Class of 2016 RB Robert Washington (NC) to UNC Charlotte

[Toga]

 

[ImperialOrange]

 

[Consigliere]

I don

Exactly. No one is going to win the Pulitzer due to breaking news of a recruitment decision. In this instance its ok to be second with the news. Like reporting a death at an accident.

I don't know. We criticize when there is too much coverage, we criticize when there is too little. Certainly seems like Bailey did his due diligence, confirmed twice with Mr. Washington that details were good to print, then Dad tried to get him to retract because RW was uncomfortable. According to Occam's Razor the simplest theory is probably correct so my read is that RW does not want his hand to be tipped since he has not notified all candidates of his decision to go Orange!

 

[Orange4]

I know it's only 247 but we have jumped way ahead in the "expert" predictions now. I believe 2 days ago we were in third but today we jumped to first by a big margin

 

[Franz69]

So how about, maybe, everyone just relax until Saturday at 3 pm?

HCSS looks anatomically correct in that pic.

 

[ImperialOrange]

I don

I don't know. We criticize when there is not two much coverage, we criticize when there is too little. Certainly seems like Bailey did his due diligence, confirmed twice with Mr. Washington that details were good to print, then tried to get him to retract because RW was uncomfortable. According to Occam's Razor the simplest theory is probably correct so my read is that RW does not want his hand to be tipped since he has not notified all candidates of his decision to go Orange!

Ehhh, if I wrote something and was asked to take it down I 100% would if I understood the reasoning behind. Simple as that. The reporter is standing behind "policy" of only taking things down if they're factually incorrect, which I get to a degree, but he's also shooting himself in the foot for potential future interviews by standing on that policy. Treat others how you would want them to treat you.

 

[Stern]

Ehhh, if I wrote something and was asked to take it down I 100% would if I understood the reasoning behind. Simple as that. The reporter is standing behind "policy" of only taking things down if they're factually incorrect, which I get to a degree, but he's also shooting himself in the foot for potential future interviews by standing on that policy. Treat others how you would want them to treat you.

No he isn't. The reporter is right to stand by his story and not take it down.

Just because the father said something he shouldn't have doesn't mean the reporter has to do a retraction and look like a fool. His job is to report, he got a quote on the record, he printed it. Nothing wrong on his part.

IF reporters took down a story every time someone they interviewed yelled at them and asked, the newspaper would be about 2 pages and be printed about once a week.

 

[jekelish]

HCSS looks anatomically correct in that pic.

If that's anatomically correct he should probably see a doctor. And also, poor Missy.

 

[djorange1989]

I know it's only 247 but we have jumped way ahead in the "expert" predictions now. I believe 2 days ago we were in third but today we jumped to first by a big margin

They read the article quoting RWs dad more than likely. That is probably why. Fun to look at but they just react to articles and quotes like we do. We will hope they happen to be right!

 

[jekelish]

No he isn't. The reporter is right to stand by his story and not take it down.

Just because the father said something he shouldn't have doesn't mean the reporter has to do a retraction and look like a fool. His job is to report, he got a quote on the record, he printed it. Nothing wrong on his part.

IF reporters took down a story every time someone they interviewed yelled at them and asked, the newspaper would be about 2 pages and be printed about once a week.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. It kills a newspaper's credibility if they're willing to remove a story UNLESS it has factual errors. It's just unfortunate that things played out the way they did.

But we can put that all behind us. Onward and upward, to positive things!

 

[tep624]

Yeah, I have to agree with this. It kills a newspaper's credibility if they're willing to remove a story UNLESS it has factual errors. It's just unfortunate that things played out the way they did.

But we can put that all behind us. Onward and upward, to positive things!

Yep. Bailey didn't do anything wrong. Now whether his decision will impact his ability to get stories in the future is a different discussion all together.

 

[Bambrewer]

And then the next article came out. I just wish everyone rooting for this to happen sAturday would just stop talking and writing about it. It's over let's move on. If you want to continue throwing gas in the fire in hopes of him running in another direction by all means continue. But if you want this to have a shot just stop bringing this up. EVERYONE wants this to be In the past.

 

[Easy Goer]

No he isn't. The reporter is right to stand by his story and not take it down.

