ADVERTISEMENT

Barchi to Blink (Again)

.
Okay buddy so explain this one thing to me. If we are so close to some form of "lack of institutional control" - again, I can't stop laughing - as YOU claimed just days ago, riddle me this:

How is all this going to be kept quiet and how is nobody going to take the fall?
whitewashed-wood-sign.jpg
 
You need a better radio. You also need to donate more to get one

So are you claiming to be a big donor who is getting inside information while hanging out on an anonymous message board getting your jollies presenting double talk type scenarios?
 
You don't understand how it works. When attorneys are hired to investigate something, the reports are sent to the client in draft form and are subject to client comments and edits. The attorneys won't lie in their report, but they will absolutely change the content and narrative to fit what the client is looking for. No one would pay lawyers to write a report they had no control over. Whether it is inside or outside counsel, Rutgers is the one paying for this report, so they will have full say in the finished product. The report will not go into "final" form without the school signing off on it. It is always done like this. The client is the customer, nd the lawyers will make sure the customer is happy.
I see.
So Penn State scrubbed all the bad stuff from the Freeh report.
 
Okay buddy so explain this one thing to me. If we are so close to some form of "lack of institutional control" - again, I can't stop laughing - as YOU claimed just days ago, riddle me this:

How is all this going to be kept quiet and how is nobody going to take the fall?


For the 4th time. When you do an internal investigation you need to sign off on the report. The report has everything and you narrow down and sign off on how its written. As easy as it is to put in a lack of institutional control is as easy as it is to not. The NCAA did not require we do this. Barchi did.
 
Interesting logic:

  • You believe Barchi and Julie saying nothing indicates that they will fire Flood.
  • You wish Barchi and Julie would be fired too.

So you want Barchi and Julie fired because they are going to fire Flood? I'd want them to get a pat on the back for firing Flood.

No, I want them fired because she is a liar and I don't trust her to pick our next coach; he could give too craps about our football program as long as his hospital gets built. Flood should not be retained and never said he should be. We need a regime change from top to bottom.
 
So are you claiming to be a big donor who is getting inside information while hanging out on an anonymous message board getting your jollies presenting double talk type scenarios?


Yeah that's exactly my MO. Now I see why I went silent for 13 years on here. People like you who think post counts mean more than money to the program
 
Saying it is or it isn't, but what if the fact is that the backup quarterback does not have it going on upstairs and the entire team supports the starting quarterback and does not want the back up in the game. Would your outlook on the quarterback situation be any different?
Do you think Coach Flood was lying about the QB competition being too close to call preseason? Do you think the back up did anything in his first start to suggest Coach Flood was lying?
If you answer no to both, how much probability do you give your hypothetical? Finally, if the two were so close then what happened after the first game?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUsSKii
Yeah that's exactly my MO. Now I see why I went silent for 13 years on here. People like you who think post counts mean more than money to the program

Please go "silent" again because all you've done is throw shit against walls since coming back. Pretty easy for ANY 10-year old, to do, let alone some big, important donor, as yourself.
 
People can continue to say Barchi doesn't care. Up to this point he hasn't shown to much interest. But someone needs to be in his ear and let him know how disliked he will be if he screws this up. That is something I'm sure he'll care about. Being considered the worst president ever is not a title he'll want
 
Flood will get paid. Barchi will get paid. That's not changing. However, the decrease in support will affect plenty of innocent bystanders. Support staff, vendors, basic needs - office supplies, furniture - these expenses rely on donations. I know it's a conundrum. This is why I really hate that the program is being held hostage by a few influential people who managed to insert themselves into the inner circle.

Huh? I'm not taking the money I save on renewing tickets and physically burning it. That money will be spent somewhere else, and someone else can be a "winner" and prosper. The Rutgers vendors and office supply people can beg the NY parochial school mafia or Barchi's special interest groups to pay the rent.
 
People can continue to say Barchi doesn't care. Up to this point he hasn't shown to much interest. But someone needs to be in his ear and let him know how disliked he will be if he screws this up. That is something I'm sure he'll care about. Being considered the worst president ever is not a title he'll want

There is more to being university president then the football team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RutgHoops
For the 4th time. When you do an internal investigation you need to sign off on the report. The report has everything and you narrow down and sign off on how its written. As easy as it is to put in a lack of institutional control is as easy as it is to not. The NCAA did not require we do this. Barchi did.

So, do tell, WHAT is the report going to say? Obviously you're so important you must have this info, so, spill the beans sir!
 
Please go "silent" again because all you've done is throw shit against walls since coming back. Pretty easy for ANY 10-year old, to do, let alone some big, important donor, as yourself.
A little harsh on Silencer, NUTS. I don't want to start a snit with you, but you have thrown a lot of your own feces around since coming back. It may be hard to deal with, but you may need to learn to live with another year of Flood on the sidelines. I don't think there are many (I can think of less than 10) people on this board who are happy if what Silencer and others has said is correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TRU2RU and ru75
King
Players do not publicly throw other players under the bus, there's been multiple times throughout my sports career where myself and team-mates outwardly and completely supported the coaches decision on who he was playing. At the same time we'd go back to our rooms and wonder what the hell is the coach thinking.
If Rettig was inserted tomorrow, you can be assured the players would completely publicly respect it and show full support for him.
You, me and everyone else has no idea what the players are truly thinking...to say the players and I quote you are saying "they don't want the backup in the game" is complete Bull Shite.
 
Disclaimer: I'm a Greg supporter. I'm also part of the crowd who was obsessed with the program but is now indifferent (still have season tix, donate, etc). Whatever his faults, everyone here knew in the back of their mind, with Greg at the helm, it was a matter of when not if. We lucked into a young DC growing into the quality of coach that Rutgers cannot attract on the free market. The guy turned down the big schools to stay here.

Right now these posters realize Rutgers is in college football purgatory. Quite frankly it's a shitty feeling.

(This is not say Greg coming back will solve all Rutgers problems. And I say coming back, not bringing back, because he has the power.)
 
There is more to being university president then the football team.

The football team is A BIG part of the university and if Barchi doesn't get that into his thick skull, he'll go down as a loser when he leaves here regardless of what he did to consolidate the medical school. Barchi is ignoring part of his duties to the university.
 
A little harsh on Silencer, NUTS. I don't want to start a snit with you, but you have thrown a lot of your own feces around since coming back. It may be hard to deal with, but you may need to learn to live with another year of Flood on the sidelines. I don't think there are many (I can think of less than 10) people on this board who are happy if what Silencer and others has said is correct.

What statement have I made - AS FACT - that hasn't been true, regarding the Flood situation, or any other, since I've been back? None. I've stated my opinions - strong ones no question - but this guy is throwing so much out it's really hard to take him seriously. Bottom line: anybody could make the same claims he's made, big donor or not, because he's basically been on both sides of the equation in a matter of days and THAT is my only problem with him (her, whatever...).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift
So, do tell, WHAT is the report going to say? Obviously you're so important you must have this info, so, spill the beans sir!
The problem is, like 2013, is too many people had snippets of information. I highly doubt any of the donors actually SAW the report. That would vitiate attorney-client privilege, unless one of the donors was on the BOG. People should learn to keep their mouths shut until all of the facts are out and the report is complete. It will never happen, because most people cannot be trusted. This is nothing against Silencer. It's more against the people he is hearing things from, or the people he's hearing things from who are hearing things. It's like the old shampoo commercial--they tell two friends, and so on and so on and so on. The other problem is that the "story" and "facts" get twisted and mutilated in the process, and it's probably at most 50-60% accurate.
 
What statement have I made - AS FACT - that hasn't been true, regarding the Flood situation, or any other, since I've been back? None. I've stated my opinions - strong ones no question - but this guy is throwing so much out it's really hard to take him seriously. Bottom line: anybody could make the same claims he's made, big donor or not, because he's basically been on both sides of the equation in a matter of days and THAT is my only problem with him (her, whatever...).
Agree---see my post immediately before this one. Too much misinformation out there.
 
Everyone needs to relax.
The Flood era is over.
Doesn't matter if we beat Maryland by 4 TD's and make a bowl trip to the Bahama's.
The change will be made.

He's got more posts than Silencer, and has been around since 2004!!! This whole saga reminds me of the Billy Joel lyric:

You may be right
I may be crazy
But it just may be a lunatic you're looking for
Turn out the light
Don't try to save me
You may be wrong for all I know
But you may be right
 
  • Like
Reactions: ru75
I just don't get how the multiple good sources have all collaborated, instead of been corroborated.
ding, ding, ding, ding.
I saw that too, but did not want to parse words. If they had CORROBORATED, we would have a totally different result. When sources collaborate, look out. Like Jesse Jackson once said, "I don't deny the allegations, I deny the allegator!". Here, we must deny the collaborators. Now, go find the corroborators, and we may be on to something. RUfan1979 may be a corroborator.
 
And apparently NONE of the backup QBs have it going on upstairs either? That's hard to accept.
Agree Lighty. There have been plenty of GREAT college QB's that didn't have it upstairs. Look at Geno Smith became a first round pick and he is an idiot. It's coaching!
 
