According to this article, the AD's ability to secure a spot in the B1G is reason for keeping his job. And college sport is about the student-athletes right... give me a break
According to this article, the AD's ability to secure a spot in the B1G is reason for keeping his job. And college sport is about the student-athletes right... give me a break
He did suspend Rice and make him go to anger-management counseling when this first broke. Do we know if Rice continued his antics or settled down thereafter?
Exactly. He addressed the situation, issued punishment of the rehabilative variety. Perhaps it even worked, we do not know. It's not like he swept it under the rug. If that was the case, then sure have this discussion. Termination is a serious (obviously) action to never be taken lightly, so I understand an attempt to rehabilitate, even if it is not the right decision in the end. Not a firable offense (unless he deceived the President of RU when discussing the punishment in December).
the member of the coaching staff that brought this to the attention of the AD last year had his employment terminated. He's now bringing suit for wrongful termination
Athletic directors do not hire/fire assistant coaches. That is the head coach's responsibility.
Are you using "termination" to refer to Rice or the AD? Perhaps the AD's actions (or lack thereof) don't constitute the need for termination, but I can't imagine that Rice's actions wouldn't necessitate termination at any other level. Hell, an NBA coach wouldn't get away with this, nor would a HS coach, but college athletics have that nice grey area where things are allowed to slip through the cracks. Rice is one sick puppy. The guy shouldn't be allowed to coach at any level without intense supervision.
It's actually scary that he is a father. Can you imagine how he treats his kids?
Because Rice was abusive (vaguely) to 18-21 year college kids, that means he is abusive to his children? Stop being so inflamed about everything.
Kicking someone, pegging them when they aren't looking, punching them in the chest, throwing a basketball at their head, calling them "fucking fairy faggots" isn't exactly "vague" abuse. You think this guy is just Mr. Charming at home? You really think he has an On/Off switch? I'm glad you're so confident in him as a moral human being, since you appear to be a great judge.
Do you also think that same thing about boot camp instructors? Because they do THE SAME EXACT THING!
Listen (if you can or want to), maybe examples of this type of extreme negative 'break you down to build you up' mentality exists. Just because this guy is going overboard with it, doesn't mean you get to assume anything about his personal life.
Except he's not a boot-camp instructor......Acting like that is part of their effectiveness. They know that they're just doing their job. This guy seems to have some serious mental health issues--I doubt he has an on and off switch he just flips.
Did I miss a memo? Is today 'God-awful analogy day on Mgoblog"?
My point was that his guy most likely has mental health issues... but implying he is a bad father and bringing his personal life into this is wrong.
I mean I don't really see what you're so bent out of shape about. It's not a stretch to think that if he has mental health issues that he cannot control at his job that he'd all of a sudden be able to control his actions at home. Maybe he isn't like this home, maybe he is and he hasn't escalated--I wouldn't doubt it and he hasn't really given anyone any reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. If he's acting this way around dudes that are 6"+ and pushing close to 200 lbs if not more each, I'd hate to see how he gets around say a 13 year old. Talk to any mental health expert or anyone who's spent time around people like this in the criminal justice system--this is a pattern of behavior.
Also, has anyone looked at this guy's post history? I'd say at least 2/3 have some form of personal attack in them, none give any sort of worthwhile opinions or facts, none have any new information... basically none are worthwhile. I really, really dislike you. Honestly. And I hope everyone else hates you too.
If this was fifth grade, I would definitely be getting everyone to exclude you right about now and it wouldn't be hard.
PS- I accidentally upvoted his post, can two people downvote it so it equals out? Thannnkkkssss.
Let the anger flow through you. Because that is all you know how to do.
your schtick is too fake, and you've waned it dramatically since you created the account. You're obviously 18 or something. You contribute to the conversation, but stop hiding behind whatever the fuck you're doing. 3/3rds of your "novelty" account are pretending to be like 80 years old and now it's boring as shit.
Yeah, I'm the guy to say it. I don't usually get so negatively outspoken--I'm not that kind of guy--but it needed to be said. Neg if you choose.
I haven't "acted" like an 80 year old for a while, these are my actual opinions. Would not signing off make you happy?
David is just a twat.
[No Sign Off]
...that I support him being as lenient as many perceive him to be, but this sensationalism is ridiculous. He at least did something, he didn't sleep on it like PSU. Get mad at the coach, not this guy.
