This is the definitive place to discuss everything that makes life on & off campus so unique in Central Virginia.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

#491018
Sly Fox wrote:This is a really bad look for LCA. No getting around it. I'm not impacted directly like Yacht Rock but from my distant view, I don't place blame on LU in this case. I see this as LCA dropping the ball.
While LCA may have been the entity actually doing the advertizing, IMHO Liberty has a degree of culpibility in this. With so much money on the line, why would we allow LCA to publish ads making promises willy-nilly without scrutinizing them? In fact, I would think when the decision was made by LU to make these changes, LCA should have been instructed specifically to change their ads as well as what they told prospective students and their parents in person, to reflect the new reality. I certainly hope this does not reach a point where the university simply puts the blame on LCA and uses whatever legal seperations exist to absolve themselves. LCA obviously does not have the resources to fulfill what they promised.
Last edited by olldflame on September 9th, 2015, 10:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
#491021
olldflame wrote:
Sly Fox wrote:This is a really bad look for LCA. No getting around it. I'm not impacted directly like Yacht Rock but from my distant view, I don't place blame on LU in this case. I see this as LCA dropping the ball.
While LCA may have been the entity actually doing the advertizing, IMHO Liberty has a degree of culpibility in this. With so much money on the line, why would we allow LCA to publish ads making promises willy-nilly without scrutinizing them? In fact, I would think when the decision was made by LU to make these changes, LCA should have been instructed specifically to change their ads to reflect the new reality. I certainly hope this does not reach a point where the university simply puts the blame on LCA and uses whatever legal seperations exist to absolve themselves. LCA obviously does not have the resources to fulfill what they promised.
This is where I put my money
#491024
Humble_Opinion wrote:So the links posted by YR that provided the ads and statements made by LCA don't work now for me... I receive an 'Error 404' telling me that they were deleted or are no longer available.
Yacht Rock wrote:I chortle audibly.

That's not surprising.

Nothing to see here folks. Move along.
Transparency. :lol:
Last edited by adam42381 on September 9th, 2015, 10:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
#491030
Purple Haize wrote:
SuperJon wrote:We can't micromanage what other organizations tell their students about us. This is on LCA, not Liberty.
Yet LU was the one with the money
They were making promises with Liberty´s $$$. If we knew about it, we should have stopped it. If we didn´t know about it, we should have known about it. There is no way of getting around the fact that even though it looks like the primary blame is with LCA, Liberty´s reputation will take a big hit if they take too hard a line on this.
#491031
olldflame wrote:
Purple Haize wrote:
SuperJon wrote:We can't micromanage what other organizations tell their students about us. This is on LCA, not Liberty.
Yet LU was the one with the money
They were making promises with Liberty´s $$$. If we knew about it, we should have stopped it. If we didn´t know about it, we should have known about it. There is no way of getting around the fact that even though it looks like the primary blame is with LCA, Liberty´s reputation will take a big hit if they take too hard a line on this.
I'm not sure they care.
#491058
Any time you have to rely on the fine print, you're in a losing situation. Not legally, but publicity-wise (and sometimes morally).

And maybe I'm getting the gist of the decision wrong, but I don't see what's wrong with a wealthier family taking full advantage of the scholarship. Why is spreading the aid around on a need basis more "fair" than rescinding on a promise made? Even if the promise was not legally binding.

This won't hurt LU in the long run, but it does hurt LCA.
#491074
ALUmnus wrote:Any time you have to rely on the fine print, you're in a losing situation. Not legally, but publicity-wise (and sometimes morally).

And maybe I'm getting the gist of the decision wrong, but I don't see what's wrong with a wealthier family taking full advantage of the scholarship. Why is spreading the aid around on a need basis more "fair" than rescinding on a promise made? Even if the promise was not legally binding.

This won't hurt LU in the long run, but it does hurt LCA.
There was absolutely nothing wrong with a wealthy family or anyone else taking advantage of the offer that was previously on the table. Liberty just decided they wanted to use different criteria to disperse the same funds in a way they deem more fair and appropriate. I don´t think anyone is questioning LU´s responsibility to follow through with promises they have made. We are dealing here with promises LCA apparently made, which they had no right to make under the new policy.

This has the potential to get very ugly. I hope and pray the 2 brothers who are ultimately responsible for these legally seperate but historically intertwined organizations will be granted the wisdom to resolve it before it gets to that.
#491078
This was a business decision on the part of LU and if you ask me, it was a good one. Removing the pain it caused YR and other parents in this situation, it only makes sense. LU has no legal authority to meddle in and investigate the business of LCA and how they market themselves. What I am wondering is where is TRBC in all of this?
#491108
Having graduated from LU back in the 80s and living in another state, I have no dog in this fight but my interest was piqued as I serve as an independent arbitrator for companies who are contractually obligated to settle their civil disputes prior to litigation. Virginia is not one of my states. I agree with Sly Fox on this. This one is on LCA. LU gave notice several years in advance of a possible change. I remember that announcement and I live in PA. That's more than can be expected from LU. Other institutions change scholarships on a year to year basis based upon giving, needs etc.

Having looked at the documents supplied by YR, however, it does not appear the leadership at LCA shares the same sense of urgency to be transparent on this issue. LCA's leadership team would have final editorial rights on those documents, especially page 50 of the current Student Handbook. There is no way to pass that off on an underling willing to say anything to boost his monthly recruitment totals.

If LCA does have a blank copy of a document, signed by prospective students, that clearly delineates the tenuous position of the scholarship, they might want to make that public, quickly. Without some sort of grandfather clause, they look really bad right now.

