- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Correcting some important information in the Will Wade situation
Posted on 3/17/19 at 8:31 pm to Lester Earl
Posted on 3/17/19 at 8:31 pm to Lester Earl
It requires him to comply with an investigation within a "reasonable" time. What is that, an hour, a week, a month, etc? I think its safe to say that the typical NCAA investigation runs for months or years, so why is the definition of reasonable now 1 day. It's not and LSU knows that, and that is why they have not used that provision as the basis for firing him for cause.
Okay, what evidence do they have on Will Wade? The only "evidence" of wrong doing is the Yahoo article, again part of a transcript that was fed to a blogger by Dawkins defense team.
LSU's investigation into smart included an interview with his mother and apparently the "handler" that LSU claims to have identified. Yet, even after interviewing these individuals, who were not removed from what Wade was alleged of doing (making an offer to Smart's family through a handler), LSU doesn't seem to have the basis to fire him with cause. That is a fact that LSU has spoon fed to its friends at the advocate and SI.
If LSU had anything more than that, they would have moved by now and fired him cause.
Instead they want Wade to prove to them he didn't do anything wrong. Sorry, but the "we weren't convinced you did not do anything wrong" is not going to hold up in court as a basis for firing your coach with cause.
Eta. Hey Lester - you going to respond or are you waiting to get your marching orders from Alexander.
Okay, what evidence do they have on Will Wade? The only "evidence" of wrong doing is the Yahoo article, again part of a transcript that was fed to a blogger by Dawkins defense team.
LSU's investigation into smart included an interview with his mother and apparently the "handler" that LSU claims to have identified. Yet, even after interviewing these individuals, who were not removed from what Wade was alleged of doing (making an offer to Smart's family through a handler), LSU doesn't seem to have the basis to fire him with cause. That is a fact that LSU has spoon fed to its friends at the advocate and SI.
If LSU had anything more than that, they would have moved by now and fired him cause.
Instead they want Wade to prove to them he didn't do anything wrong. Sorry, but the "we weren't convinced you did not do anything wrong" is not going to hold up in court as a basis for firing your coach with cause.
Eta. Hey Lester - you going to respond or are you waiting to get your marching orders from Alexander.
This post was edited on 3/17/19 at 9:25 pm
2
Posted on 3/17/19 at 8:38 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Why do you hate facts?
LMAO!!!
Posted on 3/17/19 at 8:53 pm to ellessuuuu
quote:LOL. I see that many times and I hate it. In licensing law, contracts, etc.
It requires him to comply with an investigation within a "reasonable" time. What is that, an hour, a week, a month, etc?
When asked that question by employees my response is "it is always 30 days, unless it is less".
In other words- I have no freaking clue, but I don't want you to notice. It is as long as the one with the most leverage wants it to be.
Who has the most leverage between Wade & LSU is the question?
On one hand, LSU holds the keys to Wade's reputation in the short-term and Wade's employment. Which is dog shite and not currently worth the paper it is written on, respectively.
On the other hand, it appears to me Wade holds the keys to LSU successfully fending off a LOIC charge.
Since Wade has refused, is still employed, and didn't even be compelled to grand jury testimony much less indicted in this current scandal I say he does. Too bad LSU admins can't do that political calculation.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 8:55 pm to pellietigersaint
quote:
Can we please get this shity fricking thread anchored?
Can you gfy?
Posted on 3/17/19 at 8:56 pm to dsides
This needs to die in a fire of a thread
The admins have taken a shite on the players and this thread is helping that cause. Great Job Lester and all those who help this continue.
I watched as the administration would not stand with coaches and players before. This is not the first time.
The admins have taken a shite on the players and this thread is helping that cause. Great Job Lester and all those who help this continue.
I watched as the administration would not stand with coaches and players before. This is not the first time.
This post was edited on 3/17/19 at 8:59 pm
Posted on 3/17/19 at 9:11 pm to themunch
quote:
This needs to die in a fire of a thread
What?
quote:
The admins have taken a shite on the players and this thread is helping that cause
No it’s not
quote:
watched as the administration would not stand with coaches and players before. This is not the first time.
Duh
Posted on 3/17/19 at 9:51 pm to dsides
quote:
Any competent person knows why he couldn’t meet. LSU tried to strong arm him for the wrong reasons. The competent fans are on to your bull shite.
