Jump to content

Matt Stepp confirmed DEC Meeting (District 7-3A D1) on Mount Vernon...


Smoaky

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, 01Tigers said:

Let the kids play, if they moved to Texas became residents so be it. Hughes Springs has a huge hand in this as they have others as well. I have heard more factual talk from people concerning the superintendent and AD and it all looks to be true. Worry about what is covered up in your district before treading onto others. 

Spoken like a true homer!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, bordertown said:

If someone wants to move 900 miles for athletic purposes... who cares. I think the abuse is someone moving 50 miles or less to play for school “X”. But in those cases they are able to demonstrate academic reasons (rating of schools, coarse offerings, social issues, etc...). Does Loveland have FFA?

So what you're saying is, instead of trying to fix the things that we all know are wrong that actually get reported to the media, we should just let it go because so much stuff does get swept under the rug? 

If you don't want everyone looking at your school, don't hire a coach with arguably the shadiest past of any coach living 😂

  • Stinks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, H3llR4z0r said:

So what you're saying is, instead of trying to fix the things that we all know are wrong that actually get reported to the media, we should just let it go because so much stuff does get swept under the rug? 

If you don't want everyone looking at your school, don't hire a coach with arguably the shadiest past of any coach living 😂

I don’t have a dog in this fight. People are moving for athletic purposes under the story they are moving for academic purposes. In most cases, the school may not be involved...but parents encouraging kids to move.  But those kids are playing as we speak football, volleyball, tennis, golf, cross country, etc .... . Intent is difficult to prove.

I have read good and bad on Briles character, but have never met the man. Therefore I have no opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bordertown said:

I don’t have a dog in this fight. People are moving for athletic purposes under the story they are moving for academic purposes. In most cases, the school may not be involved...but parents encouraging kids to move.  But those kids are playing as we speak football, volleyball, tennis, golf, cross country, etc .... . 

I have read good and bad on Briles character, but have never met the man. Therefore I have no opinion.

I honestly don't either. Atlanta is in their district but our kids want to play them at their best. But it's not just about the kids. The entirety of the situation is ridiculous. Hawthorne even being involved. If it results in them being ineligible, I hate it but I mean where do you draw the line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Opie1 said:

I'm not from MV district. I just think rules are in place for a reason and if people think it's ok to break these rules then why have any rules. Why even have Refs on the field since we don't need rules.

Opie, The District committee has cleared these players twice already. We dont know if any rules have been broken or not. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Opie1 said:

I'm not from MV district. I just think rules are in place for a reason and if people think it's ok to break these rules then why have any rules. Why even have Refs on the field since we don't need rules.

As long as they don’t accuse Sabine of anything right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Rabbs63 said:

I just got message that they were ruled eligible to play this morning.  Anyone know for sure?

State committee hasn't met yet. The only thing that the UIL has said is that MV will most likely NOT have to forfeit games since they were deemed eligible before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Trump2020 said:

State committee hasn't met yet. The only thing that the UIL has said is that MV will most likely NOT have to forfeit games since they were deemed eligible before.

Completely ridiculous. If they were deemed eligible before, then this means that either the DEC did not do their due diligence the first time this came up or that MV was hiding something and it did not come up in the first meeting. The fact they had to do a second DEC meeting on this matter shows a lack of professionalism with regards to the DEC by not investigating this matter thoroughly. Also, if they are deemed ineligible now, why should they be allowed to have those wins on their record? Clearly the students have been ineligible from the start. This mistake doesn't constitute the allowing of wins for that district IMO. However, the state may overrule and declare these students eligible and nothing should change with regarding their record but if that ruling is upheld by the state then there should be penalties and wins taken away IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DwightSchrute said:

Completely ridiculous. If they were deemed eligible before, then this means that either the DEC did not do their due diligence the first time this came up or that MV was hiding something and it did not come up in the first meeting. The fact they had to do a second DEC meeting on this matter shows a lack of professionalism with regards to the DEC by not investigating this matter thoroughly. Also, if they are deemed ineligible now, why should they be allowed to have those wins on their record? Clearly the students have been ineligible from the start. This mistake doesn't constitute the allowing of wins for that district IMO. However, the state may overrule and declare these students eligible and nothing should change with regarding their record but if that ruling is upheld by the state then there should be penalties and wins taken away IMO.

Uil rules say that if there is a. Ineligible player found anytime in the season weather the school knew or not that the team forfeits their wins...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StangtilDeath said:

Dec wouldn't of took the time to assemble then vote unanimously if there was an "IF"

Which time? First? Second? Third? 
 

wrong is wrong and IF they are in the wrong then punishment should be handed down but this witch-hunt is a bad look. IMO

  • Like 1
  • Stinks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Eagleborn said:

Which time? First? Second? Third? 
 

wrong is wrong and IF they are in the wrong then punishment should be handed down but this witch-hunt is a bad look. IMO

How's it a witch Hunt?  Each time the Dec assembled it was because new information was brought to the table, that's not a witch Hunt, that's doing what's right.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...