Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
http://twitter.com/WhitlockJason
http://twitter.com/WhitlockJason
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
- Thread starter irondawg007
- Start date
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
Plus, he doesn't really follow college football closely enough to have any authority on the subject.
Plus, he doesn't really follow college football closely enough to have any authority on the subject.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
Barnhart was on PTI yesterday and threw out the word "smear campaign."<div>*edit-but apparently (per an EDSBS commenter) he couldn't even get the name "Nick Bell" right throughout a tribute on his show the other day, so...yeah.</div><div>
</div><div>I wonder if anybody will sing a different tune if the tapes come out.</div><div>And how many seconds will it take before some Aubie says "that's not him on the tapes. You can tell. This is made up."</div>
Barnhart was on PTI yesterday and threw out the word "smear campaign."<div>*edit-but apparently (per an EDSBS commenter) he couldn't even get the name "Nick Bell" right throughout a tribute on his show the other day, so...yeah.</div><div>
</div><div>I wonder if anybody will sing a different tune if the tapes come out.</div><div>And how many seconds will it take before some Aubie says "that's not him on the tapes. You can tell. This is made up."</div>
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
I agree with Whitlock. I dont think he's saying that Newton didnt actually take money but these "sources" are making a mockery of the investigation. One source will say something true (John Bond) but then an anonymous source comes with this academic fraud BS and then Meyer says that's not true and it now raises doubt for all sources. Too many "sources" and not enough actual names.
I agree with Whitlock. I dont think he's saying that Newton didnt actually take money but these "sources" are making a mockery of the investigation. One source will say something true (John Bond) but then an anonymous source comes with this academic fraud BS and then Meyer says that's not true and it now raises doubt for all sources. Too many "sources" and not enough actual names.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
Plus, rivals had figured out yesterday that it probably came from someone on UF's video staff.
Oh, and Chizick didn't say it wasn't true either, just that it was ridiculous that it was being leaked. And Cam's statement basically sounded like an admittance of guilt.
Plus, rivals had figured out yesterday that it probably came from someone on UF's video staff.
Oh, and Chizick didn't say it wasn't true either, just that it was ridiculous that it was being leaked. And Cam's statement basically sounded like an admittance of guilt.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
It has absolutely nothing to do with this situation. If no action was taken, why in the world would anyone leak that he MAY have been expelled due to cheating. He wasn't expelled, so it had no business getting out. I agree with Chizik that it was garbage. I hated seeing that come out, and I sure hope we had no part in that being released.
It has absolutely nothing to do with this situation. If no action was taken, why in the world would anyone leak that he MAY have been expelled due to cheating. He wasn't expelled, so it had no business getting out. I agree with Chizik that it was garbage. I hated seeing that come out, and I sure hope we had no part in that being released.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
referring to the "conversations" that came out yesterday moreso than the original stuff with Bond.
Here's the intro from ESPN's article on the conversations:
</p>That says point-blank that we are the ones releasing this latest stuff. It's obnoxious how the media sources were saying over and over that "this is a Mississippi State story," "this is just sour grapes" ... if any smear campaign was happening, it was against MSU, John Bond, etc. I'm betting someone finally said that enough is enough, let's make it an Auburn story, and by God, we did.
referring to the "conversations" that came out yesterday moreso than the original stuff with Bond.
Here's the intro from ESPN's article on the conversations:
</p>That says point-blank that we are the ones releasing this latest stuff. It's obnoxious how the media sources were saying over and over that "this is a Mississippi State story," "this is just sour grapes" ... if any smear campaign was happening, it was against MSU, John Bond, etc. I'm betting someone finally said that enough is enough, let's make it an Auburn story, and by God, we did.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
..the same guy who loves to "tell it like it is" when it comes to African-Americansnot behaving themselves is grinding his own axe, because the Newton family malfeasanceis bearing witness to theJason Whitlock world view. And Whitlock can't stand it, so he makes **** up about Miss. State.
This guy always will & always has been full of ********.
Nobody's grinding an axe here, you *******. Except you.
..the same guy who loves to "tell it like it is" when it comes to African-Americansnot behaving themselves is grinding his own axe, because the Newton family malfeasanceis bearing witness to theJason Whitlock world view. And Whitlock can't stand it, so he makes **** up about Miss. State.
This guy always will & always has been full of ********.
Nobody's grinding an axe here, you *******. Except you.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
as i posted earlier, it's obvious from the article (not so obvious from all the headlines) that the "msu sources" were reporting information back in january, and to the school. not to espn, and not this week.
now we could still be the source now. but i don't think so, since i think that connection would have been more apparent in the article. if i had to guess, i'd say frexzell is correct: that espn's sources are ncaa-related, as this thing heats up.
as i posted earlier, it's obvious from the article (not so obvious from all the headlines) that the "msu sources" were reporting information back in january, and to the school. not to espn, and not this week.
now we could still be the source now. but i don't think so, since i think that connection would have been more apparent in the article. if i had to guess, i'd say frexzell is correct: that espn's sources are ncaa-related, as this thing heats up.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
and then says that two sources "close to the football program" confirmed that we did turn the tapes into the NCAA. How is that not a leak?
For the record, I think we have every right to defend ourselves. All that was happening in the media was a discrediting of Bond and MSU, and I'm not sure if this will fix that, but at least it brings Auburn into the picture.
and then says that two sources "close to the football program" confirmed that we did turn the tapes into the NCAA. How is that not a leak?
For the record, I think we have every right to defend ourselves. All that was happening in the media was a discrediting of Bond and MSU, and I'm not sure if this will fix that, but at least it brings Auburn into the picture.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
"a source close to the investigation says ..."? I'm not sure I buy that we're not involved in getting info out there at some level.
"a source close to the investigation says ..."? I'm not sure I buy that we're not involved in getting info out there at some level.
Whitlock: "Axe-grinding Mississippi State "sources" r what's wrong" (twitter)
i do think we're probably getting some info out there. i'm just not so sure that we're the primary leaks for these stories coming out. and i'm not so sure that this latest phone conversation story originated with us.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5786315
from this article, notice that it says "according to two <span style="font-weight: bold;">other </span>sources". that's two guys other than the ones who had the original phone chats. and from the original article yesterday, it's not much clearer. it doesn't mention anything in the present tense, just in the january.
i agree that it's strange that they didn't say "a source close to the investigation". maybe i'm just reading too much into it. but the fact that they say "msu sources told the school in january" and never say "msu sources told us" seems strange to me.
i do think we're probably getting some info out there. i'm just not so sure that we're the primary leaks for these stories coming out. and i'm not so sure that this latest phone conversation story originated with us.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5786315
from this article, notice that it says "according to two <span style="font-weight: bold;">other </span>sources". that's two guys other than the ones who had the original phone chats. and from the original article yesterday, it's not much clearer. it doesn't mention anything in the present tense, just in the january.
i agree that it's strange that they didn't say "a source close to the investigation". maybe i'm just reading too much into it. but the fact that they say "msu sources told the school in january" and never say "msu sources told us" seems strange to me.
