State of Grizzly Football

[PlayerRep]

You're doing it wrong. You can't say that Oday "didn't cover up anything" anymore because the email shows that he literally did. you need to come up with a new stategy or a new euphemism for "sweeping things under the rug." Maybe you can argue that he literally did not "sweep it under the rug"? That might confuse griz nation long enuf to come up with a better response.

Nope, I don't agree with you. However, I'll give you a chance to persuade me. What email are you talking about? Show us, just so we're clear on the email. Then explain how and why it's an indication of a cover-up by O'Day?

 

[wbtfg]

PR...from the articles, it sounds like Aronofsky also may have dropped the ball on providing accurate legal advice, and many of his public statements seem to contradict the "private" emails. As a lawyer, I'm wondering if you got the same impression.

 

[PlayerRep]

PR...from the articles, it sounds like Aronofsky also may have dropped the ball on providing accurate legal advice, and many of his public statements seem to contradict the "private" emails. As a lawyer, I'm wondering if you got the same impression.

There's not enough information in the articles for me to have any view. The Missoulian has selectively released emails. What are they not releasing? It's not known when the communications occurred. It's not what was said by telephone or in person, or in emails that were deleted or not retrieved. Aronofsky is a smart guy and good lawyer. If he was provided with the right questions and facts, I doubt that he would gotten much wrong on the legal front.

 

[garizzalies]

You're doing it wrong. You can't say that Oday "didn't cover up anything" anymore because the email shows that he literally did. you need to come up with a new stategy or a new euphemism for "sweeping things under the rug." Maybe you can argue that he literally did not "sweep it under the rug"? That might confuse griz nation long enuf to come up with a better response.

Nope, I don't agree with you. However, I'll give you a chance to persuade me. What email are you talking about? Show us, just so we're clear on the email. Then explain how and why it's an indication of a cover-up by O'Day?

I already did that, a couple posts up.

 

[AZGrizFan]

PR...from the articles, it sounds like Aronofsky also may have dropped the ball on providing accurate legal advice, and many of his public statements seem to contradict the "private" emails. As a lawyer, I'm wondering if you got the same impression.

There's not enough information in the articles for me to have any view. The Missoulian has selectively released emails. What are they not releasing? It's not known when the communications occurred. It's not what was said by telephone or in person, or in emails that were deleted or not retrieved. Aronofsky is a smart guy and good lawyer. If he was provided with the right questions and facts, I doubt that he would gotten much wrong on the legal front.

If you want to know what they're not releasing, you can file your own FOIA and sift through the thousands of emails for relevant material.

 

[zengriz]

...griz football iz about blocking/tackling...
...thiz team should be highly motivated...
...to block and tackle their azz off...
...an that alone will determine ...
...state of grizzly football...

... ...

 

[Cats2506]

PR...from the articles, it sounds like Aronofsky also may have dropped the ball on providing accurate legal advice, and many of his public statements seem to contradict the "private" emails. As a lawyer, I'm wondering if you got the same impression.

There's not enough information in the articles for me to have any view. The Missoulian has selectively released emails. What are they not releasing? It's not known when the communications occurred. It's not what was said by telephone or in person, or in emails that were deleted or not retrieved. Aronofsky is a smart guy and good lawyer. If he was provided with the right questions and facts, I doubt that he would gotten much wrong on the legal front.

If you want to know what they're not releasing, you can file your own FOIA and sift through the thousands of emails for relevant material.

I dont think they will release them to just any shyster lawyer that fills out a form :lol:

 

[Silvertip]

Interesting. Looks like the ambiguous title of the thread left it open to individual interpetation depending on (a) were you looking to the upcoming season, or (B) were you wondering if Griz football has a future beyond the upcoming season...Me? I'm far more concerned with the long term war than any iminent battle.

 

[Raider]

I believe last season was just a lucky streak and that the Griz football program has been on a decline for the past several years. I think that Griz football will be more like Pflu's first season moving forwards than last season.

I know this is part of your inexhaustible little shtick, but give me a break.
“been in decline for several years”

Were the 2008-2009 teams that went to back-to-back NC games part of that decline? 2010 was the anomaly, not 2011.

proceed with shtick……………….

 

[Brock Landers]

I believe last season was just a lucky streak and that the Griz football program has been on a decline for the past several years. I think that Griz football will be more like Pflu's first season moving forwards than last season.

I know this is part of your inexhaustible little shtick, but give me a break.
“been in decline for several years”

Were the 2008-2009 teams that went to back-to-back NC games part of that decline? 2010 was the anomaly, not 2011.

proceed with shtick……………….

Yeah, two championship appearances, and an underthrown pass from a third, in the last 4 seasons... dunno what we're declining from in that case.

 

[Brock Landers]

I'm also pretty sure we lead FCS in playoff wins over those same 4 years, with 8 over NDSU's 6

 

[ranco]

[quote :My impression, after reading the Missoulian articles the past two days, is that O'Day is the only guy who has his head on straight.[/quote]



:clap:

 

[garizzalies]

You're doing it wrong. You can't say that Oday "didn't cover up anything" anymore because the email shows that he literally did. you need to come up with a new stategy or a new euphemism for "sweeping things under the rug." Maybe you can argue that he literally did not "sweep it under the rug"? That might confuse griz nation long enuf to come up with a better response.

Nope, I don't agree with you. However, I'll give you a chance to persuade me. What email are you talking about? Show us, just so we're clear on the email. Then explain how and why it's an indication of a cover-up by O'Day?

I already did that, a couple posts up.

PR, i never did see your response to this. Are you still maintaining that "oday didn't cover up anything"?

