|
Post by timholycross on Mar 24, 2020 15:45:16 GMT -5
Brown hasn't won the Ivy League in 15 years. Three winning seasons since then, 2 w/Behn.
But other things have gone on there.
"Behn had two off-court incidents that clouded the end of her tenure with Brown. Late in the season the school band decided to boycott the final two women’s basketball home games in support of several players alleging misconduct by Behn. Seven players who had left the team accused Behn of making remarks about players’ weight and using vulgar language. Behn responded that she was simply pushing her players to perform better.
“My assistant coaches and I have always used the word ‘fitness’ to describe goals and motivate all our athletes to train to achieve their best level of fitness so they can compete better,” Behn said to the Brown Daily Herald.
Behn was also arrested in July 2018 and charged with domestic assault against her husband, Timothy McGahan. The case was dismissed in January 2020 when McGahan invoked his right not to testify against his wife. The couple were in the process of divorcing as of the dismissal."
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 24, 2020 21:25:22 GMT -5
If we weren't in the midst of a coronavirus shutdown, and if the Oyster Cabin Restaurant on Rte. 146 hadn't closed in 2007, the ADs of Brown and HC could hold joint job interviews there for WBB head coach. I wonder if AM has a shot at the Brown job? 19-11 must look sweet to them.
BC men's coach Jim Christian will remain after going 13-19 this season, his fifth losing season in six years. AD Martin Jarmond said the main factor in his decision not to launch a search is all the uncertainty in higher education due to coronavirus and the need for stable leadership because of that.
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Mar 25, 2020 2:18:25 GMT -5
If we weren't in the midst of a coronavirus shutdown, and if the Oyster Cabin Restaurant on Rte. 146 hadn't closed in 2007, the ADs of Brown and HC could hold joint job interviews there for WBB head coach. I wonder if AM has a shot at the Brown job? 19-11 must look sweet to them. BC men's coach Jim Christian will remain after going 13-19 this season, his fifth losing season in six years. AD Martin Jarmond said the main factor in his decision not to launch a search is all the uncertainty in higher education due to coronavirus and the need for stable leadership because of that. From seeing both BC men and HC women...the BC men are terrible for their competition level. HC women basically have had two straight years of tough recruiting with the Gibbons scandal and an interim coach. Tough to walk into a recruits house with that hanging over your head.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 25, 2020 7:48:08 GMT -5
Correct. I do not think BG would threaten anyone. That doesn't mean people can't feel threatened or uncomfortable. I was surprised BG was slapped with a no-trespass order by HC but some decision maker felt that was the correct action. HC ends up defending one well publicized law suit and up to two more are not beyond the realm of possibility once people have cashed their final paychecks. The decision to launch a national search into the teeth of a global pandemic only heightens the mystery of how the AD perceives the role each actor played … or it could be business as usual like Tom Brady and other free agents signing contracts for next season despite the pandemic, and the events of last season are totally water under the bridge. From BG's complaint, one can perceive a basis for the no trespass order. As a consequence of being suspended, HC took away his keys to the coaches' suite at the Luth, his HC-issued credit card, and one other thing that I can't remember. He appears to have objected, perhaps strenuously. In any event, his lingering grievance about taking away the keys and the 'perks' found its way into his complaint. He wanted to attend a banquet, not specific to HC, being held on the Hill, and the administration said, 'no'. The complaint further details that he made demands of HC administration with respect to the adjudicative process, and sought to be treated in a way not permitted under the process. These beefs were not with the athletic department, but with various offices in HC administration. HC's insurance company probably paid for the settlement in Cooper, and the insurer quite possibly told HC, 'we'll pay this time, but not the next'. Remember that Cooper's complaint specifically referenced a second player's complaint about BG's behavior, and HC apparently buried the findings, although not to an insurance company potentially paying for a settlement. Three strikes and you're out?
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 25, 2020 7:56:48 GMT -5
If I remember correctly, no "second player" stepped forward to support that claim. I also remember many WBB alums offering their strong support to BG.
