Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ibn Battuta

Mike Rice and Rutgers situation

Recommended Posts

First off, I don't agree with the coach's methodology of being super tough/angry in practice. I don't think he's a very good coach to begin with. Based on his performance, he should be fired (this incident is the tipping point).

 

However, ESPN's coverage on this issue is sensational and misleading, and for some reason it's getting to me. ESPN claims that this had been going on for 3 years yet they only show a provocative two and half minute clip. Are we supposed to assume that these incidents were going on for three years and somehow nobody came out to blow the whistle earlier? There's no testimony from any players about the incident. The assistant coach who came out with the story is also suing the university for wrongful termination. On top of that, we don't know whether these incidents occurred before or after Rice's suspension and fine in December last year.

 

This kind of journalism just makes me insane. I mean, ESPN is claiming the coach hit the kid's head with the ball, but it never touches his head! It just ricochets off his shoulder. They're very good at spinning the story.

 

edit: the coach has been fired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding was that the suspension was the initial response to the video, which was not made public until now.

 

And does it make a difference where the ball hit the kid?

 

To an extent yea.

 

If he hits him in the head/face or groin that's terrible and if an injury occurs because of it that's prosecutable. But the torso or legs, ehh. Not saying it's not bad but these athletes are probably stronger and heavier than him. Mike probably thought to get their attention that way (which is obviously debatable).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He should've been fired for just being an idiot. Pushing your players around and calling them gay slurs isn't the best motivational tactic. I can't imagine being a Rutgers player and rallying around my coach in big games when he's a giant ahole all the time to his team because he's not a good enough coach to get the best out of people like a sane human being.

 

In regards to ESPN, they're a sensationalist network. These are the same people that put Skip Bayless and Stephen "I Should've Been A TV Evangelist" Smith together for 4 hours a day, 5 days a week. I don't know what their coverage of this particular story has been, but they usually put people like Stephen A out there to play the sanctimonious role, then beat it to death for ratings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He should've been fired for just being an idiot. Pushing your players around and calling them gay slurs isn't the best motivational tactic. I can't imagine being a Rutgers player and rallying around my coach in big games when he's a giant ahole all the time to his team because he's not a good enough coach to get the best out of people like a sane human being.

 

Yeah. ESPN may be blowing this out of pro-portion, but I'm not gonna feel bad for this dude. Clearly not the way to treat your players. I can imagine some of the teams I played for, one of the guys turning around and full on punching him in the face for some of the things in that video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To an extent yea.

 

If he hits him in the head/face or groin that's terrible and if an injury occurs because of it that's prosecutable. But the torso or legs, ehh. Not saying it's not bad but these athletes are probably stronger and heavier than him. Mike probably thought to get their attention that way (which is obviously debatable).

 

None of that has anything to do with why the behavior is bad. Even if the ball never touched anyone, the fact remains that the coach's intent was to hit them with the ball. That's what's important. He either thought that was appropriate behavior or he thought there would be no consequences for it even if it was inappropriate, and either way that makes him a guy who shouldn't be coaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of that has anything to do with why the behavior is bad. Even if the ball never touched anyone, the fact remains that the coach's intent was to hit them with the ball. That's what's important. He either thought that was appropriate behavior or he thought there would be no consequences for it even if it was inappropriate, and either way that makes him a guy who shouldn't be coaching.

 

That's a good point.

 

The only mystery now is how frequent these episodes occurred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good point.

 

The only mystery now is how frequent these episodes occurred.

You almost have to assume it was frequent, but we'll see what info comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×