The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(12-03-2019 09:12 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(12-03-2019 08:46 PM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote:  $200K plus more for assistants and raised the buyout clause $ level and 2 extra years on his contract. So in the end he got his. We got screwed. Great Job Wood.

Likely Wood never knew abut this, but I feel reasonably confidant that the article is accurate.
The FAU situation was surely not used to leverage contract negotiations with ODU, but the Temple rumor probably served a twofold purpose, being used as influence for both ODU and FAU.
The Temple rumor was just that, as there was NEVER any interest from Temple.

I don't fault BW for this, as it is the way the business works.
We have laughed at JMU for an almost cult like belief that their past coaches should stay for a mere pittance, sacrificing career and family because of some exaggerated and unrealistic sense of loyalty.

No truth to it at all

(12-03-2019 07:36 PM)CalODUFan Wrote:  http://fauowlaccess.com/a-wilder-ear/14677/2019/12/03/

The fact our local press has not picked up this story supports it is unsubstantiated. BW should sue their @ for libel.

No, that doesn't prove anything.

It’s called accountability for the press - and those looking to draw attention after our announcement. Not looking to prove anything, just want the pricks to have to write a six or seven figure check - or be shut down in bankruptcy for their inability to write the check. These acts should not go unanswered.

(12-05-2019 09:59 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  It’s called accountability for the press - and those looking to draw attention after our announcement. Not looking to prove anything, just want the pricks to have to write a six or seven figure check - or be shut down in bankruptcy for their inability to write the check. These acts should not go unanswered.

Neither you, ODU, or Wilder want what happened getting out.

(12-05-2019 10:05 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(12-05-2019 09:59 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  It’s called accountability for the press - and those looking to draw attention after our announcement. Not looking to prove anything, just want the pricks to have to write a six or seven figure check - or be shut down in bankruptcy for their inability to write the check. These acts should not go unanswered.

Neither you, ODU, or Wilder want what happened getting out.

No, you’re wrong. I want to lay bare the entire truth. I don’t care who looks bad. It’s called accountability.

IN that case, 2 ouf of the 3 don't want it to come out.

(12-05-2019 09:05 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  

(12-03-2019 07:36 PM)CalODUFan Wrote:  http://fauowlaccess.com/a-wilder-ear/14677/2019/12/03/

The fact our local press has not picked up this story supports it is unsubstantiated. BW should sue their @ for libel.

That local press has not picked it up doesn't mean it is not true, in all or in part.

Anyone can sue, however to receive any compensation, there would have to provable malice on the part of the writer AND demonstrable damages.
And this case would be further complicated by the fact that BW is likely defined as a "public figure" within this context, substantially raising the burden of proof bar.



IANAL

(12-05-2019 10:05 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  

(12-05-2019 09:59 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  It’s called accountability for the press - and those looking to draw attention after our announcement. Not looking to prove anything, just want the pricks to have to write a six or seven figure check - or be shut down in bankruptcy for their inability to write the check. These acts should not go unanswered.

Neither you, ODU, or Wilder want what happened getting out.

Agreed. It serves no purpose to pursue this now.

(12-05-2019 10:17 PM)Gilesfan Wrote:  IN that case, 2 ouf of the 3 don't want it to come out.

What is done in the dark should be brought to the light. Accountability - let there be a reckoning.

What happened is meaningless. Nobody has anything to be accountable for something.

(12-05-2019 10:25 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(12-05-2019 09:05 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  

(12-03-2019 07:36 PM)CalODUFan Wrote:  http://fauowlaccess.com/a-wilder-ear/14677/2019/12/03/

The fact our local press has not picked up this story supports it is unsubstantiated. BW should sue their @ for libel.

That local press has not picked it up doesn't mean it is not true, in all or in part.

Anyone can sue, however to receive any compensation, there would have to provable malice on the part of the writer AND demonstrable damages.
And this case would be further complicated by the fact that BW is likely defined as a "public figure" within this context, substantially raising the burden of proof bar.



IANAL

If anyone has anything credible to share with the local press, trust me, they will pick this story up. They will eat it up. Again, only if anyone has information that is credible and can be substantiated.

(12-05-2019 10:25 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(12-05-2019 09:05 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  

(12-03-2019 07:36 PM)CalODUFan Wrote:  http://fauowlaccess.com/a-wilder-ear/14677/2019/12/03/

The fact our local press has not picked up this story supports it is unsubstantiated. BW should sue their @ for libel.

That local press has not picked it up doesn't mean it is not true, in all or in part.

Anyone can sue, however to receive any compensation, there would have to provable malice on the part of the writer AND demonstrable damages.
And this case would be further complicated by the fact that BW is likely defined as a "public figure" within this context, substantially raising the burden of proof bar.



IANAL

Definitely a public figure. For what it's worth, if I'm remembering my media law correctly, malice is the bar that must be cleared ONLY for public figures; if Bobby Wilder were an anonymous white-collar worked tucked away at a three-story office building in Lynnhaven, he wouldn't have to meet that standard and would only have to prove damages. But he's not.

A libel suit would just be another ineffective ODU offensive play.

(12-05-2019 10:45 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  

(12-05-2019 10:25 PM)ODUalum78 Wrote:  

(12-05-2019 09:05 PM)ODUDJ96 Wrote:  

(12-03-2019 07:36 PM)CalODUFan Wrote:  http://fauowlaccess.com/a-wilder-ear/14677/2019/12/03/

The fact our local press has not picked up this story supports it is unsubstantiated. BW should sue their @ for libel.

That local press has not picked it up doesn't mean it is not true, in all or in part.

Anyone can sue, however to receive any compensation, there would have to provable malice on the part of the writer AND demonstrable damages.
And this case would be further complicated by the fact that BW is likely defined as a "public figure" within this context, substantially raising the burden of proof bar.



IANAL

If anyone has anything credible to share with the local press, trust me, they will pick this story up. They will eat it up. Again, only if anyone has information that is credible and can be substantiated.

No.

The original story could be from a first person inside source and 100% accurate, or not.
However, if a local journalist cannot get any confirmation OR refutation from FAU sources, Bobby Wilder, or ODU sources, then the story locally will be a non starter.
We may never know the truth.

Here we go. Be sure to watch the video, does not paint a good picture. With multiple sources, including from inside FAU.
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/odu...bowl-game/

(12-06-2019 12:29 AM)DaBigBlue Wrote:  Here we go. Be sure to watch the video, does not paint a good picture. With multiple sources, including from inside FAU.
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/odu...bowl-game/

Yikes. I was sure this wasn’t going to go anywhere beyond the one article but....yikes. “Monarch for Life”

(12-06-2019 12:48 AM)LetsGoODU Wrote:  

(12-06-2019 12:29 AM)DaBigBlue Wrote:  Here we go. Be sure to watch the video, does not paint a good picture. With multiple sources, including from inside FAU.
https://www.wavy.com/news/local-news/odu...bowl-game/

Yikes. I was sure this wasn’t going to go anywhere beyond the one article but....yikes. “Monarch for Life”

I'd have preferred ODU to offer no comment and just move on from BW and all of this. It's a new day at ODU, let's act like it.

So let’s say this is a breach of contract like Bruce mentioned on WAVY. Will this allow ODAF to not pay the buyout or at the very least reduce it?

If he was in violation of his contract maybe we wouldn’t owe him $600k. It seems he wasn’t quite as loyal and ethical as we thought. I’m starting to wonder if those tears were for getting fired and losing a fat $700k per year job rather than not having a chance to stay at his baby, ODU. ODU officials loved him and for them to be mad makes me believe there must be something to it, and something wrong about it.

He was a bullshitter from the day he started getting his ass handed to him in FBS. We all knew it. If you didn't then you thought he was doing well in recruiting as well. This whole "my baby" and "most successful startup" was nothing but crap meant to pull on the "weak" admins heart strings to keep him on longer. The moment he didn't in good faith negotiate a revised contract after the bowl win...his ass would have been fired. The game is played that way and Wood knew that but should have drawn a line and that tactic would have crossed it for me.