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 25, 2020 10:34:16 GMT -5
Don't bother Rob, PP has perpetuated his own take on this story repeatedly no matter how often challenged or corrected. He seems to believe that anything and everything in the cooper compliant is true and everything and anything BG alleges is false.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 25, 2020 10:39:02 GMT -5
Thanks, HC13. I wil steer clear.
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 25, 2020 11:13:20 GMT -5
Apparently HC forging ahead in their search:
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Mar 25, 2020 11:25:30 GMT -5
Easy enough to do FaceTime stuff, I'm sure. Or do you have a big room and people sitting in each corner of it?
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Mar 25, 2020 13:05:31 GMT -5
Easy enough to do FaceTime stuff, I'm sure. Or do you have a big room and people sitting in each corner of it? Can’t imagine we’d make such an important hire without having the person to campus in some way. But lots of thing I couldn’t have imagined are happening right now so who knows?
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 25, 2020 13:33:31 GMT -5
There is always a risk when an AD makes a new hire (see SK through BN) but now there is an additional risk of the unknown because no one can accurately predict exactly how college sports and colleges will emerge post coronavirus.
In that light, having an existing head coach with a winning record in place on a year to year deal is an asset not to be taken lightly, imo. BC has an existing losing coach in place on a deal that isn't interim but must be closer to expiration than a new contract and they are valuing that as a stable asset and choosing to limit uncertainty.
Time will tell. If we get a new coach I'll give her the same half season honeymoon I gave Coach Nelson.😊
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Mar 25, 2020 16:41:02 GMT -5
It would mess up recruiting if they did something like that with AM. Similarly, it could hurt BC recruiting anyone for the fall of 2021. My guess is if next season is a normal season (let's hope so); and BC gets off to a bad start, he gets canned pretty quickly.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 25, 2020 18:15:06 GMT -5
It would mess up recruiting if they did something like that with AM. Similarly, it could hurt BC recruiting anyone for the fall of 2021. My guess is if next season is a normal season (let's hope so); and BC gets off to a bad start, he gets canned pretty quickly. I do agree with measuring twice and firing once instead of firing impulsively and then having to fire again (George Steinbrenner and Billy Martin come to mind). We could perhaps pick up a diamond in the rough if we are venturing where few dare to tread by conducting a search now, and our choice would have gone elsewhere if there were as many searches being conducted as there are in a normal off season.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 26, 2020 11:22:44 GMT -5
HC's insurance company probably paid for the settlement in Cooper, and the insurer quite possibly told HC, 'we'll pay this time, but not the next'. Remember that Cooper's complaint specifically referenced a second player's complaint about BG's behavior, and HC apparently buried the findings, although not to an insurance company potentially paying for a settlement. Three strikes and you're out? Sad but true fact that insurance companies frequently pay off on frivolous claims because its cheaper than going to court. In my opinion, it is more likely a second player mentioned she didn't like Coach Gibbons tactics but wouldn't come forward than HC buried the findings. Someone would have had to come forward and make a second actionable claim against Coach Gibbons for there to be anything to bury. There's a world of difference between not liking a coach's tactics and having a legitimate legal came because of those tactics. I know players on the men's side who didn't like Coach Willard and grumbled about him. They could have complaints while totally respecting him and knowing that nothing approached caused for a law suit.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 26, 2020 14:30:46 GMT -5
HC's insurance company probably paid for the settlement in Cooper, and the insurer quite possibly told HC, 'we'll pay this time, but not the next'. Remember that Cooper's complaint specifically referenced a second player's complaint about BG's behavior, and HC apparently buried the findings, although not to an insurance company potentially paying for a settlement. Three strikes and you're out? Sad but true fact that insurance companies frequently pay off on frivolous claims because its cheaper than going to court. In my opinion, it is more likely a second player mentioned she didn't like Coach Gibbons tactics but wouldn't come forward than HC buried the findings. Someone would have had to come forward and make a second actionable claim against Coach Gibbons for there to be anything to bury. There's a world of difference between not liking a coach's tactics and having a legitimate legal came because of those tactics. I know players on the men's side who didn't like Coach Willard and grumbled about him. They could have complaints while totally respecting him and knowing that nothing approached caused for a law suit. Cooper's complaint said that HC investigated the other player's complaint, because HC had interviewed Cooper about what had allegedly happened between BG and the other player. That's an actionable claim. IIRC, Cooper asked that HC produce video of two games, one of which apparently related to BG's actions with respect to the other player, and the other related to BG's alleged actions against her. Cooper further stated that one or both? of these incidents were witnessed by parents. And Cooper further stated that the alleged action against her was witnessed by Associate Director of Athletics, who no longer is with the school. IIRC, the Associate Director of Athletics was a named defendant.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Mar 26, 2020 15:11:51 GMT -5
Is there any possibility that the Cooper case (either pertaining to Cooper herself or the part of the case pertaining to the unnamed player) could factor into HC's defense in Gibbons' suit?
