Cynical

This must be a state specific rule. IIRC, Georgia does NOT limit lawyers from being involved/handling a small claims case. The only differences between a small claims and a regular civil suit is the dollar amount, and what costs you can include in the case.

If TCU did get the nod, the conference would have to reshuffle the divisions (Mizzou is a North div team). And instead of calling the divisions 'North' and 'South', they could just call them 'Texas' and 'Non-Texas'. The only reason I thought the Mizzou move was the most interesting was due to the Arkansas connection. Beyond that, if Mizzou jumped, the Big 12 has 4 quality choices that would practically beg the conference to join. They could literally have Mizzou's replacement within a week. As for the Big East, it is true the Big East's BCS auto-bid could be threatened. However, I really don't think the BE will have a problem getting a lower tier school to join a BCS conference. East Carolina is a great choice. (Side note: Imagine the irony. Skip got passed over for UCinn job, only to end up in the Big East, potentially having to coach against UCinn)

If you are serious about this, then I am guilty of not getting it either. Bell was put on IR on Friday. The guy starting at LT was J. Scott.

Linky Conference is only going to explore the possibility of expansion, but the last time it did this, the conference made an effort to sign ND. Some of the names being tossed around: Mizzou Cincy Rutgers Syracuse Pitt and of course, ND As long as the Big East continues being a patsy, ND has no incentive to switch. Would be interested in seeing Penn State/Ohio State reactions if Pitt/Cincy was offered the spot. Neither school may like having an instate conference rival to deal with and recruit against. Also noted that other than Mizzou, the rest are Big east schools. Out of the 6, Mizzou switching provides the most interesting ripple effect. Assuming Mizzou did switch, I could see Boise St, Utah, TCU, and maybe BYU making a hard pitch to join the Big 12. But then there is the wild card Arkansas from the SEC. Arkansas, Texas, Texas Tech, Texas A&M, and Baylor were all part of the old Southwest Conference before it folded, and Arkansas considers Texas one of it's biggest rivals. Considering Arkansas has never won the SEC title, and has never created any intense rivalry with another SEC school (from a football standpoint), could the lure of reigniting old rivalries make Arkie switch? Mind you, this is all pure speculation at this point, as Big 10 has not said it will expand.

No problem with having a differing view. But if Edwards was to start, what makes you believe he will suddenly start playing better? Furthermore, the team doesn't support/respect him anymore. How many players came to Trent's defense when he got benched? Compare that to 2007 when Evans supported Losman, and Whitner was backing Edwards. Heck, a few weeks ago, Whitner said no position/player was safe from being scrutinized and benched, with the implication being the offense needing the most scrutiny. Agreed.

WTF? If you are trying to pin Evans "lack of production" on TO and Fitz, you failed to address how this was a problem before the arrival of Fitzpatrick and Owens.

Andy Kaufman reincarnate.

You said it yourself: long term development project So let's hurry up and play him so we can make a knee jerk snap decision to determine if he is the "franchise QB". Brilliance.

Brohm was picked off the practice squad from another team. He has been on this team for less than 4 weeks. You now want him to play so (to paraphrase) "we (more like you, and people like you) can determine if he is a franchise QB or not". THREE frigging games. Here's a question. Was 3 games enough to determine if Edwards was the "franchise" QB? And here's a clue. Brohm was picked off another team's PRACTICE SQUAD. Let me repeat that: Brohm was picked off another team's PRACTICE SQUAD. I did not realize practice squad really meant "Franchise Squad".

Good point. Except Jauron was respected by his players (for good or bad). The players do not respect Edwards. Forcing Edwards into the lineup will only cause more strife, and a possible team rebellion. Post Trent. AVP mentioned being able to do things like pre-snap motion with the implication being Trent being unable to run an offense with it.

I understand the rationale, I just do not agree with it. You play to win. Period. Accept nothing less. If that means we have to wait another year to get our "franchise" QB, than so be it. IMO, this years class of QBs is looking pretty weak anyways. Other than maybe Claussen, nobody really interests me enough to take a chance on (at least not until the later rounds).

Both of these were done because of Trent. Or as AVP mentioned (to paraphrase), he can run a more complicated offense post Trent. More importantly, THE PLAYERS WANT HIM IN.

And you want them to base their decision on whether he's the guy or not on THREE GAMES? The guy was snagged off a practice squad (after failing to beat out the previous back up who was drafted in the 7th round), has been on this team less than 4 weeks, and you want to throw him into the fire so the new guys can decide whether or not they need to draft another QB? :doh: Stick to shilling for Leach. At least you are amusing doing that.

And despite all that attention, Michigan was the only other school to make an offer to Potts. After 10 years, I hope Leach was able to recruit more than ONE "top" recruit. No, I was comparing Nutt to Leach. You know, how they both came damn close to winning the conference, how they both won Coach of the Year honors, how they both run a gimmicky offense, how they both are "misunderstood" (for lack of a better word) by those outside their programs ... You tell me. You're the one who stated Leach would have won multiple Big 12 championships if they were able to draft players, and to look for the Red Raiders to win the Big 12 next year.

I don't know why people cannot grasp the obvious. Let's start with the blatantly obvious: Wilson hasn't finished "cleaning" house. Why worry (or bother) about evaluating a player when the people who are doing the evaluation probably will not be here next year? Once again, the same guys who would evaluate Brohm now probably will not be here come draft day. Do you really care what these people have to say? Brohm was snagged off the practice squad. Brohm would have to play lights out to even consider NOT drafting/acquiring a QB in the off season. And if Brohm was able to play lights out (or even something close to it), he would NOT be sitting on the practice squad. Other than to pacify people like you, the organization gains NOTHING in playing Brohm now. Why is that so hard to understand?

Makes no difference how good you perceive him to be, Trent's own teammates do NOT believe he is a leader. Hell, it was rumored even Jauron had given up on Trent after the Tenn game. The PLAYERS have given up on Trent.

I just love how people are insisting Brohm needs NEEDS to play just so they can evaluate him. Like 3 games is enough to determine if Brohm is a bust or a steal. Brohm is under contract, and will be here next year. The new staff can properly evaluate him starting in the off season.

If he was as good as you keep claiming him to be, he would attract the top recruits, and not the rejects. After 9 years, the best he could do is come "damned close". Houston Nutt and the Razorbacks came "damned close" to winning an SEC title in his fifth year. And in both cases, it means the same thing: they failed. And if he doesn't, do you have your excuse ready?

Love this. Brohm could not even make the roster as a back up on his original team, but people like you can't wait to see if he can play. You will get your chance. Next year. Brohm is under contract and going no where. Absolutely no need to rush the guy this season just so "you" can be one of the first people to claim Brohm is a bust or a steal. Maybe in your little world.

And yet, after 10 years, the guy still has been unable to win at least ONE Big 12 title. Seems to me Leach has already reached his potential: being second rate. Pass.

Really? My condolences.

Go ahead and put that one in there. How does Trent answer the question "Well, the organization fired said OC because the HC wanted an offense you could understand and run. Why do you consider that a mistake?"

As revealed during the preseason: NOT A SINGLE BILLS PLAYER WOULD CALL EDWARDS THE LEADER OF THE TEAM Don't care how "good" you think he is, the rest of the team does not want to play for him.

Whoo Hoo!

If Lane is going to pimp out those girls that way, I hope he didn't forget to pay them. Lane's father (Monte) can coach, but Lane is nothing more than a clown. Nothing he has done this season has me convinced he has turned the Vol program around. The guy seems happier generating headlines than he does coaching. Right now, I would give Lane about another 3 years, before Tenn sends him packing. I'll give Cheez-It down at the 'Barn more respect. It's just too bad a big chunk of the 'Barn faithful are delusional.