Jump to content


Eight Husker Football Players Sue the Big Ten


knapplc

Recommended Posts

Just now, WyoHusker56 said:

I saw someone else point this out elsewhere, but the B1G redacted more than 11 pages of the 13 page bylaws they submitted to the court. I mean can you try harder to make it look like you are hiding something?

 

That's the part that has me intrigued. What are they thinking doing that? And why do they think that they can foist that kind of half-a$$ response - along with the rest of these half-a$$ responses - onto the sports world and they'll just accept it?

 

There are so many self-inflicted wounds in this process. Makes you wonder how many people are going to be losing their jobs over this when all's said & done. 

  • Plus1 5
Link to comment

16 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

That's the part that has me intrigued. What are they thinking doing that? And why do they think that they can foist that kind of half-a$$ response - along with the rest of these half-a$$ responses - onto the sports world and they'll just accept it?

 

There are so many self-inflicted wounds in this process. Makes you wonder how many people are going to be losing their jobs over this when all's said & done. 

 

The PR people need to reevaluate what they are doing that's for sure. They couldn't make it look like they are hiding something more if they tried.

  • Plus1 4
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, WyoHusker56 said:

 

The PR people need to reevaluate what they are doing that's for sure. They couldn't make it look like they are hiding something more if they tried.

 

What's going to be the ultimate face-palm is if it turns out they made what they thought was a good decision in the best interests of the greater good, but have just utterly botched anything resembling an explanation for it.

 

Which I can see, with the whole "ivory tower" mentality whereby they're the smartest person in the room and they shouldn't be questioned. The more they are questioned, the more I could see that kind of person digging their heels in, being unable to see the bigger picture of how that looks outside of academia. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

What's going to be the ultimate face-palm is if it turns out they made what they thought was a good decision in the best interests of the greater good, but have just utterly botched anything resembling an explanation for it.

 

Which I can see, with the whole "ivory tower" mentality whereby they're the smartest person in the room and they shouldn't be questioned. The more they are questioned, the more I could see that kind of person digging their heels in, being unable to see the bigger picture of how that looks outside of academia. 

 

At the time they made the decision I didn't have a huge problem with it other than don't do it a week after you announce the schedule that's bad optics. However, the more they botch handling it since the more irritated I've become with it. Plus everything now is flying in the face of cancelling, yet they seem to refuse to budge on the decision. HS sports are going off successfully all over, testing has advanced in a major way, college sports are happening successfully and yet they refuse to even address any of this publicly. They're bringing this all on themselves even if their initial decision was correct at the time. It's exactly the whole ivory tower mentality, they can't admit maybe they should reconsider.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
Just now, WyoHusker56 said:

 

At the time they made the decision I didn't have a huge problem with it other than don't do it a week after you announce the schedule that's bad optics. However, the more they botch handling it since the more irritated I've become with it. Plus everything now is flying in the face of cancelling, yet they seem to refuse to budge on the decision. HS sports are going off successfully all over, testing has advanced in a major way, college sports are happening successfully and yet they refuse to even address any of this publicly. They're bringing this all on themselves even if their initial decision was correct at the time. It's exactly the whole ivory tower mentality, they can't admit maybe they should reconsider.

 

Yes. The whole "the decision won't be revisited" line in the letter, especially coming weeks after the spit-test had been made available, was pretty galling. 

 

It seemed more of "Don't question us" than "We're basing our decisions on the best-available science at the time" and that's where my opinion really started changing. 

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

1 minute ago, admo said:

 

Disagree.  I think Puerto Ricans are pretty cool.   chuckleshuffle

 

Haha, I take it all back.

4 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Yes. The whole "the decision won't be revisited" line in the letter, especially coming weeks after the spit-test had been made available, was pretty galling. 

 

It seemed more of "Don't question us" than "We're basing our decisions on the best-available science at the time" and that's where my opinion really started changing. 

 

I always thought they'd eat that line.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
On 9/8/2020 at 2:39 PM, knapplc said:

 

That's the part that has me intrigued. What are they thinking doing that? And why do they think that they can foist that kind of half-a$$ response - along with the rest of these half-a$$ responses - onto the sports world and they'll just accept it?

 

There are so many self-inflicted wounds in this process. Makes you wonder how many people are going to be losing their jobs over this when all's said & done. 

Buying time? Hoping Covid goes rampant and the season is killed 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

1 hour ago, flatwaterfan said:

Why would they blacken out sections of the bylaws?   There should be nothing that is confidential.   This is nuts.

 

I've seen speculation that they don't actually need the 9 vote super majority, but instead a simple majority (8) to reinstate the season and they don't want that out. A lot of lawyers are jumping on this now though and all of them agree you only do that if something in there hurts your case and you don't want it out.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, WyoHusker56 said:

 

I've seen speculation that they don't actually need the 9 vote super majority, but instead a simple majority (8) to reinstate the season and they don't want that out. A lot of lawyers are jumping on this now though and all of them agree you only do that if something in there hurts your case and you don't want it out.

 

 

The Big Ten members who voted for No Football are probably furiously rewriting the redacted sections of the bylaws as we speak. :D 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...