Pruitt's deadline for a settlement is today

#152
#152
DaddyChad said:
I feel like we eventually settle for a low amount to make this go away. I don’t think Pruitt or his attorney gets much out of this. I feel like the NCAA investigation will also go away shortly after this crap is resolved without much punishment.
Click to expand...

Certainly hope your last sentence is correct. To get this resolved in short order would do wonders for recruiting and taking advantage of the transfer portal.
 
#153
#153
I've no idea how all of this works. It seems to me that if Pruitt folds, it is an admission of guilt and maybe he gets a show cause that temporarily prohibits his return to daddy nick.

If Tennessee presses the issue and wins, then a show cause for Pruitt is more likely.

If the NCAA finds Tennessee's transgressions to be egregious and deserving of penalties, then a show cause for Pruitt would seem probable.

So my early Christmas present would be an early November NCAA decision that finds fault with our program but accepts the punishments already proscribed by the University. As part of that decision, the NCAA hangs a show cause on Pruitt. The show cause then undercuts Pruitt's lawsuit and he gets no money from the University because he in fact did violate the terms of his contract.

I don't want Pruitt back at bama doing what he does best at least for a year. If that is the case maybe he never goes back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NighthawkVol and FLVOL_79
#154
#154
GroverCleveland said:
No! No! No!

Grew up farming Peanuts and one uses Coca-Cola, preferably in a COLD glass bottle.

Peanuts in Mountain Dew and Dr. Pepper is pure blasphemy.
Click to expand...

To me? Part of it might be the way my now removed gall bladder was reacting, but all of them has been blasphemy to me.

But when I drink a soda, it is usually this, when I can find it:

Sioux-City-Sarsaparilla.jpg

And as we await news on the lawsuit:

 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#155
#155
DaddyChad said:
I feel like we eventually settle for a low amount to make this go away. I don’t think Pruitt or his attorney gets much out of this. I feel like the NCAA investigation will also go away shortly after this crap is resolved without much punishment.
Click to expand...

Why? He was fired 'for cause', his only legal action is to file a suit citing breach of contract, and with NCAA officials in on the interviews, he has zero legal standing if they say that violations were committed.

All this blustering about blowing the lid on boosters is just that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
#160
#160
Plano Vol said:
I've no idea how all of this works. It seems to me that if Pruitt folds, it is an admission of guilt and maybe he gets a show cause that temporarily prohibits his return to daddy nick.

If Tennessee presses the issue and wins, then a show cause for Pruitt is more likely.

If the NCAA finds Tennessee's transgressions to be egregious and deserving of penalties, then a show cause for Pruitt would seem probable.

So my early Christmas present would be an early November NCAA decision that finds fault with our program but accepts the punishments already proscribed by the University. As part of that decision, the NCAA hangs a show cause on Pruitt. The show cause then undercuts Pruitt's lawsuit and he gets no money from the University because he in fact did violate the terms of his contract.

I don't want Pruitt back at bama doing what he does best at least for a year. If that is the case maybe he never goes back.
Click to expand...
Tenn doesn't need to punish itself period. NIL presently is legal cheating above board. Screw the NCAA - we didn't win anything with that gump dolt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and FLVOL_79
#162
#162
BigOrangeTrain said:
Meaningless bowl games. Lol. Only fans could be this stupid. Just because a bowl game means nothing to you doesn’t mean they are meaningless to the team and program. Good grief.
Click to expand...
Yea...that bowl game with Indiana was a real spring board for the program's future.. get a clue.
 
#166
#166
cgrish said:
How would this end if ncaa imposes no sanctions on ut? Would pruitt win? I have no idea, just wondering.
Click to expand...

No. The NCAA sanctions are irrelevant. His contract states that if he cheats, he can be fired for cause. He was caught. I don't think he's even trying to deny it, he's just trying to spread the blame.

It's not going to work, if he cheated, he can be fired for cause. It's that simple.
 
#167
#167
BeardedVol said:
Not in a 'breach of contract' suit filed against UT they can't. Not without proving that their testimony is materially relevant to the case.
Click to expand...
"Materially relevant" is not the standard for discoverability in a civil lawsuit in the United States.
 
