I know this is thrown in with the Oregon thread, but I didn't feel like making another OT thread and clogging the boards, and the UNC allegations are ridiculous:

- academic fraud
- cash/other benefits in the tens of thousands from tutors, agents, former players, and more
- John Blake, a UNC assistant football coach, was hired by sports agency Pro Tect Management to use their services for marketing and promotion at the pro level
- no one seems to have provided requested information either correctly, in a timely manner, or at all
- the "institution failed to monitor the situation adequately" (kinda like LOIC)

uh oh

http://tarheelblue.cstv.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/unc/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/NCAA_NOA_062111

89Bear;521298 said:

---

Still think not a whole lot to learn?

---

As a matter of fact, I do.

I said when the story first broke that 1 - I don't believe a guy like Lyles is compensated for delivering commitments - rather I believe he's compensated for being able to guide coaches to kids in Texas (a state that has in the past been protective of its players through longstanding relationships between HS coaches and the University of Texas) and 2 - Oregon put this payment on the books because they knew it would be incredibly difficult to prove that they were paying for a commitment *or* an illegal service, and they reasoned that it was up to the NCAA to come up with new regulations and enforcement mechanisms if they were going to try to stop this kind of activity. I notice somebody in the thread already pointed out that the simple act of clearing the payment through UO compliance sounds very Chip Kelly-ish. (To clarify - I have never believed that Oregon paid for the data itself - video, phone numbers, etc - I believe they paid for the relationship.)

Nothing that's been released thus far changes my opinion.

Oregon has been exploiting what I perceive to be a loophole, and I think it's a loophole that's exploited by a lot of schools, and many more seriously than us. (Out of the official records.)

We'll see.

BellottiBold;521522 said:

---

As a matter of fact, I do.

I said when the story first broke that 1 - I don't believe a guy like Lyles is compensated for delivering commitments - rather I believe he's compensated for being able to guide coaches to kids in Texas (a state that has in the past been protective of its players through longstanding relationships between HS coaches and the University of Texas) and 2 - Oregon put this payment on the books because they knew it would be incredibly difficult to prove that they were paying for a commitment *or* an illegal service, and they reasoned that it was up to the NCAA to come up with new regulations and enforcement mechanisms if they were going to try to stop this kind of activity. I notice somebody in the thread already pointed out that the simple act of clearing the payment through UO compliance sounds very Chip Kelly-ish. (To clarify - I have never believed that Oregon paid for the data itself - video, phone numbers, etc - I believe they paid for the relationship.)

Nothing that's been released thus far changes my opinion.

Oregon has been exploiting what I perceive to be a loophole, and I think it's a loophole that's exploited by a lot of schools, and many more seriously than us. (Out of the official records.)

We'll see.

---

BBold,
Take off the highliter yellow glasses...

Chip paid FIVE times the going rate for the relationship? Okay..just acknowledge it and move on. Maybe he is embarrassed because he got a piece of sh!t for a report.

"BTW lyles baby, send me a recruiting report because I need it for the record. Don't worry about the accuracy. Nobody will see it. It's all good because we have a great relationship, buddy!"

NVGolfingBear;521545 said:

---

BBold,
Take off the highliter yellow glasses...

Chip paid FIVE times the going rate for the relationship? Okay..just acknowledge it and move on. Maybe he is embarrassed because he got a piece of sh!t for a report.

"BTW lyles baby, send me a recruiting report because I need it for the record. Don't worry about the accuracy. Nobody will see it. It's all good because we have a great relationship, buddy!"

---

I thought BB was pretty clear - his theory is that they overpaid for the relationship with Lyles - aka to get access to the talent, not for the recruiting materials themselves. The amount could have been 10x the going rate (which given that the information was useless, 10x is probably on the low-end). I don't want to put words in BB's mouth but it sounds to me that this was an intentional move by UO to act aggressively and close to the edge of the written rules, without necessarily crossing the line. Obviously it's up to the NCAA to determine whether or not they crossed the line.

BellottiBold;521522 said:

---

As a matter of fact, I do.

