So what did Joseph do?

[slugboy]

From an HR and legal position, Machelle Joseph and the grad assistant can talk, but the athletic association is more limited in what they can say. That’s going to color perceptions of this episode.

If I were to guess, the “no unobserved contact with players” rule that cost the grad assistant her job would give me a lot to guess from.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jophish17]

Man, I saw this headline and thought “crap! Did the NCAA find the bags I’ve been dropping?”

Tech athletics continues to deliver the drama

 

[MWBATL]

Man, I saw this headline and thought “crap! Did the NCAA find the bags I’ve been dropping?”

Tech athletics continues to deliver the drama

Just not many meaningful wins

 

[ncjacket79]

This just keeps making less sense to me as time goes on.

GT Athletics is not winning any points with me after firing the grad asst.

And you might say my time has made me inclined to view any problem as a likely result of malicious incompetence from someone in a position of power at GT.

Meanwhile, we play down two. Arrrgh.

If you tell someone who works for not to do a specific thing and they do it, what do you do? Personally I fire them. Not too hard to understand. Also don’t get the point about it making less sense “as time goes on”. What time? You want a thorough inverstigation right?

 

[LibertyTurns]

If you tell someone who works for not to do a specific thing and they do it, what do you do? Personally I fire them. Not too hard to understand. Also don’t get the point about it making less sense “as time goes on”. What time? You want a thorough inverstigation right?

Understand that but who tells someone on the staff not to talk to a member of the team particularly on their off time? Makes you wonder if someone’s hiding something. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the grad assistant or is she an adversarial witness perhaps and needs to be discredited?

I certainly don’t follow the team but from what has hit the wire, GT is not looking like it’s on the right side of the controversy here.

 

[up state jacket]

If you tell someone who works for not to do a specific thing and they do it, what do you do? Personally I fire them. Not too hard to understand. Also don’t get the point about it making less sense “as time goes on”. What time? You want a thorough inverstigation right?

Yes it is pretty black and white. Bad decision to chat with her "sisters." If I directly go against my regionals instructions, I'm looking for employment.

 

[orientalnc]

Understand that but who tells someone on the staff not to talk to a member of the team particularly on their off time? Makes you wonder if someone’s hiding something. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the grad assistant or is she an adversarial witness perhaps and needs to be discredited?

I certainly don’t follow the team but from what has hit the wire, GT is not looking like it’s on the right side of the controversy here.

Coaches have one on one meetings with players all the time, so something had to have preceded the order. Something very bad. If the issue is inappropriate contact or relationship between coaches and players, then private contact in off hours is definitely a problem.

 

[ncjacket79]

Understand that but who tells someone on the staff not to talk to a member of the team particularly on their off time? Makes you wonder if someone’s hiding something. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the grad assistant or is she an adversarial witness perhaps and needs to be discredited?

I certainly don’t follow the team but from what has hit the wire, GT is not looking like it’s on the right side of the controversy here.

Think a minute. There is something being investigated that happened between Joseph and the players no longer with the team. While investigating the last thing you need is individual conversations between people who may either have been involved or who might have the effect of changing what someone “remembers “. It’s entirely logical to restricr one on one conversations.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Think a minute. There is something being investigated that happened between Joseph and the players no longer with the team. While investigating the last thing you need is individual conversations between people who may either have been involved or who might have the effect of changing what someone “remembers “. It’s entirely logical to restricr one on one conversations.

OK, but you have a 22yo grad assistant that the previous year was a teammate. GT didn’t restrict conversations about the incident(s), but GT did lock down all contact non-private contact meaning if someone called her distraught she was just supposed to hang up the phone. I’ve never in my entire career forbid any staff from having general conversations with anyone even when internal investigations were going on. I did mandate the topic at hand was off limits and I have warned warring factions to keep their distance. That’s not what was said by either side.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

OK, but you have a 22yo grad assistant that the previous year was a teammate. GT didn’t restrict conversations about the incident(s), but GT did lock down all contact non-private contact meaning if someone called her distraught she was just supposed to hang up the phone. I’ve never in my entire career forbid any staff from having general conversations with anyone even when internal investigations were going on. I did mandate the topic at hand was off limits and I have warned warring factions to keep their distance. That’s not what was said by either side.

Yes. Because they were both directly and specifically told not to do a certain thing, and they both know why. And they did it anyway.

If they were told 'you all are not to talk about our color Navy and whether it should even be an official tertiary school color or not', then you just don't do it. I give a silly example just to drive home the point, if the two folks met and started talking about the color Navy, they would both know without any confusion they were about to break the rules they were just told about.

 

[WrongShadeOfGold]

Yes. Because they were both directly and specifically told not to do a certain thing, and they both know why. And they did it anyway.

If they were told 'you all are not to talk about our color Navy and whether it should even be an official tertiary school color or not', then you just don't do it. I give a silly example just to drive home the point, if the two folks met and started talking about the color Navy, they would both know without any confusion they were about to break the rules they were just told about.

Too bad the mods here won't actually implement the no more talking about navy rule lol

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Too bad the mods here won't actually implement the no more talking about navy rule lol

We would continue to talk about it anyway and then get banned.

 

[ncjacket79]

OK, but you have a 22yo grad assistant that the previous year was a teammate. GT didn’t restrict conversations about the incident(s), but GT did lock down all contact non-private contact meaning if someone called her distraught she was just supposed to hang up the phone. I’ve never in my entire career forbid any staff from having general conversations with anyone even when internal investigations were going on. I did mandate the topic at hand was off limits and I have warned warring factions to keep their distance. That’s not what was said by either side.

I think it all depends on the issue which we can only speculate about. I have had a situation where we separated co-workers during an investigation into a situation where inappropriate conduct was reported. In fact as the immediate manager of both, I was specifically told not to speak with either except for during work hours about work issues. One kept trying to make her case to me and I had to cut her off
and refer her to HR. This feels like one of those situations to me.

 

[g0lftime]

If suspended then GT cannot move on replacing her as head coach. Her lawsuit could drag on for months whether she is fired or not. This situation is an entanglement for the GTAA. Figure out what her price is to resign and then move on with a new hire. This has the potential to end badly and set back an improving program.

 

[LibertyTurns]

@bwelbo colored in the lines for me. now I get the picture!

Bottom line: don’t screw with the help or you’ll get screwed with

 

[presjacket]

So I went back to the DLab thread and I never could figure out from there what exactly happened trying to read in there.

I guess I now know what happened with DLab. So does that imply that Georgia Tech coaching suspension are because the coach to kids to a strip club? Is that what Coach Jo did?

 

[g0lftime]

TSTAN will now have two legal entanglements to deal with. The MJ charges seem to parallel the USA women's soccer charges about gender equity. Is this the latest issue in the LGBT sports world.

 

[RyanS12]

Won’t shock me now if coach Jo was there with DLab, JJ and Ron.... lol

 

[YlJacket]

If Joseph was indeed part of a trip to the strip club then I will indeed know that the world as I know it has changed.

 

[GTLorenzo]

Won’t shock me now if coach Jo was there with DLab, JJ and Ron.... lol

Do you think the grad assistant that was fired was the "former player" who was at the strip club indicated in the article? If so, then this is all starting to make sense.....

Jack, whom the NCAA declared to be a representative of Georgia Tech's athletics interests, is alleged to have provided Carter and an unidentified then-Georgia Tech player with $300 for the strip club visit, the sources told ESPN.