So what about Tim Floyd's alleged $1000 Dollar Handshake?
by Paragon SC on Jun 22, 2010 8:00 AM PDT
in Commentary
Email
PrintLost in all the talk of the modern day death penalty handed down in the NCAA's report, is that there is no mention of Tim Floyd's alleged $1000 pay off to Rodney Guillory.
You know, the pay off where Yahoo! sports writers Charles Robinson and Jason Cole claimed to have seen and absolutely believed the evidence that Louis Johnson put forth in his allegation that he saw the money that Floyd allegedly handed Rodney Guillory in a coffee shop in Beverly Hills.
I read the NCAA's report and I can find no mention of it happening let alone any proof put forth by Johnson that it did happen.
This kind of matters because the NCAA was so quick to believe and use the story of a witness (Lloyd Lake) that the NCAA themselves thought had credibility issues yet they didn't believe Louis Johnson?
When I wrote this last year the amount of flack that I took from both Cole (in direct emails) and Robinson (in emails to the higher ups at SBNation) was incredible.
Both Cole and Robinson refused to discuss their findings or answer my questions because they were not happy with the stories that I wrote about their reporting of the Reggie Bush mess but also because they thought that USC fans had lost their objectivity toward their reporting.
Talk about thin skinned...
Cole himself said on the radio that he believed Johnson...obviously, because Johnson was his scoop on this particular allegation he had to rehabilitate him as a credible witness who was making some pretty outrageous claims with NO corroboration what so ever.
So what about it? Where is the evidence of this in the NCAA's report and if it was so credible why didn't the NCAA site Floyd for wrong doing? I gave Cole and Robinson their due in my piece last year because of their solid credentials as NFL beat writers before they jumped to Yahoo! and I will admit that much of their reporting did bear fruit in the NCAA's report WRT Bush.
But what about the allegation against Floyd?
Nothing...
Zip, zero, nada!
As I also wrote last year...
Kleph's emphasis on the "IF's" and "COULD BE's" is where chasm widens. For example other than Johnson's attorney, via Yahoo!, is it being reported anywhere that Johnson really did talk to the feds? There simply isn't any independent source that backs that claim up. It's just recycled in all the major news papers without any corroboration.
I mean anyone can jump to conclusions based on a few snippets of reporting. As Kleph also notes that NO ONE has even been given a no comment form the federal agencies involved should raise a red flag.
And this...
Yet, Robinson claims they have talked to dozens of sources with pristine records...
We’ve got dozens of sources who have contributed to our reports and who have pristine records. So to say that everyone behind these reports is a felon is simply not true. That said, absolutely, some of the sources of these allegations do have records. But these are also people who spent years of their lives – years – in friendships or financial relationships with Reggie Bush and O.J. Mayo.
OK, so who are they. Yahoo's reporting hinges on the story of an unsavory character yet hey claim to have spoken to many sources who are "pristine". We would like to know who they are to see if they stand up to scrutiny. At this point Robinson's comments just seem incomplete.
All those "pristine" sources and none of their credible information about Tim Floyd made it into the NCAA's report?
Cole and Robinson's credibility takes a hit on this allegation even if they got much of the story right with Bush.
Why?
Because they were the point men in reporting it without ANY corroboration other than Louis Johnson. That is not even close to journalistic standards and they should not get a pass.
Robinson's credibility takes a another big hit with his tweets on the pending release of the NCAA report. They show him to be lacking objectivity, unprofessional and self-gloating. That sort of conduct from a supposed credible and respected reporter is an embarrassment to the profession.
So these allegations against Floyd would appear to be baseless based on the NCAA not even discussing it in their report and that is telling given the NCAA's apparent low evidentiary threshold that we have all seen them use in their report.
Many of us said that Floyd should sue to redeem his name if the allegations were not true, but it is clear that he wants to move on. He is back coaching in the college ranks...something that is clearly his first love.
The sad thing in all of this is that these unproven allegations soiled the reputation of a coach who gave it his all at USC. He was treated shabbily by Mike Garrett which directly led to Floyd's departure...that is unforgivable, no one should be put through that when there is not a single shred of evidence corroborating Louis Johnson's story.
To be sure, Tim Floyd had his flaws and he is not blameless WRT Mayo but he certainly isn't what Johnson, Cole and Robinson portrayed him to be...
49 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Another case of blood in the water
Those two yahoos were just running with the thread and made up whatever they needed to create a story. There was no payoff, most of the logic and reasoning to believe it was absurd. While we are on the topic of what abouts…what about McKnight? What ever happen to that?
Supposedly
McKnight filled out the appropriate paperwork regarding the Land Rover. I don’t know if it has been investigated yet, but if the girlfriend has been making the payments he should be ok on that issue.
Whatever happened
to that United States of China guy? Read that email from “South Africa” where they have “limited” internet, then nothing else :-)
But yeah, even if that guy co-signed for it, if the GF was legitimately making the payments.. then that fine, right? Or is there some sort of rule against athletes driving cars that don’t belong to them?
No the only rule is that they have to know which toilet to use in order to flush to Ncaa offices
How can you Hammer if you have no Tools
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 22, 2010 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions
The NCAA did not cite the Joe Mc SUV as an infraction
car was registered with USC, his girlfriend was making payments. another tail wagging the dog, media-contrived tabloid story.
It was the fRuins more than the media
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Well
the fact that McKnight lied about it to the reporter didn’t help.
The truth of the matter is that McKnight was dirty. He was looking for hand outs the entire time he was at USC. I know of one that he tried to get, and was thwarted when he came to collect. He was a dirty player, and I’m glad he is gone.
This is a perfect example if one of the biggest problems this nation faces
both in sports and news media: the desire by journalists to create news. In this case it is clear that Yahoo! sports had a concerted policy to make its name as a sports news site by destroying USC athletics. We talk alot about the “baying for blood” that existed in the context of the NCAA investigation, but aside from rival teams, the vast majority of it came from none other than Yahoo!. They had a real investment in USC getting punished, it was their idea. In fact the NCAA report (aside from Paul Dee’s bloviating about someone not getting picked up at the airport) is just a rubber stamp of Yahoo!‘s reporting, with no attempt made to critically examine that reporting. I shudder to think how bad Johnson’s evidence must have been to not include it. Did he claim he was in the coffee shop with Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster? That probably would have not been enough to keep it out.
As an aside I am shocked that the “real journalists” at Yahoo! would take the time to be offended by something written on a blog. I would have figured the had more important things to do, like trolling the local holding cells for felons with a story to sell. Hey I heard Tebow was illegally contacted by Kim Jong Il on his invisible cell phone in 2008, he wanted to start a sports marketing firm. (In case you are reading Yahoo! is is a joke, I am not available for interview).
by ilium55 on Jun 22, 2010 8:27 AM PDT reply actions 4 recs
HA! REC'D!
Fantastic!
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Yah I have stopped watching or reading ESPN and I am canceling my Yahoo mail. F-them all.
How can you Hammer if you have no Tools
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 22, 2010 4:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Tim Floyd's handshake
And what about the LA Times reporting of this subject? They picked it up as a major story, and added in damning commentary. My recollection is that the Times couldn’t write a USC story in those days without adding in comments from Louis Johnson’s attorney.
Yahoo sports reporting is an ambitious upstart effort. The supposedly major media - newspapers of record like the LA Times, New York times, and Washington Post - are expected to do better.
The LA Times journalistic efforts in covering this story did not meet even minimal standards of fairness – at least in my view. And the importance of the story can not be overstated, because it directly led to Floyd leaving and the mass exodus of USC players.
It is a reminder that damage done with this kind of reporting can not really be undone. This is exactly the case with the NCAA report on USC. It leaves the inference that USC football did well in the last decade because of cheating, and not by great recruiting and great coaching (the truth, in my view).
Plascke did take exception with the Yahoo piece on Floyd...
It is linked in one of the stories I linked in this piece…
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Lake was believed
Because when there was credible 3rd Party corroboration, (Lake’s former sister-in-law, a News Anchor and brother-in-law, a former NFLPA registered agent), and Lake’s stories checked out.
SC fans have to get over the entire “Lake is a criminal, why did the NCAA believe him” defense. If we were to discount any evidence from anyone with a conviction, there would be no criminal convictions, period.
Reggie Bush and LaVar Griffin swam with scum. That’s the world they delved into, and you take your evidence as you find it. The NCAA found enough consistency and corroboration for Lake’s stories to believe him. Does anyone on this board not believe Reggie Bush and his parents did not take gifts and money from Lake and Michaels?
Why didn’t the NCAA believe Johnson? Hard to say they didn’t not believe him, because they never dealt directly with those allegations. Why? Maybe because they believed USC versions of the Mayo/Guillory events. Maybe because once they went the “lack of institutional control” route, Johnson’s uncorroborated and fantastic allegations were at best superfluous.
I don't disagree with this
But the sensationalism surrounding this cost the man his job whether we liked him or not.
These accusations were left unchecked. I am still not sure Lake is credible because his corroborators don’t sound credible either…but it just enough for the NCAA.
