Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

All "Gripes" with Greg McDermott

Re: Pollard 4 Years Ago: "MBB program should be the marquee of the athletic dept"

CYKOFAN said:
The biggest question for JP is how does he explain the huge double standard? A successful coach gets 3 years and is canned and an unsuccessful coach gets 5 years and counting with his full support. JP needs to be held accountable and explain this.
Click to expand...


1. His hire
2. His friend
3. Support from big donors

Morgan was/had none of the above. Good or bad, it isn't the first and won't be the last time something like this happens. As for the money part...we paid $2.8 mil in coaching salary GMAC's first two years and JP didn't even blink. If he reeeeeeeeeeally wanted GMAC out...just like March of 06'...he would find the money.
 
So... we merged the contract thread with another thread by accident... now we merged all other anti-jp threads into this one? Almost seems like nobody wants this being talked about..... like its being buried.. /tinfoil hat.
 
alarson said:
So... we merged the contract thread with another thread by accident... now we merged all other anti-jp threads into this one? Almost seems like nobody wants this being talked about..... like its being buried.. /tinfoil hat.
Click to expand...

This is especially odd given the fact that the first mod apologized for the original merge.

The GMAC extension thread was not a Greg McDermott gripe. Which should have been patently obvious to anyone who took a look at the thread.
 
yaman3 said:
So when all else fails, ***** about what threads your ******** in.
Click to expand...

Too many asterisks for me to decode that.

I think it's a legit gripe when one thread was about Pollard and the others were about McDermott.
 
cy1010 said:
Too many asterisks for me to decode that.

I think it's a legit gripe when one thread was about Pollard and the others were about McDermott.
Click to expand...

Id say the contract thread had something to do with mcdermott, but it isnt a 'gripe'.. its trying to figure out the mystery of a contract extension that a) wasnt called for in the original contract, and B) if its a new contract, nobody seems to know anything about its existence. Something's not right.
 
cy1010 said:
Too many asterisks for me to decode that.

I think it's a legit gripe when one thread was about Pollard and the others were about McDermott.
Click to expand...

What does it matter? They all turn into each other after awhile. One starts with Mac then goes to his contact, then to Pollard and the other goes from Pollard to the contract then to Mac and the statistics that show we haven't one and a list of all the players that have left as if everyone forgot in the past 6 hours.
 
yaman3 said:
What does it matter? They all turn into each other after awhile. One starts with Mac then goes to his contact, then to Pollard and the other goes from Pollard to the contract then to Mac and the statistics that show we haven't one and a list of all the players that have left as if everyone forgot in the past 6 hours.
Click to expand...

BS. For a good 24 hours before the merge, the contract thread pretty much stayed on topic, on the contract.
 
yaman3 said:
What does it matter? They all turn into each other after awhile. One starts with Mac then goes to his contact, then to Pollard and the other goes from Pollard to the contract then to Mac and the statistics that show we haven't one and a list of all the players that have left as if everyone forgot in the past 6 hours.
Click to expand...

You clearly have forgotten the last six hours. Prior to the merging of all the threads the contract thread was quite separate and distinct. Several times it was brought up that the issue was not with McDermott but with Pollard.
 
alarson said:
BS. For a good 24 hours before the merge, the contract thread pretty much stayed on topic, on the contract.
Click to expand...

OK, fine, I was wrong. So did you guys get anything solved with that or figure out when the contract expired or did you decide Pollard knew what was going on and he was trying to fool us into believing Mac was here until 15 when in fact he is not?
 
I'll be straight up honest with you guys. Nobody is trying to bury the truth about anything. Every hour there seems to be another "Gmac sucks/Pollard sucks" thread and the mods decided to just consolidate them from now on, because it's a pain in the *** to keep track of and moderate all of them. It makes it much easier on us. The initial merge of the contract thread was a mistake, but since there is no "unmerge" it was just an unfortunate casualty.

So again, for the record, there was no cloak and dagger BS. No secret plan to suppress the truth. No conspiracy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tre4ISU
yaman3 said:
OK, fine, I was wrong. So did you guys get anything solved with that or figure out when the contract expired or did you decide Pollard knew what was going on and he was trying to fool us into believing Mac was here until 15 when in fact he is not?
Click to expand...

Thats what we're still trying to figure out. By the original contract provision, he should only be here till 2013 (2012 plus 1 year extension). People seem to operate under the false assumption that the contract provided for an additional year per scholarship lost, which it doesnt. It provides for an additional year for each *year* that was experienced the loss of one or more scholarships.

