(04-05-2013 07:44 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

looks like it worked.

(04-05-2013 02:39 PM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(04-04-2013 09:41 PM)NLOWL Wrote:  Drama, negativity, and allegations gets the news, folks. We all know that. It's what the media lives for. Disgusting if you ask me. The media in this country has no conscious, nor do they face any true system of checks and balances. Nice response by our President for the most part.

The reality is that the media and Hollywood are the ultimate in free enterprise. They show what sells

Unfortunately, that tends to bring out the worst in most folks. People don't know what is good for them anymore. Lol. I will abstain from preaching on here for fear of being persecuted for my thoughts. Lol. I liked it when America still had a conscious and a moral/ethical standard in all areas of life.

President Leebron's response represents a stunning lowering of standards in the oversight of Rice athletics. During my time at Rice, I met with his predecessor, Malcolm Gillis and when the subject of athletics came up, Gillis was quick to note the one thing he made sure all athletic coaches understood (quoting almost verbatim from memory):

"If I come to find out that there is any impropriety in the running of your program, you will probably be fired. If it becomes public or leads to an NCAA investigation, you will definitely be fired."

This type of standard is incredibly powerful because it ensures that coaches will avoid making decisions that could even potentially lead to trouble and was successful. Until this, had Rice athletics EVER had a compliance problem or hint of abuse of student athletes?

The 2003 Baseball Championship and the success of many other AAU-peer institutions in recent years demonstrates that it's possible to run a successful athletic program while maintaining your standards.
In this case, instead of drawing a clear, unmistakeable line, the University has chosen to stand behind lawyers and current staff, who otherwise have been mediocre at best at their jobs. The result has been a lost year for the program with no end in sight to this purgatory.

Lost in this discussion is what's fair for the current student athletes and the impact on recruiting and conference alignment. Why would any parent send their child to play Basketball for Rice at this point? And how is that fair to Rice Owl fans, alumni and other stakeholders who subsidize the program?

(04-06-2013 08:28 AM)Riceman2004 Wrote:  President Leebron's response represents a stunning lowering of standards in the oversight of Rice athletics.

"If I come to find out that there is any impropriety in the running of your program, you will probably be fired. If it becomes public or leads to an NCAA investigation, you will definitely be fired.

I think you, like others in this post, are assuming you know way more than you do, and, also, that Kazemi's allegations merit way more credibility than the currently known facts would support. I personally would support David Leebron way more than Kazemi, who would appear to have a personal agenda that would supersede any possible "loyalty" to Rice. IMHO, your accusations that Leebron has lowered Gillis's standards is , at this point, at the least, a big stretch, and at the most, total bull****.

They could still come because they get a scholarship to a top academic university even though the basketball program needs to win more often. Many ot the basketball players I saw in the 1970s became suceessful after Rice even though the basketball teams did not win much. There are a couple of lawyers I see often. Another player earned a PhD at Sheffield University in England and is now seminary professor. Another player from later in the decade now has his own investent banking firm.

(04-06-2013 08:28 AM)Riceman2004 Wrote:  President Leebron's response represents a stunning lowering of standards in the oversight of Rice athletics. During my time at Rice, I met with his predecessor, Malcolm Gillis and when the subject of athletics came up, Gillis was quick to note the one thing he made sure all athletic coaches understood (quoting almost verbatim from memory):

"If I come to find out that there is any impropriety in the running of your program, you will probably be fired. If it becomes public or leads to an NCAA investigation, you will definitely be fired."

This type of standard is incredibly powerful because it ensures that coaches will avoid making decisions that could even potentially lead to trouble and was successful. Until this, had Rice athletics EVER had a compliance problem or hint of abuse of student athletes?

The 2003 Baseball Championship and the success of many other AAU-peer institutions in recent years demonstrates that it's possible to run a successful athletic program while maintaining your standards.
In this case, instead of drawing a clear, unmistakeable line, the University has chosen to stand behind lawyers and current staff, who otherwise have been mediocre at best at their jobs. The result has been a lost year for the program with no end in sight to this purgatory.

Lost in this discussion is what's fair for the current student athletes and the impact on recruiting and conference alignment. Why would any parent send their child to play Basketball for Rice at this point? And how is that fair to Rice Owl fans, alumni and other stakeholders who subsidize the program?

