- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: James Cregg in tMud
Posted on 9/22/22 at 4:15 pm to Hurricane Mike
Posted on 9/22/22 at 4:15 pm to Hurricane Mike
Sorry hurricane james
1
Posted on 9/22/22 at 5:19 pm to S
This tells that you don't frick with Woodward. He even had NCAA release violations soon after the court verdict. The timing of this release is weird
This post was edited on 9/22/22 at 5:20 pm
Posted on 9/22/22 at 6:08 pm to TigerKW
Yeah, I’ve never heard of remanding to supplement the record like that.
What authority is there for that?
Agreeing to a trial date would seem to undermine this relief.
What authority is there for that?
Agreeing to a trial date would seem to undermine this relief.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 6:16 pm to bayou85
quote:
the article I read said he was contacting and sending gear to a recruit during the Covid dead period.
Damn, Cregg. How the hell you get a Level II violation on your dead period off?
Posted on 9/22/22 at 6:17 pm to Hurricane Mike
Mike I aim to kick you in the nards.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 6:20 pm to S
Good. I hope LSU wins then counter sues him. frick that pos. he sucked in recruiting and coaching his entire career here. He's not even responsible for that 2019 OL. Burrow's quick reads and fast releases made that line look waaaay better than they were.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 6:26 pm to bratch40
quote:
how was Cregg supposed to know to stop recruiting him?
He was told not to during the time he did
Posted on 9/22/22 at 6:55 pm to nitwit
They can remand for a multitude of reasons - higher courts do it routinely to flesh out a specific point of law - it isn’t just “stuffing the file” - it is saying that a “” governing body concluded an investigation and at this stage in the proceedings there is an opportunity to have a lower court consider findings - to use a football analogy think of it as a punt with directions to weigh the results
Posted on 9/22/22 at 6:58 pm to LatinTiger30
Yes they come out ahead, they get back the 500k buyout instead having to pay both the buyout and attorney costs. The attorney costs are a sunk cost.
Posted on 9/22/22 at 7:20 pm to TigerKW
Yeah, this is complete BS.
To do this would require a new trial, because plaintiff would need an opportunity to respond .
This isn’t happening.
To do this would require a new trial, because plaintiff would need an opportunity to respond .
This isn’t happening.
This post was edited on 9/22/22 at 7:22 pm
Posted on 9/22/22 at 8:01 pm to nitwit
They would absolutely have the opportunity to respond - does not require a new trial
Posted on 9/22/22 at 8:10 pm to nitwit
Nitwit I think I saw this one on Law and Order remand remand!!
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News