10 year show cause/NCAA, Tyndall discussion (merged)

#3,027
#3,027
cwbytruckers said:
That doesnt answer the question why you take this so personal. Thats just more ranting.
Click to expand...

If he was that concerned about the "American concept of justice" then there should be a crapton more important cases ahead of Butterball. You know, like wrongfully convicted death row inmates, or murderers and rapists that got away with their crimes.

But no, let's keep making crap up about how poor little Pig Boy is being persecuted and make that your life's pathetic crusade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,028
#3,028
Thunder Good-Oil said:
Tennessee has absolutely nothing to worry about. Donnie has admitted that there was cheating going on in his program. Donnie was in trouble due to NCAA violations. Having NCAA penalties was a fireable offense.
Click to expand...
Wrong answer. Look up the Sherman Antitrust Act. Let's say he is a good friend, Cowboy!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,031
#3,031
vols 30 said:
Rosie O'Donnell playing the role of DT.....
Click to expand...

and this guy is playing SD (the turtles biggest fan)
15d378ef7db80e7dea73b2f0379ef07d.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#3,032
#3,032
SeniorDrill said:
Wrong answer. Look up the Sherman Antitrust Act. Let's say he is a good friend, Cowboy!
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with Tennessee. They acted on NCAA's information. Worst case scenario, our FORMER AD may have to testify concerning what specific information was imparted to him. Quit being dramatic (edit: more than usual).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#3,033
#3,033
butchna said:
Has nothing to do with Tennessee. They acted on NCAA's information. Worst case scenario, our FORMER AD may have to testify concerning what specific information was imparted to him. Quit being dramatic (edit: more than usual).
Click to expand...

Donnie is and has been dirty. It is unfortunate that he is continue to get caught at it. He is probably a pretty decent coach. Chris Clarke is a prime example from what I know Donnie pushed the envelope quite a bit with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,034
#3,034
SeniorDrill said:
Wrong answer. Look up the Sherman Antitrust Act. Let's say he is a good friend, Cowboy!
Click to expand...

A couple of things. I'm not a cowboy, Princess. I didn't ask why you're fascinated with Butterbean, that was a different poster. Tennessee has nothing to worry about with the Sherman Anti-Trust Act... they've not restricted trade or fixed prices in the imaginary Donnie Tyndall case. Even in the near infinitesimal chance that Butterbean wins anything in court, that would be versus the NCAA, not UT. UT and the NCAA did not sit down in a meeting and conspire to take away Butterbean's job. Tennessee had nothing to gain by having to replace their coach for the third time in 4 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,035
#3,035
Thunder Good-Oil said:
A couple of things. I'm not a cowboy, Princess. I didn't ask why you're fascinated with Butterbean, that was a different poster. Tennessee has nothing to worry about with the Sherman Anti-Trust Act... they've not restricted trade or fixed prices in the imaginary Donnie Tyndall case. Even in the near infinitesimal chance that Butterbean wins anything in court, that would be versus the NCAA, not UT. UT and the NCAA did not sit down in a meeting and conspire to take away Butterbean's job. Tennessee had nothing to gain by having to replace their coach for the third time in 4 years.
Click to expand...

Now you've done it. Now we get to listen to this long conspiracy theory about Barnes calling Hart and coercing him to fire Tyndall because he had just gotten fired at Texas.
 
