ADVERTISEMENT

FC: Judge gives NCAA permission to file new response in Paterno lawsuit(updated w/ new NCAA filing)

A

I also don't think it will be that "easy for Wick and team" to directly attribute his lack of market appeal directly to the CD. He has many more negatives associated with him than anything the CD may (or may not) have done.
Really??? What many negatives does/did Jay have???
 
Really??? What many negatives does/did Jay have???

Oh, you didn't realize that bamasota makes all hiring decisions for all networks AND all DI athletic departments? He has spoken, nobody wants to listen to him and he is completely talentless and un-hireable with zero redeeming qualities, etc... Normally, I'd question this but coming from bamasota, the final authority o all hiring for broadcasters and D1 athletic departments, I don't think it can be questioned and think you'll just have to accept it as fact..... LMFAO at some of these tools and what they attempt to pass off as factual "objective" statements...
 
This semantic discussion on the meaning of the word "some" again????

If I have 10 cookies, and I eat 1 cookie, I have eaten some of the cookies.

Similarly, if there were 10 Penn State football coaches, and 1 of the football coaches was directly implicated, some of the Penn State football coaches were directly implicated.

Why not just use the exact context at hand, rather than making an out of context (and still incorrect) statement in a futile attempt to support your inane argument? (I mean, other than the exact context not supporting your inane argument of course.) Given that you ignored it the first time, it's hardly appropriate to state "this semantic discussion", never mind being disingenuous at best. Your misuse and/or misunderstanding of the English language is not an excuse for something as serious as the consent decree at hand, which is something that someone with your "Holiday Inn Express" lawyer claims would surely easily comprehend. (The fact that you can't makes me think you're more like a "Motel 6" level lawyer, but I digress.) It's extremely ironic that you're trying to claim semantics when arguing an invalid grammatical point. "Some coaches" (as stated directly by the NCAA consent decree) references the plural "coaches" and is therefore plural itself. (If not, then it would have stated "A coach" or "one coach", singular.) You can incorrectly argue semantics all you want, but the simple fact (and yes, it is a fact) is that "coaches" is plural (please, go ahead and try to argue otherwise), and therefore the indefinite pronoun proceeding it is plural. So again, what coaches (more than one) is the NCAA referring to? I'll spot you Joe Paterno. You then have to provide at least one other name.
 
I think some of your claims above are a bit of a stretch (Tom Bradley, Larry Johnson and the unnamed-thus-far John Thomas have definitely been at equal-level jobs post-PSU), but fine, I'll play along.

"Some of your claims", to which you specifically reference 3 (which is > 1), as opposed to "One of your claims". So, contrary to your previous inane arguments, you do know how to use the English language correctly and just nullified your previous claims to the contrary.
 
just so I understand the michigan math here

if I kick michnit in the left nut, but it's his ONLY nut (hey prove to me it is not! show me some medical evidence from 7 hospitals that he does, in fact, possess BOTH testicles!!)

have I kicked him in one nut? some nut? some of his nuts?? all his nuts?? :rolleyes:

You incorrectly assumed he has a nut (singular), let alone nuts (plural).
 
  • Like
Reactions: simons96
John Thomas does not have an equal job, he's not even listed on the FB site as being a S & C for FB. http://www.georgiadogs.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/061210aaa.html So if you are not a S & C for FB, and you were, you have taken a step down. S & C for ex, track, aint the same as S & C for FB. I said LJ made a lateral move, and don't forget TB spent 2 yrs out of the game before a lawyer read the Freeh report twice, before he was considered, and at that time, he took a big step down ( DC to DL is a huge step down, all the other titles were noise)

Both LJ and Bradley are making considerably more money now than they were at psu. So do you want the title or the money?
That said, it will eventually turn out that coaches have documentation from university's and/or sports companies that they were turned down for a job strictly because of the NCAA sanctions. I believe one coach actually accepted a job prior to July 2012 and was then told they couldn't hire him because of the sanctions.
Paterno will win this case IMO
 
Both LJ and Bradley are making considerably more money now than they were at psu. So do you want the title or the money?
That said, it will eventually turn out that coaches have documentation from university's and/or sports companies that they were turned down for a job strictly because of the NCAA sanctions. I believe one coach actually accepted a job prior to July 2012 and was then told they couldn't hire him because of the sanctions.
Paterno will win this case IMO

Exactly. As I said in an earlier post, it will be easy for Wick and company to prove their case. This ain't their first rodeo.

I will be drinking a bunch of Ol' Grandad when emmert, freeh, erickson, peetz, frazier, surma, tomalis, et al. get their comeuppance.
 
Oh, you're back to this again? Since you ignored my response in the other thread, please tell me who the coaches (plural, meaning more than one) were who the NCAA referred to as having ignored Sandusky. For reference, again, "some" is an indefinite pronoun and can be singular or plural, depending on what it's referring to. Therefore, since "coaches" is plural, some is also plural.

I was told there wasn't going to be math on this test.
 
I was told there wasn't going to be math on this test.

The funniest part is, using the information of the investigators and prosecutors from the PA OAG who prosecuted the Indictments that Freeh and the NCAA so love to refer to, you can't even find ONE COACH on PSU's 2011 Staff, let alone "coaches". Given that NONE of them were involved, it is pretty clear that the NCAA was irresponsibly painting with a broad brush in regards to their FALSE ALLEGATION (e.g., that any member of PSU's 2011 Football Coaching Staff was involved in the Indictments made by the PA OAG relative to the SWIGJ and Indictments announced by the PA OAG in November 2011) that "some coaches" were involved in an effort to cause as much unjustified and unfair nuclear wholesale damage as possible to PSU and its Football Program.
 
The funniest part is, using the information of the investigators and prosecutors from the PA OAG who prosecuted the Indictments that Freeh and the NCAA so love to refer to, you can't even find ONE COACH on PSU's 2011 Staff, let alone "coaches". Given that NONE of them were involved, it is pretty clear that the NCAA was irresponsibly painting with a broad brush in regards to their FALSE ALLEGATION (e.g., that any member of PSU's 2011 Football Coaching Staff was involved in the Indictments made by the PA OAG relative to the SWIGJ and Indictments announced by the PA OAG in November 2011) that "some coaches" were involved in an effort to cause as much unjustified and unfair nuclear wholesale damage as possible to PSU and its Football Program.

I don't know how to divide by zero. My math education stopped at Laplace transforms.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT