(02-18-2015 12:17 PM)btiger Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:13 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:02 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:34 AM)btiger Wrote:  rc would have had to file a personal suit. by agreeing to be a member of the ncaa you forfeit any right to take their enforcement findings to a court of law.

Unless your argument is that our legal team would have thrown the NCAA into a rage by reiterating that the University considered him eligible based on the clearing house's guidance, I can see no reason why the admission was made in such a thoughtless and damaging way.

It ended the case.

A lot of very knowledgable people on this board insist that it was a lost cause from the beginning, but that is a different argument than one defending the legal team. The hearing went poorly, and I'm not surprised that the University wasn't keen on having the transcript released.

I don't know what happened in the hearing, maybe other threats, but I know according to my wife who has been dealing with the Clearinghouse from day one of its inception, a school cannot be at fault for a player that has been cleared by them.

End of discussion. Selective enforcement against us, but no looks at Kentucky.

mayby there were facts you weren't aware of.

I cant remember details, but didnt some of the most important characters in this flustercluck agree to six figure settlements in a civil suit to avoid having to testify under oath?

I suggested there were facts I'm not aware of because I said I don't know what happened in the hearing.

(02-18-2015 11:05 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:01 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 10:58 AM)tigerlands Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:07 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  Their lawyers were better than ours. I still cringe every time I read the transcript of our hearing.

To paraphrase:

"Do you admit you played the whole season with an ineligible player?"

"Oh, yeah, sure."

Yep. I always felt, from the very start, we should have had big time outside law firm rep'ing the school. Never understood why we didn't.

Ballen or Farese woulda got our banner up and we might have got half the money back.

amen

Farese would have had Mary Winkler wear stilettos for all those dirty men on the NCAA Infractions Committee

(02-18-2015 09:02 PM)OneShiningMoment Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:05 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:01 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 10:58 AM)tigerlands Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:07 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  Their lawyers were better than ours. I still cringe every time I read the transcript of our hearing.

To paraphrase:

"Do you admit you played the whole season with an ineligible player?"

"Oh, yeah, sure."

Yep. I always felt, from the very start, we should have had big time outside law firm rep'ing the school. Never understood why we didn't.

Ballen or Farese woulda got our banner up and we might have got half the money back.

amen

Farese would have had Mary Winkler wear stilettos for all those dirty men on the NCAA Infractions Committee

Seems like something Jimmy McGill might try.

(02-18-2015 12:11 PM)btiger Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:02 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:34 AM)btiger Wrote:  rc would have had to file a personal suit. by agreeing to be a member of the ncaa you forfeit any right to take their enforcement findings to a court of law.

Unless your argument is that our legal team would have thrown the NCAA into a rage by reiterating that the University considered him eligible based on the clearing house's guidance, I can see no reason why the admission was made in such a thoughtless and damaging way.

It ended the case.

A lot of very knowledgable people on this board insist that it was a lost cause from the beginning, but that is a different argument than one defending the legal team. The hearing went poorly, and I'm not surprised that the University wasn't keen on having the transcript released.

in legal terms, we had "bad facts" on our side

Maybe you can recommend our legal team to your miss friends when they get caught. You know, just to be helpful.

The clock is ticking on them down there. Just a matter of time

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(02-19-2015 05:11 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:02 PM)OneShiningMoment Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:05 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:01 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 10:58 AM)tigerlands Wrote:  Yep. I always felt, from the very start, we should have had big time outside law firm rep'ing the school. Never understood why we didn't.

Ballen or Farese woulda got our banner up and we might have got half the money back.

amen

Farese would have had Mary Winkler wear stilettos for all those dirty men on the NCAA Infractions Committee

Seems like something Jimmy McGill might try.

Slipping Jimmy, my favorite attorney.

(02-18-2015 09:49 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:07 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  Their lawyers were better than ours. I still cringe every time I read the transcript of our hearing.

To paraphrase:

"Do you admit you played the whole season with an ineligible player?"

"Oh, yeah, sure."

This. I wouldn't let Lipman rep me in traffic court.

Why would a US Federal Judge represent your miserable butt in court?

She's moved on WAY past us...

(02-18-2015 11:01 AM)Brother Bluto Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 10:58 AM)tigerlands Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 09:07 AM)bubbapt Wrote:  Their lawyers were better than ours. I still cringe every time I read the transcript of our hearing.

To paraphrase:

"Do you admit you played the whole season with an ineligible player?"

"Oh, yeah, sure."

Yep. I always felt, from the very start, we should have had big time outside law firm rep'ing the school. Never understood why we didn't.

Ballen or Farese woulda got our banner up and we might have got half the money back.

lol, the NCAA committee on infractions is not a court of law...they can 'vacate' whatever they like...we were very lucky to get out of any scholarship reduction or post season ban.

(02-18-2015 12:13 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:02 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:34 AM)btiger Wrote:  rc would have had to file a personal suit. by agreeing to be a member of the ncaa you forfeit any right to take their enforcement findings to a court of law.

Unless your argument is that our legal team would have thrown the NCAA into a rage by reiterating that the University considered him eligible based on the clearing house's guidance, I can see no reason why the admission was made in such a thoughtless and damaging way.

It ended the case.

A lot of very knowledgable people on this board insist that it was a lost cause from the beginning, but that is a different argument than one defending the legal team. The hearing went poorly, and I'm not surprised that the University wasn't keen on having the transcript released.

I don't know what happened in the hearing, maybe other threats, but I know according to my wife who has been dealing with the Clearinghouse from day one of its inception, a school cannot be at fault for a player that has been cleared by them.

End of discussion. Selective enforcement against us, but no looks at Kentucky now or Kansas back then.

In fact, if Derrick Rose had signed with Illinois you never would have heard of this.

Derrick Rose did this to himself. make both free
throws and they let us go scott free

(02-22-2015 11:28 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:13 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:02 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:34 AM)btiger Wrote:  rc would have had to file a personal suit. by agreeing to be a member of the ncaa you forfeit any right to take their enforcement findings to a court of law.

Unless your argument is that our legal team would have thrown the NCAA into a rage by reiterating that the University considered him eligible based on the clearing house's guidance, I can see no reason why the admission was made in such a thoughtless and damaging way.

It ended the case.

A lot of very knowledgable people on this board insist that it was a lost cause from the beginning, but that is a different argument than one defending the legal team. The hearing went poorly, and I'm not surprised that the University wasn't keen on having the transcript released.

I don't know what happened in the hearing, maybe other threats, but I know according to my wife who has been dealing with the Clearinghouse from day one of its inception, a school cannot be at fault for a player that has been cleared by them.

End of discussion. Selective enforcement against us, but no looks at Kentucky now or Kansas back then.

In fact, if Derrick Rose had signed with Illinois you never would have heard of this.

Derrick Rose did this to himself. make both free
throws and they let us go scott free

Derrick, CDR and Dozier all missed free throws down the stretch, pin it on who you want to

(02-24-2015 05:26 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(02-22-2015 11:28 AM)macgar32 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:13 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 12:02 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  

(02-18-2015 11:34 AM)btiger Wrote:  rc would have had to file a personal suit. by agreeing to be a member of the ncaa you forfeit any right to take their enforcement findings to a court of law.

Unless your argument is that our legal team would have thrown the NCAA into a rage by reiterating that the University considered him eligible based on the clearing house's guidance, I can see no reason why the admission was made in such a thoughtless and damaging way.

It ended the case.

A lot of very knowledgable people on this board insist that it was a lost cause from the beginning, but that is a different argument than one defending the legal team. The hearing went poorly, and I'm not surprised that the University wasn't keen on having the transcript released.

I don't know what happened in the hearing, maybe other threats, but I know according to my wife who has been dealing with the Clearinghouse from day one of its inception, a school cannot be at fault for a player that has been cleared by them.

End of discussion. Selective enforcement against us, but no looks at Kentucky now or Kansas back then.

In fact, if Derrick Rose had signed with Illinois you never would have heard of this.

Derrick Rose did this to himself. make both free
throws and they let us go scott free

Derrick, CDR and Dozier all missed free throws down the stretch, pin it on who you want to

Missed free throws were trending. sigh

(02-17-2015 11:37 PM)3rdgenerationtiger Wrote:  

(02-17-2015 10:57 PM)tiger-viper Wrote:  love this selective stat reporting:

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=400597396

follow the link to see the graphic listing calipari's three 26-0 starts. conveniently, espn places an asterisk next to our 2008 tigers for the vacated season, but they fail to do the same to cal's 1996 minutemen. i sent my complaint in. give them hell tiger fans!

UMass' season was not vacated, only the tourney. The graphic is correct.

Lol.