Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"



    March 16, 2011, 1:47 pm Grant Hill’s Response to Jalen Rose

    Associated Press Grant Hill currently plays for the Phoenix Suns.
    “The Fab Five,” an ESPN film about the Michigan basketball careers of Jalen Rose, Juwan Howard, Chris Webber, Jimmy King and Ray Jackson from 1991 to 1993, was broadcast for the first time Sunday night. In the show, Rose, the show’s executive producer, stated that Duke recruited only black players he considered to be “Uncle Toms.” Grant Hill, a player on the Duke team that beat Michigan in the 1992 Final Four, reflected on Rose’s comments.
    I am a fan, friend and longtime competitor of the Fab Five. I have competed against Jalen Rose and Chris Webber since the age of 13. At Michigan, the Fab Five represented a cultural phenomenon that impacted the country in a permanent and positive way. The very idea of the Fab Five elicited pride and promise in much the same way the Georgetown teams did in the mid-1980s when I was in high school and idolized them. Their journey from youthful icons to successful men today is a road map for so many young, black men (and women) who saw their journey through the powerful documentary, “The Fab Five.”
    It was a sad and somewhat pathetic turn of events, therefore, to see friends narrating this interesting documentary about their moment in time and calling me a ***** and worse, calling all black players at Duke “Uncle Toms” and, to some degree, disparaging my parents for their education, work ethic and commitment to each other and to me. I should have guessed there was something regrettable in the documentary when I received a Twitter apology from Jalen before its premiere. I am aware Jalen has gone to some length to explain his remarks about my family in numerous interviews, so I believe he has some admiration for them.
    In his garbled but sweeping comment that Duke recruits only “black players that were ‘Uncle Toms,’ ” Jalen seems to change the usual meaning of those very vitriolic words into his own meaning, i.e., blacks from two-parent, middle-class families. He leaves us all guessing exactly what he believes today.
    I am beyond fortunate to have two parents who are still working well into their 60s. They received great educations and use them every day. My parents taught me a personal ethic I try to live by and pass on to my children.

    I come from a strong legacy of black Americans. My namesake, Henry Hill, my father’s father, was a day laborer in Baltimore. He could not read or write until he was taught to do so by my grandmother. His first present to my dad was a set of encyclopedias, which I now have. He wanted his only child, my father, to have a good education, so he made numerous sacrifices to see that he got an education, including attending Yale.
    This is part of our great tradition as black Americans. We aspire for the best or better for our children and work hard to make that happen for them. Jalen’s mother is part of our great black tradition and made the same sacrifices for him.
    My teammates at Duke — all of them, black and white — were a band of brothers who came together to play at the highest level for the best coach in basketball. I know most of the black players who preceded and followed me at Duke. They all contribute to our tradition of excellence on the court.
    It is insulting and ignorant to suggest that men like Johnny Dawkins (coach at Stanford), Tommy Amaker (coach at Harvard), Billy King (general manager of the Nets), Tony Lang (coach of the Mitsubishi Diamond Dolphins in Japan), Thomas Hill (small-business owner in Texas), Jeff Capel (former coach at Oklahoma and Virginia Commonwealth), Kenny Blakeney (assistant coach at Harvard), Jay Williams (ESPN analyst), Shane Battier (Memphis Grizzlies) and Chris Duhon (Orlando Magic) ever sold out their race.
    To hint that those who grew up in a household with a mother and father are somehow less black than those who did not is beyond ridiculous. All of us are extremely proud of the current Duke team, especially Nolan Smith. He was raised by his mother, plays in memory of his late father and carries himself with the pride and confidence that they instilled in him.
    The sacrifice, the effort, the education and the friendships I experienced in my four years are cherished. The many Duke graduates I have met around the world are also my “family,” and they are a special group of people. A good education is a privilege.
    Just as Jalen has founded a charter school in Michigan, we are expected to use our education to help others, to improve life for those who need our assistance and to use the excellent education we have received to better the world.
    A highlight of my time at Duke was getting to know the great John Hope Franklin, James B. Duke Professor of History and the leading scholar of the last century on the total history of African-Americans in this country. His insights and perspectives contributed significantly to my overall development and helped me understand myself, my forefathers and my place in the world.
    Ad ingenium faciendum, toward the building of character, is a phrase I recently heard. To me, it is the essence of an educational experience. Struggling, succeeding, trying again and having fun within a nurturing but competitive environment built character in all of us, including every black graduate of Duke.
    My mother always says, “You can live without Chaucer and you can live without calculus, but you cannot make it in the wide, wide world without common sense.” As we get older, we understand the importance of these words. Adulthood is nothing but a series of choices: you can say yes or no, but you cannot avoid saying one or the other. In the end, those who are successful are those who adjust and adapt to the decisions they have made and make the best of them.
    I caution my fabulous five friends to avoid stereotyping me and others they do not know in much the same way so many people stereotyped them back then for their appearance and swagger. I wish for you the restoration of the bond that made you friends, brothers and icons.
    I am proud of my family. I am proud of my Duke championships and all my Duke teammates. And, I am proud I never lost a game against the Fab Five.
    Grant Henry Hill
    Phoenix Suns
    Duke ‘94


