(05-05-2021 06:35 PM)QSECOFR Wrote: There is a possibility that a student who is well known on campus might not want to use the university’s mental health services because of the fear of being photographed coming and going to appointments and ending up on twitter, facebook, instagram, etc.
I am NOT saying that Brannen did a good thing or that he gives two sh!ts about any of the players. I’m just saying that an athlete might have concerns about using UC’s facilities. Privacy still matters to some people.
Very true. That said, privacy is important to any student regardless if they are known/recognizeable around campus. I can't imagine there wouldn't be an option to meet remotely via facetime/zoom/skype. I know this is a growing trend on the medical side [tele-health].
Agree with 92. Although it’s possible that is a reason campus physicians were not used, I think that would be unlikely. Things are relatively discreet these days.
Agreed.
Especially when half the nation is petrified to do anything face-to-face.
Another thing: Given Brannen's actions, it wouldn't surprise me if his "offer" to pay for mental health counseling was really meant to question the player's toughness. "Oh you can't handle this? I'll pay for your shrink if you feel lonely for your Mommy." And when the pissed-off player called Brannen's bluff on the offer, Brannen manned up and kept his word to pay for it.
I'm not saying that's what happened. Just saying that it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
(05-05-2021 07:37 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote: I read the article by Wittry, very telling.
It doesn’t seem to me that the details about the practice that were revealed were horrible. Seemed tough but not unreasonable. But we don’t get all the story. If there was a bunch of conditioning without access to frequent water breaks- that’s just incredibly stupid. If Branned ignored, antagonized, or otherwise hindered the training staff- that’s just unacceptable. And the tone of the article makes Brannen come off as incredibly paranoid and suspicious.
My only concern is the last recorded incident in the article was December. Why did it take the administration until March to do anything else about it? Where was the followup? Or we just don’t have any of the details? It kinda seems like the administration waited until it was more “convenient” i.e.- the season was over- to deal with it.
Does that sound fishy to anyone else?
i was thinking the exact same thing. While that article featured entries that draw largely on a single source, anecdotally, and provide details that color Coach Brannen is a very poor light, there is a 4+ month period of time that is undocumented. i'm not saying there isn't documentation of additional issues of Coach Brannen. in fact, i'm inclined to believe that there will likely be additional issues that come out. i'm more curious about why did Cunningham wait? if you know, as far back as November, that the players are subject to such behavior and at risk, isn't it his responsibility to eliminate that risk?
Initially, this was my thought too.
But my brother (a high school basketball coach) pointed out that the departure of 6 players might have triggered a review of everything that's happened since the initial incidents.
And in fact, that fits the timeline of what Cunningham actually did.
i believe it was documented that upon their exit, some, if not all, of the transfer out players interviewed with Cunningham. But that was several months since December. if the allegations are true, it begs some disbelief that nothing actionable, especially in light of the November reprimand, happened in that time frame, imo. i mean Cunningham is trying to terminate w/cause. The optics of the timing look very suspicious but that's just my opinion.
I don't get what you think is suspicious. You believe that they are actually firing him for some other reason that's unrelated to this stuff and all the players transferring?
(05-05-2021 07:37 PM)Bearcatbdub Wrote: I read the article by Wittry, very telling.
It doesn’t seem to me that the details about the practice that were revealed were horrible. Seemed tough but not unreasonable. But we don’t get all the story. If there was a bunch of conditioning without access to frequent water breaks- that’s just incredibly stupid. If Branned ignored, antagonized, or otherwise hindered the training staff- that’s just unacceptable. And the tone of the article makes Brannen come off as incredibly paranoid and suspicious.
My only concern is the last recorded incident in the article was December. Why did it take the administration until March to do anything else about it? Where was the followup? Or we just don’t have any of the details? It kinda seems like the administration waited until it was more “convenient” i.e.- the season was over- to deal with it.
Does that sound fishy to anyone else?
i was thinking the exact same thing. While that article featured entries that draw largely on a single source, anecdotally, and provide details that color Coach Brannen is a very poor light, there is a 4+ month period of time that is undocumented. i'm not saying there isn't documentation of additional issues of Coach Brannen. in fact, i'm inclined to believe that there will likely be additional issues that come out. i'm more curious about why did Cunningham wait? if you know, as far back as November, that the players are subject to such behavior and at risk, isn't it his responsibility to eliminate that risk?
Initially, this was my thought too.
But my brother (a high school basketball coach) pointed out that the departure of 6 players might have triggered a review of everything that's happened since the initial incidents.
And in fact, that fits the timeline of what Cunningham actually did.
i believe it was documented that upon their exit, some, if not all, of the transfer out players interviewed with Cunningham. But that was several months since December. if the allegations are true, it begs some disbelief that nothing actionable, especially in light of the November reprimand, happened in that time frame, imo. i mean Cunningham is trying to terminate w/cause. The optics of the timing look very suspicious but that's just my opinion.
I don't get what you think is suspicious. You believe that they are actually firing him for some other reason that's unrelated to this stuff and all the players transferring?
No. i believe that he's being fired for player endangerment and creating a hostile work environment. i'm curious that for five months or so, there was a monthly anecdotal accounting of his abusive behavior, including behavior that resulted in a letter of reprimand, followed by a four month period of nothing until the player mutiny and his termination. What did the player interviews reveal that he didn't know/act on in that four month period? Coach Brannen isn't being terminated solely for what happened between August and December. if that was the case, they could have did him months ago, and possibly curbed the mutiny. Maybe suspicious is the wrong word but it does seem odd to me.
(05-05-2021 08:02 PM)eroc Wrote: i was thinking the exact same thing. While that article featured entries that draw largely on a single source, anecdotally, and provide details that color Coach Brannen is a very poor light, there is a 4+ month period of time that is undocumented. i'm not saying there isn't documentation of additional issues of Coach Brannen. in fact, i'm inclined to believe that there will likely be additional issues that come out. i'm more curious about why did Cunningham wait? if you know, as far back as November, that the players are subject to such behavior and at risk, isn't it his responsibility to eliminate that risk?
Initially, this was my thought too.
But my brother (a high school basketball coach) pointed out that the departure of 6 players might have triggered a review of everything that's happened since the initial incidents.
And in fact, that fits the timeline of what Cunningham actually did.
i believe it was documented that upon their exit, some, if not all, of the transfer out players interviewed with Cunningham. But that was several months since December. if the allegations are true, it begs some disbelief that nothing actionable, especially in light of the November reprimand, happened in that time frame, imo. i mean Cunningham is trying to terminate w/cause. The optics of the timing look very suspicious but that's just my opinion.
I don't get what you think is suspicious. You believe that they are actually firing him for some other reason that's unrelated to this stuff and all the players transferring?
No. i believe that he's being fired for player endangerment and creating a hostile work environment. i'm curious that for five months or so, there was a monthly anecdotal accounting of his abusive behavior, including behavior that resulted in a letter of reprimand, followed by a four month period of nothing until the player mutiny and his termination. What did the player interviews reveal that he didn't know/act on in that four month period? Coach Brannen isn't being terminated solely for what happened between August and December. if that was the case, they could have did him months ago, and possibly curbed the mutiny. Maybe suspicious is the wrong word but it does seem odd to me.
There’s either more to the story (which there probably is)- or it’s really weird how it played out. I would hope that if it was a hostile environment that was endagering players, that the AD would have kept a lot closer tabs on it than what is revealed in the article.
(05-05-2021 08:16 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: Initially, this was my thought too.
But my brother (a high school basketball coach) pointed out that the departure of 6 players might have triggered a review of everything that's happened since the initial incidents.
And in fact, that fits the timeline of what Cunningham actually did.
i believe it was documented that upon their exit, some, if not all, of the transfer out players interviewed with Cunningham. But that was several months since December. if the allegations are true, it begs some disbelief that nothing actionable, especially in light of the November reprimand, happened in that time frame, imo. i mean Cunningham is trying to terminate w/cause. The optics of the timing look very suspicious but that's just my opinion.
I don't get what you think is suspicious. You believe that they are actually firing him for some other reason that's unrelated to this stuff and all the players transferring?
No. i believe that he's being fired for player endangerment and creating a hostile work environment. i'm curious that for five months or so, there was a monthly anecdotal accounting of his abusive behavior, including behavior that resulted in a letter of reprimand, followed by a four month period of nothing until the player mutiny and his termination. What did the player interviews reveal that he didn't know/act on in that four month period? Coach Brannen isn't being terminated solely for what happened between August and December. if that was the case, they could have did him months ago, and possibly curbed the mutiny. Maybe suspicious is the wrong word but it does seem odd to me.
There’s either more to the story (which there probably is)- or it’s really weird how it played out. I would hope that if it was a hostile environment that was endagering players, that the AD would have kept a lot closer tabs on it than what is revealed in the article.
If I'm reading this correctly:
Quote:In the days leading up to the University of Cincinnati’s public announcement that it was reviewing allegations related to its men’s basketball program and in the weeks before University of Cincinnati Director of Athletics John Cunningham placed former Cincinnati men’s basketball coach John Brannen on investigatory administrative leave, a University of Cincinnati athletic department employee sent Cunningham and Associate Athletics Director for Compliance Trever Wright an email that contained a seven-page document that featured 28 entries, which detailed various meetings, practices, film sessions and breakfasts with members of the men’s basketball program.
The information outlined in the article wasn't given to Cunningham until shortly before the investigation was publicly announced. Presumably the employee had not given this information to the AD earlier due to concerns about losing their job.
The individual that wrote the email that was the basis of the article was also quoted as saying that they began avoiding meetings with Brannen and staff, so maybe they weren't privy to as much "dirt" after the events outlined?
You can argue that Cunningham should've had a better idea of what was going on in the program prior to the end of the season, but on the flip side, if everyone is afraid to tell him what's going on because they're fearful of being fired/retaliated against I'm not sure how he'd know the situation was as bad as it was.
Ok point taken. But Cunningham did reprimand Brannen after a discussion with the training staff in Nov. Put that together with the cited 3 violations of practice hours, and you would think there would have been more digging going on prior to the end of the season.
With what we have here- it’s a reprimand in November and then <crickets> until March when a mystery guy turns in a personal journal of events that happened August through December.
Which makes me think, had the players sucked it up and stuck it out- then we are still saddled with Brannen.
(05-06-2021 07:08 AM)Bearcatbdub Wrote: Ok point taken. But Cunningham did reprimand Brannen after a discussion with the training staff in Nov. Put that together with the cited 3 violations of practice hours, and you would think there would have been more digging going on prior to the end of the season.
With what we have here- it’s a reprimand in November and then <crickets> until March when a mystery guy turns in a personal journal of events that happened August through December.
Which makes me think, had the players sucked it up and stuck it out- then we are still saddled with Brannen.
The internal investigation into Brannen began mid February at the latest (possibly late January or early February) based on what Justin Williams and Chad have reported. The investigation began well before the players transferred. The players transferring forced it into the light, but the firing was probably happening regardless.
Formal reprimand in November and probably a written action plan to correct the issues. Starting an internal investigation three months later is not slow to act. Have to give Brannen a chance to correct the behavior (or for him to give you enough ammo to show he didn't correct it so you can fire him).
(05-06-2021 07:08 AM)Bearcatbdub Wrote: Ok point taken. But Cunningham did reprimand Brannen after a discussion with the training staff in Nov. Put that together with the cited 3 violations of practice hours, and you would think there would have been more digging going on prior to the end of the season.
With what we have here- it’s a reprimand in November and then <crickets> until March when a mystery guy turns in a personal journal of events that happened August through December.
Which makes me think, had the players sucked it up and stuck it out- then we are still saddled with Brannen.
The internal investigation into Brannen began mid February at the latest (possibly late January or early February) based on what Justin Williams and Chad have reported. The investigation began well before the players transferred. The players transferring forced it into the light, but the firing was probably happening regardless.
Formal reprimand in November and probably a written action plan to correct the issues. Starting an internal investigation three months later is not slow to act. Have to give Brannen a chance to correct the behavior (or for him to give you enough ammo to show he didn't correct it so you can fire him).
Yea I think people have an unrealistic expectation for how quickly things like this can occur at a public university when there is an employment contract in place. The more we learn the more impressed I am with how process oriented the university seems to have been with the concerns that surfaced at the very latest by some time in September. Being process oriented is what is going to protect you when the Brannen lawsuit comes around.
(05-06-2021 07:08 AM)Bearcatbdub Wrote: Ok point taken. But Cunningham did reprimand Brannen after a discussion with the training staff in Nov. Put that together with the cited 3 violations of practice hours, and you would think there would have been more digging going on prior to the end of the season.
With what we have here- it’s a reprimand in November and then <crickets> until March when a mystery guy turns in a personal journal of events that happened August through December.
Which makes me think, had the players sucked it up and stuck it out- then we are still saddled with Brannen.
The internal investigation into Brannen began mid February at the latest (possibly late January or early February) based on what Justin Williams and Chad have reported. The investigation began well before the players transferred. The players transferring forced it into the light, but the firing was probably happening regardless.
Formal reprimand in November and probably a written action plan to correct the issues. Starting an internal investigation three months later is not slow to act. Have to give Brannen a chance to correct the behavior (or for him to give you enough ammo to show he didn't correct it so you can fire him).
The other point I would add is Cunningham just started here in December 2019 (after the Prince Toyambi incident mentioned above). Most of early to mid 2020-- beyond that really-- he was dealing with implementing Covid protocols and figuring out how they were going to run the universities sports programs. This past year was the first full season he had to oversee JB, the first time he was around during summer workouts and training before the season. This can't be overlooked.
If you'll commit to running the gasser wind sprints in the 85th percentile with no food and water 24 hours prior, I will give you starter minutes next season. Remember, this is between you and me only.
Now...
I don't give a f*** what the lying medical staff said about your heart rate or if you feel like collapsing on the floor. You better hit those damn free throws or you'll be running gasser wind sprints after practice until you turn blue and cramp with exhaustion.
Current photo he has a 3 week old old neck beard and is asleep on a couch midday in front of a Judge Judy rerun with Doritos crumbs all over his chest.
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2021 08:43 PM by rath v2.0.)
Speaking of which... I don't think I've ever seen Coach Brannen with a mask over his mouth. It's ALWAYS on his chin.
I'm the last person to be a mask Nazi... I'm the guy walking through Kroger without one unless an employee asks me to put it on. But I wear the dumb things at work because it's a policy that my employer cares deeply about, and I'm a loyal employee.
I just think it speaks volumes about how special Brannen thinks he is.
(05-06-2021 09:30 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: Speaking of which... I don't think I've ever seen Coach Brannen with a mask over his mouth. It's ALWAYS on his chin.
I'm the last person to be a mask Nazi... I'm the guy walking through Kroger without one unless an employee asks me to put it on. But I wear the dumb things at work because it's a policy that my employer cares deeply about, and I'm a loyal employee.
I just think it speaks volumes about how special Brannen thinks he is.
I know it's our new favorite offseason sport to pile on Brannen at this point but frankly, college basketball coaches were among the poorest examples of mask wearing throughout this '20/'21 season. Most that I saw were constantly touching the mask and pulling it down to yell at players/officials which is pretty much what coaches do from the opening tip to the final buzzer.
I'm looking forward to Wes Miller's first team and Brannen is now way back in my rearview mirror. I'm also hoping that Roy Williams support for Wes and the Bearcats endures beyond the hiring cycle. I'm hoping he's in the stands for some games and that UC will engage with Williams in a meaningful way to learn best practices for our historic program from a Hall of Famer who's coached two of the bluest of the blue bloods.
05-07-2021 07:42 AM
BearcatMan
Kicking Connoisseur/Occasional Man Crush
Posts: 24,241
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 590
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:
(05-06-2021 09:30 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: Speaking of which... I don't think I've ever seen Coach Brannen with a mask over his mouth. It's ALWAYS on his chin.
I'm the last person to be a mask Nazi... I'm the guy walking through Kroger without one unless an employee asks me to put it on. But I wear the dumb things at work because it's a policy that my employer cares deeply about, and I'm a loyal employee.
I just think it speaks volumes about how special Brannen thinks he is.
I know it's our new favorite offseason sport to pile on Brannen at this point but frankly, college basketball coaches were among the poorest examples of mask wearing throughout this '20/'21 season. Most that I saw were constantly touching the mask and pulling it down to yell at players/officials which is pretty much what coaches do from the opening tip to the final buzzer.
I'm looking forward to Wes Miller's first team and Brannen is now way back in my rearview mirror. I'm also hoping that Roy Williams support for Wes and the Bearcats endures beyond the hiring cycle. I'm hoping he's in the stands for some games and that UC will engage with Williams in a meaningful way to learn best practices for our historic program from a Hall of Famer who's coached two of the bluest of the blue bloods.
Fran McCaffrey had the mask manipulation video of the century when he decided to silently pull of his mask, yell "F*CK" extremely emphatically, then silently put his mask back on
/
UC Statement on Brannen
![[Image: Cincinnati-Football-Tommy-Tuberville-to-...s.jpg?lg=2]](https://cdnph.upi.com/ph/st/th/8111480873861/2016/i/14808739938262/v1.5/Cincinnati-Football-Tommy-Tuberville-to-resign-after-four-seasons.jpg?lg=2)
![[Image: 28911775001_6026376613001_6026376333001-...;auto=webp]](https://mp4media.gannett-cdn.com/28911775001/28911775001_6026376613001_6026376333001-vs.jpg?pubId=28911775001&width=660&height=371&format=pjpg&auto=webp)
![[Image: dfda5d394d5a49d9a6127ac992697f721.jpg]](https://wp.usatodaysports.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/94/2017/03/dfda5d394d5a49d9a6127ac992697f721.jpg)
![[Image: john-brannen-suspended.jpg]](https://www.si.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_1200/MTgwMDY1NzQ2NjI4Mzg3OTYy/john-brannen-suspended.jpg)