|
|
|
Post by HC13 on Mar 26, 2020 15:14:16 GMT -5
Cooper made a number of claims, including that in season end interviews, many (several?) other players complained about BG's conduct. Neither the alleged second player, nor her parents ever came forward in support of Cooper,nor for that matter, any other then current or past player, very much unlike similar claims at other schools, for example Georgetown or Boston U.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 26, 2020 17:54:10 GMT -5
Is there any possibility that the Cooper case (either pertaining to Cooper herself or the part of the case pertaining to the unnamed player) could factor into HC's defense in Gibbons' suit? I doubt it with respect to Cooper, as the settlement agreement is sealed. Cooper only filed her claim after she had transferred from Holy Cross and enrolled at NYU. The damages she sought were for two years cost of attendance at NYU, as she had been a full scollie player at HC. with respect to the other player, under current HC procedures, an investigating official may consider prior claims made against an individual, when considering sanctions. However, I believe both the other player and BG would need to agree to have the investigative report on her claim made public. That is not likely to happen. The privacy protocols are too strong. One of BG's claims is that he was denied due process, in that he was not allowed to review the report of the findings and recommendation(s) of the HC investigating official before the report was transmitted to the HC official with authority to act on any recommendation. There is no provision in the current policy allowing for such a review by BG, the respondent, nor should there be. From his complaint, it seems he had expectations that he would be afforded such a review. Whether the basis for this was past practice, i know not. As Cooper never made a claim while she was an enrolled student, no investigation was initiated. Assuming she made statements regarding BG's conduct in the course of her interview with the investigator of the other player's claim, HC did not act on those. In very recent years, HC has investigated and quickly acted on abuse claims made by former students of the professor of organ music. Interestingly, HC notified Oberlin of its investigation. Oberlin initiated its own investigation without any claim being lodged by a current or former Oberlin student, yet it found misconduct by this professor while at Oberlin, and terminated him.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 26, 2020 18:35:36 GMT -5
Is there any possibility that the Cooper case (either pertaining to Cooper herself or the part of the case pertaining to the unnamed player) could factor into HC's defense in Gibbons' suit? I doubt it with respect to Cooper, as the settlement agreement is sealed. Cooper only filed her claim after she had transferred from Holy Cross and enrolled at NYU. The damages she sought were for two years cost of attendance at NYU, as she had been a full scollie player at HC. with respect to the other player, under current HC procedures, an investigating official may consider prior claims made against an individual, when considering sanctions. However, I believe both the other player and BG would need to agree to have the investigative report on her claim made public. That is not likely to happen. The privacy protocols are too strong. One of BG's claims is that he was denied due process, in that he was not allowed to review the report of the findings and recommendation(s) of the HC investigating official before the report was transmitted to the HC official with authority to act on any recommendation. There is no provision in the current policy allowing for such a review by BG, the respondent, nor should there be. From his complaint, it seems he had expectations that he would be afforded such a review. Whether the basis for this was past practice, i know not. As Cooper never made a claim while she was an enrolled student, no investigation was initiated. Assuming she made statements regarding BG's conduct in the course of her interview with the investigator of the other player's claim, HC did not act on those. In very recent years, HC has investigated and quickly acted on abuse claims made by former students of the professor of organ music. Interestingly, HC notified Oberlin of its investigation. Oberlin initiated its own investigation without any claim being lodged by a current or former Oberlin student, yet it found misconduct by this professor while at Oberlin, and terminated him. The damages sought were two years of attendance at NYU. What do you think the amount was that was paid out by HC? Split the difference and settle on one year or do you think the full amount or close to it was paid?
