How is this a legal matter? And if so, then WF internal investigation was conducted to cover their own ass.

I would assume the legal aspect is entirely on Elrod's part. I don't what he might be charged with, but I do know the lawyer he hired is a criminal defense attorney. So he must feel that charges are possible if not likely.

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  How is this a legal matter? And if so, then WF internal investigation was conducted to cover their own ass.

Anytime liable, slander, or defamation are in play, the law is in play. You are dealing with people's professional reputations that will affect their ability to earn money in the future. That's just the first layer of the law.

Then comes violations related to fiduciaries, etc., etc.

Then comes actual crimes instead of torts.

(12-14-2016 06:22 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  I would assume the legal aspect is entirely on Elrod's part. I don't what he might be charged with, but I do know the lawyer he hired is a criminal defense attorney. So he must feel that charges are possible if not likely.

That's what I figured. Numerous employers (IMG, WF, any other jobs he was set up with) and perhaps some civil suits by numerous coaches.

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 05:58 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  It is likely that someone tipped WF through a third party. Who would Elrod shop the information to? I can't imagine him going to Duke, or NC State with the info. I can't imaging Dabo tolerating that or even needing it. I can't imagine Army taking the info. That leaves BC, Syracuse, and FSU. FSU doesn't need the info. Just guessing, I would think it might have been shopped to Indiana and perhaps to someone at BC or Syracuse that Elrod trusted. This is all conjecture, could be totally wrong.

Why would Louisville, who finished 2nd in the ACC, NEED this info? You said Clemson & FSU didn't need it, why would Louisville? We are talking about a couple of plays that WF hasn't run yet & didn't in the game. I don't see the info shared playing much more than a minimal impact on any game. I find it difficult to believe that these few additional plays are that different then what they run now. You can get anyone's playbook by watching game film & scouting reports.

You can get somewhat of an idea by watching game film but unless you are dedication long, long hours of study to each opponent you'll be hard pressed to chart out what plays are called for when, and you will not learn how they plan to attack your OLB who's prone to over pursuing and taking himself out of plays, or how they plan to disguise their pass coverages to fool your QB who has trouble reading coverages pre-snap. It's far more than knowing what play they run, it helps you know not only the plays but when and why they are going to run them.

Accessing a gameplan can also serve as a "self-scouting" session. If they state that your team has the tendency of throwing middle screens on second and long when you are deep in your own territory that's information you can use to gain an advantage. The situation comes up and they call a scheme to combat the screen and you do something else and gain the first down.

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  How is this a legal matter? And if so, then WF internal investigation was conducted to cover their own ass.

There are criminal laws against commercial espionage. This is arguably commercial espionage.

It may also be an NCAA violation. Louisville is already facing a serious unrelated allegation. Know what LOIC stands for?

Who in the ACC or anywhere else is going to step up to defend Louisville?

Wake is holding a strong hand here.

(12-14-2016 06:25 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  How is this a legal matter? And if so, then WF internal investigation was conducted to cover their own ass.

Anytime liable, slander, or defamation are in play, the law is in play. You are dealing with people's professional reputations that will affect their ability to earn money in the future. That's just the first layer of the law.

Then comes violations related to fiduciaries, etc., etc.

Then comes actual crimes instead of torts.

You're expecting someone to sue Wake for libel? That worked real well for Oscar Wilde!

(12-14-2016 06:40 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  How is this a legal matter? And if so, then WF internal investigation was conducted to cover their own ass.

There are criminal laws against commercial espionage. This is arguably commercial espionage.

It may also be an NCAA violation. Louisville is already facing a serious unrelated allegation. Know what LOIC stands for?

Who in the ACC or anywhere else is going to step up to defend Louisville?

Wake is holding a strong hand here.

WF taking down Army? This is starting to sound like IMG covering ass.

Sports Illustrated on legal issues involved.

http://www.si.com/college-football/2016/...louisville

Wake Forest, since they notified Army, might want to exonerate Clemson (at least for this year).

Clemson, UNC and NC State say they were not contacted by Wake. So apparently they were not part of Elrod's scheme.

(12-14-2016 06:42 PM)Hallcity Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:25 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Dasville Wrote:  How is this a legal matter? And if so, then WF internal investigation was conducted to cover their own ass.

Anytime liable, slander, or defamation are in play, the law is in play. You are dealing with people's professional reputations that will affect their ability to earn money in the future. That's just the first layer of the law.

Then comes violations related to fiduciaries, etc., etc.

Then comes actual crimes instead of torts.

You're expecting someone to sue Wake for libel? That worked real well for Oscar Wilde!

No silly, but there have to more parties involved and with multiple parties some innocent or quasi-Innocent parties will get slimed. At this point you don't know where it goes that's one of the reasons for an organization to lawyer up. And it's not Wake per se, but employees who could be targeted in their non-corporate capacity. And I didn't say they would win.

(12-14-2016 06:12 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Indiana and Army also had former Wake assistants that worked with Elrod.

TBH, both of those teams beat Wake, and both were head scratchers to me. Perhaps this explains how they won? Though I tend to think Army wouldn't cheat like that (it's not like they are under that much pressure to win, either).

I don't know... the whole thing is VERY strange.

(12-14-2016 06:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 05:58 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  It is likely that someone tipped WF through a third party. Who would Elrod shop the information to? I can't imagine him going to Duke, or NC State with the info. I can't imaging Dabo tolerating that or even needing it. I can't imagine Army taking the info. That leaves BC, Syracuse, and FSU. FSU doesn't need the info. Just guessing, I would think it might have been shopped to Indiana and perhaps to someone at BC or Syracuse that Elrod trusted. This is all conjecture, could be totally wrong.

Why would Louisville, who finished 2nd in the ACC, NEED this info? You said Clemson & FSU didn't need it, why would Louisville? We are talking about a couple of plays that WF hasn't run yet & didn't in the game. I don't see the info shared playing much more than a minimal impact on any game. I find it difficult to believe that these few additional plays are that different then what they run now. You can get anyone's playbook by watching game film & scouting reports.

You can get somewhat of an idea by watching game film but unless you are dedication long, long hours of study to each opponent you'll be hard pressed to chart out what plays are called for when, and you will not learn how they plan to attack your OLB who's prone to over pursuing and taking himself out of plays, or how they plan to disguise their pass coverages to fool your QB who has trouble reading coverages pre-snap. It's far more than knowing what play they run, it helps you know not only the plays but when and why they are going to run them.

Accessing a gameplan can also serve as a "self-scouting" session. If they state that your team has the tendency of throwing middle screens on second and long when you are deep in your own territory that's information you can use to gain an advantage. The situation comes up and they call a scheme to combat the screen and you do something else and gain the first down.

According to what little information WF has put out & by UL comments we aren't talking about the entire playbook. As stated by both sides it was a few plays in which WF hasn't (& didn't) run during any games. Adding a few plays is barely going to have any kind of an effect on your game planning. WF would lose the element of surprise.

(Not to mention Louisville has been in the ACC for 3 years now, it's not like taking on an OOC opponent. You have enough experience against them to know the tendencies of your conference opponents. Not to mention most staffs have assistance who's only job is to watch film & scout opponents.)

(12-14-2016 07:51 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:12 PM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  Indiana and Army also had former Wake assistants that worked with Elrod.

TBH, both of those teams beat Wake, and both were head scratchers to me. Perhaps this explains how they won? Though I tend to think Army wouldn't cheat like that (it's not like they are under that much pressure to win, either).

I don't know... the whole thing is VERY strange.

Well, here's David Teels take:


http://www.dailypress.com/sports/virgini...olumn.html

All I would add is that I don't think UofL should punish anybody based on a Wake Forest investigation. After we do are due diligence and investigate ourselves, then we should share our findings and discipline as necessary.

We are ACC and should be able to handle this internally without stomping on each other's back or turning this into some kind of dog fight.

(12-14-2016 08:51 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 05:58 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  It is likely that someone tipped WF through a third party. Who would Elrod shop the information to? I can't imagine him going to Duke, or NC State with the info. I can't imaging Dabo tolerating that or even needing it. I can't imagine Army taking the info. That leaves BC, Syracuse, and FSU. FSU doesn't need the info. Just guessing, I would think it might have been shopped to Indiana and perhaps to someone at BC or Syracuse that Elrod trusted. This is all conjecture, could be totally wrong.

Why would Louisville, who finished 2nd in the ACC, NEED this info? You said Clemson & FSU didn't need it, why would Louisville? We are talking about a couple of plays that WF hasn't run yet & didn't in the game. I don't see the info shared playing much more than a minimal impact on any game. I find it difficult to believe that these few additional plays are that different then what they run now. You can get anyone's playbook by watching game film & scouting reports.

You can get somewhat of an idea by watching game film but unless you are dedication long, long hours of study to each opponent you'll be hard pressed to chart out what plays are called for when, and you will not learn how they plan to attack your OLB who's prone to over pursuing and taking himself out of plays, or how they plan to disguise their pass coverages to fool your QB who has trouble reading coverages pre-snap. It's far more than knowing what play they run, it helps you know not only the plays but when and why they are going to run them.

Accessing a gameplan can also serve as a "self-scouting" session. If they state that your team has the tendency of throwing middle screens on second and long when you are deep in your own territory that's information you can use to gain an advantage. The situation comes up and they call a scheme to combat the screen and you do something else and gain the first down.

According to what little information WF has put out & by UL comments we aren't talking about the entire playbook. As stated by both sides it was a few plays in which WF hasn't (& didn't) run during any games. Adding a few plays is barely going to have any kind of an effect on your game planning. WF would lose the element of surprise.

Everything I have read on this states it was a playsheet, which is significantly more than "just a couple plays". Playsheets are where you have charted out how you are going to approach specific situations. It will have your play options for various situations....on second and eight these are your options, third and three, etc. Individual plays aren't really that helpful because unless you line up in a specific formation just for that play you have to decide which play out of several you are going to defend. Another way that playsheets can be valuable is the fact that a lot of teams put their signal plan for that specific game on them for sending in the call.

(12-14-2016 09:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 08:51 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 05:58 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  It is likely that someone tipped WF through a third party. Who would Elrod shop the information to? I can't imagine him going to Duke, or NC State with the info. I can't imaging Dabo tolerating that or even needing it. I can't imagine Army taking the info. That leaves BC, Syracuse, and FSU. FSU doesn't need the info. Just guessing, I would think it might have been shopped to Indiana and perhaps to someone at BC or Syracuse that Elrod trusted. This is all conjecture, could be totally wrong.

Why would Louisville, who finished 2nd in the ACC, NEED this info? You said Clemson & FSU didn't need it, why would Louisville? We are talking about a couple of plays that WF hasn't run yet & didn't in the game. I don't see the info shared playing much more than a minimal impact on any game. I find it difficult to believe that these few additional plays are that different then what they run now. You can get anyone's playbook by watching game film & scouting reports.

You can get somewhat of an idea by watching game film but unless you are dedication long, long hours of study to each opponent you'll be hard pressed to chart out what plays are called for when, and you will not learn how they plan to attack your OLB who's prone to over pursuing and taking himself out of plays, or how they plan to disguise their pass coverages to fool your QB who has trouble reading coverages pre-snap. It's far more than knowing what play they run, it helps you know not only the plays but when and why they are going to run them.

Accessing a gameplan can also serve as a "self-scouting" session. If they state that your team has the tendency of throwing middle screens on second and long when you are deep in your own territory that's information you can use to gain an advantage. The situation comes up and they call a scheme to combat the screen and you do something else and gain the first down.

According to what little information WF has put out & by UL comments we aren't talking about the entire playbook. As stated by both sides it was a few plays in which WF hasn't (& didn't) run during any games. Adding a few plays is barely going to have any kind of an effect on your game planning. WF would lose the element of surprise.

Everything I have read on this states it was a playsheet, which is significantly more than "just a couple plays". Playsheets are where you have charted out how you are going to approach specific situations. It will have your play options for various situations....on second and eight these are your options, third and three, etc. Individual plays aren't really that helpful because unless you line up in a specific formation just for that play you have to decide which play out of several you are going to defend. Another way that playsheets can be valuable is the fact that a lot of teams put their signal plan for that specific game on them for sending in the call.

You should read more. I suggest reading Tom Jurich's statement.

(12-14-2016 09:12 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 09:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 08:51 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Why would Louisville, who finished 2nd in the ACC, NEED this info? You said Clemson & FSU didn't need it, why would Louisville? We are talking about a couple of plays that WF hasn't run yet & didn't in the game. I don't see the info shared playing much more than a minimal impact on any game. I find it difficult to believe that these few additional plays are that different then what they run now. You can get anyone's playbook by watching game film & scouting reports.

You can get somewhat of an idea by watching game film but unless you are dedication long, long hours of study to each opponent you'll be hard pressed to chart out what plays are called for when, and you will not learn how they plan to attack your OLB who's prone to over pursuing and taking himself out of plays, or how they plan to disguise their pass coverages to fool your QB who has trouble reading coverages pre-snap. It's far more than knowing what play they run, it helps you know not only the plays but when and why they are going to run them.

Accessing a gameplan can also serve as a "self-scouting" session. If they state that your team has the tendency of throwing middle screens on second and long when you are deep in your own territory that's information you can use to gain an advantage. The situation comes up and they call a scheme to combat the screen and you do something else and gain the first down.

According to what little information WF has put out & by UL comments we aren't talking about the entire playbook. As stated by both sides it was a few plays in which WF hasn't (& didn't) run during any games. Adding a few plays is barely going to have any kind of an effect on your game planning. WF would lose the element of surprise.

Everything I have read on this states it was a playsheet, which is significantly more than "just a couple plays". Playsheets are where you have charted out how you are going to approach specific situations. It will have your play options for various situations....on second and eight these are your options, third and three, etc. Individual plays aren't really that helpful because unless you line up in a specific formation just for that play you have to decide which play out of several you are going to defend. Another way that playsheets can be valuable is the fact that a lot of teams put their signal plan for that specific game on them for sending in the call.

You should read more. I suggest reading Tom Jurich's statement.

Jurich statement:

"Among the communication were a few plays that were sent and then shared with our defensive staff," Jurich's statement said. "None of the special plays were run during the course of the game. … Any other information that may have been discussed was nothing that our staff had not already seen while studying Wake Forest in their preparations for the game, and the material was not given any further attention.

"I'm disappointed that this issue has brought undue attention to our football staff as we prepare for our upcoming bowl game."

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday....ent=safari

Wake Forest football staff members discovered materials left behind by Louisville last Saturday that showed the Cardinals were prepared for plays the Demon Deacons had not run before, raising suspicions of a security breach, a person with knowledge of the situation told USA TODAY Sports.

***

If Louisville indeed had documents that showed plays Wake Forest had used in practice but not games, it could be considered a competitive advantage.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...-game-plan

Wake Forest is investigating a possible breach of its game plan before its contest last week against Louisville, after discovering documents inside Louisville's stadium that showed specific plays the Demon Deacons had never run previously

(12-14-2016 09:12 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 09:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 08:51 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:16 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Why would Louisville, who finished 2nd in the ACC, NEED this info? You said Clemson & FSU didn't need it, why would Louisville? We are talking about a couple of plays that WF hasn't run yet & didn't in the game. I don't see the info shared playing much more than a minimal impact on any game. I find it difficult to believe that these few additional plays are that different then what they run now. You can get anyone's playbook by watching game film & scouting reports.

You can get somewhat of an idea by watching game film but unless you are dedication long, long hours of study to each opponent you'll be hard pressed to chart out what plays are called for when, and you will not learn how they plan to attack your OLB who's prone to over pursuing and taking himself out of plays, or how they plan to disguise their pass coverages to fool your QB who has trouble reading coverages pre-snap. It's far more than knowing what play they run, it helps you know not only the plays but when and why they are going to run them.

Accessing a gameplan can also serve as a "self-scouting" session. If they state that your team has the tendency of throwing middle screens on second and long when you are deep in your own territory that's information you can use to gain an advantage. The situation comes up and they call a scheme to combat the screen and you do something else and gain the first down.

According to what little information WF has put out & by UL comments we aren't talking about the entire playbook. As stated by both sides it was a few plays in which WF hasn't (& didn't) run during any games. Adding a few plays is barely going to have any kind of an effect on your game planning. WF would lose the element of surprise.

Everything I have read on this states it was a playsheet, which is significantly more than "just a couple plays". Playsheets are where you have charted out how you are going to approach specific situations. It will have your play options for various situations....on second and eight these are your options, third and three, etc. Individual plays aren't really that helpful because unless you line up in a specific formation just for that play you have to decide which play out of several you are going to defend. Another way that playsheets can be valuable is the fact that a lot of teams put their signal plan for that specific game on them for sending in the call.

You should read more. I suggest reading Tom Jurich's statement.

With everything that has gone on in your crooked athletic department this past year Tom Jurich isn't exactly a trustworthy source in my opinion. He's going to say whatever he can to avoid yet another black-eye for Louisville in a year full of them.

(12-14-2016 09:37 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 09:12 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 09:06 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 08:51 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(12-14-2016 06:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  You can get somewhat of an idea by watching game film but unless you are dedication long, long hours of study to each opponent you'll be hard pressed to chart out what plays are called for when, and you will not learn how they plan to attack your OLB who's prone to over pursuing and taking himself out of plays, or how they plan to disguise their pass coverages to fool your QB who has trouble reading coverages pre-snap. It's far more than knowing what play they run, it helps you know not only the plays but when and why they are going to run them.

Accessing a gameplan can also serve as a "self-scouting" session. If they state that your team has the tendency of throwing middle screens on second and long when you are deep in your own territory that's information you can use to gain an advantage. The situation comes up and they call a scheme to combat the screen and you do something else and gain the first down.

According to what little information WF has put out & by UL comments we aren't talking about the entire playbook. As stated by both sides it was a few plays in which WF hasn't (& didn't) run during any games. Adding a few plays is barely going to have any kind of an effect on your game planning. WF would lose the element of surprise.

Everything I have read on this states it was a playsheet, which is significantly more than "just a couple plays". Playsheets are where you have charted out how you are going to approach specific situations. It will have your play options for various situations....on second and eight these are your options, third and three, etc. Individual plays aren't really that helpful because unless you line up in a specific formation just for that play you have to decide which play out of several you are going to defend. Another way that playsheets can be valuable is the fact that a lot of teams put their signal plan for that specific game on them for sending in the call.

You should read more. I suggest reading Tom Jurich's statement.

With everything that has gone on in your crooked athletic department this past year Tom Jurich isn't exactly a trustworthy source in my opinion. He's going to say whatever he can to avoid yet another black-eye for Louisville in a year full of them.

How crooked are the other ACC teams of who didn't tell WF of the communications?