Welcome to Hogville!      Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Lawyers question UA logo sharing with Razorback Foundation

Started by NuttinItUp, February 18, 2018, 11:47:05 am

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

NuttinItUp

Apparently, the Razorback Foundation has free use of University of Arkansas trademarks that others must pay to display. ("an arrangement set by "oral" agreements and university policy that outside attorneys find lacking")

More details and a longer explanation:

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2018/feb/18/lawyers-question-ua-logo-sharing/


Maybe the lawyers in the room will understand this better than I, but I don't really see the controversy here. It seems like the foundation that is set up to help the UA raise money should be allowed to use the UA logos and trademarks if the UA lets them.

ricepig

The ADG has been reading 17,000 emails, I think they want something in the Sunday editions for their money spent reading them. The last two attempts to try to make up some controversy have been lame.

 

rljjr

Quote from: ricepig on February 18, 2018, 11:50:22 am
The ADG has been reading 17,000 emails, I think they want something in the Sunday editions for their money spent reading them. The last two attempts to try to make up some controversy have been lame.

The ADG is bent on doing everything it can to let the U of A know it wants games in LR. It's a petty vendetta that shows in the "University of Arkansas, Fayetteville," stuff. They don't do that for any other flagship school from other states, meaning it's NOT a consistent rule, but rather an arbitrary dig aimed at Fayetteville. It's childish.

26.2Hog

Quote from: rljjr on February 18, 2018, 01:09:47 pm
The ADG is bent on doing everything it can to let the U of A know it wants games in LR. It's a petty vendetta that shows in the "University of Arkansas, Fayetteville," stuff. They don't do that for any other flagship school from other states, meaning it's NOT a consistent rule, but rather an arbitrary dig aimed at Fayetteville. It's childish.

I've never seen any other media refer to our flagship university as the "University of Arkansas, Fayetteville."  I know my diplomas say "The University of Arkansas".  They certainly have an agenda of some sort.

I've started referring to them as the "Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Little Rock".


NuttinItUp

Quote from: 26.2Hog on February 18, 2018, 01:26:03 pm
I've never seen any other media refer to our flagship university as the "University of Arkansas, Fayetteville."  I know my diplomas say "The University of Arkansas".  They certainly have an agenda of some sort.

I've started referring to them as the "Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Little Rock".



I mean, we all know that there are UAFS, UALR, UAPB, but when someone says "University of Arkansas", everyone knows they mean the main campus in Fayetteville. Not sure why they qualify like that.

sowmonella

A response from an editor at the ADG from several months ago.

"It most definitely is not meant as a slight.
A former executive editor made the decision we would do it one time in every story for clarity reasons for the UA system. We also use Monticello for UAM, Little Rock for UALR, Pine Bluff for UAPB etc.
It was a decision made way above my paygrade, but it is really just one more word to any story or column."

I told him it was stupid. Wonder if maybe if someone from their major advertisers such as Dillards, Landers and other local big ad buyers could get more results than I could?
Not trying to brag or make anyone jealous but I can still fit into the same pair of socks I wore in high school.
Proud member since August 2003

Buff

ADG is the reason we can't have nice things.  What a sham of a sports page. 

WoooPigBrewie

February 18, 2018, 04:45:07 pm #7 Last Edit: February 18, 2018, 05:02:06 pm by WoooPigBrewie
I just laugh when I read articles like this.  Certain people act like there is an ongoing conspiracy at the University of Arkansas to skirt the Arkansas FOIA laws.  Maybe there is, maybe there isn't.

The Democrat-Gazette portrays that they have so much bombshell information in their over 17,800 pages of emails.  Watch out folks, we have a bona fide Pentagon Papers situation brewing.

I mean, how earth shattering is this tidbit, "The UA committed to help the foundation raise more money from students by better promoting its 'Collegiate Membership' program."

I definitely would NOT have wanted to have my name associated with that email chain.  I sure hope those involved sought the advice of independent counsel.

Here is an assumption:
I am willing to bet that when the vast majority of bombshell information is about to be transmitted, it is done via personal email accounts and personal cell phones.  While University business, there is no record of it ever being discussed and thus the FOIA hungry reporters don't know to ask about it.

