Jeff Jacobs on Geno

[Kevin G]

Here's an idea....Why don't we just drop it?! Let it go. ETT meant no harm, but it was not a good statement to make. Done. Finito.

 

[doggydaddy]

Here's an idea....Why don't we just drop it?! Let it go. ETT meant no harm, but it was not a good statement to make. Done. Finito.

Considering Sonny's post had nothing to do with ETT and the last post that did was from Thursday I'd say it was dropped until you brought it up again.

 

[Husky7882]

Right, we all need a nap from this bogus lawsuit. Maybe we could wake up and find it over and done with.
And get back to our gals.

Why does this post remind me of Bobby Ewing from Dallas?

 

[HuskyNan]

In today's column, Chris Elsberry from the CT Post says he's having a hard time reconciling the man he's known for 18 years with the Geno that Hardwick has described.

Of course, I admit I'm slightly biased. Back in 2003, when it was discovered that my daughter, Robyn, had a cancerous tumor on her ovary, I wrote a column for the Post saying how, only a day after surgery, we watched the UConn women's basketball game on CPTV and how she kept squeezing my hand every time a Husky player did something good.

Two days later, there was a package in my mail slot in the office. Not only was there an autographed UConn T-shirt, signed by the entire team, there was a handwritten note from Auriemma, telling Robyn that as soon as she was up to it, he wanted her to be his personal guest at a game.

Who else does that?

 

[RadyLady]

Amen

 

[Kevin G]

Considering Sonny's post had nothing to do with ETT and the last post that did was from Thursday I'd say it was dropped until you brought it up again.

And what was the point of this post? Feel better?!

 

[Icebear]

And what was the point of this post? Feel better?!

Noting inconsistency between word and action.

 

[msf22b]

It's now a week or more and there has been no avalanche of "me too."
I'm gratified and confident.

 

[JS]

It's now a week or more and there has been no avalanche of "me too."
I'm gratified and confident.

That's because there IS no "me too."

I think it'll come out that there isn't even a "me" if the interpretation is "sexual advance." I think what occurred, if anything, was an attempted make-up, not an attempted make-out -- something like "Sorry for what I said" or "Hey, no hard feelings, right?"

Of course the "masher" interpretation, while it fuels the sensationalism and splash her side evidently wanted for their lawsuit, isn't crucial to her case, and she never really alleged it. Her case is, whatever his intentions, he was embarrassed by the fuss she made and decided three years later to get her out of his sight.

I'm highly skeptical about her ability to prove that, too, or to establish any legal consequence -- and that's assuming she can keep her action against him in the New York court from being thrown out.

 

[doggydaddy]

And what was the point of this post? Feel better?!

It just seemd silly that you post to the board to let it go after no one posted in this thread about what ETT posted for 4 days. Seemed like everyone HAD let it go.


It wasn't to make me feel better.

 

[UConnChapette]

Just saw Geno on a sports report about the Travelers Pro-AM.

He was asked a question about the lawsuit (didn't hear the exact question) but his reply - in typical Geno style (paraphrased) - Those who didn't like me before now like me less; those who liked me before like me the same.

A follow-up question whether he thought about not playing in the pro-am, he replied - again paraphrased: No, this is what I do. I am not going to let anything interfere with how I run my business and how I live my life.

 

[easttexastrash]

Just saw Geno on a sports report about the Travelers Pro-AM.

He was asked a question about the lawsuit (didn't hear the exact question) but his reply - in typical Geno style (paraphrased) - Those who didn't like me before now like me less; those who liked me before like me the same.

A follow-up question whether he thought about not playing in the pro-am, he replied - again paraphrased: No, this is what I do. I am not going to let anything interfere with how I run my business and how I live my life.

I wonder if some recruits and their parents would prefer to hear more of a denial when the subject is brought up. For some people the more they hear something the more likely they are to believe it.

 

[HuskyNan]

I wonder if some recruits and their parents would prefer to hear more of a denial when the subject is brought up. For some people the more they hear something the more likely they are to believe it.

He may be speaking with them privately. There is no upside, and a lot of downside, in keeping himself in the public eye in regards to the lawsuit. He would rather focus on the Olympics and avoid distractions.

 

[msf22b]

I think the recruits and parents have noticed what I posted earlier, very good knock-on effect

 

[Icebear]

He may be speaking with them privately. There is no upside, and a lot of downside, in keeping himself in the public eye in regards to the lawsuit. He would rather focus on the Olympics and avoid distractions.

Bingo, Nan, Geno and the crew have been playing it spot perfect.

 

[easttexastrash]

Bingo, Nan, Geno and the crew have been playing it spot perfect.

Call me crazy, but if I were accused of something so serious I would not make a flippant remark when the subject comes up. The image you portray in the public eye goes a long way in determining how others judge you. And Geno is in a position, fair or unfair, of having to convince those who don't know him well that the charges are outrageous.

 

[Icebear]

Call me crazy, but if I were accused of something so serious I would not make a flippant remark when the subject comes up. The image you portray in the public eye goes a long way in determining how others judge you. And Geno is in a position, fair or unfair, of having to convince those who don't know him well that the charges are outrageous.

