My main question about TG

[PlayerRep]

I would be asking Haslem why he's considering TG when Haslem wants a squeaky clean HC that has no prior "moral" issues. He's thinking about a guy who was charged with a felony and got off because the victim was paid and decided not to follow through with the police. I'm not saying that TG doesn't deserve a second chance but Haslem needs to stop with the "moral" BS he's using against other potential head coaches and give them a second chance like he's giving TG.

You have your "facts" wrong. After the police did their investigation, it turned out that there was no basis for charging TG, so the charges were dropped. The bouncer was either wrong or lied about TG having been at the strip club and having a confrontation with him. When the tape was reviewed, it showed that TG had not gone to the strip club and the confrontation had been with a different guy. No evidence of anyone breaking into the bouncer's car to take anything, and no evidence, on the hotel video cameras or front the desk clerk, that TG brought anything into in the hotel. He did not have a suitcase or bag with him. You are defaming TG with your lies. Stop.

 

[CFallsGriz]

My questions would be

1: What are your weakest points as a coach and how would you improve upon them?

2: What in your opinion was the weakest link to this years Grizzly team and what would you do to rectify that.

3: If you had one game to select from this year that the Griz lost that you feel you could changed the outcome of as a head coach, what game would that be and what would you have done differently?

All this horsesh*t about, "what's your biggest weakness" just doesn't really happen. They want to know what your strengths are, that's what employers are interested in--what you bring to the table-- not your weaknesses. Any perceived weaknesses can be derived from what you DON'T say. The reason is simple: EVERYONE has a weakness. But not everyone has the strengths that they're seeking. That's what any interviewer worth their salt is looking for. Does this candidate have what we're looking for? Not, "does this candidate have what we're not looking for?" Unless you're talking about negative issues that are apparent and would affect job performance, there's no reason to even ask the question. I've always thought it was stupid. If you have a shred of confidence and half of a brain, you either need to think long and hard about telling a potential employer your "weaknesses," and/or you tell them your weakness is that you don't see your weaknesses on the job.

At least that's been my experience.

 

[PlayerRep]

My questions would be

1: What are your weakest points as a coach and how would you improve upon them?

2: What in your opinion was the weakest link to this years Grizzly team and what would you do to rectify that.

3: If you had one game to select from this year that the Griz lost that you feel you could changed the outcome of as a head coach, what game would that be and what would you have done differently?

All this horsesh*t about, "what's your biggest weakness" just doesn't really happen. They want to know what your strengths are, that's what employers are interested in--what you bring to the table-- not your weaknesses. Any perceived weaknesses can be derived from what you DON'T say. The reason is simple: EVERYONE has a weakness. But not everyone has the strengths that they're seeking. That's what any interviewer worth their salt is looking for. Does this candidate have what we're looking for? Not, "does this candidate have what we're not looking for?" Unless you're talking about negative issues that are apparent and would affect job performance, there's no reason to even ask the question. I've always thought it was stupid. If you have a shred of confidence and half of a brain, you either need to think long and hard about telling a potential employer your "weaknesses," and/or you tell them your weakness is that you don't see your weaknesses on the job.

At least that's been my experience.

I agree. I've always that that was a dumb question, and would never ask that. In an interview for a normal job, when questions like that may get asked, I advise people to be prepared with a few answers that describe a minor weakness that really isn't a weakness or is not relevant to the job. Who in their right mind would ever give an employer reasons not to hire you?

This doesn't mean that an interview should try to determine, indirectly, what the candidates weaknesses are. By asking basic questions about what is necessary for the job, the interviewer can start to determine potential weaknesses from the answers.

 

[garizzalies]

No evidence of anyone breaking into the bouncer's car to take anything

So how did TG get the wallet and gun?

 

[GrizFan2011]

I would be asking Haslem why he's considering TG when Haslem wants a squeaky clean HC that has no prior "moral" issues. He's thinking about a guy who was charged with a felony and got off because the victim was paid and decided not to follow through with the police. I'm not saying that TG doesn't deserve a second chance but Haslem needs to stop with the "moral" BS he's using against other potential head coaches and give them a second chance like he's giving TG.

You have your "facts" wrong. After the police did their investigation, it turned out that there was no basis for charging TG, so the charges were dropped. The bouncer was either wrong or lied about TG having been at the strip club and having a confrontation with him. When the tape was reviewed, it showed that TG had not gone to the strip club and the confrontation had been with a different guy. No evidence of anyone breaking into the bouncer's car to take anything, and no evidence, on the hotel video cameras or front the desk clerk, that TG brought anything into in the hotel. He did not have a suitcase or bag with him. You are defaming TG with your lies. Stop.

