Ollie Discrimination Lawsuit

[auggie22]

CL82- in my mind its ticky tack and they were trying to find a reason to say goodbye. I mean , if I look hard enuff u can find dirt in anybody. Things aren’t black and white. Always room for gray. I’m sure you understand that if Ollie was winning and things were going fine this would never have come about - let’s just be honest with ourselves and say he got fired because of his performance and yes I do believe what he did was ticky tack - we can agree to disagree. Just like when Kurt king accepted a plane ticket to go home to see his family over holiday break and got suspended for the rest of The season. Sometimes commonsense needs to be applied- u sound like you’re defending those crooks at the NCAA - comical

Only “just like” the Kirk King incident of Calhoun had arranged for the improper tickets and then lied to UCONN and NCAA about it. Otherwise the two are Apples and Suzuki’s.

 

[auggie22]

Only “just like” the Kirk King incident of Calhoun had arranged for the improper tickets and then lied to UCONN and NCAA about it. Otherwise the two are Apples and Suzuki’s.

Just thinking about this scenario - i’d be surprised if Calhoun had done this ( arranges for improper benegits then lied about it ) and didn’t get fired.

 

[Dogdeacon]

The false equivalencies are not what matters to Ollie's publicists acting on behalf of his lawyers. And so the agents here gaslight all of Ollie's complicity and with the press try to speak it into reality. It is a simple mud slinging pressure tactic trying much more to stick in court of public opinion versus court of law.

 

[intlzncster]

Only “just like” the Kirk King incident of Calhoun had arranged for the improper tickets and then lied to UCONN and NCAA about it. Otherwise the two are Apples and Suzuki’s.

Different eras tho. Things are constantly changing in what is considered 'de rigeur' in MCBB.

There is a definitive demarcation line between pre 2012 sanctions and post 2012 sanctions as far as UCONN MCBB operational ethics goes. Everything coming after is judged under a different light, and subject to far greater scrutiny.

 

[TJT]

It was a given that charges of racial discrimination would eventually be made if there was no mutual settlement reached. The different course of action by UConn in dealing with the white Calhoun and the black Ollie after program NCAA infractions was always the elephant in the room no one wanted to publicly talk about. The school really needed to find compromise with Ollie so that it did not get to this point. The accusations of racial bias are now out there and will do harm to UConn.

 

[intlzncster]

I would not think they have to prove discrimination per se, only that someone else was treated differently than he was.

But there are reasons they were treated differently. There is a different landscape at play. Once we were sanctioned for Nate Miles and then APR, we had the NCAA looking at us very closely, so any transgression, no matter how minor, matters.

Look at the hundreds of hours the NCAA spent investigating Ollie/UCONN on those supposed 'flimsy' transgressions.


The more transgressions and resulting punishments you have, the more severe those punishments will be.

In today's era, at UCONN, you have to toe the line completely, or they will come down on your head.

So operationally, you have to account for that fact.

 

[TJT]

Another coaching move by UConn that Ollie is likely to bring up is the rehiring of the white Tom Moore as the top assistant to Hurley. Moore was caught up in the NCAA infractions incurred by UConn while Jim Calhoun was coach. If the school now claims to take the high road on infractions making people accountable, how could it have reasonably then hired Moore back after firing Ollie?

 

[CL82]

It was a given that charges of racial discrimination would eventually be made if there was no mutual settlement reached. The different course of action by UConn in dealing with the white Calhoun and the black Ollie after program NCAA infractions was always the elephant in the room no one wanted to publicly talk about. The school really needed to find compromise with Ollie so that it did not get to this point. The accusations of racial bias are now out there and will do harm to UConn.

Alternatively, KO's team had a choice whether or not to pursue these allegations or pursue arbitration. They chose the later. Now with deadline lapsing and facing a likely judgement against them in arbitration, they are trying to have their cake and eat it too. They are unlikely to prevail, particularly if they have contributed to the delay in having the arbitration hearing.

