Muffet continues her anti-Geno smear campaign | The Boneyard

Muffet continues her anti-Geno smear campaign

Status
Not open for further replies.
Plebe

Plebe

La verdad no peca pero incomoda
Joined
Feb 22, 2016
Messages
20,031
Reaction Score
73,696
Oh so slickly, under the guise of her pseudo-feminist schtick. And that paragon of sports journalism known as SI obliges in elevating her platform.

www.si.com

Muffet McGraw is a voice for female empowerment

Muffet McGraw has worked hard to turn her players into leaders as well as champions. Now she's using her platform to bring her message of female empowerment to a wider audience.
www.si.com www.si.com

In April, when a reporter mentioned Muffet’s dictum about all-woman staffs to Auriemma (who, like McGraw, employs only woman assistants), he said, “I hope she sends a thank you to all those guys that used to be on her staff that got her all those good players that won a championship.” ...​
​
“Well, I expected some sort of comment would come out of Connecticut [when I said that]. For the record, they didn’t,” McGraw says. “Carol Owens and Niele Ivey got all those good players. You can have a staff with one man on it, and people assume, oh, he must be doing the recruiting, or he must be doing Xs-and-Os.” McGraw used to employ a male assistant because she thought it was valuable for her players to see a woman supervise a man.​
 
Quite the revelation from Ms. McGraw that Niele Ivey recruited her own teammates on the 2001 championship team. :rolleyes:

I also suppose, then, that Xavier lied in its 2002 announcement of McGuff as their new head coach:

While at Notre Dame, McGuff assisted with the day-to-day operations of the office, the planning of practices and the coordination of Irish recruiting and scouting efforts.​
​
goxavier.com

Kevin McGuff Inroduced As Basketball Coach - Xavier University Athletics

Kevin McGuff Inroduced As Basketball Coach
goxavier.com goxavier.com
 
Last edited:
Wow, shots fired. This rivalry could be turning genuinely nasty. Might be rivaling the good ol' days of Geno vs. Pat.
 
The problem is, coaches have too many assistants. If they didn't have so many, they could concentrate on coaching and not criticizing others.
 
Another gem from the article:

"Women who have never played for a female coach might not see themselves as leadership material, she [McGraw] adds."​
​
My response:

43864
 
.-.
Now she's just getting weird and wacky. What happened to hiring the best person for a job. I do strongly support giving women opportunities in women's sports (and men's sports for that matter), but, in general, the best person should get the job. I would not support choosing to hire a man because someone thinks they will be better "because" they are a man, anymore than I support choosing a woman because someone thinks they are better simply "because" they are a woman.

I don't really view her original comments as being specifically anti Geno, though, particularly since, as you point out, his staffs have been even more women than hers. He answered her honestly, if a bit sarcastically (that, a habit I share with Geno but I get in more trouble for it at a smaller level) and then she replied in kind.

I get a feeling they no longer like each other (duh), although apparently at one time they did.
 
Plebe said:
Oh so slickly, under the guise of her pseudo-feminist schtick. And that paragon of sports journalism known as SI obliges in elevating her platform.

www.si.com

Muffet McGraw is a voice for female empowerment

Muffet McGraw has worked hard to turn her players into leaders as well as champions. Now she's using her platform to bring her message of female empowerment to a wider audience.
www.si.com www.si.com

In April, when a reporter mentioned Muffet’s dictum about all-woman staffs to Auriemma (who, like McGraw, employs only woman assistants), he said, “I hope she sends a thank you to all those guys that used to be on her staff that got her all those good players that won a championship.” ...​
​
“Well, I expected some sort of comment would come out of Connecticut [when I said that]. For the record, they didn’t,” McGraw says. “Carol Owens and Niele Ivey got all those good players. You can have a staff with one man on it, and people assume, oh, he must be doing the recruiting, or he must be doing Xs-and-Os.” McGraw used to employ a male assistant because she thought it was valuable for her players to see a woman supervise a man.​
Expand ...

I’m sure McGuff and Tsipis are happy to know the real reason they were hired.

She’s lost her mind a little bit.
 
Plebe said:
Another gem from the article:

"Women who have never played for a female coach might not see themselves as leadership material, she [McGraw] adds."​
​
My response:

View attachment 43864
Expand ...

Sue Bird, captain of the USA BB Senior National Team has no leadership skills. Taurasi? Nope.

I doubt Paige Bueckers is going to lose her obvious leadership skills because she’s chosen to play for a male coach.

What is she even talking about?
 
Muffet is an interesting study in narrow-minded thinking ... she limits her perception to gender differences and adds animosity to it ... Gino is just one target of this animosity ... she has not understood that a person is a human being first ... and that gender is a secondary characteristic ... expect more of this divisive expression, although I would hope she would come to understand the damage to others her outlook produces ...
 
She is divisive because it serves her well. The more anti-Male sentiment she can foster in female refs, the more preferential treatment her teams will get. And her narrative may also push the NCAA to hire more female refs. To me, this crusade is the epitome of being a troll.
 
.-.
I’m no expert, but I think in what’s remaining of the off-season, actually recruiting a few more players to fill her roster instead of complaining about Geno would be a much better use of her time.

But what do I know?
 
Well, if nothing else, this should add some spice to an otherwise one-sided beat down that MM’s brand new starting 5 might expect when the Irish travel to CT for their annual early season OOC matchup. :cool:
 
.-.
UConnCat said:
I’m sure McGuff and Tsipis are happy to know the real reason they were hired.

She’s lost her mind a little bit.
Expand ...

Idk how this isn’t grounds for easy lawsuit. Openly admitting it was the basis of sex.
 
nwhoopfan said:
Wow, shots fired. This rivalry could be turning genuinely nasty. Might be rivaling the good ol' days of Geno vs. Pat.
Expand ...

