Good question, but early 2000's Washington had a similar example with their football coach (who violated NCAA rules on ‘gambling’), so apparently “NCAA violations are just cause” wasn’t a standard part of contracts back then.

Of course he didn’t respond when a random person asked him to provide information (in writing!) about an ongoing legal/liability issue and media firestorm.

You’d think that’d be an obvious cause, but it really depends on how the contract is written. Here’s a nice analogous example that’s still remembered by people in the business of college athletics:

If you start talking salary at the end, then the HR team that you’re working with is not competent. Our HR team will have figured out the ballpark for the person before we talk to anyone.

it’s weird to expect a hiring manager to spend more than about 30 seconds looking over your resume in most situations

Are you certain that he isn’t a center? With where the NBA is in 2018, a guy who’s 6'10", doesn’t shoot, but bullies people in the lane sure sounds like a center to me...a slightly undersized center, maybe, but a center nonetheless.

Yup - the Hawks are a classic case of the old saying about how people are exactly as loyal as their options.

Because GMs are convinced, convinced, convinced that unlike every other team, we really do have a system that lets us pick players better than the rest.

That’s how it read to me - they’re avoiding calling it a ‘toxic culture’ because that would point back at themselves for all the other aspects of the culture. Instead, by refusing to call it a ‘cultural issue’, that allows Maryland to just pin the entire problem on DJ Durkin and leave it at that.

Yeah, it’ll be have to be REAL bad to knock FO:Tactics off that hill

Yeah.

The best part about the tweet is that muffing a kickoff at your own 1 yard line only deserves a “Pretty Rutgers” rating. Like, for any other team this would be a serious what the hell screw-up...but for Rutgers, it’s just a run-of-the-mill, average screw-up.

I’m talking about subtractions like no cheese on a burger or no croutons on a salad.

I must be too cynical, because every single time I see an overwhelming amount of signs and advertising about a specific ballot initiative, I immediately assume some big corporation is behind the media blitz and most likely trying to confuse the little guy (aka “me”) into voting against his (my) own self-interest.

3) If you’re gonna go this route, just let team get drafted normally out of high school. All this does is suppress player wages for a year, which is bullshit.

I thought about that too, but I don’t think it’s an insurmountable problem. Here are a few random possibilities off the top of my head (might create issues of their own or need refinement):

My favorite example of this sort of “scandal” was when Ohio State players had the temerity to sell their own property to pay for tattoos, and were suspended for half a season—an extreme penalty in the NCAA system—but were allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl against Arkansas because everyone wanted to see that looming…

As someone who once owned a yard across from a T-junction, I can 100% assure you that a depressingly large number of drivers will still run into giant freaking white boulders.

Cleveland completely botched the Kyrie situation by openly opining about trading him.

What’s the endgame here? To somehow woo Butler back while simultaneously alienating the team’s actual young core even further?