Posted by jf  4/10/2022 1:21 pm | #1 |
Hesitant to bring this up at a rare time of optimism for us in the past 6 years. But we've got some time
before the official coach appearance. And it's very important to understand how we got here--and the collateral
damage from it.
With that said, note this section from an extraordinary love letter to Coach K in a local newspaper.
Heavy verbal and emotional abuse, from holding a pity party for a player (no word on whether therapy needed) to abusing a student writing for the college paper, seems to be in the eye of the beholder. Sounds like a virtue
in this ode to greatness.
Source: Coach K’s family reflects on the Duke legend’s role as dad, grandpa and father-in-law - The Washington Post
"When Duke underachieves, the coach can be volatile, and his red-faced explosions are as legendary as they are predictable. He played for Bob Knight at Army, and early in his coaching career, he adopted some of Knight’s more infamous coaching habits, often being combative with journalists and belittling players to the point of making them cry. In 1990, a year before Krzyzewski won his first national title, he invited student newspaper staffers to Cameron after an article he disliked. He issued a rant decorated with profanity, according to a subsequent New York [size=75]Times story, and “scatological and anatomical references.”[/size]Krzyzewski softened long ago, those close to him say, but his response to losses can be no less extreme. A few years ago, when a player was feeling sorry for himself, Krzyzewski ended practice and invited players, coaches and support staff to midcourt so everyone could have an actual pity party."
|
Posted by GW0509 4/10/2022 1:46 pm | #2 |
I mean, isn't the simple answer it's ok because Coach K was a winner? And that the Duke administration cares more about winning than any reported bad behavior?
If you look at the coaches that have been removed for unruly behavior, it's often at schools that don't really have much in the way of a national basketball program: GW (ML), Siena (Patsos), Colorado State (Eustachy), Penn State (Chambers). The one outlier is Wichita State and Gregg Marshall. Their fanbase actually sounds a lot like ours in questioning the decision to fire him and promote the interim coach.
Meanwhile, coaches like K, Knight, Izzo, etc. can stay on campus with all sorts of reports of being assholes because they are winners and frankly have more power on campus than the President or the Board. That environment does not and probably will never exist at GW.
I still contend ML's biggest mistake was thinking he could win a power struggle at GW. I like how someone called it "Lonergan's Last Stand." As we saw, Knapp and Maltzman gave zero shits about the basketball program. ML could've gone 38-0 and won the national championship and it probably would've ended the same way. I was looking at the coaching carousel in 2015 and while I don't think ML could've beaten out Mullin for the St. John's job, he might've been able to get the DePaul job if he wanted to. Leaving in 2014 he probably would've been a strong candidate at BC. As we all know he "withdrew" from the Rutgers job as well. So all that being said, ML very likely could still be coaching today if he had just said screw it and left in 2014 or 2015. I actually think he still could come back and coach somewhere today if he wanted to. Pat Chambers is a head coach again and there was video of him pushing Myles Dread and telling his players to loosen the noose around their necks.
Posted by Gwmayhem  Online!4/27/2022 9:34 am | #3 |
Just ventured onto this thread as it was moved to the "Rewind" section and I subsequently was unaware of its existence until this morning. Here is what I believe:
1) The real reason why ML lost his job was because he became a whistleblower against his boss and ultimately lost this power struggle. Those who were in the position to genuinely investigate the claims were either too apathetic (Knapp) or too inept (Maltzman) to do so. Nero denied any wrongdoing and the lazy solution was to back the higher ranked individual. In time, the Deadspin article surfaced along with video evidence, more than enough for a new objective president to swiftly show Nero the door.
2) From Nero's perspective, it was much easier to cry "verbal abuse" and characterize ML as a monster than it was to acknowledge that ML made the claims he made against him personally. Keep in mind, without the Deadspin article leading the way, Nero is probably still our AD today.
3) Am not suggesting that the verbal abuse charges were completely out of left field. But, the reality is that practically all Division 1 head football and basketball coaches are guilty of verbal abuse to various extents. This is perhaps changing today to an extent as younger head coaches are named and athletes' rights are exponentially growing. Nevertheless, if ML is guilty of verbal abuse, then so are hundreds of additional coaches. While winning coaches might get an easier pass as GW0509 indicates, less successful coaches are excused as well as long as these interactions stay on the field, court or locker room and formal complaints are not filed. Which is the case at most schools.
