Jackie Sherrill Questioned Again
After finally succumbing to the withdrawal pains inflicted by years of not breaking some sort of NCAA rule, the man they call "Kang" made a trip back to Starkville over the weekend.
And though it appeared on multiple occasions that he interacted with players—which everyone knows is a violation of NCAA bylaw 11.7.2, limiting schools to one head coach, nine assistants, and two graduate assistants working with players—both he and Mullen swear it didn't happen.
"In his usual post-practice meeting with reporters, Mullen smiled and laughed when asked if Sherrill's presence violated the limitations on coaches.
"'No, because he was coaching me,' Mullen said. 'I don't think there's any limitation of coaches that can coach your coaches.'
"Asked if he was sure that Sherrill did not interact with players, Mullen was emphatic.
"'No, I was coaching the players,' Mullen said. 'He was sitting there telling me what to tell them.'"
"Reached on his cell phone later as he was returning to his Germantown, Tenn., home, Sherrill said he 'wasn't coaching them. I was trying to coach the coaches how to coach them.'"
Good to see he's never strayed from the "Deny 'til you die" philosophy that landed multiple schools on NCAA probation under his watch. It also makes me wonder if Mullen is so unqualified for a head coaching position that he has to solicit the advice from a person who compiled a mediocre 75-75-2 overall record and a 43-59-1 SEC record.
As a bonus, every message board certainly has their share of idiots, but some are just more quotable than others:
"After all these years of trying to get Sherrill they still have not given up. Who made up this story about Sherrill? They should be added to the lawsuit! JWS has endured enough false accusations. He has never cheated. You can't prove one instance where he ever cheated. JWS and Croom are among the top five most ethical coaches the SEC has seen in the last 20 years. JWS was the most winningest coach for MSU that I can remember."
I'll leave it up to you to form your own opinions about that.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?