For example: 
Suppose eight people work for the University of Arkansas (they don't all have to be Athletic Department folks), lets call them Group A.  Group A is about to have some bombshell information.  Group A schedules to meet in person.  The leader of Group A says, "Let's send that via our personal email accounts.  We have each other's personal cell numbers, so no texts to the University cell phones."  Because the original meeting was conducted in person and the Group A leader orally communicated the process of discussing the bombshell information, there is no record of it ever being said. As a result, unless one of the eight makes a mistake, there is no information chain on University email accounts or cell phones to tip off the FOIA hungry reporters. Thus, the FOIA hungry reporters don't even know where to beginning looking for bombshell information that they never knew existed.

So, I guess if that example is true, then there is a conspiracy.  How ever will the Flagship survive?

The Flagship's Flag has been waiving since 1871.  That is not going to change because the Razorback Foundation uses the Razorback markings for free and withheld private documents from the FOIA hungry reporters.

The real question people should be asking is whether or not members of the Board of Trustees have breached any of the duties that they owe the University of Arkansas System. 

Why? For too long have they "rubber stamped" new facility construction projects, expansions, renovations, contract extensions, buyouts, coaching incentives, etc. 

It is the nature of the business, but people should be appalled at some of these approvals. 

For example:
"Your team had a cumulative GPA of 3.0, here is an additional $25,000."  How much does the coach have to do with Academics when there is an entirely separate Academics Department?  Do all the counselors, advisers, and tutors get an incentive?  No.  Their incentive is employment.

"We know you only went 3-9 the year before, but we are so happy you went 7-6 and won a bowl game.  We know that we signed a contract four year contract and that your job is to win football games.  Thanks for doing what you are contracted to do. How does an extension and buyout sound?  Lets start at $25 million and go from there."

"We know that we just got beat up over extensions and buyouts when we fired an AD and entire coaching staff. We know that you aren't even halfway through this basketball season, and that a lot could happen between now and the end of the season, but how does an extension sound?"

Pure insanity.

DIAMOND BOWL BABY!!!

DIAMOND BOWL BABY!

Inhogswetrust

Quote from: NuttinItUp on February 18, 2018, 11:47:05 am
Apparently, the Razorback Foundation has free use of University of Arkansas trademarks that others must pay to display. ("an arrangement set by "oral" agreements and university policy that outside attorneys find lacking")

More details and a longer explanation:

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2018/feb/18/lawyers-question-ua-logo-sharing/p


Maybe the lawyers in the room will understand this better than I, but I don't really see the controversy here. It seems like the foundation that is set up to help the UA raise money should be allowed to use the UA logos and trademarks if the UA lets them.

Any organization that wants someone else to raise money exclusively for them  would be stupid not to let them use their logo and such. No wonder lawyers get a bad rap a lot of the time.
If I'm going to cheer players and coaches in victory, I damn sure ought to be man enough to stand with them in defeat.

"Why some people are so drawn to the irrational is something that has always puzzled me" - James Randi

TebowHater

The ADG is truly dying and trying to do everything it can to drive readership. Glad to see most people in our state see straight through their idiocracy and fake news. Glad this is back firing on them. Not sure how they thought trying to destroy the Razorbacks athletic program was the best route to success.

Love how they wasted months reading through 17k emails and couldn't find a dang thing wrong. Because there is nothing there. The Foundation is being led by probably the most integrous person related to the UA in any capacity. Good luck.

Doofus

The ADG's issue is that the UA uses the Foundation's status as a private entity to avoid their FOIA requests. 

In the course of several articles, the ADG appears to be attempting to make the case that the Foundation is essentially part of the UA and, therefore, subject to FOIA.

As a practical matter, I think we could all agree that the Foundation serves at the UA's whim.  As a legal matter, I am unsure what hurdles must be overcome to demonstrate this.

It would seem that sharing a copyrighted logo would be one indicator that they are really one and the same. 


OneTuskOverTheLine™

Quote from: sowmonella on February 18, 2018, 03:37:10 pm
A response from an editor at the ADG from several months ago.

"It most definitely is not meant as a slight.
A former executive editor made the decision we would do it one time in every story for clarity reasons for the UA system. We also use Monticello for UAM, Little Rock for UALR, Pine Bluff for UAPB etc.
It was a decision made way above my paygrade, but it is really just one more word to any story or column."

I told him it was stupid. Wonder if maybe if someone from their major advertisers such as Dillards, Landers and other local big ad buyers could get more results than I could?

