When character assassination knows no bounds
I understand that opinions are like a**holes and that everyone has one. However, I typically expect that the person holding such opinion would have the slightest exposure to the subject of their opinion.You can imagine my surprise when I read an article from Jennifer Floyd Engel from the Fort-Worth Star Telegram, which sits along side the Dallas Morning News as the two major newspapers in the Dallas Metroplex area. Jennifer is a Mizzou grad who started covering the Dallas Stars and has branched out into other areas for the paper and sports radio. Having previously spent 12 years in the Dallas area, my opinion of her has already been formed, but this part of her unhinged Big 12 rant even surprised me.
"However, whatever, just beat them. Send Nebraska to the Big Ten, or whatever name E. Gordon Gee decides to slap upon that league, with a big fat reminder that their Big 12 legacy was never all that impressive and they will barely be missed at all.
Remind Nebraska why it was never the bellwether team of this conference and why it will not be in the Big Ten. Show the Huskers what Wisconsin and Ohio State and possibly Michigan (if Jim Harbaugh replaces that slimy little RichRod) will do to them."
Apologies for not knowing how to put the above in a nice box. Pretty strong words for someone at a major newspaper who has no horse in the race in regards to Michigan and I strongly doubt has ever met RR. Slimy? F*ck off random sports writer in Texas. This is ridiculous. At least teenage recruits don't read newspapers anymore. Feel free to spam jenfloyd@ star-telegram.com or call 817-390-7697, your choice.
http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/12/01/2673121/hey-coach-stoops-win-one-for-the.html
December 6th, 2010 at 2:15 PM ^
And I get accused of parsing? It's Rodriguez's program. The program (i.e. his grad assistants) were reprimanded/fired for their behavior. I know Rodriguez wasn't named, but honestly, if this was Nick Saban at Alabama...the general thought process would be that Saban('s program) was sanctioned.
And yeah, Michigan put itself on probation. And the NCAA agreed. That's essentially the same thing as Michigan being put on probation by the NCAA.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:31 PM ^
One graduate assistant, Alex Herron, was terminated, for having made false statements to investigators. The University terminated his employment. Rich Rodriguez did not lie, was not accused of lying. And was not accused of any primary violation of NCAA rules.
I don't fucking care about any "general thought process" or about "Saban." I am interested in the specifics, as they relate specifically to Rich Rodriguez, now that you have joined in on the colossally unfair attack on him.
I'm still waiting for the explanation on how "slimy" is justified in Rich Rodriguez's case.
You sound like 1,000,000 other dumb fucks who get their information on Michigan football from the newspapers and radio.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:35 PM ^
I'm attempting to avoid pissing contests like this one is turning out to be. I've explained how one might view Rodriguez as slimy. I'm not going to continue.
Have a great day.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:43 PM ^
You're like Rosenberg; operating in a responsiblity-free zone. You just observe what the perception could be, what questions there might be, take your cheap shot, and walk away.
You deserve no respect, and in the future I hope that there will be a lot fewer people like you near the Michigan football program.
Slimy indeed.
December 11th, 2010 at 10:48 AM ^
You have valid arguments; maybe if you don't sound like such a dickbag while making them, people would actually listen to you.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:02 PM ^
Technically, Rodriguez was not sanctioned by the NCAA personally. I think its a matter of semantics? That said, I think its pretty disingenuine for someone to call another "slimy" or question their morals (which is, in effect, what someone does when they call another "slimy"). I assume she questions his morals because of the way he left WVU and the NCAA investigation stuff. But are people outside of the program really entitled to call him slimy? Balance those allegedly "slimy" things with all the good he does and I think its no only incorrect to call him slimy but should also be reprehensible. But that probably goes for Saban's and Dantonio's detractors as well so maybe I don't like my argument . . .
P.S. Section 1, no reason to resort to name-calling. I think Mangus is simply referring to public perception, which often is totally separate from the facts of the matter.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:02 PM ^
M was already on probation from before RR's time, it was only extended.
