Started By
Message

re: Les Miles on Elliot Porter today...

Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:12 pm to
Posted by kadillak
Member since Nov 2007
7641 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:12 pm to
quote:

scholarships are 1-year contracts. there isn't this fine print or schools would get in serious trouble

Right. And you would know this how? The ability for the team to release a player because he got arrested would be just one thing that would be written out in this document. That's just one agreement. There's probably several other agreements that allow a team to release you including the case the Porter is in. These kind of release / firing conditions are on just about every contract for so many different jobs.

quote:

they're not, which is why porter was so shocked

Porter is shocked that Miles didn't mention that he was a candidate, not because something like this isn't mentioned in the contract. Once again, you don't know what all is involved in a Letter of Intent. Neither do I. However, more than likely, LSU has EVERY RIGHT to do what they did in this situation, therefore no lawsuit can be made. You're assuming a lot of stuff that you don't know on such a claim.
Posted by AlxTgr
Kyre Banorg
Member since Oct 2003
81955 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:12 pm to
quote:

you can't move it

a scholarship for the 2010-2011 season exists once in reality

porter had this scholarship promised to him until monday

now LSU says he doesn't have this scholarship
I know you're laughing.
Posted by tigerguy121
Baton Rouge
Member since Jun 2006
10695 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:13 pm to
quote:

That's just not how it works. Sorry. I know it fits SFP's agenda. The FACT is, LSU will start paying his way in January if he shows up. Do you guys really not know what pulled means


what do you mean that's not how it works??

He can't play during the 2010-2011 football season, not for LSU at least. What are you talking about?
Posted by tigerguy121
Baton Rouge
Member since Jun 2006
10695 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:14 pm to
quote:

LSU has EVERY RIGHT to do what they did in this situation, therefore no lawsuit can be made.


no lawsuit doesn't mean this wasn't a dipshit move
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425837 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:16 pm to
quote:

That's just not how it works.

yes it is

quote:

Do you guys really not know what pulled means?

yes. it means you had a scholarship and then you didn't. like porter with the 2010-2011 season
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425837 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:17 pm to
quote:

I know you're laughing.

are you denying that a scholarship for the 2010-2011 fall LSU semester is not an individual, intangible item?
Posted by AlxTgr
Kyre Banorg
Member since Oct 2003
81955 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:19 pm to
quote:

what do you mean that's not how it works??


This part: "He may get another offer for 2011-2012,"

There is no "may". No greyshirt is turned away come January.
Posted by AlxTgr
Kyre Banorg
Member since Oct 2003
81955 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:19 pm to
quote:

are you denying that a scholarship for the 2010fall LSU semester is not an individual, intangible item?
No.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425837 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:21 pm to
quote:

LSU has EVERY RIGHT to do what they did in this situation,

no they don't

porter has not violated the terms of his LOI or scholarship in any way

quote:

you don't know what all is involved in a Letter of Intent.

it's not rocket science

here, i'll give you a basic rundown

LINK

quote:

therefore no lawsuit can be made

it can be, but it won't. CFB is a good ole boys club and doing something like suing schools is a huge no no

Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
425837 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:22 pm to
quote:

No.

then how can you argue he hasn't lost anything

he had an intangible item in his possession (the LSU scholarship for 2010-2011)

now he does not possess that item
Posted by Books
BR
Member since Jun 2005
11174 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:28 pm to
quote:

Denial of what? It was a bad situation. Do you think it was done intentionally?
denial of the f up. Miles failed to communicate the possibility that someone would have to greyshirt if all the kids signed made it. End result is Porter is left in a bad situation

quote:

You don't care about Porter. You simply are excited to have something to bitch about Miles about.
I care that a LA kid that shaved LSU in the side of his hair as a sign of how excited he was before he got to campus and worked out all summer was screwed over. Why wouldn't I? The fact that it was done bc of another patented LM's miscommunitcation isn't a surprise to anyone.
Posted by ForeLSU
The Corner of Sanity and Madness
Member since Sep 2003
41525 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:38 pm to
quote:

then how can you argue he hasn't lost anything

he had an intangible item in his possession (the LSU scholarship for 2010-2011)


The way I read it, if the school does not fulfill the offer of a scholarship then the LOI is then null and void.
Posted by 102362
Denham Springs, LA
Member since Jul 2009
1669 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:41 pm to
Books your an idiot 24 hrs is if he found out today the 4th camp starts tomorrow. if he found out yesterday he had at least 48 hours
Posted by kadillak
Member since Nov 2007
7641 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:43 pm to
quote:

no lawsuit doesn't mean this wasn't a dipshit move

I'm not talking about how ethical the situation is. I'm strictly debating the legality of what happened which SFP brought up.

quote:

no they don't

porter has not violated the terms of his LOI or scholarship in any way

I never said he did. He didn't have to violate anything for him to be eligible for the team to release him.

quote:

it's not rocket science

here, i'll give you a basic rundown

LINK

That's a very general run-down of the agreement. There's way more to the contract than that. You and I both know that for a fact. The article doesn't even mention the ability for a team to release a player for conduct problems during that time period, and we all know teams can/have done that in the past. That's one obvious aspect of a release that's not even mentioned in the article and it's a very well-known, and used aspect.
Posted by 102362
Denham Springs, LA
Member since Jul 2009
1669 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:47 pm to
if he would have WOWED the coaches during the summer he wouldn't have been asked to greyshirt
Posted by TheBob
Metairie
Member since Jun 2005
16935 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:50 pm to
quote:

if he would have WOWED the coaches during the summer he wouldn't have been asked to greyshirt


Most retarded post in this thread. Congrats.
Posted by NorfolkVATiger
Guam
Member since Nov 2005
2786 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:52 pm to
quote:

spin the horrid timing of telling the kid 24 hrs before he starts Fall practice after 3 months of busting his arse w/ his teammates after having been promised a full ride for the '10 season


This. It's complete bullshite.
Posted by 102362
Denham Springs, LA
Member since Jul 2009
1669 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 6:56 pm to
Why would you want someone that did the best over the summer to greyshirt?
Posted by TheBob
Metairie
Member since Jun 2005
16935 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 7:03 pm to
quote:

Why would you want someone that did the best over the summer to greyshirt?


What?

Posted by 102362
Denham Springs, LA
Member since Jul 2009
1669 posts
Posted on 8/4/10 at 7:07 pm to
dont worry about it bob!
Jump to page
Page First 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 6 of 11Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram