Martell’s Attorney re: NCAA Waiver

[Suhrthing]

Lawyers get a bad rap, by and large because of personal injury and criminal defense. And maybe corporate lawyers. I've worked with plenty and had a few friends go to good law schools. There's so many areas of law you can practice that no one makes much light of.

In my experience they're by and large good people trying to do the right thing, and there's massive guilt by association.

Also, when you need one, they're very very expensive.

Indeed. Maybe its my perception of all the lawyer-turned-politicians that infest government that turns me off.

 

[CashMoneyCane]

Indeed. Maybe its my perception of all the lawyer-turned-politicians that infest government that turns me off.

Well it's pervasive for a reason. Many, many large institutions hire lawyers for leadership positions. Large institutions do shady things. Therefore the figureheads of these large institutions look like shady people. Then they're often lawyers, and therefore lawyers look shady.

Mark Emmert is a lawyer. Ken Starr is a lawyer. Mitt Romney is a lawyer. We could go on for ages

 

[Suhrthing]

Asking from ignorance here, what are Martell's odds for a waiver? What is the recent precedence?
For that matter what are Justin Field's odds, even his case seems absolutely ridiculous.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I'd agree that it's the angle they will be/should be pursuing, as it's an outlier and an emotional appeal. The extent to which that argument will be received, however, is dubious at best. The fact that idiot lawyer basically said "we'll take whatever works" and didn't come right out with "we really take objection to the way the institution handled reports of domestic violence" just gives further credence to the lawyer being incompetent.

Precisely the point. If he is taking the time to give an interview (that the NCAA lawyers and employees are perfectly capable of googling), then he needs to lead with the issue that has the greatest chance of engendering sympathy and shaping public opinion.

Talk about Zach Smith, domestic violence, the lying head coach (who hid both his Smith coverup and his medical condition), the massive Ohio Taint "circle-the-wagons" effort (particularly the venomous fans who ripped Smith's ex-wife), etc.

Don't say you're going to throw **** against the wall.

That was my point all along. The attorney sucks.

 

[Cookie917]

Precisely the point. If he is taking the time to give an interview (that the NCAA lawyers and employees are perfectly capable of googling), then he needs to lead with the issue that has the greatest chance of engendering sympathy and shaping public opinion.

Talk about Zach Smith, domestic violence, the lying head coach (who hid both his Smith coverup and his medical condition), the massive Ohio Taint "circle-the-wagons" effort (particularly the venomous fans who ripped Smith's ex-wife), etc.

Don't say you're going to throw **** against the wall.

That was my point all along. The attorney sucks.

I mean maybe it is not the way you would do it but to say he "sucks" is a little harsh. The Martell's have money, they are not risking their kid's future on some bum attorney. Just because he didn't go to law school with you doesn't mean he is a bad lawyer

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I mean maybe it is not the way you would do it but to say he "sucks" is a little harsh. The Martell's have money, they are not risking their kid's future on some bum attorney. Just because he didn't go to law school with you doesn't mean he is a bad lawyer

I don't care where he went to law school, I just expect basic competence.

And Trump has paid Cohen and Giuliani a lot of money, and those two bozos are the definitions of bum attorneys.

 

[classiccane12]

Precisely the point. If he is taking the time to give an interview (that the NCAA lawyers and employees are perfectly capable of googling), then he needs to lead with the issue that has the greatest chance of engendering sympathy and shaping public opinion.

Talk about Zach Smith, domestic violence, the lying head coach (who hid both his Smith coverup and his medical condition), the massive Ohio Taint "circle-the-wagons" effort (particularly the venomous fans who ripped Smith's ex-wife), etc.

Don't say you're going to throw **** against the wall.

That was my point all along. The attorney sucks.

Its not about the court of PUBLIC OPINION. It is about the law or in this case the bylaws of the NCAA.

That is the whole problem with this country right now. Its not about creating a media circus. I'm sure the ncaa would appreciate a professional approach. I havnt looked at any of your other posts but are you an attorney ? I hope not.

