Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="champs99and04, post: 2759723, member: 488"] I understand the University had no choice. And what I consider a desperation heave might not be the same as what other people think. But you lose me when you insist that these are serious allegations of misconduct. According to the NCAA? No kidding, they want their pillow gun rulebook to mean something. My hope is that a group of impartial observers sees through this for what it is: institutional corruption. To [USER=44]@CL82[/USER] 's point - you don't need to convince me of all people that documentation is important. But as I've learned, some degree of interpretation is inevitable regardless of how precise you think something may be. That's why we're human. Something is always going to be lost in translation, even when we're scanning legal binding's. Sure, the terms may sound simple. Don't break the rules, keep your money. To the extent that a contract is enforceable when its terms are inseparable from the biased discretion of the people with whom you're negotiating? I have no idea. I'm not a lawyer. I'm inclined to take you and [USER=8028]@MadDogRevival[/USER] 's word, but only begrudgingly. Either the school is purposely omitting prior context that clarifies their agreement or Ollie's agent is the biggest dope on the planet, because there's no way this was the intended consequence of that arrangement. [/QUOTE]