So I guess that makes the whole athletic program 'slimy', right?
December 6th, 2010 at 2:55 PM ^
the university/AD were still within the timeframe for being repeat offenders from the previous probationary period.
December 6th, 2010 at 1:59 PM ^
A systemic issue that resulted in some extra stretching time is comparable to oversigning and dumping recruits out the back door. Right on there, nice comparison. Oh and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a thorough investigation showed it not to be RR's fault beyond being one compenent of that system.
Personal life? Are you referring to his real esate deal? Do you invest at all, because if you did you would understand that grouping together some money on a real estate venture is very common and very rarely do you really have anything at all to do with the actual administration of that investment and in fact your accountant likley handles, quite literally 99% of whatever goes on with that. So someone managing a partnership that he had invested funds into did some shady stuff, I'm sure RR and his accountant found out about it right about the same time as everyone else.
So you look at all the other evidence to the contrary and rely on purely rumore to draw your conclusion that he is partly slimy?
I am sure Saban, et al, have done some community work as in fundraising appearances, etc., however I don't think they take the same approach to the Mealer situation, I don't think Saban visits the hospital every day for a player in a car accident, I don't think he spends time with 'Bama fans in the hospital with a dying infant, I don't think he holds out players at even the hint of a concussion, I don't think he is overly concerned with team GPA beyond a regulated minimum, I don't think he would be too concerned with player attendance in class during the off-season, I don't think he pulls Denard at the end of the Illinois game b/c of some concussion-type symptoms, I don't think he leaves his extremely valuable punter home for the most important game of the year due to a violation of team rules.....and so on and so on. RR certainly doesn't over-sign or job-hop the way Saban does (at least not yet, but only time will tell).
So, sure, you can call it a 'few nice things', but that is being dismissive in the extreme.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:25 PM ^
I'm referring to several personal issues that we've all heard, but don't need to be rehashed here. If you want to know what I'm talking about, I'm sure a little research can be done.
I'm not saying Rodriguez = Saban. I'm saying both have been involved in some shady things (professionally); both can feasibly be seen as "slimy" by outsiders. As Michigan fans, we have insights into Rodriguez's works with Mott, the Mealers, etc. That doesn't mean guys like Saban, Price, Bruce Pearl, what's-his-name that used to coach Indiana's basketball program, etc. haven't also done great things for their players and community. And yet we wouldn't bat an eyelash to hear them called "slimy," would we?
This is offensive to Michigan fans because he's Michigan's coach. That doesn't mean there isn't any truth to it.
December 6th, 2010 at 3:05 PM ^
You're slimy. Just my opinion. Happy to share it with you. Have a nice day.
December 6th, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^
so, if they are just rumors without any basis in fact, we'll just leave them as that.
I guess we just disagree that he has been involved in shady things professionally in the same sense that Saban has. Using the term 'professionally', to me, would indicate that RR had done something shady in his capacity as a HC and I just don't see that as being the case. Leaving WVU doesn't qualify as shady, IMO. The real estate thing is something someone else did, there were many investors and RR wouldn't have had any knowledge of, or control over, those actions and was probably more than arm's length from the situation given that his accountant handles all that for him. It is no different than someone that invested in a corrupt/failed mutual fund, just fewer investors.
I can't speak about the other coaches you mention b/c I'm not really familiar with them in a detailed sense, only vaguely in terms of reputations that would seem to indicate they are shady. It would by hypocritical of me to label them as such as that reputation could likely be the result of the same sort of vagueries and innuendo at work in casting RR as 'slimy' to some. Saban, I am initmately familiar with having grown up in East Lansing and knowing a few of his ex-players, plus his fairly public and obvious practice of oversigning recruits,that is plain for all to see and not really debateable.
I don't really want to go on about this as I typically respect your opinions and views on the board, but for curiosity's sake, what would you list as the two factors that most influnce you in your opinion that RR is at least somewhat slimy?
December 6th, 2010 at 3:30 PM ^
I'm not saying that Rodriguez is a shady/slimy person.