So let me get this straight...  Y'all take the ADG's response as disrespect, but see none towards the other half of the state when the tried and true troll speak of the GSD comes out. Did I get that right.!? Y'all go ahead and carry out your petty vendetta against the rest of the state in your rage to get your way. I'm gonna sit this GSD out..
Peace...
Quote from: capehog on March 12, 2010...
My ex wife had a pet monkey I used to play with. That was one of the few things I liked about her

quote from: golf2day on June 19, 2014....
I'm disgusted, but kinda excited. Now I'm disgusted that I'm excited.

Karma

The Hogville mob has already made up its mind, but there are very precise and technical rules on both FOIA and trademarks. The Razorback Foundation is taking different sides of the argument for each point to get to the result it wants, which is to act as a public entity without the requirements to comply with the FOIA.

 

NuttinItUp

Quote from: Karma on February 19, 2018, 09:28:11 am
The Hogville mob has already made up its mind, but there are very precise and technical rules on both FOIA and trademarks. The Razorback Foundation is taking different sides of the argument for each point to get to the result it wants, which is to act as a public entity without the requirements to comply with the FOIA.

Can you explain it a little better? Why can't the Razorback Foundation use the trademarks/images if the UA has no problem with them using said trademarks/images?

I am not arguing with you. I legitimately do not understand how that could be the case.

hawgon

Someone posted that interview with that young woman from Elysian Fields, Texas the other day who followed Morris from SMU to Arkansas in some sort of recruiting role.  So, anyway I was looking through an athletic department staff directory to try and find out exactly what her job description was out of curiosity.  And I found one maintained by the school that had the Foundation listed as well with all their phone numbers too.

I don't want to get into an argument about this and that.  I'll just say that from a legal point of view it is darned sloppy and frankly, just stupid to claim that the Foundation is not part of the school and therefore not subject to a FOIA when you maintain a website that makes them look like the rest of the staff in the Athletic Department. 

Here you go.  Open the link and scroll down.

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/athletics-2/athletics/

NuttinItUp

Quote from: hawgon on February 19, 2018, 09:42:10 am
Someone posted that interview with that young woman from Elysian Fields, Texas the other day who followed Morris from SMU to Arkansas in some sort of recruiting role.  So, anyway I was looking through an athletic department staff directory to try and find out exactly what her job description was out of curiosity.  And I found one maintained by the school that had the Foundation listed as well with all their phone numbers too.

I don't want to get into an argument about this and that.  I'll just say that from a legal point of view it is darned sloppy and frankly, just stupid to claim that the Foundation is not part of the school and therefore not subject to a FOIA when you maintain a website that makes them look like the rest of the staff in the Athletic Department. 

Here you go.  Open the link and scroll down.

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks.com/athletics-2/athletics/

You got me curious as to whether other schools do the same thing.

I went to the Alabama staff directory, and not only do they list their Foundation members on their athletic staff page, apparently all of their Foundation members get .edu email addresses as well! (talk about non-separation; at least ours have non-school email addresses)

http://www.rolltide.com/staff.aspx


I didn't check other schools, but I can only assume this is commonplace.


Edit: I wanted to check another team, so I looked at the 2nd best SEC team last year, Georgia's site (link). (Note: they call theirs "The Georgia Bulldog Club", but it is the same thing and they also list theirs with .edu emails.)

Also, both Alabama and Georgia (and likely others) give titles like "Executive Associate Athletic Director" and things to their foundation members.

Perhaps the kerfuffle is because of some laws specific to Arkansas? 

HoggyCat

Quote from: 26.2Hog on February 18, 2018, 01:26:03 pm
I've never seen any other media refer to our flagship university as the "University of Arkansas, Fayetteville."  I know my diplomas say "The University of Arkansas".  They certainly have an agenda of some sort.

I've started referring to them as the "Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Little Rock".

Read contracts with the UA.... even the bond agreement for the expansion refers to UAF.
I'm only responsible for what I say, not how you perceive it.

Porkys Revenge

Quote from: rljjr on February 18, 2018, 01:09:47 pm
The ADG is bent on doing everything it can to let the U of A know it wants games in LR. It's a petty vendetta that shows in the "University of Arkansas, Fayetteville," stuff. They don't do that for any other flagship school from other states, meaning it's NOT a consistent rule, but rather an arbitrary dig aimed at Fayetteville. It's childish.

Boom. I wondered if anyone else noticed how Wally always refers to us as UA Fayetteville. An email was sent to him to point out how wrong and petty that is. He was somewhat of an ass in his response. Here's an excerpt - "Sir, I do what my employers tell me to do".

Seriously, who comes up with stuff like that?

factchecker

Quote from: NuttinItUp on February 19, 2018, 09:58:37 am
You got me curious as to whether other schools do the same thing.

I went to the Alabama staff directory, and not only do they list their Foundation members on their athletic staff page, apparently all of their Foundation members get .edu email addresses as well! (talk about non-separation; at least ours have non-school email addresses)

http://www.rolltide.com/staff.aspx


I didn't check other schools, but I can only assume this is commonplace.


Edit: I wanted to check another team, so I looked at the 2nd best SEC team last year, Georgia's site (link). (Note: they call theirs "The Georgia Bulldog Club", but it is the same thing and they also list theirs with .edu emails.)

Also, both Alabama and Georgia (and likely others) give titles like "Executive Associate Athletic Director" and things to their foundation members.

Perhaps the kerfuffle is because of some laws specific to Arkansas? 

The kerfuffle is because of the GSD.  The same reason why you see people pissed about Fayetteville being listed as the best place to live in Arkansas and one of the best places to live in the United States.
WORK FOR IT
PLAN ON IT
EARN IT
OMAHOGS

factchecker

Quote from: WoooPigBrewie on February 18, 2018, 04:45:07 pm
I mean, how earth shattering is this tidbit, "The UA committed to help the foundation raise more money from students by better promoting its 'Collegiate Membership' program."

I read that god awful click bait article thinking that they were starting to charge mandatory fees like the other instate schools.... nope - just the collegiate membership program that has been going on since 2013.

My daughter was a collegiate member.  It cost an additional $15 to the $85 athletic pass.  The membership granted her early access to big games.  They had a crawfish boil.  They got to go to a couple open practices for football and meet with Mike Anderson for basketball. They also got a pretty cool t-shirt which probably cost more than the membership fees.  They also got to start accumulating priority points and learned about the foundation which made the transition easy after graduation.

The best thing about the collegiate membership program was that it was OPTIONAL.  She paid a total of $100 for a year pass to all Razorback athletics.

Compare that to the stolen money that jonesboro tech, conway college, and university of absolutely last resort take from their students via mandatory athletic fees.

jonesboro tech charges a mandatory $19.00 per credit hour fee for their students to support the red pups.  That is $285 a semester ($570 a year)  stolen from students.

Makes you wonder why the democrap gazette of lil rock doesn't do a story on that program.
WORK FOR IT
PLAN ON IT
EARN IT
OMAHOGS

Karma

Quote from: NuttinItUp on February 19, 2018, 09:35:42 am
Can you explain it a little better? Why can't the Razorback Foundation use the trademarks/images if the UA has no problem with them using said trademarks/images?

I am not arguing with you. I legitimately do not understand how that could be the case.
One of the requirements of a trademark is that you defend your trademark. You can't "loan it out" without a licensing or some other agreement. There is an assumption that if the trademark is on it, then the organization owning the trademark is placing it there. It's why if you buy a "Coca-Cola" you know you are getting the real thing. By the university giving the trademark to the foundation, they are implying that these organizations are commonly controlled. If that is true, then the foundation is a part of the public university and is subject to FOIA requests.

NuttinItUp

Quote from: Karma on February 19, 2018, 01:06:43 pm
One of the requirements of a trademark is that you defend your trademark. You can't "loan it out" without a licensing or some other agreement. There is an assumption that if the trademark is on it, then the organization owning the trademark is placing it there. It's why if you buy a "Coca-Cola" you know you are getting the real thing. By the university giving the trademark to the foundation, they are implying that these organizations are commonly controlled. If that is true, then the foundation is a part of the public university and is subject to FOIA requests.

Is there any requirement on how much they have to charge the foundation? Like, could they charge the foundation $1/year to use it, or does it have to be commensurate with what they charge other entities who use it?

hawg66

A nonprofit raising money for the school vs a private company in it for a profit. Seems like a significant difference to me.

NuttinItUp

Quote from: hawg66 on February 19, 2018, 01:24:16 pm
A nonprofit raising money for the school vs a private company in it for a profit. Seems like a significant difference to me.

Good point. Are there any other nonprofits (other than the foundation) that are licensed to use the logos/trademarks?

Maybe they should have a policy of nonprofits getting it for free or at a significant discount vs. for-profit entities.

 

hawg66

It's also a nonprofit raising revenue for another nonprofit. If any nonprofit (UA) brings in a fundraiser I'm pretty sure they're going to allow the fundraiser to use their logos and trademarks without a fee.

