per AJC: significant announcement for GT football

GYI0059081558_crop_450x500.jpg
 
txsting said:
My take was that Bud and DRad had their tails between their legs and they had no choice but to move forward. I definitely expect no appeal based on the conciliatory language in the release and verbally in the presser. Drad did say he disagreed with some things, namely that anything was done below board, but that's an easy crutch. It sounded like DRad kept Hewitt's Teflon shield after he was let go.
Click to expand...
You, sir, are clueless. They said they disagreed with the most important parts of the ruling in the strongest language that was proper to use at this moment in time.
 
jacket1515 said:
This is bullshit:

On Thursday August 19, 2010, Assistant Director of Athletics for Compliance Paul Parker
received a telephone call and an e-mail from a fan informing him of comments posted on
Facebook by Dede Campbell. ... They were not disassociated due to their sincere belief about
not realizing they still retained booster status and their extreme remorsefulness over the​
violation (See Exhibit 7-1).
Click to expand...

Please tell me that Exhibit 7-1 is simply a photo of D*d* and Archie as the only evidence the NCAA needs that the two are too dumb to have done something like this wrong intentionally.
 
ND_jacket said:
They played it very diplomatically. When the body that sanctioned you is also the body that will hear the appeal (yes, different committee, but still NCAA), you don't rain down fire and brimstone during the presser. You write a very strong appeal. I've not worked extensively with Bud, but I worked with Dan a good deal as a student leader and he was definitely playing his cards exactly the way he needed to here.
Click to expand...

I believe he did too. I believed both him and Bud kept their cool, while voicing some obvious disagreements with the bastards findings. They did fine.
 
ND_jacket said:
They played it very diplomatically. When the body that sanctioned you is also the body that will hear the appeal (yes, different committee, but still NCAA), you don't rain down fire and brimstone during the presser. You write a very strong appeal. I've not worked extensively with Bud, but I worked with Dan a good deal as a student leader and he was definitely playing his cards exactly the way he needed to here.
Click to expand...

This. But I would say that they used pretty strong language for polite company.

Has the ACC issued a press release or statement on this?
 
txsting said:
Drad freely admitted to taking the matter to CPJ. It's in the report, and it was said again, by him, in the presser.

Drad screwed this up, SEC-style.
Click to expand...

Did you listen to the press conference? He said he had to talk to CPJ because he had to get it on the student's schedule, and CPJ manages his schedule.

DRAD's only "wrongdoing" in this entire thing was not informing the NCAA first that he was going to have to talk to CPJ to set the appointment up.
 
You guys are giving Heather too much credit. I expect her first question was a sincere level-one question: "If the NCAA vacates a win for which the coach received a huge bonus by contract, does this ruling, de jure, negate his bonus?"

It's the kind of question college students ask when they want to sound thoughtful but haven't done the assigned readings.
 
TechSBP said:
This. But I would say that they used pretty strong language for polite company.

Has the ACC issued a press release or statement on this?
Click to expand...

Yes. The ACC plans to retroactively award the championship to UNC.
 
Definitely under investigation. Thanks Calvin Booker for supplying random öööö to Bebe through your agent yay!
 
JacketFan77 said:
Really? That's the BIG DEAL? As DRad said, the student would have gone to CPJ as soon as the NCAA contacted him. Is it really our fault that the NCAA has some retarted SOP for interviewing student athletes under investigation? For most of them, their coach is like their second father. Give me a ööööing break. DRad's only öööö up was overlooking that the NCAA rules are not common sense rules.
Click to expand...

I don't see why the player going to CPJ would make a difference. CPJ would say "I have no idea what's going on". So what? DRad claims he did this out of the idea of having an open, truth-based relationship with CPJ. Well, i hope CPJ would be able to understand it if DRad told him "i'm not allowed to discuss it with you, per NCAA rules". This explanation just rings really hollow.

We are in the NCAA. Hate the NCAA, but we agree to play by their rules, no? We're told the rules in one breath and break them in the next. Understand you're upset, but what is really unclear here?
 
TechSBP said:
This. But I would say that they used pretty strong language for polite company.

Has the ACC issued a press release or statement on this?
Click to expand...
There were definitely a couple of moments where their true feelings were abundantly clear. I don't think anything the NCAA can point to and say "OMG, look what you said!", however. They also did a very good job of admitting to mistakes and describing corrective actions. It's the "Yes, we made mistakes, but you don't have this 100% correct, so let's meet in the middle on these sanctions." response. Honestly, if we got the earlier wins we had to vacate reinstated (we'd been misapplying an eligibility rule for multiple years, which is really a big oversight problem), the mea cupla here should be enough to keep the ACC title.

Also curious about a statement from the girl up in NC.
 
AE 87 said:
That dude looks like my old calc prof. He used to erase the bottom of the chalk board as he wrote at the top.
Click to expand...

As I said earlier. Al Groh needs to find this man, and check on his eligibility. Maybe work on some conditioning.
 
AE 87 said:
You guys are giving Heather too much credit. I expect her first question was a sincere level-one question: "If the NCAA vacates a win for which the coach received a huge bonus by contract, does this ruling, de jure, negate his bonus?"

It's the kind of question college students ask when they want to sound thoughtful but haven't done the assigned readings.
Click to expand...
That was my take on her question, too. She's not smart, but she's not so dumb that she'd insinuate such a thing about CPJ. She knows he can't stand her already.
 
ND_jacket said:
That was my take on her question, too. She's not smart, but she's not so dumb that she'd insinuate such a thing about CPJ. She knows he can't stand her already.
Click to expand...
You know what kind of question you ask if CPJ doesn't like you...?

You shut your damn mouth.
 
beej67 said:
Did you listen to the press conference? He said he had to talk to CPJ because he had to get it on the student's schedule, and CPJ manages his schedule.

DRAD's only "wrongdoing" in this entire thing was not informing the NCAA first that he was going to have to talk to CPJ to set the appointment up.
Click to expand...

The report indicates that the discussion between CPJ and the SA covered more than just scheduling. Namely, he was asked about the issue. CPJ could schedule the interview without knowing what's up, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top