Athletic Director Announcement

[Triple B]

 

P.S.  What kind of trophy do we get to put in the case for getting a top 50 recruiting class? 

 

[Skingraft]

P.S. What kind of trophy do we get to put in the case for getting a top 50 recruiting class?

Shouldn't those hands be cupping something, or is that for a 25 or higher recruiting class??

[Bear]

 

 

interesting an ad from a non football school from a non bcs conference

good luck

 

Smazza was right

 

 

You missed the part where he called it a good hire:

 

http://thebullspen.com/index.php/topic/2627-athletic-director-announcement/page-4#entry26295

 

To be fair, smazza was far from the only one.

 

 

 

 

Good point!

[Brad]

 

 

 

 

 

Well it was until slick went to Petrino

When you think of how Woolard signed off on such a sham of an investigation report and signed off on the $2.7 million dollar settlement and re-signed Holtz and still paying him and now paying Taggart, you have to think a rational man would not act as irresponsible and reckless were it with his own money. There is no way I would have ever terminated someone's career based on the report filed, rife with bias, speculation and contradiction. Just a poor performance by a guy paid quite handsomely whose teams just don't get it done.

There was no bias in that report. You might be unhappy with the outcome, but the parties authoring that report have and still have extremely well respected reputations and no vested interest in anything other than a fair and impartial outcome. Doesn't mean the report was right -- sometimes folks do their best and get fooled or get the wrong information. But it was clear CJL did not respect the process, was not open to the investigation, and in fact took steps to directly circumvent a fair and impartial investigation. That is the true reason he had to be fired - he left senior administration with no options. Frankly that should have been the grounds for his termination anyway -- by making it about actions in the locker room which no one could be sure exactly what happened the administration opened themselves to have to defend rumor and speculation.

Either way, not sure it serves much for USF that we continue debating this. I know you have a lot of personal admiration for CJL and frankly so do I -- as I said think unlike mostly any other coach we will every hire for USF, CJL did not see it as a stepping stone to his next career move. He genuinely loved USF football. It was tragic how the relationship ended - regardless of fault.

There was bias. When parties on either side have opinions or descriptions, but one side is deemed more credible, that is a bias. When Miller tells a myriad of different stories, he is deemed to have more credibility than someone whose story conflicts with his. When players identified to testify by Miller couldn't support his story, that should have merit too. It takes a willing desire to choose sides in order that a desired outcome can be met. That is bias.

When you say Leavitt did not respect the process and took steps to circumvent a fair and impartial process, can you elaborate? Because while that is a popular thing to say, there is only wafer thin evidence disclosed to that point in the report. Again, if you are dealing with Barry Cohen type threats and all, then that itself is not credible.

Since you can't seem to let this go...

Leavitt lied. He said he knelt down in front of the player in question and was speaking to him quietly. Not a single witness said Leavitt was down on one knee. Are you really going to tell me he did not lie to investigators when he said he was down on his knees and only shook Miller's knee instead of grabbing him around the collar?

Leavitt clearly lied in at least one instance, and still you are a denier. You have a man crush, we get it. But your denials that he wasn't trying to cover up what happened are beyond what a reasonable person would conclude.

And you probably don't remember in your denial state, but I steadfastly stood behind Leavitt until the investigation was complete and all the facts were known. I wasn't going to judge until the proof was there. And it was, overwhelmingly. Not that his actions were wrong, but that he was lying and manipulating. Very easy to see for the unbiased.

The Athletic Director and the President gave him an out, and he refused to take it. They told him exactly what he needed to say to find a way out, and he refused. They could have been out in front of the situation more, but I suspect a rational person would assume that Leavitt would be smart enough to accept a small penalty rather than pretend nothing happened. But he was too stubborn. That isn't the fault of the AD or the president.

Sorry, couldnt read your whole post, but you do know the situation was a bundle of lies led by the accuser himself. Secondly, it's good to see you took some time to read the report. The report says no one confirmed Leavitt kneeling. It also fails to state where it was attempted to corroborate that fact. It was not dicumented in the report that anyone was asked.

And, for the record, failing to kneel is not a crime.

 

 

I read the report thoroughly.  The entire report is not a bundle of lies.  Eyewitness testimony is all kinds of unreliable.  That is why you talk to as many people as possible and piece things together to get the most accurate story.

 

A dozen or so people in the room were interviewed, and NOT ONE said Leavitt was kneeling.  If I'm describing a scene and someone is kneeling, I'm going to state that.  Most people will.  No one did.  Leavitt lied about that point.  There is no reason for him to lie other than he felt that at least others could view what he did as wrong.  If you are going to lie about a significant point like that, your entire statement is pretty much worthless.

 

Someone kneeling in front of someone sitting is going to have a very difficult time slapping or hitting that person in the face.  Try it sometime.

 

 

Never said the entire report is a bundle of lies.  And I know better than to debate your moving target, assumption fueled nonsense.

 

What I said was there were lies throughout the event.  You have chosen to make a determination about a person because you believe they lied.  There were a lot of liars in this incident - most would agree.

 

The report itself has contradictions and yes, lies.  Like you, the reviewers picked the lies to condemn and the lies to excuse.  That's cool.  The report loses credibility with the contradiction, if not lie, about the "most powerful man in the building" nonsense since so many repeated it.

 

As I tried to relate to your thick skull, my point was that a more gifted manager would have handled this situation much better.  I'm not debating that something happened.  Whatever happened you know the truth no less and no more than me or anyone else. 

 

What's left is a damaged football program.  That is what matters.  Our AD (Director of Athletics) has responsibility - for those that still believe in responsibility - for the program.  He could have done a much better job.  That's an opinion.  You don't have to share it.

[USF_Grouper]

I think we might be throwing the term lie around a bit harshly.  The moments Jim spent talking with Miller during that locker room exchange where hardly the most important thing that occurred that day.  It seems more than reasonable that he may have simply not realized he was "bent over" instead of kneeling -- that hardly seems worthy of calling the guy a liar.

 

Unfortunately when you are in a position of senior leadership you have to work very hard to avoid the appearance of any impropriety during an investigation like this.  Jim's actions went very much to the opposte and as a result he left any AD in the country little choice but to fire him -- perhaps the AD didn't need to start the investigaton but once he punched that ticket Jim's actions gave him no choice.

 

Still, let's not go calling the greatest football coach USF has ever had, a true gentleman, and someone who loved this school so deeply a liar because he misremembered his posture while talking to a student athlete at half-time!!!!

[Who'sYourData?]

I think we might be throwing the term lie around a bit harshly.  The moments Jim spent talking with Miller during that locker room exchange where hardly the most important thing that occurred that day.  It seems more than reasonable that he may have simply not realized he was "bent over" instead of kneeling -- that hardly seems worthy of calling the guy a liar.

 

Unfortunately when you are in a position of senior leadership you have to work very hard to avoid the appearance of any impropriety during an investigation like this.  Jim's actions went very much to the opposte and as a result he left any AD in the country little choice but to fire him -- perhaps the AD didn't need to start the investigaton but once he punched that ticket Jim's actions gave him no choice.

 

Still, let's not go calling the greatest football coach USF has ever had, a true gentleman, and someone who loved this school so deeply a liar because he misremembered his posture while talking to a student athlete at half-time!!!!

 

That isn't the only example.