bgoblue02

April 28th, 2016 at 3:44 PM ^

seriously?  This is in no way stunning at all.  There is nothing shocking about this.  I am more suprised that ban got overturned than this happening.   If anything I am stunned it took them almost an hour to decide to be hypocrites. 

FauxMo

April 28th, 2016 at 4:14 PM ^

I have thought about those poor kids a lot. What do you want to bet Freeze gets them to do their chores in unethical/illegal ways? I just envision the kids refusing to make their beds, and then waking up the next morning with a new Hummer in the driveway with a stack of Harriet Tubman's on the seat and a naked blond co-ed. BOOM, beds made...

Blue Mike

April 28th, 2016 at 3:48 PM ^

How is this hypocritical?  They have said since the beginning that they were against satellite camps (hence their conference ban) but if they were going to be allowed by the NCAA then they were going to rescind their own ban.  Not hypocritical at all.  You can be against something but still allow it, since they are basically the only conference that didn't allow it before.

Blue Mike

April 28th, 2016 at 4:13 PM ^

Hypocrisy would be Hugh Freeze announcing tomorrow that he has set up 10 camps across the country.  The SEC lifting their ban is just a conference repealing a rule that put its school at a competitive disadvantage.

It's not like the SEC came out and announced they are forcing schools to participate in satellite camps now.

DetroitBlue

April 28th, 2016 at 4:18 PM ^

I'm not sure you understand what the word means. They swore up and down that these camps were bad for kids so they should be banned. When their efforts failed, they decided to allow camps. So either they were lying all along (which, spoiler alert, is hypocritical) or they still think camps are bad for kids but are going ahead anyway (also hypocritical).

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

LJ

April 28th, 2016 at 4:32 PM ^

If it's the latter, (that they still think camps are bad for kids but are going ahead anyway), that doesn't make them hypocrites.  Say you'd vote to eliminate social security.  Are you a hypocrite if you cash the check when social security remains in place?  Of course not.

DOBlue48

April 28th, 2016 at 5:22 PM ^

I think your premise depends on why said person voted against social security.  If they voted against it because they feel too many people who don't need the subsidy, get it, and include themselves in that group of people, then yes hypocritical they are.