That's where you would be wrong. Most important is to stay faithful to yourself just as Geno said. Vary from that and someone will see it as proof of something they want to believe is happening. He understands you cannot control how others will see you. The people who count in his life know the truth.

You'll note he said nothing about Hardwick nor the situation itself. Again he was spot on.

 

[easttexastrash]

Don't give me too much credit. I'm wrong in many other facets.

 

[UConnChapette]

Call me crazy, but if I were accused of something so serious I would not make a flippant remark when the subject comes up. The image you portray in the public eye goes a long way in determining how others judge you. And Geno is in a position, fair or unfair, of having to convince those who don't know him well that the charges are outrageous.

Okay...you're crazy. (Sorry, you opened the door...I had to walk through)

 

[HuskyNan]

Call me crazy, but if I were accused of something so serious I would not make a flippant remark when the subject comes up. The image you portray in the public eye goes a long way in determining how others judge you. And Geno is in a position, fair or unfair, of having to convince those who don't know him well that the charges are outrageous.

Gee, I thought it was Hardwick that had to prove Geno was guilty, not that Geno had to prove he's innocent (I know, board attorneys, that it should read "not guilty" but it sounded too awkward).

 

[UConnCat]

He may be speaking with them privately. There is no upside, and a lot of downside, in keeping himself in the public eye in regards to the lawsuit. He would rather focus on the Olympics and avoid distractions.

I thought I heard Geno say something like if it were up to him, he'd speak more about what happened but he's really not able to do that. I'm sure his lawyers have advised him to keep quiet believing they have a good defense, but keep in mind that one of the co-defendants is USA Basketball and Geno's being sued for activity while coach of USA Basketball. As Helen (TJI) said in her blog this week, USA Basketball takes decorum beyond seriously and my guess is that Carol Callan et al with USA Basketball have instructed Geno to avoid drawing more media attention on the allegations, focus on coaching and the Olympics and allow the lawyers to deal with the lawsuit for the next few weeks.

 

[Tonyc]

In situation like this you sue everybody and hope that they pay you off to shut you up. Geno on the other hand wants to prove his innocence so he's going for the jugulor. I hope she ends up in jail. Im tired of all this going for the money stuff. Many people dont know anything but .... hey theyve got alot of money and I can get something to shut me up, Im going for it.

 

[easttexastrash]

Gee, I thought it was Hardwick that had to prove Geno was guilty, not that Geno had to prove he's innocent (I know, board attorneys, that it should read "not guilty" but it sounded too awkward).

I'm talking about the court of public opinion. And notice that I said "fair or unfair." Unfortunately, Geno is in the unfortunate position of convincing some that he did not do anything wrong, thus it just seems like it would be prudent to reply with a comment that leads in that direction.

If it were me, I would say exactly what I've said before, that the charges are baseless and I expect to be fully exonerated. That seems more prudent than a semi-joke. I doubt that his lawyers would have much of an issue with a statement like that.

 

[easttexastrash]

I thought I heard Geno say something like if it were up to him, he'd speak more about what happened but he's really not able to do that. I'm sure his lawyers have advised him to keep quiet believing they have a good defense, but keep in mind that one of the co-defendants is USA Basketball and Geno's being sued for activity while coach of USA Basketball. As Helen (TJI) said in her blog this week, USA Basketball takes decorum beyond seriously and my guess is that Carol Callan et al with USA Basketball have instructed Geno to avoid drawing more media attention on the allegations, focus on coaching and the Olympics and allow the lawyers to deal with the lawsuit for the next few weeks.

Explain to me how saying something to the effect of "those who don't like me already will like me less and those who like me now will like me the same" is a better response than saying that "I am completely innocent and this will be proven when all of the facts come out." And then stating that he cannot discuss further on the advice of his attorney.

If I were him, I would set ground rules up front before an interview that the case is not to be discussed due to the fact that it is an ongoing legal issue and therefore he will not be commenting. Either that or develop a standard denial statement that he uses repeatedly. It is not a good idea to make comments off the cuff.

 

[Icebear]

Explain to me how saying something to the effect of "those who don't like me already will like me less and those who like me now will like me the same" is a better response than saying that "I am completely innocent and this will be proven when all of the facts come out." And then stating that he cannot discuss further on the advice of his attorney.

If I were him, I would set ground rules up front before an interview that the case is not to be discussed due to the fact that it is an ongoing legal issue and therefore he will not be commenting. Either that or develop a standard denial statement that he uses repeatedly. It is not a good idea to make comments off the cuff.

It is better because it is as clear a statement of the truth as there is. It makes you and me and every person who takes a position or makes a statement responsible for their own attitude. It, actually, takes the force of the purported events out of the hands of those simply wanting to harm him, USA Basketball and UConn through him and puts it on others for prejudging the situation. It acknowledges that there are others who will do that and says that is on them because even his innocence cannot change that. And it says that those who like him will not be disappointed.

I would, also, challenge your assumption that the statement was necessarily flippant, it need not have been toned that way. Before anyone relies on your advice of using ground rules for a TV interview I think you put too much trust in such means of protection. They provide little shade.