|
Post by hcgrad94 on Mar 28, 2019 20:57:26 GMT -5
Everything is hunky dory.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 28, 2019 21:15:38 GMT -5
Looks like this guy learned the “I’m the smartest guy in the room” tone and smirk from Pine. Total clown show on Mount St James right now. Sad.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 28, 2019 21:32:26 GMT -5
Dick Regan definitely had his faults, but the athletic department and teams were never in shambles quite like what we are seeing now.
Fr. B has other things on his plate, so you have to wonder how much he really even cares.
|
|
|
Post by spenser on Mar 28, 2019 21:35:11 GMT -5
Garbage. It is well-known here in CMass what went on and it has been mentioned by posts that have since been deleted. Sullivan didn't have the courage just to outright fire him. If you wanted to fire him for performance then do it. I'll say this...if you're going to fire Coach Gibbons (613 career wins by the way) for too much losing the you better be firing every coach, except Chesney who is new, on that campus. Thanks to Coach Gibbons for all he has done in Central Massachusetts. Holy Cross and the clown-college athletic department should be
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 28, 2019 21:57:33 GMT -5
This statement doesn't make sense. How does HC have the authority to not allow Coach Gibbons to say anything? Maybe they're letting his contract expire and they're holding 3 months pay over his head. Excluding anything libelous, he can say whatever he wants. It suggests that HC still has some leverage in the situation to exercise the control
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 29, 2019 5:42:07 GMT -5
This statement doesn't make sense. How does HC have the authority to not allow Coach Gibbons to say anything? Maybe they're letting his contract expire and they're holding 3 months pay over his head. Excluding anything libelous, he can say whatever he wants. It suggests that HC still has some leverage in the situation to exercise the control HC would have some authority if a.) he is still employed by the college; b.) adjudicative matters flowing from the complaint that led to the investigation and the suspension from his head coaching duties are still ongoing; c.) or, if the applicability of certain provisions in his contract are being 'litigated'. Continuing the interim title for AM suggests to me that b.) and/or c.) are still in play, and will not be resolved soon. Until resolved, for HC to name a permanent coach could be prejudicial to the actions that HC has taken with respect to BG. Dean Wormer is likely to thump me if I write more, but the complaining party(ies) in this personnel matter might very well still be associated with the college. And the complainant(s) have certain rights as well. BG has the option of tendering his resignation and then speaking 'freely'. He has chosen not to do so.
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 29, 2019 6:19:47 GMT -5
This statement doesn't make sense. How does HC have the authority to not allow Coach Gibbons to say anything? Maybe they're letting his contract expire and they're holding 3 months pay over his head. Excluding anything libelous, he can say whatever he wants. It suggests that HC still has some leverage in the situation to exercise the control HC would have some authority if a.) he is still employed by the college; b.) adjudicative matters flowing from the complaint that led to the investigation and the suspension from his head coaching duties are still ongoing; c.) or, if the applicability of certain provisions in his contract are being 'litigated'. Continuing the interim title for AM suggests to me that b.) and/or c.) are still in play, and will not be resolved soon. Until resolved, for HC to name a permanent coach could be prejudicial to the actions that HC has taken with respect to BG. Dean Wormer is likely to thump me if I write more, but the complaining party(ies) in this personnel matter might very well still be associated with the college. And the complainant(s) have certain rights as well. BG has the option of tendering his resignation and then speaking 'freely'. He has chosen not to do so. Sorry, but your explanation really doesn't make any sense either. If any of that were the case, what they should have done was simply say not going to renew contract and AM remains as Interim and once contract expires in June either hire her or not. It's not rocket science, the amateur IAD could have cut & paste from any number of announcements that have been made by other schools in recent days. Embarrassing, this joke of an IAD needs to go NOW!
|
|
|
Post by spenser on Mar 29, 2019 6:50:47 GMT -5
Actually, as a lawyer, I can tell you his explanation makes perfect sense. It may not prove to ultimately be accurate, but it’s very logical. To expect “transparency” from the College on this issue, especially at this time is unrealistic.
|
|
|
Post by trimster on Mar 29, 2019 6:57:06 GMT -5
Time for a nationwide search? What a joke. As someone else pointed out, why would anyone want to get involved with the dumpster fire of an athletic program?
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 29, 2019 7:02:16 GMT -5
Actually, as a lawyer, it really doesn't, I don't ever expect transparency from any institution. Even they aren't trying to sell that line From today's paper: "As for leaving the interim tag on McInerney’s title, Sullivan said, “As an institution, a college administration, myself, we talked about the options that were there and obviously we are in a period of transition with the athletic director role at this time and we thought the best decision at this point was the decision we made to have an interim coach for the year.”"