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Hold on there Desmo
The NCAA was able to corroborate Lake’s story about the goodies he and Michaels channeled to the Griffin-Bush cabal, but none of those people can corroborate Lake’s canard that McNair (and by extension USC) knew because “he was around a lot.”
Don’t point fingers at USC alums and fans for not believing Lake. He is indeed a gang-banger and a felon, and he has a pecuniary motive to continue selling his story. Problem is, his bullshit ramblings about USC knowing were just that, bullshit. All you have to do is read the transcript of his interview to understand this. The NCAA wanted to put USC football down for it’s own reasons, they were so desperate to do it that they built their case on a foundation of gangsta bullshit.
No one around here believes Bush has an ounce of credibility. He is a crook and he threw his team, his coaches and USC under the bus without a second thought. Reggie can go f*ck himself, he’s been excommunicated from the Trojan Family.
As far as Johnson goes, the committee had to let him go or risk looking utterly stupid.
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
McNair's Phone Records
And lack of 3rd party corroboration did him in. Simply, the NCAA committee didn’t find him credible.
I do suspect that The Committee found Johnson less than credible.
I’ve said a lot about Floyd, and he is a charmer/con-man (The NCAA report noted Floyd’s speech to the Committee about the evils of AAU basketball while dealing with Guillory with arms wide open), but he is not stupid.
Wouldn't the lack of 3rd party corroboration for McNair
Be trying to prove a negative? I realize the NCAA doesn’t have to actually prove anything, but isn’t asking McNair to prove he didn’t do something just a bit much? Kind of like the police asking you to prove you were home by yourself?
by ev on Jun 22, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
In an alibi defense
Yes, you have to “prove” that you were home by yourself.
…Lake’s short calls to McNair the night they were out with Bush. Really Desmo?
Look, I’m not defending McNair, his past is marred by his involvement in dogfighting, but Lake’s speculative comments that he should have known prove nothing and wouldn’t have convicted USC illegal parking in a court of law.
Having been slammed himself, Paul Dee wasn’t going to be denied his pound of flesh. Dee and company chose to believe Lake’s musings because they fit their preconceived notions.
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
"Wouldn’t have convicted USC illegal parking in a court of law"
No, but in a court of law, with full subpoena and contempt powers, info that USC most definitely would not want to come out would. Do you really want Reggie Bush or LaVar Griffen on the stand? If I’m USC, I say absolutely not.
The Committee spent a long time on the testimony of McNair’s Date (the Intern) and how there was a lot of chatter after the fact, but little or none before the party. It suggested that McNair may have been covering up. Also, McNair saying initially he didn’t know Lake, never met him, then after shown pictures and other evidence McNair kind of back-tracked, and was never able to keep his story consistent. Seems to be that he lost credibility with the Committee and he never got it back.
As for this:
“Having been slammed himself, Paul Dee wasn’t going to be denied his pound of flesh. Dee and company chose to believe Lake’s musings because they fit their preconceived notions.”
I don’t see Paul Dee as some ruthless vengeful manipulator, but I’m not going to argue because at this point it’s pointless. Are the penalties overkill? Yes. Does the NCAA appear as though they are simply satiating a National Sports Press looking for another “Moral Panic of the Day.” You bet.
It seems to me that the NCAA is cracking down big-time on the fun and freewheeling atmosphere under Carroll and telling other programs “Stop. This is not supposed to be fun. This is football.” That they made this point in the first page of the report, then reiterated it at the end tells me that fun, loose college sports programs are to be discouraged. From now on collegiate athletes are to follow in the piousness of Tim Tebow and coaches are to be sanctimonious control freaks like Mike Krzyzewski
Look, it always sucks to be the example. My living is made by appealing the jury verdicts for people who were made examples of. The NCAA is punishing USC for failing to uphold a standard of care that it never before articulated, had never provided guidance on, and will be almost impossible to enforce fairly or consistently.
Yes, the NCAA sucks. But if you want to be involved in college athletics, you are going to have to deal with the NCAA. Or stop watching college sports.
But USC didn’t help matters with 1.) actively recruiting an agent to employ Reggie Bush (Ornstein), and 2.) having a compliance office of 2.
by Zoulou on Jun 22, 2010 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
No No No Mcnair should not be accountable for having to know what was going on, USC was put down on hearsay and if the school took it to court they would win period.
How can you Hammer if you have no Tools
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 22, 2010 5:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Sure there's potential
But there are also landmines. In civil cases, there are no 5th Amendment rights (well, that’s not true, but I’m not sure what was criminal about the case, so I’m not sure they apply), and even if someone did exercise their 5th Amendment rights, can imagine the bombshell? Criminal actiivity in a B+NCAA infractions case.
