• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

ALL PRAISE JOHN CURRIE FOR ACTING A YEAR TOO LATE

The only time I gave a semi-specific number, I prefaced it by saying, "this is a guesstimate". I never said I knew the number only that Goodman was FOS.
 
You losers just can't accept that RJ knows his SOURCE and this SOURCE has never been wong about anything Wake. If you took the time to actually read what he posts, NOT that he posts it, you'd know there are very, very. very. few things he says he knows for sure or has SOURCES on. Buyout RUSE and hatch fucking SHAKA are two of those very, very, very, very rare situations. He don't care what you or others believe. He knows what he knows and from for whom.

I fully understand it's easier to take the ERRONEOUS and LAZY position that because RJ posts something he is saying he knows all about it, but he amost NEVER says such things.

But keep believing that RJ knows nothing. It's soooooooo much easier.

The realty is RJ could show significant portion people on this board emails or texts or "Skypes" with a pier 1 source and they would say they weren't real.

OGB intentially ignores that RJ and only RJ laid out the SPECIFIC reasons why Danny wasn't fired last year, and he gave board most PERFECT information of how Danny's firing and the hiring of Forbes would go down this year.

I understand that no matter how much of what RJ tells you comes to pass there's segment here that will dismiss it or come up with excuses. They are LOUDEST and SUREST about themselves among "universe". Even when they are wong, they have said RJ was wrong.
 
RJKarl said:
The only time I gave a semi-specific number, I prefaced it by saying, "this is a guesstimate". I never said I knew the number only that Goodman was FOS.
Click to expand...

Sounds like your source is saying there was no buyout.
 
This is assumably the same source that told RJ that we didn't get Shaka because Hatch wouldn't grant his wife a tenured professorship as a part of Shaka's hiring. Never mind that she's not an academic and has expressed zero interest in becoming one.

That's why I think this is all one big long play from a boards poster who happened to get ahold of RJ's Cricket Wireless number.
 
qlAROtr.jpg
 
BabyDeac75 said:
If you guys really want this thing settled, I volunteer to be the credible source confirming or disputing RJ’s info upon review of his sources and whatever they said. My impression was that the buyout numbers were legit, plus I believe RJ trusts me. Everyone should agree to the terms and conditions prior to his sending me whatever he has via PM. My motivation is that I was told the higher buyout numbers were accurate and I want to check the veracity of my sources against his info.
Click to expand...

RJKarl said:
Didn't say that either. No matter how hard you try, you can't put words in my mouth.
Click to expand...

Whats your interpretation of a buyout story being "completely inaccurate and fabricated” other than the buyout didn't exist? What else would they be completely fabricating?
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Whats your interpretation of a buyout story being "completely inaccurate and fabricated” other than the buyout didn't exist? What else would they be completely fabricating?
Click to expand...

Just received this from 1976 -

Me: Thanks, but did it provide any evidence that it was completely inaccurate and fabricated?
Click to expand...

1976: No, but I don’t know anything of the accuracy of its recital.
Best wishes
Click to expand...
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Whats your interpretation of a buyout story being "completely inaccurate and fabricated” other than the buyout didn't exist? What else would they be completely fabricating?
Click to expand...

Well, the gaudy amount of the buyout and the fact that the ENTIRE thing was guaranteed would qualify as "completely inaccurate and fabricated" to me.
 
RJKarl said:
If Jesus, Abraham, Buddha and Mandela all told you that I have what I have, you'd look for an excuse to not admit you are wrong and all of your disgusting insults towards me were wrong to do.

The bottom line is I don't give a fuck about you and it kills you. What kills you even more is people who do know and do count, know what a lame, hate-filled fucking clown you are and would never talk to you about anything more meaningful than the weather.
Click to expand...

Oh my, I am not worthy of such honor.
 
That was directed at Strick not you, silly. :)

I'd send you ScarJo, Penelope Cruz and Ana de Armas. You've been married 40 years. The wife wouldn't mind a break from you.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Whats your interpretation of a buyout story being "completely inaccurate and fabricated” other than the buyout didn't exist? What else would they be completely fabricating?
Click to expand...

The amount Goodman posted and most here believed was totally bogus and completely fabricated.

If you say something costs $1000 without knowing anything about it, if it cost $400, your statement would be "completely fabricated".

Keep dancing...
 
deacondamo said:
Well, the gaudy amount of the buyout and the fact that the ENTIRE thing was guaranteed would qualify as "completely inaccurate and fabricated" to me.
Click to expand...

Yeah - Goodman reported last year that the contract guaranteed Manning $18 million dollars over 6 years, iirc. The initial buyout figure that was reported on here was approximately $15 million, which makes sense since Manning was paid for this year (18-3=15). Before the negotiation went kaput and we fired Manning, the reports on here was that the buyout was negotiated down to roughly half of its original amount, which means that the buyout would have been approximately $7.5 million.

If RJ actually has a contradictory account, then these are the statements that he would have to contradict.

From what I gather, RJ texted somebody, they told him that the report was outrageous and he shared it on the board. He told a handful of people on the board about this by sharing a screenshot with his source which showed the source denying the validity of Goodman's point. According to 1976, the source did not share any information substantiating this assertion. RJ believes that Currie further confirmed this when he said that the reports were inaccurate.

What am I leaving out?

So, essentially, there is no evidence. This is a he-said/she-said between a veteran basketball reporter who gets most of his info from AD personnel and coaches' agents and RJ taking the word of two people close to the program who have an interest in not looking incompetent
 
DistrictDeacon said:
So, based on RJ's claim, proposed terms:

RJ sends unedited screenshots to BabyDeac. If the screenshots show that RJ had a direct conversation with a Hatch/Wellman/Currie/BOT/Shah/Sutton level source that confirmed that the initial buyout was significantly less than $18 million (<50%?), then OGB will receive a lifetime IP ban and cannot post under any screen name. If not, than RJ will receive the IP and posting ban.

Does this sound right?
Click to expand...

BeachBumDeac said:
Should also clarify if the source both 1) would know the details accurately and 2) does NOT have a vested interest in playing down the buyout story. It would definitely be in the best interests of the high up mucky mucks at Wake to get everyone to think the buyout was low.
Click to expand...

OldGoldBeard said:
Yes, I'm in
Click to expand...

me too.

here's your chance to get rid of me rj. nut up or shut your fucking pie hole.
 
I'm willing to grant you "fabricated," as I don't really care if Goodman had good info or fell ass-backwards into the right number. I'll stake everything on 1. Tier-one source, 2. Saying the buyout is substantially inaccurate. I'm not interested in a report that the buyout was actually $17.9 million, because then your info is a big nothingburger.
 
Can we agree to consider a Goodman number within 10% of actual contract as not fabricated?

Resolution on this could be good for the boards on a couple fronts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top