re: Moscona: SEC Presidents voted to dismiss lawsuit vs LSU

Idc how objective and exceptional you claim to be, this proves you are anything but:

quote:

---

In what fantasy world do you think there wouldn't be a leak from someone to the pervasive and ever-present sports media validating what A.G.Murrill said and giving substance to the LSU fan accusations?

---

Translation: Why wouldn’t you expect the same media that has been wrong at virtually every turn on relevant legal proceedings to rush to LSU’s defense?

Media like Dellenger, Finebaum, Goodman, Forde? That media?

quote:

---

the fact that the SEC offices aren't making any noise or statements tells me there likely is activity on their end.

---

So the fact that Presidents of other schools aren’t coming out of the woodwork to openly undermine the commissioner is proof the LA AG is just making up shite, but the fact the SEC is silent is proof the LA AG is making up shite

Murrill gains absolutely nothing & nukes any goodwill she has gained if this statement is proven false.

You aren’t as sharp as you think boss.

All of this (quote below) still feels applicable. At least, I've not read nor heard anything to dissuade my belief of the present brinkmanship by LSU's coaches and administration, Landry's outsized involvement in the program, and the department's role in prior and active litigation, has subsided in any way.

quote:

---

"This case addresses a broader dispute: Defendants' complete lack of institutional control over LSU's athletic programs, their ongoing defiance of the Conference's Professionalism Rules, and the very real threat -- reiterated in Defendants' briefing -- that Defendants will interfere with any effort to terminate LSU's membership in the Conference," the SEC's court filing, issued Tuesday, said. "That dispute remains live."

---

Of course, I'm not going through the prior 160+ comments to read all of the equivocating from LSU fans. I'm referring to real journalistic and fact-based sauces here

quote:

---

Fine, the SEC office and lawyers have gone rogue.

---

Maybe, maybe not - I for one don't find that so hard to believe.

But the fact remains - that is what the LA AG said, which is the actual point at issue here, not some shite you made up because you can't fathom that the vote was unconditional and separate from the proposed settlement by the SEC lawyers that asked for conditions.

quote:

---

All of this (quote below) still feels applicable.

---

It's not though, walk with me:

quote:

---

Defendants' complete lack of institutional control over LSU's athletic programs

---

Hard to argue LSU has a LOIC if they aren't breaking rules. At best, that's just a theory. Without violations, there's no evidence of actual LOIC.

quote:

---

their ongoing defiance of the Conference's Professionalism Rules

---

The definition of "defiance" is "open resistance, bold disobedience."

LSU hasn't openly resisted the SEC's professionalism rule, in fact they voted for it. They also haven't disobeyed the rule.

quote:

---

the very real threat -- reiterated in Defendants' briefing -- that Defendants will interfere with any effort to terminate LSU's membership in the Conference,

---

LSU has no standing to force the SEC to keep the school as a member, they have ceded this is their responses.

This entire lawsuit's main purpose was to obtain a TRO to prevent LSU from interfering in a September 10th vote for expulsion that never even happened.