Zac Crews

[CDAGRIZ]

Were the condition(s) that every teammate agreed to accept him onto the team, and then those condition(s) weren't met when some said no? Because that's kind of what it sounds like. That said, I have no clue. Just asking because people here seem to have the scoop.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

And I thought (was hoping) this pond was fished out..... :roll:

 

[wyomingriz]

Help me understand here. Why is it so unbelievable that the staff would impose conditions for Crews to join the team?

Sure, I'll try to help you understand. To summarize: you state a falsehood with the caveat: "I've heard indications (absolutely no way to know if they are accurate)" Posters who know let you know you are wrong. You say, we are both right. They say, nope you are wrong. You change tactics and say you know for sure you're right. They say, nope you are wrong. You then admit you have no idea if you're right, but deflect by saying the Venmo comment is unjust, so nobody but Crews can be wrong. They say, nope, you're still wrong on your information. You say I'm speculating so we all must be speculating. They say, nope, they know and you're wrong.

Finally, you deflect and say why can't what I initially said be true. To answer this last question: it is not unbelievable the staff would impose conditions and Zac didn't meet them - it just didn't happen that way.

This is great! Astute, you nailed it!

 

[SACCAT66]

Sure, I'll try to help you understand. To summarize: you state a falsehood with the caveat: "I've heard indications (absolutely no way to know if they are accurate)" Posters who know let you know you are wrong. You say, we are both right. They say, nope you are wrong. You change tactics and say you know for sure you're right. They say, nope you are wrong. You then admit you have no idea if you're right, but deflect by saying the Venmo comment is unjust, so nobody but Crews can be wrong. They say, nope, you're still wrong on your information. You say I'm speculating so we all must be speculating. They say, nope, they know and you're wrong.

Finally, you deflect and say why can't what I initially said be true. To answer this last question: it is not unbelievable the staff would impose conditions and Zac didn't meet them - it just didn't happen that way.

This is great! Astute, you nailed it!

I am confused... What did EverettGriz say that was so off. He stated that a source told him something. All comments directed at him after that were saying "you are wrong, and that is false". Isn't 99% of what is said on any message board based on this exact same thing? If he is wrong, then isn't saying something like "My sources tell me that isn't what happened" the correct path? Nobody has actually stated any real proof of what happened... To jump on one guy who is just saying what he heard for a source (again... about 99% of what every message board is) doesn't seem logical to me.

 

[SoldierGriz]

This is great! Astute, you nailed it!

I am confused... What did EverettGriz say that was so off. He stated that a source told him something. All comments directed at him after that were saying "you are wrong, and that is false". Isn't 99% of what is said on any message board based on this exact same thing? If he is wrong, then isn't saying something like "My sources tell me that isn't what happened" the correct path? Nobody has actually stated any real proof of what happened... To jump on one guy who is just saying what he heard for a source (again... about 99% of what every message board is) doesn't seem logical to me.

Let me summarize:

EG said he heard there were conditions set to join and they were not met.

Astute said no. Instead, a few players said its him or us. So, no conditions set to meet.

Pretty much everyone shitting on a kid who did something stupid...like all kids do.

 

[EverettGriz]

I am confused... What did EverettGriz say that was so off. He stated that a source told him something. All comments directed at him after that were saying "you are wrong, and that is false". Isn't 99% of what is said on any message board based on this exact same thing? If he is wrong, then isn't saying something like "My sources tell me that isn't what happened" the correct path? Nobody has actually stated any real proof of what happened... To jump on one guy who is just saying what he heard for a source (again... about 99% of what every message board is) doesn't seem logical to me.

Let me summarize:

EG said he heard there were conditions set to join and they were not met.

Astute said no. Instead, a few players said its him or us. So, no conditions set to meet.

Pretty much everyone shitting on a kid who did something stupid...like all kids do.

So astute has no more knowledge than anyone else? He has all the answers? So you tell us all what DID happen, soldier. Why did it take till May for a decision? Did Crews meet with some/any players? If no conditions were imposed, why did that happen? If some players were uncomfortable with Crews on the team, did they make the decision not to have him or did Hauck?

Very curious to get all the answers from those of you who claim to know exactly what happened (hint: you don't).