UConn is unlikely to hurt by empty knee jerk allegations of racism. Kevin on the other hand most certainly will by making them. KO's representation is making misstep after misstep. If KO needs money there may be a more likely place to find it.

 

[BlueDogs]

He's also not a member of a protected class.

Foot fetish class...

 

[BlueMAB]

Another coaching move by UConn that Ollie is likely to bring up is the rehiring of the white Tom Moore as the top assistant to Hurley. Moore was caught up in the NCAA infractions incurred by UConn while Jim Calhoun was coach. If the school now claims to take the high road on infractions making people accountable, how could it have reasonably then hired Moore back after firing Ollie?

Because it was 12 years ago, and Moore ran a clean program at Quinnipiac.

Was he ever found to have committed violations? Articles I found said he was investigated, cooperates fully, and wasn’t named by the NCAA

 

[intlzncster]

Another coaching move by UConn that Ollie is likely to bring up is the rehiring of the white Tom Moore as the top assistant to Hurley. Moore was caught up in the NCAA infractions incurred by UConn while Jim Calhoun was coach. If the school now claims to take the high road on infractions making people accountable, how could it have reasonably then hired Moore back after firing Ollie?

What are you talking about? Tom Moore was coaching at Quinnipiac since 2007. And with Nate Miles, the NCAA cleared him of everything. The Yahoo article was throwing snow against a wall hoping stuff would stick. Some did, but the Tom Moore part was BS.

 

[intlzncster]

It was a given that charges of racial discrimination would eventually be made if there was no mutual settlement reached. The different course of action by UConn in dealing with the white Calhoun and the black Ollie after program NCAA infractions was always the elephant in the room no one wanted to publicly talk about. The school really needed to find compromise with Ollie so that it did not get to this point. The accusations of racial bias are now out there and will do harm to UConn.

For the umpteenth time, there's no elephant in the room. They were operating under different landscapes. Once UCONN had received sanctions under JC, UCONN was under the microscope. Every action of the program would be evaluated under stricter standards, by both the NCAA and the school, from there on out. You'll note the purported 100s of hours NCAA interviews that went into investigating KO. These weren't Louisville Hooker Ring violations, but they were pursued like they were.

 

[TJT]

Which violations are we even talking about? Moore wasn't even involved in any of the recent stuff as it happened after his watch.

UConn, Calhoun cited for 8 violations
UConn: NCAA finds 8 violations in men's hoops

The NCAA alleges 160 impermissible telephone calls and at least 191 impermissible text messages between recruits and coaches, including assistants Beau Archibald, Patrick Sellers, Andre LeFler, associate head coach George Blaney, and then-assistant Tom Moore, who is now the head coach at Quinnipiac.

 

[Ukonnfan]

This whole thing is really dumb.

 

[intlzncster]

UConn, Calhoun cited for 8 violations
UConn: NCAA finds 8 violations in men's hoops

The NCAA alleges 160 impermissible telephone calls and at least 191 impermissible text messages between recruits and coaches, including assistants Beau Archibald, Patrick Sellers, Andre LeFler, associate head coach George Blaney, and then-assistant Tom Moore, who is now the head coach at Quinnipiac.

I corrected my post just after posting. Moore was fully cleared by the NCAA. The Yahoo article was a hit piece, that tried to pin anything on anyone. Moore got caught in that crossfire.

COLLEGE BASKETBALL: Tom Moore is content Miles away from UConn

"Moore was ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing... "


So why is it suspect for UCONN to hire someone who had never stepped foot afoul of the NCAA? Strange concept.

 

[superjohn]

I corrected my post just after posting. Moore was fully cleared by the NCAA. The Yahoo article was a hit piece, that tried to pin anything on anyone. Moore got caught in that crossfire.

COLLEGE BASKETBALL: Tom Moore is content Miles away from UConn

"Moore was ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing... "


So why would is it suspect for UCONN to hire someone who had never stepped foot afoul of the NCAA? Strange concept.

