’s time to take a look at some of the minor details that seem to have been passed over.”

“Think about it this way, behind door number one, you have a "textbook scandal” but a coach with numerous trips to the SEC Title game and a National Championship on his resume. Behind door number two, you’ve got a coach with a 5-12 record and a buch of athletes who not only aren’t buying extra textbooks, they might not need to buy any at all!

Yeah, y’all can keep Door #2. We’re good here."

There have been countless other remarks by Bama fans like this on other Blogs as well

by Jumpn_JackFlash on Mar 6, 2009 12:04 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

There have been countless other remarks by Bama fans like this on other Blogs as well

now that’s just ridiculous. have you counted them all?

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:09 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Take of your Crimson colored glasses and read them your self.

And no, why would I bother to count them all. I would be here all day if I did.

by Jumpn_JackFlash on Mar 6, 2009 12:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

or maybe forever…

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:11 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

that depends...

…on if the person is willing to get arrested for indecent exposure or not.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

You can try and be insulting if you wish, I really don't care.

But this whole thing has you guys riled up like nothing I have ever seen before.

by Jumpn_JackFlash on Mar 6, 2009 12:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

don't worry...

we don’t have to try.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:15 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Awww...

…how cute! He thinks we’re “riled up”.

Note: this is not “riled up”. This is what it looks like to take a serious interest in your football program. Try it some time.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:18 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

This is not a place for rational people

If you feel that rational thoughts should be processed, SB Nation is NOT the place for you

"The game demonstrated the superiority of the Southern teams over any aggregation that the damn yankees could send across the Mason and Dixon Line." Sports writer Charles Israel of the Philadelphia Bulletin after the Tide's 61-6 win over Syracuse in the 1953 Orange Bowl.

by morri029 on Mar 6, 2009 12:21 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Those are direct references to the profligate posts on the Auburn blogs. It’s not “Alabama against the world”, it’s responding to things that have already been written by countless Auburn fans.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:09 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Ok to defend my Crimson Brethren

Everyone has trolls… People who come over just to stir the pot, TET has them, and RBR has them. Now I have NEVER posted on TET but I do scroll through to see whats up every once in a while. WEA does a good job, but alot of it is just a cestpool kinda like AL.com, and not just because of Auburn fans, but some Bammers too. Some people just can’t be civil about this, but the reason Pete posted this I think is that some people are just beside themselves giddy saying the death penalty, when its probably going to be much less severe…we hope

"The game demonstrated the superiority of the Southern teams over any aggregation that the damn yankees could send across the Mason and Dixon Line." Sports writer Charles Israel of the Philadelphia Bulletin after the Tide's 61-6 win over Syracuse in the 1953 Orange Bowl.

by morri029 on Mar 6, 2009 12:09 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If you could care less

why are you posting here?

ChineseDentist ez my heros!

by BamaReturns07 on Mar 6, 2009 11:51 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I am just trying to get info on the subject and you guys thoughts on it.

But there seems to be a lot of this “because we are Bama, the NCAA is out to get us” mentality in a lot of the other posts I read.

by Jumpn_JackFlash on Mar 6, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

There’s a long history of Alabama’s sanctions being ridiculous for no apparent reason other than the fact that we’re alleged to have “gotten away with” cheating for a long time. The 2002 sanctions are rife with that kind of thing.

That said, I’m still not seeing where, at least in this post or thread, you’re seeing any “The NCAA is out to get us”

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:14 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

JumpNJack

You my friend are a moron. Your friends over there at TET waiting on the sky to fall are hopeless losers trying to avoid the inevitable. I do not expect an iron bowl to come within 3 touchdowns for the next 5 years.

Jealousy is the thread that holds TET threads together!

by The Voice of Reason on Mar 6, 2009 12:59 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

has there ever been any indication this rose to the level of an investigation by the authorities?

i’m playing catch-up on the details of all this. there is considerable emphasis on the university’s allegation that no-one involved in this scheme received any direct financial largess from the proceeds since the books were returned. and, obviously, this has been poo-poohed by the pundits.

but, if in fact, there was a possiblity of this being a for-profit scheme using state and federal funds then that’s something prosecutors would be interested in knowing more about even in alabama. the fact there has NOT been such an inquiry is reflective of the university’s assertation in this instance.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 11:48 AM CST reply actions   0 recs

The investigation didn’t turn up anyone who even sold the sold the books at all, let alone for profit.

That said, I’m not sure that even what you’re describing would turn out to be a crime unless the University was complicit in it and was using it to somehow manipulate the textbook market on campus, even then, I have a hard time figuring out what on earth they could even be charged with. After all, the school ALREADY sells textbooks to make a profit, right?

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 11:52 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

No

A profit is I pay you 50 for this and I sell it for 75, what the Supe store does is downright molestation of students bank accounts, with they give them 20 for it, and sell it for 150…. But thats any school and the backwards ass textbook industry…. I wish for them all to bankrupt… they damn near bankrupt me

"The game demonstrated the superiority of the Southern teams over any aggregation that the damn yankees could send across the Mason and Dixon Line." Sports writer Charles Israel of the Philadelphia Bulletin after the Tide's 61-6 win over Syracuse in the 1953 Orange Bowl.

by morri029 on Mar 6, 2009 11:54 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

if students were running a system of obtaining books for free and pocketing the resale money it would be theft and prosecutable by the civil authorities. so, my question is, has there ever been such an inquiry or no? we know the university and the ncaa looked into this but that’s a different matter.

keep in mind, i’m trying to clarify a point i’ve not seen addressed as yet, not making any sort of accusation about the situation.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 11:57 AM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Asked and answered, counselor.

“The investigation didn’t turn up anyone who even sold the sold the books at all, let alone for profit.”

Further, nobody received anything for “free”. They got textbooks that they knew they were going to have to return or pay for at the end of the semester, which is why it wasn’t possible for them to profit here, really. They were essentially borrowed books.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:00 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

This is supposed to be a reply to this comment of Kleph’s, but I fail at teh intarwebz.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:01 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

not exactly…let me clarify my question.

your comment – if i understand it correctly – reflects the university’s investigation which is completely separate from anything that might be conducted by civil authorities. my question is if there was ever a criminal investigation which would not be bound by the finding of the university internal probe.

basically, what i’m trying to divine is if prosecutors examined the evidence and determined there was no need to pursue things if that actually transpired then that bolster’s the university’s contention that there was no criminal activity on the part of the student’s activities and strengthens the findings of the internal investigation. but i’ve not seen any information about that aspect of the situation.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:07 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

christ. i sound like a lawyer.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

“my question is if there was ever a criminal investigation which would not be bound by the finding of the university internal probe.”

There is nothing to investigate here is what I’m telling you.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

To expand, there’s not even the hint of a legal infraction here. Nothing was attained for free. This is nit-picky even by NCAA standards.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

yes. but that’s your opinion. whether or not that’s the opinion of prosecutors is a different matter. i’m looking to see if there is information out there concerning the latter – not attacking the fomer.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:13 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not sure how much more clear I can be on this so, no, there aren’t any legal authorities looking into it.

There is nothing to investigate. You might as well be asking if the prosecutor has an opinion on the legality of what you had for breakfast.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:16 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

pete, i’m not trying to debate you on that point. i’m asking if anyone has seen anything in the reports about the autorities looking into this, either recently or when it originally broke, in referece to anyone in authority treating this in a criminal matter. the absence of this is something that bolsters your argument.

by kleph on Mar 6, 2009 12:19 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

There are no such reports because the authorities are not looking into it as a criminal matter because it’s not one. Seriously.

That said, there’s nothing legally significant about an “investigation.” There is a 100% chance that the Tuscaloosa County prosecutor heard about this scandal and the lawyer portion of his brain examined it for possible violations of state and/or federal law completely subconsciously before deciding there really wasn’t anything worth looking into further. That said, a formal investigation into this would take about 30 minutes and would conclude with “Well, that was a huge waste of time.”

