Gerald Bordeaux replaced

[tomegun]

The reason behind Boudreax's firing is much worse - a common polarizing subject - than the Ed Rush situation.

I would like to add that the comments about moderator/member were made because most of us know the moderators are officials and members also. I have never thought, "Oh, Joe Blow made that comment as a moderator". Now, I'm not on here enough to read things that would suggest there is more to it than that so...

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I would like to add that the comments about moderator/member were made because most of us know the moderators are officials and members also. I have never thought, "Oh, Joe Blow made that comment as a moderator". Now, I'm not on here enough to read things that would suggest there is more to it than that so...

Point taken. I just didn't want it to be construed as anything other than my personal opinion.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by tomegun

The reason behind Boudreax's firing is much worse - a common polarizing subject - than the Ed Rush situation.

I would like to add that the comments about moderator/member were made because most of us know the moderators are officials and members also. I have never thought, "Oh, Joe Blow made that comment as a moderator". Now, I'm not on here enough to read things that would suggest there is more to it than that so...

Sure... and the majority of the time that makes sense.

But I'm sure you can also see the reason he wrote that. "If I wanted to read that tripe, I'd read it on the link itself. (Written as a member, not a mod.) "

If he said that without a disclaimer, someone might think he meant it as a mod, and infer that users are not supposed to post comments from sites ... or some such. He wanted to be overly clear that this particular post was personal opinion, and not moderator-driven.

I tread the same line sometimes... most of the time I'm here simply as a member. But I've deleted posts I've made when I read them back and they take on a different tone than I intended if someone read them as if coming from a moderator.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tomegun

The reason behind Boudreax's firing is much worse - a common polarizing subject - than the Ed Rush situation.
....

What is the reason behind it? I've heard rumblings about some stuff happening in the upper stratosphere of Men's officiating from a close friend but he won't fill me in on the details until I see him in camp at the end of the month.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What is the reason behind it? I've heard rumblings about some stuff happening in the upper stratosphere of Men's officiating from a close friend but he won't fill me in on the details until I see him in camp at the end of the month.

You can call me, text me or email me and I will tell you what I know. I have second hand information and the subject is too volatile for me to mention it here.

...but if you keep poking I will keep dropping hints...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tomegun

You can call me, text me or email me and I will tell you what I know. I have second hand information and the subject is too volatile for me to mention it here.

...but if you keep poking I will keep dropping hints...

Haha

My info would be 2nd hand also. Funny you talk about it being too volatile to mention here. My source didn't want to put anything in an email, said he'd only tell me face-to-face. His comments were before Boudreaux fired. He said some mess was going on. He didn't say what it concerned (other than the Pac 12 story wasn't over), but his buddy is a big dawg in the SEC amongst other conferences.

Had to replace my phone this week so I lost all my numbers. I'll message you on Facebook.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

other than the Pac 12 story wasn't over

I keep hearing this said ... but with zero details. The story seems pretty over to me, especially since those that keep acting like there is some other smoking gun don't have a clue as to what it is.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Seems the Pac 12 isn't quite done yet.

cbssports

Originally Posted by Brad

I keep hearing this said ... but with zero details. The story seems pretty over to me, especially since those that keep acting like there is some other smoking gun don't have a clue as to what it is.

Seems that some of the officials(sources) are disputing the PAC 12 finding that Rush was joking. They are saying he was serious, and the PAC 12 is looking again.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Seems that some of the officials(sources) are disputing the PAC 12 finding that Rush was joking. They are saying he was serious, and the PAC 12 is looking again.

They have said that from the first article — doesn't make it true necessarily either.

"After considering the matter, commissioner Scott and I agree that an independent review is important to maintain the confidence of our members, and of the public, in the integrity of our competition"

I consider this completely standard — seems prudent so that they can put everything behind them.