Try to be honest with yourself instead of just blindly supporting someone who may have committed very serious NCAA infractions which have hurt all involved (fans, players, LSU, etc). I have been a die-hard LSU & Saints fan since the early '70s. Because of my longtime support through many administrations, coaches, teams, I am able to have a sense of perspective on this topic. I cannot be someone that ignores the evidence just because I'm a fan.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 9:55 pm to Irish LSU Fan
quote:
ry to be honest with yourself instead of just blindly supporting someone who may have committed very serious NCAA infractions which have hurt all involved (fans, players, LSU, etc). I have been a die-hard LSU & Saints fan since the early '70s. Because of my longtime support through many administrations, coaches, teams, I am able to have a sense of perspective on this topic. I cannot be someone that ignores the evidence just because I'm a fan.
You are a simpleton and the exact fan the administration thought they could fool. It doesn’t work like that anymore. Feel free to keep your head in the sand but enough is enough. Bench yourself
Posted on 3/17/19 at 10:00 pm to ellessuuuu
quote:
If LSU had anything more than that, they would have moved by now and fired him cause. Instead they want Wade to prove to them he didn't do anything wrong. Sorry, but the "we weren't convinced you did not do anything wrong" is not going to hold up in court as a basis for firing your coach with cause. Eta. Hey Lester - you going to respond or are you waiting to get your marching orders from Alexander.
Exactly.
Lester's takes are always moronic. This is nothing new.
I am actually glad he is actually giving these hot takes. This reminds me so much of when he was wrong about the Will Smith murder.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 10:15 pm to dsides
Look....check my "fire JA" threads, etc. I am no fan of FKing or JA. But my disdain for them does not blind me from the evidence.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 10:26 pm to Irish LSU Fan
quote:
But my disdain for them does not blind me from the evidence.
Muh evidence. Dear god. LSU is not under investigation. Let it play out without drawing more attention to it.
Posted on 3/17/19 at 10:46 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Why do you hate facts?
Cause it's a middle school girl fight.
And nobody hates facts, just your tired schtick
Posted on 3/17/19 at 11:19 pm to dsides
WHAT EVIDENCE?!?!
Please, I'm dying to hear what evidence LSU or the NCAA has that a violation occurred. The only "evidence" is part of a wiretap recording that was spoon fed to a blogger by a criminal defense attorney trying to craft a certain narrative to defend a felon, who is on trial for the 2nd time in 8 months.
Neither LSU nor the NCAA have the recording and quite frankly, neither of them are likely to get the recording. The recording is not likely to be admitted into evidence at the second trial, just like the other recording was excluded from the first trial. Inadmissible evidence is not publicly available. I am not aware of any mechanism for a non-party in a criminal case to get access to wiretaps of third parties.
So again, what evidence exists, besides a blogger's article?
Please, I'm dying to hear what evidence LSU or the NCAA has that a violation occurred. The only "evidence" is part of a wiretap recording that was spoon fed to a blogger by a criminal defense attorney trying to craft a certain narrative to defend a felon, who is on trial for the 2nd time in 8 months.
Neither LSU nor the NCAA have the recording and quite frankly, neither of them are likely to get the recording. The recording is not likely to be admitted into evidence at the second trial, just like the other recording was excluded from the first trial. Inadmissible evidence is not publicly available. I am not aware of any mechanism for a non-party in a criminal case to get access to wiretaps of third parties.
So again, what evidence exists, besides a blogger's article?
This post was edited on 3/17/19 at 11:20 pm
Posted on 3/17/19 at 11:22 pm to ellessuuuu
quote:
WHAT EVIDENCE?!?! Please, I'm dying to hear what evidence LSU or the NCAA has that a violation occurred. The only "evidence" is part of a wiretap recording that was spoon fed to a blogger by a criminal defense attorney trying to craft a certain narrative to defend a felon, who is on trial for the 2nd time in 8 months. Neither LSU nor the NCAA have the recording and quite frankly, neither of them are likely to get the recording. The recording is not likely to be admitted into evidence at the second trial, just like the other recording was excluded from the first trial. Inadmissible evidence is not publicly available. I am not aware of any mechanism for a non-party in a criminal case to get access to wiretaps of third parties. So again, what evidence exists, besides a blogger's article?
Thank You. Admins, can we now anchor our residents contrarian’s attempt at attention now???
Posted on 3/17/19 at 11:32 pm to dsides
quote:
LSU is not under investigation.
Are you drunk? Of course, LSU is under investigation. LSU has already admitted this in their statement.
quote:
Let it play out without drawing more attention to it.
