Blair Holliday Delayed Readmission To Duke Until Summer Semester

[Greg_Newton]

Per his hometown paper (http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/jan/11/oaks-christian-graduate-relishes-second-chance/) - full context:


"The coaches have invited me to help coach the wide receivers," Holliday said. "I would probably do that because I don't want to just get rid of football completely in my life."

But Holliday's return to Duke is in limbo right now.

He reapplied for admission this semester, but was denied last week. Before the accident, Holliday was a psychology major with a 3.75 grade-point average.

"He was really disappointed. He tried to not get out of bed, but I made him," Leslie Holliday said. "He wanted to get back into school and get back to a normal life around his friends. His doctor at Shepherd Center was 100 percent behind him doing it, but I think Duke maybe feels it is looking out for his best interest, too, to make sure when he does come back he succeeds."When asked about the denial, Duke officials said federal privacy laws prohibit them from discussing the situation.

Of course, you hesitate to jump to conclusions, but I struggle to see how this is right. The only explanation that makes sense is the bolded, that Duke wants to make sure he's ready to succeed... but for that logic to fly, we'd have to assume that folks in the admissions office have a better handle on Blair's situation than his doctor, family and himself - combined.

Perhaps someone with a little more knowledge of the situation can chime in, but this feels potentially troubling (not a mention a potential PR nightmare).

[Newton_14]

Per his hometown paper (http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/jan/11/oaks-christian-graduate-relishes-second-chance/) - full context:



Of course, you hesitate to jump to conclusions, but I struggle to see how this is right. The only explanation that makes sense is the bolded, that Duke wants to make sure he's ready to succeed... but for that logic to fly, we'd have to assume that folks in the admissions office have a better handle on Blair's situation than his doctor, family and himself - combined.

Perhaps someone with a little more knowledge of the situation can chime in, but this feels potentially troubling (not a mention a potential PR nightmare).

This is horrible if true. I absolutely cannot fathom this. What message does this send to our players? I can imagine that one David Cutcliffe is ripping someone a new one over this. Good grief the kid almost died, and deserves the chance to come back to HIS school and complete his degree. If the injury prevents him from being able to perform in the classroom, then deal with it at that time and go to plan B. But my God, you have to give him a fighting chance.

I am terribly disappointed and embarrassed, to be be honest. This just isn't right.

[SoCalDukeFan]

This is horrible if true. I absolutely cannot fathom this. What message does this send to our players? I can imagine that one David Cutcliffe is ripping someone a new one over this. Good grief the kid almost died, and deserves the chance to come back to HIS school and complete his degree. If the injury prevents him from being able to perform in the classroom, then deal with it at that time and go to plan B. But my God, you have to give him a fighting chance.

I am terribly disappointed and embarrassed, to be be honest. This just isn't right.

This is impossible for me to understand.

SoCal

[TruBlu]

Not going to jump to any conclusions but this one:

If this story is true, it will only be a temporary setback to Blair. With as much fight and determination as he has shown, there is no doubt that he will succeed. He is truly an inspiration.

[Devil in the Blue Dress]

The only place I've seen this reported is on http://dukecheck.com/, a blog which examines a variety of topics related to Duke.

[uh_no]

I, too was shocked at reading this, even going so far as to discuss it with a professor. I was thankfully relieved at being lead to the trinity rules concerning medical leaves of absence:



Students placed on medical leaves may return after two semesters following the semester in which the leave is granted or as soon thereafter as they are deemed healthy enough to resume a full-time course of study.

While I'm sure we would all love to see him back at school, the fact remains that he must follow the rules everyone else does, and should be eligible for readmission in the fall.

[MattC09]

I, too was shocked at reading this, even going so far as to discuss it with a professor. I was thankfully relieved at being lead to the trinity rules concerning medical leaves of absence:



While I'm sure we would all love to see him back at school, the fact remains that he must follow the rules everyone else does, and should be eligible for readmission in the fall.

My understanding, as an undergrad, of the medical leave was that the two semester minimum was not set in stone. I can't remember the specifics of the case, but an acquaintance took one semester off because of health issues and was able to return since the issue was resolved. One of my friends left during the spring semester but was able to return the following spring semester. I don't know if they count the summer though.

The reporting of this is very strange if indeed it is a case of medical leave rules. If that's the case, why is it not being reported as Duke requires students on medical leave to wait two semesters before returning from medical leave?

[nmduke2001]

Per his hometown paper (http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/jan/11/oaks-christian-graduate-relishes-second-chance/) - full context:



Of course, you hesitate to jump to conclusions, but I struggle to see how this is right. The only explanation that makes sense is the bolded, that Duke wants to make sure he's ready to succeed... but for that logic to fly, we'd have to assume that folks in the admissions office have a better handle on Blair's situation than his doctor, family and himself - combined.

Perhaps someone with a little more knowledge of the situation can chime in, but this feels potentially troubling (not a mention a potential PR nightmare).

I really hope that there is more to this story.

[uh_no]

My understanding, as an undergrad, of the medical leave was that the two semester minimum was not set in stone. I can't remember the specifics of the case, but an acquaintance took one semester off because of health issues and was able to return since the issue was resolved. One of my friends left during the spring semester but was able to return the following spring semester. I don't know if they count the summer though.

The reporting of this is very strange if indeed it is a case of medical leave rules. If that's the case, why is it not being reported as Duke requires students on medical leave to wait two semesters before returning from medical leave?

Full disclosure: summer semester counts as a semester.

[Brian913]

As someone with no knowledge of Blair's situation. but much too much knowledge of the effects of TBI - this may be a blessing for Blair and his family.

Trying to resume your "old life" after a severe TBI can be a prescription for failure - and for heartache. A severe, or even moderate TBI changes things in your life - some are things you never expect. It is not something you "recover" from in six months. Sadly, the family often does not see these changes.

[wallyman]

Don't have any information on the facts in this case, but the website in question is a creature of the post-lacrosse, everything-Duke-does-is-evil mentality. Sometimes it gets things right. Sometimes it gets things wrong. But all of it's informed by the Brodhead-as-Satan mentality. So curious to know Holliday facts but would not assume anything.

[uh_no]

Don't have any information on the facts in this case, but the website in question is a creature of the post-lacrosse, everything-Duke-does-is-evil mentality. Sometimes it gets things right. Sometimes it gets things wrong. But all of it's informed by the Brodhead-as-Satan mentality. So curious to know Holliday facts but would not assume anything.

He also makes gross assumptions based on things he may not fully understand. He blasted tenting numbers last year, without understanding what the tent numbers even meant, and now seems to be spouting off on whatever this is without having actually read the rules concerning reinstatement after a medical leave of absence.

He has value in being able to extract and distribute information that the administration tries to conceal from stakeholders, but certainly does not always tell the whole story, and clearly has his own agenda.

Therefore you have to take everything he says with a grain of salt and try to read through the bias.

[SoCalDukeFan]

He also makes gross assumptions based on things he may not fully understand. He blasted tenting numbers last year, without understanding what the tent numbers even meant, and now seems to be spouting off on whatever this is without having actually read the rules concerning reinstatement after a medical leave of absence.

He has value in being able to extract and distribute information that the administration tries to conceal from stakeholders, but certainly does not always tell the whole story, and clearly has his own agenda.

Therefore you have to take everything he says with a grain of salt and try to read through the bias.

This story was reported in the Ventura County Star http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/jan/11/oaks-christian-graduate-relishes-second-chance/

I doubt if they have an anti Duke agenda.

I hope its just a timing thing and that Blair is at Duke in the fall semester is that is what he wants and what is best for him.

SoCal

[uh_no]

This story was reported in the Ventura County Star http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/jan/11/oaks-christian-graduate-relishes-second-chance/

I doubt if they have an anti Duke agenda.

I hope its just a timing thing and that Blair is at Duke in the fall semester is that is what he wants and what is best for him.

SoCal

they also talked about the rejection for about a paragraph...where it is reasonable to have glossed over the fact that there is a 2 semester rule.

Dukecheck (ed rickards) took that couple sentence clip and ran with it as if the university were somehow not doing right by him. Seeing as the piece focused on the rejection, you would think he would have looked for some viable explanation...hence the comment on his bias.

anyway, I'd imagine he'd be back in the fall, and I'm also surprised that the university didn't want him back as a student ASAP so they could use him as a feel good PR story (not that I or anyone else thinks of him that way....)

