I'm one who has been very critical of Father Harrington's handling of the athletic program.

When I went to St John's back in the late 60's I shared a house with six fellow veterans. One of them had a twin brother who was at Mary Immaculate in Pennsylvania studying for the priesthood. If I'm not mistaken, it took nine or eleven years to become a Vincentian priest.
I was invited to spend a few days at Mary Immaculate where I had a chance to meet so many of the seminarians. Every one was great. Many were funny. It was like being back in the service hanging out with the guys. There was absolutely no difference. Not in language or subject matter if you catch my drift. Coincidently, Harrington was among that group. He was ordained in 1973. l really don't remember meeting him, but he was there. All great guys. People I know who've met Father Harrington all say he's a great guy.

Father Harrington has done a very good job running the university. That's what he's there for. He's done a horrendous job running the basketball program. Father Harrington has done a horrendous job running the basketball program. He CHOSE the extra-curricular activity, and he's doing a horrendous job. I won't get into yet another litany of how far the program has fallen. Father Harrington runs the program. We're not a Big East program any more. We've had six coaches since he got here 15 years ago. Who do we blame, President Bush?

If Fred Wilpon does a bad job running the Mets, people have a right to say it. When George Steinbrenner went through a manager a year, people had a right to say he was too disruptive. How about the Dolans ruining the Knicks and Rangers? They CHOSE to run these teams, so they opened themselves up to criticism. Father Harrington CHOSE to run the basketball program.

If I criticize the Wilpons, does that make me anti-semitic? How about the Dolans, is that Irish bashing? Criticizing Father Harrington isn't priest bashing. He CHOSE to run a team that went in the toilet during his tenure.