On a side note, count me as one person very excited to have sideline passes in Morgantown this weekend. Go Flames.
#491113
Yacht Rock wrote:
rogers3 wrote:
JK37 wrote:I don't care if somekne gives $100k or not: the furthest that person can go is to sugget how the money they have should be used. But even then, it's a gift. Furthermore, no gift grants someone the right to say what should or should be. Being an alum doesn't grant that right either. JJ knows this and believes it. It's why Liberty isn't interested in private development. People who give always want a seat at the table or something else in return.

Liberty's response: keep your money. Even moreso now because they we need it.

And, I'm okay with that.
A little snippet of an earlier conversation. One response was "that's life." Well, not the same case, but the expectation that an organization like LU should act a certain way is shared. That being said, my wife and I, both LCA grads, chose another private school that has never been included in LU's program. We are hoping that educational attainment will help with future college needs. One other thing to think about- college in 10 years won't look like college today. There will likely be opportunities in the future for students that we don't really see right now. Some faculty I've spoken with are pleased with this change. They feel that it is time to reward excellent students rather than give scholarships for efforts that aren't always top-notch. Hopefully, parents at LCA will be as demanding of the school in their educational excellence versus the over-emphasis on athletics.
#491114
Yacht Rock wrote:Pastor Jonathan said he wished there was something he could do to change LU's decision.
isn't that dude related to somebody at LU?
#491115
For what it's worth, I just reviewed every document we signed when enrolling in LCA. None of the documents state that LU's scholarship was subject to change or was temporary. So there wasn't a contract where we acknowledged that this "temporary arrangement" existed.
#491117
rogers3 wrote: A little snippet of an earlier conversation. One response was "that's life." Well, not the same case, but the expectation that an organization like LU should act a certain way is shared. That being said, my wife and I, both LCA grads, chose another private school that has never been included in LU's program. We are hoping that educational attainment will help with future college needs. One other thing to think about- college in 10 years won't look like college today. There will likely be opportunities in the future for students that we don't really see right now. Some faculty I've spoken with are pleased with this change. They feel that it is time to reward excellent students rather than give scholarships for efforts that aren't always top-notch. Hopefully, parents at LCA will be as demanding of the school in their educational excellence versus the over-emphasis on athletics.
Well I think it's a little different when there is an explicit promise made by an organization. Whether that organization was LCA or Liberty. I wouldn't expect anything if it wasn't implied.
#491118
Yacht Rock wrote:For what it's worth, I just reviewed every document we signed when enrolling in LCA. None of the documents state that LU's scholarship was subject to change or was temporary. So there wasn't a contract where we acknowledged that this "temporary arrangement" existed.
If that's the case, this could be a serious legal issue. Do you have copies of everything you signed?
#491119
adam42381 wrote:
Yacht Rock wrote:For what it's worth, I just reviewed every document we signed when enrolling in LCA. None of the documents state that LU's scholarship was subject to change or was temporary. So there wasn't a contract where we acknowledged that this "temporary arrangement" existed.
If that's the case, this could be a serious legal issue. Do you have copies of everything you signed?
I do. I'm wary of going that route as a Christian though. While I don't feel what was done was right, if the business can't do the right thing, do I want to keep my kids there? I don't know. Definitely need a lot of prayer. A reporter from WDBJ7 reached out to my wife (not sure how they got her information) and wanted to come over for an interview. We declined. I'll leave that for other parents for now. It sounds like they will be covering the parent's side later today though.
#491120
Yacht Rock wrote:
adam42381 wrote:
Yacht Rock wrote:For what it's worth, I just reviewed every document we signed when enrolling in LCA. None of the documents state that LU's scholarship was subject to change or was temporary. So there wasn't a contract where we acknowledged that this "temporary arrangement" existed.
If that's the case, this could be a serious legal issue. Do you have copies of everything you signed?
I do. I'm wary of going that route as a Christian though. While I don't feel what was done was right, if the business can't do the right thing, do I want to keep my kids there? I don't know. Definitely need a lot of prayer. A reporter from WDBJ7 reached out to my wife (not sure how they got her information) and wanted to come over for an interview. We declined. I'll leave that for other parents for now. It sounds like they will be covering the parent's side later today though.
Sometimes you have to protect your interests when you've been wronged. I'm not positive this is one of those situations, but it seems possible. I would wait to see how this plays out before ruling out consulting an attorney.
#491122
Yacht Rock wrote:
rogers3 wrote: A little snippet of an earlier conversation. One response was "that's life." Well, not the same case, but the expectation that an organization like LU should act a certain way is shared. That being said, my wife and I, both LCA grads, chose another private school that has never been included in LU's program. We are hoping that educational attainment will help with future college needs. One other thing to think about- college in 10 years won't look like college today. There will likely be opportunities in the future for students that we don't really see right now. Some faculty I've spoken with are pleased with this change. They feel that it is time to reward excellent students rather than give scholarships for efforts that aren't always top-notch. Hopefully, parents at LCA will be as demanding of the school in their educational excellence versus the over-emphasis on athletics.
Well I think it's a little different when there is an explicit promise made by an organization. Whether that organization was LCA or Liberty. I wouldn't expect anything if it wasn't implied.
I think that I acknowledged the difference. Moreso, I was pointing out how easily a Christian can take the "that's life" attitude unless it is their pocket that loses out.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 9
Dondi Costin - LU President

Ive gone there a few times since moving to texas[…]

NCAA Realignment Megathread

Duke Gonzaga B12? https://larrybrownsports.com/co[…]

FlameFans Fantasy Baseball

We are on!!! Hope to see everyone tonight at 9:30[…]

Another player that most people who post on here[…]