I said when the story first broke that 1 - I don't believe a guy like Lyles is compensated for delivering commitments - rather I believe he's compensated for being able to guide coaches to kids in Texas (a state that has in the past been protective of its players through longstanding relationships between HS coaches and the University of Texas) and 2 - Oregon put this payment on the books because they knew it would be incredibly difficult to prove that they were paying for a commitment *or* an illegal service, and they reasoned that it was up to the NCAA to come up with new regulations and enforcement mechanisms if they were going to try to stop this kind of activity. I notice somebody in the thread already pointed out that the simple act of clearing the payment through UO compliance sounds very Chip Kelly-ish. (To clarify - I have never believed that Oregon paid for the data itself - video, phone numbers, etc - I believe they paid for the relationship.)

Nothing that's been released thus far changes my opinion.

Oregon has been exploiting what I perceive to be a loophole, and I think it's a loophole that's exploited by a lot of schools, and many more seriously than us. (Out of the official records.)

We'll see.

---

So with your rationalization are you ok with this? Is is basically no big deal to you?

Unit2Sucks;521553 said:

---

...

---

:beer:

That's basically it. Though who is to say they overpaid? They've had great success pulling lesser known guys out of Texas. *shrug* Also, I still think it is worth considering what kinds of unreported information Lyles might be positioned to provide - things about a kid's personal life, for example.

Also, I would say this latest scandal fits in with a larger pattern at Oregon. The Duck AD will do whatever it can to get an edge on other programs, but in general Oregon has managed to do sketchy things that while certainly not in the spirit of the regulations are not explicitly outlawed. (See the charter plane for a big recruting weekend, the comic book for Jonathan Stewart, the humvee, the locker room xbox's... there was even a rumor recently that the Ducks have been using holographic simulations to woo recruits on their visits (video is against the rules.) In each instance the NCAA came up with new regulations based on things Oregon was trying.

http://www.bettercallsaul.com/


damn cheaters, Chipster better lawyer up

89Bear;521586 said:

---

So with your rationalization are you ok with this? Is is basically no big deal to you?

---

Basically I decided recently that I had been very naive about how this industry - and it is an industry - really operates. I think 25k to Lyles is really small potatoes as far as the corruption of college athletics is concerned. And I don't think there is a program in the country as unwilling to do business with these types of people as they claim publicly.

I'm more concerned with the behavior of the kids than I am with how the AD decides to use 25k of booster cash.

As a final thought, I've said in the past that I believe major college athletics are basically horrible for the academic enterprise. So I can sit here and type away about how this behavior is not befitting of a public university (which is certainly true) but the reality is that a school's AD is a vastly different organization when compared to that institution at large. Frankly it's ridiculous how these teams claim to represent their schools in this day and age. Also I thing there's enough funny business within university administration to suggest that we really shouldn't be holding an athletic department to very high standards to begin with.

Bellotti still doesn't know what the NCAA considers a booster :facepalm:

Questions - did all the other schools (And I understand there were many) get the exact same info?

BellottiBold;521522 said:

---

As a matter of fact, I do.

I don't believe a guy like Lyles is compensated for delivering commitments - rather I believe he's compensated for being able to guide coaches to kids in Texas (a state that has in the past been protective of its players through longstanding relationships between HS coaches and the University of Texas) and 2 - Oregon put this payment on the books because they knew it would be incredibly difficult to prove that they were paying for a commitment *or* an illegal service, and they reasoned that it was up to the NCAA to come up with new regulations and enforcement mechanisms if they were going to try to stop this kind of activity.

Oregon has been exploiting what I perceive to be a loophole, and I think it's a loophole that's exploited by a lot of schools, and many more seriously than us. (Out of the official records.)

---

[COLOR="DarkGreen"]BINGO. This is why I exclaimed "wtf?" earlier...the payout and amount itself was bs, the actual deliverable was bs, the Oregon compliance office is all bs and the lack of ethics behind this and the subsequent support of such activities by Ducks supporters is bs. We all know this but.....their actions pinpoint a loophole nonetheless. As a competing school member, it is ingenious to say the least, but I am glad my Alma Mater is not embroiled in this nonsense. We'll see how the NCAA views this all and I hope they take action in addition to closing a loophole. Maybe their hands are too full with slot machines, paid "hostesses", parking tickets and classes/tests not being taken by the enrolled scholarship players.:headbang

Until punished, Oregon will continue their practice of testing the legal parameters of NCAA rules and their football program obviously has no apparent qualms with "bending" these guidelines (ethical or not). "Breaking" is a more appropriate term but one has to have ethics to realize the difference. What will eventually kill them is their lack of oversight/control in monitoring and counseling their student athletes over the next few months and years. As stated earlier, I see no smoking gun here. Stories will change and counter arguments will appear that explain all this bs like lipstick on a pig (I hope I am wrong). pi$$ and vinegar until then....
[/COLOR]

speculating that other teams rob banks, while oregon robs convenience stores, is not a compelling argument.

the argument that oregon pushes the envelope within the written regulations is all you need. oregon's creativity is great, and would be applauded by any school's alumni, i suspect. this particular situation, it looks to most fans like they pushed things too far. we'll see if the ncaa agrees.

BellottiBold;521613 said:

---

Basically I decided recently that I had been very naive about how this industry - and it is an industry - really operates. I think 25k to Lyles is really small potatoes as far as the corruption of college athletics is concerned. And I don't think there is a program in the country as unwilling to do business with these types of people as they claim publicly.

I'm more concerned with the behavior of the kids than I am with how the AD decides to use 25k of booster cash.

As a final thought, I've said in the past that I believe major college athletics are basically horrible for the academic enterprise. So I can sit here and type away about how this behavior is not befitting of a public university (which is certainly true) but the reality is that a school's AD is a vastly different organization when compared to that institution at large. Frankly it's ridiculous how these teams claim to represent their schools in this day and age. Also I thing there's enough funny business within university administration to suggest that we really shouldn't be holding an athletic department to very high standards to begin with.

---

I would like to see the Chipster go down as much as the next guy but does the new PAC 12 really need stink on both SC and Oregon just as it takes shape. Don't think so.

BellottiBold;521613 said:

---

I'm more concerned with the behavior of the kids than I am with how the AD decides to use 25k of booster cash.

---

This is rich.

You've been a consistent apologist for virtually every Duck player who beat another student, stole personal property, drove while drunk, racked up thousands of unpaid tickets, physically assaulted females, etc. Virtually every time you have started with the refrain that all the facts aren't out then migrated to the position that a good kid made a (single) mistake and ultimately reached the position that Oregon doesn't have a systemic problem and that Chippy really is running a tight ship.

Look, I get that fans defend their programs to the end. Fine. Just don't pretend that you are anything different.

BellottiBold in 2010: There is absolutely nothing wrong with our program. Chip Kelly is the man of integrity. All of these arrests are just isolated incidents....


BellottiBold in 2011: Yes, something smells, but nothing will really happen. Perhaps a slap on the wrist if that.... It's certainly nowhere near as bad as USC, tOSU, and NC.


BellottiBold in 2012: Every good program cheats at some level. It's the price you pay to be a part of this group. Thank goodness we didn't have any bowl wins or other player awards to forfeit from those years.

tequila4kapp;521672 said:

---

This is rich.

You've been a consistent apologist for virtually every Duck player who beat another student

---

Not true.

Quote:

---

stole personal property

---

Not true.

Quote:

---

drove while drunk

---

sort of true

Quote:

---

racked up thousands of unpaid tickets

---

Cliff is getting at the very least what he deserves. *shrug*

Quote:

---

physically assaulted females

---

That's specific to an instance involving 1 player, and 1 female. You make it sound like I've rushed to the defense of 10 kids that beat up any number of people. (And obviously, I still don't buy that James "beat up" the girl in question.)

Quote:

---

Virtually every time you have started with the refrain that all the facts aren't out then migrated to the position that a good kid made a (single) mistake and ultimately reached the position that Oregon doesn't have a systemic problem and that Chippy really is running a tight ship.

---

True I've often argued that a good kid made a single mistake - but not in each instance. And I do need to revise my opinion on Chip's "tight ship." At this point I'm convinced that Kelly doesn't consider it his responsibility to keep these kids out of trouble, and that they are supposed to do that themselves. It will be telling if Oregon is having the same number of problems off the field once Kelly's first class are seniors - he claims today that Oregon's evaluations in the recruiting process are much more thorough than they ever had been previously. (I'm not sure if I buy that, or not.)

dupdadee;521679 said:

---

...

---

You are grouping the off-field problems with the possible NCAA violations, and I don't treat them the same at all. I've never compared us to USC, Ohio State, and NC. Lastly I don't think every "good" program cheats at some level - rather I suspect every program *period* is willing to test the limits of existing regulations. I don't think the latest "revelations" are all that indicative of any significant lack in character by Chip Kelly, either.

Factual question: is it an NCAA violation to pay someone to "steer" (hard to define "steer" I'm guessing) a recruit to a school? I would think it would have to be some form of violation.