(04-08-2013 03:44 PM)75src Wrote:  Many ot the basketball players I saw in the 1970s became suceessful after Rice even though the basketball teams did not win much.

There are a couple of lawyers ....

Another ... is now ... professor.

I thought you said they were successful ..

(04-06-2013 08:28 AM)Riceman2004 Wrote:  President Leebron's response represents a stunning lowering of standards in the oversight of Rice athletics. During my time at Rice, I met with his predecessor, Malcolm Gillis and when the subject of athletics came up, Gillis was quick to note the one thing he made sure all athletic coaches understood (quoting almost verbatim from memory):

"If I come to find out that there is any impropriety in the running of your program, you will probably be fired. If it becomes public or leads to an NCAA investigation, you will definitely be fired."

This type of standard is incredibly powerful because it ensures that coaches will avoid making decisions that could even potentially lead to trouble and was successful. Until this, had Rice athletics EVER had a compliance problem or hint of abuse of student athletes?

The 2003 Baseball Championship and the success of many other AAU-peer institutions in recent years demonstrates that it's possible to run a successful athletic program while maintaining your standards.
In this case, instead of drawing a clear, unmistakeable line, the University has chosen to stand behind lawyers and current staff, who otherwise have been mediocre at best at their jobs. The result has been a lost year for the program with no end in sight to this purgatory.

Lost in this discussion is what's fair for the current student athletes and the impact on recruiting and conference alignment. Why would any parent send their child to play Basketball for Rice at this point? And how is that fair to Rice Owl fans, alumni and other stakeholders who subsidize the program?

Why is this a surprise? He is a lawyer.

(04-06-2013 11:30 PM)RiceDad Wrote:  

(04-06-2013 08:28 AM)Riceman2004 Wrote:  President Leebron's response represents a stunning lowering of standards in the oversight of Rice athletics.

"If I come to find out that there is any impropriety in the running of your program, you will probably be fired. If it becomes public or leads to an NCAA investigation, you will definitely be fired.

I think you, like others in this post, are ******** you know way more than you do, and, also, that Kazemi's allegations merit way more credibility than the currently known facts would support. I personally would support David Leebron way more than Kazemi, who would appear to have a personal agenda that would supersede any possible "loyalty" to Rice. IMHO, your accusations that Leebron has lowered Gillis's standards is , at this point, at the least, a big stretch, and at the most, total bull****.

I don't pretend to know the facts, but I would be very cautious about making assumptions about what various people on the board know and do not know. But I do know two things that are irrefutable:
1. How Leebron's predecessor would have handled the issue based on his comments that were made in meetings I attended. Based on the circumstances surrounding George Rupp's departure, it's also fairly safe to assume how he would have handled it as well.

2. Perception is reality, irrespective of the facts. Even if the allegations are completely false, someone needs to be held accountable for bringing people into the fold who have sullied the reputation of an institution many spent years building

I don't want to believe that these allegations are untrue, but I also care deeply about Rice's reputation. It is unfair to donors, current student-athletes and alumni to allow this charade to continue.

Tamir just tweeted that Leebron had him into his office today.

Apparently he thanked him for his commitment to Rice, and acknowledge his pride in that, and his accomplishments.

A great gesture from Leebron (would have been nice to have this come earlier, or more publicly) and is just the type of thing that should have happened to Tamir after he gutted it out this season.

(04-09-2013 11:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Tamir just tweeted that Leebron had him into his office today.

Apparently he thanked him for his commitment to Rice, and acknowledge his pride in that, and his accomplishments.

A great gesture from Leebron (would have been nice to have this come earlier, or more publicly) and is just the type of thing that should have happened to Tamir after he gutted it out this season.

He should take him to lunch at Cohen House too!!

So the assumption at this point is that Rice is intent on winning the potential legal battle (with Morcos) at the expense of the public image battle? I stongly question which of those is actually more important, since the vast majority of legal issues settle these days and go away quietly, while bad publicity can stick around much longer and have a more deleterious impact.

(04-09-2013 11:29 AM)TJS_NYC Wrote:  

(04-09-2013 11:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Tamir just tweeted that Leebron had him into his office today.

Apparently he thanked him for his commitment to Rice, and acknowledge his pride in that, and his accomplishments.

A great gesture from Leebron (would have been nice to have this come earlier, or more publicly) and is just the type of thing that should have happened to Tamir after he gutted it out this season.

He should take him to lunch at Cohen House too!!

He also posted a pic on facebook of a Centennial Medallion. Which according to Leebron, Tamir is the only student he can think of with one.

(04-09-2013 11:38 AM)dragon2owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2013 11:29 AM)TJS_NYC Wrote:  

(04-09-2013 11:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Tamir just tweeted that Leebron had him into his office today.

Apparently he thanked him for his commitment to Rice, and acknowledge his pride in that, and his accomplishments.

A great gesture from Leebron (would have been nice to have this come earlier, or more publicly) and is just the type of thing that should have happened to Tamir after he gutted it out this season.

He should take him to lunch at Cohen House too!!

He also posted a pic on facebook of a Centennial Medallion. Which according to Leebron, Tamir is the only student he can think of with one.

Deservedly so.

I wonder if there will be anything mentioned in-particular when he walks at graduation this year.

Could be kind of awkward, especially with Kazemi coming so close after Jackson (both were at McMurtury IIRC)

http://instagram.com/p/X5ADGPHTIu/#

(04-09-2013 12:45 PM)Tiki Owl Wrote:  http://instagram.com/p/X5ADGPHTIu/#

Thanks TIKI

(04-09-2013 11:34 AM)mrbig Wrote:  So the assumption at this point is that Rice is intent on winning the potential legal battle (with Morcos) at the expense of the public image battle? I stongly question which of those is actually more important, since the vast majority of legal issues settle these days and go away quietly, while bad publicity can stick around much longer and have a more deleterious impact.

MrBig,

My sense is they've come to the conclusion that there is no winning the public image battle. And I think I agree with that conclusion. It seems to me there are to approaches they could take:

1. The University could attack the credibility of the two student-athletes. The University could say, "We've done an exhaustive investigation and find: a. there is no evidence that any racially inappropriate comments were made, and b. there is no evidence that either student-athlete ever complained about such treatment to anybody before making their cases to the NCAA." (all of which is true) But that does not PROVE that nothing ever happened - only that the University has no evidence that it did. And the lead voice carrying the University's case would either be the Jewish President, the Jewish AD, or the Jewish basketball Coach - perhaps that shouldn't make a difference, but I bet it would in the court of public opinion.
2. The University could "clean house". They could fire Greenspan - for being accused of this. I guess they could fire Braun - for allegedly not knowing about and reporting the matter. And Leebron could be fired - for allowing this alleged incident to happen on his watch. But wouldn't that be viewed as a tactic admission of guilt?

I agree that this does damage to Rice's image. And it does my personal image no good because I've always loudly associated myself with an organization that now is considered racist.

I would love for the University to be able to refute this convincingly. But I can't figure out how they'd do that. I think ducking down in the hopes that this story is replaced by something else fairly quickly is that least bad alternative available to Rice.

Am I missing something?

Guys,

I understood that Rice publically took the NCAA to task late last week for granting the waiver without an investigations. This was reported in the Chronicle (thanks RUBPA for the daily udpates - see Saturday's)

Chronicle Article referenced by RUBPA

I don't see that as either giving up on the public image battle, or that they've come to the conclusion that they cannot win it.

And I guess I'm a little bit perplexed that people are so quick to judge an organization as racist . . . or even our AD as such for that matter. I haven't jumped to that conclusion at all.

Coatza's post speaks to what other here have posted . . .i.e., Coatza seems to be literally afraid he's going to be tarred with the label, primarily because in today's highly-charged, politically-correct environment, possibly the worst 'crime' anyone can commit is to allow themselves to be categorized as intolerant, either as a homophobe or as a racist.

Of course people who would categorize someone on such circumstantial evidence without knowing the circumstances, or the merits of the evidence, or knowing whether the rest of the person's life justifies such a categorization . . . . . are demonstrating ignorance and intolerance as well.

In other words we're more scared of people who rush to judge and are willing to base their judgements on perception and not a complete understanding of fact . . . . . than we are scared of the fact that by refusing to wait for the truth, and by refusing to point out the truth when its available (in this case that the truth is probably somewhere in the broad area between the potential polar ends of the incompletely defined situation, i.e., the NCAA did NO investigation, the players benefitted from the waiver - - greatly) we allow people to be judged based on perception and not reality.