What I'm saying is that there are valid reasons out there to call him "slimy."
You need look no further than the fact that Rodriguez said he was going to be at WVU for life. He left soon after for the Michigan job.
That alone made many people think he's slimy, even before the NCAA issues at Michigan.
December 6th, 2010 at 3:53 PM ^
The devil's advocate is always misunderstood. I commend you, Mangus, for taking up the role so people can get an understanding as to how the program might be viewed from the outside, no matter how misguided the uninformed may be. The problem with doing so is that you'll always be villified. As someone who has been trained to argue for a living, I feel your "pain" (annoyance a better word?) in this discussion.
December 6th, 2010 at 3:56 PM ^
Thanks, profit.
December 10th, 2010 at 6:24 PM ^
I don't really have a problem with somebody out there calling him slimy. It's kind of true.
I guess where our opinions differ is that I would not simply dismiss the vast body of evidence supporting the notion that he is of high character in favor of some vague, shadowy rumors that may or may not have any basis in fact and be 'okay' with people calling him slimy. Let's face it, if there were even a shred of evidence to back up any of the rumors to which you refer, you would have had the details of each published hither and yon long ago, as there are no shortage of people digging around in his past and no lack of zeal in trying to smear him. Nor would I call trumped up charges since debunked by an NCAA investigation rationale for calling him slimy.
Certainly many people have written and posted reasons you could call him slimy. It certainly doesn't make them true, and that is my point. You choose what you want to believe, but if you choose to believe he is slimy, then you made up your mind long before you found reasons to do so.
December 10th, 2010 at 7:07 PM ^
I don't think you understand.
Saying "I'm going to be at WVU for a long, long time" and then departing the very next offseason for another job is somewhat slimy. Yeah, he did it for his family and because it was a better job, etc. I would probably do it, too. But it was still misleading to fans, recruits, WVU staffers, and recruits' families.
Whether the rumors are true or untrue, that fact made many people think he's slimy. Just like Nick Saban promised that he wasn't looking at any other jobs the day before he took another job. People said Saban was slimy for that, and Rodriguez was virtually in the same boat.
I can't help it if you don't like the word "slimy" referring to our basketball coach. But that notion exists, whether you like it or not.
December 13th, 2010 at 4:18 PM ^
I believe when he made those comments he probably believed in what he was saying because he just signed a contract extension that contained several parameters to be fulfilled by WVU and likely made some assumptions about what his job would be like starting in the near future. Despite many times telling him 'trust me', the AD, the university president and even the governor of West Virginia failed to live up to their word.....all people that since this that time have proven to be be pretty slimy themselves.
It should be noted that's RR's requests that remained unsatisfied had to do compensation for his assistants, tighter restrictions on how booster funds targeted for recruiting activities were used and hiring more grad assistants and a recruiting coordinator to ease the burden on some in his coaching staff.
WVU failed to come through on many of the items they agreed to after repeated promises to the contrary and then continued to act in a way that essentialy took RR for granted.
Don't take my word for it, read this:
http://postgazette.com/pg/07352/842541-144.stm
Look back at the people who did not criticize RR for leaving. His players - enough said. Booster and donors who were familiar with the situation and were furious that WVU officials for driving him away.
So was RR supposed to ignore the fact that WVU didn't come through with the promised $$ for his assistants and just sit on his new contract that took care of him? That would be slimy.
The President and AD at WVU unleashed a firestorm of bad PR and foundless allegations to cover their own ass in mishandling the situation, going as far as getting the governor of WV involved to support them. Hmm, it seems right now the AD at WVU has resigned since then. Some WVU officials have resigned and some are calling for the President at WVU to resign after a scandal where WVU falsified a transcript and bestowed a non-existant M.B.A degree on, lo and behold, the daughter of the same Governor. You tell me who is slimy in that situation?
