Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 193
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluedawg View Post
    I don't see what they have to gain?
    Bluedawg - since you seem to have all of the answers who do you think duke should hire?

  2. #62

    the cheater

    Quote Originally Posted by formerdukeathlete View Post
    about participating in a NCAA b ball bracket which apparently a compliance advisor at the athletic department had ok-ed in advance?
    So that's all he did wrong at Washington?

    You kind of skipped over the recruiting violations he committed at Washington, didn't you? You kind of missed the sanctions that the school had to self-impose after he cheated. You kind of missed the official repriment from the American Football Coaches association. You kind of missed the fact that he lied to an NCAA investigator about betting $1500 on an NCAA pool.

    Neuheisal leaves a track record of dishonesty that is far more impressive than his record as a coach who sent two superb programs into decline.

    I'm as bummed as anyone that we seem to be focusing on nonenities such as Bobby Johnson and Karl Dorrel. But better either of them than a chronic liar and a cheat.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    Neuheisal leaves a track record of dishonesty that is far more impressive than his record as a coach who sent two superb programs into decline.
    Again, I'm not going to campaign for Neuheisal, but I can tell you that he did not send Washington into decline. Gilbertson was (to put in nicely) both a subpar recruiter and a subpar game coach. Those were very frustrating times for UDub fans.

  4. #64
    To folks saying we absolutely owe this guy an interview, and to the even crazier who say we should flat out hire him: have you ever hired someone for a job?

    In what world would you agree to interview a candidate who was fired from his previous job for dishonesty? Who failed to comply with regulations at his previous two jobs? Whose prior employers would not recommend him? Who sued his previous employer? This is someone you're excited about interviewing?

    Only in athletics does this kind of track record get glossed over instead of ending a career. Between the leeway we give athletes and the leeway we give coaches, the world of sports is just screwed up. Just because other institutions gamble on their athletic programs, doesn't mean Duke should. And that is not holier than thou... I'm arguing from strict common sense. How many third chance hires actually work out?

    I'd be much more comfortable finding a candidate with less experience but a better track record of judgment and character.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by formerdukeathlete View Post
    about participating in a NCAA b ball bracket which apparently a compliance advisor at the athletic department had ok-ed in advance?
    He also lied to the Washington AD about interviewing with the NFL.

    The point is that Neuheisal promised the Washington AD that he would be honest with her. She was taking a risk with him, and he knew that. He lied anyway and betrayed that trust. JA would be taking a risk with him. Why?

    Why did he lie about the basketball pool? He had been told that it was okay but the compliance person.

    I understand that the NCAA rules are complex and that you need people to check for compliance, etc. Some of that must depend on the honesty of the coaches. I just find this guy to be untrustworthy.

    SoCal

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeb View Post

    In what world would you agree to interview a candidate who was fired from his previous job for dishonesty? Who failed to comply with regulations at his previous two jobs? Whose prior employers would not recommend him? Who sued his previous employer? This is someone you're excited about interviewing?

    That statement is completely false. If asked they have already said that they would highly recommend him.

    and as far as suing his previous employer....He was WRONGFULLY terminated, you would probably do the same....He won the law suit by the way.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeb View Post
    To folks saying we absolutely owe this guy an interview, and to the even crazier who say we should flat out hire him: have you ever hired someone for a job?
    I don't think people are saying we "owe" him an interview--obviosuly we don't. However, it is delusional to think that the head football coach at Duke is a plum job. Sure, we can hire a no-name up and comer or a lower tier veteran. Maybe that would turn out great. The point, though, is that, given position that the school is seeking to fill, many think that it would be prudent to cast a wide net and to consider candidates who, at first glance, might seem unappealing. Sure, such a hire could be high risk, but it could also be high reward. And it can't hurt to talk to people. See what the guy has to say for himself. See what his references say. If you can get former empoyers to speak, check with them. I, for one, hope the school looks everywhere. We are at a critical point.
    "Just like you man. I got the shotgun, you got the briefcase." Omar Little

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeb View Post
    To folks saying we absolutely owe this guy an interview, and to the even crazier who say we should flat out hire him: have you ever hired someone for a job?

    In what world would you agree to interview a candidate who was fired from his previous job for dishonesty? Who failed to comply with regulations at his previous two jobs? Whose prior employers would not recommend him? Who sued his previous employer? This is someone you're excited about interviewing?

    Only in athletics does this kind of track record get glossed over instead of ending a career. Between the leeway we give athletes and the leeway we give coaches, the world of sports is just screwed up. Just because other institutions gamble on their athletic programs, doesn't mean Duke should. And that is not holier than thou... I'm arguing from strict common sense. How many third chance hires actually work out?

    I'd be much more comfortable finding a candidate with less experience but a better track record of judgment and character.
    I've never had to hire anyone, but having been on hundreds of interviews (that's what happens when you don't get a job immediately), I know what goes into hiring someone. You look at everyone's resume. The best resumes you set up interviews with to get to know the person. Sometimes, you dig deep to find out why they did bad in this class, why they got arrested, why they lied about betting on an NCAA tourney pool, etc. The point is, we are in the position to get the best coach we possibly can. If we don't consider EVERYONE, we may not find that person. We all have our doubts about certain "candidates" and we all have our favorites, but I feel we are nowhere near the position of being uber-selective in our process. I don't necessarily know if I would like to see RN as a Duke coach, but what I do know is that he should at least get an interview. A guy with a record of success that is on par and even better than most of the other names that have been thrown out so far, and he wants to come here! You at least have to interview the guy. Sure, I expect the committee to get down to the specifics of what went down at Colorado and Washington. I expect RN to have to provide excellent answers to challenging questions. And, if in the end, they cannot get past that, then don't hire him. But, you will never know how he's changed until you at least meet with the guy. Give him a chance to prove himself, to wow the committee. If RN didn't have the baggage following him that he did, we would be lucky to have him. I understand that some people here don't want that baggage here, but I think that the committee should let RN defend himself and prove to us why this time around it will be different.

    As in the Adidas commercials, you miss 100% of the shots you don't take. I think Duke needs to take that shot and invite him in for an interview. If you miss, oh well, there are plenty more shots in us. But, if he has improved, if they feel he has shed that negative image, then we may have a chance for a slam dunk.

    I'll put it to you like this: upwards of 18,000 high school seniors across the nation send their applications to Duke because they want to be here. Does Duke only interview those who don't want to come, or just a select few? No, they interview EVERYONE. Why? If you didn't, you'd never know the whole story about a person. Now, if Duke can interview 18,000 students to fill the next incoming class of Blue Devils, you mean they can't interview one or 2 more guys who have expressed interest in coming here to help resurrect our football image? I say it's worth it. Give them a chance to be heard, at the very least.


    P.S. This same sentiment goes for Terry Bowden as well.
    2003-2004 HLM

    Duke | Mirecourt | Detroit| The U | USA

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Quote Originally Posted by RepoMan View Post
    I don't think people are saying we "owe" him an interview--obviosuly we don't. However, it is delusional to think that the head football coach at Duke is a plum job. Sure, we can hire a no-name up and comer or a lower tier veteran. Maybe that would turn out great. The point, though, is that, given position that the school is seeking to fill, many think that it would be prudent to cast a wide net and to consider candidates who, at first glance, might seem unappealing. Sure, such a hire could be high risk, but it could also be high reward. And it can't hurt to talk to people. See what the guy has to say for himself. See what his references say. If you can get former empoyers to speak, check with them. I, for one, hope the school looks everywhere. We are at a critical point.
    Quicker to the draw than I, but essentially the same message. I agree 100%
    2003-2004 HLM

    Duke | Mirecourt | Detroit| The U | USA

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham at heart
    I know this is a sticky issue, but for those of you saying that seem so intent on supporting Ricky, I was wondering if you could provide some actual evidence for all these "pro"-arguements... you know, like Paterno reccomending him, and the former UW AD reccomending him after that same AD terminated him for LYING.

    You know... I'm just saying.

    Oh, and by the way, if he were a college coach out on the recruiting trail, do you really think he'd be bragging about the potent Ravens offense? Or maybe he could brag about the great job that he's done turing Boller into a franchise QB. Oh wait...
    WWJDD?

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by DukeDevilsBB View Post
    That statement is completely false. If asked they have already said that they would highly recommend him.

    and as far as suing his previous employer....He was WRONGFULLY terminated, you would probably do the same....He won the law suit by the way.
    Who is "they"? University adminstrators? If so, care to provide links to back this up? The CU community was very disappointed with how RN handled his departure. He left the cupboard bare and and a lot of angry fans. Who from CU is on record saying they would hire him again?

    I think the UW experience speaks for itself... he was FIRED. You're saying UW administrators would give RN a glowing recommendation?

    As for the lawsuit... RN did not win that case. The lawsuit was settled. And if you're saying that as a prospective employer the way Rick handled himself at UW was in line with what you'd expect of a head coach, you obviously have different criteria for a head coach than I do.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Parts Unknown

    To all who support RN...Was it all talk?

    Quote Originally Posted by killerleft View Post
    Possibly a very good football coach? There seems to be conflicting info regarding his "evilness".
    52 NCAA Violations. Do you really want to go there? What happened to all of the talk about excellence, standards, academic pride?

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    I understand the emotion and good faith of both sides of this issue. But, with all due respect, Duke is not in a position to say that it refuses to even talk to the guy. Otherwise, given a lot of what I'm reading, we should have just stuck with Roof.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Parts Unknown
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    I understand the emotion and good faith of both sides of this issue. But, with all due respect, Duke is not in a position to say that it refuses to even talk to the guy. Otherwise, given a lot of what I'm reading, we should have just stuck with Roof.
    Yes they are...as is any institution of integrity.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    I understand the emotion and good faith of both sides of this issue. But, with all due respect, Duke is not in a position to say that it refuses to even talk to the guy. Otherwise, given a lot of what I'm reading, we should have just stuck with Roof.
    If Neuhesiel is the best we can do, I absolutely agree we should have stuck with Roof. We shouldn't interview candidates we are unwilling to hire.

    Duke is in a very tough spot. We need someone extraordinary to take a high risk job. This does not mean we have to consider a candidate who has demonstrated poor character and judgment when given the reins of two other Div 1 programs.

    I'd rather take a gamble on an unproven assistant with promise than gamble on coaches who have proven problematic to their prior employers.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    I understand the emotion and good faith of both sides of this issue. But, with all due respect, Duke is not in a position to say that it refuses to even talk to the guy. Otherwise, given a lot of what I'm reading, we should have just stuck with Roof.
    I disagree 100%. There are candidates out there who have demonstrated the ability to produce winning teams who do not have a track record of recruiting violations that resulted in sanctions, lying to the media and their own administrators, and being terminated (or allowed to "resign") due to misconduct. IMO, merely interviewing someone with that kind of record, who has repeatedly demonstrated utter disdain for the rules and for truthfulness, would be damaging to Duke's integrity and would undermine the school's reputation for its commitment to maintaining high standards in the operation of its athletic programs.

    As a Duke alumnus, an Iron Duke, and a season-ticket holder for both football and basketball, I dearly want to see the Blue Devils win on the field; but there's a limit to how much I think the University should sacrifice in order to achieve that success. A reasonable relaxation of admissions standards in line with peer institutions is, IMO, an acceptable accommodation; but a relaxation of our standards for integrity and honesty in the people who lead our student-athletes and who represent our school would, IMO, be far more shameful than a losing record on the field.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluedawg View Post
    Yes they are...as is any institution of integrity.
    I never understand how people see things so black and white. What do you know about each violation? What do you know about the circumstances? What do you know about the relationship between those violations and whatever happened at Washington? What do you know about the people at Washington who felt he lied to them? Were you present? Have you heard what the coach has to say? Is he contrite? Does he seem to have learned anything? What do people who have worked with him say about him? Not just the president of the school, what about others? How does he treat people? If he has a flaw, what precisely is its nature? Etc. Etc. I have interviewed 100s of people for jobs. Sometimes, you learn about something that makes you question a candidate. A bad reference. Maybe a terrible one. So, you dig. You learn more. Maybe you become convinced this is a bad candidate. Maybe you come to believe that the context surround the negative report is relevant. Maybe you are trying to fill a tough spot, so you are will to take more risk. Maybe not.

    But to imply, based solely on publicly available resources, that "an institution of intergrity" should not even consider this guy, nothwithstanding the difficulties it has faced filling this job over the last 20 years, is, well, amazing to me.

    It must be nice to be so certain of things.
    "Just like you man. I got the shotgun, you got the briefcase." Omar Little

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    So . . . I'm assuming that none of you would have interviewed Bobby Knight if K had gone to the Celtics in the 90's?

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Parts Unknown
    Quote Originally Posted by Stray Gator View Post
    A reasonable relaxation of admissions standards in line with peer institutions is, IMO, an acceptable accommodation; but a relaxation of our standards for integrity and honesty in the people who lead our student-athletes and who represent our school would, IMO, be far more shameful than a losing record on the field.

    Very well put and I'm in 110% agreement

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Parts Unknown
    Quote Originally Posted by RepoMan View Post
    I never understand how people see things so black and white. What do you know about each violation? What do you know about the circumstances? What do you know about the relationship between those violations and whatever happened at Washington? What do you know about the people at Washington who felt he lied to them? Were you present? Have you heard what the coach has to say? Is he contrite? Does he seem to have learned anything? What do people who have worked with him say about him? Not just the president of the school, what about others? How does he treat people? If he has a flaw, what precisely is its nature? Etc. Etc. I have interviewed 100s of people for jobs. Sometimes, you learn about something that makes you question a candidate. A bad reference. Maybe a terrible one. So, you dig. You learn more. Maybe you become convinced this is a bad candidate. Maybe you come to believe that the context surround the negative report is relevant. Maybe you are trying to fill a tough spot, so you are will to take more risk. Maybe not.

    But to imply, based solely on publicly available resources, that "an institution of intergrity" should not even consider this guy, nothwithstanding the difficulties it has faced filling this job over the last 20 years, is, well, amazing to me.

    It must be nice to be so certain of things.
    It is, but please pay attention to what i said...

    OldPhiKap said:

    I understand the emotion and good faith of both sides of this issue. But, with all due respect, Duke is not in a position to say that it refuses to even talk to the guy.
    And I responded...

    Yes they are...as is any institution of integrity.
    yes they are what...? "in a position to say that it refuses to even talk to the guy" They are under no obligation to talk to anyone...no matter how bad the team they can still hold out standards.

    I never sad, as you claim, that they "should not even consider this guy" i said they are in a position not to...that they have the right not to if it is their desire.

Similar Threads

  1. Dump Billy packer petition
    By jtholland in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 04-07-2008, 01:13 PM
  2. Neuheisel to UCLA
    By jimsumner in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-29-2008, 09:58 PM
  3. Alas poor Rick
    By throatybeard in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-11-2008, 09:41 PM
  4. why rick barnes will never win an NC
    By grossbus in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-11-2007, 05:43 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •