FB: Old Dominion Athletic Conference

[HeardEnough]

I saw where Volgeback suffered a concussion at end of last weeks game.  Will he be playing this week?  Next week?

[Bmore BC]

One thing keeps coming back to me.

As posted by hasa' yesterday:

Does anyone honestly believe a reputable program with logical coaches would dare touch a player that had a previous association with another conference or DIII member if they had any inkling of his complete history?  I don't.  Were there some additional ways, such as the clearinghouse mentioned in earlier posts, that Guilford could have fully verified his background?  Perhaps.  Do I think there will be some additional stringent checks in the future?  Yes!  This could have happened to any school in this conference, so I hope everyone, not just Guilford, is doing a "lessons learned" evaluation.

I believe you make some good points here. I do want to compare this scenario to another currently happening in the NFL. Though the topics are very differant the emphasis by both the NFL and NCAA are both very strong as the NCAA has many strict regulations when it comes to an athletes elgibility and the NFL has many strict regulations when it comes to its HGH policy.

Does anyone think that Shawn Merriman a 270lb linebacker would start to use steroids after being a pro bowler in his rookie year and on the verge of becomming the best defensive player in the NFL? Were there some additional ways he could of known what was in the supplements he was taking? Will he take those extra additional steps to ensure this doesn't happen again? Of course.

I know I may catch some lashing for this comparison as the topics are very differant. But Personally I do not think Guilford did this on purpose and I also don't think Merriman did it on purpose. I do think that one will pay a penalty and the other will not. Just my thoughts.

[hasanova]

http://www.guilfordfootball.com/

GC/RMC photos from Tim Bates' site if anyone is interested.  Again, he does a great job!

[narch]

Does anyone honestly believe a reputable program with logical coaches would dare touch a player that had a previous association with another conference or DIII member if they had any inkling of his complete history?  I don't.  Were there some additional ways, such as the clearinghouse mentioned in earlier posts, that Guilford could have fully verified his background?  Perhaps.  Do I think there will be some additional stringent checks in the future?  Yes!  This could have happened to any school in this conference, so I hope everyone, not just Guilford, is doing a "lessons learned" evaluation.

'nova - i don't think for a second that the guilford coaches knew about this, but it doesn't change the fact that they used an ineligible player - i also don't think for a second that the su coaches last year knew that the players they used were ineligible, either, yet they had to forfeit games - what i don't know is this...was the decision for su to forfeit games last year made by the school, by the usasac or by the ncaa?

if it was made by the ncaa, i don't understand this decision at all

if it was made by the usasac, then shame on the odac for not holding similar standards

if it was made by su, then kudos to them for doing the right thing...maybe guilford should follow suit

why does this seem so black and white to me?  am i missing something?

[Jacketlawyer]

http://www.guilfordfootball.com/

GC/RMC photos from Tim Bates' site if anyone is interested.  Again, he does a great job!

Those are really good, almost life-like. . . . . . . . like I'm back in Ashland on October 28th. . . again.

[hasanova]

I saw where Volgeback suffered a concussion at end of last weeks game.  Will he be playing this week?  Next week?

I know Vogelbach took some wicked hits and was "woozy" in the late stages of the RMC game and there was some speculation that he might have a concussion.  After he threw his last two interceptions on back-to-back plays, the coaches put in the backup QB for the final series of the game and the team doctor spent a lot of time with him on the sideline.  Unless there's more to this than I currently know, Josh is a pretty tough guy and I'm betting he'll start against both CUA and E&H.  At any rate, expect the Guilford coaching staff to keep this close to the vest until game time on Saturday.

[hasanova]

narch -

Thanks for your thoughts.  I fully understand everyone's points and points of view on the ineligible player issue at Guilford.  Not knowing all the facts and ramifications in each of the cases (SU and GC) makes it difficult for me to discuss with authority and clarity, so my thoughts, just like almost everyone else on this board, are purely conjecture.

Perhaps everything is only "black and white," so I appreciate your stance on the subject.  Personally, I see the world with a lot of "gray" and I am not just saying that because this case involves my alma mater.  I would say that regardless of who was involved.  I'm also not saying one of us is wrong and the other is right, I'm just saying we may differ in our opinion.  In my mind, I would like to see the NCAA, the conferences and the commissioners have the latitude to handle each situation on a case-by-case basis based on the merits.  If we are only going to follow a "black and white" book, then you don't even need a human - and may I say, rational thinking - commissioner.   Just robotically look it up in the book!

If you think about it, our legal system is that way, too.   I would speculate that all NCAA and conference bylaws are a microcosm of the English legal system.  Should a person who has never committed a crime be given the same sentence as a repeat offender?  What if one person was handed a gun and believed the person who told them it wasn't loaded while another personally bought the gun, purchased the bullets, filed off the serial number and loaded it?  What if one person was acting in self-defense and the other crime was premeditated?  Same sentence for both?  I say no and our legal sentence also allows for such discretion.

Perhaps Guilford should voluntarily forfeit.  I can see why someone would make that argument.  I can tell you, however, that action could possibly hand the conference championship and a playoff bid to a team that, in my opinion, did not earn it on the field of play and take it away from another team(s) that probably did.  That too, would be an injustice.  Perhaps the letter of the law is blind to such inequities.  I like to think that's why humans also leave room for the "spirit" of the law.  In this case, I believe the spirit has justifiably trumped the letter.

