- 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
0
Posted on 3/16/19 at 7:56 am to Macavity92
quote:
He offered the handler a piece of the pie
Could have been a literal pie
This post was edited on 3/16/19 at 7:56 am
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:07 am to Macavity92
quote:
Anything captured on tape by WW is not hearsay. It would be an admission. Go back and read the transcript. He offered the handler a piece of the pie. Explain how exactly the handler gets a piece of a scholarship. Anyone reading those transcripts and not concluding that he was offering something —- cash, assets, something of value —- to the mom and handler to get Smart to sign is simply using P&G glasses to deny what happened
I totally understand what you’re saying and you’re right, it is very easy to assume and no matter who you are it’s quite obvious he was talking about offering something pretty significant other than a scholarship.
BUT, just think about what I’m asking please and tell me do you think this is plausible. Could Wade eventually come out and say that he indeed had those conversations with Dawkins which is quite obvious because they have his conversations recorded, but also state that he was lying to Dawkins the whole time and that he never intended to offer any player or “agent”. He is not recorded saying anything to an actual player or a players family member. His reason for lying might be something along the lines of he was doing this to try to get closer to someone or some player and totally playing Dawkins. If nothing can be proven and all we are left with is those tapes, does anyone think it’s possible that a very crafty explanation that is persuasive could make this all go away and Wade be reinstated?
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:16 am to LSUAlumnus2001
quote:
BUT, just think about what I’m asking please and tell me do you think this is plausible. Could Wade eventually come out and say that he indeed had those conversations with Dawkins which is quite obvious because they have his conversations recorded, but also state that he was lying to Dawkins the whole time and that he never intended to offer any player or “agent”. He is not recorded saying anything to an actual player or a players family member. His reason for lying might be something along the lines of he was doing this to try to get closer to someone or some player and totally playing Dawkins. If nothing can be proven and all we are left with is those tapes, does anyone think it’s possible that a very crafty explanation that is persuasive could make this all go away and Wade be reinstated
This is what I thought would happen before LSU and Wade starting their pissing match in the media. Now I am not sure the relationship is salvageable.
The problem Wade has is that while he can probably come up with a crafty response for what is public today:
1. He hasn't and apparently won't talk to LSU, or even say I did nothing wrong but can't discuss details to due pending trial
2. He doesn't know what else may be on tape
This post was edited on 3/16/19 at 8:17 am
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:21 am to MandevilleLSUTiger
quote:
He hasn't and apparently won't talk to LSU, or even say I did nothing wrong but can't discuss details to due pending trial
I've heard he was willing to talk to administrators, but not with the NCAA in the room?
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:22 am to MustWin
quote:
However apparently Smart was not aware of an offer. How could an impermissible "offer" be considered to have been made if the purported counterparty is not even aware of said "offer"?
A third party, or handler, makes it all very possible.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:23 am to Revelator
quote:
Discussing what? How do you or anyone else know what that offer was? What if they were haggling over playing time or Smart wanted a guaranteed starting spot? Can you or anyone else say that wasn't the offer?
Shoot, Wade could have been offering Smart a certain jersey number or locker assignment!
Let's pretend the offer was benign.
Why hasn't Wade publicly declared his innocence yet?
Better yet, why is he afraid to met with anyone, including the NCAA? Why does he need prepared questions to have a meeting if they were simply talking about playing time?
Will Wade has not once acted like an innocent person would act
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:23 am to Revelator
quote:
I've heard he was willing to talk to administrators, but not with the NCAA in the room?
It’s an LSU-led joint investigation with the NCAA. He has to meet with both to be cleared.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:24 am to MandevilleLSUTiger
quote:
This is what I thought would happen before LSU and Wade starting their pissing match in the media. Now I am not sure the relationship is salvageable.
Most of the pissing has been between fans.
All I have read from Wade was a request to be reinstated and that he had down nothing of which he was ashamed.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:25 am to MandevilleLSUTiger
quote:
This is what I thought would happen before LSU and Wade starting their pissing match in the media. Now I am not sure the relationship is salvageable. The problem Wade has is that while he can probably come up with a crafty response for what is public today: 1. He hasn't and apparently won't talk to LSU, or even say I did nothing wrong but can't discuss details to due pending trial 2. He doesn't know what else may be on tape
I honestly think both of your possibilities could be true. Right or wrong, cheater or innocent, he may not know what else might be available and doesn’t want to say anything until he gets all the details once this trial is over.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:26 am to Gus007
quote:
All I have read from Wade was a request to be reinstated
By due process, but failed to state that due process was being carried out - in a joint investigation with the NCAA. His failure to submit to the investigation is what stopped due process.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 8:37 am to LSUAlumnus2001
quote:
BUT, just think about what I’m asking please and tell me do you think this is plausible. Could Wade eventually come out and say that he indeed had those conversations with Dawkins which is quite obvious because they have his conversations recorded, but also state that he was lying to Dawkins the whole time and that he never intended to offer any player or “agent”. He is not recorded saying anything to an actual player or a players family member. His reason for lying might be something along the lines of he was doing this to try to get closer to someone or some player and totally playing Dawkins. If nothing can be proven and all we are left with is those tapes, does anyone think it’s possible that a very crafty explanation that is persuasive could make this all go away and Wade be reinstated?
If that was the case why not tell LSU and the NCAA that he was just playing Dawkins? Problem solved.
If Wade had a valid reason for what he was doing it would have been aired by now so he could continue coaching and, more importantly, clear his name.
However, what you are saying is pretty implausible. He’s going to use a guy known for paying players to get to a player and then get the player for free? Maybe that’s how Duke got Zion, right?
We all know what happened, whether we want to admit it or not.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 10:09 am to Macavity92
quote:
Go back and read the transcript. He offered the handler a piece of the pie. Explain how exactly the handler gets a piece of a scholarship.
Yahoo
quote:
A 2017 phone conversation intercepted by the FBI between LSU coach Will Wade and basketball middleman Christian Dawkins features Wade speaking freely about a “strong-arse offer” he made in the recruitment of a prospect, Yahoo Sports has learned.
On part of the call, Wade expresses frustration that a third party affiliated with the recruitment had yet to accept Wade’s “offer.” Instead, a verbal commitment to LSU was being delayed because Wade theorized he hadn’t given the third party a big “enough piece of the pie in the deal” and instead “tilted” the offer toward the player and his mother.
“I was thinking last night on this Smart thing,” Wade said. “I’ll be honest with you, I’m [expletive] tired of dealing with the thing. Like I’m just [expletive] sick of dealing with the [expletive]. Like, this should not be that [expletive] complicated.”
There is no elaboration on what the “Smart thing” is. Javonte Smart is currently a freshman guard at LSU and formerly a top-50 recruit from Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
quote:
“Dude,” Wade continued to Dawkins, referring to the third party involved in the recruitment, “I went to him with a [expletive] strong-arse offer about a month ago. [Expletive] strong.
“The problem was, I know why he didn’t take it now, it was [expletive] tilted toward the family a little bit,” Wade continued. “It was tilted toward taking care of the mom, taking care of the kid. Like it was tilted towards that. Now I know for a fact he didn’t explain everything to the mom. I know now, he didn’t get enough of the piece of the pie in the deal.”
Dawkins responded by saying, “Hmmmm.”
“It was a [expletive] hell of a [expletive] offer,” Wade continued. “Hell of an offer.”
“OK,” Dawkins said.
“Especially for a kid who is going to be a two- or three-year kid,” Wade said.
I somewhat stand corrected, I was previously going of off Advocate recap which left out bolder text.
Harder to explain but it can still be explained
Point is no one knows if it was a handler or a family member or friend
It could be something as bad as cash to something as simple as family member / friend wanting 25 floor seats
At this point I really don’t think it matters, if it comes out that Wade is clean the bridges are burned
If it comes out he’s dirty LSU basketball sucks again & admin will maybe get the door too
Posted on 3/16/19 at 10:10 am to Macavity92
quote:
If that was the case why not tell LSU and the NCAA that he was just playing Dawkins? Problem solved.
Making this kind of statement and explaining the reason may expose something in his upcoming testimony that his attorney doesn’t want the defense to know in advance.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 10:34 am to Ed Osteen
quote:
Which does nothing to change the situation
It maintains Smarts amateur status. Making an offer to a 3rd party that didn't actually transpire is a lot less severe as offering and/or making a payment to an actual recruit. I think LSU will be hit with some penalties, but nothing even close to what national media has been clamoring for: bypass the NCA tourney, not even close to that. Fines, maybe lose a scholarship, no post season ban or forfeiture of games.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 10:34 am to LSUGrrrl
I'm still thinking that Dawkins had no part in Smart coming to LSU. Dawkins was a go between for Coaches and an Agent, who was also involved with the Adidas scandal. Dawkins was probably stroking Wade for info on Smart for an Adidas school. Now who that might be? Who knows?
Posted on 3/16/19 at 11:18 am to LSUGrrrl
quote:
Making this kind of statement and explaining the reason may expose something in his upcoming testimony that his attorney doesn’t want the defense to know in advance.
He is going to be called to the stand by the defense. They get to ask the questions. He has to answer them. If you think they are putting him on the stand without a very good understanding of what he will say you are nuts and they likely have information that is not public.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 11:19 am to LSUJML
quote:
It could be something as bad as cash to something as simple as family member / friend wanting 25 floor seats
My understanding of the NCAA rules is that both of these are violations.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 11:21 am to TigerLunatik
We still don't know what the content of the "offer" was.
What if the offer was a starting position on the team? I know it wasn't, we all know it wasn't, but if you can't prove what the offer was, you can't prove it was a violation of the rules.
What if the offer was a starting position on the team? I know it wasn't, we all know it wasn't, but if you can't prove what the offer was, you can't prove it was a violation of the rules.
Posted on 3/16/19 at 11:27 am to TigerLunatik
quote:
According to the statement that LSU released yesterday. I forget the exact phrasing, but discussing any type of payment or extras or some thing of that nature.
From my understanding, offering something of monetary value is a violation. The player accepting it is a violation from the player.
But, from what has been released, I still don't see how any of that proves some sort of monetary compensation was offered.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News