-
Posts
3394 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by hpslugga
-
Hell, “if you put Barry Sanders on the 1990’s Houston Oilers” But that’s how you can tell how special he really was: that he had a HOF career on a team that was arguably the least conducive to achieving that reality.
-
Except in their case it’s “don’t care, jerked off.”
-
So those effeminate losers just twisted in the wind for months only to reveal that their effeminate loser in chief lost by an even larger margin than the liberal pinko commie fascist CNN reported by the end? Clearly those guys are Biden plants. Sad!
-
No, but Robertson (fuck you, no relation) and Falwell certainly were.
-
Right the only thing I see in the video is shitty signaling and communication. That’s a bad look for sure, but it’s still hard to generate any more sympathy than that because NI was not “robbed” of a win.
-
South Oak Cliff vs. Liberty Hill HS Championship Game
hpslugga replied to JohnnyRage's topic in Football
1950. Sunset Of course taking that 1988 title away from Carter was complete bullshit, but that’s still a long time -
South Oak Cliff vs. Liberty Hill HS Championship Game
hpslugga replied to JohnnyRage's topic in Football
I don’t call it a gimmick because I want to; I call it a gimmick because it’s a gimmick -
South Oak Cliff vs. Liberty Hill HS Championship Game
hpslugga replied to JohnnyRage's topic in Football
LH’s offense is a gimmick -
Rick Perry: From Aggy Animal Science to Nukes
hpslugga replied to atomheartbevo's topic in Cloak Room
I’m sure AWK has a perfect explanation for this. Well, at least he thinks it is. -
You're a degenerate to even watch the game. Think of the children, man! Toledo is playing this game on the final day of its exam schedule!!!
-
What a shock The internet is where I found the documents of the depositions of all the relevant characters of the lawsuit. You claim to have “first hand knowledge,” yet you won’t say who you are and you won’t produce anything. Yet somehow, in your own mind, that means you apparently know more even though all you’ve provided is recycled Kent Hance lies. Again, if you don’t give us a reason to believe you, we have no reason to believe you. And yes, Hance absolutely did admit that they (not just he) had made the decision to fire him well before the lawsuit. And it wasn’t just him, either. You don’t seem to grasp the significance of Bingham’s revelation. She was saying the exact same thing that Hance said in the deposition. Hance was asked the same question Bailey was asked, and I point Bailey out because his answer to that question is in that amendment that I posted. So if Hance said what I said he said, then my assertion was correct: Hance conceded that the decision to terminate was made prior to (and therefore independent of) Leach’s decision to file the TRO. If I’m wrong, and you’re right that the decision to terminate was in retaliation for his filing of the TRO, then you’re saying that all these Tech guys lied in their depositions when they said it wasn’t that AND that they were in violation of their own policies. So you either sank the 8-ball in a pocket you didn’t call or you sank the 8-ball in a pocket you did call but the cue ball went into a pocket as well. You lose in either scenario. As to this offer of the money he’s owed, again what evidence is there of this? Your word? That’s gonna be a tough sell, especially since we know that Leach offered to settle the case and Texas Tech rejected it. https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/college/texas-tech-rejects-mike-leachs-offer-to-settle-suit-college-football/
-
I already did. I'll quote myself For some reason, Texas Tech's webmasters have felt the need to scrub these depositions off the website from which I originally got them: https://www.vivathematadors.com/platform/amp/2010/5/6/1460333/leach-and-james-fire-back-world You'll notice that the guy has a link (which are all from Texas Tech's website) to pretty much everyone's deposition, but if you click on them, they just time out. And it's not just Hance; it's everyone. That's...handy. But it doesn't even matter because that statement I quoted was corroborated by Charlotte Bingham. http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/351139/Leach_4th_Amended_Petition.pdf "Defendant Hance called Leach to advise him that some members of the Board of Regents wanted to fire Leach over the complaints made by Craig James. Hance also advised Leach that they were going to take some kind of disciplinary action against Leach, though Hance could not articulate what Leach had done wrong. Hance indicated he wanted to fine Leach up to $100,000 and demanded a letter of apology from Leach. When Leach reiterated that he had not done anything wrong and did not believe an apology was appropriate, Hance also advised Leach that he would call Leach after the board meeting. Hance never called Leach. According to