Welcome!

Welcome to our community forums, full of great people, ideas and excitement. Please register if you would like to take part.

Register

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

U of R Rams

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Giventofly
    started a topic U of R Rams

    U of R Rams

    http://www.rodpedersen.com/2018/08/1...-pizzeria.html

    The U of R Rams are home to the Manitoba Bisons Wednesday at 6:00 pm at Leibel Field. There's no broadcast of it so get out and pack the park to see what Coach Steve Bryce has got! Plus it's Noah Picton's final career exhibition game ...

    Hey, are the Rams playing all their games at Leibel this year? Man, I've been wanting them to move there since they joined the CIS and now that it's totally renovated, it's such a beautiful facility. Should be a much better atmosphere, especially if they can find a way to get the students to come out. I finally went to a Rams game last year for the first time in years and it completely sucked. 1000 people in Mosaic for a sporting event is a waste of time.




  • Rotor
    replied
    Originally posted by thebulldog14 View Post

    Even if this list did in fact exist, are we really surprised from a bunch of university aged football players?
    and did the Dean think it was going to be a written list they kept in the locker room? How 1980's lol

    Leave a comment:


  • thebulldog14
    replied
    Originally posted by Rotor View Post
    Rumor

    can anyone confirm this

    heard the U of R did a search of Ram locker room - searching for evidence to support the existence of a "U of R girls I'd like to do" list and female staff walked in on two players showering


    may be BS
    Even if this list did in fact exist, are we really surprised from a bunch of university aged football players?

    Leave a comment:


  • Huff Daddy
    replied
    Originally posted by Rotor View Post
    Rumor

    can anyone confirm this

    heard the U of R did a search of Ram locker room - searching for evidence to support the existence of a "U of R girls I'd like to do" list and female staff walked in on two players showering


    may be BS
    Check Ballsy's Twitter page for the details. @ballsy72

    Leave a comment:


  • Rotor
    replied
    Rumor

    can anyone confirm this

    heard the U of R did a search of Ram locker room - searching for evidence to support the existence of a "U of R girls I'd like to do" list and female staff walked in on two players showering


    may be BS

    Leave a comment:


  • footballisgood
    replied
    Originally posted by Rock Preston #1 View Post

    I don't know I'm not sure. Woodsy brought it up so who knows if its true or not.

    One thing that is not in dispute is the Rams didn't do anything wrong and followed all protocols correctly
    The only thing the Rams may need to do better in the future is ensure that they tell the out of country players what they need academically to be elgible. The whole thing sucks really.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rock Preston #1
    replied
    Originally posted by footballisgood View Post

    Can another university look at the players transcripts though? That would be where the shortage of credit hours would be found. Unless the kid applied to both of the schools and they had a copy of his old transcripts??
    I don't know I'm not sure. Woodsy brought it up so who knows if its true or not.

    One thing that is not in dispute is the Rams didn't do anything wrong and followed all protocols correctly

    Leave a comment:


  • footballisgood
    replied
    Originally posted by Rock Preston #1 View Post

    Woodsy said rumour is that another team combed through the Rams roster after losing to them, found the error and then went to the Rams. Then the Rams took it to Usports. But who knows if there is any truth to that.
    Can another university look at the players transcripts though? That would be where the shortage of credit hours would be found. Unless the kid applied to both of the schools and they had a copy of his old transcripts??

    Leave a comment:


  • Rock Preston #1
    replied
    Originally posted by go riders View Post

    But it sounds like the university didn't realize it until after 5 games were played. Somehow, someone noticed and notified USports, made the appeal, and the team was sanctioned.
    Woodsy said rumour is that another team combed through the Rams roster after losing to them, found the error and then went to the Rams. Then the Rams took it to Usports. But who knows if there is any truth to that.

    Leave a comment:


  • go riders
    replied
    Originally posted by footballisgood View Post

    Accordingly to Ballsy on the Wolf, THIS SITE FINALLY HAS A BALLSY SAID, God help us all, the player was short 1 class when he transferred up here from the States to be elgible. As part of the appeal, USports gave him a "compassionate" waiver allowing him to play the rest of the year. Without that, he would still be inelgible. If the university would have made that appeal at the beginning of the year, it probably would have worked out.
    But it sounds like the university didn't realize it until after 5 games were played. Somehow, someone noticed and notified USports, made the appeal, and the team was sanctioned.

    Leave a comment:


  • footballisgood
    replied
    Originally posted by Sprout View Post

    What you say makes sense, but let me throw something into the discussion.

    Said player is now eligible. To me, that says he earned enough credit hours during this academic year to date to be eligible.

    It would be fair, using USports' own argument, to make subsequent wins eligible. So when exactly did he become eligible?

    i know that if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas. Just speculating.
    Accordingly to Ballsy on the Wolf, THIS SITE FINALLY HAS A BALLSY SAID, God help us all, the player was short 1 class when he transferred up here from the States to be elgible. As part of the appeal, USports gave him a "compassionate" waiver allowing him to play the rest of the year. Without that, he would still be inelgible. If the university would have made that appeal at the beginning of the year, it probably would have worked out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sprout
    replied
    Originally posted by lerriuqs View Post

    Meh. How do you justify something different than the other cases in the past that were basically the same issue? I donít see how to can make that change on the fly. If thatís the new approach itís got to be discussed and agreed upon by all involved.
    What you say makes sense, but let me throw something into the discussion.

    Said player is now eligible. To me, that says he earned enough credit hours during this academic year to date to be eligible.

    It would be fair, using USports' own argument, to make subsequent wins eligible. So when exactly did he become eligible?

    i know that if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas. Just speculating.

    Leave a comment:


  • lerriuqs
    replied
    Originally posted by Sprout View Post
    I guess what irritates me about the USports decision is that no judgment was applied. They applied the letter of the rule. Well, we knew what the letter was before. We don't need a talking head parroting that. We were looking for the human factor of judgment to be applied. The ineligible player had 10 carries in total. I dunno but suspect that they had little effect on the outcome of those games.

    I don't need someone to say the rule is the rule; I do need someone to say here is how we can resolve this fairly for all concerned. A mechanical response does not cut it.
    Meh. How do you justify something different than the other cases in the past that were basically the same issue? I donít see how to can make that change on the fly. If thatís the new approach itís got to be discussed and agreed upon by all involved.

    Leave a comment:


  • footballisgood
    replied
    Now what will the Rams do with Brandon Gandire who was charged with assault?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sprout
    replied
    I guess what irritates me about the USports decision is that no judgment was applied. They applied the letter of the rule. Well, we knew what the letter was before. We don't need a talking head parroting that. We were looking for the human factor of judgment to be applied. The ineligible player had 10 carries in total. I dunno but suspect that they had little effect on the outcome of those games.

    I don't need someone to say the rule is the rule; I do need someone to say here is how we can resolve this fairly for all concerned. A mechanical response does not cut it.

    Leave a comment:

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
Working...
X