Started By
Message

Tennessee attorney general threatened NCAA with state law before Jeremy Pruitt verdict
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:29 pm
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:29 pm
LINK
quote:
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti threatened legal action against the NCAA if it had given the University of Tennessee football team a postseason ban in the Jeremy Pruitt recruiting scandal, documents show.
The weapon was a new state law protecting college players’ right to earn money from name, image and likeness.
quote:
“Tennessee law prohibits the NCAA from imposing such a sanction (as a postseason ban), and I will not hesitate to vindicate the rights of UT students to enjoy the full measure of their intercollegiate athletic opportunities,” Skrmetti wrote in the letter.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:35 pm to CarolinaGamecock99
I really have no idea how the ncaa continues to have any power. We're playing along with an overridden ruler. It's odd.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:40 pm to Themicah86
At this point the NCAA’s only move is to pass punishment and tell schools “fine, sue us” knowing that the majority of them won’t.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:43 pm to CarolinaGamecock99
Pretty badass tbh.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:43 pm to Volatile
Got the best AG in the land.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:45 pm to Themicah86
Honestly, Pruitt and UT could challenge the penalties that were given over selective enforcement.
LSU did just as bad with their football and basketball programs and received minimal punishment, while Tennessee and Pruitt received a lot more.
frick the NCAA
LSU did just as bad with their football and basketball programs and received minimal punishment, while Tennessee and Pruitt received a lot more.
frick the NCAA
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:49 pm to ForeverGator
Tennessee just showed the blueprint on how to treat the NCAA.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:50 pm to CarolinaGamecock99
Looks like a politician trying to claim credit for something he didn't do and couldn't lose at to me (saying 'frick you' to the NCAA is never going to cost you with voters). Plowman and White deserve credit not him.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:52 pm to CarolinaGamecock99
Hell yes. Bitch slapped the NCAA. They’re essentially done.
Please run for governor
Please run for governor
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:55 pm to Prof
Did you actually read the story? The threat of legal action most definitely played a role in the bowl decision
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:58 pm to Henry Jones Jr
8 million is a good chunk of money but we're playing along so I guess they still have something. I wish they would tell them to frick off. There backs are against the ropes already on this paper dragon falling to pieces but leave it to our administration to do something like that.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 1:59 pm to CarolinaGamecock99
Doesn’t matter
Tenn will be lucky to make a bowl this year
Tenn will be lucky to make a bowl this year
Posted on 7/16/23 at 2:05 pm to BigOrangeBri
quote:
Did you actually read the story? The threat of legal action most definitely played a role in the bowl decision
The NCAA was never going to give us a bowl ban in the first place. That was the entire point of entering into a negotiated settlement wherein we did all the work and gave them the evidence. Threatening a hated organization in front of voters who hate that org and love their football team is absolutely pandering.
Danny White and Donde Plowman are owed the credit. They took the risk and did the work. This guy is a bench player claiming he won the game.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 2:07 pm to Themicah86
quote:
I really have no idea how the ncaa continues to have any power.
They don’t have power. They’re a Potemkin village propped up by university presidents to take the brunt of the legal challenges and bad PR that would otherwise fall to the schools on issues like player compensation. That’s why they continue to exist and the only reason, at that.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 2:08 pm to CarolinaGamecock99
Alright, that is funny
Posted on 7/16/23 at 2:10 pm to Prof
Not to mention that the NCAA is a voluntary organization that member institutions agree to abide by. So any state law would not supersede the agreement.
Member institutions are free to leave but as long as they are members they will abide by organization guidelines.
Member institutions are free to leave but as long as they are members they will abide by organization guidelines.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 2:16 pm to CarolinaGamecock99
Not a fan of the NCAA and how they do things but this is Tennessee being shite heads.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 2:33 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
Not a fan of the NCAA and how they do things but this is Tennessee being shite heads.
Do you truly believe that what we were fined for is beyond anything most every single sec team aside from maybe vandy is doing? Was it stupidly brazen under that particular regime? Sure. However if we were to have paid x player an amount of money and he elected to to elsewhere I highly doubt it was for a better weight room. I would say the same thing is true for the players Tennessee gets. It's been that way for decades.
Posted on 7/16/23 at 2:33 pm to Prof
quote:
The NCAA was never going to give us a bowl ban in the first place. That was the entire point of entering into a negotiated settlement wherein we did all the work and gave them the evidence. Threatening a hated organization in front of voters who hate that org and love their football team is absolutely pandering.
Danny White and Donde Plowman are owed the credit. They took the risk and did the work. This guy is a bench player claiming he won the game.
If that were the case then this wouldn’t have happened at the last minute. They would’ve just ignored it.
“On March 31, Skrmetti sent the letter to Scott Bearby, NCAA vice president of legal affairs. It had the potential to carry weight, or at least UT thought so.
UT petitioned to get the letter entered into the case record for its NCAA infractions hearing under the 30-day deadline. The NCAA granted the request just seven days before the hearing began on April 19 in Cincinnati.
The NCAA also thought it could carry weight.
In its response, the NCAA accepted the late submission because Skrmetti’s letter appeared to be “pertinent to the institution’s arguments with respect to … the imposition of penalties.”
Back to top
