Re: Will it be the same? Hall and Adam H.

[Brent Wyrick]

I had no idea Hall's status was even in question. When did this come up?
Also, I have a hard time blaming the Compliance Office on Hall. If they drop
the ball, the result is worse.

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of jrulz
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 4:48 PM
To: UC Basketball Forum
Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] Will it be the same? Hall and Adam H.

Yeah, UC's past history re: elegibility is kind of like the Red's
pronouncements re: Ken Griffey Jr.'s healthe status.....if they say Ken
stubbed his toe, and it's day-to-day, you know he's out for the
season...same with the Bearcats in recent years.....we should know soon
translates into out for the season waaaay too often!

One really nice thing about the article in the Enquirer (only thing decent
in that right wing neo-con rag), is that I finally know how to pronounce
hrycaniuk's name:  Hrycaniuk (pronounced err-RITCH-a-nuke)
'Course, if he's ineligible, I guess no one will be saying it too often.

Here's hoping that the regime change, and seeming emphasis on character,
academic responsibility yady yada will result in a favorable decision.

On 10/21/06, Brian Hesseling <address@hidden> wrote:
> This will tell if it is same old Bearcats:
http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061021/SPT0101/61021
0470/-1/CINCI
> In previous years I would predict Adam out for the year and Hall for 6
> games. I have no facts on any of this, just an opinion.