    http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/201...se/?ref=sports

  • #2
    Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

    the Times version is edited for brevity. At his own web site Grant Hill has posted the full, unedited response.

    http://granthill.com/hilltop/hilltop...es-documentary
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

      Originally posted by Grant Hill
      And, I am proud I never lost a game against the Fab Five.
      Niiiiiiiiiiiice.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

        I always enjoy when intelligence trumps and outshines arrogant ignorance. I never liked Jalen as a Pacer, and it is embarrassing that he is associated with this story.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

          countdown to KStat showing up to defend the poor misunderstood Jalen Rose, who some are picking on for no good reason (his opinion)

          5...
          4...
          3...
          2...
          1...
          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

            kstat may defend jalen since grant hill abruptly left his beloved pistons. thats my theory.
            "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

              Jalen is great, very articulate and told the story how he saw it.
              GO PACERS!!!

              Twitter: @Circlecity3318

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                countdown to KStat showing up to defend the poor misunderstood Jalen Rose, who some are picking on for no good reason (his opinion)

                5...
                4...
                3...
                2...
                1...
                well, they are. He didn't articulate it the best way but i'm shocked at the attention his comments have gotten. Pretty clear to me that it was a detailed and powerful statement on his thinking at the time.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                  Originally posted by MTM View Post
                  I always enjoy when intelligence trumps and outshines arrogant ignorance. I never liked Jalen as a Pacer, and it is embarrassing that he is associated with this story.
                  agreed. i haven't seen the whole documentary but the part i have seen was just sad for those jealous guys. they call people ***** while they are the real *****es.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                    They were saying how they felt when they were 18 and 19 years old. Give me a break.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                      Originally posted by JB24 View Post
                      I'm shocked at the attention his comments have gotten.
                      Jalen wasn't shocked at all, which is why he apologized to Grant Hill in ADVANCE of the telecast. Any argument that this was an unexpected media-driven controversy is not accurate.

                      As Grant Hill put it, perfectly: "He leaves us all guessing exactly what he believes today."

                      Sure Jalen was discussing what he felt at the time, but the logical next thing for Jalen to say would very obviously be "But in these 20 years I've grown up, and I now know that I was wrong". Simple as that, if that is how he feels, 5 more seconds in a program he produced.

                      But...for all we know, how he felt then is exactly how he still feels today.
                      Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 03-17-2011, 06:38 PM.
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                        Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                        They were saying how they felt when they were 18 and 19 years old. Give me a break.
                        The fact that he apologized means he knew he offended people. No one holds him accountable for what he felt at 18 or 19, just what he feels now.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                          J

                          As Grant Hill put it, perfectly: "He leaves us all guessing exactly what he believes today."

                          But...for all we know, how he felt then is exactly how he still feels today.
                          Uh...no he doesn't.

