DiMauro: Ollie's recent public relations plan reeks of hypocrisy

[Storrs South]

I called an old friend of mine who works as an athletic director at a Division I school in the east. He began at another school, cultivating a deep background in NCAA compliance. I asked him about Ollie's misdeeds, which include shooting baskets with a recruit during an unofficial visit last September; arranging a video call between a potential recruit and Ray Allen, who is now considered a school booster by the NCAA; and Ollie arranging improper training sessions with a friend who is a personal trainer both on campus and during out of state trips that amounted to improper gifts.​

"The violation involving the trainer and the expenses to travel to Atlanta is a serious one," my friend said. "I would fire a coach for that. Saint Mary's went on probation for five years for the same thing a few years ago."​

Ollie's recent public relations plan reeks of hypocrisy

 

[Ewekon]

I called an old friend of mine who works as an athletic director at a Division I school in the east. He began at another school, cultivating a deep background in NCAA compliance. I asked him about Ollie's misdeeds, which include shooting baskets with a recruit during an unofficial visit last September; arranging a video call between a potential recruit and Ray Allen, who is now considered a school booster by the NCAA; and Ollie arranging improper training sessions with a friend who is a personal trainer both on campus and during out of state trips that amounted to improper gifts.​

"The violation involving the trainer and the expenses to travel to Atlanta is a serious one," my friend said. "I would fire a coach for that. Saint Mary's went on probation for five years for the same thing a few years ago."​

Ollie's recent public relations plan reeks of hypocrisy

Ouch

 

[BlueMAB]

He gave UConn a reason to want to move on, and the ability to do so without having to pay him. The KO hoard pretended the travel to Atlanta wasn't serious, but when your program has been under the microscope and treated much more harshly than other programs who have done far worse, the AD simply has to act.

 

[polycom]

Shocking KO is a hypocrite...

 

[Huskybass]

I just wish a reasonable settlement can be reached soon and that everyone can put that chapter behind them.

 

[Guapo]

Will Dickie V read this article or...

 

[TRest]

Ollie's defenders in the national media usually gloss over the personal trainer trips, which is an open and obvious violation. People want to pretend he was fired for shooting baskets with a recruit.

 

[Rico444]

This comes off as very bitter. I'm sorry Ollie didn't give you as much access as you would've liked, but it doesn't mean you get to make the column about your issues with the guy.

 

[JMick]

This comes off as very bitter. I'm sorry Ollie didn't give you as much access as you would've liked, but it doesn't mean you get to make the column about your issues with the guy.

It's an opinion piece. That's literally what they're for

 

[Rico444]

It's an opinion piece. That's literally what they're for

Yeah, but the columns should be about the state of UConn athletics, not that the writer is mad the coach doesn't give him enough access to the program.

If his article solely focused on the quotes from his AD friend and concluded that Ollie would be lucky to get any of his buyout from the program, that would've been fine. Once he interjected his own personal feud with Ollie into the story, that's when he lost me.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Ouch

Actually, ouch on the entire piece.

Someone at the top (in a general sense) is given a heads up to regarding something positive, passes it along to someone within the organization who is closer to the situation, and that person says, "Oh, no you don't, and here's what... and what's more..and here's what I'm gonna label it."

 

[Matrim55]

Yeah, but the columns should be about the state of UConn athletics, not that the writer is mad the coach doesn't give him enough access to the program.

No, the columns should be on what he and his editors feel is relevant coverage of athletics in the state. And Ollie's dismissal + subsequent behavior is DEFINITELY relevant. So is the context added by DiMauro's AD friend.

This isn't even that hard to figure out. Honestly you're just having a tantrum here about good journalism. Guess it's the type of thing that's been going around...

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Once he interjected his own personal feud with Ollie into the story, that's when he lost me.

I can see how that would be the case. Some will agree with you and some won't, but the Editor passed it along, and this is what came back, and the decision was made to run it. Other editors went with the stories that the PR firm pitched. It happened. If it moves things toward resolution, that's good for everybody.

