Comments on: Video: Pat Forde on UK and John Calipari

By: bringbackmikey

bringbackmikey — Sat, 30 May 2009 06:22:24 +0000

So…who doesn’t get an invite back to the team next year? Thanks for your services guys…your scholarship is no longer valid…

By: Whoisforde

Whoisforde — Sat, 30 May 2009 04:35:28 +0000

Bottom line:
THIS is why you don’t have a journalist with obvious ties to Louisville, as your singular voice on the story.
It absolutely screams CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

Get a clue espn.

It makes Forde’s job impossible to appear objective, and forces UK fans to over-analyze everything he says.

Props to Kevin for answering a question much easier than any on Derek Rose’s SAT exam.
What has happened in the last two years to make us go for coach cal? LOL
He dominated at Memphis and pulled in ridiculous recruits who were going to get 2 games a year on national television in a nobody conference?
He won 20 some odd games consecutive while we lose to VMI and Georgia (last in SEC) AT HOME? ON SENIOR NIGHT?

Blame ESPN for putting Forde on a story he has no business being on. Blame Forde for not being able to answer a question with so many answers – it’s tough to keep them in order.

By: barry

barry — Fri, 29 May 2009 20:14:22 +0000

QUOTE:

“I think it possible that “what has changed” is 2 more years to watch Cal and not see any evidence of probation causing behavior and getting an “all clear” from the NCAA. Of course, what has changed might also be wanting to keep a0 job as AD and/or President of UK. Either works for me.”

The NCAA didn’t provide any all-clear. In fact, the NCAA is prohibited from discussing coaches vis a vis involvement in current or past NCAA investigations.

Here’s a link that clears up the comment Barnhart made during his press conference:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/news?slug=dw-kentucky052809&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

By: tom

tom — Sat, 23 May 2009 15:52:23 +0000

I don’t see anything wrong with what Forde said. If they had to vacate the Final Four stuff why not tell us about it?
As long as it has ‘KENTUCKY’ on its chest it can’t be wrong can it? We are going to spend 10 MILLION to get it right so don’t let Mitch think this came cheap!

By: MD

MD — Fri, 22 May 2009 21:44:53 +0000

Kevin-I agree with your assessment, only there hasn’t been any bona fide information on Pitino that has been shared yet–by ANY media outlet. Kind of weak, in my opinion. I think the proof will be once all the details hit the media, let’s see who comes to the defense and who grills him. You could be right on. I’m curious to see how it all unfolds. This isn’t the first time he’s done some shady things, so I can’t wait to see what happens when everything comes out (hopefully it will) and people start dredging up the past. I like Pitino as a coach, even now at UofL. My feelings never really changed even when he switched to the Dark Side. But I have much contempt for the man’s personal dealings. Keep your seat belts fastened, it could be a wild ride!!!

By: John Clay

John Clay — Fri, 22 May 2009 21:40:38 +0000

Kevin, we have printed several stories on the Pitino situation. There are legal issues at play in that particular pending criminal case.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Fri, 22 May 2009 21:27:17 +0000

MD- I don\’t have a big problem with people laying it all out there and allowing people to make their own judgement. I am just contrasting that Forde has no problem laying it out there on Calipari, as do other writers such as Mark Story of the LHL, but will not lay it all out there with Pitino.

I don\’t know why, but the local media, such as the LHL and the CJ, refuse to spend any time on what should be a major story.

By: MD

MD — Fri, 22 May 2009 20:03:17 +0000

Kevin – I agree, except that I don’t mind the so-called knee-jerk reactions by Forde and Story. Regardless of who the hire was, we needed to lay it all out there and make our own judgments. These guys did that, while other journalists were busy jumping on the bandwagon. I feel like I have a better appreciation and understanding of the process and the coach, having that information. Of course, I don’t agree necessarily with those journalists’ opinions that he wouldn’t be a good hire, but I do appreciate them bringing that information to light.

By: Kevin Faris

Kevin Faris — Fri, 22 May 2009 19:02:03 +0000

What changed in two years?

1. Cal went to the championship game.
2. Billy G. showed the need for a large personality at the head coach position.
3. A closer look at Cal, not just the knee jerk response that Forde and also Mark Story in his column the day Cal was hired, showed that the NCAA trouble was not really there.
4. Cal followed up the Final Four run with another good season after losing a ton of players.

By: MD

MD — Fri, 22 May 2009 18:53:09 +0000

Sorry, guys, but I’m as big a UK fan as there is and I just didn’t see anything worth fussing about. I though overall it was a pretty objective piece. In fact, I find it quite funny the folks on here who think Forde is in Pitino’s and UofL’s pocket after writing the book. The fact is, when Forde was still at the C-J, the UofL fan base was ready to hang him because they thought he was a UK homer. You should have read some of the editorial letters and hate mail. So, pardon me, while I have a momentary chuckle at your expense!

Back to the story, NOBODY has a perfect past, and Pat Forde was just bringing up possible concerns why he wasn’t hired 2 years ago and that those concerns are still valid. I disagree a bit, because there’s no way to undo what happened in the past. What Calipari HAS done, is excel on and off the court during that time, which made him a can’t-miss hire. I suggest jumping over to Eric Crawford’s blog at the C-J for his take on the OTL interview. He has some good insights about Calipari’s “last 2 years”.

http://www.courier-journal.com/blogs/crawford/blog.html

GO CATS!!