If there was truly egregious behavior involved he should have been fired, the handling of this has been an embarrassment from the start. It is clear that the details are coming I think unless BG opts for the NDA package, which he may.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Mar 29, 2019 7:19:12 GMT -5
A simpler possible explanation for the College having sway over BG remaining silent, for the moment: As a 30+ year employee who is of a certain age, BG is almost certainly eligible to retire from the university. I'm not familiar with HC's policies in this area, but at my institution, retiree status comes with a set of benefits: from benign things like retaining a university email address, to potentially more valuable things like the option to buy into the university's health insurance plan, and the retention of tuition benefits for family members.
There may be something of value to BG in gaining retiree status that is compelling him to comply with HC's gag order, else he risks actually being terminated and losing the option to retire. Now that the door is closed on him returning to coaching, presumably he can just file that retirement paperwork sometime between now and June 30. Once he's a retiree and not an employee, he's presumably then free to talk all he wants. It doesn't make sense to me that AM's interim tag has anything to do with BG's situation. BG's contract ends on June 30 regardless of how it ends. The position is open as of July 1 if they wanted AM to slot into it. This seems to be more about leaving the longer-term decision to the permanent AD.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 29, 2019 7:23:19 GMT -5
"National search" in practical terms simply means that applications will be accepted from across the country. The idea that HC would have people (a search committee, for example) actually traveling across the country is foolish. Candidates can be reached via email and phone instantly, with resumes sent instantly via the internet. Today's national search is far different from what took place only a few years ago. As to HC being, as one person put it, a "clown college." Well, if the poster is an HC alum and feels that he is a "clown" I guess his comment cannot be refuted - at least in that one case.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Mar 29, 2019 7:25:37 GMT -5
Maybe both BG and BS are being coy because
1. BG is making some sort of claim against the College, perhaps in a non public arbitration, over pay for the final period of the contract. For example, the College claims that he was relieved of his duties for cause and they only owe him "$x" but he says it was not for cause and they owe him "$2x." 2. BG is making some sort of discrimination claim against the College (age?)
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 29, 2019 7:26:45 GMT -5
Ray, I don't disagree in principle, but naming her Interim for the season? I can't recall any situation at any school anywhere that they would do something like this so far in advance of the season. Let's say the hire a new AD tomorrow (one can only hope and pray!) have you not tied his/her hands for the year?
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 29, 2019 7:28:20 GMT -5
The word "interim" is a real problem here. Why not simply give her a one or two year contract and make her officially what she already is...the head coach?
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 29, 2019 7:38:20 GMT -5
The word "interim" is a real problem here. Why not simply give her a one year contract and make her officially what she already is...the head coach? Or two, clearly they were worried about losing some of their kids, especially out of the impressive freshmen class and truthfully what appears to be a really good class for '20 so far
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 29, 2019 7:39:42 GMT -5
"National search" in practical terms simply means that applications will be accepted from across the country. The idea that HC would have people (a search committee, for example) actually traveling across the country is foolish. Candidates can be reached via email and phone instantly, with resumes sent instantly via the internet. Today's national search is far different from what took place only a few years ago. As to HC being, as one person put it, a "clown college." Well, if the poster is an HC alum and feels that he is a "clown" I guess his comment cannot be refuted - at least in that one case. Thanks for that breakdown explaining HC officials won’t be going door to door. That internet sure is a powerful tool.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Mar 29, 2019 7:44:32 GMT -5
The word "interim" is a real problem here. Why not simply give her a oe year contract and make her officially what she already is...the head coach? But then what happens when you inevitably get asked why it’s only a one year contract? It’s a semantic difference at that point. As others have noted, there isn’t really a difference today between AM’s status and Carmosy’s. They are both under contract thru 6/30/20. And we aren’t going to have a new AD until the summer. That’s awfully late to do a search, especially for an AD who is just getting oriented and has plenty of other burning fires on their desk. So that new AD makes a decision a year from now to retain AM or start a search next spring. And AM gets an opportunity to stake a claim to the job with a good season.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 29, 2019 7:45:05 GMT -5
The word "interim" is a real problem here. Why not simply give her a oe year contract and make her officially what she already is...the head coach? As HC13 and I have discussed in PMs, a reason -- whether it is a good reason is another matter -- gets into an area that Dean Wormer has ruled to be off-limits: i.e., speculation about the complaint that triggered the investigation and the suspension. As I recall Dean's edict, if somebody posts the speculation using his/her real name, he might let it stand. Otherwise, it comes down, and Dean may start imposing his own suspensions.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 29, 2019 7:47:57 GMT -5
I reserve the right to change my find after learning how much direct involvement Sullivan had in this Gibbons fiasco, but part of me feels bad for the guy.
He’s clearly in way over his head, was dealt a horrible hand by Pine, and is now just being fed to the wolves by Borroughs.
He either needs to get back to his bean counter role or back to a place like Stonehill where there are no expectations and nobody is paying attention.
