Pastner cleared of Ron Bell lies

[1979jacket]

Forget recruiting - forget our record. Just like I don't want Pitino coaching Ga Tech I also don't want a definite goof ball and possible slanter of the truth -I'm trying to be nice - coaching Ga Tech. He has proved already he is a goof ball by being associated with Bell. I absolutely do not go for the story of the "make a wish". It insults my intelligence.

 

[dtm1997]

Forget recruiting - forget our record. Just like I don't want Pitino coaching Ga Tech I also don't want a definite goof ball and possible slanter of the truth -I'm trying to be nice - coaching Ga Tech. He has proved already he is a goof ball by being associated with Bell. I absolutely do not go for the story of the "make a wish". It insults my intelligence.

If you don't want a possible slanter of the truth as a Men's College Basketball Head Coach, you may as well stop watching Men's College Basketball.

 

[Peacone36]

Forget recruiting - forget our record. Just like I don't want Pitino coaching Ga Tech I also don't want a definite goof ball and possible slanter of the truth -I'm trying to be nice - coaching Ga Tech. He has proved already he is a goof ball by being associated with Bell. I absolutely do not go for the story of the "make a wish". It insults my intelligence.

Given those guidelines, I’d love to hear a quality suggestion as to who we hire...

 

[TooTall]

Gregg Marshall

 

[1979jacket]

Given those guidelines, I’d love to hear a quality suggestion as to who we hire...

I don't care - somebody else. I am not an athletic director and neither are you.

 

[dtm1997]

I don't care - somebody else. I am not an athletic director and neither are you.

99% of potential candidates in Men's College Basketball are possible slanters of the truth, which you don't want.

Then again, you don't care.

That brings us back to Rick Pitino.

 

[smokey_wasp]

https://www.dukebasketballreport.co...chs-josh-pastner-possibly-in-big-trouble-ncaa

Duke basketball report has picked up the AJC story. Are they trolling us suggesting we hire Duggar Baucom? Lol

 

[slugboy]

99% of potential candidates in Men's College Basketball are possible slanters of the truth, which you don't want.

Then again, you don't care.

That brings us back to Rick Pitino.

Well, Pitino doesn’t “slant” the truth; he’s in another orbit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Peacone36]

I don't care - somebody else. I am not an athletic director and neither are you.

But you do care...because you just told us who you DONT want...

 

[1979jacket]

But you do care...because you just told us who you DONT want...

From your comments, it sounds like you want to keep CJP. What will it take for you to lose your loyalty to him?

 

[YlJacket]

From your comments, it sounds like you want to keep CJP. What will it take for you to lose your loyalty to him?

The ability to have sufficient resources to hire a legit staff. We don't have that. Until we do - we don't. And until we do CJP gets every chance to prove he can put a legit ACC team on the court - whether it be via transfers or HS or pulling kids out of the stands. In reality, even if the NCAA does lodge a charge against him for slanting the truth I am not sure I fire him for cause even if it means no buy out as on the surface we don't have the resources to hire a legit ACC staff. Reality sucks.

If Todd has a multi million dollar donor waiting in the wings for CJP to go then things change - but that is a low probability and Tech ADs have been left holding the bag in buyouts/coaching commitments before.

 

[RonJohn]

https://www.dukebasketballreport.co...chs-josh-pastner-possibly-in-big-trouble-ncaa

Duke basketball report has picked up the AJC story. Are they trolling us suggesting we hire Duggar Baucom? Lol

This type of reaction is the reason that I think the AJC story is bad. The AJC writer didn't find new pictures of Bell in the locker room, they were available to the NCAA when Pastner made his comments. The AJC writer didn't find new video of Bell opening a package with a basketball, it was available to the NCAA when Pastner made his comments. The NCAA had access to everything in the entire article before they made decisions about what allegations to make. The only information that the AJC writer gained access to recently was the interview tapes. Since the NCAA conducted those interviews, they had access to them as soon as anyone.

There are things in this story that are bad for Pastner. Those things have been in the public for at least a year, and almost two for most of them. The dukebasketballreport article says that the AJC article is full of details. However, the details are along the lines of:

• The NCAA didn't ask questions that this AJC writer wishes they did.
• Pastner didn't fully explain situations that the NCAA didn't inquire about.

If those types of assertions are allowed to become "proof" that he wasn't truthful, then how about the following assertions:

• NCAA investigators failed to ask a certain mutt running back about a Trans-Am.
• NCAA investigators failed to ask Coach K about payments to Williamson.
• NCAA investigators failed to ask Justin Fields how much money he was paid to sign with the mutts.
• NCAA investigators failed to ask me if I violated the speed limit in the last week.

The NCAA not asking questions isn't "proof" that you misled them. Not explaining details that the NCAA doesn't ask about isn't "proof" that you misled them. Pictures of RB in a location that CJP said he didn't allow him to go aren't "proof" that CJP misled the investigators. Video of RB supposedly opening a package years ago isn't "proof" that CJP misled the investigators about how many packages he sent to RB.

The article could have pointed out the Bell pictures and video and questioned whether CJP told the truth. Instead the article listed those as falsehoods and mixed them with general "they didn't ask" type statements. If you want to find the truth, you look into actual questions and try to get the answers. If you want to write a hit piece, then you mix unanswered questions with general vague statements and hint at something untoward. Which way was this AJC article written?

 

[dtm1997]

From your comments, it sounds like you want to keep CJP. What will it take for you to lose your loyalty to him?

The ability to have sufficient resources to hire a legit staff. We don't have that. Until we do - we don't. And until we do CJP gets every chance to prove he can put a legit ACC team on the court - whether it be via transfers or HS or pulling kids out of the stands. In reality, even if the NCAA does lodge a charge against him for slanting the truth I am not sure I fire him for cause even if it means no buy out as on the surface we don't have the resources to hire a legit ACC staff. Reality sucks.

If Todd has a multi million dollar donor waiting in the wings for CJP to go then things change - but that is a low probability and Tech ADs have been left holding the bag in buyouts/coaching commitments before.

Most of those, including myself to a degree, remain supportive of Pastner's efforts because of what @YlJacket lays out. Not because we think he's necessarily the long term solution at GT.

Also, supportive does not equate to loyalty.

@1979jacket - if you're eager for CJP's removal today because of this article, look in the mirror and ask yourself these 2 questions:

1) Where am I coming up with $7MM-$8MM to buy out the current staff?
2) Where am I coming up with another $15MM-$25MM to properly fund a new, top flight staff?

It's been reiterated ad nauseum that the GTAA doesn't have the answers to those questions right now.

 

[dtm1997]

This type of reaction is the reason that I think the AJC story is bad. The AJC writer didn't find new pictures of Bell in the locker room, they were available to the NCAA when Pastner made his comments. The AJC writer didn't find new video of Bell opening a package with a basketball, it was available to the NCAA when Pastner made his comments. The NCAA had access to everything in the entire article before they made decisions about what allegations to make. The only information that the AJC writer gained access to recently was the interview tapes. Since the NCAA conducted those interviews, they had access to them as soon as anyone.

There are things in this story that are bad for Pastner. Those things have been in the public for at least a year, and almost two for most of them. The dukebasketballreport article says that the AJC article is full of details. However, the details are along the lines of:

• The NCAA didn't ask questions that this AJC writer wishes they did.
• Pastner didn't fully explain situations that the NCAA didn't inquire about.

If those types of assertions are allowed to become "proof" that he wasn't truthful, then how about the following assertions:

• NCAA investigators failed to ask a certain mutt running back about a Trans-Am.
• NCAA investigators failed to ask Coach K about payments to Williamson.
• NCAA investigators failed to ask Justin Fields how much money he was paid to sign with the mutts.
• NCAA investigators failed to ask me if I violated the speed limit in the last week.

The NCAA not asking questions isn't "proof" that you misled them. Not explaining details that the NCAA doesn't ask about isn't "proof" that you misled them. Pictures of RB in a location that CJP said he didn't allow him to go aren't "proof" that CJP misled the investigators. Video of RB supposedly opening a package years ago isn't "proof" that CJP misled the investigators about how many packages he sent to RB.

The article could have pointed out the Bell pictures and video and questioned whether CJP told the truth. Instead the article listed those as falsehoods and mixed them with general "they didn't ask" type statements. If you want to find the truth, you look into actual questions and try to get the answers. If you want to write a hit piece, then you mix unanswered questions with general vague statements and hint at something untoward. Which way was this AJC article written?

One of the things many people learn as they go through life and especially in business careers, don't answer questions that haven't been asked. It's only going to lead to more questions that may cross you up over time.

Not putting forth info to unasked questions is not the same as lying to someone.

 

[ESPNjacket]

Not putting forth info to unasked questions is not the same as lying to someone.

When I read the article originally I thought the author lacked competence. After thinking about it I believe the author is malicious. The spin is intentionally dishonest.

 

[dtm1997]

When I read the article originally I thought the author lacked competence. After thinking about it I believe the author is malicious. The spin is intentionally dishonest.

I said this elsewhere. The author conveniently used the term "shaded the truth". He never said Pastner lied.

In my opinion, he never said that because he couldn't outright prove it and if he published it as Pastner lying, he's basically committed libel and left himself open to litigation. What's one more lawsuit for Pastner right now?

This Ron Bell **** is annoying, but there's no purpose for it to remain in the news other than driving clicks and bad publicity.

 

[kg01]

Is this writer a dawg?

 

[Peacone36]

From your comments, it sounds like you want to keep CJP. What will it take for you to lose your loyalty to him?

Ha. If you don’t know $***, don’t talk about $***

 

[ESPNjacket]

Is this writer a dawg?

I looked him up. His last dozen or so stories are just some guy throwing rocks at stuff.

GT fans with a dwag obsession is always funny. Thank you for contributing that angle.

 

[YlJacket]

One of the things many people learn as they go through life and especially in business careers, don't answer questions that haven't been asked. It's only going to lead to more questions that may cross you up over time.

Not putting forth info to unasked questions is not the same as lying to someone.

Having been deposed several times - and more importantly having been prepared by lawyers to be deposed several times - that is the key thing they keep pounding into your head. Make your answers short and very specific to what is being asked. Don't elaborate. And if you don't know say so. As the NCAA interview was essentially a deposition, that is exactly what CJP was supposed to do. In reality, the lawyers I have dealt with would tell CJP he was too chatty in his answers.