Ole Miss player played in six games while academically ineligible


Ole Miss rising sophomore and former walk on Carlos Davis played in six games, including three wins, last season while he wasn’t academically eligible, according to the Clarion Ledger. He recorded seven tackles all on kick coverage.

Ole Miss self-reported the NCAA violation and will likely avoid punishment because they played Davis without knowing the ACT was reviewing his test scores. The test scores were ultimately canceled, and Davis was ruled a non-qualifier.

The ACT notified Davis last August and told him they were reviewing his test scores, but he failed to inform Ole Miss, and the attorney he and his family hired did not ‘sufficiently respond to the testing center’s requests’.

Davis was cleared by the NCAA Eligibility Center last summer and met the minimum standards to attend Ole Miss.

Ole Miss contends they did not know about the score in question until the NCAA Eligibility Center and the ACT informed them on April 26. This is similar to Derrick Rose’s fraudulent SAT score at Memphis, which used the “strict liability” clause and resulted in the Tigers vacating 38 victories from 2007-08. Playing devil’s advocate, what’s the difference?

Davis will sit out six games in 2013 as punishment.

This is just another example of how you never know what the NCAA will rule on any given violation. There’s no communication between the NCAA and the testing services.

Ole Miss winning the Egg Bowl with an ineligible player, one of the three wins Davis participated in, is sure to spark some discussion in the state of Mississippi.

Photo Credit: Chuck Cook – USA TODAY Sports



You must be logged in to post a comment. Please sign in or register

  • so the teams that obeyed the rule, and did the work to watch their athletes test scores, and sent their not qualifiers to JC or redshirted them get punished and the programs that stick their head in the sand get rewarded just get losses. In the real world there is a punishment for hiring an incompetent lawyer, YOU LOSE IN COURT…NOT WIN OR DRAW.

  • So Jon what you are saying is, and correct me if I am wrong, all Mississippi State fans can now say that Dan Mullen is still undefeated against TSUN and that we’ve won four in a row?
    As for me I’m going to the typical thing and go ahead and count it as a win for State. On a side note this also strengthens our belief that the NCAA might have missed some recruiting violations in the last cycle.
    Hail State!! Go To Hell The School Up North!!!!

  • So let me get this straight for those throwing stones:
    1) Player x is cleared by the NCAA Clearinghouse to play in the fall of 2012.
    2) Player x, a walk-on, non-scholarship special teamer plays in 6 of 13 games.
    3) 3 months after the conclusion of the season, the NCAA & the American Composite Testing board notify Ole Miss that the player’s ACT score is a non-qualifier.
    4) Ole Miss reports to NCAA that they will suspend him for 6 games (the amount of games he saw action in, in 2012) to begin the 2013 season.
    5) The NCAA agrees that the punishment is satisfactory, as the institution had no idea this even occurred until 3 months following the season in question.

    Based on that, why is anyone suggesting that Ole Miss forfeit games? If this was our starting QB, then maybe this has a little traction, but a walk-on special teamer?? Come on guys.

    • Why are we suggesting that? Well because we haven’t watched a football game in 7 months and we have nothing else to talk about, because no matter what, we want teams to forfeit wins if they broke the rules (even if they didn’t know they were), and because we can’t get a rise out of our arch rivals if we don’t!! Hail State!! GTHTSUN!!!

Continue scrolling for more articles.