And Borroughs needs to get a competent AD in the role for the first time since Ron Perry left.
|
|
|
Post by crusader12 on Mar 29, 2019 8:14:40 GMT -5
Maybe both BG and BS are being coy because 1. BG is making some sort of claim against the College, perhaps in a non public arbitration, over pay for the final period of the contract. For example, the College claims that he was relieved of his duties for cause and they only owe him "$x" but he says it was not for cause and they owe him "$2x." 2. BG is making some sort of discrimination claim against the College (age?) Alum, I think you may be right. If I'm BG and this dismissal was out of line, I sue Holy Cross. He needs to be careful and seems to be taking the right approach.
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 29, 2019 8:25:27 GMT -5
Maybe both BG and BS are being coy because 1. BG is making some sort of claim against the College, perhaps in a non public arbitration, over pay for the final period of the contract. For example, the College claims that he was relieved of his duties for cause and they only owe him "$x" but he says it was not for cause and they owe him "$2x." 2. BG is making some sort of discrimination claim against the College (age?) Alum, I think you may be right. If I'm BG and this dismissal was out of line, I sue Holy Cross. He needs to be careful and seems to be taking the right approach. Respectfully, if they wanted to avoid a law suit all they had to do, as a cabillion other schools have done recently is announce a non-renewal - bye bye wrongful termination or age discrimination lawsuit! I grant their may be other grounds to sue over the suspension, but if indeed the school botched his termination they deserve all the bad PR they will get.
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Mar 29, 2019 8:38:16 GMT -5
Alum, I think you may be right. If I'm BG and this dismissal was out of line, I sue Holy Cross. He needs to be careful and seems to be taking the right approach. Respectfully, if they wanted to avoid a law suit all they had to do, as a cabillion other schools have done recently is announce a non-renewal - bye bye wrongful termination or age discrimination lawsuit! I grant their may be other grounds to sue over the suspension, but if indeed the school botched his termination they deserve all the bad PR they will get.
Isn't this what they did, though? Yesterday's announcement was that "Bill Gibbons will not return as head coach". Now, I don't think it was made clear whether BG was being paid during his suspension, it's possible there's an ongoing dispute about roughly 5-6 months salary going on here. But really, the path of least resistance for the school here is to just pay that out in full and move on cleanly.
Assuming they were smart enough to figure that out and go down that path, then there really isn't much for BG to be complaining about. The College has been notably tight-lipped about the reason for the suspension, so BG can't really claim any injury to his reputation. The College also claimed yesterday that the decision not to retain him was about performance in terms of W-L, as opposed to the suspension. Given all of those facts and assuming that Gibbons is made whole financially, then Gibbons isn't really left with anything to litigate.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 29, 2019 8:50:40 GMT -5
This statement doesn't make sense. How does HC have the authority to not allow Coach Gibbons to say anything? Maybe they're letting his contract expire and they're holding 3 months pay over his head. Excluding anything libelous, he can say whatever he wants. It suggests that HC still has some leverage in the situation to exercise the control HC would have some authority if a.) he is still employed by the college; b.) adjudicative matters flowing from the complaint that led to the investigation and the suspension from his head coaching duties are still ongoing; c.) or, if the applicability of certain provisions in his contract are being 'litigated'. Continuing the interim title for AM suggests to me that b.) and/or c.) are still in play, and will not be resolved soon. Until resolved, for HC to name a permanent coach could be prejudicial to the actions that HC has taken with respect to BG. Dean Wormer is likely to thump me if I write more, but the complaining party(ies) in this personnel matter might very well still be associated with the college. And the complainant(s) have certain rights as well. BG has the option of tendering his resignation and then speaking 'freely'. He has chosen not to do so. As I said, the school cannot "not allow" someone to comment, unless they have some sort of leverage. Maybe he is still on the payroll and could lose the weekly pay check through June. Maybe it is as Ray suggests there is something to do with retirement benefits. I said that the wording suggests that HC has some sort of leverage. It is my own personal interpretation of the statement “Holy Cross has not allowed me to speak about this matter" and based on nothing else, that Coach Gibbons believes that he will forfeit something of value that he has received or expects to receive if he speaks on the topic. His desire not to forfeit this thing is the source of whatever power HC has to not allow Coach Gibbons to say anything. That thing of value could be something as small as his retiree ID badge that lets him use the facilities in Hart/Luth. It could be something as big as access to that Powerball ticket he bought in Wisconsin and left in his desk. There is insufficient information in the statement “Holy Cross has not allowed me to speak about this matter" to publicly speculate what that thing of value is
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 29, 2019 8:58:37 GMT -5
"National search" in practical terms simply means that applications will be accepted from across the country. The idea that HC would have people (a search committee, for example) actually traveling across the country is foolish. Candidates can be reached via email and phone instantly, with resumes sent instantly via the internet. Today's national search is far different from what took place only a few years ago. As to HC being, as one person put it, a "clown college." Well, if the poster is an HC alum and feels that he is a "clown" I guess his comment cannot be refuted - at least in that one case. Thanks for that breakdown explaining HC officials won’t be going door to door. That internet sure is a powerful tool. I am glad you appreciate my post. Some people keep posting about a national search and I am afraid they are not as well informed. For some, facts do not mean much...like the much overused term "national search."
|
|