Yesterday we hoped for answers to Kolton Houston's case of mysterious ineligibility. Unfortunately, after Richt and Ron Courson laid it all out on the line, it just got curiouser. If you're late to the #FreeKoltonHouston party, the short of it is:
Just your average, run of the mill NCAA eligibility case, that doesn't involve Miami hookers and child peddling. And while that last bullet might make it sound fair enough, what it boils down to is punishing a kid that has served his time and oh yeh, also happens to have a different metabolic rate than your average NCAA pompous presidential douchebag. I'm sorry, I'll stick with Dr. Ron Courson.
- He had shoulder surgery in HS
- unknowingly took a banned substance
- tested positive for it last April
- served a one year loss of eligibility
- has been tested numerous more times by UGA and the NCAA
- both agree that he has not taken the substance subsequently
- yet his body has not metabolized the Norandrolone fully
- his levels continue to be outside of the NCAA's parameters
Moving on, Theus will back up Dantzler at right tackle.
Is it safe to assume that if he were to register a satisfactory level in a test during the season that he would be automatically ruled eligible? In your opinion? That's kind of what I took from the statement...
Not sure anything is safe to assume, but yes. I'm reading things the same way. IF that were to happen, hopefully the NCAA wouldn't drag their 1950's styled penny loafers too long in reinstating him. However, what gives me great pause is that if he hasn't used it in 2.5 years, can he ever metabolize it to "acceptable" levels? He may never be an eligible student athlete in Emmert's eyes.
In a criminal case, all a defense attorney has to do is prove 'reasonable doubt' that his client guilty. Here we have a young man who got screwed by his doctor and there is PLENTY of reasonable doubt that he is still using. Funny how the kangaroo court at the NCAA works differently...
Post a Comment