What is the difference between "providing access to a player" and "steering" a player? Strikes me while there may be a c-hair's width in difference it is largely the same thing.

UO paid $25K to Lyles for something - apparently that "something" wasn't a shoddy, outdated report (even according to BellottiBold here). To argue that the $25K wasn't for delivering a player, but rather some sort of special kind of access (don't even know what that means) is stretching it big time.

I understand that High School coaches get involved in recruitment as well - for whatever reason (and not just to Texas, but other schools in the state, like A&M or even LSU) - but they aren't being paid by the universities. These schools spend time building those relationships and treat the players appropriately, so the High School coaches are comfortable with their kids going to those programs.

Lyles, on the other hand, pretty clear had his hand out for cash to direct/encourage/provide access to players to go to specific schools that were paying him (including A&M and LSU). While one can argue semantics, its pretty clear what is going on here, and I'm pretty sure it's not above board.

I started a thread two weeks ago, that said there would be reports coming out on Oregon.

Response was BOSTON MARKET!

Love this board!

SouthBayPhenom;521315 said:

---

I'm going to channel my inner duck fan and come up w/ the following explanation for why UO paid $25K for bios on 2009 graduates:

"You see, we also recruit JUCO's, so getting some info on 2009 grads that we can then pursue after they spend some time at a JUCO is of immense value. Nothing wrong with that - in fact, others should be doing it too."

How'd that sound?

---

Hey I could use $25,000 in spending money myself. Do you think UO would pay me for a list of 2010 graduates. Heck I would even throw in a list of 2011 graduates.

Peter

Unit2Sucks;521553 said:

---

I thought BB was pretty clear - his theory is that they overpaid for the relationship with Lyles - aka to get access to the talent, not for the recruiting materials themselves.

---

Quote:

---

That's basically it. Though who is to say they overpaid?

---

So it's OK under NCAA rules to pay for a relationship with someone who has access to a recruit? Why not pay $25K to the kid's mother?

MisterNoodle;521937 said:

---

So it's OK under NCAA rules to pay for a relationship with someone who has access to a recruit? Why not pay $25K to the kid's mother?

---

Bozeman did that to a Dad and was hammered...

So Chipster pays it to a family friend instead...

just saying

tequila4kapp;521672 said:

---

Look, I get that fans defend their programs to the end. Fine. Just don't pretend that you are anything different.

---

I'm actually beginning to suspect that BB is more than a fan. His words suggest to me that he is actually a PR professional on the UO payroll. He is on here at all times of day, within minutes, to give a "reasoned" response to any anti-Duck rhetoric that pops up, not to mention his ubiquitous presence on the UW, OSU and USC boards, as if it is his day job to defend OU's good name across the internet. He seems to have all this inside info on what the UO athletic dept. is thinking and doing. And I've seen more than one poster on here say "BB is a good guy, a level headed guy" which is precisely the image a PR hack would try to cultivate. As for trying to explain this latest scandal away as much ado about nothing, he ought to ask Uncle Phil for a big bonus because that is equivalent to asking him to convince the whole board to suspend their basic common sense.

Since this is the internet, I guess we'll never be able to prove (or disprove) my growing suspicion, short of an admission from the man himself.

MisterNoodle;521937 said:

---

So it's OK under NCAA rules to pay for a relationship with someone who has access to a recruit? Why not pay $25K to the kid's mother?

---

I was under the impression that at some point, Lyles did in fact have a relationship with Seastrunks mother.......

MisterNoodle;521937 said:

---

So it's OK under NCAA rules to pay for a relationship with someone who has access to a recruit? Why not pay $25K to the kid's mother?

---

These were rhetorical questions.

I don't read Oregon boards but I assume BB is all over them (or at least the main one whatever it is) and if so, I'd be surprised if anyone was willing to pay a PR kid the amount it would take to do what BB has done the last few years. And what would be the point - to make a very small impact on a few lunatic fringe fans on opposing team message boards? Seems a bit far-fetched to me.

Of course, I could be a PR hack too!

:cheer

MisterNoodle;521943 said:

---

I'm actually beginning to suspect that BB is more than a fan. His words suggest to me that he is actually a PR professional on the UO payroll. He is on here at all times of day, within minutes, to give a "reasoned" response to any anti-Duck rhetoric that pops up, not to mention his ubiquitous presence on the UW, OSU and USC boards, as if it is his day job to defend OU's good name across the internet. He seems to have all this inside info on what the UO athletic dept. is thinking and doing. And I've seen more than one poster on here say "BB is a good guy, a level headed guy" which is precisely the image a PR hack would try to cultivate. As for trying to explain this latest scandal away as much ado about nothing, he ought to ask Uncle Phil for a big bonus because that is equivalent to asking him to convince the whole board to suspend their basic common sense.

Since this is the internet, I guess we'll never be able to prove (or disprove) my growing suspicion, short of an admission from the man himself.

---

http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/p/26660568/Have-Fun-Oregon-coach-Chip-Kelly.aspx

Calfans;522029 said:

---

http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/p/26660568/Have-Fun-Oregon-coach-Chip-Kelly.aspx

---

LOL....oh man, how can I not repost a couple of those..........

Twams;521846 said:

---

I started a thread two weeks ago, that said there would be reports coming out on Oregon.

Response was BOSTON MARKET!

Love this board!

---

Alas, there are no Boston Markets in Oregon.

See website:

http://www.bostonmarket.com/locations

BellottiBold;521699 said:

---

blah, blah, blah....

---

As expected, more blah, blah, blah from bellottiblah.....




Here is an interesting nugget I found from one of the several discussions growing like a weed at ESPN on this whole Lyles/Quack scandal:

In addition to being a mentor/handler, Lyles is considered a member of scouting service since he's running his own scouting business out of his apartment (curiously registering his new company domain on March, 2010...after Seastrunk was delivered to Oregon...just 2 weeks before the payment of $25k. Pretty obvious why). Not only that, Lyles was an employee of another scouting service prior to starting his own gig.

It's interesting what NCAA says about these so-called "a recruiting/scouting service"

NCAA said:

---

Do NCAA coaches have to pay for information sent by a recruiting/scouting service?

Although a fee is not required, if a fee is charged, the same fee must be charged to all subsribers....

---

We all know how much Oregon paid compared to other schools to this same guy, not to mention how the price of $25,000 for "National" package just appeared out of the blue on Lyles' website just a day after the story broke.

Here is another gem....

NCAA said:

---

May a recruiting/scouting service call NCAA coaches to give them information on high school athletes?

No. It is not permissible for NCAA coaches to receive verbal information from recruiting/scouting services. Coaches may only receive information from published services.

---

I wonder what was said between all those 400+ text message exchanges between Chippy Kelly and this Lyles character. They couldn't have all been just customer service related stuff obviously since many of those texts were exchanged after midnight and more frequently around the time Oregon was getting a commitment from TheMichael James in 2008 and from Lache Seastrunk in 2010.



Link to the NCAA Recruiting Service FAQ PDF:
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=ncaa+faq+recruiting+services&aq=f&aqi=q-n1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=905e9081899b75b1&biw=1021&bih=923

Unit2Sucks;521995 said:

---

I don't read Oregon boards but I assume BB is all over them (or at least the main one whatever it is) and if so, I'd be surprised if anyone was willing to pay a PR kid the amount it would take to do what BB has done the last few years. And what would be the point - to make a very small impact on a few lunatic fringe fans on opposing team message boards? Seems a bit far-fetched to me.

Of course, I could be a PR hack too!

:cheer

---

Yeah, it is a bit far fetched. I agree with that generally. I have no direct evidence and given the intrinsic anonymity of the internet, never will, unless BB cops to it. I also admit that I do not read OU, USC, OSU, UW or any other boards but this one so I don't know if BB is all over those as well defending OU's good name.

But just for fun, consider the following counterpoints to your "far fetched" argument:

1. Phil Knight is made of money. Keeping a PR professional on retainer for the purpose of shaping public opinion on message boards is not an economic problem for him.

2. Message boards are as influential in shaping public opinion as blogs and mainstream sports news. Where does the average CFB fan go for information and opinion? Probably all three sources. When mainstream journalists and college football commentators refer to the chatter among fanbases, which they regularly do, their source is message boards like this one.

3. The NCAA enforcement folks are not immune to public opinion. No public figure or institution is. Their legitimacy depends on it. If the media and fans make a big enough stink about the OU allegations, that would influence their decision whether to start a formal investigation. Athletic departments know this, and therefore might reasonably decide that spending a little bit to shape public opinion about their program is a wise investment.

4. BB does do a pretty good job of giving the OU point of view. He's always here, he's reasonable without being bombastic, he has all sorts of inside information. Did I mention he is always here, as if it is his job?