You can continue to skim the headlines and be a rube to the mass media and have your beliefs spoon-fed to you by people that know little about a situation, or you can look into it a little further and get the facts. Your choice, but I still contend that your opinion that RR is in any way slimy is based on a perception manufactured by people covering their asses when he left WV and those with an agenda once he got to M and not on any real information. Until you give me more than some real estate venture that went bust that he had nothing to do with and the smearings of so-called journalists to suit their needs, I don't think you have any credible reason to call him slimy and are just acting as a puppet to those with an agenda against RR in parroting their tripe.
Do I think he is some kind of saint? No. I think he is human like anyone else, certainly imperfect. However, I do think he cares deeply for his players and coaches and in my opinion that is more important at Michigan than anything, even wins. I also think he goes above and beyond in caring for people when he could easily justify not doing so given the current situation, he deserves credit for that.
December 13th, 2010 at 4:40 PM ^
Some WVU officials have resigned and some are calling for the President at WVU to resign after a scandal where WVU falsified a transcript and bestowed a non-existant M.B.A degree on, lo and behold, the daughter of the same Governor. You tell me who is slimy in that situation?
If this thread were about the president of WVU or the governor of West Virginia being slimy, then this might be relevant.
Until you give me more than some real estate venture that went bust that he had nothing to do with and the smearings of so-called journalists to suit their needs, I don't think you have any credible reason to call him slimy and are just acting as a puppet to those with an agenda against RR in parroting their tripe
Please identify in this thread anywhere that I have mentioned a real estate venture or journalists.
Your argument has turned into a diatribe against the WVU administration, the Free Press, the governor of West Virginia, etc.
Not once has it addressed that West Virginia fans think he's slimy because he made a promise that wasn't fulfilled. Regardless of what happened to his assistant coaches, he made a public statement that ended up being untrue. West Virginia fans - and many football fans nationwide - view him as slimy, if for no other reason than that.
December 14th, 2010 at 1:57 PM ^
It is definitely relevant to talk about the president of WVU because he was intimately involved in:
A. The original contract negotiations for RR's extension and the guarantees made at that point
B. The subsequent refusal to honor those guarantees (read the article, RR is brought to a late night meeting at the house of said president where he is told by the president of WVU, after being strung along for several months, that they will in fact not be honoring the commitments).
C. Getting the governor of the state of WV involved in the first place in calling RR when he balked at signing the original extension to essentially pressure him to sign and threaten a PR nightmare if he did not, then being sure that the governor himself publicly vilified RR in support of the media shizzle storm they were creating.
Hence also the discussion of what is obviously an uncomfortbaly close relationship between WVU administration, AD, and the governor's office, a relationship that resulted in the falsification of a transcript and a fraudulent MBA degree for the daughter of the governor. That IS slimy and that IS definitely pertinent when these are the people saying 'trust us, we honored our word and are telling you the truth with regard to RR's departure.'
RR's reasons for leaving WVU are valid and documented, although certainly not widely publicized given the parties responsible for the media storm that forms the basis of your argument that RR is 'kind of' slimy. Looking at the actual situation from a factual viewpoint, rather than one founded in mass media rhetoric and sensationalized headlines, you find that RR was lied to and his staff hung out to dry, and after giving the administration almost 7 months to fix the situation, he left. His players supported his move, the boosters/alumni at WVU familiar with the situation recognize that he was mistreated, the only people that don't are those who sought to crucify him on his way out and the boobs that bought into their witch hunt.
In summary:
A. Supporting RR: business savvy boosters and players that were close to the situation with a sophisticated understanding of what went on supported RR in leaving and pointed the finger at the administration.
B. Vilifying RR: Administration officials who are also familiar with the situation who don't want to be blamed for losing the coach, who have proven to be liars, and the rube fans with zero skills in critical thought who knew nothing about the actual situation that ate up the headlines fed to them and ran out to buy torches and pitchforks.
You decide with which group you want to cast your lot.
RR's only fault in the whole fiasco was not fighting back and pointing out exactly why he was leaving and laying the blame on those at fault, instead he took the high road.
