Partially right. I was giving the assistant the benefit of the doubt.
So either he didn't know OR he did know and didn't advocate his position well enough to keep his HC out of hot water, and then went behind her back to report her. Either way, not really a person I'd want heading my basketball program. Either ignorant or a conniving little weasel.
Or, a third option. He advocated his position. He explained the NCAA rules, reminding her of them. And she refused to listen to him. So he reported her to the administration or the school's compliance office.
Assume this hypothetical is true - and that he was the one who contacted the compliance office.
-- Does reporting a violation making someone a weasel?
-- Does going to the compliance office to explain that a coach is violating the rules and not wanting the university to bear the punishment for her doing so make him a weasel?
It is a bit much to refer to an assistant as "going behind [the head coach's] back to report her and that makes him a "conniving little weasel."
What if people had reported misconduct or things they saw that violated the law much earlier in, say, the cases involving Jerry Sandusky, Larry Nasser, etc.? What about people reporting things earlier regarding Rene Portland?
Again, assuming the third option is true (an option you did not consider in your previous post), I do not understand why reporting a violation of law/rules makes someone a "conniving little weasel." I do, however, understand that labeling someone who reports a violation of law/rules as a "conniving little weasel" is part of the reason why various whistleblower retaliation protection laws exist.
Now, who's speculating? At least I'm going on what's been reported.
@vowelguy noted that so much of this is speculation, but, with all due,
@meyers7 , you seem, in the first post that I quoted above, to be making a lot of judgment calls without necessarily having all of the facts or considering that there may be additional options in terms of the events that transpired.
