Started By
Message
2
Posted on 7/31/26 at 11:24 am to Pickle_Weasel
Well it's by the USA today who when they employed Dan the cocksucker Wolken would scrape threads here to write articles. I'm certain that Matt and the rest of the hacks that write for that piece of shite paper are still doing the same things.
Hey Dan since I know you still read these threads: Get turbo AIDS of the anal cavity
Hey Dan since I know you still read these threads: Get turbo AIDS of the anal cavity
Posted on 7/31/26 at 11:35 am to DMagic
quote:
Dan the cocksucker Wolken
he's the worst
Posted on 7/31/26 at 12:19 pm to lsufball19
I don't think he will ever get over his girlfriend getting hammered when they came to Ole Miss covering a game...and she ended up getting railed at a frat house afterwards.
Posted on 7/31/26 at 12:46 pm to Pickle_Weasel
Hayes seems to have been getting some scoops from kiffin lately since he got mad at Chris low so it's not a surprise lane would call in a favor
Posted on 7/31/26 at 1:28 pm to DMagic
quote:
Dan ... Wolken
Posted on 7/31/26 at 2:44 pm to geauxcoco
quote:
I get it. In this upside-down world of no accountability for players and NIL deals, where a player can transfer from one school, be enrolled in classes at his new school, and accept another offer from another school and transfer again — ahem, Ole Miss? — someone at some point has to take responsibility for his actions.
It’s sad that even the national reporters don’t have the attention span or intelligence to understand nuance in complicated matters like this one. I get it when fans who have day jobs and other responsibilities don’t understand it past surface level, but this dude is literally paid to know the latest in college football and isn’t smart enough to do it.
He’s basically saying that since Ole Miss has taken a player from another school in the NIL era, we can’t hold people to contractual terms they agreed to or else we’d be hypocrites. What a clown take.
Posted on 7/31/26 at 2:49 pm to RebelExpress38
I think this is what most here meant when they said it was a bad look for Ole Miss.
If you actually look into the matter, it's easy to understand what's happening but the average person doesn't really look into stuff that deep.
If you actually look into the matter, it's easy to understand what's happening but the average person doesn't really look into stuff that deep.
Posted on 7/31/26 at 3:25 pm to SidewalkTiger
But is it though? Is there any other industry where contracts can just be ignored by one side? I think the average person understands that. If Ole Miss (or any other school) just ignored the buyout to their own detriment then what’s the point of having them in there? You would be inviting everyone on your roster to immediately ignore their buyout too and invite every school out there to poach your whole team.
Posted on 7/31/26 at 3:43 pm to RebelExpress38
I do wonder what LSU's staff and AD feel about it. On one hand I'm sure they don't want the players to have to pay it or feel they have to help pay, on the other, LSU doesn't want to deal with their own players potentially breaking rev share contracts. These schools want to know once a player has signed their deal, they can move on to the next player knowing he's playing for them next year.
Posted on 7/31/26 at 3:49 pm to rebsfan10
Seems perfectly reasonable that Ole Miss would want a refund for services not rendered. Seems like the bad publicity-all the "LSU stole your coach and now you are pouting" narrative that people will run with- would negate the desire to do this publicly though. Surprised this couldn't have been handled by two membership institutions with a week of back-channel phone calls.
Posted on 7/31/26 at 4:14 pm to RebelExpress38
quote:
But is it though?
I mean this article definitely makes it look bad. Just depends on who is looking at it, I guess.
quote:
Is there any other industry where contracts can just be ignored by one side? I think the average person understands that. If Ole Miss (or any other school) just ignored the buyout to their own detriment then what’s the point of having them in there? You would be inviting everyone on your roster to immediately ignore their buyout too and invite every school out there to poach your whole team.
This is just the next step in ultimately making players employees. IMO, both schools are challenging this to see if these contracts/buyouts hold up in court.
Posted on 7/31/26 at 4:25 pm to Pickle_Weasel
Who cares if it’s about NIL or Rev share… it calls you out for the hypocrites that you are.
Posted on 8/1/26 at 10:27 pm to Saskwatch
I didn't say it would be changed. I said it would be requested. But they'll say they do have grounds, which is they cannot get a fair trial in Oxford.
This post was edited on 8/1/26 at 10:28 pm
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:35 pm to hubreb
Technically a contract should be honored if not met...but this seems pety by Ole Miss honestly.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:43 pm to OleVaught14
quote:
quote:
tired in Mississippi
The lawsuit was filed in Lafayette Co (where Oxford is).
The lawsuits are being heard by different judges. Both are Ole Miss Law
graduates
The lawsuits will probably be removed to federal court, where there are other Ole Miss graduates on the bench. Ole Miss will win at the district court level. Then they will be appealed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals … in New Orleans.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 1:44 pm to Beau Fontenot
17 pages. Impressive.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:26 pm to Lucado
quote:
The lawsuits will probably be removed to federal court
I dont think it can be.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:39 pm to OleVaught14
quote:
quote:
The lawsuits will probably be removed to federal court
I dont think it can be.
I haven’t reviewed the complaints, but Ole Miss is suing two current LA residents. I would think diversity jurisdiction would apply.
Posted on 8/2/26 at 2:45 pm to OleVaught14
quote:
I dont think it can be.
You are correct. Ole Miss is not a citizen of MS for the purpose of diversity jurisdiction
Page 17 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News