This really reminds me of the Michigan "investigation"

[SU2NASA]

This really reminds me of the Michigan "investigation" by Michael Rosenberg, the UofM version of Pat Forde. Had an axe to grind, looked long enough, took quotes from either disgruntled players or players that said they were quoted completely out of context.

From about the book Three and Out by John Bacon below. Remind you of anyone?
http://mgoblog.com/content/three-and-out-takes-ensemble
Mike Rosenberg

As for my bête noir… well now. Revelations about Rosenberg from the book:

1. Countable hours was "in the story at some point" but "there were a lot of edits."
2. He did not attend a single practice before writing the infamous story in which he declares it "sad" that Michigan is employing a guy to belittle its students. (I found this so implausible when I read it that I double-checked with Bacon about this; he dug up the email he had gotten from Rosenberg as proof.)
3. He told multiple Michigan employees that he "hated Bill Martin" and "was going to get him run out of his job."
4. He got teary when Michigan fans left nasty reviews of his book on Amazon.

Rosenberg has taken to twitter to call Bacon a "fan" and claim the book is "littered with errors," complaining that Bacon made "almost no attempt to talk to anybody who would contradict his subject's point of view."
How Rosenberg knows this is unknown. Bacon states in the book that he repeatedly tried to talk to Martin, Coleman, Carr, and Brandon but never got anywhere. Certainly Brandon's response to the book—a disingenuous "what book?" issued at the same time he's pressuring the M-Den not to carry it and Bacon has been exiled to Drew Sharp Row—indicates the sort of cooperation the AD is providing the guy.
Meanwhile, the height of irony:

When I asked Rosenberg if they had made any attempt to talk to players with different views, he replied, "Did we keep calling until we got guys to say, 'Hey, it's fine?' No, we didn't."​

The difference between Bacon's book—which contains a half-dozen quotes from Rosenberg as it attempts to show both sides of the story—and the Free Press piece is stark. The [REDACTED] has the balls to complain about Bacon's approach to journalism? After the NCAA called the original article exaggerated and misleading? After they took countable hours out of the story? /head explodes
That this guy still has a job is a black mark on the Free Press. That he's still allowed to show up at press conferences is inexplicable. That he has the chutzpah to criticize someone else's journalism is totally expected, because he's just that kind of guy.

 

[NKR1978]

I'm just sick of unnamed sources. I get it for important things like government corruption, corporate wrong doing, and other situations that are life and death. But college athletics is really not that important. There is absolutely no.reason for this story to run without sources.

How do you defend yourself in public opinion when you don't who is accusing you?

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

 

[SU2NASA]

I'm just sick of unnamed sources. I get it for important things like government corruption, corporate wrong doing, and other situations that are life and death. But college athletics is really not that important. There is absolutely no.reason for this story to run without sources.

How do you defend yourself in public opinion when you don't who is accusing you?

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

It eventually came out in the Michigan case and it was two groups: guys that had an axe to grind with Rodriguez, and guys that said "that's not what I said at all".