MORGANTOWN — Of all the strange twists the lawsuit between West Virginia University and its estranged football coach Rich Rodriguez has produced, the strangest yet may have come up during athletic director Ed Pastilong’s deposition on April 18.

With an all-star cast of characters involved in Pastilong’s testimony, from Gov. Joe Manchin to WVU President Mike Garrison and his predecessor David Hardesty through school executives Craig Walker, Mike Parsons and Larry Aschebrook to “former” WVU basketball coach Bob Huggins and, in a way you could never believe, Bob Knight, it appears that a major player in the defense case will be Dusty Rutledge.

While we’ll delay for a moment explaining the Huggins and Knight involvement, we will immediately get to Rutledge, who many believe to be the last player-coach in college football when he doubled as a coach and player at Fairmont State in another day and age.

Casual WVU fans won’t know who Rutledge is until we point out that he was the rather sizable red-headed gentleman pacing the sideline wearing headphones during games who seemed to have nothing to do but walk up and down. Fans with a stronger interest will know that he was the team’s video coordinator under Rodriguez, a seemingly harmless underling dedicated to the fiery coach.

As the Pastilong testimony dragged on and on and on, more than eight hours and 200 pages of testimony that became public Wednesday, much was learned, although little of it came from Pastilong. Pastilong, it seems, had been eased out of the loop long before the Rodriguez negotiations on the contract in question were completed.

In Rodriguez’s final eight months, Pastilong seldom had contact with the coach other than in social settings and was not involved in negotiations, which were done through Team Rodriguez’s agent, lawyers and financial experts while the WVU legal team and President Garrison and Walker handled the Mountaineer side.

Pastilong testified that the $4 million buyout, which Rodriguez refuses to pay and is at the heart of this contract, was concocted by staff members in the athletic department led by his assistant Mike Parsons.

And, while all this was going on, Rodriguez’s attorney Marv Robon tried to get Pastilong to admit that Gov. Joe Manchin was really directing the entire show, from scheduling the Marshall series to demanding the school get “every penny” of the $4 million buyout from Rodriguez.

Pastilong never made any such admission as he negotiated his way through Robon’s verbal road mines.

It became apparent through the questioning that Rodriguez is clinging to his claim that Garrison promised that if he signed the contract with the $4 million buyout clause, he would see that it was not enforced or cut in half.

Enter Rutledge.

It appears Rodriguez will claim Rutledge was at President Garrison’s house on Dec. 15, 2007, and overheard Garrison tell Rodriguez he would not keep those alleged promises, leading to him leaving for Michigan.

Two days later, Pastilong admitted, Rutledge and his belongings were removed from his office in the Milan Puskar Center and moved to the Coliseum.

This is how the deposition went:

Q: And can you tell me why that occurred, and who directed that that occur?

A: It was felt that he would better serve the department in a different capacity.

Q: Who made that decision?

A: Well, that was —

Q: Governor Manchin?

A: No.

Q: President Garrison?

A: Well that was a discussion — first of all, Governor Manchin did not make that, and it was a decision, after some discussion in our department, and some other people within the university, just felt it would be best for him, for everybody, if he was relocated in the Coliseum, worked into another assignment, that kind of thing.

After more questioning in which Pastilong denied Garrison made the decision, it was established that Garrison’s chief of staff Craig Walker was involved.

Pastilong would not put it on Walker, nor would he take credit for the decision himself.

Pastilong said he also could not recall Walker saying “fire his ---” or “get his --- out of here” during the discussion.

When asked if Rutledge was removed because he was loyal to Rodriguez, Pastilong replied:

“It was felt that it would again — to repeat myself, it was felt it would be better if he wasn’t in that setting.”

From this one would assume Rutledge will offer contrary testimony as evidence of a fraudulent inducement by the university.

Of course, this may not matter at all as the university claims that even if such promises were made to Rodriguez they are not part of the contract that the coach agreed to and signed and have no bearing on the case.

And so it is that things just get more curious with each passing day.

Now, as for the comic relief provided to the hearing by Robon, who either is the law profession’s version of Columbo or simply not very well informed for someone handling a case involving athletics.

At one point Pastilong testified that Texas A&M; had a problem when its football coach was given his own Web site, leading to his dismissal.

“You mean Bobby Knight?” Robon asked.

Bobby Knight? He was a basketball coach. Latest stop at Texas Tech, not A&M.; And he was fired at Indiana.

And finally there was this question from Robon:

“Do people blame Mike Parsons for Bobby Huggins leaving?”

When he was corrected and told that Huggins was the current coach, Robon dug himself in deeper.

“Attempt to leave?” he asked.

Exasperated, Pastilong simply said that Huggins was the coach at present and “I don’t know of any attempts for him trying to leave.”

Next question.

E-mail Bob Hertzel at bhertzel@hotmail.com.