[Scorp4me]

Can't imagine Cut allowing this to happen so I'm willing to wait and see what the full story is.

[Greg_Newton]

I, too was shocked at reading this, even going so far as to discuss it with a professor. I was thankfully relieved at being lead to the trinity rules concerning medical leaves of absence:



While I'm sure we would all love to see him back at school, the fact remains that he must follow the rules everyone else does, and should be eligible for readmission in the fall.

This makes the most sense, but would still seem potentially troubling in that Blair's family and doctors cleared/supported him returning to school, but admissions deemed him not healthy enough to return. Shouldn't the doctor's opinion carry the most weight in that debate?

For everyone commenting on dukecheck, please see the link in the OP; the quote is from Blair's mom in an article in their hometown paper. "Dukecheck" subsequently reporting on it has no bearing on its legitimacy.

[El_Diablo]

Can't imagine Cut allowing this to happen so I'm willing to wait and see what the full story is.


I hope its just a timing thing and that Blair is at Duke in the fall semester is that is what he wants and what is best for him.


This makes the most sense, but would still seem potentially troubling in that Blair's family and doctors cleared/supported him returning to school, but admissions deemed him not healthy enough to return. Shouldn't the doctor's opinion carry the most weight in that debate?

The "full story" is that it is a timing issue. As already noted above, the school's policy (for all students) is that a student granted a medical leave of absence can apply for readmission after two semesters following the semester in which the leave is granted. Blair was simply not eligible to return for the spring semester, regardless of what his doctors concluded. I really see nothing nefarious or troubling afoot here.

[bob blue devil]

blair holliday aside, the policy itself strikes me as a bit odd and i am curious about its origins. why have a minimum time attached to medical leave and why is 2 semesters the magic number? i would think there are plenty of ailments that would render one incapable of completing coursework, but for which one could recover in a short period of time. is the minimum simply to keep people from frivolously seeking medical leave/encourage them to stay on track despite obstacles?

[uh_no]

blair holliday aside, the policy itself strikes me as a bit odd and i am curious about its origins. why have a minimum time attached to medical leave and why is 2 semesters the magic number? i would think there are plenty of ailments that would render one incapable of completing coursework, but for which one could recover in a short period of time. is the minimum simply to keep people from frivolously seeking medical leave/encourage them to stay on track despite obstacles?

yep, as far as I know

If this policy was not in place, if you were getting a bad grade, you could simply take a medical leave, come back a few weeks later and try again. If you have to sit out the next semester as well (and it is really only one semester since the summer term counts towards the two total), then you won't take a medical leave unless you really NEED a medical leave.

Also, they don't want people to be forced to make a choice to come back before they're ready. If you think you might be ready to come back, say early february, but aren't in january, you might attempt to put your health at risk by toughing it out in january. This policy prevents you from having to make that decision.

So yeah, in the end you may end up holding a kid back a semester who was actually ready to go, but overall, I think it is a fine policy.

[Turtleboy]

Students placed on medical leaves may return after two semesters following the semester in which the leave is granted or as soon thereafter as they are deemed healthy enough to resume a full-time course of study.

Why can't this mean that if one is healthy, one might return before two semesters have passed, if "thereafter" refers to "the semester in which the leave is granted"? If the two semesters were carved in stone, why would he even re-apply?

[Dev11]

I would imagine that since Blair's attendance in school is predicated on his participation in football, it doesn't make sense to rush back into the full swing of class AND football practice before he is absolutely healthy. Working with the team full-time may be a good way to ensure his body is ready for participation before heaving a full course load on him. I think it's ok.

I don't suggest that the staff would take away his scholarship if he attended class and decided to step away from the team for a semester (similar to the Andre Dawkins case, who as we understand is enrolled in school on his basketball scholarship and not playing basketball). Given that university policy prohibits him from returning to class unless he petitions for it, I don't think it makes enough sense to petition. Best to just have him around the team, and not violating any NCAA player eligibility rules while getting back into football shape.

I look forward to seeing him on the field next year.

[El_Diablo]

Students placed on medical leaves may return after two semesters following the semester in which the leave is granted or as soon thereafter as they are deemed healthy enough to resume a full-time course of study.