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 12:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Employment (OT)

I’m not trying to be critical, just curious. How do you people stay employed when you spend all day involved in masturbatory internet speculation on message boards? If you can do your job and still spend literally hours on this site, couldn’t you do an even better job than you are currently doing?

by rhinoskin on Mar 6, 2009 1:51 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Says the guy who designs websites for a living?

Some jobs have a lot of downtime. Some jobs don’t require constant attention. Clearly, some of these posts don’t require a tremendous amount of thought or time. Lots of office jobs are filled with inefficiencies

As far as doing the job better . . . what would be the point of that? To make some other guy more money for the same take-home?

The trick to staying employed is to do a little bit more than you’re asked for and do it well. For most jobs, that doesn’t tend to require even 40 hours a week.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 2:06 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

All that

to say nothing of the following:

Students, people with today off, people who work 4 day x 10 hour wok-weeks, and people who are actually unemployed.

Anyone who can’t spare a few minutes a day to fool around on the internet is either making a ton of money or needs a new job.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 2:10 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes - Excellent point Pete

I have been on and off. I have a good deal of busy work, but I can jet in and out of here every hour or two. I don’t understand the criticising of someone else’s work; you’re not there and you don’t know what he/she does on a daily basis.

To further elaborate on Pete’s point, it really doesn’t take long to write commentary such as this if you are knowledgeable of the subject material. I could literally type what Pete wrote in a few minutes, IF I had a thorough understanding of the subject. It’s not that difficult, and the other posts come from natural debating.

Honestly, RS, why pick a fight with Pete, something you are apparantly trying to do? Did you read the 67-page document like Pete, OTS, and Kleph did? They devoted their time to posting interesting and noteworthy commentary to help us readers grasp exactly what is happening with this situation. Takes a lot of time and devotion; if you don’t like it, don’t read it and keep your opinions to yourself.

ChineseDentist ez my heros!

by BamaReturns07 on Mar 6, 2009 3:28 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Eh, nevermind

I see you got called out below.

ChineseDentist ez my heros!

by BamaReturns07 on Mar 6, 2009 3:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

FWIW

I’m between jobs, so I had plenty of time to read the documents and I am intensely interested in the NCAA Bylaws and infractions type stuff in general, so it’s not so much that I took offense to the call-out as there are just a ton of situations where someone would have a bit of time to sit around and surf the ’net.

Though I doubt I’d have had time to read all 90 pages of documents if I were at work.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 3:37 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Come on
The trick to staying employed is to do a little bit more than you’re asked for and do it well. For most jobs, that doesn’t tend to require even 40 hours a week.

Hard to do that when you’re self employed. It’s refreshing to learn the trick to staying employed from someone who’s been employed for less than a decade.

And, is there something wrong with being a web developer? Any job can be as challenging and intensive as your desire and self-determination will make it.

by rhinoskin on Mar 6, 2009 2:17 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

But hey

I think my question was answered, so i’ll get back to work :)

by rhinoskin on Mar 6, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Why are you stirring the pot?

I mean, I’m sorry we are able to work and play at the same time. My boss is sitting ten feet away and knows what I do, and I am being commended for my work, as long as I get my job done, every day, why is that a problem… and second of all what in the hell does it matter to you if I’m sitting at home on welfare!?!?!

"The game demonstrated the superiority of the Southern teams over any aggregation that the damn yankees could send across the Mason and Dixon Line." Sports writer Charles Israel of the Philadelphia Bulletin after the Tide's 61-6 win over Syracuse in the 1953 Orange Bowl.

by morri029 on Mar 6, 2009 2:40 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I’m sorry, I’m not sure why it concerned me enough to post about it, but it did. I now wish that I didn’t.

by rhinoskin on Mar 6, 2009 2:48 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Probably because you realize that, being self-employed, every minute you spend here is a minute you’re not spending making money. That’s one of the few luxuries of not being your own boss: your paycheck sometimes over-compensates for actual work accomplished.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 2:52 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

I also realized that I too was mixing arrogance and ignorance.

by rhinoskin on Mar 6, 2009 2:53 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Alright

Your forgiven…. But only if you bring a six pack for everyone to the RBR tailgate before the 2020 ADay game

"The game demonstrated the superiority of the Southern teams over any aggregation that the damn yankees could send across the Mason and Dixon Line." Sports writer Charles Israel of the Philadelphia Bulletin after the Tide's 61-6 win over Syracuse in the 1953 Orange Bowl.

by morri029 on Mar 6, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

If you’re self-employed and can’t spare a few minutes to surf the net, I’d say your boss is an asshole.

“someone who’s been employed for less than a decade.”

I think you need to brush up on your knowledge of my employment history. But, are you really suggesting that it takes more than 10 years to figure out how to keep a job?

There’s nothing wrong with being a web developer, but it’s not exactly hard.

by PeteHoliday on Mar 6, 2009 2:30 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

The way im looking at all this is
1) the andre smith suspension makes a lot more sense given the fact there were rumors that he may have been eligible to play but we werent about to take the chance that there was more to the story.
2) We are freaking out bc we are just hearing about this. Saban and co. have been on the case for a long time, know more details than we do, know the tone of the ncaa meeting and still come out literally giddy about the future of the program and make statements about beating AU for a long time to come.
3) Bottom line given all the above Im not going to panic until I see someone who knows the situation turn negative.

by bamainexile on Mar 6, 2009 2:24 PM CST reply actions   0 recs

Unless the admin is totally irrational why would they EXPAND the stadium for impending doom?

by bamainexile on Mar 6, 2009 2:29 PM CST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog covering the Alabama Crimson Tide.
Start posting about the Crimson Tide »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Img_2235_small
Bama's Greatest Games
Crabtreeinmyhead_small
RBR Tourney Pick 'Em
26935420b_small
NCAA Balks on Head-Coach-in-Waiting Rule

Recent FanPosts

010_small
Hypothetical question of the day
Nickcave_small
Music Monday: SIX ORGANS OF ADMITTANCE
Small
Barrett Jones and Kendall Kelly
Nickcave_small
Classic Music Friday: THE KINKS
Twitter_small
SEC looking to give Alabama some schedule relief
S6300204_small
Bobby Humphrey Nominated to CFB HoF
Small
Rare audio of man who played for Wallace Wade

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Murray State guard Isaiah Canaan (3) dances in celebration as he's applauded by teammates (L-R) forward Danero Thomas (12), guard Jordan Burge,guard Picasso Simmons, guard Donte Poole (11), guard Jewuan Long, and guard B.J. Jenkins after their 62-51 victory over Morehead State in the NCAA college Ohio Valley Conference Basketball Championship game in Nashville, Tenn., Saturday, March  6, 2010.  (AP Photo/Frederick Breedon)

Welcome To March Madness: Murray State Nails Buzzer-Beater To Upset Vanderbilt

Villanova head coach Jay Wright instructs his team in the first half of an NCAA college basketball game against West Virginia, Saturday, March 6, 2010, in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)

Villanova Narrowly Avoids Massive Upset, Fights Back To Top Robert Morris In OT

BYU's Jimmer Fredette reacts to a call during an NCAA college basketball game against UNLV in Las Vegas on Saturday, February 6, 2010. UNLV defeated BYU 88-74. (AP Photo/Laura Rauch) +1 updates

BYU's Fredette Drops 37; Cougars Down Florida In Double-OT, 99-92

More from SBNation.com >

Roll Bama Roll on Twitter


Managers

Large_hankwilliams_small Todd

Miltonf-788904_small outsidethesidelines

Nickcave_small Nico2.0

Author

Kleph_logo_copy_small kleph

26935420b_small PeteHoliday

Oguchionyewu_1511662_small Bama07

Official Partner of CBS Sports