http://www.13abc.com/video?clipId=915948...start=true

Interesting.

Heard he is trying out for Dirk Diggler in "Boogie Nights: Ready, Set, Go."

Oh yes the Blade journalisn at its finest. Toledo FB has put together a real juggernaut, but let's run an article that we can link UT and scandal
on the sport's page. Where's the article on attrition on the BGSUCK FB team that is a real problem for Clawson in his 5th season. Especially hit hard is the Offense. A few injuries and Falcon fans are looking at team that will hover around 5-7 wins.

Here's the article.

http://www.toledoblade.com/UT/2013/08/04...ation.html

(08-04-2013 06:57 AM)Boca Rocket Wrote:  Oh yes the Blade journalisn at its finest. Toledo FB has put together a real juggernaut, but let's run an article that we can link UT and scandal
on the sport's page. Where's the article on attrition on the BGSUCK FB team that is a real problem for Clawson in his 5th season. Especially hit hard is the Offense. A few injuries and Falcon fans are looking at team that will hover around 5-7 wins.

I think today's article is very interesting and a follow-up on a story that really stunned a lot of people at UT. The complete 180 in Hadsell's life is, in my opinion, more interesting than pressing questions like, "Will UT's defense actually show up this year?" or "Can UT finish better than 3rd in the MAC West?" or "Over/under 600, how many yards will Lynch drop on UT?"

There are still three Sundays before the opening game. There will be plenty of coverage on UT football between now and then; though not nearly enough for people on this board.

Loved the article. Finally got to see all of the facts in one place along with more insight into Hadsell's personality. Seems like he has found a his niche...love the quote to end the article. Acting is more a part of what he saw his role to be all the while at UT. Interesting.

Ryan is a BG homer. I agree - the Blah puts good articles like today's on WBB commit near the back and bottom of the section. Too much on BG and not enough on UT. I expect a nice article about the point shaving coming out just before the first game - you can bet on it. The Blah just is a hater of UT and it loves its suckeyes and bgsucks! There is a history... and i have heard of John Block professing he will tear down UT and then rebuild it - what a $%^# bag!

"...I have a dream...that one day on the rolling hills of the Centennial Mall little Block babies will be playing with little UT babies...I have a dream...that one day the Blade will judge its home town university not by its school colors...but by the content of its character...i have a dream...."

GO ROCKETS!!!

(08-04-2013 10:49 AM)Rocket Man Wrote:  Ryan is a BG homer. I agree - the Blah puts good articles like today's on WBB commit near the back and bottom of the section. Too much on BG and not enough on UT. I expect a nice article about the point shaving coming out just before the first game - you can bet on it. The Blah just is a hater of UT and it loves its suckeyes and bgsucks! There is a history... and i have heard of John Block professing he will tear down UT and then rebuild it - what a $%^# bag!

"...I have a dream...that one day on the rolling hills of the Centennial Mall little Block babies will be playing with little UT babies...I have a dream...that one day the Blade will judge its home town university not by its school colors...but by the content of its character...i have a dream...."

GO ROCKETS!!!

I wouldn't call Ryan a BG homer. If he was, why would he want to switch from covering UM for the Blah to covering UT, and not BG? Ryan does a good job, but the Blah doesn't let him do even better. The writers don't decide what stories go where, or what stories get published.

The guy strikes me delusional.

I do agree with those that feel there is a story here, a good one but I don't agree with Ryan caving on the location of the interview. The story wasn't THAT important and I felt Ryan permitted himself to be manipulated (the location, the ring, bringing in the new coach to the story...). The guy made the writer part of the story, a big no no. The wording and phrasing (shot putt's throw, married with adult son, which seems to have nothing to do with what followed...) not Ryan's best effort, IMO.

Wow! I'm surprised of the reaction regarding this article from people on this forum.

First, I have no issues with this piece or any other article Ryan has written regarding Rocket athletics. To call him names (like a BG Homer) is shallow and inaccurate.

Second, there's no speculation here. Shame on us that we put winning over character issues. Someone within the Athletic Department had to know something way before Emma had the courage to expose such misconduct.

Third, speaking of Emma; shame of the people of this forum who indicated she was a vindictive psycho-chick whose motivation was to throw her coach under the bus. I said it before and I'll repeat; Emma is a hero for future Rocket women (and other) runners whom she'll never know but will be saved from unwanted gaze of a creepy coach.

(08-04-2013 01:14 PM)San Giuseppe Jato Rocket Wrote:  Wow! I'm surprised of the reaction regarding this article from people on this forum.

First, I have no issues with this piece or any other article Ryan has written regarding Rocket athletics. To call him names (like a BG Homer) is shallow and inaccurate.