Amyway, do you really want risking to put Reggie Bush and Lavar Griffin on the stand? And rack up hundreds of dollars of legal fees for what? First, a school cross-examining their former Heisman Trophy winning RB isn’t going to go over well in recruiting. And who knows what is he going to say? We know Reggie Bush is a cheater, a liar and greedy. Who knows what he’ll say in order to protect his ass.
Conversely, does the NCAA want its internal documents open to discovery?
Does Paul Dee want to be deposed to explain how USC’s sanctions compare to Miami’s or Alabama’s or OU’s or FSU’s? Honestly, I’m not concerned that Bush or Lavar would do any further damage to USC. I don’t believe that they could further implicate USC as I don’t believe that is what happened.
Regardless, don’t 98% of all cases get settled or withdrawn before trial? So, the lawsuit would be more of a strategic tact to add teeth to our NCAA appeal to “encourage” the NCAA to materially reduce the sanctions.
It sounds good to me, but I am not a trial lawyer.
by DFWTrojan on Jun 22, 2010 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This!
Bush and Griffin were not associated with USC in their transactions with Lake and Michaels. It was in their interest to hide their activities from USC.
The question is, who has more to hide, USC or the NCAA? There’s more than a few pols and public interest groups that would be interested in an airing of everybody’s dirty laundry.
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
I think under the CA state law that y'all are throwing around . . .
That would be irrelevant, more prejudical than probabtive, and perhaps not subject to disclosure. And the NCAA would fight hard to keep them out. And they’d probably win. Unless you are suing the NCAA on the penalties (and until the anti-trust exemption is lifted, that is a remedy that is not available — and may not be even if lifted) i’m not sure how you get that in.
I have no idea how you would keep it out
It seems to me that the question would be whether the procedure was fair, that has two parts — first did the actual investigation afford USC substantially fair procedure. Second was the penalty accessed in line with those handed out to other schools in similar circumstances. I also believe that USC could focus on the statement “big time athletes require big time compliance” as being beyond the scope the compliance that was required. In essence it creates a new rule, and punishes USC for not following that rule. I’m not even sure how it would be prejudicial, unless you mean “bad for the NCAA” I’m also not sure why USC should be concerned about the NCAA fighting to keep it out of court — everyone fights to stay out of court, and both parties have plenty of money — neither will drown the other in litigation costs.
by ilium55 on Jun 22, 2010 8:17 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
re-reading Zoulou's post
I believe it would be probative because the relationship of the parties to USC is a key component of determining of the procedure was fair. In other cases like Alabama and Oklahoma the relationship was quite clear, they were boosters. In this case it is unclear how Lake’s actions benefited USC. Additionally lakes testimony is 90% of their case, and the questions about its veracity I believe are Germain.
by ilium55 on Jun 22, 2010 8:21 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
But a State Court Action
Has nothing to to with the fairness or reasonableness of the penalties.
The law creates a cause of action against the agent or runners, not against the NCAA. The State Court has no jurisdiction to determine if NCAA penalties are fair or reasonable. Folks need to drop that line of thinking and debate whether or not it’s worth going after Lake.
I don't agree
perhaps what we are debating is too different things. I am speaking of the California common law right for members of an association to demand fair process in proceedings by that association if said proceedings cause the member monetary harm.
I don’t think they should sue Lake, whats the point? I guess they could if they wanted too but how much could they really recover?
Well zoo I guess you should run for governor, then you can get your way.
Sometimes I feel you hate USC, but maybe you want to run the place.
How can you Hammer if you have no Tools
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 23, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I mean that's fine
I understand that you “feel” that McNair was covering up. However I think what posters have are trying to say is that there was no direct “evidence” of such a cover up. Yes 1 call of 2:30 seconds was placed. If you look at the actual transcripts Lake didn’t even recall what was said. In addition he assumed that McNair knew “because he was always around.” I wouldn’t want that on the stand either. Also you casually dismiss any impeachment of Lake with this so called “corroboration” which consists of a phone record. I’ll tell you what I’d take Pete Carroll on the stand versus a convicted gang member and drug dealer any day of the week.
I know the tough guy take your medicine attitude sounds salty but you won’t convince some of us. Nothing personal, but I think you are wrong in your presentation of the facts.
I wouldn't put any of them on the stand
Big Time College Football is a very murky business. Who knows what they’ll say.
I wouldn’t put Pete on the stand. I’m guessing he knows more than he lets on. McNair would have a lot of trouble on the stand.
As for Lake’s corroboration, when it came to meeting McNair; no, he didn’t have any credible 3rd party corroboration. The issue with McNair is that he fucked up when he first was interviewed by the NCAA, saying he never ever met Lake. After he was shown pictures of posing with Lake and Michaels, after he was shown phone records that he called Lake, he changed his story, twice, so the Committee decided not to believe him.
There is no indication that the meeting was memorable
and we also don’t know how it was worded: did they ask do you know Lloyd Lake — the answer is no he didn’t — I met Bush’s stepdad at a game, but I don’t know him. Additionally I don’t see why stonewalling a little should be held against him — it was clear from the get go that the NCAA was going after USC, no matter what he said it would not be believed. I would be hesitant in that sort of a situation too. I’d still prefer McNair’s testimony to that of a convicted Drug dealer who was testifying to further his attempt to shake down a third party. Lake had a reason to lie, documented low moral character, and his testimony was contradictory and confusing. Thats a hat trick if you ask me. I’d have no problem putting Carroll on the stand, he’s a personable guy, and witnesses rarely break out in Perry mason style theatrics, most of the questions asked both parties already know the answer, it comes down to poise and credibility. Pete Carroll has alot of credibility, felons (especially gang/drug types have little).
Well, we are arguing past each other
The point is that Constitutional legal process and protections do not apply to an NCAA fact-finding mission. They can use their best judgment.
Lake’s story was more-or-less consistent and corroborated. And McNair’s initial denial that he never met them turned out to be false. How well he knew them I have no idea. But he knew them, or of them, well-enough to have Lake cell number. That’s pretty damning. And once you say something to any fact-finding body and it turns out to be less than true, you could be Moses on the Mountain and the fact finder will still dismiss much of your testimony.
USC’s best defense would be to throw McNair under the bus: “Reggie deceived us. So did McNair.” But they don’t seem inclined to do that.
Pete lied. He told the the LA Times that the special teams coach was approved by compliance. The USC compliance rep told the NCAA she never heard about it until another school’s compliance program told her. I would not want PC on the stand. All that charm and “pumped up” rhetoric will be used against him by a skilled trial attorney.
Stonewalling is always held against the testifying witness. Conspiracy is not a defense to stonewalling.
Lake had motive. And perhaps bias. That would be brought up in cross. USC brought it up time and time again. The NCAA Committee heard it and still believed Lake. You think a jury would be any different? Probably not.
And character evidence is generally inadmissable.
Instead of bagging on Yahoo Sports And Paul Dee, ask why Sample and Garrett allowed the most high-profile collegiate sports program in the nation to employ a compliance staff of two?
I think we are debating two different things
see above. There’s really no point in arguing back and forth on the subject. I don’t agree with your characterization of events — you don’t agree with mine. I think we’ve both said what we have to say. I guess that’s why they have juries, otherwise lawyers would go on forever.
Fight On.
For once we agree...
However, I believe that USC (and I’m saying this as an alum) has nothing to hide and would fare well in LA Superior Court. USC would present a formidable case, and even though Garrett would be a less than impressive witness and McNair would be seen as a fool who didn’t figure out what was happening but shouldn’t have been expected to. A jury would come to the conclusion that the bad actor in this movie is Bush, but at the same time it would be revealed that NCAA is a greedy monopoly that runs a plantation system that turns poor black athletes into indentured servants for three years.
Still LOCO after all these years
All hail Augustus Kiffin!
M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT
Wonderful piece, Para!!!
Cole and Robinson have lost all credibility and are a disgrace to journalism. And, their employer is a dying company whose search engine sucks. So, they decided to give journalism a try? The proverbial turd in the Internet punch bowl:
BTW, Para, I emailed the story to Andy Katz
he replied with a quick “thanks”. I think that’s a good sign!
Now, there's a damn good reporter
--Conquest Chronicles , SBNation's USC Trojans blog
Follow me on Twitter @Joey_Kaufman
by Joey Kaufman on Jun 22, 2010 11:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Anyway
My take on all this is:
Reggie Bush is a lying cheater who actively tried to deceive both the University and the NCAA by accepting gifts and cash.
However, Reggie isn’t particularly bright. Going into business with felon is never smart. And casually dismissing felons who gave you money is even less smart. The tricked-out Impala really set the wheels in motion against the University.
Reggie Bush and his step-father have done immeasurable damage to the University, not just to the football program, but to all athletes and students and alumni, because they destroyed a lot of good will out there for the University.
Reggie Bush has surpassed Cade McNown as my least favorite athlete ever.
Well I think you finally have it right, but if you didn't realize that Reggie was just a gifted Gang Banger then you don't get out much.
How can you Hammer if you have no Tools
by so.cal.native1952 on Jun 23, 2010 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Conquest Chronicles
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