This sums it up. If I made a mistake about WHY the charge was dropped, I apologize. The point was about Haslem, not TG:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/may/07/gregorak-050710/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[PDXGrizzly]

How can Haslam make the case that TG shouldn't be hired based on something that didn't happen. There is a reason why TG wasn't charged with anything. How would you feel if the fact that the police investigated you on a false premise, cleared you of any wrong doing, and then not getting a promotion because you had been investigated? Does that make sense? Why punish someone for something that they didn't do?

The reality is that some people on this board don't want TG and are using this instance, where he was investigated and cleared, as an excuse to withdraw their support. Use something that is logical and valid. Like defensive scheme, choice of OC, player development, or anything other than hating on someone for something that they didn't do.

 

[PlayerRep]

I would be asking Haslem why he's considering TG when Haslem wants a squeaky clean HC that has no prior "moral" issues. He's thinking about a guy who was charged with a felony and got off because the victim was paid and decided not to follow through with the police. I'm not saying that TG doesn't deserve a second chance but Haslem needs to stop with the "moral" BS he's using against other potential head coaches and give them a second chance like he's giving TG.

You have your "facts" wrong. After the police did their investigation, it turned out that there was no basis for charging TG, so the charges were dropped. The bouncer was either wrong or lied about TG having been at the strip club and having a confrontation with him. When the tape was reviewed, it showed that TG had not gone to the strip club and the confrontation had been with a different guy. No evidence of anyone breaking into the bouncer's car to take anything, and no evidence, on the hotel video cameras or front the desk clerk, that TG brought anything into in the hotel. He did not have a suitcase or bag with him. You are defaming TG with your lies. Stop.

This sums it up. If I made a mistake about WHY the charge was dropped, I apologize. The point was about Haslem, not TG:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/may/07/gregorak-050710/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Virtually every key allegation in that article turned out not to be true, is the point. Only the stuff ending up in his room, and being returned by him, turned out to be true. None of the other important stuff turned out to be true, after the police did their investigation. Wasn't at strip club, did not have confrontation with the bouncer, no evidence of anyone let alone TG breaking into the car, no fingerprints, not on parking garage video, not seen by nearby parking attendance, not seen on hotel videos or by desk clerk carrying anything into hotel, including no bag. That's why the UNLV eventually started giving recommendations for TG for jobs. That's why the charges were dropped. I've heard, and believe, it was as set up. That's the only logical explanation. While people may be skeptical of that, it's more plausible than the alternative explanation.

 

[PlayerRep]

How can Haslam make the case that TG shouldn't be hired based on something that didn't happen. There is a reason why TG wasn't charged with anything. How would you feel if the fact that the police investigated you on a false premise, cleared you of any wrong doing, and then not getting a promotion because you had been investigated? Does that make sense? Why punish someone for something that they didn't do?

The reality is that some people on this board don't want TG and are using this instance, where he was investigated and cleared, as an excuse to withdraw their support. Use something that is logical and valid. Like defensive scheme, choice of OC, player development, or anything other than hating on someone for something that they didn't do.

Good points. And UM then hired TG back, and later promoted him to DC. Hasn't this bridge already been crossed?

 

[PDXGrizzly]

How can Haslam make the case that TG shouldn't be hired based on something that didn't happen. There is a reason why TG wasn't charged with anything. How would you feel if the fact that the police investigated you on a false premise, cleared you of any wrong doing, and then not getting a promotion because you had been investigated? Does that make sense? Why punish someone for something that they didn't do?

The reality is that some people on this board don't want TG and are using this instance, where he was investigated and cleared, as an excuse to withdraw their support. Use something that is logical and valid. Like defensive scheme, choice of OC, player development, or anything other than hating on someone for something that they didn't do.

Good points. And UM then hired TG back, and later promoted him to DC. Hasn't this bridge already been crossed?

I'm more responding to what other people are saying. If they don't like him, let it be an Xs and Os reason rather than a fake charge.

 

[GrizFan2011]

How can Haslam make the case that TG shouldn't be hired based on something that didn't happen. There is a reason why TG wasn't charged with anything. How would you feel if the fact that the police investigated you on a false premise, cleared you of any wrong doing, and then not getting a promotion because you had been investigated? Does that make sense? Why punish someone for something that they didn't do?

The reality is that some people on this board don't want TG and are using this instance, where he was investigated and cleared, as an excuse to withdraw their support. Use something that is logical and valid. Like defensive scheme, choice of OC, player development, or anything other than hating on someone for something that they didn't do.

Good points. And UM then hired TG back, and later promoted him to DC. Hasn't this bridge already been crossed?

I'm more responding to what other people are saying. If they don't like him, let it be an Xs and Os reason rather than a fake charge.

I happen to like TG and think he's a good coach and would make a good HC in a few years. The point I was trying to make regarded Haslem. He likes him too but seems to have a different standard for other potential hires, trumped up charges or not. The TG charge IS water under the bridge unless others are being held to a higher standard.