Just because the father said something he shouldn't have doesn't mean the reporter has to do a retraction and look like a fool. His job is to report, he got a quote on the record, he printed it. Nothing wrong on his part.

IF reporters took down a story every time someone they interviewed yelled at them and asked, the newspaper would be about 2 pages and be printed about once a week.

I pretty much agree, but that's probably not the best analogy. Have you seen many papers today?

 

[jekelish]

Yep. Bailey didn't do anything wrong. Now whether his decision will impact his ability to get stories in the future is a different discussion all together.

Exactly. That's why, if I were him, I'd have at least thought about holding off on releasing that stuff until the weekend. Now if Robert comes to SU, there's a good chance he'll never give Bailey an interview because of a lack of trust.

 

[jekelish]

And then the next article came out. I just wish everyone rooting for this to happen sAturday would just stop talking and writing about it. It's over let's move on. If you want to continue throwing gas in the fire in hopes of him running in another direction by all means continue. But if you want this to have a shot just stop bringing this up. EVERYONE wants this to be In the past.

You mean the horrible Poliquin 44 column? Because that was a piece of garbage.

 

[tep624]

Exactly. That's why, if I were him, I'd have at least thought about holding off on releasing that stuff until the weekend. Now if Robert comes to SU, there's a good chance he'll never give Bailey an interview because of a lack of trust.

Yep. And that's the point that "journalist doing his job" crowd don't understand or don't want to understand. Calculated restraint is part of the equation.

 

[Trueblue25]

Alright there's no need to put off the inevitable. I'm gonna start boozing today, for celebration or coping.

 

[Bambrewer]

I mean all of it. Here Twitter fizz syracuse.com everywhere. There is not one person involved in this that wants to keep rehashing this. Most of what has been said is putting blame on this one or that one. No one did anything wrong and everyone wishes it never happened. It's just best to put it behind and move on. In two days none of it will matter no matter what RW decides.

 

[retro44]

So how about, maybe, everyone just relax until Saturday at 3 pm?

I'm waiting for someone to use the weather on Saturday as an early indication of where he is committing.

Some of your are losing your minds and going batshitt crazy over small stuff. Let's all remain bullish, go have several cocktails and then reconvene on Saturday afternoon.

I'm still thinking we're celebrating, but who the F knows in the recruiting world.

4:44 pm

 

[ImperialOrange]

No he isn't. The reporter is right to stand by his story and not take it down.

Just because the father said something he shouldn't have doesn't mean the reporter has to do a retraction and look like a fool. His job is to report, he got a quote on the record, he printed it. Nothing wrong on his part.

IF reporters took down a story every time someone they interviewed yelled at them and asked, the newspaper would be about 2 pages and be printed about once a week.

Was this actually in the paper or just an internet article? He doesn't have to print a retraction, just disable the link for 2 days then move on. He certainly wasn't wrong to print it but his reaction to the request is a bit different than mine would be.

The reporter can stand by whatever he wants but he could also show some common decency in this instance or common sense really. He stood by his story so what happens if RW chooses Cuse, does huge things, and this reporter and his paper no longer get the priviledge of interviews from RW or his colleagues? Ignoring that simple request could have lasting implications.

 

[Bambrewer]

Another pint that wouldn't have mattered. Even if Bailey had taken the story down when it was requested it would t have mattered. Nunes had already qouted it. 247 had quoted it. The damage was done and taking it down would not fix anything.

 

[Trueblue25]

Washington, Brown and Coleman

Would love to get those 3

 

[Jasoncuse]

I know it's only 247 but we have jumped way ahead in the "expert" predictions now. I believe 2 days ago we were in third but today we jumped to first by a big margin

The last 11 predictions are all SU, with the last 10 coming in the past couple of days. I like that. Hope they are correct!

 

[RF2044]

The last 11 predictions are all SU, with the last 10 coming in the past couple of days. I like that. Hope they are correct!

Me too!

But it just goes to show how insular these recruiting sites are. They don't know anything more than we do, and are basing their "predictions" upon the same limited information.

 

[ImperialOrange]

Washington, Brown and Coleman

Would love to get those 3

Time to upgrade from this

to this

Let's get it done!