Could get? Geno's superior record has been like a cancer eating at Muff It for 2 decades. When she gets a strong team she let's her envy come out and play. Low class and transparent. The over the top "never will hire a man" thing sure fits the looney left of "the feminist movement", but it's illegal pandering and a horrible message.
 
the Q said:
Idk how this isn’t grounds for easy lawsuit. Openly admitting it was the basis of sex.
Expand ...
Almost all discrimination lawsuits are filed on the basis of charging a bias against a “protected class (minority).” Caucasian males are not considered a protected class. As a result, bias lawsuits are much more difficult to prove in these cases. Furthermore, the male coaches mentioned left ND on their own for other jobs. Clearly, there is no basis for a lawsuit.
 
oldude said:
Almost all discrimination lawsuits are filed on the basis of charging a bias against a “protected class (minority).” Caucasian males are not considered a protected class. As a result, bias lawsuits are much more difficult to prove in these cases. Furthermore, the male coaches mentioned left ND on their own for other jobs. Clearly, there is no basis for a lawsuit.
Expand ...

Who said "caucasian male". It's gender discrimination. The guy can be green or pink. Gender is a protected classification. Now, if Muff It said to a white male I can't hire you because I only hire black males the white guy could sue because "race" is a protected class too. "Minority" is not a protected class classification in any law I'm familiar with, though the EEOC has regulations which classify 4 racial groups as minorities who have protected status.
 
oldude said:
Almost all discrimination lawsuits are filed on the basis of charging a bias against a “protected class (minority).” Caucasian males are not considered a protected class. As a result, bias lawsuits are much more difficult to prove in these cases. Furthermore, the male coaches mentioned left ND on their own for other jobs. Clearly, there is no basis for a lawsuit.
Expand ...

Please review Title VII.

You can’t discriminate on the basis of race or sex.
 
.-.
RockyMTblue2 said:
Who said "caucasian male". It's gender discrimination. The guy can be green or pink. Gender is a protected classification. Now, if Muff It said to a white male I can't hire you because I only hire black males the white guy could sue because "race" is a protected class too. "Minority" is not a protected class classification in any law I'm familiar with, though the EEOC has regulations which classify 4 racial groups as minorities who have protected status.
Expand ...
Rocky, I have to correct you. Women are a protected class, as are various races, ethnicities and old people like me. Males have never been a protected class.
 
Sad commentary by Muffet. These types of statements started showing up a few years ago. This stuff does not serve Muffet, ND or women's basketball well - my opinion.

While I can appreciate Muffet's coaching ability, this type of rhetoric will never get my support.
 
the Q said:
Please review Title VII.

You can’t discriminate on the basis of race or sex.
Expand ...
That’s correct, but males are not a “protected class.” Also, where exactly is the discrimination here?
 
oldude said:
Rocky, I have to correct you. Women are a protected class, as are various races, ethnicities and old people like me. Males have never been a protected class.
Expand ...

"I'm not going to debate you Jerry." But:

"Sex discrimination involves treating someone (an applicant or employee) unfavorably because of that person's sex.

Discrimination against an individual because of gender identity, including transgender status, or because of sexual orientation is discrimination because of sex in violation of Title VII."

***********
An employment policy or practice that applies to everyone, regardless of sex, can be illegal if it has a negative impact on the employment of people of a certain sex and is not job-related or necessary to the operation of the business. "

Sex-Based Discrimination [EEOC Guidelines]

"For sex discrimination to be illegal, it has to involve different treatment that negatively affects the terms or conditions of employment. Unlawful sex discrimination occurs when an employer treats an applicant or employee differently and less favorably because of his or her sex or gender or because the person is affiliated with an organization or group that is associated with a particular sex. Sex discrimination includes treating an employee or an applicant differently based on sex stereotypes or because he or she does not conform to traditional notions of femininity or masculinity. Sex discrimination also includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature. Sexual harassment may also include offensive remarks made about women or men in general. "

Sex Discrimination At Work | Equal Rights Advocates

Texas Man Wins Sexual Harassment Case Against Female Boss: Jury Awards James Gist $567K In Pam Matranga Case [PHOTO]

Anthony Griffin, Gist’s attorney, told the Houston Chronicle that the jury awarded Gist $200,000 more than he was seeking in damages. He also said the jury’s decision showed that gender didn’t play a role in the case.
“They rejected this whole notion that you get away with [sexual harassment] because you are a female," Griffin said. The attorney blamed Galveston County for not doing enough to stop Matranga’s behavior, noting that she was known to pull her shirt over her deputies’ heads (Matranga admitted to the behavior at trial but denied doing it to Griffin) and often made off-color jokes.

"It was about sex, and it was about power," Griffin told the Galveston County Daily News about the case. “The only way she could engage in such conduct is because of that badge on her blouse."

It would be a strange law that said woman are entitled to this protection but men are not. Pink, purple, black, chartreuse or white.

Damn @oldude I'm going to have a nightmare tonight. I'm standing at my counsel table and addressing the court and I'm not wearing a tie! The horror.
 
Last edited:
oldude said:
That’s correct, but males are not a “protected class.” Also, where exactly is the discrimination here?
Expand ...
This would be reserve discrimination then if you claim that men are not a "protected class" Anytime you use something like race, sex, or age to promote one individual over another it is discrimination. Alan Bakke v UC Davis muddied the waters around affirmative action, but did come out and claim that his rights were violated according to the 14th Amendment when they refused to admit him.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,539
Messages
4,581,360
Members
10,491
Latest member
7774Forever


Top Bottom