Maybe he could have acted faster, but to imply that he should be fired because he didn't act until the Rice video became public is simply naive. By brokering the B10 deal, he is securing funding for the AD to the tune of 10-15M approx. per year, able to save programs that were recently cut and enhance the university brand. Rutgers and all the student athletes are now in a much better position because of the job he has done.
(still not cool to have a ball thrown at your head)
so he gets to keep his job because he secured funding and enhanced the Rutgers brand. It can be argued that Chris Webber and the Fab Five did the same thing but I guess since they are athletes, when they do wrong, lets distance ourselves from them and kicked them out the program. But the adults that charged to lead and be examples get to keep their jobs. I understand what he did for the athletic department and the university at large but that does mean he is teflon. I know people around here would be calling for Dave Brandons head if the situation were the happend at Michigan.
He also actually did something about the problem, which, even if terribly shortsighted, cannot be said for Webber et al. Obviously he made a mistake by going so easy on the coach, but he still did something. That alone should be reason enough to keep the job. The B1G thing to me is totally unrelated.
Your mixed tenses make it really hard to read your post.
he gets to keep his job because he secured funding and enhanced the Rutgers brand. It can be argued that Chris Webber and the Fab Five did the same thing
The Rutgers AD did it WITHOUT BREAKING THE RULES. That shouldn't be too hard to figure out. Oh, but I forgot, you're the one on the high horse who thinks you should fire the fuck out of everyone who ever witnessed a coach calling someone a bad word and didn't immediately run screaming to ESPN.
First of all im not on a high horse who thinks everyone should be fired because people witnessed a coach calling someone bad words. Im believe they should be fired because they witnessed a coach physically assaulting and abusing his players. Also Im almost certain the AD must inform the president of the goings on in the department and the president said he never saw these tapes until a few days ago. So the AD did break rules, the rules of his contract. I hope you dont work in a profession where you are charged with the well being of people because those people would be in trouble with your way of thinking.
Also Im almost certain the AD must inform the president of the goings on in the department and the president said he never saw these tapes until a few days ago. So the AD did break rules, the rules of his contract.
You truly have a gift for making assumptions that are necessary to make your narrative work. How can you possibly assume that not showing the tapes to the president is a breach of his contract?
Unfortunately for you, I have worked in a profession where I was responsible for people's well-being. It's clear you haven't, or you'd understand that when you have the power and responsibility to discipline people, you don't have an itchy trigger finger.
Actually im not making assumptions to make my narrative work. If you want to believe that there arent clauses in contracts to safeguard against stuff like this, then you can. Are you trying to tell me in your profession if you have information that damning about a subordinate you wouldn't have to bring it to the attention of your boss as part of your duties? This not only to protect you but also your subordinate. But lets say the AD didnt have to tell the president, it better serves him to do so.
Are you trying to tell me in your profession if you have information that damning about a subordinate you wouldn't have to bring it to the attention of your boss as part of your duties?
Are you trying to tell me the president didn't have any idea that Rice was suspended? He doesn't need to watch the video to know it exists. He doesn't need to watch the video to know about Rice being suspended and why. It's called placing trust in the people you hire to do their jobs. So yes, you are making wild assumptions. Just like when you acted like the assistant coach Murdock never talked to anyone at all for two years. That was a foolish assumption. Now you're making the same assumption, only with the AD and president. How can you be so pompous and arrogant, to think you know about every conversation between the people involved, and any that you don't know about, never happened?
Could you tell me exactly how Chris Webber "enhanced" the Michigan brand when he was the major reason they had to vacate every game he ever played in? Chris Webber is directly responsible for 15 years of underachievement in the W-L column, and ten years of hell for the Michigan program.
If that's "enhancement," I think I'll just take the standard version.
The same way any athlete enhances the brand of university. Many students want to attend universities because of the sports teams and the players that go there. I for one wanted to attend michigan because of that. I began learning that michigan was such a great academic school only because my interest in the sports team lead me to do research on them. Its also been documented i believe in the Fab Five documentary that enrollment increased during his time in AA. So yes he did enhance the brand of michigan.
I think you are missing the point. So money is more important than doing what right now a days? I hear people around go off on a player for taking money, hell people still hate Chris Webber for taking money because it was the wrong thing to do. But we are going to sit here and say he at least did something? Yea he tried to sweep information under the rug with a token suspension and fine so they can secure a sport in a better conference with a bigger pay out.
What if the anger- management classes he made Rice take worked, and Rice stopped being abusive? Would you say that he still didn't do what is right?
If we're being honest here, we know there are a lot of Mike Rices out there. One coach told the news the other day "There are coaches all over the country destroying practice tape right now." That kind of behavior is a bigger part of the sports culture than we like to admit. The AD did take some steps to rectify things. It's likely that he knew other ADs who had been in this situation before (probably every year you have players in some sport complaining to the AD about their coach) and followed their advice. This story wouldn't have made the news if one of Rice's assistants hadn't brought on a wrongful-termination suit.
My friend is an AD. He said at this level the kind of people who become head coaches are essentially unmanageable. You just have to bring them in and pray to god they are not too crazy and their good character will win out over the ego, the pressure, and all the other things that could go wrong.
I think the Rutgers AD had to walk a fine line. Here's a serious problem with a coach. If the details get out it will be a PR nightmare. If the school fires him it will also be a PR hassle, and then they will have to go through the expense & disruption of coaching search on top of it. To the AD, it probably looked like the most reasonable thing to do was slap the fine on the guy and make him take steps to stop this kind of behavior. Voila, you've protected the players from further abuse, you've protected the program from disruption, you've protected the school from scandal--assuming it works. Maybe it didn't (it's not clear to me whether anyone is alleging the taped behavior is still how Rice behaved after the fine & anger management classes).
It was a reasonable step to take, IMO. They should have found a way to keep the whistleblower on instead of firing him, although I could see where his relationship with Rice may have been forever poisoned.
I think if Rice never coaches again it will be sweet justice. I won't defend that guy, he sounds like an ass and I'm not sorry he got canned. BUT I understand why the AD chose the approach that he did.
That reminds me of what David Brandon said about Beilein a couple years ago, when there was some discontent from the fanbase: "If I were to fire John Beilein, I'd have to find another one of him." It's hard to find guys like him, who can connect with their players without being too permissive (think Steve Fisher) or too draconian. We should think about this when we complain that he doesn't show enough "fire." When you see some coaches make an ass of themselves on the sidelines during a game, with everyone watching, it makes you wonder what they're like behind closed doors...
Great post that reasonably covers the situation.
Glad the coach is gone, but I'm not upset with the AD's actions at all.
...I saw more of the tapes and was appalled, plus I didn't realize an assistant coach went undisciplined despite displaying the same behavior. I'm not sure I feel the same way anymore. I appreciate the position the AD was in--it was a tough one-- but the video is very damning, IMO
Yeah I just saw that on Sportscenter. I had to replay it a few times because the anchor's explanation was confusing.
Apparently, once seeing the video the AD hired an independent investigator in November prior to the suspension. But then ESPN followed that up saying that the video shown by the whistleblowing coach was the same video that prompted the independent investigation.
Again, I think it just falls back to we don't have all the info and can't make any informed decision.
But, now knowing this, I'd say the timeline makes more sense:
July: Assistant Coach is fired. Shows tape to AD
AD supervises practices where Rice is on best behavior (as was reported).
November: AD is given more/longer tape hires independent investigator.
December: Issues punishment for Rice. Why no punishment for assistant coach?
Perhaps he viewed the actions of the asst coach as an extension of the head coach? Perhpas there was actually punishment for the asst coach - we haven't heard any official word from RU yet.
Again, we still don't know enough to make any informed decisions. With that, I'm done with it.
Their AD looks like such a BRO. Definitely spend his summers on the shore.
Didn't the AD play at Rutgers? IIRC, I could be wrong. I just thought they mentioned that when Rutgers joined the BIG Ten.
The message is money is more important than integrity.
The Rutgers AD has zero integrity. But boy, does he make lots of money for Rutgers! And money wins.
So we can blame him for not caring all that much about the welfare of student athletes and for Rutgers being in the Big Ten.
...but I hope this is opinion and no administrator was stupid enough to say this (he's staying because of his work with the B1G) publically.
If that's the case, THAT person should be fired for being an idiot. At this point, everyone at Rutgers just needs to stop talking. The coach is fired, it'll go away as soon as someone else does something crazy.
Rutgers isn't even in the league yet and I'm about ready for a movement to move them into the America Athletic Conference. Call up Cincinnati for a year while the Scarlet Knights simmer in the D-League.