Why can't this mean that if one is healthy, one might return before two semesters have passed, if "thereafter" refers to "the semester in which the leave is granted"? If the two semesters were carved in stone, why would he even re-apply?

Yeah, it's not drafted perfectly, since one could make that argument in interpreting the "thereafter" (since, by itself, it could in theory refer to the time at which point 2 subsequent semesters have passed, or to when it was granted). But your interpretation would render the first part of the sentence (establishing the 2-semester waiting period) meaningless.

In other words, it's Time A (2 semesters after the granting of leave have passed) or Time B (as soon after Time A that the student is deemed healthy). Time B accounts for when the student is not yet healthy at Time A.

If one reads it your way, it would be Time A (2 semesters after the granting of leave have passed) or Time B (whenever healthy). It would only make sense to distinguish Time B from Time A if we assume kids would have to re-enroll at Time A regardless of health, and that makes no sense. It's not saying a student has to enroll by Time A, or earlier if possible. If one could re-enroll whenever healthy, the policy would just say "whenever the student is healthy."

[Turtleboy]

If one reads it your way, it would be Time A (2 semesters after the granting of leave have passed) or Time B (whenever healthy). It would only make sense to distinguish Time B from Time A if we assume kids would have to re-enroll at Time A regardless of health, and that makes no sense. It's not saying a student has to enroll by Time A, or earlier if possible. If one could re-enroll whenever healthy, the policy would just say "whenever the student is healthy."Well, that makes sense.

[Indoor66]

Yeah, it's not drafted perfectly, since one could make that argument in interpreting the "thereafter" (since, by itself, it could in theory refer to the time at which point 2 subsequent semesters have passed, or to when it was granted). But your interpretation would render the first part of the sentence (establishing the 2-semester waiting period) meaningless.

In other words, it's Time A (2 semesters after the granting of leave have passed) or Time B (as soon after Time A that the student is deemed healthy). Time B accounts for when the student is not yet healthy at Time A.

If one reads it your way, it would be Time A (2 semesters after the granting of leave have passed) or Time B (whenever healthy). It would only make sense to distinguish Time B from Time A if we assume kids would have to re-enroll at Time A regardless of health, and that makes no sense. It's not saying a student has to enroll by Time A, or earlier if possible. If one could re-enroll whenever healthy, the policy would just say "whenever the student is healthy."

It seems to me that the policy is pretty clear and, apparently, followed consistently. There is an old saying that "hard cases make bad law." This situation is clearly a hard case. Let's also not make it into one where we create bad law.

[budwom]

I would imagine that since Blair's attendance in school is predicated on his participation in football, it doesn't make sense to rush back into the full swing of class AND football practice before he is absolutely healthy. Working with the team full-time may be a good way to ensure his body is ready for participation before heaving a full course load on him. I think it's ok.

I don't suggest that the staff would take away his scholarship if he attended class and decided to step away from the team for a semester (similar to the Andre Dawkins case, who as we understand is enrolled in school on his basketball scholarship and not playing basketball). Given that university policy prohibits him from returning to class unless he petitions for it, I don't think it makes enough sense to petition. Best to just have him around the team, and not violating any NCAA player eligibility rules while getting back into football shape.

I look forward to seeing him on the field next year.

Well. Without being overly assertive, let me say that the chances he will play football again are miniscule, as in as close to zero as you can possibly be. Given the brain injury he
suffered I find it implausible that any responsible physician would allow him to play. I sure wish he could, but just can't imagine it ever happening.
p.s. and I don't think his attendance in school is predicated on football participation. We've had a number of guys who could no longer play but still went on to get their degrees.

[johnb]

As someone with no knowledge of Blair's situation. but much too much knowledge of the effects of TBI - this may be a blessing for Blair and his family.

Trying to resume your "old life" after a severe TBI can be a prescription for failure - and for heartache. A severe, or even moderate TBI changes things in your life - some are things you never expect. It is not something you "recover" from in six months. Sadly, the family often does not see these changes.

I see people with TBI on a regular basis, and I'd be willing to bet $100 that the above is the explanation. If he had been in good academic standing--which he apparently was--and viewed as currently fine, re-admission would be automatic; if they had to bend a rule to get him back this month, they'd probably have done it in a second. Cut's backing would be helpful, though I assume he's polite about it. I don't think the admission dept is set up so that they'd encourage the football coach to "rip people new ones" when he didn't get his way; if Cut were the kind of guy to do such things, he'd have been fired several years ago regardless of our success. Nevertheless, Blair is high profile, and there is NO WAY that the institution would turn him down without cause. Ie, don't underestimate the lasting consequences of TBI or the draining, painful effects on the patient's family and friends. Oh, and it would be great if he could hang out with the team, but no college team would ever let him again put on a helmet, much less a place like Duke with excellent medical and law schools (ie, it'd be institutional malpractice).

[Dev11]

Well. Without being overly assertive, let me say that the chances he will play football again are miniscule, as in as close to zero as you can possibly be. Given the brain injury he
suffered I find it implausible that any responsible physician would allow him to play. I sure wish he could, but just can't imagine it ever happening.
p.s. and I don't think his attendance in school is predicated on football participation. We've had a number of guys who could no longer play but still went on to get their degrees.

I haven't seen any news about the long-term severity of the injury, I just figured it would take him more time to get back to football shape.

I think I phrased my point incorrectly, as his attendance in school isn't necessarily predicated on football, but he likely recognizes the relationship between his participation in football and his scholarship. I don't think in a hundred years that Cut would take away his scholarship, but he probably feels obligated to be as involved as possible in the program, which given that it appears he's friends with a lot of the other guys on the team isn't really an issue.

Let me then rephrase and say that I hope we see him on the sidelines in the fall, doing as much as he can do for Duke football. Whether that's in a helmet or not, it's great for him and for the program.

[ricks68]

While I have a lot of respect for many of the posters on this thread, it appears to me that this thread could be heading towards a kind of "Nancy Grace" style slippery slope about all this-------------and you all (should) know what happened with that deal.

Seems to me that until there is some kind of verification of what is, or is not, going on, all of the negative speculation about something that may or may not have happened, is a bit over the wall for me. Maybe the mods should close this thread until there is some kind of reality check on what actually went down, or is still going down (not to stifle normal discussion, but to prevent possible injuries while attempting a hasty exit from the theater.:o ), and then my humble opinion is that it should definitely be re-opened.

ricks

[SoCalDukeFan]

While I have a lot of respect for many of the posters on this thread, it appears to me that this thread could be heading towards a kind of "Nancy Grace" style slippery slope about all this-------------and you all (should) know what happened with that deal.

Seems to me that until there is some kind of verification of what is, or is not, going on, all of the negative speculation about something that may or may not have happened, is a bit over the wall for me. Maybe the mods should close this thread until there is some kind of reality check on what actually went down, or is still going down (not to stifle normal discussion, but to prevent possible injuries while attempting a hasty exit from the theater.:o ), and then my humble opinion is that it should definitely be re-opened.

ricks

Closing the thread until we get more info is probably a good idea.

However with the confidentiality rules we may never get more concrete information.

SoCal

[Brian913]

This is my daughter http://www.dukechronicle.com/a...table-improving

If you met her today you wouldn't think anything had ever happened to her. She is a bright, "normal," person.

She had a lot more physical injuries than Blair, but the main thing to deal with was the TBI.

Her, and our, greatest hope was that she could resume "normal life" as soon as possible. About nine months after this article she returned to a job in the same business she was in before. She thought - we thought - her MDs thought - she was ready For many reasons - all related to the TBI - it was a failure. Worse, it shook her confidence for a long period of time.

She recovered from that failure, but trying to get back into her old life too soon delayed her real recovery. In retrospect we should have taken a much more cautious path.

Her story is not unique. I have heard it a hundred times from other TBI survivors and their
families.

I don't know Blair - and all I know about his condition is what I read on the web. I don't know the real extent of his injury. I do know that you have to be really cautious about rushing the return to "normal life."

[BigWayne]

This is my daughter http://www.dukechronicle.com/a...table-improving

If you met her today you wouldn't think anything had ever happened to her. She is a bright, "normal," person.

She had a lot more physical injuries than Blair, but the main thing to deal with was the TBI.

Her, and our, greatest hope was that she could resume "normal life" as soon as possible. About nine months after this article she returned to a job in the same business she was in before. She thought - we thought - her MDs thought - she was ready For many reasons - all related to the TBI - it was a failure. Worse, it shook her confidence for a long period of time.

She recovered from that failure, but trying to get back into her old life too soon delayed her real recovery. In retrospect we should have taken a much more cautious path.

Her story is not unique. I have heard it a hundred times from other TBI survivors and their
families.

I don't know Blair - and all I know about his condition is what I read on the web. I don't know the real extent of his injury. I do know that you have to be really cautious about rushing the return to "normal life."
Link is busted. Think this one is correct.... http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/hit-and-run-victim-stable-improving

[JasonEvans]

To me this is real simple. Unless you think Duke has some nefarious and/or evil motives, they are doing what they think is best for Blair and for Duke. I am tempted to say we have only half of the story, but my bet is we have even less than half of it.

We have no way of knowing what went into Duke decision. Almost certainly there are medical reports involved, perhaps even psychological evaluations. None of us have any idea what those reports said. Heck, we don't even know for certain what Blair's doctor's thought aside from something Blair's family told a newspaper. It is entirely possible there is something that the Duke admissions office saw that told them it was best for Blair to wait a while longer before coming back to Duke.

The job of the admissions office, in this case especially, is to make sure that Blair has the best chance to succeed academically and personally when he returns to Duke. Clearly, they felt that best chance was not right now. I would wager the reason they made that choice is entirely reasonable and wise.

-Jason "if Blair and his family truly felt Duke was treating them wrong, we'd be loudly hearing about it in the media, I guarantee it" Evans

[allenmurray]

To me this is real simple. Unless you think Duke has some nefarious and/or evil motives, they are doing what they think is best for Blair and for Duke. I am tempted to say we have only half of the story, but my bet is we have even less than half of it.

We have no way of knowing what went into Duke decision. Almost certainly there are medical reports involved, perhaps even psychological evaluations. None of us have any idea what those reports said. Heck, we don't even know for certain what Blair's doctor's thought aside from something Blair's family told a newspaper. It is entirely possible there is something that the Duke admissions office saw that told them it was best for Blair to wait a while longer before coming back to Duke.

The job of the admissions office, in this case especially, is to make sure that Blair has the best chance to succeed academically and personally when he returns to Duke. Clearly, they felt that best chance was not right now. I would wager the reason they made that choice is entirely reasonable and wise.

-Jason "if Blair and his family truly felt Duke was treating them wrong, we'd be loudly hearing about it in the media, I guarantee it" Evans

Even if you are 100% correct, and I have no reason to doubt that you are, from a PR perspective Duke has handled this horribly.

[Bluedog]

Even if you are 100% correct, and I have no reason to doubt that you are, from a PR perspective Duke has handled this horribly.

It would be a violation of FERPA to say anything publicly about the situation. I would think that they could, however, say a generic "we have a medical leave policy that requires an applicant to wait two semesters and be deemed healthy enough to re-enroll." I agree that most likely there is nothing nefarious about Duke's decision and they are simply following protocol.

[uh_no]

Even if you are 100% correct, and I have no reason to doubt that you are, from a PR perspective Duke has handled this horribly.

Duke has a legal obligation to hold confidential all decisions regarding admission....

[allenmurray]

Duke has a legal obligation to hold confidential all decisions regarding admission....

Yep, that is correct. It is also an oversimplification. Duke is limited in what it can say, but the family does not have those same limitations. Working together with the family so the information that does go public puts all in a positive light and gives a full explanation of the situation is part of the role of the university's public information office and part of the role of the athletic departments information office. Both Duke and the Holiday family greatly benefited from the good will this story generated. It doesn't seem that the university did a good job of coordinating with the family what information would come out and when.

[uh_no]

Yep, that is correct. It is also an oversimplification. Duke is limited in what it can say, but the family does not have those same limitations. Working together with the family so the information that does go public puts all in a positive light and gives a full explanation of the situation is part of the role of the university's public information office and part of the role of the athletic departments information office. Both Duke and the Holiday family greatly benefited from the good will this story generated. It doesn't seem that the university did a good job of coordinating with the family what information would come out and when.