 

[The Franchise]

The Fields’ case will be tied to the situation with the baseball player.

Yeah, he’s mad that Fromm gets to be the starter. But the case has merit. The situation warranted UGA dismissing the kid.

It pales in comparison to Ohio Taint harboring a serial domestic abuser. No player should be forced to stay at a program that does that.

 

[The Franchise]

Ohio State didn’t receive any punishment from the NCAA from the situation you’re trying to use.

I can’t imagine they will buy that argument.

If he was so appalled, why stay? He actually would have had a better case for leaving if he pushed this approach when the story broke, IMO.

What was the ncaa punishment UGA got for the drunken baseball player, and why didn’t Fields transfer immediately after that incident?

 

[cyrez8]

If the strategy is conditioning, the phrasing is tragic. He could have said:

"We believe we have a multitude of valid claims for the basis of an immediate eligibility waiver. We will present these claims to the NCAA and expect them to agree and grant our request."

What he said was:

"We'll just throw a bunch of arguments at the wall and hope one sticks."

It doesn't take a law degree to see the attorney openly admitted their case is weak and doesn't have any one specific indisputable claim for a waiver.

How do you know he was not misquoted?

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Its not about the court of PUBLIC OPINION. It is about the law or in this case the bylaws of the NCAA.

That is the whole problem with this country right now. Its not about creating a media circus. I'm sure the ncaa would appreciate a professional, civil approach. I havnt looked at any of your other posts but are you an attorney ? I hope not.

Hey, dumba$$, read all the words. I said IF he is going to give an interview. Nobody put a gun to his head. But IF he is going to take the time to give a lengthy interview, then he expects to get something out of it. I was not saying that he absolutely should court the media, but he is already doing so. Poorly.

Furthermore, you are clueless about whether the NCAA is impacted by public opinion. I am not suggesting that public outcry alone would win the case, but it certainly reached a critical mass in Miami's NCAA violations case a couple of years ago.

Quite frankly, I don't give a **** what the NCAA (or an NCAA apologist such as yourself) would "appreciate". I hope every attorney who goes up against the NCAA rips them a gigantic gaping pulsating hole where their collective ****** used to be. I'm just not very confident that Martell's attorney is up to the task.

But just keep whining about this country and the media circus and the rest of your ridiculous nonsense.

I just want to see Tate Martell kick some Gaytor a$$ in August.

 

[CashMoneyCane]

How do you know he was not misquoted?

This is not an argument. That argument quickly leads to "the reporter made it up," "the interview never happened," and "the lawyer doesn't exist."

We assume the information is correct because it would be absolutely pointless to discuss it otherwise. You can always poke holes in the validity of print.

Sure, I acknowledge it as a possibility, which means there's no reason to have this thread.

 

[classiccane12]

Hey, dumba$$, read all the words. I said IF he is going to give an interview. Nobody put a gun to his head. But IF he is going to take the time to give a lengthy interview, then he expects to get something out of it. I was not saying that he absolutely should court the media, but he is already doing so. Poorly.

Furthermore, you are clueless about whether the NCAA is impacted by public opinion. I am not suggesting that public outcry alone would win the case, but it certainly reached a critical mass in Miami's NCAA violations case a couple of years ago.

Quite frankly, I don't give a **** what the NCAA (or an NCAA apologist such as yourself) would "appreciate". I hope every attorney who goes up against the NCAA rips them a gigantic gaping pulsating hole where their collective ****** used to be. I'm just not very confident that Martell's attorney is up to the task.

But just keep whining about this country and the media circus and the rest of your ridiculous nonsense.

I just want to see Tate Martell kick some Gaytor a$$ in August.

So not a lawyer. Got it.

 

[TheRichtShow]

I don't care where he went to law school, I just expect basic competence.

And Trump has paid Cohen and Giuliani a lot of money, and those two bozos are the definitions of bum attorneys.