The president of the university said this
Soooo sooo soo so glad to have Rutgers in the Big Ten! Welcome guidos, fake bakers, fist pumpers, flat-brim wearers, academic underachievers, etc. The culture just screams Big Ten. Can't they just go away? I'd take anyone else that has been mentioned over them (except Cinci or Louisville).
YAY! You are being racist!
with E Gordon...
In the video they said whenever the AD was around, Rice was on his best behaviour. Maybe the AD didn't have enough evidence to act quickly. When he did have enough evidence, he sent Rice to counseling. Then when this came out there nothing to do but to fire him. Sure, it may not be ideal to you but he gave Rice a second chance, then fired him when it didn't work. If you say he should've acted sooner, what is the threshold for how soon he should have acted? How can we be sure he knew all along about Rice's behavior and tried to sweep it under a rug?
We can't be sure he tried to sweep it under the rug. That's just what people conclude whenever they don't take two seconds to consider the intricacies of the situation and rather follow ESPN on their dumb sensationalist tirade.
It's not even clear if the second chance worked or not. Is the leaked video from before or after he was punished?
Why is that even a question? If any other person had acted that way in their jobs with KIDS, would they be given a chance to continue working with KIDS? Seriously?
Anyone who watched that video and thinks the coach should have kept his job has a screw loose.
Hypotheticals about what would happen to someone in another line of business are pointless. In college sports, I can guarantee you there are a lot of guys like this. Most will never get fired or probably even disciplined. The Rutgers AD tried to intervene, suspending him and sending him to anger-management classes. If that had a positive effect on Rice, then yes, I do think that's important to note. You don't think it matters if the AD's actions had positive effects on his behavior?
The AD had ALL THE VIDEO of the coach acting like a psycho. He's had the video for over a year now and has been sitting on it. He admitted as much on ESPN duirng the OTL intefview yesterday.
All of this excuse making for the AD is pathetic. He was trying to sweep it under the rug and hope that it would go away without anyone finding out.
It's good to see another sane viewpoint here.
Right. Anyone that has a different viewpoint MUST be insane. (eyeroll)
I'm actually impressed that, by and large, this community doesn't get swept up in knee-jerk hysteria. (Well, maybe after we lose a sports game...)
The Rutgers AD tried to get Rice some help. Maybe he didn't do quite enough, but it's not like he engaged in a cover-up. When you suspend your coach for improper conduct, that's kind of hard to keep under wraps.
If I or anybody else I know behaved as he did, physically and verbally abusing others at a job, they would be fired. Since he was their superior, it is worse since they were unable to file a complaint without fear of retribution. On top of that, this unethical tool apparently fired an assistant coach (who compiled the video) for blowing the whistle.
Why did the AD keep this abuse a secret? Why didn't he give the abused athletes the freedom to leave the program?
If Rutgers fails to fire the AD, it's a travesty. If the President of the University also had knowledge of the video, he should be fired as well.
All of these people are unsuitable for any position of authority in the future.
The student athletes and the fired assistant should sue and are likely entitled to major damages.
This whole fiasco should inspire a movement to give student-athletes greater freedom and rights. I would even suggest breaking up the NCAA monopoly which uses its power to exploit and abuse student-athletes.
First of all, lots of athletes did leave. Nothing stopped them. In case you didn't know...
Second of all, I'm fairly certain Rice himself had more to do with the assitant's firing than the AD himself.
Finally, you sound like OTL.
This is what happens when you judge without knowing all the detais.
First of all, don't athletes have to sit out a year if they transfer? That's not exactly freedom to transfer. In case you didn't know....
Second of all, according to reports I've looked at, the assistant (Eric Murdock) brought the issues with Rice to the AD's attention in July 2012 and was later let go for "insubordination." If that's true, it's clear the AD was directly involved or negligently uninvolved in Murdock's firing.
Finally, you sound seriously uninformed.
Coaches are in charge of hiring/firing their staffs, not athletic directors.
my post just above. The AD SHOULD have been involved. And ultimately the AD IS in charge of all hiring and firing, especially if they have reason to believe it is being done improperly.
No AD is going to force a coach to hire/keep an assistant he doesn't want. That AD will quickly be unable to attract top talent. The athletic director is in charge of the head coach and it is the head coach's responsibility to assemble a staff.
Rice decided to not renew a coach. This happened prior to the suspension. There would be no reason for any AD to force one of his head coaches to hire/keep an assistant coach that the head coach did not want.