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Mar 26, 2020 19:02:37 GMT -5
What’s the point of continued speculation about this matter? The Zapruder film was less closely dissected than l’affaire Cooper.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 26, 2020 20:06:49 GMT -5
The point for me when I ask PP a question is so I can learn something. He has a wealth of knowledge and is very generous about sharing it. I'm only asking his opinion with my latest query since I assume the exact answer is sealed by mutual agreement, but his is a much more educated opinion than mine.
|
|
|
Post by HC92 on Mar 26, 2020 21:49:08 GMT -5
The point for me when I ask PP a question is so I can learn something. He has a wealth of knowledge and is very generous about sharing it. I'm only asking his opinion with my latest query since I assume the exact answer is sealed by mutual agreement, but his is a much more educated opinion than mine. I love PP like a second cousin and agree he has a wealth of knowledge on many subjects. However, he has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about when it comes to the Cooper matter. We have many lawyers here, including me. PP is not one. The amount the College or its insurer paid could range from $0 to a bajillion dollars. No one here knows. My strong suspicion based on reading the available tea leaves is that it was not a significant sum but that’s a guess and nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Mar 26, 2020 22:07:28 GMT -5
It is somewhat similar to the lawsuit filed against Jim Calhoun and/or St. Joseph's of West Hartford by the former athletic department employee: a clash between older long time male coaches and younger women where the younger woman is offended but the older man can make a case he did not intend to offend her.
|
|
|
Post by Pakachoag Phreek on Mar 27, 2020 6:27:27 GMT -5
I doubt it with respect to Cooper, as the settlement agreement is sealed. Cooper only filed her claim after she had transferred from Holy Cross and enrolled at NYU. The damages she sought were for two years cost of attendance at NYU, as she had been a full scollie player at HC. with respect to the other player, under current HC procedures, an investigating official may consider prior claims made against an individual, when considering sanctions. However, I believe both the other player and BG would need to agree to have the investigative report on her claim made public. That is not likely to happen. The privacy protocols are too strong. One of BG's claims is that he was denied due process, in that he was not allowed to review the report of the findings and recommendation(s) of the HC investigating official before the report was transmitted to the HC official with authority to act on any recommendation. There is no provision in the current policy allowing for such a review by BG, the respondent, nor should there be. From his complaint, it seems he had expectations that he would be afforded such a review. Whether the basis for this was past practice, i know not. As Cooper never made a claim while she was an enrolled student, no investigation was initiated. Assuming she made statements regarding BG's conduct in the course of her interview with the investigator of the other player's claim, HC did not act on those. In very recent years, HC has investigated and quickly acted on abuse claims made by former students of the professor of organ music. Interestingly, HC notified Oberlin of its investigation. Oberlin initiated its own investigation without any claim being lodged by a current or former Oberlin student, yet it found misconduct by this professor while at Oberlin, and terminated him. The damages sought were two years of attendance at NYU. What do you think the amount was that was paid out by HC? Split the difference and settle on one year or do you think the full amount or close to it was paid? See HC92's response supra..
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Mar 27, 2020 8:09:47 GMT -5
Putting Cooper aside, we have what I guess you could call a mystery competition between the men's and ladies' programs:
Copeland and "Who has/had a scholarship, Reilly or Sandy" versus Parks and Faulkner.
Only time will tell which program's stories are the best. No sense commenting further until something is revealed.
|
|