No need to keep rehashing this stuff, the same facts keep being brought up and every single time they are disregarded.

UConn and Calhoun are clearly racist.

 

[UofCT]

So do you think the courts will not look at Calhoun getting a pass and Ollie being fired for cause? That is where there could be a problem. Uconn may have to answer(even though the AD's where not the same person, how they allowed one to stay.

Different athletic directors?

 

[intlzncster]

No need to keep rehashing this stuff, the same facts keep being brought up and every single time they are disregarded.

UConn and Calhoun are clearly racist.

This is one of those times we really need JC.

"Get some facts and come back and see me"

 

[Madmannsucks]

No need to keep rehashing this stuff, the same facts keep being brought up and every single time they are disregarded.

UConn and Calhoun are clearly racist.

Total misrepresentation of the comments.

 

[superjohn]

Total misrepresentation of the comments.

How many times does it have to be spelled out to you that Ollie and Calhoun's situations aren't the same and yet you keep repeating black coach was treated differently than white coach. Now you guys are latching onto Tom Moore getting special treatment because he's white.

This is really stupid but worse it makes light of real racism which is an enormous problem.

 

[intlzncster]

Total misrepresentation of the comments.

The other guy claimed Tom Moore was part of the NCAA sanctions for UCONN. The NCAA disagrees. I'll trust their opinion (yuck) in this matter over a poster on the internet.

 

[Madmannsucks]

How many times does it have to be spelled out to you that Ollie and Calhoun's situations aren't the same and yet you keep repeating black coach was treated differently than white coach. Now you guys are latching onto Tom Moore getting special treatment because he's white.

This is really stupid but worse it makes light of real racism which is an enormous problem.[/QUOTE
OK...situations are different. We'll see if the courts see it that way. I do not think so. The verbiage in the contracts has been pointed out by some previously is nearly identical. When you coach a program JC's contract does not allow him to break rules. There is no implied rule that allows him to commit NCAA violations. So I do not think they are different as you say.

 

[superjohn]

The other guy claimed Tom Moore was part of the NCAA sanctions for UCONN. The NCAA disagrees. I'll trust their opinion (yuck) in this matter over a poster on the internet.

As I said, facts are totally disregarded.

 

[Hurleyman216]

I used to be a big Ollie supporter but he has officially hit rock bottom. It’s sad because he won’t be welcome at UConn now for a very long time (if ever). He made some poor choices in the lawyer department which really hurt him. He should be suing his lawyers rather than going after UConn. UConn should have just paid him $2-3M to go away. Who knows maybe they tried to and it was turned down. We have our future coach and the public damage has already been done. My gut tells me when the smoke clears this whole race card thing will hurt Ollie more than it hurts UConn. No one is going to hire him after this.

 

[TJT]

I personally don't think Ollie was fired for racist reasons. I however also for one second don't believe he was fired for NCAA infractions either. Both sides can be rightfully called out for stretching things. The reality is that UConn fired KO for performance issues as he did not win enough games (unlike Calhoun). The school however did not want to pay him what would be due to him under those circumstances. They therefore used the just cause reasoning to get rid of him without having to pay him the 10M+. That reasoning has now painted the school into a corner as it opens itself up to accusations of treating employees (who happen to not be of the same color) differently. That is the sad state of affairs that now exists since a settlement was never reached.

 

[RichZ]

I lost all respect for the man when I read that the other morning.
He had a contract that stipulated NCAA violations would be "just cause".
He committed or allowed to be committed under his jurisdiction, NCAA violations.
The man he replaced -- who also happened to be the man who pretty much forced UConn to hire him -- also committed or allowed to be committed under his jurisdiction, NCAA violations, or so says the NCAA. And the program self-reported those instances, which is not the same as getting caught lying in denying them. I would not be surprised if this ploy does not cost Ollie his primary champion in this ordeal.