#168
#168
BigOrangeTrain said:
Yeah you clearly know what all the players and coaches feel about bowl games right?
Click to expand...

How someone "feels" about a bowl game, has no measurable effect on whether or not playing in a bowl game provides any real material contribution to the program.

Any bowl game outside of the CFP, is a glorified scrimmage that sees players opt-out, and lackluster gameplay from teams that have nearly a month between their last regular season game and the bowl game.
 
#169
#169
BeardedVol said:
How someone "feels" about a bowl game, has no measurable effect on whether or not playing in a bowl game provides any real material contribution to the program.

Any bowl game outside of the CFP, is a glorified scrimmage that sees players opt-out, and lackluster gameplay from teams that have nearly a month between their last regular season game and the bowl game.
Click to expand...

This is fan thinking only. Neither you nor the poster I responded to know how the players and coaches feel about a bowl game. Using the blanket statement that bowl games are meaningless is ridiculous fan fodder and your last sentence proves it.

When you can show the proof that the players and coaches feel like you then come back at me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PNW Huskie
#170
#170
unfrozencvmanvol said:
"Materially relevant" is not the standard for discoverability in a civil lawsuit in the United States.
Click to expand...

Lol, no.

You can't file a 'breach of contract' lawsuit against UT, and then try to depose an athletic booster without providing proof in the pleadings, that a booster, who is not party to the contract, is somehow materially relevant to UT breaching that contract.

Real life is not Law & Order.
 
#171
#171
BigOrangeTrain said:
This is fan thinking only. Neither you nor the poster I responded to know how the players and coaches feel about a bowl game. Using the blanket statement that bowl games are meaningless is ridiculous fan fodder and your last sentence proves it.

When you can show the proof that the players and coaches feel like you then come back at me.
Click to expand...

Feel free to provide data showing that playing in a bowl game has a measurable impact on the future success of a college football program.

eating-popcorn.gif
 
#172
#172
BeardedVol said:
Lol, no.

You can't file a 'breach of contract' lawsuit against UT, and then try to depose an athletic booster without providing proof in the pleadings, that a booster, who is not party to the contract, is somehow materially relevant to UT breaching that contract.

Real life is not Law & Order.
Click to expand...

Lol, Tennessee Rule 26.02:

'It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial (i.e. irrelevant) if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence."

Same rule in federal court and pretty much every state, this is first year law student stuff.
 
Last edited:
#173
#173
unfrozencvmanvol said:
Lol, Tennessee Rule 26.02:

'It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial (i.e. irrelevant) if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence."

Same rule in federal court and pretty much every state, this is first year law student stuff.
Click to expand...

And in the pleadings, you still have to show how the evidence is party to establishing a breach of contract by UT. This occurs well prior to discovery. You see any boosters' names at the bottom of this contract?

pruittcontract.png


Stop watching Judge Judy for examples of how a civil court process is played out.
 
#174
#174
BeardedVol said:
And in the pleadings, you still have to show how the evidence is party to establishing a breach of contract by UT. This occurs well prior to discovery. You see any boosters' names at the bottom of this contract?

pruittcontract.png


Stop watching Judge Judy for examples of how a civil court process is played out.
Click to expand...

Man, I always thought you were fairly smart, I'm re-evaluating that assessment if you think the list of potential witnesses in this matter will be limited to whose names are on the contract.

We have notice pleading in the United States, your pleadings just need to be put the opposing party on notice of what the allegations are, you don't have to prove them at that stage.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#175
#175
unfrozencvmanvol said:
Man, I always thought you were fairly smart, I'm re-evaluating that assessment if you think the list of potential witnesses in this matter will be limited to whose names are on the contract.
Click to expand...

Have you ever actually been party to, or even witnessed civil proceedings where a contract was in dispute?

Your concept and understanding of the reality of the legal process is woefully inept if so.

Google "parol evidence" and the Tennessee Supreme Court ruling on Individual Healthcare Specialists v BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee get back to me.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top