Sign the Petition for Alleva to interview Rick Neuheisel

[DukeDevilsBB]

If you support Rick Neuheisel please sign the petition. I personally believe this is the guy for the job!


http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/H...uheiselatDuke/

[Duvall]

I personally believe this is the guy for the job!

Why? He washed out of two coaching jobs that are easier than Duke.

[DukeDevilsBB]

Why? He washed out of two coaching jobs that are easier than Duke.

Then don't sign it. I personally think he is a really good coach/recruiter and can make a big splash at Duke.

[Channing]

hasnt he had ncaa violations everywhere he has been?

[DukeDevilsBB]

hasnt he had ncaa violations everywhere he has been?

When he was at CU he was charged with several infractions...Many of these were minor and were dropped and the others were obvioulsy results of what many other coaches referred to as a "witch hunt". I for one believe that people deserve second chances or at least an interview where they can tell their side of the story.

Duke took a chance on a BB player that had allegations against him and
they proved to be false and he has become an outstanding young man. Everyone deserves a second chance.

[Cavlaw]

They might consider fixing the typo in the body of the petition.

[dukie8]

When he was at CU he was charged with several infractions...Many of these were minor and were dropped and the others were obvioulsy results of what many other coaches referred to as a "witch hunt". I for one believe that people deserve second chances or at least an interview where they can tell their side of the story.

Duke took a chance on a BB player that had allegations against him and
they proved to be false and he has become an outstanding young man. Everyone deserves a second chance.

no they don't. vick sure doesn't.

you are comparing false allegations against a teenager to proven violations of an adult. there's just a slight difference there.

[DukeDevilsBB]

no they don't. vick sure doesn't.

you are comparing false allegations against a teenager to proven violations of an adult. there's just a slight difference there.

my comparison may have a slight difference but your comparison of Vick to Rick N is absurd. Sure the violations commited fall squarely on the shoulders of the head coach even though he may not have been actively involved in the actions themselves. Does that make it right? No, but I do believe that he has learned his lesson and this is the perfect opportunity for both a coach and a football program to get a new start.

[dukie8]

my comparison may have a slight difference but your comparison of Vick to Rick N is absurd. Sure the violations commited fall squarely on the shoulders of the head coach even though he may not have been actively involved in the actions themselves. Does that make it right? No, but I do believe that he has learned his lesson and this is the perfect opportunity for both a coach and a football program to get a new start.

i wasn't comparing vick to rick n -- i was just showing that your belief that EVERYONE deserves a second chance is not true. vick can sit in jail for the next 2 years without a 2nd chance.

your comparison is ridiculous. as stated above, you are comparing someone who did NOTHING wrong (shel) to someone who did A LOT wrong (rick n). i am sorry if you cannot tell the difference. duke can do a lot better than someone with that checkered past.

[ugadevil]

I'll sign the petition if Rick agrees to put Duke in the Final Four in his NCAA Tournament Bracket.

[Channing]

i looked it up - i am thinking of someone other than Rick Neuheisel . . .

[SoCalDukeFan]

I used to think that Rick was a good option. However I think he pushes the envelope and am afraid he would get in trouble at Duke.

Besides his football pool, he also had a problem at Washington with misrepresenting an interview for an NFL job.

SoCal

[jimsumner]

"When he was at CU he was charged with several infractions...Many of these were minor and were dropped and the others were obvioulsy results of what many other coaches referred to as a "witch hunt"."

I'm sorry but this is incorrect. The NCAA found Colorado guilty of over 50 infractions from RH's tenure at Colorado and placed them on probation for two years.

At Washington he violated an NCAA rule that prohibits coaches from participating in gambling pools.

Whether he does or does not deserve a second (or third) chance is a question over which reasonable people can disagree. But let's go into this with open eyes. The man has some baggage.

[DukeDevilsBB]

"When he was at CU he was charged with several infractions...Many of these were minor and were dropped and the others were obvioulsy results of what many other coaches referred to as a "witch hunt"."

I'm sorry but this is incorrect. The NCAA found Colorado guilty of over 50 infractions from RH's tenure at Colorado and placed them on probation for two years.

At Washington he violated an NCAA rule that prohibits coaches from participating in gambling pools.

Whether he does or does not deserve a second (or third) chance is a question over which reasonable people can disagree. But let's go into this with open eyes. The man has some baggage.

Jim,

I have seen the list of infractions and they were all petty violations and the majority of them were not directly related to RN. It is obvious that they were trying to make him an example.

[rockymtn devil]

Jim,

I have seen the list of infractions and they were all petty violations and the majority of them were not directly related to RN. It is obvious that they were trying to make him an example.

This simply isn't true.

Petty Violations: Recruiting violations are never petty, especially when they lead to lost scholarships, recruiting restrictions, and two years of probation. What Rick Majerus did by providing milk and cookies at film sessions is petty.