#3,036
#3,036
butchna said:
Has nothing to do with Tennessee. They acted on NCAA's information. Worst case scenario, our FORMER AD may have to testify concerning what specific information was imparted to him. Quit being dramatic (edit: more than usual).
Click to expand...
Let me clarify for you.
Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act states, “Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal.” 15 U.S.C. § 1. Although nearly every contract restrains trade, Section 1 bars only “unreasonable restraints of trade. Law v. NCAA, 134 F. 3d 1010, 1016 ( 1998); NCAA v. Board of Regents, 468 U.S. 85, 98 (1984). Accordingly, in order to prevail under a Section 1 claim under the Sherman Act, Tyndall must prove three elements to demonstrate that the NCAA violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. First, Tyndall must demonstrate that an agreement exists between independent economic entities in the form of a contract, combination, or conspiracy. Agnew v. NCAA, 683 F.3d 328, 335 (7th Cir. 2012). Next, Tyndall must demonstrate that the agreement resulted in an unreasonable restraint on trade in a relevant market. Id. Finally, Tyndall must demonstrate that the agreement has resulted in an antitrust injury implicating interstate commerce. See generally, id. at 336.
Every requirement is met with a big exclamation point. Ending his career is the "unreasonable restraint of trade". An agreement existed between the independent economic entities, NCAA, University of Tennessee, and Southern Mississippi who conspired to end that career. And guess what, the mighty NCAA is dragged UT into the agreement that "resulted in an antitrust injury implicating interstate commerce" with their ludicrous attempt to cover the fact they implicated an innocent coach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,037
#3,037
SeniorDrill said:
Let me clarify for you.
Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act states, “Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal.” 15 U.S.C. § 1. Although nearly every contract restrains trade, Section 1 bars only “unreasonable restraints of trade. Law v. NCAA, 134 F. 3d 1010, 1016 ( 1998); NCAA v. Board of Regents, 468 U.S. 85, 98 (1984). Accordingly, in order to prevail under a Section 1 claim under the Sherman Act, Tyndall must prove three elements to demonstrate that the NCAA violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. First, Tyndall must demonstrate that an agreement exists between independent economic entities in the form of a contract, combination, or conspiracy. Agnew v. NCAA, 683 F.3d 328, 335 (7th Cir. 2012). Next, Tyndall must demonstrate that the agreement resulted in an unreasonable restraint on trade in a relevant market. Id. Finally, Tyndall must demonstrate that the agreement has resulted in an antitrust injury implicating interstate commerce. See generally, id. at 336.
Every requirement is met with a big exclamation point. Ending his career is the "unreasonable restraint of trade". An agreement existed between the independent economic entities, NCAA, University of Tennessee, and Southern Mississippi who conspired to end that career. And guess what, the mighty NCAA is dragged UT into the agreement that "resulted in an antitrust injury implicating interstate commerce" with their ludicrous attempt to cover the fact they implicated an innocent coach.
Click to expand...

Can Tyndall still coach in other ranks besides Div I? Yes? Then he's got nothing.

UT didn't conspire to do anything. They received information, it was deemed "due cause", and they fired him. He lied to them, was busted, and got fired. His only bone to pick is maybe with the NCAA. Tennessee firing him is not prohibiting him from coaching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,038
#3,038
SeniorDrill said:
Let me clarify for you.
Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act states, “Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal.” 15 U.S.C. § 1. Although nearly every contract restrains trade, Section 1 bars only “unreasonable restraints of trade. Law v. NCAA, 134 F. 3d 1010, 1016 ( 1998); NCAA v. Board of Regents, 468 U.S. 85, 98 (1984). Accordingly, in order to prevail under a Section 1 claim under the Sherman Act, Tyndall must prove three elements to demonstrate that the NCAA violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. First, Tyndall must demonstrate that an agreement exists between independent economic entities in the form of a contract, combination, or conspiracy. Agnew v. NCAA, 683 F.3d 328, 335 (7th Cir. 2012). Next, Tyndall must demonstrate that the agreement resulted in an unreasonable restraint on trade in a relevant market. Id. Finally, Tyndall must demonstrate that the agreement has resulted in an antitrust injury implicating interstate commerce. See generally, id. at 336.
Every requirement is met with a big exclamation point. Ending his career is the "unreasonable restraint of trade". An agreement existed between the independent economic entities, NCAA, University of Tennessee, and Southern Mississippi who conspired to end that career. And guess what, the mighty NCAA is dragged UT into the agreement that "resulted in an antitrust injury implicating interstate commerce" with their ludicrous attempt to cover the fact they implicated an innocent coach.
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah. Tennessee acted on info that was provided them. IF Tyndall ever gets a REDUCTION in his show cause, Tennessee has no dog in the hunt. Just because YOU desperately want this to mean something bad for Tennessee doesn't make your warped and slanted interpretation legit. Clear as mud...thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,039
#3,039
butchna said:
Blah blah blah. Tennessee acted on info that was provided them. IF Tyndall ever gets a REDUCTION in his show cause, Tennessee has no dog in the hunt. Just because YOU desperately want this to mean something bad for Tennessee doesn't make your warped and slanted interpretation legit. Clear as mud...thanks.
Click to expand...

Somehow i think he wants Tyndall back at UT.
 
#3,042
#3,042
Want a little more. "THE NCAA, THROUGH ITS ENFORCEMENT STAFF VIOLATED FEDERAL LAW WHEN IT REFUSED TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION FROM THE NORTHERN COLORADO UNIVERSITY INVESTIGATION THAT IS RELEVANT TO THIS CASE AND IS HIGHLY EXCULPATORY TO DONNIE TYNDALL." Now you know why it's been 5 months and the NCAA still hasn't ruled on the 113 pages of documented appeal proving his innocence and exposing their attempt to cover up the biggest mistake they ever made along with Dave Hart. This is the underlying reason he is gone, buddy. It is also the reason the NCAA does not want his case going to federal court because everyone will be forced into court without the protective backdrop of the NCAA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,043
#3,043
whobethis16 said:
Can Tyndall still coach in other ranks besides Div I? Yes? Then he's got nothing.
UT didn't conspire to do anything. They received information, it was deemed "due cause", and they fired him. He lied to them, was busted, and got fired. His only bone to pick is maybe with the NCAA. Tennessee firing him is not prohibiting him from coaching.
Click to expand...
Above your pay grade, my friend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,044
#3,044
SeniorDrill said:
Want a little more. "THE NCAA, THROUGH ITS ENFORCEMENT STAFF VIOLATED FEDERAL LAW WHEN IT REFUSED TO DISCLOSE INFORMATION FROM THE NORTHERN COLORADO UNIVERSITY INVESTIGATION THAT IS RELEVANT TO THIS CASE AND IS HIGHLY EXCULPATORY TO DONNIE TYNDALL." Now you know why it's been 5 months and the NCAA still hasn't ruled on the 113 pages of documented appeal proving his innocence and exposing their attempt to cover up the biggest mistake they ever made along with Dave Hart. This is the underlying reason he is gone, buddy. It is also the reason the NCAA does not want his case going to federal court because everyone will be forced into court without the protective backdrop of the NCAA.
Click to expand...

Good grief Dude let it go. You keep bringing information from Tyndall's attorney and of course it's going to sound like Tyndall was handled badly by his former employers and the NCAA. The fact is nobody cares! Tyndall is gone and Barnes is twice the coach Tyndall ever was. UT can't be touched for firing a coach who was about to be handed a 10 year show cause and nobody likes the NCAA anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3,045
#3,045
This thread needs deleted. No more Tyndall talk aloud. This guy keeps spouting lawyer mumbo talk and he has no inside info to offer. This subject is only relevant in his mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,047
#3,047
SeniorDrill said:
Above your pay grade, my friend.
Click to expand...

Your obsession is fascinating, but also sickening. Tyndall is only doing all this because he's got nothing to lose. He's hoping all this will make the NCAA sick and say "screw it, we'll lessen it to make him shut up".

It's even more sickening that you seem to want UT to get sucked into it. It won't, but you want it to. That's all the evidence anyone needs to know that you don't care about UT or the program, because if you did, you wouldn't be hoping for them to get dragged into the supposed "federal court".

And, by the way, where's a link to the full 140 page appeal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top