- 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: the Bench Tweet just now
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:53 pm to lsufball19
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:53 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Sure you did. It will always have to be explained and proven for those provisions to be enforceable. I didn't realize that had to be explained
It’s been what, 12 days since LSU requested to meet with him? They’ve had no communication about the issue. How is that reasonable in your eyes?
6
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:55 pm to lsufball19
Lester just likes to spins things as negatively as possible toward LSU even to the point of characterizing facts.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:56 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
They’ve had no communication about the issue.
You know this how?
And who is "they"? Name names.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:56 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
It’s been what, 12 days since LSU requested to meet with him? They’ve had no communication about the issue. How is that reasonable in your eyes?
Except Wade agreed to meet with his boss (Alleva and F King).
Checkmate!
You lose!
This post was edited on 3/19/19 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:57 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
They’ve had no communication about the issue
Link?
Another assumption on your part.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:58 pm to Lester Earl
He denied conducting business with Dawkins.
He never said he didn't speak with Dawkins.
You blabber quite a bit in here, so why have you never presented any concrete evidence against Will Wade? Someone who is so certain that the guy is guilty of wrong doing should surely be able to provide proof. Refusing to speak with someone about an FBI case that they are not involved in seems like a reasonable request.
And with so many damning recordings of Will Wade, why do we not have any mention of money? Why are there no specifics of this offer? I mean they have the conversation recorded. Surely the details would be leaked too, right?
He never said he didn't speak with Dawkins.
You blabber quite a bit in here, so why have you never presented any concrete evidence against Will Wade? Someone who is so certain that the guy is guilty of wrong doing should surely be able to provide proof. Refusing to speak with someone about an FBI case that they are not involved in seems like a reasonable request.
And with so many damning recordings of Will Wade, why do we not have any mention of money? Why are there no specifics of this offer? I mean they have the conversation recorded. Surely the details would be leaked too, right?
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:58 pm to GumboPot
Not really. Most are worn the f out and mentally done with it all.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 2:59 pm to BilJ
quote:
By nice present do you mean face a firing squad ?
I figure FKA will try to save his own arse by sacrificing Alleva. The BOS will probably let FKA push Alleva out then they will probably push FKA out as well.
The PR damage and the new LSU Capital Campaign are looming large and it is past time for a change.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:00 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
It’s been what, 12 days since LSU requested to meet with him?
Well, then you go to if they provided written notice or simply communicated through his attorney via telephone. Then it goes to whether that meeting request and denial would be considered a material breach of his contract. And if it was a material breach of that contract, was the breach unreasonable based on the circumstances. There's a hell of a lot more to it than "Was a meeting requested and has it been more than 10 days." Sorry, but if you want to play internet lawyer, you're going to have to do better than that.
quote:
How is that reasonable in your eyes?
Because he has a completely justified reason in not taking the meeting in the manner in which it has been requested, making his actions arguably reasonable. That's why. The simple act of refusing a meeting is not, in and of itself, unreasonable. With a pending subpoena to testify in federal court, and Wade acting under advice of counsel not to discuss this matter with anyone kills any argument his refusal is/was unreasonable. And I don't see any judge ruling to the contrary were Wade fired and this proceeded to litigation. LSU likely knows this as well.
This post was edited on 3/19/19 at 3:06 pm
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:07 pm to lsufball19
I'm happy that Will Wade's attorney can see that him talking to anyone about the Dawkins trial as a potential witness exposes him to a perjury trap. If the defendant's subpoena WW to testify you can rest assured the prosecution will subpoena people that WW has talked to to discredit WW as a witness. And just saying, "just tell the truth", is not that easy.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:09 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
It’s been what, 12 days since LSU requested to meet with him? They’ve had no communication about the issue. How is that reasonable in your eyes?
That is factually incorrect. Wade has agreed to meet with his bosses. He declined to meet with them under certain circumstances.those circumstances being the inclusion of the BoS and the NCAA. He wants he and his legal council to meet with only Alleva and Alexander. I think that’s a very fair request.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:10 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Lester Earl
Obstinate or TROLL? Which is it?
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:11 pm to jmon
Lester is a contrarian, but is good people
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:11 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I'm happy that Will Wade's attorney can see that him talking to anyone about the Dawkins trial as a potential witness exposes him to a perjury trap.
It's not just that, it exposes everyone else present at that meeting to a subpoena as well. Perjury is very hard to prove and not often prosecuted. I think they're more worried about Wade's words being twisted around and him fumbling over himself at trial. It's a very nerve-racking process to be on the stand in a court-room, regardless of whether you have nothing to hide. I think his attorneys are also worried about him saying things he shouldn't. Wade still has rights. Him asserting those rights I do not believe would equate to his actions being unreasonable. And the reasonableness of his actions are a prerequisite for the aforementioned termination cause provision in his contract being satisfied and enforceable. I also don't even think that would rise to the level of a material breach of his contract, which is also required.
I can assure you that LSU is not going to fire him for cause under these set of circumstances, using that basis, and potentially spend millions in litigation costs, lost wages, and damages. It would be outright idiotic at the present time.
This post was edited on 3/19/19 at 3:15 pm
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:16 pm to Vanilla Ice
Holy Cow! Vanilla Ice is back!!!
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:37 pm to lsufball19
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:37 pm to deathvalleytiger10
Lester averages 50 posts per day, every single day of the year, for 15 years.
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:39 pm to Sir Fury
quote:
He wants he and his legal council to meet with only Alleva and Alexander. I think that’s a very fair request.
For someone that is guilty lol
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:39 pm to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
Look at his occupation... Blogger. LOL. 247000 something posts here.
How the FU€k can you post that much
Posted on 3/19/19 at 3:40 pm to lsufball19
quote:
can assure you that LSU is not going to fire him for cause under these set of circumstances, using that basis, and potentially spend millions in litigation costs, lost wages, and damages. It would be outright idiotic at the present time.
I don’t either. Would come with a resignation & a settlement between the 2 parties, tho
Page 15 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News