forums

NCAA Board gives Emmert a vote of confidence.

Advertisement
What were they going to do, NOT give him a vote of confidence? Else, they would have fired him. They have to prop him up or they're all done. That they felt such a vote was needed is a sign of weakness.
 
The guy needs to go, and that board needs to go. The entire organization is corrupt. You don't double down on a corrupt moran.

The NCAA board is supposed to be comprised of people of substance who care about their reputations. Not looking like that right now.
 
I've seen that happen just before a guy gets thrown under the bus. It will be interesting to see what happens in this case.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Usually I would say this means they are going to can him soon as usually a "vote of confidence" is followed by getting fired. But this, this just seems flat out defiant. With the way they have continued to pursue action with almost the entire media calling for his head and asking for the investigation to be dropped this just screams them feeling like no one can touch them. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is what comes to mind. The NCAA thinks they are untouchable and this is just there way of saying **** you to anyone who says otherwise.
 
Docholliday03 said:
Usually I would say this means they are going to can him soon as usually a "vote of confidence" is followed by getting fired. But this, this just seems flat out defiant. With the way they have continued to pursue action with almost the entire media calling for his head and asking for the investigation to be dropped this just screams them feeling like no one can touch them. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is what comes to mind. The NCAA thinks they are untouchable and this is just there way of saying **** you to anyone who says otherwise.
Click to expand...

I said it before, but the bizarre quote was "the road to transformational change is often bumpy and occasionally controversial." That's some Pol Pot/Mao sounding isht. It's a paraphrasing of the 'you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.' And UM is the egg here.

And again I'll note, her use of 'occasionally controversial' in that sentence is extraordinarily alarming -- it's an implicit defense of tactics. She didn't say occasional wrong or full of mistakes. She said 'controversial.' The only way there is anything 'controversial' here is if the NCAA justifies its own tactics or witch hunt. Otherwise the word 'controversial' makes no sense in that statement. I wasn't aware that anyone was actually debating whether the NCAA's methods were acceptable. So where's the controversy?
 
Ethnicsands said:
Docholliday03 said:
Usually I would say this means they are going to can him soon as usually a "vote of confidence" is followed by getting fired. But this, this just seems flat out defiant. With the way they have continued to pursue action with almost the entire media calling for his head and asking for the investigation to be dropped this just screams them feeling like no one can touch them. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is what comes to mind. The NCAA thinks they are untouchable and this is just there way of saying **** you to anyone who says otherwise.
Click to expand...

I said it before, but the bizarre quote was "the road to transformational change is often bumpy and occasionally controversial." That's some Pol Pot/Mao sounding isht. It's a paraphrasing of the 'you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.' And UM is the egg here.

And again I'll note, her use of 'occasionally controversial' in that sentence is extraordinarily alarming -- it's an implicit defense of tactics. She didn't say occasional wrong or full of mistakes. She said 'controversial.' The only way there is anything 'controversial' here is if the NCAA justifies its own tactics or witch hunt. Otherwise the word 'controversial' makes no sense in that statement. I wasn't aware that anyone was actually debating whether the NCAA's methods were acceptable. So where's the controversy?
Click to expand...

And that horseshyt quote would have made some sense if the "bumps" and "occasional controversy" that they have encountered along the road to transformational change involved some honest mistakes. We've all seen honest mistakes during transformations, and most are willing to overlook those.

The problem here is that this **** from the board completely glossed over the fact that the "bumps" were: pervasive corruption; fraud on a federal court; extortion; managing to be billed $57K for work done for the NCAA by the attorney of a convicted Ponzi scheme confidence man; and building an entire case around the word of a convicted liar with a stated vendetta against UM and then paying that sawed-off scumbag with the stated agenda.
 
The Franchise said:
Ethnicsands said:
Docholliday03 said:
Usually I would say this means they are going to can him soon as usually a "vote of confidence" is followed by getting fired. But this, this just seems flat out defiant. With the way they have continued to pursue action with almost the entire media calling for his head and asking for the investigation to be dropped this just screams them feeling like no one can touch them. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely" is what comes to mind. The NCAA thinks they are untouchable and this is just there way of saying **** you to anyone who says otherwise.
Click to expand...