That horse has left the barn. Yahoo (probably via the defense) took care of that. Everything since has been attempts at "damage control."
Posted on 3/18/19 at 6:02 am to Irish LSU Fan
The best damage control for LSU would have been to issue a statement that the allegations in the Yahoo article are serious and that the compliance office is vigorously investigating these claims, then claim up until the media storm blows over in two days. Instead, they suspend the coach on the brink of an SEC Championship, treat him as a pariah, public tout that he wasn't said he was innocent, and proclaim that an offer is a violation thereby confirming Wade's guilt in the court of public opinion. How can anyone think this administration has handled this well?
Posted on 3/18/19 at 7:11 am to ellessuuuu
quote:
Please, I'm dying to hear what evidence LSU or the NCAA has that a violation occurred
This really shouldn’t be that hard to understand.
Will Wade cannot be put away simply by what’s on the wire tap. That in itself is merely a flag that got the attention of LSU & the NCAA, which in turn leads to each party looking into the details surrounding it.
Neither party “needs” the recording for anything. There own investigation will determine his fate. The one he is not cooperating with right now. Which makes you rub you chin. If he’s innocent, what’s he holding out for??
Posted on 3/18/19 at 7:17 am to Lester Earl
Okay, according to LSU, it has interviewed the other players involved, Smart, Smart's mom and the handler. Those interviews didn't produce proof of wrong doing. If they did, Smart wouldn't be playing and Wade would have been fired.
So where is the proof coming from? Again, LSU has suspended its head coach based on a bloggers report based on information that was given to him, in piecemeal fashion, by a criminal defense attorney defending his client. Now, LSU has backed itself into a corner and has to fire Wade, but as we sit here 10 days later, they have zero evidence of wrong doing.
ETA. It's not his job to prove he's innocent. Go back and review recent history of NCAA investigations. When schools circle the wagons and stick up for their coaches, they have done far better than schools that threw themselves at the mercy of the NCAA. Ask Mizzou how that worked.
The NCAA showed up and mentioned institutional control and LSU wet themselves.
So where is the proof coming from? Again, LSU has suspended its head coach based on a bloggers report based on information that was given to him, in piecemeal fashion, by a criminal defense attorney defending his client. Now, LSU has backed itself into a corner and has to fire Wade, but as we sit here 10 days later, they have zero evidence of wrong doing.
ETA. It's not his job to prove he's innocent. Go back and review recent history of NCAA investigations. When schools circle the wagons and stick up for their coaches, they have done far better than schools that threw themselves at the mercy of the NCAA. Ask Mizzou how that worked.
The NCAA showed up and mentioned institutional control and LSU wet themselves.
This post was edited on 3/18/19 at 7:22 am
Posted on 3/18/19 at 7:29 am to ellessuuuu
quote:
Again, LSU has suspended its head coach based on a bloggers report based on information that was given to him, in piecemeal fashion, by a criminal defense attorney defending his client. Now, LSU has backed itself into a corner and has to fire Wade, but as we sit here 10 days later, they have zero evidence of wrong doing.
No, they suspended him because he will not meet with them.
quote:
Okay, according to LSU, it has interviewed the other players involved, Smart, Smart's mom and the handler. Those interviews didn't produce proof of wrong doing. If they did, Smart wouldn't be playing and Wade would have been fired.
You don’t know who They interviewed. And again, Wade & Smart’s involvement are separate. Smart isn’t on tape. Smarts mom is not on tape. They are 3 and 4x removed from the recordings.
In the end, Wade still won’t meet with LSU. If he’s innocent & if it were that easy to prove he’d be coaching right now cause he would have met with them to clear the air
Posted on 3/18/19 at 7:36 am to Lester Earl
Welp ok having read this again. WW has the right to do what ever he wants. He by his actions invites LSU to take action as outlined in his contract. The contract allows LSU the right to,suspend him in the event of an investigation criminal or NCAA etc.
It is pretty difficult line to manage for WW to talk to LSU about matters that he could be asked to testify in federal court about. I suppose that if subpoenaed everyone could claim attorney client privilege. They would certainly be subpoenaed.
The more this goes on. It does not seem that there is any reason that it is advantageous to the defense to get WW on the stand.
It is pretty difficult line to manage for WW to talk to LSU about matters that he could be asked to testify in federal court about. I suppose that if subpoenaed everyone could claim attorney client privilege. They would certainly be subpoenaed.
The more this goes on. It does not seem that there is any reason that it is advantageous to the defense to get WW on the stand.
Page 21 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News