Second, there's no speculation here. Shame on us that we put winning over character issues. Someone within the Athletic Department had to know something way before Emma had the courage to expose such misconduct.

Third, speaking of Emma; shame of the people of this forum who indicated she was a vindictive psycho-chick whose motivation was to throw her coach under the bus. I said it before and I'll repeat; Emma is a hero for future Rocket women (and other) runners whom she'll never know but will be saved from unwanted gaze of a creepy coach.

"Third"

I think people sometimes jump to what would make the best movie. I agree with you on athlete and believe I posted as much at the time. It took guts. Human situations are rarely "clean" and it takes an enormous amount of guts to bring things like this to light knowing it will put you under scrutiny yourself.

UT can only be better as a program for dealing with the situation. As for the guy. He paid his penalty but he doesn't appear to me to have "moved on," not when he insists the interview take place on campus, wears his ring and uses the time to wave to people he thinks he is on good terms with. I don't begrudge good relationships in the future but to me, it feels too soon.

A hero? You obviously have not been keeping up on the story. He was able to prove that she lied this happened months ago and was well-documented even on this message board.

(08-04-2013 02:07 PM)utxctrack Wrote:  A hero? You obviously have not been keeping up on the story. He was able to prove that she lied this happened months ago and was well-documented even on this message board.

Did he or did he not do the things of which he was accused. Didn't he just admit it? Not sure exactly which part was "proven" to not have occurred but seems to me, he in that article pretty much fessed up.

AND, wouldn't he still be doing these things if someone hadn't gotten up the gumption to say something? Again, according to his own admission, this is who he is so the answer to that question is, "yes he would be."

Drinking on the job and dating younger women are not = to a false accusation of sexual harassment. Just because he was guilty of these things doesn't mean it is ok to ruin his name or life with such lies. By your logic, he was guilty of some things so he must be guilty of all things?
And let's be clear that there is a distinction between ethics and morals. Dating younger women is not a moral issue and it is only an ethical one if he was dating someone he coached. He admitted to dating shook 10+ years ago (before it was a university policy). That doesn't mean he should be falsely accused of doing it recently.

(08-04-2013 03:14 PM)utxctrack Wrote:  Drinking on the job and dating younger women are not = to a false accusation of sexual harassment. Just because he was guilty of these things doesn't mean it is ok to ruin his name or life with such lies. By your logic, he was guilty of some things so he must be guilty of all things?
And let's be clear that there is a distinction between ethics and morals. Dating younger women is not a moral issue and it is only an ethical one if he was dating someone he coached. He admitted to dating shook 10+ years ago (before it was a university policy). That doesn't mean he should be falsely accused of doing it recently.

"dating younger women are not = to a false accusation of sexual harassment."

Those would seem to have nothing what so ever to do with each other and apples are not oranges but

dating women who are your educational charges = sexual harassment, is not that controversial a statement now is it? We could both completely disagree with that statement but it still wouldn't remove his guilt for dating athletes under his charge, drinking on the job... If you don't already agree that those are no less career damaging than harassment, no less "ruin" his name, then I really don't know how to communicate it to you.

If you feel I made some charges of sexual or any other type of harassment, please quote that part of my post.

When I address one of your complaints instead of countering you come up with another. You have gone from complaining that some of us respect the athlete for bringing this to the open to accusing me (and others?) of making some sort of charge not already clearly admitted to by the man.

Could you kindly be clear on what it is I did that has you concerned.

Even though he admitted to dating someone over 10 years ago I will entertain your question. Dating someone who is under your educational charge does not, in any way, meaning that you are guilty of sexual harassment. At many universities it is not against University policy to date your students. Eastern Michigan is one of those universities. University of Toledo, at the time Coach Hadsell dated one of the runners, is also a university where it was not a policy at that time. Sexual harassment is an unwanted advance. One defense against sexual harassment is in the attention was wanted. Show me anywhere where dating a subordinate immediately equals sexual-harassment.

Your statement that dating someone under your educational charge equals sexual-harassment is absolutely faults. That being said, Coach Hadsell was not dating someone is educational charge he was not dating Emma Kertesz. Yet she made a false sexual harassment claim against him. That does not qualify her as a hero.

(08-04-2013 03:46 PM)utxctrack Wrote:  Even though he admitted to dating someone over 10 years ago I will entertain your question. Dating someone who is under your educational charge does not, in any way, meaning that you are guilty of sexual harassment. At many universities it is not against University policy to date your students. Eastern Michigan is one of those universities. University of Toledo, at the time Coach Hadsell dated one of the runners, is also a university where it was not a policy at that time. Sexual harassment is an unwanted advance. One defense against sexual harassment is in the attention was wanted. Show me anywhere where dating a subordinate immediately equals sexual-harassment.