 

[Yorkeez4]

Whenever a contract has penalty stipulations I believe it is up to the injured party to decide whether to look for relief or not. In this case UConn chose to seek relief by firing Ollie. I believe we all agree that this would not have happened had Ollie been having success with the team.

The argument that Calhoun got away with it and Ollie did not is weak IMO for two reasons: Calhoun did not lie to the school or the NCAA and the school needed to be extra careful because they were coming off sanctions. Another occurence would result in a much harsher penalty.

It has been stated that Ollie’s team made an initial request for a settlement. It has also been stated that the request was for the full value of the contract. As a result no counter offer was made.

My experience is that a situation like this has a cost. Lawyers et al are not cheap. That makes me think that UConn would have been willing to negotiate a settlement had the initial response been reasonable. It was not.

Now the situation has led to allegations of discrimination. Whether this will succeed in court is anyone’s guess. How often have you see the results of litigation and come away shaking your head. It’s a shot Ollie and his team are willing to take.

No one wins here. But one team will suffer a lesser loss then the other. I do think in the long run these developments are more injurious to Ollie then UConn.

I also think that the Ollie who ran the program his first two years was not the same one that ran the program the last few years and that is a shame - I thought he showed great promise initially and was one of the last holdouts for his dismissal.

 

[CL82]

UConn, Calhoun cited for 8 violations
UConn: NCAA finds 8 violations in men's hoops

The NCAA alleges 160 impermissible telephone calls and at least 191 impermissible text messages between recruits and coaches, including assistants Beau Archibald, Patrick Sellers, Andre LeFler, associate head coach George Blaney, and then-assistant Tom Moore, who is now the head coach at Quinnipiac.

Among the allegations against UConn is that Archibald and Sellers provided false and misleading information to NCAA investigators. Sellers and Archibald, who served as director of basketball operations, have both resigned. Hathaway said Archibald left last week and Sellers quit on Sunday.

Um is your point that UConn hasn't tolerated lying to the NCAA in past, just as it didn't with Ollie? Because if it was, you made it very well.

Of course Archibald and Sellers had the self-respect and personal decency to resign. So that's a difference.

 

[CL82]

I personally don't think Ollie was fired for racist reasons. I however also for one second don't believe he was fired for NCAA infractions either. Both sides can be rightfully called out for stretching things. The reality is that UConn fired KO for performance issues as he did not win enough games (unlike Calhoun). The school however did not want to pay him what would be due to him under those circumstances. They therefore used the just cause reasoning to get rid of him without having to pay him the 10M+. That reasoning has now painted the school into a corner as it opens itself up to accusations of treating employees (who happen to not be of the same color) differently. That is the sad state of affairs that now exists since a settlement was never reached.

I suppose that is possible, doubtful, but possible. It is far more likely, though, that getting caught providing illegal travel, food and lodging for players to attending an illegal coaching session, lying about it to his bosses repeatedly, and lying about it to the NCAA all while leading UConn to two losing seasons in a row, and have kids transfer out of the program en masse might have played a role.

Moral of the story, if you are bad at your job, it's best not break rules and lie to your bosses when you are caught.

 

[Dogdeacon]

I personally don't think Ollie was fired for racist reasons. I however also for one second don't believe he was fired for NCAA infractions either. Both sides can be rightfully called out for stretching things. The reality is that UConn fired KO for performance issues as he did not win enough games (unlike Calhoun). The school however did not want to pay him what would be due to him under those circumstances. They therefore used the just cause reasoning to get rid of him without having to pay him the 10M+. That reasoning has now painted the school into a corner as it opens itself up to accusations of treating employees (who happen to not be of the same color) differently. That is the sad state of affairs that now exists since a settlement was never reached.

What you miss is when you cite 'performance issues' and only say it was not winning enough games.
Q: Why didn't he win enough games?
A: He wasn't doing his job diligently
Q: Prior to termination he was paid despite not diligently fulfilling his contractual duties and in fact violating the contract, so why is he owed additional monies for a job he wasn't doing according to a contract he knowingly violated?