Jump to content

Report: Zions step dad took 400K


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, Sark said:

They’ve voiced their opinions and I have voiced mine. It was fantastic. Lol. In all seriousness, I took an unpopular position on a topic and realize that didn’t go over well. I’ll either avoid doing so on this or other topics in the future or just refrain from posting if my view differs from the mainstream. Not here to troll or upset, just an IU fan who enjoys following the programs and talking about them with fellow travelers.

I don't mind if you debate and defend you opinion, as long as that is your opinion. If you're doing it just to make Scott mad, i am also ok with it,  lol.  J/k  don't be a troll jerk (not calling you a troll or a jerk, just saying please don't act like one), ok

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sark said:

Debating and defending my opinion was what got me labeled as a troll by a few, so I need to back away from that if I’m to continue posting here. I’ll either abide with the rules by not going against the mainstream or just keep my views to myself. It’s very simple and straightforward and I understand completely.

Ok now, you know better than this, and this kind of comment just takes away from credibility.

All kinds of posters argue, post non “mainstream” views (whatever that means), defend their positions against more popular positions etc. Of course none of that has anything to do with our board rules, which are posted. No one labels that trolling. I don’t think it’s necessary to post a definition of trolling, we all know what it is. If you troll you do so at your own risk here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2020 at 5:51 PM, Sark said:

I’m not sure you have any point in this. Well, maybe you do. I’m just curious why Knight would be so fond of an allegedly known cheater and, further, why no one seems to have a plausible explanation for BK’s odd ethical 180.

I'm just curious, are you as successful in real life as you are on the internet? If so, can you post documented proof? Just looking for a plausible explanation if you go about life utilizing only proof based facts and disregarding common deductive reasoning, does it work well in the real world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sark said:

Debating and defending my opinion was what got me labeled as a troll by a few, so I need to back away from that if I’m to continue posting here. I’ll either abide with the rules by not going against the mainstream or just keep my views to myself. It’s very simple and straightforward and I understand completely.

I have no issue with you having a different opinion.  As long as you're not doing it just to cause annoy people.  If you want to play devils advocate, maybe mention it when you start.  Otherwise, if you don't break the rules defend your opinion however you like.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, cybergates said:

I'm just curious, are you as successful in real life as you are on the internet? If so, can you post documented proof? Just looking for a plausible explanation if you go about life utilizing only proof based facts and disregarding common deductive reasoning, does it work well in the real world?

Well stated.  I don't mind disagreement, but when you start with an unreasonable standard of evidence (the same level used for murder convictions), you'll likely get a lot of push back on your position and you'll find fewer people willing to engage. 

Sean Miller hasn't been convicted of anything either, but there are plenty of IU fans willing to admit that it looks like he's played fast and loose with the rules and it makes folks a mite bit uncomfortable that Archie was once on his staff.  There's likewise plenty of evidence that many of the top coaches in college basketball have at the very least benefited from rule-breaking and it's hard to imagine that veterans like Coach K and Calipari were 100% blissfully ignorant of the malfeasance going on all around them with players they interacted with on a daily basis.

Fine...debate, but stop with the nonsense that coaches are lily-white simply because they haven't been convicted of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

Well stated.  I don't mind disagreement, but when you start with an unreasonable standard of evidence (the same level used for murder convictions), you'll likely get a lot of push back on your position and you'll find fewer people willing to engage. 

Sean Miller hasn't been convicted of anything either, but there are plenty of IU fans willing to admit that it looks like he's played fast and loose with the rules and it makes folks a mite bit uncomfortable that Archie was once on his staff.  There's likewise plenty of evidence that many of the top coaches in college basketball have at the very least benefited from rule-breaking and it's hard to imagine that veterans like Coach K and Calipari were 100% blissfully ignorant of the malfeasance going on all around them with players they interacted with on a daily basis.

Fine...debate, but stop with the nonsense that coaches are lily-white simply because they haven't been convicted of anything.

Another thing is all of these articles written has to have more the one source for them to publish the article.  If all of these articles are untrue why has there not been any law suites for slander.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Another thing is all of these articles written has to have more the one source for them to publish the article.  If all of these articles are untrue why has there not been any law suites for slander.

I can remember when the Anthony Davis story came out, the Davis family and UK both had a fit and threatened all manner of lawsuits.  For awhile, the Chicago paper that put out the story stuck to their guns, but as I recall, they ultimately bowed to a lot of pressure and took down the story, although I don't recall any formal retraction.  I'm not aware of either the Davis family or UK ever following through with a lawsuit.  I'm sure they would tell you that it was because the story was removed, but a more likely reason is that it would have subjected all parties to discovery and I don't think either UK or the Davises wanted investigators and attorneys poking around in their records and getting to the truth.  As much as that story circulated, if there really was no truth to it, I have a hard time imagining the Davises not following through with a suit to clear their good names.  As I remember, there were several coaches sore about being outbid by UK and that's what started all the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update to the story https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/29460266/rep-says-was-conned-posing-zion-williamson-friend

 

ID was definitely fake and the story is that someone was pretending to know Zion and got 100k out of Slavko Duric (the accuser). Usually would side with bashing Duke but since this Slavko dude tried to con Luka Doncic out of money too (and forged his signature) I'm more than happy that this is looking like a win for Zion/Duke

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PritchardPutBack said:

Update to the story https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/29460266/rep-says-was-conned-posing-zion-williamson-friend

 

ID was definitely fake and the story is that someone was pretending to know Zion and got 100k out of Slavko Duric (the accuser). Usually would side with bashing Duke but since this Slavko dude tried to con Luka Doncic out of money too (and forged his signature) I'm more than happy that this is looking like a win for Zion/Duke

 

Definitely looks like the 400k wasn't Duke related, but the Duke booster house obviously is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cybergates said:

Definitely looks like the 400k wasn't Duke related, but the Duke booster house obviously is.

Yeah I'm still reading up on the case as a whole so don't really have an opinion on the entire thing yet. Slavko seems pretty slimy from what I see so I'm glad he wasn't viewed as too reliable

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, PritchardPutBack said:

Yeah I'm still reading up on the case as a whole so don't really have an opinion on the entire thing yet. Slavko seems pretty slimy from what I see so I'm glad he wasn't viewed as too reliable

That fake ID wouldn't get someone into Kilroy's haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2020 at 1:02 PM, Sark said:

They’ve voiced their opinions and I have voiced mine. It was fantastic. Lol. In all seriousness, I took an unpopular position on a topic and realize that didn’t go over well. I’ll either avoid doing so on this or other topics in the future or just refrain from posting if my view differs from the mainstream. Not here to troll or upset, just an IU fan who enjoys following the programs and talking about them with fellow travelers.

 As most fans are biased to some extent, certainly myself included, I appreciate another viewpoint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2020 at 1:02 PM, Sark said:

They’ve voiced their opinions and I have voiced mine. It was fantastic. Lol. In all seriousness, I took an unpopular position on a topic and realize that didn’t go over well. I’ll either avoid doing so on this or other topics in the future or just refrain from posting if my view differs from the mainstream. Not here to troll or upset, just an IU fan who enjoys following the programs and talking about them with fellow travelers.

That’s weird, I seriously thought you were a MSU fan, go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...