Your statement that dating someone under your educational charge equals sexual-harassment is absolutely faults. That being said, Coach Hadsell was not dating someone is educational charge he was not dating Emma Kertesz. Yet she made a false sexual harassment claim against him. That does not qualify her as a hero.

I never made that statement (the one bolded).

"Sexual harassment" definition has changed, that I do agree. I know at a school down south (maybe ten years ago) at the mandatory, harassment, equal opportunity, FERPA, seminar the person in charge stated that a Prof/Instructor/GA could ask "once" and if rebuffed had to stop or it would be "harassment." Of course, the audience went nut-so. Ethics dictated you could not even ask once and the community challenged Compliance's "loose" interpretation. Did the definition change or did the understanding change, I don't know to be honest.

Ethically? Repeating what I actually stated as opposed to what you said I stated,

Quote:dating women who are your educational charges = sexual harassment, is not that controversial a statement.

I never said that is WAS harassment but I'll make the case that most people on campus would consider it so.

You'd also get argument against your definition of harassment, "Sexual harassment is an unwanted advance."
"Show me anywhere where dating a subordinate immediately equals sexual-harassment." Somehow I know we're going to get into a semantics argument on "immediately" but here is part of the definition according to UT.

Quote:3364-50-01 Sexual harassment and other forms of harassment
c) Such conduct has the purpose or effect of interfering with the individual’s work or academic performance

I could find no requirement that a statement must be made that the attention is unwanted and clearly sexual harassment is not limited to undesired sexual contact. Policy continues:

Quote: Accordingly, the definition above and the examples of sexual harassment below apply to behavior during working hours and non-working hours, including University-sponsored programs, seminars, conferences, business trips or business related social events, and conduct that occurs directly

Harassment policy is interpreted liberally to protect those in a position of subservience. Saying "no" is NOT a requirement.

I Believe that MOST people on campus are going to tell you that dating a student under your charge is "harassment." If you disagree, then maybe we should ask the university to conduct a poll, there's obviously a need for commitment and clarity by the University.

As far as whether or not the student made a false accusation about her personal relationship between the coach and herself, that I don't know. Apparently her accusation brought out details that he doesn't dispute? You must have documentation, I know you wouldn't want to make a false accusation against this student? Either way, her coming forward got rid of a problem looking to get worse. Hero? Still took guts from what I can see.

I've stayed out of this tawdry discussion until now, but I can't keep my mouth shut anymore.

Although dating a subordinate is not necessarily sexual harassment, it can often lead to it. Many people will tell you that it is very difficult to have a truly and completely consensual relationship in this kind of situation. The coach controls much of the athlete's life. He controls their scholarship, and if they are an athlete with a promising future, he might even control their future career. If the student does something to tick off the coach in their "relationship", what might happen to their athletic career? The student might be put in a position that they believe they need to appease whatever the coach wants out of the relationship for fear of what might happen to their career. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but if you have taken any training on sexual harassment, you should know that happens and happens a lot in these cases - the subordinate is not an equal partner in the relationship and bad things can happen in a lot of different ways. This is not even remotely the same as say, and art teacher dating a student who took art 101 from them and will never teach them again.

And quite frankly, it works the other way too. If the coach ticks off the athlete, they can turn around and bring charges that can lead to serious problems for both the coach and the University. He should have been mature enough to know that, at his age.

The fact that his defense to the relationship was that there was no policy in place at the time tells me that he still to this day has no understanding of the potential (and now real) consequences of his actions. You shouldn't need to be told that something like this is wrong. He was behaving more like a frat boy than a coach and teacher. The admitted drinking, the admitted past relationship, the late night texts that show he treated at least some of his students like drinking buddies instead of students he is charged to protect, is in my opinion waaay more than enough to warrant what he has gotten - sexual harassment or not.

(08-04-2013 05:21 PM)northcoastRocket Wrote:  I've stayed out of this tawdry discussion until now, but I can't keep my mouth shut anymore....
The fact that his defense to the relationship was that there was no policy in place at the time...

Tawdry? yeah I suppose so but the discussion?
It's instructional isn't it? If reasonable adults as we generally are on this board cannot agree on what "sexual harassment" constitutes and at what time in history, then it would say to me the University and institutions in general need to be clearer about a naturally occurring human emotion. These policies are not just to protect us from the predators but also to teach us to guard our emotions, actions and reactions so as to not inadvertently harm others.

I really would be surprised that policies in place ten years ago didn't also have the same intent as today's, to guard people in naturally bonding situations from harming others or being harmed. We concentrate too much on the "predator" angle. I think it's really that angle that has utxctrack upset. He feels the guy is (unfairly) being labeled a predator.