Misanthrope
Banned
How do these morons get these jobs?
Mike Lopresti is just totally baffled by the NCAA's announcement of only one no-no in our football program:
Am I the only one smelling the implication that if Maurice Clarett truly lied, why isn't OSU suing him for "slander"? That's the only conclusion I can draw from this dope.
Apparently, he actually thinks it would be in Ohio State's best interest to drag Clarett into court - rehash all of the past - and sue him for a part of his 3rd round signing bonus?
I guess the fact that Clarett was suspended for lying 17 times during the initial investigation into this mess is irrelevant. I guess it's impossible to conclude that a known liar might have "engaged in massive slander", yet again.
What a dumbass!
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=678&e=1&u=/usatoday/20050518/sp_usatoday/ohiostateprobeleavesunansweredquestions
Mike Lopresti is just totally baffled by the NCAA's announcement of only one no-no in our football program:
In a word, yes.So let's see if we have this right.
The central figure in a national football championship charged in print that a program was operating in blatant disregard of the rules.
The main governing body investigated and said it could not verify any of those charges.
So that means the school buried the bodies and covered up the tracks. Or the governing body is impotent to investigate serious violations against one of its most visible members. Or Clarett engaged in massive slander.
And everyone is supposed to just shrug and wave goodbye to that and get on with either making the Bronco depth chart or trying to beat Michigan again?
Am I the only one smelling the implication that if Maurice Clarett truly lied, why isn't OSU suing him for "slander"? That's the only conclusion I can draw from this dope.
Apparently, he actually thinks it would be in Ohio State's best interest to drag Clarett into court - rehash all of the past - and sue him for a part of his 3rd round signing bonus?
I guess the fact that Clarett was suspended for lying 17 times during the initial investigation into this mess is irrelevant. I guess it's impossible to conclude that a known liar might have "engaged in massive slander", yet again.
What a dumbass!
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=678&e=1&u=/usatoday/20050518/sp_usatoday/ohiostateprobeleavesunansweredquestions