(04-09-2013 01:24 PM)CoatzaOwl Wrote:  

(04-09-2013 11:34 AM)mrbig Wrote:  So the assumption at this point is that Rice is intent on winning the potential legal battle (with Morcos) at the expense of the public image battle? I stongly question which of those is actually more important, since the vast majority of legal issues settle these days and go away quietly, while bad publicity can stick around much longer and have a more deleterious impact.

MrBig,

My sense is they've come to the conclusion that there is no winning the public image battle. And I think I agree with that conclusion. It seems to me there are to approaches they could take:

1. The University could attack the credibility of the two student-athletes. The University could say, "We've done an exhaustive investigation and find: a. there is no evidence that any racially inappropriate comments were made, and b. there is no evidence that either student-athlete ever complained about such treatment to anybody before making their cases to the NCAA." (all of which is true) But that does not PROVE that nothing ever happened - only that the University has no evidence that it did. And the lead voice carrying the University's case would either be the Jewish President, the Jewish AD, or the Jewish basketball Coach - perhaps that shouldn't make a difference, but I bet it would in the court of public opinion.
2. The University could "clean house". They could fire Greenspan - for being accused of this. I guess they could fire Braun - for allegedly not knowing about and reporting the matter. And Leebron could be fired - for allowing this alleged incident to happen on his watch. But wouldn't that be viewed as a tactic admission of guilt?

I agree that this does damage to Rice's image. And it does my personal image no good because I've always loudly associated myself with an organization that now is considered racist.

I would love for the University to be able to refute this convincingly. But I can't figure out how they'd do that. I think ducking down in the hopes that this story is replaced by something else fairly quickly is that least bad alternative available to Rice.

Am I missing something?

Rick, your words are very eloquent and do a solid job of explaining how people are responding these days to their political and social inequities and differences. I won't turn this political, but it is past time we stop wearing our feelings on our sleeves and quit calling folks racist every time an issue comes up that involves people of different races. God help us!

Whatever the truth is, the situation is a mess. Whatever happened, it was significant enough to gut the men's basketball team. I find it hard to believe that any university or athletic department policy would be discriminatory, but I find it easy to believe that a given individual could exercise poor judgment. I don't think the latter is reflective of the university; rather, the university's response is the real statement of the university's values and principles.

I don't know anything about the context under which the alleged comments were made, but from the time I first heard the rumors in the fall, I was highly doubtful that Greenspan (if he made them) was truly trying to insult or discriminate against anyone. I interpreted more along the lines of a good old boy attorney calling his legal assistant "Honey" or "Baby". Which of course doesn't excuse the behavior and doesn't mean there shouldn't be serious reprecussions, it just means that the offender isn't a bigot, but is instead someone who just doesn't "get it" and doesn't understand that just because they think its funny or cute doesn't mean everyone else feels the same way.

In regards to how I wish Rice had handled this:
(1) If Greenspan did not say any of this, then I think he (not Rice or Leebron) should have issued a statement in the fall when the first mention of racially insensitive comments broke after the waivers were granted denying with specificity each allegation in the waiver application. Or even if they didn't go through the allegations bullet point, release a statement that the waivers made a number of specific allegations of racial/ethnic insensitivy and that each allegation in the waiver request is specifically denied. At that point, it seemed highly likely that more details would eventually emerge from somewhere, and if Rice and Greenspan are saying all the specific allegations are false, might as well get out in front of the story, instead of playing damage control. (and especially the way they played damage control with general denials). Especially with such a sensitive topic.
(2) If Greenspan said and did some or all of the specific allegations in the waiver, I think he should have been heavily reprimanded and probably fired. That kind of stuff can't be said by a person in a leadership role in an organization in this day and age. It just can't happen. It is playing with fire and eventually they will say something to someone and the whole organization will get burned as a result. If one comment had been made and word had gotten back to the administration after a single incident, I think a "you do it again and you are gone" warning would have been preferable to firing. But if anything close to the volume of allegations in the waiver is true, then the volume of specific incidents combined with the prominent transfers has passed the point where Greenspan should be retained, despite what other good things he might or might not have done.

This is just my gut reaction, legal ramifications be damned. If the allegations are false, then I wish Rice would play the criminal defense attorney and tell all the prospective jurors watching the nightly news that his client is innocent. If the allegations are mostly true, then I don't see any reason to continue to employ the offending individual. If I made those kind of comments, I'd expect to be fired from my job. If my wife or best friend said those kind of things at their jobs, I'd say it was probably a fireable offense.