MSU Board Gives Simon Vote of Support

Submitted by HelloHeisman91 on

"Through this terrible situation, the university has been perceived as tone-deaf, unresponsive and insensitive to the victims," chairman Brian Breslin said at the end of a nearly five-hour session to discuss the Nassar case. "We understand the public's faith has been shaken. ... This can never happen again. ...

"We continue to believe that President Simon is the right leader for the university, and she has our support."

 

I hope these people burn.  

 

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/22151987/lou-anna-simon-g…

MGoBoard
Other

AZBlue

January 19th, 2018 at 9:23 PM ^

NOT dismissing any of the gravity of what Gibbons did or was accused of... and Hoke handled the PR/disclosure portion of situation ham-handedly, but I believe the process was spot-on. Gibbons was cleared legally (no charges filed) and the Title IX legislation did not exist at the time. He was processed (prosecuted) retroactively when the new rules came into affect.

LTT was dismissed from the team for something that some rival fans saw as so minor that I believe some claimed it was a convenient “processing”. (We know now how desperately capable OL were needed.)

The issue is not that it happens but how it is handled after it does.

Joined: 09/14/2008

MGoPoints: 16788

bronxblue

January 19th, 2018 at 10:57 PM ^

What is the etc there? Gibbons was handled properly per the school's new process, even though I agree that the handling of the entire incident by Hoke was troubling. LTT was kicked off the minute it came out, same with Clark. Perry is actually the one that bothers me the most, but that was handled about as normal as those situations are in college football. Michigan hasn't been perfect, but it's a gross misapplication to equate these incidents with what happened as PSU and MSU, where people ignored complaints and abuse for decades.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171436

turtleboy

January 19th, 2018 at 7:53 PM ^

So then....can they all be fired? I'm pretty sure some people still employed by the university are criminally liable in this. If the president of the university of Missouri got forced out for no real reason at all, then Simon should be tarred and feathered.

Joined: 04/22/2011

MGoPoints: 35131

UnkleBuck

January 19th, 2018 at 8:24 PM ^

I like how the MSU buffoons ask for a "review" of events, not a full-on investigation.  Of couse they want the State AG to only look at what they hand him.  Their perpetual shoulder chippiness, dismissive attitude is appalling.  The trustees still don't get the severity of the situation, I mean those people are truly brain dead.

Joined: 11/02/2013

MGoPoints: 2122

HailHail47

January 19th, 2018 at 8:40 PM ^

There really isn’t much concrete evidence that Simon knew anything until the 2014 Title IX investigation, correct? Even though these events were occurring for decades, it’s still possible that she never knew anything until then, given the size and beauracracy of a university. This doesn’t seem to be as bad as Sandusky case in that regard for her personally, as it was for Spanier and Curley who actually covered it up. Maybe more evidence will come out though about the extent of her knowledge. Based on that email it seems like she is doing many of the right things though.

Joined: 10/07/2017

MGoPoints: 5305

1VaBlue1

January 19th, 2018 at 9:30 PM ^

I find it comical that anyone would think this 'review' might result in anything bad to/for/about Simon, Hollis, and the BoT.  The only reason they publically admit asking the AG for a review is - most likely - because the AG agreed to look at things the BoT can control.  I'm sure its a review of the information they already have.  Controllable stuff.

This whole situation is fucked up.  

Joined: 01/31/2016

MGoPoints: 126892

kehnonymous

January 19th, 2018 at 9:42 PM ^

Joined: 11/25/2011

MGoPoints: 32994

old98blue

January 19th, 2018 at 10:03 PM ^

This reeks of the Penn State scandal with top officials living in denial. Its not about the rival school its about right and wrong and just admitting guilt rather than denial or protecting your pocketbook at the expense of others. In both cases the abuse could have ended years earlier

Joined: 11/16/2015

MGoPoints: 4450

bronxblue

January 19th, 2018 at 10:41 PM ^

I thought this might just be a precursor to firing her down the line, but the rest of the quotes really do make it sound like they are drinking the kool-aid with Simon. There is no reason anyone in that school's administration should be retained at this point.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171436

Scottwood

January 19th, 2018 at 10:55 PM ^

I frankly don't understand this on any level. Leaving aside all the other reasons she should be fired, this is just about as easy a decision as one would get from a pure PR standpont. She should be gone.

Joined: 01/08/2009

MGoPoints: 730

enlightenedbum

January 19th, 2018 at 11:31 PM ^

To be fair, MSU fans seem to be running like 90-10 in favor of her being fired.  Need to turn that into some actions to pressure the trustees, like cancelling donations or what not.

I have seen some MSU grads tell stories about how they're stopping their donations to MSU and instead giving to various East Lansing women's shelters and charities for the survivors of sexual abuse.

Joined: 06/06/2009

MGoPoints: 64388

CarrIsMyHomeboy

January 19th, 2018 at 11:59 PM ^

Between the Trustees' unwavering support of a rudderless administration and the fact that MSU hired its own defense lawyers to "investigate" the scandal without interviewing any victims, so as to distort the story in their favor, their university continues to fail their obligations (to the victims as well as to future students who will suffer from the endowment lost in civil court).

And it would appear they think that if they don't publicly acknowledge that they've executed any aspect of this narrative suboptimally (as firing Simon would signal), then that can't be used against them as a moment when they accepted responsibility for the mess. As if prosecutors and journalists can't prove it without them admitting it.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 7324

Don

January 20th, 2018 at 7:59 AM ^

This is the tell—the reason MSU is contesting things legally is specifically because the MSU "leaders" are petrified that the financial liabilities inherent in civil suits are a serious danger to the institution's viability.

They are never going to admit institutional culpability and responsibility—they will attempt to pin everything on Nassar, and if necessary, on other individuals like Klages.

MSU sees this as an existential threat to itself, and will do everything it can to protect itself, regardless of how it appears to the outside world.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 148288