Not Directly Related to Neuheisel: If this was true, then why would the NCAA restrict his ability to recruit at Washington from October, 2002 to May, 2003? It's one thing to not attribute a rogue player taking benefits from a booster to the HC. It's another to not attribute recruiting violations to the person in charge of overseeing recruiting.

Maybe they were trying to make an example out of him--I would agree that this is true to a certain extent--but that doesn't mean he didn't break the rules.

Here's the press release put out by the NCAA regarding Colorado's probation: http://www.ncaa.org/releases/infract...02100802in.htm

[Karl Beem]

Meh.

[DukeDevilsBB]

This simply isn't true.

Petty Violations: Recruiting violations are never petty, especially when they lead to lost scholarships, recruiting restrictions, and two years of probation. What Rick Majerus did by providing milk and cookies at film sessions is petty.

Not Directly Related to Neuheisel: If this was true, then why would the NCAA restrict his ability to recruit at Washington from October, 2002 to May, 2003? It's one thing to not attribute a rogue player taking benefits from a booster to the HC. It's another to not attribute recruiting violations to the person in charge of overseeing recruiting.

Maybe they were trying to make an example out of him--I would agree that this is true to a certain extent--but that doesn't mean he didn't break the rules.

Here's the press release put out by the NCAA regarding Colorado's probation: http://www.ncaa.org/releases/infract...02100802in.htm

From the press release you linked...

The violations involved impermissible recruiting contacts beginning with the 1995-96 academic year and concluding in the 1998-99 academic year. The committee also found violations involving the provision of clothing to recruits, contacts with an athletics representative, excessive reimbursement of travel expenses for recruits and improprieties involving recruiting entertainment expenses.

The report noted that the pattern of violations caused the case to rise to the "major" level. A significant number of the findings involved contact with prospects, or "bumping," during non-contact periods in the Spring when only evaluation is permitted. "When viewed separately," the committee's report said, "each of these contacts might be considered secondary; however, taken cumulatively, they reach the level of a major violation."

Trust me...I have seen the details of what happened during these "impermissable contacts" and they are by all means "petty" and 90% of coaches could be charged with these same "violations" each and every year.

The rest of the allegations listed are very generic and if you happen to see documentation of what really took place you would probably change your stance on the matter just as I have.

I'm not saying he is a saint but he is a good football coach and that's what we need in Durham right now!

[OrangeDevil]

I do not know Jim Sumner, but based on the opinions and insights he has posted on this this board I respect him tremendously. Jim, you wrong about this one. Your argument is essentially a moral one: Neuheisel did bad ergo he is bad. If there ever was a situation in need of redemption--as is Neuheisel himself--it is Duke football. Neuheisel should be chastened by now, His "sin' was that he irritated Barbara Hedges with his cutesy around the margins response to whether or not he placed bets in a basketball pool. Clearly this kind of behavior will not fly at Duke, nor should it. But I emphatically repeat, this should not disqualify him from consideration. The infractions were, in fact, fairly minor and he was completely exonerated of any gambling infractions.

I ask you, not considering his past indiscretions, who is preferable as a on the field offensive, pass-oriented tactician and coast-to-coast recruiter: Rod Broadway, Troy Calhoun, Bobby Johnson, Steve Logan or Rick Neuheisel? The perfect, immaculate candidate is not there. From this bunch clearly, to my way of thinking, Neuheisel is the obvious choice. He has won everywhere, he has a youthful vitality that college age athletes relate to, and given his bi-coastal bonafides he can successfully gain entry into the living rooms of the best in the nation recruits.

Let me be even bolder. The participants of the DBR ARE the Duke football fanbase. It is us who give a rats posterior about restoring the football program to ACC re national prominence. We should have our people in the Triangle (Jim Sumner and others) make our preferences known to the powers that be. Arrange a meeting or submit a petition to Alleva and Brodhead, let them know what we think. Duke football has reached a critical junction; I'm not sure of the alternative if the Franks-Roof scenario is replayed yet again. I don't know what others think, but I am not in the least excited or even hopeful over the prospect of a Bobby Johnson hire.

[killerleft]

OK, I signed the petition. Why not interview him? Check his story, re-check the facts, make a decision about that. If he passes the test, then decide whether he is the man for the job. What's the problem?

[diablesseblu]

OK, I signed the petition. Why not interview him? Check his story, re-check the facts, make a decision about that. If he passes the test, then decide whether he is the man for the job. What's the problem?

Agree completely. I do not understand, given the recommendations from sterling, successful football people, why we wouldn't interview RN.

If we don't, Duke comes off with both the arrogant tag we get all the time and a "holier than thou" attitude.

It seems that some people want to ensure Duke football success...but only on a modest level. That's the sense I get from who they've interviewed so far (Johnson excepted).