[Llamaguy]

Does anyone honestly believe a reputable program with logical coaches would dare touch a player that had a previous association with another conference or DIII member if they had any inkling of his complete history?  I don't.  Were there some additional ways, such as the clearinghouse mentioned in earlier posts, that Guilford could have fully verified his background?  Perhaps.  Do I think there will be some additional stringent checks in the future?  Yes!  This could have happened to any school in this conference, so I hope everyone, not just Guilford, is doing a "lessons learned" evaluation.

'nova - i don't think for a second that the guilford coaches knew about this, but it doesn't change the fact that they used an ineligible player - i also don't think for a second that the su coaches last year knew that the players they used were ineligible, either, yet they had to forfeit games - what i don't know is this...was the decision for su to forfeit games last year made by the school, by the usasac or by the ncaa?

if it was made by the ncaa, i don't understand this decision at all

if it was made by the usasac, then shame on the odac for not holding similar standards

if it was made by su, then kudos to them for doing the right thing...maybe guilford should follow suit

why does this seem so black and white to me?  am i missing something?

Based off the DNR article posted I would say its the ODAC who made this decision. In a Winchester Star article I posted a link to yesterday it specificly mentioned SU wanted to do the right thing so I'd assume Shenandoah forfeited the game. As I've said, I just wanted an explaination which I can live with as long as the NCAA doesn't come back and alter Guilford's record, "after-the-season". If that happens then The ODAC and the folks who made the initial dececision will be the ones left with egg on their face. 

If you missed the article, here is the link:

http://www.winchesterstar.com/TheWinchesterStar/051010/Sports_su.asp

[hasanova]

Llamaguy, I saw a post and then it was gone.  Perhaps, you gave it a second thought and deleted, but it is something I started to address and then did not in my post to Narch.

To answer your thoughtful question, llamaguy, if Guilford should miraculously win the ODAC (with the unlikely combination of wins and losses that requires), I personally think they should decline a bid to the NCAA playoffs.   Quite frankly, I saw the game in person and I don't think this one player was the deciding factor in the one ODAC win in which he played.  However, in order to avoid further criticism, remove even the hint of impropriety and arguably self-impose a sanction, I think the college should voluntarily decline a bid (and that's painful because it would be their first!).  There are a lot of things that have to happen before that position is reached, so maybe that conundrum won't be necessary.  That's also just the opinion of one alumnus and does not at all presume to say what the team and school would do.

[Llamaguy]

Yeah I meant to hit preview, not post.

In a nutshell I just pointed out that Guilford can still win the ODAC Championship and represent the ODAC in the NCAA playoffs.

What would Guilford's stance be on the subject if that were to happen?

I respect your answer and it is exactly what I would expect from Guilford College. I wouldn't guarantee that had they ruled the other way that Bridgewater would accept the forfeit anyway. As Coach Clark said, " you need to take care of your own business", and BC didn't on the field. I also agree that this one kid probably didn't win or lose the game for Guilford.

[kickerdad]

This is a shame. The one's that need to be punished for this are the adminstrators that sit in the offices and push paper all day and not
the kids that have worked there butts off for 4 years and sweated
off pounds during those summer practices. Those kids deserve to
go to the playoffs, (if they win the conference). 99 players shouldn't
have to suffer for 1 player and a bunch of adminstrators who get
paid the big bucks to catch that stuff.

[Snakehandler]

I've got a few thoughts.

It does not matter whether or not the player had an impact on the game. There was a Level I NCAA violation taht took place in that game, the NCAA is who should make the decision. Not the ODAC Commissioner. His only goal is to fly under the radar.
He was affraid there may be poor conduct at the W&L/BC game this weekend. He came to the game but left early and wasn't around when the players shook hands. (an obvious time when trouble may occur)


Also, if Guilford is allowed to keep the wins, and make the playoffs, they should go and not look back. You should scratch and claw for every post season appearance that you have a chance to be in.

[Llamaguy]

This is a shame. The one's that need to be punished for this are the adminstrators that sit in the offices and push paper all day and not
the kids that have worked there butts off for 4 years and sweated
off pounds during those summer practices. Those kids deserve to
go to the playoffs, (if they win the conference). 99 players shouldn't
have to suffer for 1 player and a bunch of adminstrators who get
paid the big bucks to catch that stuff.

You have a good point there Dad. After further thought I agree that their are 99 other individuals who have worked their azzes off and if the chips fall that way then they should go. 

[Jacketlawyer]

Also, if Guilford is allowed to keep the wins, and make the playoffs, they should go and not look back. You should scratch and claw for every post season appearance that you have a chance to be in.

I agree with this opinion whole-heartedly.

[hasanova]

This is a shame. The one's that need to be punished for this are the adminstrators that sit in the offices and push paper all day and not the kids that have worked there butts off for 4 years and sweated off pounds during those summer practices. Those kids deserve to go to the playoffs, (if they win the conference). 99 players shouldn't
have to suffer for 1 player and a bunch of adminstrators who get paid the big bucks to catch that stuff.

Well, who's to say they won't?  Even college administrators and admissions personnel have performance reviews.  If they failed to follow due diligence in double-checking an applicant's eligibility (or in designing and promoting a system that does), perhaps they get a reprimand or fail to get a raise or a promotion.  As rightfully so with most personnel matters, it just may not be as public as this forum.