- 01:12 PM
- 04/19/24
Just out of curiosity, why did UM pony up the cash for what was obviously a losing argument (someone needs to teach Mr. Rodriguez the meanings of the words "material breach")? Unless that was part of the new contract (which TFA doesn't say). Because it would be a distraction to him to have taken a better job and suddenly have no money? Waah. Anyway, enough about UM, Coach R, and their woes, does this do anything for the Mountaineers? Coming off an exciting, momentum shifting bowl win and $4M in your pocket could be pretty big for WVU football or WVU athletics, no? Another big bowl win this season, not out of the question, and they should be worthy of some more consistent attention.
posted by bmauger at 03:32 PM on July 10, 2008
Speaking of funny, does anyone else think its interesting that Clarence Thomas (or at least Anita Hill) is back in the news the same week Isiah Thomas is. Two prominent, self-righteous, black men with the last name of Thomas, who've sexually harassed a black woman yet adamantly believe that she's just being difficult. At least Isiah didn't use the "I was just courting her" defense. Then again, Clarence's story didn't involve "sex with star guard Stephon Marbury outside a strip club."
posted by bmauger at 02:58 AM on October 04, 2007
From the article: "Dolan testified that he dismissed Browne Sanders after discovering that she was pressuring subordinates to back her complaint. Defence [sic, oh wait, no it's just Canadian] lawyers accused Browne Sanders of being incompetent and unable to adapt once Thomas arrived at the organization. " Nice defense work there guys--"Uhm, she might have been fired purely as retaliation, as confessed, but it was really because she was incompetent."
posted by bmauger at 11:13 AM on October 03, 2007
Google Trends, although a touch less reputable in the world of polling than Harris, but always also confirms the Cowboys as pretty consistently America's Team, and the gap seems to be widening this year. Link I'm pretty bleh about the Cowboys (although I did probably Google them a few times last year to watch youtube videos of Romo dropping the game loser) but still interesting. Of course, the nice thing about fair weather fans, is it gives teams a financial incentive to compete. Gets people in the seats and wearing your licensed apparel. Speaking of which, I can apparently finally buy some Browns merchandise, and be the 13th most popular person in Anytown, USA.
posted by bmauger at 01:21 AM on October 03, 2007
Eh, since this thread isn't quite dead yet... The last message (Madison Square Garden Sues NHL) involves lawyers too, yet no lawyer jokes. Who do you think makes the least between the legal staff for Madison Square, the lawyers defending for the NHL, the Patroits legal department, or some joker public interest (alright, probably screwball) lawyers, trying to turn a quick buck? Granted, Patriots will probably have to shell out about $2000 in legal fees to get their attorneys to draft a couple page memo to dismiss. But the "crooked sharks" representing the class action won't see a dime of that. Presumably they were just doing it for kicks, PR, hoping to dig up some dirt on the organization in discovery, or jsut trying to win the plaintiff lottery. And if the Patriots do have to shell out a $100k more to get this thing to go away, so what? Aren't Jets fans (and of course all fans) a bit deceived? Don't fans have the right to something more than the NFL's private reassurances that "we'll take care of it? Sorry that your team got cheated, but if it happens again, we promise to be sure that we get compensated." And yes, lawyers take a cut off the money that you get toward your medical bills when you get a settlement. Otherwise, you'd have no lawyer, and probably get no settlement (of course you still can get a lawyer who sucks, in which case SOL) . You could argue that losing defendants should have to compensate your lawyer so that you don't have to. But those greedy defense lawyers who lobby and become legislators themselves wouldn't have it that way.
posted by bmauger at 10:11 PM on October 01, 2007
College Stadium Tests Students for Blood-Alcohol Content
Sounds alright, but is 0.08 (if you're over 21) really the right number? I'm dubious of using it as a bright line for impaired DUI driving, but impaired football watching? I don't think I know anyone, even a freshman, who would barf or get rowdy enough to get tossed after 2-3 beers. I suppose it's only for people who've had an alcohol problem before, but still, I think they could comfortably draw the line at 0.12. (NHTSA BAC Chart)
For record keeping purposes, they should check their BAC at the time they get tossed. For some added deterrence, publish it in the campus paper along with what they did to get the boot. From what I remember, the police beat was the only thing worth reading in campus papers.