Addressing WVU fans opinion is the whole point, as their opinion is the result of a lot of CYA posturing and an effective smear campaign by the administration at WVU AND the governor on RR's way out to deflect blame and make sure that they were not cast in a negative light for their mishandling of the situation. Coaches change jobs..all...the...time. When at their current job they nearly always talk about how much they love the fans, the school, the traditions, the players, etc., they may even indicate that they want to coach there a long time. However, things change and people move on, especially successful, ambitious people and to believe that RR was going to remain at WVU for the rest of his career is naive and unfair. The reaction to RR leaving was completely out of proprtion to the actual event and that is entirely a result of the people that created and fanned the flames of a negative PR campaign. Quite simply, their opinion is wrong and even the most minimal amount of critical thought and research proves that.
No you did not reference the real estate deal specifically, you only make vague references to rumors about his past without providing any specifics whatsoever, so I have to assume that is what you refer to. Any other rumors beyond that are surely untrue, or the rabid masses of RR detractors would most certainly be quoting them, repeating them and digging around for so much of a hint of evidence to substantiate them, so you would have to consider them patently false at this point. If you have anything beyond whispers and unnuendo, I'm all ears, but until such time as I am given any kind of substantiated information that speaks to RR being slimy, I will stick with the mountain of evidence to the contrary that is there and in plain sight, over and over again, at least for those who care to see it. It is clear that many have the ability to look at this information, put their fingers in their ears and say, 'I'm not listening, I'm not listening, I'm not listening.'
You argue that because WVU fans think he is slimy, that it is a fair and accurate statement to say he is slimy, regardless of facts are the reasons for which they feel this way. Well, congratulations to you for helping to contribute to a world where perception is more important than reality and sensationlized, agenda-based public relations and reporting matter more than substance and accountability.
You may think I am an ardent supporter of RR, however that would be untrue, at least in the sense that I think he is guaranteed success at UM as a coach. He is not. I do think he should have 1 more year as a do or die, with the criteria being that his offense continues to improve, specifically that they should all but eliminate the sophomore mistakes that have all but nullified a statistically historic performance that resulted in the one most disappointing stat, that being points scored. Of course, he needs to recognize and fix what is wrong with the defense and bring in a DC that is a lock to work with the young players to better mitigate the youth and lack of experience. Criticize his coaching and his decisions on the field and you are good with me, as long as you can back it up and it doesn't involve the oft used 'unacceptable' meme, which clearly signifies a lack of any football knowldege (not that you do or have done this). I take issue with the character assassination and the smear campaigns because I firmly believe that the perception of RR as some kind of scumbag to be wholly untrue and I base that opinion on a very informed and substantiated set of information. In the end, it is my hope that RR will be judged on his on the field results after being provided a fair opportunity to produce those results, rather than on a false perception of his character that is a wholly manufactured product of sub-standard reporting/journlism and unscrupulous individuals with an agenda. Anything less would denigrate the program and sell it short, inching us one step closer to every other program that cares about W's and nothing else matters.
ok, THAT was a diatribe ;)
December 6th, 2010 at 12:23 PM ^
There's a couple people here at Oklahoma who have told me something along the lines of "RR doesn't deserve a great player like Denard"...and had I had time, I would have properly stated my case why that's a really ridiculous statement. But in general, you're right, there aren't many reasons for outsiders to like RR or think he is anything other than slimy.
However, there's a difference between a random guy at OU saying it and a newspaper reporter writing it in a published article. Seems like newspapers everywhere have lost journalistic integrity these days...
December 6th, 2010 at 12:23 PM ^
Isn't it just assumed that Saban is slimy?
December 6th, 2010 at 12:26 PM ^
I don't think its OK for random writers to just print it as asides to stories that aren't even about RR. That being said, everyone's own coach is a great guy and all other coaches are slime balls. I used to live with a guy that went to USC and all he ever talked about was what a great guy Pete Carrol was. He did a lot of good work with gang violence prevention. My point is, all coaches regardless of how slimy, do some charity work and their own fans praise them for it. That being said, I found the reference in the article to be inappropriate.
