- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction Score
- 102
"According to Travis, who is also an attorney, the “grant of rights” for college football television is flimsy at best."
Link
"Works on contingency? No, money down!"Good lord imagine having Clay Travis as your attorney?
"Works on contingency? No, money down!"
"Works on contingency? No, money down!"
"Works on contingency? No, money down!"
I believe those are called Remoras.The B12 has been a dead conference walking for quite some time now. But it was never more evident of this than the conference still hasn't expanded by the minimum number of schools to get a football CG, despite being at such a huge disadvantage to every other power conference.
The conference truly consists of 3 sharks and a bunch of little fish that cling on to the sharks to feed off of their scraps.
Hiring me as your attorney, you'll also recieve this free smoking monkey."Works on contingency? No, money down!"
But your analysis is? Got it.Has a credible media lawyer from a real firm ever made a rational case against the GOR? Mr. Travis' assertions that "no court would enforce a GOR" is not a credible legal analysis of the structure.
Has a credible media lawyer from a real firm ever made a rational case against the GOR? Mr. Travis' assertions that "no court would enforce a GOR" is not a credible legal analysis of the structure.
A more than credible business lawyer has.
Look at him! He's going back for another puff!Hiring me as your attorney, you'll also recieve this free smoking monkey.
But Nelson & Dude says its bulletproof - tough to say who is more credible
But Nelson & Dude says its bulletproof - tough to say who is more credible
sdhusky says it is easy to break. That is why so many have been broken.
Once again you are wrong about someone else's position too. The Dude has only claimed that the Big 12 GOR is bulletproof. He claims the ACC GOR is easily broken.
Is it really that hard to do a quick search to find out what someone actually said, or do you prefer to make up other people's positions on things and argue with those?