5. A denial from BB has been mighty slow in coming. A denial now will be undermined a bit by the delay. And a denial at any time would be totally self-serving and therefore not automatically credible.

If I were BB, I think I would take the high road, and dismiss this thread as far fetched and unworthy of a response.

dupdadee;522099 said:

---

As expected, more blah, blah, blah from bellottiblah.....




Here is an interesting nugget I found from one of the several discussions growing like a weed at ESPN on this whole Lyles/Quack scandal:

In addition to being a mentor/handler, Lyles is considered a member of scouting service since he's running his own scouting business out of his apartment (curiously registering his new company domain on March, 2010...after Seastrunk was delivered to Oregon...just 2 weeks before the payment of $25k. Pretty obvious why). Not only that, Lyles was an employee of another scouting service prior to starting his own gig.

It's interesting what NCAA says about these so-called "a recruiting/scouting service"



We all know how much Oregon paid compared to other schools to this same guy, not to mention how the price of $25,000 for "National" package just appeared out of the blue on Lyles' website just a day after the story broke.

Here is another gem....


I wonder what was said between all those 400+ text message exchanges between Chippy Kelly and this Lyles character. They couldn't have all been just customer service related stuff obviously since many of those texts were exchanged after midnight and more frequently around the time Oregon was getting a commitment from TheMichael James in 2008 and from Lache Seastrunk in 2010.



Link to the NCAA Recruiting Service FAQ PDF:
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=ncaa+faq+recruiting+services&aq=f&aqi=q-n1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=905e9081899b75b1&biw=1021&bih=923

---

hammer time
[ATTACH]1612[/ATTACH]

Wow... if even one of you for a second thinks I'm a hired gun on behalf of the Oregon AD then I've made some pretty poor choices since I started posting here. (That or nobody that actually pays attention to the full spectrum of what I have to say with regard to the University of Oregon and/or Oregon football has yet stepped forward to point out how absurd that suggestion is.)

Hell, maybe I *should* forward all of my posts to the AD though... try to get a sweet gig out of all of this.

As to the "delay" in response to the accusation (if that is even the right word to use) forgive me for suffering some from "Lyles-fatigue" and for having been out camping

For the record: there is only one Oregon board I post regularly on, and yours is the only in-conference msg board I post on. I lurked for a bit over at wearesc, but they banned me after one post. (Sweethearts, they are...) I don't participate on either osu or uw boards, and I never have - so I have no idea where that garbage was coming from.

In fact, the boards I do hang out on I joined initially for no other reason than to talk recruiting. (So why would I bother with UW and OSU? --- ohhh! ZING!) Over the years I've popped on to some of the SEC boards, and I was on Bucknuts for a short while, but that pretty much sums up my activity.

And nothing I've ever posted here really suggests "insider" knowledge - not beyond what is being discussed on any of the Oregon premium boards at any given moment, at any rate.

MisterNoodle;522777 said:

---

If I were BB, I think I would take the high road, and dismiss this thread as far fetched and unworthy of a response.

---

lol.. so much for that.

BellottiBold;523154 said:

---

Wow... if even one of you for a second thinks I'm a hired gun on behalf of the Oregon AD then I've made some pretty poor choices since I started posting here. (That or nobody that actually pays attention to the full spectrum of what I have to say with regard to the University of Oregon and/or Oregon football has yet stepped forward to point out how absurd that suggestion is.)

Hell, maybe I *should* forward all of my posts to the AD though... try to get a sweet gig out of all of this.

As to the "delay" in response to the accusation (if that is even the right word to use) forgive me for suffering some from "Lyles-fatigue" and for having been out camping

For the record: there is only one Oregon board I post regularly on, and yours is the only in-conference msg board I post on. I lurked for a bit over at wearesc, but they banned me after one post. (Sweethearts, they are...) I don't participate on either osu or uw boards, and I never have - so I have no idea where that garbage was coming from.

In fact, the boards I do hang out on I joined initially for no other reason than to talk recruiting. (So why would I bother with UW and OSU? --- ohhh! ZING!) Over the years I've popped on to some of the SEC boards, and I was on Bucknuts for a short while, but that pretty much sums up my activity.

And nothing I've ever posted here really suggests "insider" knowledge - not beyond what is being discussed on any of the Oregon premium boards at any given moment, at any rate.

---

Well played.

That's exactly the kind of response I would give if I were a paid message board poster.