- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Interesting question on SEC Rant about Muschamp being at the ceremony
Posted on 2/5/20 at 6:57 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
Posted on 2/5/20 at 6:57 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:eh, valid question IMHO.
Dumb comment
quote:Very true. For my $0.02 for the OP...
The NCAA doesn’t circumvent parenthood. If his kid is involved in anyway, he can be there.
Muschamp can obviously be there, Bjorn Cyborg is right. He has to walk a tightrope though. He can not be in anyway recruiting anyone else there.
In short, he has to take his coaches cap off and maybe go just a tad above and beyond (e.g. asking Burch's mom not to to come greet him once on campus). Let's be honest, it's all in the open. If he did anything that was a violation there's no way it doesn't get screamed about by someone.
I imagine he was solidly staying on the parent side of the line.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 6:58 pm to I20goon
Only way for him to do that is to wear Clemson gear.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:07 pm to LSU4Life12
quote:
Well, since you’re so fricking informative, what’s the right answer then, a-hole?
Answer to what?
Is it a violation? No. Not in any way. Football coaches are allowed to be regular parents.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:12 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
Y'all think we get an answer tonight? I don't.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:14 pm to VolTiger13
I'm just busting your balls not being serious.
I think it's funnier seeing the meltdown on here when you're wrong. Most people on this board probably don't understand how recruiting works.

I think it's funnier seeing the meltdown on here when you're wrong. Most people on this board probably don't understand how recruiting works.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:14 pm to LSU Patrick
In other news, usc is down to 10-11 ,1-7 in conference, old miss by 11 in the 2nd half
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:39 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
You were the idiot that said he was “wrong”. What was he “wrong” about, since you seem to know so much more...
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:42 pm to LSU4Life12
quote:
my layman understanding is that Muschamp was in violation...
Not sure of your level of literacy, but the above quote is what I was responding to, and it is completely wrong.
There is no violation for him to be there.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:46 pm to Dlab2013
quote:We should all try to be more like O. I am ready to see ol Ray Baker one day.
but I doubt anything is done, nor does anyone really care. O was asked about it and didn’t seem to give a shite
Posted on 2/5/20 at 7:58 pm to VolTiger13
Ed sounded quite perturbed by it when a question referenced it in his presser
Posted on 2/5/20 at 8:02 pm to sportsman2582
I will say, 3 of the 6 kids “signing” at Hammond today were PWO. They all got to have their family there. It would be ridiculous to preclude a father due to the distinction of LOI/no LOI
Posted on 2/5/20 at 8:04 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Dumb comment. The NCAA doesn’t circumvent parenthood. If his kid is involved in anyway, he can be there.
What kind of signing is done for a walk on?
Posted on 2/5/20 at 8:10 pm to sportsman2582
quote:
It would be ridiculous to preclude a father due to the distinction of LOI/no LOI
Rules is rules, if it says the HC of the team he is supposed to be signing with isn’t supposed to be there it doesn’t matter regarding his son being there!
The school would need to accommodate Jackson by having a separate signing for him “won’t do that for a PWO I would think” or not allowing Boom there!
Posted on 2/5/20 at 8:10 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
a PWO
Doesnt "sign"...so theres that
Posted on 2/5/20 at 8:18 pm to GeeOH
You guys are making this more complicated than it is.
It doesn’t matter if he’s actually signing anything. Perhaps he’s making an announcement. Perhaps he’s just there to have his photo taken and have his moment to shine.
When it comes to their children, coaches have all rights other patents have.
Newsflash: they can also go to all practices and games, regardless of dead periods, visit limits, etc.
It doesn’t matter if he’s actually signing anything. Perhaps he’s making an announcement. Perhaps he’s just there to have his photo taken and have his moment to shine.
When it comes to their children, coaches have all rights other patents have.
Newsflash: they can also go to all practices and games, regardless of dead periods, visit limits, etc.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 8:19 pm to Dudebro2
quote:
Rules is rules
Except when not.
Posted on 2/5/20 at 8:31 pm to Dudebro2
If by rules, you mean some vague reference made by an anonymous forum poster, I’ll go with common sense. Especially when there’s nothing wrong with fathers being present at sons games, school events, etc etc
Posted on 2/5/20 at 9:02 pm to sportsman2582
quote:
Especially when there’s nothing wrong with fathers being present at sons games, school events, etc etc
I will make any bet you want, that if there is a rule prohibiting a future coach from attending the ceremony, that the only way Boom could have been there is with a release from the NCAA.
Just because he is a father doesn’t mean he doesn’t have to follow the rules
Posted on 2/5/20 at 9:19 pm to VolTiger13
quote:
I had the same question when it happened, and I'm not sure he was allowed to be there. Indiana may be able to clarify, but my layman understanding is that Muschamp was in violation...
I'm not very familiar with these rules, but Goon's response is probably right. He has a right to be there for his son, but he can't initiate any contact with Burch or his mother. If they were to initiate it, then the most he could do is politely say hello, excuse himself, and move away.
Popular
Back to top