Do you think when John Beilein replaced his coaching staff that he needed to have each firing and each hiring approved individually by Dave Brandon? I'd imagine the conversation went something like:
JB: Dave, I've decided we need to replace our assistant staff.
DB: Ok, let me know what I can do to help. Here are the financials you need to work within. When you have a recommendation for hire, we'll sort through the paperwork.
JB: Cool beans.
So the AD has no responsibility for what goes on in his athletic department? The AD has no responsiblity for the firing of a whistleblower by a coach who (according to video shown to the AD) physically and verbally abused student-athletes?
How about this conversation:
Rice: I'm gonna can that $%#$%&^* who ratted on me for knocking some of my players around.
AD: Good idea. We don't need rats like that around. Just make sure that video doesn't get out. And make sure nobody else is taping when you decide to kick some kid's a$$.
Rice: Cool beans. (High fives the AD)
Yeah, that's the kind of AD we need in college athletics.
Yeah, I'm sure the conversation went exactly in that fashion. Come on, you're beating up a straw man.
Oh come on. Assistant coaches come and go all the time.
We don't know the timeline of what Murdock told the AD and when. All we know is that Murdock's contract was not renewed in July - a decision made by Rice. Then in December Rice was punished by the AD.
Student Athlete Welfare <<<<<<<<<<<<< Dollars
Sounds about par for the course when it comes to the NCAA
I am surprised that there has been little comparison made between the situation at Rutgers and Bobby Knight at Indiana. Knight engaged in similar behavior for years. It was only when a disgruntled former staffer had the video of him choking Neil Reid that Knight was put on zero tolerance probation (much worse behavior than Rice in my mind, though I agree Rice should have been fired the first time). Nobody called for IU president Myles Brand to be fired, in fact he was hailed for standing up to Knight for putting him on probation (though many criticized Brand for being so harsh on Knight. Later Knight was fired for violating his probation when he grabbed a student that called him "Knight." Of course, Knight had 3 national championships and Rice has a losing record.
You just answered your own question. Indiana put up with Bobby Knight because he won, and he won big. Same reason that Bama puts up with Nick Saban. The guy has no soul, but he is a winner, he puts an elite product on the field, and he puts Auburn in its place.
If the AD had been half as worried about protecting the kids from an abusive coach as some of you on this thread are worried about him losing his job, none of this would have happened.
Anytime someone uses the "would someone please think of the kids" line, without anything else to go with it, I assume they have no idea what they are talking about.
These aren't kids. They are adults.
At least people don't have to assume you don't know what you are talking about. You put it right down in words and make it obvious.
You are talking about 18-21 year olds being abused by an adult authority figure who has ultimate power over their entire lives. He can completely destroy them by pulling their scholarship. And you can't see the the problems inherent with that? And how it might be part of the AD's job to step in and protect them from being abused?
Good fucking grief. No wonder so much abuse ends up going unreported.
You know when else 18-21 year old adults gets berated by authority figures? In military boot camp. Do you have an issue with how our armed forces get trained? I would assume that it works just fine in that case.
The AD fired the guy and he isn't going to get a head coaching job for a long time because of this. What else do you want? Nuke the entire Rutgers athletic program from orbit?
We could have a civil conversation about this. Trust me, I'm game to go back and forth with you. But you first have to be civil.
You're the one who decided to say that I must "not know what I'm talking about" because of some semantics argument about whether 18-21 year olds are technically adults or kids. Don't lite a crap-bomb on my doorstep and then ask what I'm all cheesed up about.
The AD only fired the coach because ESPN released the tapes. He had no intention of doing anything before yesterday. DId you even watch the interview? He spent the entire interview defending the coach and made it clear he felt the issue was closed. It was only after he got back to his office and realized what a shit storm had kicked up that he fired the guy. So the firing has nothing to do with what actually occurred and everything to do with CYA.
So what else would I like? Athletic DIrectors with integrity who do the right thing is pretty much #1 on my list. Didn't we just go through this with Penn State? Obviously the Rutgers AD can't be counted on to do the right thing. He sat on this video for YEARS. Sure, now that it is exposed, he fired the guy. Great. That is like breaking up with your mistress after your wife conrfronts you with video evidence that you're cheating on her. Bully for you--what a stand up move.
As for the military, I would hope most people would understand there is a big difference between going into the military and playing college basketball. One is preparing you for surviving a life and death struggle. The other is preparing you for playing a game. Even given that, I doubt many in the military would say that firing basketballs at people's heads is an effective form of discipline.
