The Atlanta Braves

#250,152
#250,152
There isn’t clear evidence it was backwards

The refs blew the play dead

There’s a 2 second beat before the ball is recovered

What the **** are we doing
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carp and TBrown
#250,157
#250,157
Unless more evidence comes forth, it sounds like Ohio might have really shot themselves in the foot with firing Smith. His lawyers are gonna have a field day with this one.

It's going to be hard to prove that Smith did anything that would warrant a firing. Having a celebratory glass of alcohol on school property outside regular hours is hardly enough to fire someone over. And the alcohol was reportedly provided by the husband of the University's President.

The relationship with the student also isn't justification, as she was not a member of the staff or otherwise associated with the athletic department. I doubt there is anything in his contract about banging co-eds.

Not only that, but this look is pretty bad for the athletic department and the top university officials. Trying to snag any decent HC from a lower conference/division or a good OC/DC from a P4 school becomes much harder for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#250,158
#250,158
zjcvols said:
There isn’t clear evidence it was backwards

The refs blew the play dead

There’s a 2 second beat before the ball is recovered

What the **** are we doing
Click to expand...
Based on what the rules analyst said, if the ball is thrown on the line that was drawn on the screen it’s still technically considered backwards. If that’s correct then it appears the correct call was made. It’s funny that the running back nonchalantly picking up the ball in the endzone proved to be beneficial.
 
#250,159
#250,159
Carp said:
Unless more evidence comes forth, it sounds like Ohio might have really shot themselves in the foot with firing Smith. His lawyers are gonna have a field day with this one.

It's going to be hard to prove that Smith did anything that would warrant a firing. Having a celebratory glass of alcohol on school property outside regular hours is hardly enough to fire someone over. And the alcohol was reportedly provided by the husband of the University's President.

The relationship with the student also isn't justification, as she was not a member of the staff or otherwise associated with the athletic department. I doubt there is anything in his contract about banging co-eds.

Not only that, but this look is pretty bad for the athletic department and the top university officials. Trying to snag any decent HC from a lower conference/division or a good OC/DC from a P4 school becomes much harder for them.
Click to expand...
Moral turpitude/"don't bring the school into disrepute" clause. The school is also alleging now that the alcohol issue was a more persistent thing, including showing up at a school event drunk and smelling like a brewery.

The coach is going to hang his hat on the fact that the school didn't have a policy prohibiting relationships between employees and students and that she wasn't his subordinate. I imagine the school is going to say that is irrelevant, because it made the school look bad, which violates the contract.

If Mel Tucker didn't get his buyout because he had (likely) consensual phone sex with someone who wasn't even a Michigan St employee or student, I doubt this guy gets anything either.
 
#250,160
#250,160
Plecoptera said:
Based on what the rules analyst said, if the ball is thrown on the line that was drawn on the screen it’s still technically considered backwards. If that’s correct then it appears the correct call was made. It’s funny that the running back nonchalantly picking up the ball in the endzone proved to be beneficial.
Click to expand...
But the whistle…
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV_12
#250,162
#250,162
Wickman said:
I still can’t believe that happened lol
Click to expand...
I think the reason this kind of stuff keeps happening, aside from people just being stupid, is they think "Well there isn't anything in the handbook saying I can't do this." And the amount of people who say "Why can't he do that, he was divorced" or "but it was consensual, what is wrong about it" any time things like this happen is astonishing to me.
 
#250,163
#250,163
Bob_Vols (another site’s “insider”) said there's a donor willing to foot the bill for a portal QB separate from our rest of team budget
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carp
#250,164
#250,164
LotteryPick said:
Bob_Vols (another site’s “insider”) said there's a donor willing to foot the bill for a portal QB separate from our rest of team budget
Click to expand...
I've seen a few things here and there suggesting that more is being pushed into the NIL for football. Why now all of a sudden? Can think of a few possibilities but havent heard/seen anything concrete anywhere.
 
#250,167
#250,167
05_never_again said:
Moral turpitude/"don't bring the school into disrepute" clause. The school is also alleging now that the alcohol issue was a more persistent thing, including showing up at a school event drunk and smelling like a brewery.

The coach is going to hang his hat on the fact that the school didn't have a policy prohibiting relationships between employees and students and that she wasn't his subordinate. I imagine the school is going to say that is irrelevant, because it made the school look bad, which violates the contract.

If Mel Tucker didn't get his buyout because he had (likely) consensual phone sex with someone who wasn't even a Michigan St employee or student, I doubt this guy gets anything either.
Click to expand...

I think they'll have a hard time proving the relationship with a student made the school look bad. It's not as if he was cheating on his wife (which also should be irrelevant to the proceedings, but I digress). It was a consensual relationship that he didn't try to hide.

The alcohol thing will be equally hard to prove, imo, at least in regards to the showing up smelling of alcohol. She would need several corroborating witnesses at the very least. And it's further muddied by the fact that her husband reportedly provided him the alcohol that was in his office.

The Tucker situation was certainly more nuanced than that. Especially given that MSU was still recently recovering from the Larry Nassar scandal.
 
Last edited:
#250,172
#250,172
Carp said:
I think they'll have a hard time proving the relationship with a student made the school look bad. It's not as if he was cheating on his wife (which also should be irrelevant to the proceedings, but I digress). It was a consensual relationship that he didn't try to hide.

The alcohol thing will be equally hard to prove, imo, at least in regards to the showing up smelling of alcohol. She would need several corroborating witnesses at the very least. And it's further muddied by the fact that her husband reportedly provided him the alcohol that was in his office.

The Tucker situation was certainly more nuanced than that. Especially given that MSU was still recently recovering from the Larry Nassar scandal.
Click to expand...
Generally speaking, it is a bad look for an organization to have a person in a leadership position in an intimate relationship with someone further down the chain, even if that person isn't a direct report. Especially if the guy is still technically married. The potential for that to go awry is very high because of the power imbalance between the people involved. I'm surprised the existing school rules don't prohibit relationships between employees and students. And it supposedly wasn't just one, but multiple relationships.

The Tucker situation does have the added complication of the woman claiming that the phone sex wasn't consensual, although IMO that is a dubious claim given that they had multiple calls of this nature that went on for extended periods of time. She wasn't even a university employee.

Like the Moore and Tucker firings, I suspect the true motivation behind the firing is performance on the field. This Ohio coach had kind of an underwhelming season after three 10-win seasons in a row and a conference title by his predecessor, although it didn't seem to be a "bad" season. But there probably is enough there to avoid paying the buyout.
 
#250,173
#250,173
mr.checkerboards said:
Rumor...... Hood got a day 3 draft grade and might come back.
If we can get Gibson back too.
Click to expand...
That seems almost impossible to me that he got graded that low. Almost every draft board I see has him as a top 50 pick. Of course Shaduer Sanders was a top 10 pick on most mock drafts, so what do these people really know?

But damn, a secondary of Hood, Gibson, and Redmond.... I don't know that we've ever had a secondary with that much talent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#250,175
#250,175
Also, WTF are the Orioles doing? That's a pretty insane package for a SP that hasn't been healthy or all that good for most of his career.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top