Basic competence?

Martell's attorney works for Ballard Spahr, one of the best law firms in the Southwest, and is particularly distinguished within sports law. This isnt his first eligibililty case with the NCAA. Just like with Fields's attorney, I'm sure he knows what to do.

https://www.ballardspahr.com/people/attorneys/leach_travis.aspx

 

[cyrez8]

This is not an argument. That argument quickly leads to "the reporter made it up," "the interview never happened," and "the lawyer doesn't exist."

We assume the information is correct because it would be absolutely pointless to discuss it otherwise. You can always poke holes in the validity of print.

Sure, I acknowledge it as a possibility, which means there's no reason to have this thread.

All I know is that I'm sure there was a very good reason for his public comments. I have yet to actually click the article but I think everyone is totally overreacting. Tate isn't on trial for murder. Everyone hates the NCAA and I took his comments that I'm picking up from this thread as trying to condition the outcome. Could he have used better words? Sure. But I really don't think it matters.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

Basic competence?

Martell's attorney works for Ballard Spahr, one of the best law firms in the Southwest, and is particularly distinguished within sports law. This isnt his first eligibililty case with the NCAA. Just like with Fields's attorney, I'm sure he knows what to do.

https://www.ballardspahr.com/people/attorneys/leach_travis.aspx

Wow, ThePrichtShow can google.

I don't care what law firm he works for, he still gave a horrible interview.

Hey, Skadden Arps just admitted to lying to the Department of Justice. Even the best law firms are capable of employing incompetent and/or unethical attorneys.

Only a nitwit will blindly attribute competence to an attorney based solely on what firm he/she works for.

 

[CashMoneyCane]

All I know is that I'm sure there was a very good reason for his public comments. I have yet to actually click the article but I think everyone is totally overreacting. Tate isn't on trial for murder. Everyone hates the NCAA and I took his comments that I'm picking up from this thread as trying to condition the outcome. Could he have used better words? Sure. But I really don't think it matters.

So hold on. You haven't even read it but you're arguing your opinion about it?

It's not that the words matter to the NCAA so much as it is that he basically admitted he doesn't have a reason, and he's going to try doing whatever and seeing if it works.

If you come to the NCAA with a waiver request, they ask why, and you go "uhhhh... well... here's one reason" without a valid argument behind it, you're not getting the waiver.

This is really basic stuff. It's like a little kid trying to stay home from school and his mom asking him why, and he's like "I don't know... I'm sick?"

 

[TheOriginalCane]

All I know is that I'm sure there was a very good reason for his public comments. I have yet to actually click the article but I think everyone is totally overreacting. Tate isn't on trial for murder. Everyone hates the NCAA and I took his comments that I'm picking up from this thread as trying to condition the outcome. Could he have used better words? Sure. But I really don't think it matters.

And it's not like Peter Warrick and Laveranues Coles shot the President.

Sure, everything will be OK. Nothing really matters. Who really gives a ****? Why did you bother posting? Do you always use so many words without actually saying anything of value?

 

[Calinative]

It pales in comparison to Ohio Taint harboring a serial domestic abuser. No player should be forced to stay at a program that does that.

This is the angle I'm assuming the lawyer is refferring to when he says we don't want to get negative, but they will if they have to.
The AD who let all that **** go on, is STILL at tOSU running ****. You can easily argue a toxic culture and that it isn't in your best interest to stay there.

 

[cubin10]

The school not receiving punishment is irrelevant.

He had to stay until the end of the season because the story broke so late that it would have been too difficult to find a place to transfer to without jeopardizing his education and career, so he decided to stick it out to see if tOSU would do the right thing. By the time the issue was resolved it was too late to transfer.

No chance the NCAA rejects a waiver on these grounds. Can you imagine the backlash and the headlines? Violence against women is one of the hottest of hot button issues right now.

Add in the fact that the NCAA ignored the situation when it was learned, suggests they don't want any of this to become public, like you said violence against women is a hot button.