Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp
There's a big distinction between instructing your staff to take certain actions and what Rush said, joking or not. It was over the top.
Again, I personally don't have a problem with what Rush said but once it became public, he had to go.
|
From
Fischer: Separating facts from perception in the Ed Rush controversy - Pac-12 Post:
“He didn’t think the officials were doing the job of containing the coaches, that coach decorum was getting out of control – not solely focused on Coach Miller, but several coaches. As part of that banter this discussion was had about, ‘What do I have to do to get you guys to enforce the rules? To ‘T’ a coach up if he won’t listen to the warning? Do I got to give you a trip? Money?’
“Our investigator asked very, very pointed questions and it was clear that no one thought that there was a real bounty. Ed was trying to shock them into being more firm in order to make a point.”
This is exactly the context that this story has been lacking. Instead, sports writers have run with the "Targeting Arizona / Miller" idea ... and the "Bounties on Coaches" ... completely misrepresenting the comments and turning them into something they were not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp
And I don't think the public is really overreacting here. Sometimes perception is reality and it's a bitch.
|
It is a complete overreaction, but you are right that it is par for the course.