Karma

Quote from: NuttinItUp on February 19, 2018, 01:13:18 pm
Is there any requirement on how much they have to charge the foundation? Like, could they charge the foundation $1/year to use it, or does it have to be commensurate with what they charge other entities who use it?
They can license it to whoever they want, but run the risk of making all foundation records subject to FOIA.

NuttinItUp

Quote from: Karma on February 19, 2018, 02:03:53 pm
They can license it to whoever they want, but run the risk of making all foundation records subject to FOIA.

Ok, I am understanding a bit better now.

Options:
1) UA can let foundation use trademarks for free but then they appear to be one-and-the same entity and are subject to freedom of information (FOI) requests. (Foundation is public option.)
2) UA can defend it's trademarks and/or charge the foundation to use them, thereby making them appear more like separate entities so that the foundation would not be subject to FOI requests like the university is. (Foundation is private option.)

What you are saying is that the foundation wants to have their cake and eat it too. They want the best of both options. (to both not be subject to FOI requests and also not pay the licensing fees)

Thank you for clarifying for dummies such as myself that didn't understand.

redeye

Quote from: factchecker on February 19, 2018, 11:49:32 am
The kerfuffle is because of the GSD.  The same reason why you see people pissed about Fayetteville being listed as the best place to live in Arkansas and one of the best places to live in the United States.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone pissed because Fayetteville was listed as a best place to live.  Any idea that this ever happens is extremely ludicrous and naive.

ricepig

Quote from: NuttinItUp on February 19, 2018, 01:13:18 pm
Is there any requirement on how much they have to charge the foundation? Like, could they charge the foundation $1/year to use it, or does it have to be commensurate with what they charge other entities who use it?

The University can charge or not charge anyone they choose. 

Rudy Baylor


ricepig


TebowHater

Quote from: Doofus on February 19, 2018, 09:00:06 am
The ADG's issue is that the UA uses the Foundation's status as a private entity to avoid their FOIA requests. 

In the course of several articles, the ADG appears to be attempting to make the case that the Foundation is essentially part of the UA and, therefore, subject to FOIA.

As a practical matter, I think we could all agree that the Foundation serves at the UA's whim.  As a legal matter, I am unsure what hurdles must be overcome to demonstrate this.

It would seem that sharing a copyrighted logo would be one indicator that they are really one and the same.

Great first post! What's your role at ADG? While we're at it, do you think exposing information of donors (hint: your readers and advertisers) is going to make those groups happy with you? Just wondering.

Quote from: ricepig on February 19, 2018, 02:50:49 pm
The University can charge or not charge anyone they choose.

Correct.

Karma

Quote from: ricepig on February 19, 2018, 02:50:49 pm
The University can charge or not charge anyone they choose. 
True, but there are FOIA implications they are trying to avoid.

WoooPigBrewie

Someone should sue the Board of Trustees...

They have likely been violating the 501(c)(3) Private Benefit Doctrine for years...

"The IRS furthermore acknowledges, 'genuine public benefit often provides an incidental benefit to private individuals.' The key is that such benefit to a private individual must be incidental both qualitatively (i.e., the private benefit is a mere byproduct of the public benefit) and quantitatively (i.e., the private benefit is insubstantial in amount)."

Some things that could raise a cause for concern include: entering into transactions on unreasonable or unfavorable terms to the organization (see Nutt, Long, and Bielema contracts); engaging in substantial activities not clearly in furtherance of the organization's exempt purposes (the exempt purpose is educational, I would love to see them squirm on this one); conferring benefits to private parties beyond the scope necessary to further the organization's exempt purposes (see Long, Nutt, and Bielema contract); and failing to consider alternative sources or comparative prices when purchasing goods and services (see Coke v. Pepsi, just kidding).

DIAMOND BOWL BABY!
DIAMOND BOWL BABY!

Inhogswetrust

Quote from: Karma on February 19, 2018, 01:06:43 pm
One of the requirements of a trademark is that you defend your trademark. You can't "loan it out" without a licensing or some other agreement. There is an assumption that if the trademark is on it, then the organization owning the trademark is placing it there. It's why if you buy a "Coca-Cola" you know you are getting the real thing. By the university giving the trademark to the foundation, they are implying that these organizations are commonly controlled. If that is true, then the foundation is a part of the public university and is subject to FOIA requests.