Ms. Bingham, Defendants Turner and Anders had resolved to fire Leach for cause during their meeting on December 22nd. The Tech Defendants admit that they never gave Leach the 10 business day notice of an opportunity to cure as allowed by his contract because they wanted to terminate Leach and avoid payment." Leach didn't sue until a week later, so it's impossible to argue that his decision to do so played any part in the decision to terminate whatsoever. Again, there's no mention of it in the termination letter, and Hance even fessed up to it in the deposition after months of this horseshit, "if you sue your boss, it's not gonna turn out well" falderal. And there's a reason that he said that, too: Texas Tech was not permitted to fire Leach out of retaliation. You'll notice in that same link, it explicitly states: "Among other things, the TTU Operating Procedures ("OP") provide that an employee aggrieved by an employment decision of the University may appeal that decision through a grievance proceeding without fear that the University will retaliate. Moreover, the University expressly acknowledged that the purpose of these policies and procedures was to ensure that University employees received the due process to which they are entitled: It is the policy of TTU/TTUS to ensure due process and to seek fair, just, and prompt resolution of complaints and grievances by non-faculty employees arising from the employ relationship with TTU/TTUS. OP 70:10.1.c (emphasis added) (Ex. 2). Operating procedure 70.31:11 specifically provides that Any employee of the university may present complaints and grievances without retaliatory action being taken against him/her in accordance with the policy governing appeals and grievances." Hell, even Bailey was asked essentially the same question that Hance was asked, and he too answered "yes." He had to because he understood the policies of the University full well and to answer "no" would be a commission of perjury. Texas Tech's whole argument about this is like a giant, rotten onion that began rotting from the inside: just keep peeling those layers and it just continues to look worse.
-
Correct. When I said that, I mean that one would have to be so closed-minded as to cling desperately to a preconceived conclusion that was spoon fed to them by obvious liars with obvious skins in the game. And I understand where you’re coming from by objectively trying to assess blame, but it’s hard for any learned person to muster even 1% sympathy for the spoiled brats when they violated both civil and criminal law to cheat a guy out of what he was owed. They breached his contract under false pretenses and tried to advance their crime further in civil court by committing fucking perjury. To even pay a microsecond worth of attention to anything Leach was saying/doing is a waste of time. Petty, small minded, and I would add that they suffered from really poor character judgment. If they looked at Mike Leach and saw a smarmy, weasley, shifty little fucker and then looked at Kent Hance and saw a straight talkin’ no nonsense guy, their character judgment had to have been as ass backwards as it is humanly possible to be. If you don’t give us a reason to believe you, we have no reason to believe you, and not having a reason to believe you is the best reason not to believe you. That’s dubious at best. It wasn’t just that the other Tech coaches didn’t want him, it was that no other school would offer. But Leach did, even though he said that they could never get his lazy and entitled ass to work hard? Sure. Of course you omitted the part where Craig James and Kent Hance were involved in a business deal together. So yeah Hance kissed his ass, but you’re only telling half the reasons why. He didn’t just go to ESPN about it, he went to Hance himself. And he had no reason to sign it. At all. And Hance wanted him gone well before that circus act started. Kent Hance should never have been the Chancellor. Period. He was an abject disgrace. Again, there’s absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support this. When you attach “literally” to this, you’re “literally” asserting baseless speculation as if it were a matter of fact. That’s tantamount to lying. If you had actual evidence of this instead of hearsay from a known liar, you would have presented it already. You and the rest of those who take this position have had 12 years to present tangible evidence of this and there’s been nothing. Leach denied it, the liar said it happened. Poor judgment on your part to believe the latter. Neither his termination letter nor Kent Hance’s deposition support this. His termination letter said it had to do with his treatment of Adam James, and Hance’s deposition said the decision had already been made. Again, that’s bullshit even by Hance’s own admission. They had already made the decision to fire him prior to the lawsuit. You will never be correct about this.
-
I mean I only said that because that’s all he’s been left with. We can’t sit around pretending that Tech will one day muster enough humility to admit “yes, our BMD’s drove us to fuck this guy around starting with our initial refusal to give him a raise that he earned by having the greatest season in program history and ending in a full blown hoax of an incident that was so heinous that our own chancellor committed perjury in a deposition in a desperate effort to legitimize said hoax.” And it’s not just Tech that they exposed; they exposed the entire state. The whole lesson that was learned from that freak show was “in the state of Texas, public universities are not bound to their contracts.” It’s a hideous and embarrassing look.
-
I mean one needn’t be “outside the tech community” to know it. All it requires is the execution of a technique known as “not sticking your head up your ass.”
-
I always called him Tommy Tubofshit
-
I appreciate the fact that you admit to clearly not reading what I said because if you had, you would have noticed that I alluded to that. Fact.
-
I should have said the following, since this issue never fails to get me in a “torch the motherfucker down” mood whenever it comes up: You and I actually had an exchange on SB about this nearly four years ago and I went into semi-intimate detail about the matter, which I’m sure is in far better order than the degenerate version of revisionist history buttfumble has to say about it. Here’s what I said: “Oh they were. The "go fuck yourself" line? Complete bullshit; and here's how you know it. It's very simple to test: 1) Steve Pincock said he told James not to go into the electrical closet. James (both Craig and Adam) says he was locked in there. Hance said he was locked in there. 2) Charlotte Bingham says Adam James told her that he was in there for 5 minutes. Craig James says it was an hour. I can't remember offhand what Hance said under oath as I can no longer find the full version of his deposition (more on that later), but he did say in that ESPN phone interview that it was for 2-3 hours. So he exaggerated Craig’s exaggerated version of Adam’s lie. 3) Hance said that on December 22nd (or so), he told (basically ordered) Leach to sign a generic statement adhering to how to and how not to act towards a player as a coach. Again, according to Hance, Leach's response was "go fuck yourself." Leach says that profanity was used by neither participant. Neither participant has listed any witnesses to this interaction So every claim that the Jameses/Hance made regarding the electrical closet was refuted, and Adam ultimately admitted that he went into that room under no one’s orders and that the door was never locked. The Jameses and Hance clearly lied in their depositions. There's no doubt about that. Then this business about "go fuck yourself" comes up. Ok, fine. One problem: Leach was never caught lying about anything in his deposition. Hance was. Leach says no profanity was used by either person, Hance did. Even if I completely ignore that the mere idea that "go fuck yourself" is a for-cause termination offense is an abject disgrace at humanity, why should anyone believe that it even happened to begin with? The established liar says it happened, the guy whose assertions were corroborated by disinterested 3rd parties to this matter says it didn't. Who are we suppose to fucking believe on that one? And if one is still inclined to believe Kent Hance, answer this: If Leach was fired because he told the chancellor of the university to "go fuck” himself, why does his termination letter read: Dear Coach Leach, This letter shall serve as formal notice to you that, pursuant to Article V of your Employment Contract, you are terminated with cause effective immediately, for breach of the provisions of Article IV of that Contract." Article V, Subsection D states: BY UNIVERSITY WITHOUT CAUSE: In addition to the provision set forth above, there is also reserved to the University the right to terminate this agreement without cause at any time and for any reason. The parties agree that in the event this right to terminate is exercised, the University will pay to Coach liquidated damages in an amount equal to $400.000 for each year remaining in the Term, pro rated as of the date of termination. It is agreed that University shall also pay any Supplemental Compensation set forth in Article III.C.4 above earned prior to such termination. In such event, the University shall not be liable to Coach for any other University benefits, perquisites or any collateral business opportunities, outside income revenues or guarantees or other benefits associated with Coach's position as Head Football Coach. Article IV states: PERFORMANCE In the performance of his duties, Coach shall be directly responsible to and under the supervision of the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics. Without limitation of the foregoing, Coach, in the performance of his duties, shall conduct himself at all times in a manner consistent with his position as an instructor of students. The parties agree that, although this agreement is sports related, the primary purpose of the University and this agreement is educative. Thus, the educative purposes of the University shall have priority in the various provisions of this Agreement. Coach will follow all applicable University policies and procedures. Coach shall not, either directly or indirectly, breach or countenance to the breach by any player or coach subject to his control or supervision of any of the rules and standards of the Big 12 Conference, the NCAA, youth, collegiate, and master's amateur athletics as well as other associations or agencies to which the University adheres. In this connection, Coach agrees to devote his entire time, labor, effort and attention, in good faith, to conduct and perform the duties commensurate with the position as Head Football Coach, bearing in mind that University recognizes and accepts that Coach has the ability to engage in reasonable Outside Income producing activities as defined in Article III.C.3. Coach shall assure the fair and responsible treatment of student-athletes in relation to their health, welfare and discipline. Breach of such rules and standards, whether willful or through negligence, may be subject to disciplinary action and penalties ranging from termination, public or private reprimand to monetary fines or adjustments in compensation or adjustments in the term of this contract as determined by the President following consultation and review with the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics. The provision of this Article IV shall be without prejudice to any right the University may have under Article V of this Agreement. Unless notice of termination of employment has been given to Coach in accordance with Articles V.A. or V.D. below, Coach shall not engage in discussions or negotiate, either directly or indirectly, concerning Coach's prospective employment by any other employer without first providing prior written notice to the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics of such discussions or negotiations. Failure to provide such notice may be considered a material breach of this Agreement.” There's no mention of profanity. There's not even a mention of the chancellor. So why does his termination letter infer wrongdoing towards one of his players (the bold section), but nothing about cussing out the chancellor? Or “suing your boss?” Is it because...it didn't happen and was conjured up later on by Kent Hance? Kent Hance's deposition took place in early March 2010, which was the first time this story of "go fuck yourself" was ever uttered by anyone, including Kent Hance. He had 3 full months to come up with the fairy tale, which is what he used the time for. You'll notice in his ESPN phone interview, Hance doesn't even mention profanity. He did manage to slip in a reference to "insubordination" at the very end, but he only linked that to "suing your boss." By the way, in that same interview, he says that he supported Leach throughout the contract negotiation, which was a lie, but the point is he never implied that was a factor. As Leach's attorney noted in Kent Hance’s deposition: ”Q: Okay. And it's fair to say that by filing suit that didn't assist Coach Leach in terms of whether or not Tech was going to terminate him, right? A: Didn't help him Q: Okay. And you know that under Texas Tech policies Coach Leach had the absolute right to appeal the suspension by filing a lawsuit without fear of retaliatory action, don't you? A: Right, but the decision to fire him was made before the lawsuit” Come again? They suspend him on the evening of December 28th because he refused to sign that preposterous letter that had a guilty admission in between every fucking line, Leach files the injunction on December 29th, then they fire him on the 30th? Ok, so what was the point of the suspension if "the decision to fire him was made before the lawsuit?" Was this all just a dog and pony show that was ultimately meant to route to a predetermined outcome? And by the way, none of what I just said made any mention of those emails that were released by the DMN around the time of his firing, which make the issue clear: Tech dragged their ass on paying Leach what he was rightfully owed, they begrudgingly gave him a competitive contract but were already talking about firing him before the season began. Craig James just made it easier for them to pull the trigger because he threatened litigation against Tech if they chose not to terminate. ”Oh Craig! Please don’t twist our arms on this! We don’t want to fire the guy we wanted to fire before extending his contract! Please don’t make us do the thing we already said we were gonna do a year ago!” Craig James killed 5 hookers…and two college football programs. Since Tech fucked Leach on his pay and they then fucked him out of his day in court with that effeminate loser “sovereign immunity” bullshit, I sincerely hope Mississippi State beats the living shit out of them.
-
It reads like a drunken Alex Jones rant. Not a good look
-
Oh horseshit. Kent Hance was saying that Leach locked James in that electrical closet in that piss ant excuse for an interview with Rece Davis and he even repeated the claim in the deposition. You absolutely just made all that shit up.
-
By itself, yes, but I think what puts a lot of people off about it is that he’s a self-loathing friend of Dorothy, and that’s not okay.
-
See you’re assuming his audience has the intellectual capacity to complete a syllogism.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!