Syracuse Update: Fine Fired, Boeheim and SU Issue Statements. (Will JB Survive?)

[pbiflyer]

Statement:

"The allegations that have come forth today are disturbing and deeply troubling. I am personally very shocked because I have never witnessed any of the activities that have been alleged. I believe the university took the appropriate step tonight. What is most important is that this matter be fully investigated and that anyone with information be supported to come forward so that the truth can be found. I deeply regret any statements I made that might have inhibited that from occurring or been insensitive to victims of abuse."

Um, calling them liars MIGHT have been insensitive????????

[Tugg Speedman]

+1...would it even be legal for Cuse to fire JB for having a molester on his staff?  i don't work in hr, nor do i understand how the laws would pertain to a coach, but that wouldn't fly in my office.  

By your logic, it is illegal to fire a coach for having a bad record.

[chapman]

+1...would it even be legal for Cuse to fire JB for having a molester on his staff?  i don't work in hr, nor do i understand how the laws would pertain to a coach, but that wouldn't fly in my office.  

Would assume Boeheim, and probably most if not all D1 coaches are under At Will Employment.  They don't have to fire him for anything, they can just fire him.  Little remedy against it, and nothing that would really apply to Boeheim.

[Hamostradamus]

Well, let's see how Jimmy B handles the post-game presser on Tuesday. I am sure all the media questions will involve the Eastern Michigan matchup, and nothing else. 

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

The more I read about this, the more I'm with MU84.  JB's statement is ALL lawyerly. Let him answer some questions from the media on this. Then let's see how genuinely contrite he is. JB is in trouble. If no more allegations come out this week and the story starts to die down, he may survive yet.

[Litehouse]

Would assume Boeheim, and probably most if not all D1 coaches are under At Will Employment.  They don't have to fire him for anything, they can just fire him.  Little remedy against it, and nothing that would really apply to Boeheim.

They're not at-will, they're under contract.  Depending on what Boeheim's contract says, Syracuse might have to pay a substantial buy-out to fire him.

[jtrash37]

In the statement 10 days ago, Boeheim calls the alleged victim a liar, saying the university investigated the claims in 2005 and never could corroborate them.

"He supplied four names to the university that would corroborate his story. None of them did ... there is only one side to this story. He is lying."

But Boeheim took it a step further, saying money was the motivation for the claims.

"Why wouldn't he come to the police? Why would he go to ESPN? What are people looking for here? I believe they are looking for money. I believe they saw what happened at Penn State and they are using ESPN to get money. That is what I believe. You want to put that on the air? Put that on the air."

Jim Boeheim, open mouth, insert foot.

[avid1010]

By your logic, it is illegal to fire a coach for having a bad record.

i can fire a person for having poor results, not meeting goals/quotas, etc.  that's easy to justify.  if i try to fire someone because someone they were "supervising" did somethin illegal i'd have to prove that there was poor supervision or a cover-up.  the poor supervision argument is great because it comes back to bite me in the butt, much like we saw at Penn State.  

like i said, i have no clue how this works with coaches, and i always make a call to the lawyers/HR before firing because i'm far from understanding all the laws and how they play into a specific scenario, but i think it's a tough sell IF JB had no clue that this was happening...that's a big if, and imho the calling the accuser a liar and $$$ grabber is fireable if Cuse wants to go down that road.  just don't think you can say anyone who has a molester on their staff is fired.

[noblewarrior]

It would be a real shame if JB gets fired for speaking what he believed to be true. The fact that he so strongly defended his coach indicates he had no idea what was really happening. Furthermore, he spoke clearly and rationally, why did the victims not go to the police first. He wasn't condeming them just concluding they were money hungry based on their approach to the situation.

[mu03eng]

The only one that seems to be acting emotional is you.  Paterno was fired for logical and reasonable reason.  

Who at Penn State was fired due to emotion?  Or in the court of public opinion?

Actually Paterno was fired for PR....there was no proof of what he did or did not know nor was there proof of what he did or did not do.  There is speculation and conjecture but no discernible evidence or proof.

So Paterno was fired because a loud enough voice turned that speculation into proof.  No different than what should happen to Boeheim.

This is not a defense of Paterno, merely pointing out that what is good for the goose is good for the gander and Boeheim has been proven to have taken no more and no less action than Paterno.

[mu03eng]

It would be a real shame if JB gets fired for speaking what he believed to be true. The fact that he so strongly defended his coach indicates he had no idea what was really happening. Furthermore, he spoke clearly and rationally, why did the victims not go to the police first. He wasn't condeming them just concluding they were money hungry based on their approach to the situation.

They did go to the police first, Syracuse also conducted an internal investigation and concluded there was nothing to see to the point of not coordinating with the Syracuse police.  So going to ESPN was presumable their last resort since they were unable to get traction anywhere else.

Having said that, there is no evidence that Boeheim did anything wrong or knew anything and didn't act on it.  Additionally, while it looks considerably more substantial today then even earlier in the week the accusations are far from proven.  However, the level of proof is no different than the Paterno story so shouldn't the same standard apply?

Lastly, what culpability, legal or moral, does ESPN have?  They purportedly had possession of these tapes in 2005 and didn't turn them over to police.....how is that different than what Paterno supposedly did?

[🏀]

http://bit.ly/s89rOp

Doyle hits the ball out of the park.

[chapman]

Interesting...the ESPN reporter who spoke to Bobby Davis today said that it "means the world" to him that Boeheim has seemed to shift his view after being read Boeheim's statement by the reporter.  Strange that it could be his opinion that helps save Boeheim's job.

[cheebs09]

Wow, was watching NBC for football and they had the news teaser for Channel 4 Milwaukee news. They showed a picture of Fine and said how there was news of a latest sexual assault (but didn't name the school) and ended it with "and find out how it could affect Marquette's basketball season." Probably just being sensitive, but after the stuff over the summer, I just think that could be taken as very misleading and sound like it's an MU coach to people who don't follow MU basketball. Not that that was their intent, just poor reporting.

Chapman, I hadn't seen that, but something like that could save Boeheim's job. At the moment, the most important things are the victims (like in Penn State situation, although a lot of people seemed to forget that). If the victims don't come out against Boeheim and even commend him, then I think he has a much better chance of surviving.

[MerrittsMustache]

Wow, was watching NBC for football and they had the news teaser for Channel 4 Milwaukee news. They showed a picture of Fine and said how there was news of a latest sexual assault (but didn't name the school) and ended it with "and find out how it could affect Marquette's basketball season." Probably just being sensitive, but after the stuff over the summer, I just think that could be taken as very misleading and sound like it's an MU coach to people who don't follow MU basketball. Not that that was their intent, just poor reporting.

Saw that too. If they were going for a local connection, they should have simply mentioned that it was a school in MU's conference. That likely wouldn't get the same number of eyes though.

[Hamostradamus]

Channel 4 said the local connection relates to Cuse playing MU at the Bradley Center in their last year in the conference.

[Oldgym]

It's Channel 4.  Leave no innuendo unexploited.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

I'm with most of you that Boeheim is being railroaded out on the back of JoePa.

What I'm arguing is life is not fair and JoePa set a new standard.  Your over-analyzing that standard.  It is very simple.  If you are a head coach and you have a molester on your staff, you're gone.  If you thrash a victim of molestation, you cannot stay.

You're the only one I'm reading doing any "railroading." Boeheim hasn't been fired or resigned.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/michael_rosenberg/11/27/syracuse.fires.fine/index.html

"The accusations against Bernie Fine are very similar to the accusations against Jerry Sandusky, but the accusations against Syracuse are not similar to the accusations against Penn State.

Penn State is accused of covering up eyewitness accounts of sexual molestation. Nobody has alleged that at Syracuse. Boeheim said dumb things to support his friend, and he deserves heat for it. But Penn State officials allegedly heard about specific incidents, shortly after they occurred, from independent observers, and did nothing. That is an enormous difference."

+1

[cheebs09]

I think the one thing that could make this very bad for Boeheim is the claim that he knew Fine had Davis in his hotel room on road trips. While that in itself may not be proof he knew anything and if Boeheim trusted this guy, I'm sure it wouldn't be out of the norm to view him as more of a chaperone for the kid. However, if it was out of the norm for kids to travel with the team like that, especially sharing a room with a coach, it could get pretty ugly.

[bilsu]

Ignoring all the other stuff, I just do not see why Boeheim risked continuing to have Fine on his staff after the 2002 allegations. Even, if he did not believe the allegations he should have been smart enough to separate himself from Fine.

[brewcity77]

Channel 4 said the local connection relates to Cuse playing MU at the Bradley Center in their last year in the conference.

That's really deceitful journalism, for two reasons. First, they are leading you to believe the Fine events are directly connected to Marquette. Second, it's inaccurate because this isn't Syracuse's last year in the conference. They are required to stay this year and next, unless they negotiate an earlier release, which hasn't happened yet.

All that aside...I think Boeheim needs to go. Early on, I was thinking this might be coat-tail riding after Penn State, I'm sure a lot of people were. But to come out and say it and launch an attack on the victim is simply something you cannot do. The Doyel article summed it up perfectly: defend your friend, say you don't believe the accusations, say you weren't aware of any of this going on, but don't attack the person before all the evidence is in. Now that it's coming in, and it looks bad, there's no going back. This lame retraction is too little, too late.

As much as I'm not a fan of Syracuse, or Boeheim, I've always respected them on the court. But this time, he really stuck his foot in it. There's no separating him from what he said, especially not the money-grab accusation. It's too bad, because based on what we know now, I don't think he was complicit in hiding a scandal like JoePa was, but for completely different reasons, he still needs to go.

[TallTitan34]

http://bit.ly/s89rOp

Doyle hits the ball out of the park.

This.

[GGGG]

Actually Paterno was fired for PR....there was no proof of what he did or did not know nor was there proof of what he did or did not do.  There is speculation and conjecture but no discernible evidence or proof.

He knew what McQueary told him and testified as such.  That is irrefutable fact.

There is also pretty strong conjecture that he knew about previous incidents, kept them quiet, and kept him involved with the program.

[MUMac]

He knew what McQueary told him and testified as such.  That is irrefutable fact.

There is also pretty strong conjecture that he knew about previous incidents, kept them quiet, and kept him involved with the program.

I find it humorous that your 2nd paragraph is "conjecture" apparently refuting the post you quoted as stating that "There is speculation and conjecture but no discernible evidence or proof."