If he was given an extension to 2015, there would have to be some new documentation about that out there.
 
Last edited:
Mr Janny said:
I'll be straight up honest with you guys. Nobody is trying to bury the truth about anything. Every hour there seems to be another "Gmac sucks/Pollard sucks" thread and the mods decided to just consolidate them from now on, because it's a pain in the *** to keep track of and moderate all of them. It makes it much easier on us. The initial merge of the contract thread was a mistake, but since there is no "unmerge" it was just an unfortunate casualty.

So again, for the record, there was no cloak and dagger BS. No secret plan to suppress the truth. No conspiracy.
Click to expand...

That's unfortunate on so many levels.
 
alarson said:
Thats what we're still trying to figure out. By the original contract provision, he should only be here till 2013 (2012 plus 1 year extension). If he was given an extension to 2015, there would have to be some new documentation about that out there.
Click to expand...

I was saying we will not figure it out without help. To me, the initial contract read that he gets a year for every year he was at a competitive disadvantage due to Morgan. That is two years at most. In Chris' mailbag he speaks of an alteration of said contract in April of 07. Normally Chris would say he assumes something but he spoke of that matter-of-factly. That leads me to believe that 2015 is indeed the year the contract runs out due to the alteration. I think the one we can read is the old one and we have not seen the new one. That is my opinion. To know for sure we would need some help. We will not figure it out on our own here unless someone has the right access.
 
cy1010 said:
That's unfortunate on so many levels.
Click to expand...

I know, right? JP used to give me a nickel for every anti-Mac post I deleted, but what with the budget cutbacks and all, now I don't get crap.
 
yaman3 said:
I was saying we will not figure it out without help. To me, the initial contract read that he gets a year for every year he was at a competitive disadvantage due to Morgan. That is two years at most. In Chris' mailbag he speaks of an alteration of said contract in April of 07. Normally Chris would say he assumes something but he spoke of that matter-of-factly. That leads me to believe that 2015 is indeed the year the contract runs out due to the alteration. I think the one we can read is the old one and we have not seen the new one. That is my opinion. To know for sure we would need some help. We will not figure it out on our own here unless someone has the right access.
Click to expand...

And i would think that altered contract would be public record.
 
yaman3 said:
I was saying we will not figure it out without help. To me, the initial contract read that he gets a year for every year he was at a competitive disadvantage due to Morgan. That is two years at most. In Chris' mailbag he speaks of an alteration of said contract in April of 07. Normally Chris would say he assumes something but he spoke of that matter-of-factly. That leads me to believe that 2015 is indeed the year the contract runs out due to the alteration. I think the one we can read is the old one and we have not seen the new one. That is my opinion. To know for sure we would need some help. We will not figure it out on our own here unless someone has the right access.
Click to expand...

Oh, I definitely agree with that. There's not much we can do other than speculate.

Regarding Chris's response: The alteration, as far as I know, was simply an alteration of the term of the contract to 2015. To my knowledge, the language was not altered. The Athletic Department stated that the extension was granted in April of 2007, not that a new contract was drawn up. I agree the contract was in fact extended to 2015, that much seems undeniable. The issue I have, and have had, is the manner it which said extension was presented.

The reason I doubt a change to the language of the contract is because, when asked the qeustion about the extension, the Athletic Department did not say it was because of alteration to the language. Rather, they said the contract was interpreted to grant three years worth of extensions. If there was an alteration to the language of the contract, they would have had an easy answer. Namely, the old contract language does not apply. When specific language was called to their attention, they did not say that language is no longer operable. They simply said their interpretation was that it called for three years.
 
Mr Janny said:
I know, right? JP used to give me a nickel for every anti-Mac post I deleted, but what with the budget cutbacks and all, now I don't get crap.
Click to expand...

I don't pretend to think Pollard could orchestrate a cover up of this magnitude anyway.


Joking of course.



He clearly could.
 
Yes, it would be interesting to know the real circumstances about the 2007 contract extension. It just seems like a sweetheart deal that was not needed since spectacular wins had not occurred on a six year contract and one year instead of three years of extension would seem reasonable. The more years of 15 wins pass, the less likely the answer will be known. I still think it had something to do with recruiting HB to prove Greg would remain in place. Of course, as HB became the top player, he could only go to Duke, Kansas, or UNC. Looks like UNC needs HB worse of the three.

Wonder if there are any more coaches out there in BCS bball that consistently does not win half his games, mops up the bottom in his conference, loses players routinely and in in the catbird seat for nine years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back