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I am confused... What did EverettGriz say that was so off. He stated that a source told him something. All comments directed at him after that were saying "you are wrong, and that is false". Isn't 99% of what is said on any message board based on this exact same thing? If he is wrong, then isn't saying something like "My sources tell me that isn't what happened" the correct path? Nobody has actually stated any real proof of what happened... To jump on one guy who is just saying what he heard for a source (again... about 99% of what every message board is) doesn't seem logical to me.

Let me summarize:

EG said he heard there were conditions set to join and they were not met.

Astute said no. Instead, a few players said its him or us. So, no conditions set to meet.

Pretty much everyone shitting on a kid who did something stupid...like all kids do.

I guess I’m missing something. If the players had to accept him before he could join, what would that be called? A requirement? A term? Say you’re signing up for an Apple ID, you have to accept the terms and…what’s the word I’m looking for? Terms and avocados! Nailed it.

 

[alabamagrizzly]

I am confused... What did EverettGriz say that was so off. He stated that a source told him something. All comments directed at him after that were saying "you are wrong, and that is false". Isn't 99% of what is said on any message board based on this exact same thing? If he is wrong, then isn't saying something like "My sources tell me that isn't what happened" the correct path? Nobody has actually stated any real proof of what happened... To jump on one guy who is just saying what he heard for a source (again... about 99% of what every message board is) doesn't seem logical to me.

Let me summarize:

EG said he heard there were conditions set to join and they were not met.

Astute said no. Instead, a few players said its him or us. So, no conditions set to meet.

Pretty much everyone shitting on a kid who did something stupid...like all kids do.

So what if the conditions were that everyone on the team needed to accept him and a small handful said no? Do you know exactly what happened or you don’t know what happened at all, just only that what EG said is a lie cus astute says so.

 

[alabamagrizzly]

Not to compare Zac Crews to Jesus but someday, maybe today, some one is gonna know the truth and post it here but no one will believe him cus it’s his word against everyone else’s.

 

[mthoopsfan]

I don't know whether any conditions were imposed or not. If there were conditions, I can't imagine that they were much.

If some group of players, let's say some important black players, didn't want Crews, then Hauck would have to make a decision. Looks like the decision was not to buck even a small group of players. I get that.

 

[mthoopsfan]

This is great! Astute, you nailed it!

I am confused... What did EverettGriz say that was so off. He stated that a source told him something. All comments directed at him after that were saying "you are wrong, and that is false". Isn't 99% of what is said on any message board based on this exact same thing? If he is wrong, then isn't saying something like "My sources tell me that isn't what happened" the correct path? Nobody has actually stated any real proof of what happened... To jump on one guy who is just saying what he heard for a source (again... about 99% of what every message board is) doesn't seem logical to me.

Cat,

Here is where astute answered Everett's question:

Astute? "Finally, you deflect and say why can't what I initially said be true. To answer this last question: it is not unbelievable the staff would impose conditions and Zac didn't meet them - it just didn't happen that way."

What's so hard to understand? Astute said Everett and his source were wrong. Even Everett said he didn't know if his source was right. Astute appears to have the real scoop. Why you would want to defend a poster who almost never has any good information on the team, I don't know.

 

[EverettGriz]

And yet multiple posters have asked those who claim adamantly that I’m wrong to tell all of us what DID happen then. Radio silence.

Just makes one wonder. And not to speak for Sac and the others who are more than capable of doing so themselves, but it seems that’s where the confusion comes in.

 

[alabamagrizzly]

And yet multiple posters have asked those who claim adamantly that I’m wrong to tell all of us what DID happen then. Radio silence.

Just makes one wonder. And not to speak for Sac and the others who are more than capable of doing so themselves, but it seems that’s where the confusion comes in.

It’s just another case of “You’re wrong! I don’t know what’s right but I know you’re wrong!”

 

[EverettGriz]

And yet multiple posters have asked those who claim adamantly that I’m wrong to tell all of us what DID happen then. Radio silence.

Just makes one wonder. And not to speak for Sac and the others who are more than capable of doing so themselves, but it seems that’s where the confusion comes in.