 

[Storrs South]

Yeah, but the columns should be about the state of UConn athletics, not that the writer is mad the coach doesn't give him enough access to the program.

If his article solely focused on the quotes from his AD friend and concluded that Ollie would be lucky to get any of his buyout from the program, that would've been fine. Once he interjected his own personal feud with Ollie into the story, that's when he lost me.

The article focused on that Ollie was apathetic to the media, but now suddenly wants to use it as a tool when it is convenient to him. This isn't a DiMauro specific issue. Dauster (CT-based, grew up a UConn fan) has said publicly that Ollie was difficult to talk to. Borges included it in his book about the 2014 National Title that Ollie was difficult to get a hold of. When Ollie had anything to break from his camp on his firing, he didn't go to CT media, he went to Medcalf at ESPN.

As the team got worse, he closed up even more minimizing the program's exposure and exposure of the players. It was selfish and malpractice on his part.

 

[Rico444]

No, the columns should be on what he and his editors feel is relevant coverage of athletics in the state. And Ollie's dismissal + subsequent behavior is DEFINITELY relevant. So is the context added by DiMauro's AD friend.

This isn't even that hard to figure out. Honestly you're just having a tantrum here about good journalism. Guess it's the type of thing that's been going around...

lol. I agree that Ollie's dismissal is relevant. I never said it wasn't. I would love to hear why a columnist's relationship with the former head coach is relevant, though. It has no bearing on UConn athletics. It's just a petty grudge that the writer can't get over.

 

[BlueMAB]

Yeah, but the columns should be about the state of UConn athletics, not that the writer is mad the coach doesn't give him enough access to the program.

If his article solely focused on the quotes from his AD friend and concluded that Ollie would be lucky to get any of his buyout from the program, that would've been fine. Once he interjected his own personal feud with Ollie into the story, that's when he lost me.

No. Op-Ed's should be about whatever the writer wants it to be about. You keep calling it an article. It's not an article, it's an opinion piece. It's literally supposed to be his own personal opinion.

 

[Rico444]

The article focused on that Ollie was apathetic to the media, but now suddenly wants to use it as a tool when it is convenient to him. This isn't a DiMauro specific issue. Dauster (CT-based, grew up a UConn fan) has said publicly that Ollie was difficult to talk to. Borges included it in his book about the 2014 National Title that Ollie was difficult to get a hold of. When Ollie had anything to break from his camp on his firing, he didn't go to CT media, he went to Medcalf at ESPN.

I'm sure it's true, and I don't begrudge writers for bringing it up. Writing an entire article about it after the guy is already gone just seems petty and irrelevant. Ok, the former head coach that left 6 months ago is showing some hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with the case against UConn and has zero bearing on anything having to do with the UConn program in general. Why write about it?

 

[BlueMAB]

I'm sure it's true, and I don't begrudge writers for bringing it up. Writing an entire article about it after the guy is already gone just seems petty and irrelevant. Ok, the former head coach that left 6 months ago is showing some hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with the case against UConn and has zero bearing on anything having to do with the UConn program in general. Why write about it?

Not an article. Op-Ed. Different.

 

[Rico444]

No. Op-Ed's should be about whatever the writer wants it to be about. You keep calling it an article. It's not an article, it's an opinion piece. It's literally supposed to be his own personal opinion.

I know op-eds can be about anything...it is still an article though. If you want to quibble about syntax, we can do that, but the bottom line is I don't know why we're supposed to care about a coulmnists' beef with the former head coach if it has no relevance to his only current ties to the university. If he wrote this article last year when Ollie was still the head coach, it would be relevant and I wouldn't question its writing.

 

[Guapo]

I'm sure it's true, and I don't begrudge writers for bringing it up. Writing an entire article about it after the guy is already gone just seems petty and irrelevant. Ok, the former head coach that left 6 months ago is showing some hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with the case against UConn and has zero bearing on anything having to do with the UConn program in general. Why write about it?

He doesn’t work for UConn or Ollie, he can write about whatever he wants; including his personal opinion of Ollie.

Furthermore, the whole point of the piece was to point out that Ollie is now trying to use the media to paint him in a positive light when before he was openly antagonistic towards the media. It’s not that difficult of an idea to wrap your head around...

 

[Storrs South]

I'm sure it's true, and I don't begrudge writers for bringing it up. Writing an entire article about it after the guy is already gone just seems petty and irrelevant. Ok, the former head coach that left 6 months ago is showing some hypocrisy. It has nothing to do with the case against UConn and has zero bearing on anything having to do with the UConn program in general. Why write about it?

It's a part of the story. Ollie can go on a smear campaign, but it is important to contextualize the actions of both parties. National writers have written about UConn's history with being under investigation under Calhoun so this is looking at the other side.

I would really just like this to go away, but it's still going on and I was not aware Ollie hired a PR firm so I appreciate him highlighting this and giving background on Ollie's history with CT media. I think it changes the motivations of KO if he was very well received by the media v. a difficult relationship and trying to use them when it is convenient. Maybe if he was in the former camp he wouldn't have to pay someone to write some hit pieces on UConn.

I have too much time, but it is actually crazy that Medcalf was breaking stories from Ollie camp when considering this: the last time Medcalf wrote a UConn specific story was in 2014 after the National title about Ryan Boatright taking over as the leader of the team. 4 years ago, then suddenly appears to talk about KO being the victim.

 

[JMick]

I know op-eds can be about anything...it is still an article though. If you want to quibble about syntax, we can do that, but the bottom line is I don't know why we're supposed to care about a coulmnists' beef with the former head coach if it has no relevance to his only current ties to the university. If he wrote this article last year when Ollie was still the head coach, it would be relevant and I wouldn't question its writing.

But Ollie didn't go to a PR firm to spin the story in the news last year so it wouldn't have been relevant then. It is relevant now. Hence why DiMauro decided to write about it

 

[CL82]

Ollie's defenders in the national media usually gloss over the personal trainer trips, which is an open and obvious violation. People want to pretend he was fired for shooting baskets with a recruit.

... or having Ray Allen call a recruit. Those were added to show that Ollie's failure to follow NCAA rules was systematic not a single act. There is a case which states that a single act may not be sufficient for a "for cause" dismissal. UConn phrased it inelegantly but is well positioned if the case goes to trial.

Dickie V is an idiot but it is surprising to me that Bilas invested so much capital in Ollie, talking about just shooting hoops and Ray Allen call rather than the meaty violation.

I had hoped that extended silence meant that a settlement was near. I think KO's representation prior media management was a disservice to him. I'm not sure whether the PR firm burst tells us anything. It could be leverage for a stalled negotiation or positioning for post settlement.

 

[Rico444]

He doesn’t work for UConn or Ollie, he can write about whatever he wants; including his personal opinion of Ollie.

Furthermore, the whole point of the piece was to point out that Ollie is now trying to use the media to paint him in a positive light when before he was openly antagonistic towards the media. It’s not that difficult of an idea to wrap your head around...

Dear lord, I understand that he can write about whatever he wants. I'm not advocating that DiMauro's editor fire him, or that he be thrown in jail. I just don't see the relevance to UConn athletics.

Fine, the dude is a hypocrite. I don't see the capital case in trying to hire someone to make you look good in a case where optics play such a critical role. UConn is hypocritical in this case, too. Neither side comes out smelling like roses here, but Ollie's hypocrisy isn't going to affect whether or not he gets the full buyout, none of it, or something in-between. It's also not going to affect whether or not DiMauro gets access to the current UConn staff. It's pure schadenfreude from a writer that is taking a personal issue and trying to make it relevant as a way to stick it to Kevin Ollie.

This is all coming from a guy that thinks Ollie was in the wrong and is hoping he gets either a small buyout or none at all. People are so entrenched as pro or anti Ollie on this board that it's clouding their judgment.

 

[CL82]

People are so entrenched as pro or anti Ollie on this board that it's clouding their judgment.

#unintentionallyironicposts