Rutgers fires basketball coach after release of video showing player abuse, gay slurs

[JRutledge]

Have we heard from Kelvin Sampson lately? And Sampson who coached Indiana after Mike Davis left the program, who replaced Knight only committed NCAA recruiting violations. And Sampson was accused of making extra phone calls and texts mostly. Sampson is now an assistant coach for the Houston Rockets and has not been to the college ranks at all since what happened at Indiana. So Rice might work again, but I doubt he will seriously work at a college job for some time. And not with all the stories coming out and negative PR that a school would get for employing a coach that multple times was physically abusing players on video tape. And this is why comparing Knight is silly, because Knight was not accused of many things on tape and in practice. People had to go over a long time to even show where Knight would act up and he won consistently. So Knight got a job because he was a winner, Rice is not. Even Sampson was a winner and where is he now?

Peace

[maroonx]

It had to be done. Sad situation for my Alma Mater. If he was winning, I wonder if he would have any supporters.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Here's where pedigree takes over. Knight had three national titles and an Olympic gold medal when he got canned. Rice hasn't gotten out of the first round of the NCAA or NIT. Rice's best chance would be as someone's assistant for a while. It would be hard for even a D-2 or D-3 program to hire him as its head coach.

And this is basically what I have been saying.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Bad analogy - that was not Sampsons 1st chance. Indiana was his 2nd chance after similarly screwing up at Oklahoma. He got his school 3 years probation, and got canned, but was given another opportunity at Indiana. He screwed up there (twice, actually - once with more phone calls, another with recruiting Gordon) and got canned again.

Wondering where he is now is more like wondering about Knight post-TTech, or about Mike Leach after he screws up at his new place.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And this is why comparing Knight is silly, because Knight was not accused of many things on tape and in practice. People had to go over a long time to even show where Knight would act up and he won consistently. So Knight got a job because he was a winner, Rice is not. Even Sampson was a winner and where is he now?

Peace

The difference with Knight is that there wasn't a camera given out in every box of cereal back then to film every move he made. If someone did bring a camera around Knight, it was typically the size of a shoe box or bigger and it was easily seen. Now, cameras can be practically unnoticeable.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Bad analogy - that was not Sampsons 1st chance. Indiana was his 2nd chance after similarly screwing up at Oklahoma. He got his school 3 years probation, and got canned, but was given another opportunity at Indiana. He screwed up there (twice, actually - once with more phone calls, another with recruiting Gordon) and got canned again.

Wondering where he is now is more like wondering about Knight post-TTech, or about Mike Leach after he screws up at his new place.

Mike Leach? I thought it had since come out that a lot of the accusations in that case were fabricated or grossly exaggerated....and that it was largely a spat between Leach and Craig James over playing time for James' son....and it is looking like Craig James is really the guilty party in that one.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The difference with Knight is that there wasn't a camera given out in every box of cereal back then to film every move he made. If someone did bring a camera around Knight, it was typically the size of a shoe box or bigger and it was easily seen. Now, cameras can be practically unnoticeable.

And is there any doubt he would have been fired even sooner had the technology existed back then?

JRut's contention is that Knight's tactics were common among top college programs. Not sure I want to believe that. Maybe I'm delusional but I want to believe Boeheim, Williams, Pitino, Cady, Calhoun, Valvano, Smith, Coach K and other winners were tough and used pretty foul language at times...but didn't physically and mentally abuse their players as a rule.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Here's where pedigree takes over. Knight had three national titles and an Olympic gold medal when he got canned. Rice hasn't gotten out of the first round of the NCAA or NIT. Rice's best chance would be as someone's assistant for a while. It would be hard for even a D-2 or D-3 program to hire him as its head coach.

Bingo!

While this thread has certainly taken an interesting turn I think many people are missing this point.

We can go back and forth all year giving our opinions on Knight's behavior vs Rice's, on what Knight's practice tapes would have shown had there been more cameras in his era, etc. Most of that is conjecture.

The facts are that by the time an actual tape of Knight's misconduct in practice got out there he ALREADY had 3 national titles, a gold medal, 30 years of experience, and numerous former players who would go to bat for him. Mike Rice has NOWHERE close to that resume. NOWHERE CLOSE! AND the tape of his actions is much longer and much worse than any actual tape of Knights in terms of abuse toward players.

So this all started when I said I don't see how any school could hire Rice any time soon. And someone disagreed citing Bob Knight. For the purposes of that convo, I think that's an entirely misguided comparison.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Mike Leach? I thought it had since come out that a lot of the accusations in that case were fabricated or grossly exaggerated....and that it was largely a spat between Leach and Craig James over playing time for James' son....and it is looking like Craig James is really the guilty party in that one.