I said it before, but the bizarre quote was "the road to transformational change is often bumpy and occasionally controversial." That's some Pol Pot/Mao sounding isht. It's a paraphrasing of the 'you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.' And UM is the egg here.

And again I'll note, her use of 'occasionally controversial' in that sentence is extraordinarily alarming -- it's an implicit defense of tactics. She didn't say occasional wrong or full of mistakes. She said 'controversial.' The only way there is anything 'controversial' here is if the NCAA justifies its own tactics or witch hunt. Otherwise the word 'controversial' makes no sense in that statement. I wasn't aware that anyone was actually debating whether the NCAA's methods were acceptable. So where's the controversy?
Click to expand...

And that horseshyt quote would have made some sense if the "bumps" and "occasional controversy" that they have encountered along the road to transformational change involved some honest mistakes. We've all seen honest mistakes during transformations, and most are willing to overlook those.

The problem here is that this **** from the board completely glossed over the fact that the "bumps" were: pervasive corruption; fraud on a federal court; extortion; managing to be billed $57K for work done for the NCAA by the attorney of a convicted Ponzi scheme confidence man; and building an entire case around the word of a convicted liar with a stated vendetta against UM and then paying that sawed-off scumbag with the stated agenda.
Click to expand...

Was that wrong of them? I'm not an attorney.
 
Advertisement
But, what do we expect the NCAA to say? It has to try to diffuse the situation.

Emmert probably thought that, by going aggressive on the language when he announced the problem, it would be received better. That backfired big time.

So, the NCAA can't use harsh self-critical language anymore. It will only further stoke the fire. It has to go in the direction of euphemisms and soft language.
 
NoahZach said:
But, what do we expect the NCAA to say? It has to try to diffuse the situation.

Emmert probably thought that, by going aggressive on the language when he announced the problem, it would be received better. That backfired big time.

So, the NCAA can't use harsh self-critical language anymore. It will only further stoke the fire. It has to go in the direction of euphemisms and soft language.
Click to expand...

I guess there are two answers here: the 'what would a PR person advise them to say' and 'what would a responsible Chairperson with a reputation at stake' say.

The PR answer would probably be a lot less messed up than what she said. "bumps in the road," 'occasionally controversial" and "transformational change" are an awful set of comments to just toss out there. That's fuel on the fire. Completely wrong messaging. No way a PR person scripted that. She should have said something bland to the effect that 'we take our integrity, and the trust in the institution, very seriously. clearly, mistakes were made here. the board will look hard at what lessons to learn and conclusions to draw from them. in the meantime, we ask patience while the infractions process runs its course. it is in the interest of all parties that we get to completion on this matter without jumping to conclusions.'

But this answer is just a punt. If she really cares for the reputation of the NCAA, she might consider the 'responsible Chairperson' answer, which I'd suggest is something like the following: In recent weeks we have all learned that the enforcement committee made mistakes and violated NCAA rules and procedures in its investigation of the University of Miami. We take this matter and the ethics of the NCAA very seriously, and we intend to independently assess what happened, and how, to ensure that these mistakes will not happen again. However, we also have a matter that has been sent to the Committee on Infractions, and this process needs to be seen through to its conclusion for the benefit of all parties involved, and the NCAA as a whole. Accordingly, we respectfully ask for patience and understanding while this process is resolved. Again, we strongly condemn the abuses of process that have occurred, and intend to ensure that these mistakes do not happen in the future.
 
They're just protecting his butt, for the moment. Short of canning him, they had to issue a statement of support. Had to say, even if wishy washy, in light of the NCAA head getting hammered from all corners - unprecedented nationally media attacks, Donna, UM bd of trustees, politicians and pundits. Never before has an NCAA president required a public vote of confidence, which is pretty telling.
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
NoahZach said:
But, what do we expect the NCAA to say? It has to try to diffuse the situation.

Emmert probably thought that, by going aggressive on the language when he announced the problem, it would be received better. That backfired big time.

So, the NCAA can't use harsh self-critical language anymore. It will only further stoke the fire. It has to go in the direction of euphemisms and soft language.
Click to expand...

I guess there are two answers here: the 'what would a PR person advise them to say' and 'what would a responsible Chairperson with a reputation at stake' say.

The PR answer would probably be a lot less messed up than what she said. "bumps in the road," 'occasionally controversial" and "transformational change" are an awful set of comments to just toss out there. That's fuel on the fire. Completely wrong messaging. No way a PR person scripted that. She should have said something bland to the effect that 'we take our integrity, and the trust in the institution, very seriously. clearly, mistakes were made here. the board will look hard at what lessons to learn and conclusions to draw from them. in the meantime, we ask patience while the infractions process runs its course. it is in the interest of all parties that we get to completion on this matter without jumping to conclusions.'

But this answer is just a punt. If she really cares for the reputation of the NCAA, she might consider the 'responsible Chairperson' answer, which I'd suggest is something like the following: In recent weeks we have all learned that the enforcement committee made mistakes and violated NCAA rules and procedures in its investigation of the University of Miami. We take this matter and the ethics of the NCAA very seriously, and we intend to independently assess what happened, and how, to ensure that these mistakes will not happen again. However, we also have a matter that has been sent to the Committee on Infractions, and this process needs to be seen through to its conclusion for the benefit of all parties involved, and the NCAA as a whole. Accordingly, we respectfully ask for patience and understanding while this process is resolved. Again, we strongly condemn the abuses of process that have occurred, and intend to ensure that these mistakes do not happen in the future.
Click to expand...

The chairman reply is good. I guess there is a science in knowing what the right to say is.
 
Ethnicsands said:
NoahZach said:
But, what do we expect the NCAA to say? It has to try to diffuse the situation.

Emmert probably thought that, by going aggressive on the language when he announced the problem, it would be received better. That backfired big time.

So, the NCAA can't use harsh self-critical language anymore. It will only further stoke the fire. It has to go in the direction of euphemisms and soft language.
Click to expand...

I guess there are two answers here: the 'what would a PR person advise them to say' and 'what would a responsible Chairperson with a reputation at stake' say.

The PR answer would probably be a lot less messed up than what she said. "bumps in the road," 'occasionally controversial" and "transformational change" are an awful set of comments to just toss out there. That's fuel on the fire. Completely wrong messaging. No way a PR person scripted that. She should have said something bland to the effect that 'we take our integrity, and the trust in the institution, very seriously. clearly, mistakes were made here. the board will look hard at what lessons to learn and conclusions to draw from them. in the meantime, we ask patience while the infractions process runs its course. it is in the interest of all parties that we get to completion on this matter without jumping to conclusions.'

But this answer is just a punt. If she really cares for the reputation of the NCAA, she might consider the 'responsible Chairperson' answer, which I'd suggest is something like the following: In recent weeks we have all learned that the enforcement committee made mistakes and violated NCAA rules and procedures in its investigation of the University of Miami. We take this matter and the ethics of the NCAA very seriously, and we intend to independently assess what happened, and how, to ensure that these mistakes will not happen again. However, we also have a matter that has been sent to the Committee on Infractions, and this process needs to be seen through to its conclusion for the benefit of all parties involved, and the NCAA as a whole. Accordingly, we respectfully ask for patience and understanding while this process is resolved. Again, we strongly condemn the abuses of process that have occurred, and intend to ensure that these mistakes do not happen in the future.
Click to expand...

Agree with you, but I don't think the NCAA can say "and we intend to independently assess what happened" because it would (and would have to) stand on what it already has done.

The NCAA should take some advice from you. Right now, it is a major botch job over there.
 
NoahZach said:
Ethnicsands said:
NoahZach said:
But, what do we expect the NCAA to say? It has to try to diffuse the situation.

Emmert probably thought that, by going aggressive on the language when he announced the problem, it would be received better. That backfired big time.

So, the NCAA can't use harsh self-critical language anymore. It will only further stoke the fire. It has to go in the direction of euphemisms and soft language.
Click to expand...

I guess there are two answers here: the 'what would a PR person advise them to say' and 'what would a responsible Chairperson with a reputation at stake' say.

The PR answer would probably be a lot less messed up than what she said. "bumps in the road," 'occasionally controversial" and "transformational change" are an awful set of comments to just toss out there. That's fuel on the fire. Completely wrong messaging. No way a PR person scripted that. She should have said something bland to the effect that 'we take our integrity, and the trust in the institution, very seriously. clearly, mistakes were made here. the board will look hard at what lessons to learn and conclusions to draw from them. in the meantime, we ask patience while the infractions process runs its course. it is in the interest of all parties that we get to completion on this matter without jumping to conclusions.'

