TexasTiger 12,800 Posted December 25, 2015 Share Posted December 25, 2015 ""Right now he's not eligible to play against UAB," Auburn coach Bruce Pearl said Monday on the Tiger Talk radio show. "It's an ongoing process and I don't know that we'll know anything more conclusive before Friday. It's obviously extremely frustrating to go through this process. There's so much that gets involved with eligibility and grades and core and test scores and all those different things. We've got a great compliance staff here in Auburn and our compliance staff is doing everything they can to work with the testing agency and the NCAA to get this to some conclusion. I'm disappointed but not discouraged." " http://www.al.com/auburnbasketball/index.ssf/2015/11/danjel_purifoy_still_working_t.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared52 4,354 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. The ACT is not currently validated. We're not waiting for them to invalidate a validated ACT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared52 4,354 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. The ACT is not currently validated. We're not waiting for them to invalidate a validated ACT. Ah. Thanks for the clarification. In that case, the NCAA can't clear him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. The ACT is not currently validated. We're not waiting for them to invalidate a validated ACT. Ah. Thanks for the clarification. In that case, the NCAA can't clear him. That's my understanding of all the available information-- I have no inside info. But Bruce hasn't said he's eligible, but we're being careful. He said he's not currently eligible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,545 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. This is my understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. This is my understanding. So Bruce mistated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,545 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. This is my understanding. So Bruce mistated? No. There is nothing in Bruce's above statement that conflicts with what jared52 said. If the higher score is not validated by the ACT board, obviously the NCAA will have to become involved at that point. Attempting to stay within NCAA requirements and waiting for an NCAA decision are vastly different things. We're concerned about meeting requirements, not waiting for a decision from the NCAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. This is my understanding. So Bruce mistated? No. There is nothing in Bruce's above statement that conflicts with what jared52 said. If the higher score is not validated by the ACT board, obviously the NCAA will have to become involved at that point. Attempting to stay within NCAA requirements and waiting for an NCAA decision are vastly different things. We're concerned about meeting requirements, not waiting for a decision from the NCAA. Bruce said he wasn't eligible to play-- are you saying he is and we're holding him out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoundationEagle 637 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 I say play him. We aren't going to have any chance at all at post season play without him so what would it really hurt if we did end up forfeiting games? We would atleast have a chance at post season with him. The way we play right now, we are only risking forfeiting games in a .500 season. Who really cares about protecting that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,545 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. This is my understanding. So Bruce mistated? No. There is nothing in Bruce's above statement that conflicts with what jared52 said. If the higher score is not validated by the ACT board, obviously the NCAA will have to become involved at that point. Attempting to stay within NCAA requirements and waiting for an NCAA decision are vastly different things. We're concerned about meeting requirements, not waiting for a decision from the NCAA. Bruce said he wasn't eligible to play-- are you saying he is and we're holding him out? Depends on what you & Bruce mean by eligible. You may not be thinking the same thing. The Auburn compliance department has deemed him "ineligible", and rightfully so. The NCAA has not, though they will if the decision of the ACT is not favorable and AU notifies them of such a decision. At this point in time, Auburn is the holdup, waiting for the ACT decision. The NCAA is not. I have now made what I believe is going on here as clear as I can make it, from several different angles. Are you really having such a tough time understanding what I'm saying? If you don't believe what I think is true, fine. Get your own source and come up with something different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared52 4,354 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 I say play him. We aren't going to have any chance at all at post season play without him so what would it really hurt if we did end up forfeiting games? We would atleast have a chance at post season with him. The way we play right now, we are only risking forfeiting games in a .500 season. Who really cares about protecting that? The guy just coming off a show cause cars. You don't play a guy you know is a risk of being declared ineligible. That's career suicide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. This is my understanding. So Bruce mistated? No. There is nothing in Bruce's above statement that conflicts with what jared52 said. If the higher score is not validated by the ACT board, obviously the NCAA will have to become involved at that point. Attempting to stay within NCAA requirements and waiting for an NCAA decision are vastly different things. We're concerned about meeting requirements, not waiting for a decision from the NCAA. Bruce said he wasn't eligible to play-- are you saying he is and we're holding him out? Depends on what you & Bruce mean by eligible. You may not be thinking the same thing. The Auburn compliance department has deemed him "ineligible", and rightfully so. The NCAA has not, though they will if the decision of the ACT is not favorable and AU notifies them of such a decision. At this point in time, Auburn is the holdup, waiting for the ACT decision. The NCAA is not. I have now made what I believe is going on here as clear as I can make it, from several different angles. Are you really having such a tough time understanding what I'm saying? If you don't believe what I think is true, fine. Get your own source and come up with something different. This is the clearest you've been . Earlier you said "the ncaa is not involved" and Bruce said our staff is working with them, so there are some semantics involved there to rectify what he has said and what you are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Bruce said we would know something before the new year. And the new year is almost here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuburnNTexas 7,127 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Didn't want to start a new Topic but how serious was Dunan's injury? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared52 4,354 Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Didn't want to start a new Topic but how serious was Dunan's injury? No idea, but that's certainly worth a new thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuburnArch13 185 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Again, the NCAA isn't the reason. The ACT is the reason. The NCAA has cleared him, but if he plays and the ACT score is invalidated, he would be ineligible and AU would forfeit any games he played in. And Brice can't afford the black eye of playing him and then getting hit with forfeits if his score is invalidated. This is my understanding. So Bruce mistated? No. There is nothing in Bruce's above statement that conflicts with what jared52 said. If the higher score is not validated by the ACT board, obviously the NCAA will have to become involved at that point. Attempting to stay within NCAA requirements and waiting for an NCAA decision are vastly different things. We're concerned about meeting requirements, not waiting for a decision from the NCAA. Bruce said he wasn't eligible to play-- are you saying he is and we're holding him out? Depends on what you & Bruce mean by eligible. You may not be thinking the same thing. The Auburn compliance department has deemed him "ineligible", and rightfully so. The NCAA has not, though they will if the decision of the ACT is not favorable and AU notifies them of such a decision. At this point in time, Auburn is the holdup, waiting for the ACT decision. The NCAA is not. I have now made what I believe is going on here as clear as I can make it, from several different angles. Are you really having such a tough time understanding what I'm saying? If you don't believe what I think is true, fine. Get your own source and come up with something different. So in theory, if the ACT rules to reject his recent test, does that mean that they are ruling that foul play occurred, or just that they can't confirm that it didn't? And if they rule that foul play did occur, does that affect his eligibility for next season, or would he still be eligible as an initial partial qualifier (provided his grades are good)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jared52 4,354 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Bruce said we would know something before the new year. And the new year is almost here. And it's passed. I'm suprised there hasn't been some news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cole256 17,039 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 He recently said he expect to know something by the end of this month Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU64 10,122 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 He recently said he expect to know something by the end of this month Is he hiring a DC also....sounds like what we heard from Gus the past several weeks.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cole256 17,039 Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Well at least we can see other people has his hands tied lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoundationEagle 637 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 If he hasn't been cleared yet, I have serious doubts he ever plays at AU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 If he hasn't been cleared yet, I have serious doubts he ever plays at AU No he will play for Auburn at some time. There are only two possible outcomes from the ACT decision: he qualifies, or he partially qualifies. He will remain at Auburn regardless. The question is whether he will play this year or next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoundationEagle 637 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 If he hasn't been cleared yet, I have serious doubts he ever plays at AU No he will play for Auburn at some time. There are only two possible outcomes from the ACT decision: he qualifies, or he partially qualifies. He will remain at Auburn regardless. The question is whether he will play this year or next year. And if they decide something is off in his ACT score, wouldn't that make him ineligible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,800 Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 If he hasn't been cleared yet, I have serious doubts he ever plays at AU No he will play for Auburn at some time. There are only two possible outcomes from the ACT decision: he qualifies, or he partially qualifies. He will remain at Auburn regardless. The question is whether he will play this year or next year. And if they decide something is off in his ACT score, wouldn't that make him ineligible? I think they can invalidate w/o finding fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.