December 6th, 2010 at 1:41 PM ^
is what they call "recruiting" at USC.
In East Lansing, it is the name they use for "midterms."
Come on, seriously. Nobody calls Joe Paterno "slimy." I don't. I don't describe Jim Tressel or Mack Brown that way. Nobody EVER called Woody, or Bo, or Frank Broyles, or Darrell Royal or Tom Osborne "slimy."
Honestly, I am just guesing here -- prediction, perhaps -- that the lady columnist is going to write back to those who address her politely, and say that it was all a kind of a joke. That it was never meant to be a serious judgment at all, but written in the voice of some angry fictional letter-writer.
December 6th, 2010 at 1:56 PM ^
That's a pretty dumb perspective to take. It's not a question of whether people could see him as slimy, it's a question of whether he genuinely is a slimy guy. RR is not a slimy guy and the stories about his foul character have been fabricated or exaggerated, so he should not be be considered a bad person.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:36 PM ^
That's your opinion, and it's justified.
Some outsiders do not see it the same way, and they might be justified, too.
December 6th, 2010 at 11:58 AM ^
I was reminded by a fellow poster that Bo's philosophy was to just win. This keeps the hounds at bay. Lose, and nothing will protect you.
My hope is that beginning with next season, RR concurrently starts winning regularly and retreats to the bunker, limiting most MSM discussions to what is necessary and required, and no more.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:24 PM ^
Whammy!
December 6th, 2010 at 2:05 PM ^
Her idiocy makes more sense after listening to that, it is just her schtuck to spew stupidity....sad thing is there are just so many willing to listen.
December 6th, 2010 at 3:55 PM ^
She is not attractive. Its neither here nor there, but I'm just stating a personal opinion in the form of a fact like she appears to enjoy doing in her articles.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:32 PM ^
that RR is slimy. I think they are crazy perceptions, but I dont deny they are out there.
And I could really care less what some random reporter or ignorant fan from another school thinks. BUT if recruits hear and listen to the drivel, even if it IS BS, it is not good for the program in general.
I dont like it, but perception becomes reality. Even when perception is 100% wrong, when enough people buy into the perception, it hurts your reputation and it becomes reality.
I think RR is a good guy in general and wish him success whether he stays or rides into the sunset.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^
I dont like it, but perception becomes reality. Even when perception is 100% wrong, when enough people buy into the perception, it hurts your reputation and it becomes reality.It's the Goebbels strategy, and it works. I hate to make a political reference, but this is exactly why a number of people continue to believe Obama is a Kenyan-born Muslim.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:14 PM ^
I cannot think of one group that does not use the tactic of vilification.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:28 PM ^
I can't wait for someone to publish your home phone-number, young man. This board need to unite not against some random, joking writer in Missouri; it needs to rise up against the humorless douches of the world.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:31 PM ^
This lady published her OWN phone number, smart guy.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^
Here is a link for you.
December 6th, 2010 at 12:45 PM ^
This was just ridiculously stupid journalism. Why the editor allowed this screed, clearly a mean-spirited unloading of a "reporter's" sore ego, to go to print I can't understand.
Are they trying to outdo Jenni Carlson's gossip article that preceded the Mike Gundy rant?
BTW, I would have loved to see the paper conclude the article with the following: "NOTE: In the interests of full disclosure, Nebraska beat the author's school 31-17 earlier this season in a game that wasn't as close as the score."
December 6th, 2010 at 1:06 PM ^
.......really, really, want UConn to win in the Fiesta. Not that I dislike Stoops, or even OU. I really don't have any opinion of them one way or the other.
However, I dislike the B12 in general(although not nearly as much as I hate the SEC), and would love to have OU, the B12's rep, lose to a team from the worst BCS conference. After that, one can write to Ms. Smartass and discuss the finer points of Nebraska leaving the B12 and what it means for the B12 in general.
December 6th, 2010 at 2:50 PM ^
Why is he slimy?
More importantly, how does she know he's slimy?
