1. bahnsen said lsu has effectively already lost one scholarship (hicks). kinda sounded like he thought/hoped that would be enough.
  2. We didn't renew his scholarship but not heard we will only have 84 on scholarship next year. That would be a pretty big deal if true.
  3. Fortunately, LSU has long had a corps of such lawyers on retainer . . .they just keep a lower profile :hihi:

  4. I don't think that we would be interested in a group of retreads that have already failed in representing a client against the NCAA.
  5. The implication was that since we didn't allow Hicks to play last year, we effectively played with 84 last year. Thus the loss of 1 scholarship. IMO, this is something that they might limit the number of official visits or something equivalent. Loss of ships is unlikely.
  6. listen to this poster. "Indiana tiger", must work for the ncaa:yelwink2:
  7. Ok, that makes sense.

    I also predicting something like limited Official Visits. Or they could limit in-home visits or number of calls allowed but not likely.
  8. If Oh No and Lame are not available, maybe we could just have John Calipari come in as a recruiting consultant. He could provide some great references from the folks here in Memphis.

    :rofl:
  9. If a coach wants to fly under the radar I guess he can. I'd imagine they all know the rules but also know how to look at gray areas...NASCAR style. See the "no phone call rule but you didn't say nothing about text messaging" incident a few years ago.

    My concern lies in using "student workers" in assisting with recruits. Not that I'm implying wrong doing but young minds are sometimes easily manipulated or maybe the best judgment isn't used. If that is an area that can be punitive I think I'd discontinue that practice.


  10. I'm not sure that LSU is eligible for that firm's "volume discount" :grin:
    1 person likes this.