For all we know, that occurred. All this got was about a sentence worth of quote in a random paper....it's possible they discussed all this stuff and it didn't make the final print....

either way, I don't think lambasting the school is the right decision here.

[Turtleboy]

The story on the front page says that he tried to re-admit as a part time student, but apparently that option is only available to seniors in their last semester who need less than a full course load to graduate.

[allenmurray]

For all we know, that occurred. All this got was about a sentence worth of quote in a random paper....it's possible they discussed all this stuff and it didn't make the final print....

either way, I don't think lambasting the school is the right decision here.

from a PR perspective Duke has handled this horribly = lambasting the school?

I forgot, this is a "Duke can do no wrong zone".

[Brian913]

I cannot imagine any way Duke could have handled that would have prevented the false "Duke won't readmit" Blair storyline.

[Duke09]

I think the point here is he applied to be a part time student and duke has a clear policy against that.

According to the Star, Holliday is a psychology major with a 3.75 grade point average. In a November interview with The News & Observer, Leslie Holliday said her son had petitioned to return to Duke as a part-time student in January. At Duke, however, only graduating seniors who need fewer than 3.0 course credits to graduate (4.0 is a full load) may request permission to study on a part-time basis in their last semester of enrollment, according to the Trinity College of Arts and Sciences website. This would be Holliday’s sophomore year.

[SoCalDukeFan]

I think the point here is he applied to be a part time student and duke has a clear policy against that.

According to the Star, Holliday is a psychology major with a 3.75 grade point average. In a November interview with The News & Observer, Leslie Holliday said her son had petitioned to return to Duke as a part-time student in January. At Duke, however, only graduating seniors who need fewer than 3.0 course credits to graduate (4.0 is a full load) may request permission to study on a part-time basis in their last semester of enrollment, according to the Trinity College of Arts and Sciences website. This would be Holliday’s sophomore year.

I am not a lawyer nor a PR genius but it would seem that if the reason Holliday was denied re-admission at this time was the part time policy then somehow that fact could have been communicated. His mother said he applied as a part time student so that is not exactly confidential information and neither is Duke's policy.

I do wonder if Duke follows the policy all of the time, really have no idea.

SoCal

[Turtleboy]

I think the point here is he applied to be a part time student and duke has a clear policy against that. No foolin'? (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?30201-Blair-Holliday-Denied-Readmission-To-Duke&p=617855#post617855)

[uh_no]

I am not a lawyer nor a PR genius but it would seem that if the reason Holliday was denied re-admission at this time was the part time policy then somehow that fact could have been communicated. His mother said he applied as a part time student so that is not exactly confidential information and neither is Duke's policy.

I do wonder if Duke follows the policy all of the time, really have no idea.

SoCal

The professor that I discussed this with knew of no one who was granted an exception to these rules.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Here is a nice follow up to this story.

Rick Holliday, Blair’s father, said once the family understood Duke’s policies, it made it easier to understand the decision.
“I makes sense, and it’s easier to buy into it,” Rick Holliday said. “We’re moving forward.”
For Holliday, that means he has moved back to Durham for good. The Holliday family rented a house here last fall during his rehabilitation from his injuries, and Blair will be living there.
Since he’s not a student, NCAA rules allow him to work in the athletic department this semester. He will start that job within the next couple of weeks.

http://www.heraldsun.com/sports/duke/x2029061902/Duke-s-Holliday-back-on-campus-to-stay

[Turtleboy]

Here is a nice follow up to this story.

http://www.heraldsun.com/sports/duke/x2029061902/Duke-s-Holliday-back-on-campus-to-stayThat's a nice story, but geez the formatting sucks. Every paragraph one sentence long? No indentation? No spacing? Is that the state of journalism today?

[allenmurray]

That's a nice story, but geez the formatting sucks. Every paragraph one sentence long? No indentation? No spacing? Is that the state of journalism today?

You have to remember, the Herald-Sun isn't a "real" newpaper. The Herald-Sun is to journalism what Lennay Kekua is to supermodels.

[BD80]

You have to remember, the Herald-Sun isn't a "real" newpaper. The Herald-Sun is to journalism what Lennay Kekua is to supermodels.

Lennay's going to be p!ssed to hear you say that!