Nothing revs my engine for a productive work week like mulling over the state of athletics at my favorite B1G university. As I was thinking this morning, about the conflicting ideas of what our coaches knew, and whether hazing is acceptable in some degree, or what even rises to the level of hazing, a parallel struck me I hadn't considered before.
I wonder if, in setting up the leadership councils the way that he did, as student led, self-policing groups, with no direct coach oversight, if our football program and perhaps others didn't happen to create a Stanford Prison scenario.
It sits right with me in a lot of ways. It explains why the coaches ought to be accountable, while also not necessarily making them responsible for condoning or participating in hazing.
Rather, it might make them responsible for something potentially worse.
I remember participating in the thread about Rico Tarver's name, and looking at some old details about the Randy Walker era. Whether the hazing goes back that far, or further, my impression is that with Walker, the buck stopped with him in a very strong way. Players knew he was harsh, and kept in line because coach demanded it. Not a council of peers. And frankly, think our team character has been on a downward trajectory since the passing of Walker.
I think the conclusion that I'm settling on is that the mechanisms put in place to keep players in line backfired spectacularly. There's a degree of separation between that and hazing, and yes, any manager of a team should know if their organizational structure is failing. And say what you want about hazing, I think its now clear that ours was failing. I think, maybe, we created a situation that any freshman in a Psych 101 elective learns about. And really, I think that's why the attempt to seek restitution for hazing sits uneasy with me - because, if you agree that there was a problem, the both the lawsuit and the administrative response are just addressing a symptom and doing nothing to even speak the root cause of the problem within organizational structure.
There's no need to eliminate sports. The counterintuitive conclusion is that we need stronger, more direct leaders in our coaching positions. I suppose this might rankle some of the pro-Fitz lot, but you have to admit, he delegated quite a bit of responsibility to his kids. And that might not have been the most responsible thing to do...
Just thoughts I'm mulling over today. I need some basketball games to get my mind on other things ASAP.
I wonder if, in setting up the leadership councils the way that he did, as student led, self-policing groups, with no direct coach oversight, if our football program and perhaps others didn't happen to create a Stanford Prison scenario.
It sits right with me in a lot of ways. It explains why the coaches ought to be accountable, while also not necessarily making them responsible for condoning or participating in hazing.
Rather, it might make them responsible for something potentially worse.
I remember participating in the thread about Rico Tarver's name, and looking at some old details about the Randy Walker era. Whether the hazing goes back that far, or further, my impression is that with Walker, the buck stopped with him in a very strong way. Players knew he was harsh, and kept in line because coach demanded it. Not a council of peers. And frankly, think our team character has been on a downward trajectory since the passing of Walker.
I think the conclusion that I'm settling on is that the mechanisms put in place to keep players in line backfired spectacularly. There's a degree of separation between that and hazing, and yes, any manager of a team should know if their organizational structure is failing. And say what you want about hazing, I think its now clear that ours was failing. I think, maybe, we created a situation that any freshman in a Psych 101 elective learns about. And really, I think that's why the attempt to seek restitution for hazing sits uneasy with me - because, if you agree that there was a problem, the both the lawsuit and the administrative response are just addressing a symptom and doing nothing to even speak the root cause of the problem within organizational structure.
There's no need to eliminate sports. The counterintuitive conclusion is that we need stronger, more direct leaders in our coaching positions. I suppose this might rankle some of the pro-Fitz lot, but you have to admit, he delegated quite a bit of responsibility to his kids. And that might not have been the most responsible thing to do...
Just thoughts I'm mulling over today. I need some basketball games to get my mind on other things ASAP.
