More goodies -- the non-NCAA related incident

#1
LawVol13

LawVol13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
11,524
Likes
0
#1
zjcvols said:
Hey Zas, he still do this ALONG with the extra ticket thing? Was that the non NCAA issues?
Click to expand...

Hot off the press from Andy Katz.


The non-NCAA related incident, multiple sources told ESPN.com's Andy Katz, was a violation of the Tennessee athletic department substance abuse policy by UT senior forward Brian Williams. Williams missed the last two regular-season games at South Carolina and at home against Kentucky due to what team officials said was a bad back.
Click to expand...
 
#4
#4
Freak said:
I copied this from another thread.
Click to expand...

Freak, are you interpreting this as meaning the basketball staff was lying about what was wrong with Williams and that the AD later found out? That's all I can figure.
 
#5
#5
LawVol13 said:
Freak, are you interpreting this as meaning the basketball staff was lying about what was wrong with Williams and that the AD later found out? That's all I can figure.
Click to expand...

That's how I read it.
 
#10
#10
I am honestly starting to think Pearl has a serious issue with telling the truth. Like, an actual medical reason.
 
#11
#11
The back story always seemed strange. I don't know how they couldn't suspend him earlier in the year after those arrests.
 
#13
#13
vol66 said:
what's unbelievable?
Click to expand...

Team officials said Williams didn't participate in two games due to a bad back, but it appears he missed those games because of a substance violation.
 
#15
#15
Katz needs to clarify because this makes no sense to me. Surely, the drug testing is set up where the AD finds out before the coach.
 
#16
#16
Just...incredible, absolutely incredible...I mean, are you serious? Is he that dumb?
 
#17
#17
My guess is that B-Dub was on his third strike with the substance abuse policy, and Pearl would have been forced to kick him off the team immediately if the truth had come out. And by that point, Pearl figured that a deep run in the tourney was the only thing that might possibly save his job, and that wasn't gonna happen without Williams on the team. Obviously, it didn't happen anyway, but you gotta play the percentages.

And yes, if this is true, it's really, more than anything, pathetic.
 
#18
#18
tvols75 said:
Katz needs to clarify because this makes no sense to me. Surely, the drug testing is set up where the AD finds out before the coach.
Click to expand...

This definitely needs to be clarified.


Anyone have a link?
 
#19
#19
DowntownVol said:
My guess is that B-Dub was on his third strike with the substance abuse policy, and Pearl would have been forced to kick him off the team immediately if the truth had come out. And by that point, Pearl figured that a deep run in the tourney was the only thing that might possibly save his job, and that wasn't gonna happen without Williams on the team. Obviously, it didn't happen anyway, but you gotta play the percentages.

And yes, if this is true, it's really, more than anything, pathetic.
Click to expand...

This is what I'm thinking as well.
 
#20
#20
tvols75 said:
Katz needs to clarify because this makes no sense to me. Surely, the drug testing is set up where the AD finds out before the coach.
Click to expand...

Usually I think the coach gets the word first, then the coach tells the AD. It could happen like this:

Drug testing guy: "Hey coach, Brian violated the drug policy again. Want me to tell the AD?"

Pearl: "No, we are gonna have to suspend him (or kick him off the team). I'll tell him myself and we can plan the PR stuff."

Drug testing guy: "Okay, thanks coach."

And Pearl doesn't tell anyone. Seems reasonable, right?
 
#22
#22
zjcvols said:
Usually I think the coach gets the word first, then the coach tells the AD. It could happen like this:

Drug testing guy: "Hey coach, Brian violated the drug policy again. Want me to tell the AD?"

Pearl: "No, we are gonna have to suspend him (or kick him off the team). I'll tell him myself and plan the PR stuff."

Drug testing guy: "Okay, thanks coach."

And Pearl doesn't tell anyone. Seems reasonable, right?
Click to expand...


Under that scenario, what happens when drug testing guy is watching ESPN and see's Brian Williams suspended for a bad back? Cover up? :)
 
#24
#24
zjcvols said:
Usually I think the coach gets the word first, then the coach tells the AD. It could happen like this:

Drug testing guy: "Hey coach, Brian violated the drug policy again. Want me to tell the AD?"

Pearl: "No, we are gonna have to suspend him (or kick him off the team). I'll tell him myself and plan the PR stuff."

Drug testing guy: "Okay, thanks coach."

And Pearl doesn't tell anyone. Seems reasonable, right?
Click to expand...

I don't see how the coach gets the word first though. The drug testing is sent off, and it is mailed back to the athletic department at least that is how I witnessed it in my time at college then the University tells the coach what has happened and lets him do the discipline so long as the player has enough strikes left.
 
#25
#25
tvols75 said:
Katz needs to clarify because this makes no sense to me. Surely, the drug testing is set up where the AD finds out before the coach.
Click to expand...

It must not be. Otherwise, they wouldn't knowingly allow the basketball staff to blatantly lie to the media but then leak the information that this was a "issue" that helped cause Pearl's termination. If the AD found out first, they would have been complicit in the act, which they clearly must not have been.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top