re: Worried about losing Shep

quote:

---

She averaged that from the rb position.....per carries! nice try though, of course a reciever would aveerage that!

Hence the commnet, "whent they knew he was gettin it"

Qgain, football iq needed here

---

Shep averaged high YPC from the wildcat position too, you dip. Doesn't matter where he lines up he is a threat to break it.

His problem (not yours, which is total ignorance) is how he is being utilized.

quote:

---

Not at all. Since all LSU players should have known the consequences of inappropriate living arrangements, REGARDLESS of who supplied them (why couldn't a booster do it?), then I definitely see where the NCAA has a VERY strong case.
Did LSU show a lack of institutional control by allowing this to happen while there was an on-going NCAA investigation into housing arrangements for LSU Student Athletes and FAILED to report this violation?

---

You loons are going ape shite with your tin foil hats on over a minimum wage AD job of a girl that was here before Shep even enrolled. How could this EVER be lack of institutional control or a way a funneling money? Even if Shep was pocketing his stipend all he'll have to do is pay it back. This is no big deal.

quote:

---

Knile Davis; Trent Richardson.

But RS is a receiver so you're right on us needing some FB iq...beginning with yours.

---

THanks for making my point, two of the better players in the league is who you named! MORON!

And, he is a receiver now, but his fresh and much of last year he did his damage on handoffs.....Did your guy do that? No, Jeff was pure reciever (which is why he avg at least as much as shep as a runner)...and yes, your IQ, or lack thereof needs an upgrade..

quote:

---

Read the thread before your ignorance is shown...the OP (dick) was saying we wouldn't miss him at all....again GFY

---

You have really serious anger issues. Logging off may be a benefit to you.

quote:

---

Pay it back isn't an option if indeed he didn't pay it to start with.

---

Yes, it is. If he pocketed the money, then LSU found out he wasn't using the money for rent; he simply needs to repay the money in order to have his eligibility restored. This is what Dwayne Jarrett did at USC.

quote:

---

Pay it back isn't an option if indeed he didn't pay it to start with. he was CAUGHT. That is the deal.
In the eyes of a regulator, he should have known better and LSU should have made sure he did so.
Both are culpable since he alledgedly gained an unfair advantage.
To compound the issue, if he did not pay his portion of the rent and did it when the university had an on-going NCAA investigation on improper housing arrangemetns for a recruit, he hurt LSU reagardless of LSU taking the see-no-evil approach.

It should have known the housing arrangements for EVERY player without question.

---

1) It's pretty obvious you don't wtf you're talking about here. Just Google USC & Dwayne Jarrett.

2) NO ONE KNOWS IF HE WASN'T PAYING RENT. That's just speculation at this point. We won't know any of that until LSU releases all the details. My guess is it will be this week since the players report the following week. Just sit tight homey.

quote:

---

2) NO ONE KNOWS IF HE WASN'T PAYING RENT. That's just speculation at this point

---

Did you even read what I posted?
if he did not pay his portion of the rent

if indeed he didn't pay it to start with

quote:

---

I have never seen a board with so many guys on bitch pills in my life!

---

explain.
I am simply pointing out how a regulator (which I deal with daily in my line of work and attorneys) can take something that seems minor and turn it into a big deal when a situation exists while you are being investigted.

I have personally been involved with a huge law suit the last 1.5 years that has basically caused a company to close because of media pressure and regulators digging into its business.

The management team was accused of and admitted to misleading investigators (unknowingly BTW) after ANOTHER government agency told them that they should protect certain information under priviledge. In this case it was about who had jurisdiction and control of documentation.

When it got to congress (yes it went to a house hearing committee), the other regulator said "we do not know anything about that agreement" which was totally false and was shown as such. They knew and gave guidance, but because the government cuts deals amongst themselves and congress was looking to punish someone, they cleared each other and brought the wrath on the company. The information that the company was withholding from the agency that was inspecting it was information the other agency told them that they could and should protect. 500 people are losing their job because of it.

What does this have to do with LSU? Situations can get really ugly if there is any indication of withholding information that it should (I stress should have) have known.

quote:

---

THanks for making my point, two of the better players in the league is who you named! MORON!

---

Well YOU asked to tell you WHO ELSE you foo.