Bad news for Georgia Tech Football: (http://www.ajc.com/gatech/content/sports/gatech/0503/15gtfoot.html?22898)

Eight Georgia Tech football players have been declared academically ineligible for this fall, including two of the Yellow Jackets' most valuable players, tailback Tony Hollings and defensive end Tony Hargrove, people familiar with the situation said Thursday afternoon.


Bad news for Georgia Football: (http://www.ajc.com/uga/content/sports/uga/0503/15gafoot.html)

Seventeen University of Georgia football players have been suspended or declared ineligible to play, and the Bulldogs could be without as many as seven projected starters when the defending SEC champions open their season against Clemson on Aug. 30.

The breakdown: Nine players have been declared ineligible for selling their 2002 SEC championship rings, four players have been suspended for violations of unspecified team rules and five players were suspended last month after being arrested on charges of marijuana possession. Cornerback Tim Jennings, one of the players suspended in the marijuana case, was among the players declared ineligible for selling his ring.

Yeah, yeah...but the nine that has been declared ineligible for selling the rings will get reinstated before they miss the first game. Pass precedent shows this.

I think you're right. UGA may do a single game suspension and spread them out over the season, but the Tech situation is much more dire. They were going to be in trouble even if they were at full strength. Not that I'm really crying about that, though.

Originally posted by KWhit
Dola

The selling rings thing is a stupid rule anyway. If a player wants to sell their PERSONAL property, they should be able to do so.

Exactly how I feel, but the NCAA is always making rules that keep players from having any kind of money while they make millions off of them.

Teams selling themselves out for more money but how dare those "student-athletes" make a dime while making millions for the schools. The NCAA has more worthless rules then i can count and it's too bad that there is no check on their lack of intelligence and common sense on these matters.

I just want to add to this that if Tony Hollings doesn't get to play next year, that would really suck. That guy was incredible at the begining of last year, and I'll hate not seeing him next year. I know he plays for a hated rival and all, but, man, the guy was fun to watch.

BTW, it is now up to ten GT players being reported ineligible for fall, according to the AJC story. This jives with the 11 reported yesterday on various message boards. The defensive line is taking a massive hit, as is the running back position.

Yes, it will be a shame not to see Tony compete on the Flats, but you never know how he would have come back from the ACL injury either.

FWIW, I think the UGA situation will be resolved prior to the season.

GrantDawg or KWhit, do you think Dooley's job will ever be in jeopardy in Athens? Even given his stature, he hasn't had a stellar year on the administrative front--and he has had several reported disagreements with Adams over the years. Would they ever force him to "retire"?

Official word from Georgia Tech is 11 student-athletes, 10 of which are football players.

However, since it's an academic ineligibility, these students (or, at least some of them) have the opportunity to bring their grades up during the summer quarter to regain eligibility. Not sure which are able to.

Not trying to start a flame war here, but I'm glad I'm in Tech's shoes rather than Georgia's. I've been listening to sports radio in Atlanta all day, and I've heard people rag on Tech and say Georgia got screwed (this is from both the UGa flagship and teh GT flagship stations). My personal opinion? Regardless of whether SAs should be allowed to profit from their memorabilia, right now they aren't. The athletes broke a rule, they're suspended. Simple as that. The argument about whether the rule should be there is completely separate. As for Tech, if they can't cut it academically, then they shouldn't be there. I feel for Hollings, Hargrove, and the others - but one reason I'm so proud of being a Tech grad is the academics. Better than classes taught by coaches' sons. :D

Dooley is already is going to retire (I think it is next year). That is already done.

And as for which team I'd rather be with (and notice, I have been civil in this thread), the rule the Dawgs players broke has been broken before, and the players involved didn't miss a game. They will not this time either. I hope no one on the Tech team does either. I hope they do go to summer school and play. BUT the academic ineligibility is going to be much more difficult to make up than the ring thing.

As for the little crack about classes, I know many people that went to Tech and I know they have an easier track of classes for the players (plus, what was O'Leary's graduation rate? 28%? Be proud!).

Hehe... those classes aren't easy. I never had class with football players that I know of, but had a bunch with basketball players - Travis Best in a psych class, Stephon Marbury in an english for two. Although Marbury showed up to class three times - no real surprise he was leaving. ;)

Nah, wasn't that low. Was somewhere around 40%, plus 15% of transfer-outs. Bring those in and it's close to the student body rate. I'd like to see graduation rates higher, of course, but I don't think we'll ever get athlete grad rates as high as the Notre Dames of the world, just because of the limited curriculum, but ya know.