 

[AZGrizFan]

PR...from the articles, it sounds like Aronofsky also may have dropped the ball on providing accurate legal advice, and many of his public statements seem to contradict the "private" emails. As a lawyer, I'm wondering if you got the same impression.

There's not enough information in the articles for me to have any view. The Missoulian has selectively released emails. What are they not releasing? It's not known when the communications occurred. It's not what was said by telephone or in person, or in emails that were deleted or not retrieved. Aronofsky is a smart guy and good lawyer. If he was provided with the right questions and facts, I doubt that he would gotten much wrong on the legal front.

If you want to know what they're not releasing, you can file your own FOIA and sift through the thousands of emails for relevant material.

I dont think they will release them to just any shyster lawyer that fills out a form :lol:

Actually, they'll release them. Even to cat fans.

 

[PlayerRep]

You're doing it wrong. You can't say that Oday "didn't cover up anything" anymore because the email shows that he literally did. you need to come up with a new stategy or a new euphemism for "sweeping things under the rug." Maybe you can argue that he literally did not "sweep it under the rug"? That might confuse griz nation long enuf to come up with a better response.

Nope, I don't agree with you. However, I'll give you a chance to persuade me. What email are you talking about? Show us, just so we're clear on the email. Then explain how and why it's an indication of a cover-up by O'Day?

I already did that, a couple posts up.

PR, i never did see your response to this. Are you still maintaining that "oday didn't cover up anything"?

I'm still waiting for you to explain what you mean (as I said above). Your prior post or posts weren't understandable to me. Please respond here (so I can see exactly what you're saying or trying to say), and then I'll respond to you.

 

[garizzalies]

on the first page of this thread i quoted and linked the email where oday crossed out comments re football players' transgressions. so i don't think you can say oday "didn't cover up anything" because the email shows he literaly did. whatever.
actually, of all the released emails, i think this sentence is the funniest:

Oday: If we say everything, many taxpayers will think we have wasted a lot of money on the report.

think about that sentence for a sec. he's basically saying, if we come clean now the public will be mad that the investigation didn't find us hiding something???? This to me is the weirdest part because i always assumed the "gap" in reporting that Bartz found had something to do with the Heath Center; but no, all along it was our head coach yet we didn't get to know that because oday "crossed" it out. of all the "email" articles, that's the most fascinating one.

 

[PlayerRep]

on the first page of this thread i quoted and linked the email where oday crossed out comments re football players' transgressions. so i don't think you can say oday "didn't cover up anything" because the email shows he literaly did. whatever.
actually, of all the released emails, i think this sentence is the funniest:

Oday: If we say everything, many taxpayers will think we have wasted a lot of money on the report.

think about that sentence for a sec. he's basically saying, if we come clean now the public will be mad that the investigation didn't find us hiding something???? This to me is the weirdest part because i always assumed the "gap" in reporting that Bartz found had something to do with the Heath Center; but no, all along it was our head coach yet we didn't get to know that because oday "crossed" it out. of all the "email" articles, that's the most fascinating one.

Nope, no evidence or indication of any cover-up. O'Day was advocating that Engstrom not get out ahead of the Barz investigation, which was ongoing at the time (her final report was issued several weeks after Engstrom spoke at the forums). This is good practice in situations like this. Engstrom apparently agreed with O'Day.

Below is what O'Day crossed out. Barz had already reported that there had been a gap in reporting. Later, Barz said there was no UM requirement for this matter to have been reported to anyone. Eventually, after the Barz report was completely, it was reported that this one matter had been the gap in reporting referenced in this first Barz report.

This is what the second Barz report said: "December 2010: Alleged rape against student by multiple students. Police report filed. No charges brought. Police provided limited information about allegations to University employee. The situation was addressed with the students allegedly involved. UM does not have guidelines and procedures requiring reporting of information of the nature received in the manner this information was received."

[O’Day] crossed out:
“Coach Pflugrad (word missing) that an incident occurred and allegedly involved some football players. Coach Pflugrad did discipline players at the time, but did not report the incident to his supervisor. This is the ‘gap’ in reporting pointed out by our investigator, Diane Barz.”

If you didn't know this was the gap in reporting, it's because you weren't paying attention. This was mentioned a number times on egriz, and was also in the press at least in some form. I think Engstrom may have also mentioned it but may not have used Pflu's name.

Anyhow, what's the big deal? The police had looked at a matter and declined to pursue it. The police has give Pflu "limited information". He took internal action with the players. What's the big deal?

 

[Cats2506]

There's not enough information in the articles for me to have any view. The Missoulian has selectively released emails. What are they not releasing? It's not known when the communications occurred. It's not what was said by telephone or in person, or in emails that were deleted or not retrieved. Aronofsky is a smart guy and good lawyer. If he was provided with the right questions and facts, I doubt that he would gotten much wrong on the legal front.

If you want to know what they're not releasing, you can file your own FOIA and sift through the thousands of emails for relevant material.

I dont think they will release them to just any shyster lawyer that fills out a form :lol:

Actually, they'll release them. Even to cat fans.

hey I read today that the Cats Lawyer is going to review them for the BOR :shock:

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/regents-to-review-um-sexual-assault-emails-before-releasing-them/article_c5e4a472-a807-5aa6-a710-8681ffd25787.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regents chief legal counsel Cathy Swift and staff attorney Jessica Brubaker will take over the process of reviewing the requested emails to make sure privacy concerns are appropriately addressed, McRae said. Montana State University legal counsel Leslie Taylor may also be involved, he said.

 

[GrizPony]

Since she has a law degree, you know it isn't from MSU, so she probably can not be proven to be completely stupid at this point. :lol:

 

[Catsrback76]

The horrible state of grizzly football and um legal issues and all you have to say is that the MSU legal counsel must have gotten her degree from um?

Wow, gina, wake up!