I here you but its not about that. Protocol is that a school will usually send a letter to the NCAA notifying them of possible infractions. If there they are not ultimately considered a violation by the NCAA, what difference does it make? If they are, what athletic department would be allowed to scrub reports that led to the violations? There must at minimum be in the report the information that led to and substantiates the NCAA penalties. Once those OPRA letters go out and what happened is public information, It would be considered an attempt to cover-up damaging or embarrassing information to the university - they would be committing career suicide ... heads would roll.
Well, all indications are that UNC will try to scrub their reports by punishing women's basketball in order to save football and men's basketball, soccer, etc.
 
I want to report a rumor that I heard that reporting rumors we've heard but can't substantiate is silly, but that reacting emotionally to such reported unsubstantiated rumors is rumored to be even sillier.

But I can't substantiate that.
 
I see.
So Penn State scrubbed all the bad stuff from the Freeh report.

You don't have to believe me, but realize I do know a thing or two about what I am talking about.

I am not obsessed with the PSU scandal like many are, so I am not sure I have all the information correct on what happened at PSU. But the following ius my understanding of what happened:

The Freeh report was commissioned by the PSU Board of Trustees. Louis Freeh never interviewed any of the fact witnesses (never spoke with Sandusky, McQueary, Paterno, AD Curley or President Spanier). Instead, he relied upon emails and interviews with ancillary personnel.

in his report, Freeh basically hung all the blame on a dead football coach, the AD and the President. With respect to the Trustees, he said that they didn't follow the best oversight procedures, and because they did not involve themselves enough in day to day operations of the University, no one told them about Sandusky.

Hmm....notice anything there? The Trustees, who paid for the report, were not implicated in any way, other than to say that they should pay more attention to University operations. All blame fell on a dead guy, and an AD and President who couldn't have been saved anyway, and were promptly forced to resign. So the Trustees got complete cover from that report, and got a tidy recommendation that they clean house, which the media and public at large was already demanding.

The biggest criticism of the Freeh report is that it laid the bulk of the blame on Paterno. Pretty convenient, don't you think? Him being dead and all. So no, it is not a matter of scrubbing everything bad from the report. Given what had happened, Louis Freeh couldn't very well conclude nothing bad happened. Like I said, the attorneys won't lie. But the attorney did limit his review to secondary sources, and never interviewed primary fact witnesses to ask them directly who knew, and concluded - big shocker - that the Trustees of the University weren't to blame.
 
He's got more posts than Silencer, and has been around since 2004!!! This whole saga reminds me of the Billy Joel lyric:

You may be right
I may be crazy
But it just may be a lunatic you're looking for
Turn out the light
Don't try to save me
You may be wrong for all I know
But you may be right
He played on campus in 75 I think it was it 74?
 
I highly doubt any of the donors actually SAW the report. That would vitiate attorney-client privilege, unless one of the donors was on the BOG. People should learn to keep their mouths shut until all of the facts are out and the report is complete.

The stuff that got Mulchay fired was reviewed by a sub committee of three members of the BOG. A member of that group told me that unless one of the attorneys leaked it came from their meeting room to our friends at the NSL before they could present to the full board. . Now he did not say this but I can surmise that the former BOG member, PSU booster, political hack, and zombie mall developer that was in the room was to blame but I can't prove it.
So I don't care how close they try to hold it it will likely get out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TRU2RU
Yeah that's exactly my MO. Now I see why I went silent for 13 years on here. People like you who think post counts mean more than money to the program

I'm quite sure I never mentioned post counts. Others did so perhaps you meant to respond to someone else? However, it is really quite simple to determine that you are a poser just by reading your posts. Reading is becoming more of a lost art in this society, perhaps you should try it in order to try to learn to make your posts more believable.

Here's a couple of hints......

Your making claims to know what Barchi is "thinking"

You've significantly changed your tone in regards to Barchi over the last several weeks of posting.

Your posts make it seem like you are in the know regarding the KS Firm internal investigation - you would likely have to be at a BOG or GB level in order to have this info at this point.

It's a pretty sad statement when someone is looking to promote self importance on an anonymous fan board by claiming to be in the know. People who are confident about what they know, either keep it to themselves or pass it along in such a way as to help others without looking for credit or self promotion. Further, over the past weeks - you've presented scenarios which will cover any possible outcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kupuna133
If multiple sources collaborate, don't they then represent a single, collaborative, source?
Maybe.

But what I do love is this thread. It's high drama. It's GOT RU style. The possibility of a feeble Flood flanking a ball-less Barchi is just too delicious for words. Do you hate on Shawshank because it's fiction? No, you know you watch that goddamn movie over and over and over and over (fess up)...simply because it's awesome.

Sorry, but anyone who is not entertained by this is N-V-T-S, NUTS. Silencer, I salute you.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT