This might be a totally naive take, but if this young man was so willing to take such a hard stance on “unfulfilled commitments”, why did he even play a single down? Obviously different narratives are going to swirl around this whole thing for a while, but eventually a clearer picture will start to form. When that does happen, it’ll be interesting to see what really transpired here.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

chickenbox said:

Merge, why do you bother????

Click to expand...

He can’t help himself

chickenbox said:

Merge, why do you bother????

Click to expand...

This one’s fun. He’s so obviously wrong here, just can’t admit it.

He’s not vindictive. Well he’s vindictive but he wouldn’t act on it. Well he acted on it but I agree with him. lol

Merge said:

No one is arguing he shouldn't have fired McCabe. That would have been taking care of the problem.

Had Trump not tweeted about his pension eligibility months earlier, or fired him after a 30 day notification which is in accordance with FBI policy... then I'd agree. Unfortunately, his termination was expedited JUST because of vindictiveness. Trump didn't want to just fire him, he wanted to go beyond that and make sure he couldn't get his full pension. You just keep ignoring the timing here.

Click to expand...

Merge, why do you bother????

By the way, there are rumors floating out there that Memphis reached out to the big east for membership with the plan being a pac 12 membership for football and a big east membership for everything else.

Apparently, Val was not interested.

HALL85 said:

You don’t seem to get it. It’s not being vindictive when someone is unable to do their job and uses it for political purposes, when he’s not supposed to. It’s called taking care of a problem.

Click to expand...

No one is arguing he shouldn't have fired McCabe. That would have been taking care of the problem.

Had Trump not tweeted about his pension eligibility months earlier, or fired him after a 30 day notification which is in accordance with FBI policy... then I'd agree. Unfortunately, his termination was expedited JUST because of vindictiveness. Trump didn't want to just fire him, he wanted to go beyond that and make sure he couldn't get his full pension. You just keep ignoring the timing here.

SHUSource said:

The "representations" Sluka references are not specified, and who knows if anything was actually signed, such as a contract, but it seems like if UNLV reneged, then he's got some standing to do this. It's definitely a strange new world, but the players' leverage doesn't mean much if they don't use or enforce it.

No, who knows? "Representations" could mean they promised him a good duel blocking/receiving tight end and none materialized. In that case, that's like any other player who takes a leap of faith that his team will follow through on its promise to improve (hello, Mike Trout!), but if a sum of money was promised and not delivered, then good for him.

I think we're quickly headed toward much more standardized, publicly known contracts. That's the only way to avoid this crap.

Click to expand...

According to the player' agent, it was a verbal offer of $100,000 from the offensive coordinator. The only written agreement was $3,000 paid to the player for moving expenses.

These mini plans get worse every year. There isn't even flexibility. And what is a $25 priority seat premium?

Merge said:

You asked for an example where Trump acted vindictively. I gave you one. Now you just agree with the vindictiveness so it doesn't count?
ok... I guess you're right that Trump acting vindictively is not something you need to worry about because you will just make excuses for it anyway.

Click to expand...

You don’t seem to get it. It’s not being vindictive when someone is unable to do their job and uses it for political purposes, when he’s not supposed to. It’s called taking care of a problem.

hallgrad80 said:

And some pissed off player will retaliate by disclosing all the seamy side of recruiting i

Click to expand...

Or retaliate thru Fan Duel to re-cap the $ they feel owed to them.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

SHUHoopsFan said:

Weren't conservative non profits targeted by the IRS during the Obama administration.

Click to expand...

Well, yes, but so were liberal groups. Progressive, green energy and occupy were also on target lists.

The issue was that the IRS was not supposed to target specifically based on ideology but they were supposed to target political organizations which should not qualify for tax exempt status. That was the issue.

Not vindictive or inherently biased, the tea party movement was just bigger so there were a ton of requests from tea party groups popping up which were flagged. The IRS now has a policy in place to monitor the filters used and nothing can be added without approval.

SHUHoopsFan said:

Isn't the Trump lawsuit over property values just an attack on Trump

Click to expand...

The problem for Trump was that it became public elsewhere that he had lied. Not sure the state should let it slide when the facts show fraud?

SHUHoopsFan said:

My opinion this is a bunch of Trump is a monster because he's going to do the same things we've been doing behind closed doors, right out in the open for everyone to see and he's not going to twist it to make it sound good.

Click to expand...

That's fair. It's entirely possible Harris would be just as vindictive.. though my original point before that was that Trump was less likely to keep the guardrails up. The people who push back against Harris potentially doing whatever she wants will be there if she wins. I don't think Trump keeps anyone around that doesn't say yes to him in a 2nd term.

I had the same thought as Dan watching it live. And then remembered that nowadays there is no hesitation walking a guy like Judge even with first base occupied (others have gotten this treatment in the past too, I recall, but seems more widespread now across baseball).

This is the exact stuff that makes fans run away from watching unless there is a gambling interest.

garyshu71 said:

Times are tough. Undefeated and UNLV can’t come up with the money. What would Tark do?

Click to expand...

Tark would have had the money.

Burnsly said:

They would have walked Judge regardless but no reason for Soto to take that risk. Dumb base running by both guys but it's hard to criticize the extra effort.

Click to expand...

That's a probable, but in doing so you put the winning run on second. So it's not a given.