                          I expect this kind of comment from someone like you, but you would think Grant Hill ,with his Duke upper-class education and all, would not be one to jump to conclusions. Oh well.

                          Frankly, Grant Hill and Bobby Hurley getting so snippy at age 38 over what Jalen Rose admitted he though at eighteen says a lot more about their maturity than Jalen's.

                          http://www.freep.com/article/2011031...t-respect-Duke


                          Jalen Rose now has 'great respect' for Duke
                          11:17 AM, Mar. 17, 2011 |
                          33 Comments
                          Piston Grant Hill, right, gets by former Fab Fiver Jalen Rose for a driving lay-up at the Palace of Auburn Hills on Feb. 7, 1999. The Pistons beat the Pacers, 107-98.
                          Piston Grant Hill, right, gets by former Fab Fiver Jalen Rose for a driving lay-up at the Palace of Auburn Hills on Feb. 7, 1999. The Pistons beat the Pacers, 107-98. / JULIAN H. GONZALEZ / DFP

                          * Twitter
                          * Facebook
                          * Share
                          o Del.icio.us
                          o Digg
                          o Reddit
                          o Facebook
                          o Twitter
                          o Newsvine
                          o
                          o FarkIt
                          * Email
                          * Print

                          *
                          * A
                          * A
                          * A
                          *

                          BY MICHAEL MCCARTHY
                          USA TODAY

                          * Filed Under
                          * Sports
                          * Michigan Wolverines

                          ESPN's Jalen Rose wants to end the war of words between the Michigan Fab Five and Grant Hill and his former Duke Blue Devils over the harsh comments made in his ESPN Films documentary, “The Fab Five.”
                          The ESPN basketball analyst was supposed to do a phone interview from Bristol, Conn., with Game On’s Michael McCarthy on Wednesday about his documentary, which became ESPN Films' highest-rated ever, beating all of the “30 for 30” films.

                          Rose missed the interview, but he left a long voicemail Wednesday night in which he clarified his comments from the documentary and responded to Hill's Wednesday column in the New York Times in which the Phoenix Suns star and former Detroit Piston fired back at Rose and Fab Five teammate Jimmy King.

                          First, says Rose, his comments about Duke preferring to recruit "Uncle Tom” African-American athletes were said from his former perspective as a high school athlete; not as a 38-year-old man. He's irritated that one comment is overshadowing the rest of the documentary.

                          "I know a lot of people are trying to circumvent a great documentary that was two hours of quality content and paraphrase a statement that I made and look at the headline but not read the story. That's basically when I talked about my recruiting as a high school student, as it related to Duke. I just want to make sure I verify how I felt about that. I was clearly talking about a framework from 1991-93, not about 2011."

                          As an adult, he says he has a "broader perspective of great respect and appreciation for Duke, their players and all they've achieved. The comments I made during the 'Fab Five' documentary were clearly reflecting my thoughts as a teenager. I'm proud of the documentary and its success, as well as our accomplishments at the University of Michigan, as well as the work I'm currently doing to support the city of Detroit."


                          Previously, former Duke point guard Bobby Hurley told Dan Patrick that Rose would have been a benchwarmer for Duke. Both Hill and Hurley reminded Rose that their Blue Devils teams, which won repeat titles in 1991-1992, were 3-0 against the Fab Five.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 03-17-2011, 07:22 PM.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                            He had two hours to say it and didn't, but it's nice that he polished it up after the fact.

                            He likely enjoys the extra attention he gathered from the [intentional?] omission in the show
                            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Interesting article about Jalen Rose and "Dukies"

                              Right. Jalen was devious like that.

                              Well, either that, or he just didn't expect a Duke graduate to not be intelligent enough to connect the dots. That seems to be a common problem, given that it also went over Hurley's head as well.

                              Grant can reach Jalen anytime he wants to and ask him personally if he was that unsure about it. He chose to write the New York times and get defensive. Maybe the comment his a deeper nerve than he realized?

                              Jalen actually comes off classier than Grant in this fiasco.
                              Last edited by Kstat; 03-17-2011, 07:31 PM.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X