re: Does anyone think LSU BB is going to escape the Smart/Wade stuff unscathed?

quote:

---

Fire him for what? You are claiming he didnt do anything wrong. Why would they fire him? And better yet, why would he not fight that if he didn't do anything wrong?

---

Please quote in any of my posts where I said or claim "he didn't do anything wrong."

What I have always said is that while yes, one can make an easy assumption that he likely did something wrong based on what all has been released, an argument can also be made to the contrary as there is no hard proof that he did in fact do something wrong. But I have NEVER come out and said, "he didn't do anything wrong." So try again on that bullshite.

What I have a problem with is people drawing the conclusion, as fact, that he cheated, when there is no hard proof that he did. Based on what we have heard and read, there is nothing there to definitely say he cheated or paid a player. Is there more that could come out or be uncovered that we do not know and proves he cheated? Of course there can. But basing it off the fact that he didn't collect his money, or accepted a suspension, or allowed LSU to make it easier to fire him is just complete conjecture at this point.

quote:

---

That's a hugggggge reach, and frankly a deflection because you know i am right.

---

How is it a reach, other than you want to claim it is in order to try some weak attempt to diminish my argument?

As a hypothetical, if I stated that you stole from your employer and released some tapes or other evidence that doesn't prove you did steal, but helps infer that you did, then there is a good chance your employer would suspend you from your job and withhold pay or work bonuses owed and then say, "we want to amend your contract to make it easy to fire you in the event that our investigation proves you did steal." And lets say you resist all those things and continue to show up at your job, demand your pay, and don't agree to amend your contract, is it not plausible to think your employer would fire you as a result of that regardless if they are right or wrong to do so? And would you not likely relent to their demands even though you know you are innocent because you know that there is a good chance no other employer is going to hire you if you quit or are fired because everyone else in the public believes you did it based on what has been said about you, and you also know that any lawsuit for wrongful termination would likely get dragged out for years while you sit there unemployed and unpaid?

TLDR: My argument is that there is another plausible reason as to why Wade would relent to all of those things other than a reason that he knew he had cheated.

quote:

---

Again, you should read his contract. It's not that long and a pretty easy read even for a layman.

---

Again, quit being an egotistical know-it-all that assumes someone hasn't done something (or has done something) just because you say it is so. I have read his contract and as an attorney I understand it pretty damn well.

quote:

---

TLDR: In order for LSU to fire him and not pay him, there has to be a cause

---

No shite Dick Tracy. That is true of any employment contract unless it states you are hired "at will" like most Louisiana jobs are. But just b/c they have to have cause doesn't mean they still can't fire him. All that statement of "with cause" does is creates a means for litigation and becomes a question of the court to decide on whether or not they had valid cause to fire him.

Would it have been stupid for LSU to fire him at that point? Of course it would have been as their only argument for cause would have been Wade's refusal to meet with administrators. And yes, that is a reason, but it is not an airtight reason.

I’m not reading all that, but judging by the length it’s your fantasy about what happened based on your feelings, not facts. It’s really not that complicated

quote:

---

I’m not reading all that,

---

Congrats on your lazy ignorance.

Also, I'm still waiting on you to show me where I have ever made the statement that Wade did nothing wrong.

quote:

---

but judging by the length it’s your fantasy about what happened based on your feelings,

---

Congrats on again basing your opinion on an assumption and not on facts as there is nothing regarding my personal feelings in any of that. Also thanks for conceding the argument.

quote:

---

It’s really not that complicated

---

Hey, hey, something we can finally agree on.

Another question might be if “ole joe “ handled the situation so wonderfully, why was he abruptly reassigned ?

Could it be that he completely botched the whole deal?

We can sit here and give him credit for Orgerons success but only a fool thinks that coaching search was handled appropriately regardless of the very fortunate outcome.

Alleva was an incompetent buffoon. All he had to do was issue a statement acknowledging the situation and advising the media that LSU would continue to monitor the situation closely. That’s it.

Alleva blew it. That’s the reality. There’s a reason Will Wade is here and Alleva is not.

quote:

---

there are plausible arguments to make against Wade being proven as a cheater

---

My main concern is that he admitted to making deals in the past on the wiretap while discussing making an offer to Smart. How would you go about defending that part of it?

Unless someone talks that hasn't already. Like the bag man or a recruit that wasn't on the radar in any of this I don't think anything happens. They interviewed Smart and family and found nothing, they interviewed Wade and got nothing. Unless there is something we don't know they don't have enough to sanction LSU IMO.

quote:

---

to say you are all in your feelings and speaking from a biased position just because you acknowledge that there is not enough proof (based on what we are aware of

---

You do understand that there is a difference in

A) not being able to prove it

And

B) trying to pass it off like he was talking about something other than a payout

Right?

Like who do you think you are fooling? Lmao. That’s so childish & sophomoric


I hope he can skate it, but it won’t because he contends he was just “talking bullshite” to some handier. Everything that he has said & done says it was much more serious than that.

quote:

---

What I have always said is that while yes, one can make an easy assumption that he likely did something wrong based on what all has been released, an argument can also be made to the contrary as there is no hard proof that he did in fact do something wrong. But I have NEVER come out and said, "he didn't do anything wrong." So try again on that bullshite.

What I have a problem with is people drawing the conclusion, as fact, that he cheated, when there is no hard proof that he did. Based on what we have heard and read, there is nothing there to definitely say he cheated or paid a player. Is there more that could come out or be uncovered that we do not know and proves he cheated? Of course there can. But basing it off the fact that he didn't collect his money, or accepted a suspension, or allowed LSU to make it easier to fire him is just complete conjecture at this point.

---

If/when the NOA comes down, you can bet this will be one of the bylaws Wade/LSU is alleged to have violated:

quote:

---

13.2 Offers and Inducements.

13.2.1 General Regulation. An institution's staff member or any representative of its athletics interests shall not be involved, directly or indirectly, in making arrangements for or giving or offering to give any financial aid or other benefits to a prospective student-athlete or his or her family members or friends, other than expressly permitted by NCAA regulations.
Receipt of a benefit by a prospective student-athlete or his or her family members or friends is not a violation of NCAA legislation if it is determined that the same benefit is generally available to the institution's prospective students or their family members or friends or to a particular segment of the student body (e.g., international students, minority students) determined
on a basis unrelated to athletics ability.

13.2.1.1 Specific Prohibitions. Specifically prohibited financial aid, benefits and arrangements include, but are not
limited to, the following: [R] (Revised: 10/28/97, 11/1/00, 4/23/08, 4/25/18)
(a) An employment arrangement for a prospective student-athlete's family members;
(b) Gift of clothing or equipment;
(c) Co-signing of loans;
(d) Providing loans to a prospective student-athlete's family members or friends;
(e) Cash or like items;
(f) Any tangible items, including merchandise;
(g) Free or reduced-cost services, rentals or purchases of any type;
(h) Free or reduced-cost housing;
(i) Use of an institution's athletics equipment (e.g., for a high school all-star game);
(j) Sponsorship of or arrangement for an awards banquet for high school, preparatory school or two-year-college athletes by
an institution, representatives of its athletics interests or its alumni groups or booster clubs; and
(k) Expenses for academic services (e.g., tutoring, test preparation) to assist in the completion of initial-eligibility or
transfer-eligibility requirements or improvement of the prospective student-athlete's academic profile in conjunction
with a waiver request.

---

According to the bylaw a coach shall not be involved....in..."offering to give".....other benefits not permitted by NCAA regulations.

This is part of the transcript from the wiretap:

quote:

---

WADE: All right I was thinking last night on this Smart thing. Like, I'll be honest with you, I'm [expletive] tired of dealing with the thing. Like I'm just [expletive] sick of dealing with this [expletive]. What do you think, 'cause I went to him with a [expletive] strong-arse offer about a month ago. [Expletive] strong. Now, the problem was, I know why he didn't take it now -- it was [expletive] tilted toward the family a little bit. But I mean it was a [expletive] hell of a [expletive] offer. Like, hell of an offer. Especially for a kid who's going to be a two- or three-year kid.

---

Wade is saying he made an "offer". That's absolutely going to questioned. Now, without more corroborating evidence, Wade could say he was lying when he spoke to Dawkins. Then it would become a credibility battle. Does Dawkins have more to the story to establish an offer was actually made? And for what? Or is Wade's own testimony that he made an "offer" enough to prove a violation of 13.2.1?

At minimum, that's going to be a point of contention.

quote:

---

According to the bylaw a coach shall not be involved....in..."offering to give".....other benefits not permitted by NCAA regulations.

---

Exactly! I'll be honest, I'm not sure if you are trying to dispute what I've been saying or lend support; but I have acknowledged this point as the one thing (based on what we know) that the NCAA would even be close to getting Wade and LSU on.

But just like you go on to state, which is the same as I have stated, that Wade simply uses the word "offer". The rule as you quoted states it has to be an offer of "financial aid or other benefits"; but nothing in what we have heard Wade say or read anywhere is clear proof that the offer he made was one that meets either of these criteria set up by the NCAA.

While it is easy to sit here and say there is all this circumstantial evidence surrounding the situation that clearly points to Wade having cheated, the fact remains that it is just that, circumstantial and not clear proof. One must assume or infer his meaning while given no clear indication of what the meaning behind his statements or actions truly is.

quote:

---

nothing in what we have heard Wade say or read anywhere is clear proof that the offer he made was one that meets either of these criteria set up by the NCAA

---

Is there any sort of offer that would be within that criteria set forth by the NCAA that would allow for it to be tilted more towards the mother than it is the player? That seems unlikely and is some tricky wording.