Obviously the Rutgers AD can't be counted on to do the right thing. He sat on this video for YEARS.
He was first shown the video in December, at which point he suspended Rice and ordered him to training. Nice try.
He was TOLD about the stuation, and he HAD THE VIDEO almost a full year ago. Whether he actually watched the video or not is his problem, not mine, as THAT IS HIS JOB. The situation was brought ot his attention in mid 2012.
I apologize for using plural years. I should have said he sat on the video for nearly a year, which is just as bad.
Go back and read the article. Murdock showed him the video in December, not before.
The AD had access to ALL the video the moment the allegations were brought to him in mid-2012. It was HIS JOB to review the tape. If you are told your employee is abusing students and you have video tape, it is YOUR JOB to watch the tape or at least get an assistant to watch it for you.
The fact that Pernetti sat on his ass and forced Murdock to make a "Mike Rice's greatest hits" mix tape before doing anything just further proves my point about how little integrity he has. He had full access to video of this behavor for months and months and either chose not to watch it or watched it and chose to do nothing about it. Oh, except to fire the whistleblower. He managed to make time for that.
20 hours a week of practice. 20 weeks in a season. And that's just when the games are being played. If you think it's an ADs job to sort through 400 hours of practice video - 800, actually, over two seasons - to find the 30 minutes' worth of stuff that got Rice fired, you have a twisted idea of his job description. The burden of proof is on the accuser. It's entirely reasonable for Pernetti to tell Murdock to show him.
Unless you think it's reasonable for an AD to hear a complaint from a former assistant coach and think, "oh shit, I'd better drop my meetings with donors, scheduling calls for 20 different sports, interviews with potential coaching candidates, compliance paperwork, and the thousand other things an AD does, so I can watch 800 hours of video to find that one time the coach might have thrown a ball at someone's head."
No, it absolutely is NOT his job to do that, nor is it an assistant's. Murdock brought the accusation. Murdock is the one with the responsibility to prove it.
He was a CURRENT assistant coach who was claiming that the coach was abusing students. So yeah, I damn well DO think that maybe someone in the AD's office (the AD does have people that work for him you know--he isn't a one-man shop) should have maybe looked at some practice recordings instead of just sitting around for 6 months hoping that the assistant coach was a lying lunatic with an axe to grind.
As I've said before, listeining to the attitudes on this board, it is becoming increasingly obvious why so much abuse goes unreported. If it isn't the Athletic Director's job to protect the students from an abusive coach, then who the hell is supposed to do it?? The Tooth Fairy? I mean the AD is only the coach's boss and all.
except that it was months rather than years. But you should save your breath. There seem to be quite a few hardheaded and/or uninformed individuals here who are immune to logic. This hardheadedness is the reason people like Rice get hired and then tolerated despite criminal misconduct. It's the reason incompetent and/or unethical AD's and University Presidents keep their jobs and get paid the big bucks despite massive incompetence.
Yes I had my timetable off by a bit--he was informed in mid 2012, which means he only sat on the video for about 10 months, which admittedly isn't "years". That doesn't really change my point but I was wrong to say "years"
As for your other point, it is exactly right. For some reason, people are unbelieably tolerant of incredibily unethical behavior, and they refuse to see how their tolerance enables more of that behavior to occur.
Because tolerance is a bad thing?
Are you seriously putting forth the idea the being tolerant of unethical behavior is a GOOD idea?????
What, did you work for Enron or something???
This is your definition of unethical. Some people in Mississippi think interracial marriage is unethical.
He's just not fireable by the University President, who rubberstamped his wrist-slapping mini-suspension of RIce for what was obviously unacceptable conduct that should've resulted in immediate termination. The UP needs to resign, as some Rutgers faculty have been calling on him to do, after which his replacement can clean house.
How often is a D1 head coach suspended by their own AD? The only other I can think of is Calhoun. But I don't remember if his suspension was from the NCAA or not.
How often is a D1 head coach taped whipping basketballs at his players heads & kicking and shoving them around the court, not to mention the verbal abuse? Maybe most AD's don't have to suspend their own coaches because they don't hire crazy assholes to coach?
If you think Mike Rice is a rare exception, behavior-wise, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you.
In any university there is always a faction of a faculty that want the president to resign. They are just using this PR blip to get their voice heard. Nothing new here.