Your opinion. So lawyers with the Foundation and those lawyers employed by the University disagree. Especially since the University isn't giving it to the Foundation because they receive value in return.
If I'm going to cheer players and coaches in victory, I damn sure ought to be man enough to stand with them in defeat.

"Why some people are so drawn to the irrational is something that has always puzzled me" - James Randi

Karma

Quote from: Inhogswetrust on February 19, 2018, 06:23:50 pm
Your opinion. So lawyers with the Foundation and those lawyers employed by the University disagree. Especially since the University isn't giving it to the Foundation because they receive value in return.

what's the basis of your legal opinion?

Horse racer

From the various city/state boards I have sat on it has always been that Arkansas has some of the most strict FOI laws, maybe that's why other states/universities can issue .edu emails and ours can't ? It will be interesting to see if new legislation is presented in the next session to change the laws and who is pushing for it. As always follow the money

Inhogswetrust

Quote from: Karma on February 19, 2018, 06:34:37 pm
what's the basis of your legal opinion?

Not mine. I don't have one. I did work for a lawyer on the Foundation board at one time. I guarantee if it was an issue for him it would not be as it is. The ones with the legal opinion that matters is the Foundation and the University.
If I'm going to cheer players and coaches in victory, I damn sure ought to be man enough to stand with them in defeat.

"Why some people are so drawn to the irrational is something that has always puzzled me" - James Randi

Nashville Fan

u of A should fully perfect their trademark by charging foundation. Foundation then shorts donations by the expenses. you end up the same spot moneywise and Both sides are protected. You don't want someone suing for public domain because not everyone is paying to use the TMs.
Pittman or Bust!

NuttinItUp

Quote from: Nashville Fan on February 19, 2018, 07:27:54 pm
u of A should fully perfect their trademark by charging foundation. Foundation then shorts donations by the expenses. you end up the same spot moneywise and Both sides are protected. You don't want someone suing for public domain because not everyone is paying to use the TMs.

Yeah, I guess the University gets the same amount of money either way in that scenario.

I mean, I guess the lawyers might get slightly more in that scenario for drawing up the extra paperwork.

Nashville Fan

Quote from: NuttinItUp on February 19, 2018, 08:35:58 pm
Yeah, I guess the University gets the same amount of money either way in that scenario.

I mean, I guess the lawyers might get slightly more in that scenario for drawing up the extra paperwork.
Lawyers will get their cut either way.  That's why they are lawyers. :)
Pittman or Bust!

Karma

Quote from: Inhogswetrust on February 19, 2018, 06:40:00 pm
Not mine. I don't have one. I did work for a lawyer on the Foundation board at one time. I guarantee if it was an issue for him it would not be as it is. The ones with the legal opinion that matters is the Foundation and the University.
Actually the only legal opinion that matters is the judge's.

Porked Tongue

No case here if they are questioning the "University of Arkansas,Fayetteville"

No such thing exists.


Karma

Quote from: Porked Tongue on February 19, 2018, 09:03:13 pm
No case here if they are questioning the "University of Arkansas,Fayetteville"

No such thing exists.


You may want to let the University of Arkansas system know

https://www.uasys.edu/campuses-affiliates/

WoooPigBrewie

Quote from: Karma on February 19, 2018, 09:49:08 pm
You may want to let the University of Arkansas system know

https://www.uasys.edu/campuses-affiliates/
The University of Arkansas System office is likely too busy conspiring with the University of Arkansas Board Trustees on how they can continue to approve ludicrous contracts (across all fronts), while indirectly benefiting themselves.

The money flows as it goes...
DIAMOND BOWL BABY!

Porked Tongue

Quote from: Karma on February 19, 2018, 09:49:08 pm
You may want to let the University of Arkansas system know

https://www.uasys.edu/campuses-affiliates/


Point taken. I should have clarified from an athletic formality.

Karma

Quote from: Porked Tongue on February 19, 2018, 10:17:09 pm
Point taken. I should have clarified from an athletic formality.
I hate when the ADG does that. It's silly.

IronHog

Quote from: Porked Tongue on February 19, 2018, 09:03:13 pm
No case here if they are questioning the "University of Arkansas,Fayetteville"

No such thing exists.




True


But there is a UA of wants to be at n Texas so bad it can't stand it SW MO campus 🙄
Iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens another.

Inhogswetrust

If I'm going to cheer players and coaches in victory, I damn sure ought to be man enough to stand with them in defeat.

"Why some people are so drawn to the irrational is something that has always puzzled me" - James Randi

Karma