Most Tech athletes are Industrial Management majors, which still carries a calculus requirement--it is not engineering level calculus, but still calculus nonetheless. Urban legend has it that teams recruiting against Tech used to send calculus books to recruits after Tech visits and told them that they better get used to it if they wanted to go to Tech.

Originally posted by digamma
Most Tech athletes are Industrial Management majors, which still carries a calculus requirement--it is not engineering level calculus, but still calculus nonetheless. Urban legend has it that teams recruiting against Tech used to send calculus books to recruits after Tech visits and told them that they better get used to it if they wanted to go to Tech.

Yeah, I heard that Dooley used to do that to anyone who was considering both UGA and Tech.

I know one of the kids who sold his ring. (I won't name him, but just a tiny bit of thought and research would make it obvious which one I'm talking about.) I'll almost guarantee that this kid is in the bottom 1% financially of students at UGA. I'm trying to picture him in the social scene with the other kids there. He's a pretty good kid. I have a hard time with the NCAA begrudging him a chance to go to the movies and out to eat from time to time because he can't have a summer job. Let him sell the ring!!!

Yes the ring was given to him and it is his. However, I agree that he should not be able to sell it for more than the cost of the ring. The reason? What if a Florida booster buys the Florida jersey that Brock Berlin wore in bowl game for $20,000? And then Brock just HAPPENS to decide that he wants to stay at Florida. TOOOOO much room for abuse if the NCAA doesn't have some sort of regulation. After a player is out of eligibility, by all means, let them make what they can.

In regard to having jobs, I'm sure there is a better solution than what is currently in place. I haven't given it enough thought to have an alternative. I don't know if I would rather see stipends, or allowing athletes to work in certain "approved" jobs, or simply opening it up altogether. I really can't see me being in favor of simply opening it up because of the potential for abuse. Of course between classes, studying, practice, travel to games, and game day, I don't see that there is a lot of time for athletes to earn a great deal of money working anyway.

As for the argument that athletes are basically slaves for the schools, that the colleges are getting rich off of the athletes sweat, I say HOGWASH!!! If you don't like it, quit playing. And scholarship players have NO argument. They are getting a free college education. Non-scholly's have a little better argument, but it is still weak.

Originally posted by Buzzbee
Yes the ring was given to him and it is his. However, I agree that he should not be able to sell it for more than the cost of the ring. The reason? What if a Florida booster buys the Florida jersey that Brock Berlin wore in bowl game for $20,000? And then Brock just HAPPENS to decide that he wants to stay at Florida. Yeah...I guess I'd hate for those kids to learn at an early age how the real world works. I guess we oughta keep 'em idealistic, huh? ;)

Seriously, I get your point.

--Ben

Ouch, sucks to be Georgia Tech...

As a update....All the players that sold their rings were cleared and will not miss a game. Linky (http://www.ajc.com/uga/content/sports/uga/0603/05rings.html)

Basically the NCAA said the rule was unclear. The university will punish them, but none will miss a game. Hmmmm....seems someone said that would happen.

Originally posted by GrantDawg
Hmmmm....seems someone said that would happen.

Who would that be? :)

I heard that this morning. Made my day.

Man, I can't wait for college football!

A shame for both UGA and GT fans to see all of this. I just think its ludicrous what the Crystal Palace of the NCAA decides to enforce. Sell your ring on eBay for a grand (or whatever they sold it for) and your a criminal.

Meanwhile, Herschel had a well-documented brand new car when he showed up on UGA's campus, I remember Mike Bobo's new BMW, the list goes on and on, not just here but at Tech.

Heck people were giving Jack Nicklaus' kid stuff when he was at Tech, and he was only playing golf (and already loaded).

Interesting side note is that Quincy Carter and I used to ride the same bus to morning classes for a couple of semesters (he might've lived in the same complex as me, I don't know), and he was the one who ALREADY had a million bucks. :)

As a side note to this, it is being reported that Tony Hollings may apply to be a part of the NFL supplemental draft. He is thought to have top 10 potential for next year's draft.

I can't remember when there was last a supplemental draft.

Buzzbee, I almost agree with you. ;) I understand what you are saying, but big time D1 schools make a killing off selling tons of stuff with the players name on it.

I remember watching the Vol's playing the Hogs and seeing what looked like thousands of Manning jerseys. He didn't make a red cent off of that. It somehow doesn't seem fair to me.