Yes, but that's immaterial. He was fired for all that went on, whether you believe his side or Craig James's kid's side. He has since found a new job.

If he were to get fired again for abusing his players - he would be in line with an analogy about Kelvin Sampson - and increasingly unlikely to find another gig.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

And is there any doubt he would have been fired even sooner had the technology existed back then?

JRut's contention is that Knight's tactics were common among top college programs. Not sure I want to believe that. Maybe I'm delusional but I want to believe Boeheim, Williams, Pitino, Cady, Calhoun, Valvano, Smith, Coach K and other winners were tough and used pretty foul language at times...but didn't physically and mentally abuse their players as a rule.

You would be wrong on a few levels about my opinion. I did not say it was common, I said that many coaches did things that we find objectionable now in Knight at that time. The difference we did not have 24 hours SportsCenter and social media and YouTube. And you mentioned Coach K who played under Knight and has a different off-court persona that Knight never tried to have. Coach K in many circles is seen as a dick to officials at least and uses very over the top language in many cases (He is after all a Polish kid from a tough part of Chicago, so not a choir boy that went to West Point where he played for Knight). Knight did not interview well and did not care and still does not care on many levels if you see him in recent interviews. And even some of the coaches you mentioned are much younger than Knight. They were not Rupp or Glenn Haskins or other old-timers where Knight learned a lot of stuff from or during his original era. I am not sure Rupp would survive if we had social media and heard his comments about race and other issues in this era. You really think coaches did not call a player a "fag" or other socially insensitive words back then? Rice is getting ripped for just his words, but his actions are so over the top hardly anyone is even talking about those things.

You notice you never see these coaches today with a mic at the college level on during games like you see in the NBA and conversations are not allowed in private moments. Coaches have the opportunity to shape their image if they do the right things. But players that played for Knight love the man just like some of those other coaches. Because even the stuff brought up about Knight were not all on-court issues or stuff done directly in his job. But yes I believe if Knight threw a chair today they would be in big trouble today for sure, but not necessarily for the other things people are upset by after that IMO.

Right now they are talking about how they do not see Rice working again anytime soon at the D2 or D3 levels as well because of the way he acted in practice when not everyone tapes practices and other times they are not around a camera. In my opinion Rice will be very similar to what Dave Bliss is going through for some time.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Bingo!

While this thread has certainly taken an interesting turn I think many people are missing this point.

We can go back and forth all year giving our opinions on Knight's behavior vs Rice's, on what Knight's practice tapes would have shown had there been more cameras in his era, etc. Most of that is conjecture.

The facts are that by the time an actual tape of Knight's misconduct in practice got out there he ALREADY had 3 national titles, a gold medal, 30 years of experience, and numerous former players who would go to bat for him. Mike Rice has NOWHERE close to that resume. NOWHERE CLOSE! AND the tape of his actions is much longer and much worse than any actual tape of Knights in terms of abuse toward players.

So this all started when I said I don't see how any school could hire Rice any time soon. And someone disagreed citing Bob Knight. For the purposes of that convo, I think that's an entirely misguided comparison.

And before and after that incident in practice, Knight had people attend his practices. And there was dispute over what happened on the tape. Even players that were gone did not take up for the kid Knight was accused of assaulting. This tape of Rice is continuous, several actions of throwing the ball at players and grabbing players. That is why I cannot equate this situation to really anyone but Rice and his opportunity to get another job.

Peace

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Bad analogy - that was not Sampsons 1st chance. Indiana was his 2nd chance after similarly screwing up at Oklahoma. He got his school 3 years probation, and got canned, but was given another opportunity at Indiana. He screwed up there (twice, actually - once with more phone calls, another with recruiting Gordon) and got canned again.

Wondering where he is now is more like wondering about Knight post-TTech, or about Mike Leach after he screws up at his new place.

Sampson is in the NBA. Assistant with the Rockets.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Sampson is in the NBA. Assistant with the Rockets.

And has yet to work on any college campus since his firing at Indiana.

Peace

[Judtech]

There is a big difference between the perception of Knight and the reality. Coaches at every level in IN thought that running up and down the sidelines and yelling at players and officials was how Knight coached. They never saw the part about teaching and the fact that he was more sarcastic then mean was lost on a lot of people. I can only speak of personal experience and coaches who 'got it' were great
While he had the least amount of technicals every year at IU, the ones he did get were usually spectacular. (My personal favorite was walking down the court and around the official, Ted V, who tossed him).
As for the video tape and the alleged choking, I have to laugh every time I see it.
Completely off topic to Rice.

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by Judtech

As for the video tape and the alleged choking, I have to laugh every time I see it.

And what exactly is funny about it to you? I wonder if it was funny to Neil Reed's parents. Personally, I find choking to be worse than throwing a ball at a kid.