It’s just another case of “You’re wrong! I don’t know what’s right but I know you’re wrong!”

Message Board 101.

 

[astutegriz]

And yet multiple posters have asked those who claim adamantly that I’m wrong to tell all of us what DID happen then. Radio silence.

Just makes one wonder. And not to speak for Sac and the others who are more than capable of doing so themselves, but it seems that’s where the confusion comes in.

Radio silence? You have 23,000 more posts than me and I have a life. Patience. Why did I call you out: because you made is sound like Zac did more wrong than the Venmo. Or that Zac didn't fulfill some sort of obligation.

Anyway, here it is. Zac had an offer. Was told it was good but would be silent and delayed. Other schools continued to recruit him even after the Venmo. Zac stuck with UM. Signing day happened. The Kaimen article appeared months later. A small group approached the coach and said him or them. The coaches asked if they would meet him or mentor him. They declined. Offer gone. Other schools don't have scholarships right now.

I don't find fault with the players or coaches. It is what it is. Zac is a good kid (albeit a trash talker) who I don't find at all racist and I'm making this claim from a larger body of work - not just an out-of-context Venmo. Can we let it go now and let everyone get on with their lives? Or do you need more blood?

 

[Allezchat]

I dont know BH. But does this sound like him? A few players say we don't want him on the team but coaches and most of the team are okay with it but because a few players say it's him or me, the offer is taken away? I have a hard time with that. I have an easier time believing Everett.

 

[EverettGriz]

And yet multiple posters have asked those who claim adamantly that I’m wrong to tell all of us what DID happen then. Radio silence.

Just makes one wonder. And not to speak for Sac and the others who are more than capable of doing so themselves, but it seems that’s where the confusion comes in.

Radio silence? You have 23,000 more posts than me and I have a life. Patience. Why did I call you out: because you made is sound like Zac did more wrong than the Venmo. Or that Zac didn't fulfill some sort of obligation.

Anyway, here it is. Zac had an offer. Was told it was good but would be silent and delayed. Other schools continued to recruit him even after the Venmo. Zac stuck with UM. Signing day happened. The Kaimen article appeared months later. A small group approached the coach and said him or them. The coaches asked if they would meet him or mentor him. They declined. Offer gone. Other schools don't have scholarships right now.

I don't find fault with the players or coaches. It is what it is. Zac is a good kid (albeit a trash talker) who I don't find at all racist and I'm making this claim from a larger body of work - not just an out-of-context Venmo. Can we let it go now and let everyone get on with their lives? Or do you need more blood?

Thank you. I appreciate the response.

As I indicated above, we’re saying much the same thing. I simply stated that conditions were established and not met. At no point did I say Crews didn’t meet them. You and others just made a huge assumption and vehemently called me wrong, then called me out. I simply pushed back against that.

Now, my understanding of the facts differ some from how you’ve described them, but not enough to continue the pissing match.

All the best to Crews. I hope he has a fantastic college experience.

 

[zengriz]

...anybody play the game...
...anybody remember "bull in the ring'...
...put him on the griz..put him in the flippn' ring...
...knock the dog out of him for a couple weeks in fall ball...

... :shock: ...

 

[mthoopsfan]

And yet multiple posters have asked those who claim adamantly that I’m wrong to tell all of us what DID happen then. Radio silence.

Just makes one wonder. And not to speak for Sac and the others who are more than capable of doing so themselves, but it seems that’s where the confusion comes in.

It’s just another case of “You’re wrong! I don’t know what’s right but I know you’re wrong!”

Astute said this: "A few teammates said absolutely not, and refused to meet or talk with him. So in May the choice put out was him or them, which is unfortunate because I'm willing to bet that if these few took 5 minutes with the kid, they'd see he isn't to be defined by that Venmo comment." Why isn't that the explanation?

Also, it is perfectly possible to know someone's explanation is wrong, without knowing exactly what occurred,.

 

[mthoopsfan]

I dont know BH. But does this sound like him? A few players say we don't want him on the team but coaches and most of the team are okay with it but because a few players say it's him or me, the offer is taken away? I have a hard time with that. I have an easier time believing Everett.

Man, I don't agree. It's clear you never played the game. And I know BH well.