The Official “Regular Posters of the Basketball Forum” Thread

#8,826
#8,826
VolGee4 said:
I am not a dietician, but soy bean oil is high in fat and used in many processed foods. Eating a high number of processed foods can lead to health issues. Just like anything else, it needs to be eaten in moderation.

I am not getting involved with the rest of the discussion, but I have a colleague who is allergic to soybean and corn, and it is amazing what is made these days with both oils/syrup.
Click to expand...

Peanuts are poisonous.
 
#8,831
#8,831
golfballs said:
How can someone not see a pattern and wonder what’s up? At BEST it’s just coincidence that these guys are consistently impacting the outcome of games with outrageously bad calls. At worst???
Click to expand...

You’re just mad cause the Golf balls thrown weren’t you. 😘
 
#8,835
#8,835
walkenvol said:
Didn’t Dino Gauido try that at Louisville and got convicted for extortion for his efforts?
love to see cornbread get some time in a federal pound him in the arse prison! He sure pounded UT while here
Click to expand...

I think the situations are likely very different, at least, to my recollection.

i think Pruitt’s lawyer is basically saying, UT conspired to fire a coach for cause to avoid paying a buyout when the university was complicit in the cheating itself, or knowledgeable.

Which may very well be true and a decent legal defense.

I think Dino was just stupid and didn't have an attorney go to bat for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: berryvol, johnfnkelly and Vols All Day
#8,836
#8,836
omghulkhands said:
I think the situations are likely very different, at least, to my recollection.

i think Pruitt’s lawyer is basically saying, UT conspired to fire a coach for cause to avoid paying a buyout when the university was complicit in the cheating itself, or knowledgeable.

Which may very well be true and a decent legal defense.

I think Dino was just stupid and didn't have an attorney go to bat for him.
Click to expand...

It’s legal posturing. By filing suit, Pruitt will have to prove that UT breached their contract by terminating him with cause and whether Pruitt’s actions fall within that clause in the contract. I don’t see how other people being complicit (if that’s even true) absolve Pruitt from what he did. Doesn’t really help Pruitt. But if there are things that may come out that UT may not want out, then that would be a reason UT might want to settle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: berryvol
#8,837
#8,837
omghulkhands said:
I think the situations are likely very different, at least, to my recollection.

i think Pruitt’s lawyer is basically saying, UT conspired to fire a coach for cause to avoid paying a buyout when the university was complicit in the cheating itself, or knowledgeable.

Which may very well be true and a decent legal defense.

I think Dino was just stupid and didn't have an attorney go to bat for him.
Click to expand...
Dino alleged the same
 
#8,838
#8,838
VolGee4 said:
It’s legal posturing. By filing suit, Pruitt will have to prove that UT breached their contract by terminating him with cause and whether Pruitt’s actions fall within that clause in the contract. I don’t see how other people being complicit (if that’s even true) absolve Pruitt from what he did. Doesn’t really help Pruitt. But if there are things that may come out that UT may not want out, then that would be a reason UT might want to settle.
Click to expand...
He’s trying to scare the university into a settlement. It’s a total bluff otherwise it wouldn’t be publicized like this. He would have already filed suit and not needed this grandstanding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: berryvol, InVOLuntary and walkenvol
#8,839
#8,839
Barnes response…

"I'm really disappointed that Jeremy would throw people's names around that he knows did nothing but support him the entire time he was here and make these unsubstantiated claims," Barnes told ESPN. "I would invite the NCAA to come in any day of the week and investigate our program. I have too much respect for our players, our school and our administration for somebody to ever think we were not doing things right here and make such ridiculous statements.

"Jeremy is not here because of the decisions he made and the way he led his program. Here's what I know: Our university has done everything it possibly can in working with the NCAA to clean up the mess he left behind and bring this to closure."
 
  • Like
Reactions: berryvol, AngryButchJones, JelloPuddinPup and 4 others
#8,840
#8,840
golfballs said:
Dino alleged the same
Click to expand...

Dino’s contract expired, and Mack informed him that they weren’t renewing it. That’s when Dino threatened to turn over violations if they didn’t agree to a new deal. A bit different.

The attorney buffers Pruitt, but he even he has to be careful making such threats.
 
#8,841
#8,841
VolGee4 said:
Dino’s contract expired, and Mack informed him that they weren’t renewing it. That’s when Dino threatened to turn over violations if they didn’t agree to a new deal. A bit different.

The attorney buffers Pruitt, but he even he has to be careful making such threats.
Click to expand...
He alleged that Mack was aware of the violations. And that’s why he wanted money. The circumstances weren’t the same but the allegations are
 
#8,842
#8,842
golfballs said:
He alleged that Mack was aware of the violations. And that’s why he wanted money. The circumstances weren’t the same but the allegations are
Click to expand...

Pruitt is alleging a cause of action- that UT breached its contract. The attorney is using some other “noise” to leverage them into a settlement.

Dino was under no contract and UL had no obligation to him. Yet he attempted to extort UL and Mack for money based on what he threatened to turn over. There is a difference.
 
#8,843
#8,843
VolGee4 said:
Pruitt is alleging a cause of action- that UT breached its contract. The attorney is using some other “noise” to leverage them into a settlement.

Dino was under no contract and UL had no obligation to him. Yet he attempted to extort UL and Mack for money based on what he threatened to turn over. There is a difference.
Click to expand...
Yes the circumstances are definitely different but the allegations are not.
 
#8,844
#8,844
golfballs said:
Yes the circumstances are definitely different but the allegations are not.
Click to expand...

Ok…but I’m just trying to explain how one was extortion and the other is more of leveraging a case. While I would caution Pruitt’s attorney to be careful with “threats,” there is a kind of litigation privilege.
 
#8,845
#8,845
VolGee4 said:
It’s legal posturing. By filing suit, Pruitt will have to prove that UT breached their contract by terminating him with cause and whether Pruitt’s actions fall within that clause in the contract. I don’t see how other people being complicit (if that’s even true) absolve Pruitt from what he did. Doesn’t really help Pruitt. But if there are things that may come out that UT may not want out, then that would be a reason UT might want to settle.
Click to expand...
Sounds like the legal definition of blackmail.
 
#8,846
#8,846
VolGee4 said:
Ok…but I’m just trying to explain how one was extortion and the other is more of leveraging a case. While I would caution Pruitt’s attorney to be careful with “threats,” there is a kind of litigation privilege.
Click to expand...
Yes I don’t actually think this would rise to the legal definition of extortion because he’s not technically alleging anything. He’s just making vague threats, but he’s certainly suggesting that everyone at UT knew of “embarrassing details” or something 🙄
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top