But this answer is just a punt. If she really cares for the reputation of the NCAA, she might consider the 'responsible Chairperson' answer, which I'd suggest is something like the following: In recent weeks we have all learned that the enforcement committee made mistakes and violated NCAA rules and procedures in its investigation of the University of Miami. We take this matter and the ethics of the NCAA very seriously, and we intend to independently assess what happened, and how, to ensure that these mistakes will not happen again. However, we also have a matter that has been sent to the Committee on Infractions, and this process needs to be seen through to its conclusion for the benefit of all parties involved, and the NCAA as a whole. Accordingly, we respectfully ask for patience and understanding while this process is resolved. Again, we strongly condemn the abuses of process that have occurred, and intend to ensure that these mistakes do not happen in the future.
Click to expand...

Agree with you, but I don't think the NCAA can say "and we intend to independently assess what happened" because it would (and would have to) stand on what it already has done.

The NCAA should take some advice from you. Right now, it is a major botch job over there.
Click to expand...
I dont agree. Emmert led an internal investigation, but he oversees the folks getting investigated and was hip deep in the *****. It would be 100.0% standard for a board of directors to conduct their own independent investigation when there is corruption going on in an organization. Indeed, the committee charters of many board committees in my experience expressly permit the hiring of advisors for just this purpose.

In fact, i'd go so far as to say the lack of an independent board-led investigation here would be clear evidence of a cover-up.

The NCAA bots may want to take a look at their D&O policy. Because duty of care requires more than i've seen so far.
 
Bruce Feldman wrote this related piece:

From @Monsoonforlife: will Emmert be canned before the 2013 football season starts?

It wouldn't shock me despite the NCAA's Executive Committee releasing a statement "unanimously" affirming its ongoing support of embattled NCAA president Mark Emmert's leadership. In other news, my mom thinks I'm actually as good a basketball player as LeBron James and everything I write is great.

Unanimously? As in there are 17 members of the Executive Committee and not a single one saw any reason to have issue with Emmert's handling of this fiasco. Zero for 17?

Yep.

That should be stunning -- should be, but it just seems par for the course with the NCAA and Emmert. Earlier in the week, when the NCAA had its teleconference regarding the botched Miami investigation, word got out about Emmert canning several top NCAA enforcement staffers, including Julie Roe Lach. That's the person he picked for the role two years ago. I asked the president, in light of his push to punish head coaches for the screwups of their underlings, what he would say to those who think it is hypocritical that there would be no punishment for him given the egregious mistakes his people have made?

Emmert's response seemed like a shoulder shrug: "If the Executive Committee feels some sort of disciplinary action needs to be taken against me, then I'm sure they will."

So on Saturday, we got that glowing statement about Emmert and the Executive Committee, and it went over with quite a thud. A source at a big BCS school I spoke with Saturday night told me he's heard Emmert won't keep his job. And there are too many people coming at the guy now from all sides, and the Executive Committee's statement only inflamed things around him even more. I don't know. Maybe that is just wishful thinking. Does that mean Emmert will be forced out in the next year?

I suspect we're going to get even more lawsuits, which has the potential to uncover more embarrassing information about how the NCAA operates its murky system of "justice" -- and I've heard there will be more details coming out soon about Emmert that will only fan the flames of his grease fire. One intriguing part of this will be what Miami president Donna Shalala does down the road as the UM case keeps unfolding. No school ever has come out as hard against the NCAA publicly as Miami did earlier this week. Among the haymakers: "...sadly the NCAA has not lived up to their own core principles. The lengthy and already flawed investigation has demonstrated a disappointing pattern of unprofessional and unethical behavior."

Shalala, keep in mind, has as many big connections in the world of politics as anyone in the NCAA community from her days in D.C., where she served eight years as the Secretary of Health and Human Services. She has clout and isn't intimidated playing politics. I doubt the NCAA wants this ending up on Capitol Hill.

In my story earlier this weekend, Pete Carroll had some very strong comments about just how broken and bewildering this whole process is, and how it needs to change now. I feel like that sentiment is shared by more and more people within the college sports community and, like I was told Saturday night, this is gaining more traction. But will key power brokers inside the sport actually feel compelled to act?
 
Advertisement
Back
Top