Per KSTP: Top U of MN athletics fundraiser violated sexual harassment policy

Donate To GopherHole
Iceland12 said:
It's not weird. As you mentioned before, it's KSTP 5. They will aways go with sleaze and innuendo as long as it's aimed at one of their punching bags like the U.
Click to expand...

Typical Hubbard owned station.KSTP is owned by a bunch of global warming deniers and Scott Walker supporters, they have no shame.
 

Clue...

I don't think Carter is a regent, but the thought is great! Good one Zman...
 

The bigger issue in this whole thing is the leaking of the email for sure. That should not be made public. The U, as an employer, should be able to properly go thru the process of an investigation, and if accusations are valid, be able to fire the person without having the media create a sh!t storm for no reason. Why isnt this same regent leaking every email related to all other faculty? They clearly have something against the athletics department.
 

Donkeypunch Jones said:
Typical Hubbard owned station.KSTP is owned by a bunch of <b>global warming </b>deniers and Scott Walker supporters, they have no shame.
Click to expand...

Climate change. They changed the name when data debunked the theory.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

DLguy said:
The bigger issue in this whole thing is the leaking of the email for sure. That should not be made public. The U, as an employer, should be able to properly go thru the process of an investigation, and if accusations are valid, be able to fire the person without having the media create a sh!t storm for no reason. Why isnt this same regent leaking every email related to all other faculty? <b>They clearly have something against the athletics department.</b>
Click to expand...

The letter the EOAA sent to Kill didn't even hide that point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 




Interesting that KSTP went as far as it did in the identification. Not too hard to figure out the exact source when you ID them in their smallest "anonymous" group. Guess KSTP figured it wouldn't need that person as a source in the future, but probably also lost most other key anonymous U sources in the process.
 




Coyle better get a handle on the culture in that department.
 

GopherBulldog said:
Coyle better get a handle on the culture in that department.
Click to expand...

A culture problem exists when you allow these things to happen without consequences. As long as it is properly handled, Coyle is not to blame. You cannot stop an adult employee from doing something like this, unless they were hired with a previous pattern. Does not appear to be the case here. And of course, the regent that leaked the document did so before Coyle or the U had time to properly investigate and react accordingly.
 


GopherBulldog said:
Coyle better get a handle on the culture in that department.
Click to expand...

Should ignore it, but the culture reference is so clever and original I can't. The guy has been there since 2010 and was promoted by Mega-Tongue so what's your point?
 



Mulligan said:
Should ignore it, but the culture reference is so clever and original I can't. The guy has been there since 2010 and was promoted by Mega-Tongue so what's your point?
Click to expand...

Your post suggests that I am in some way blaming Coyle for what happened. I am not. As far as my point... The momentum around the program right now is palpable. PJF has done a masterful job in a short period of time creating a buzz that in some cases reaches a national scope. In this situation, Coyle needs to swiftly and decisively deal with the problem (if there truly is a problem), and manage the public discussion around it. He was woefully poor at doing this during the last crisis situation facing the department. Is that original enough for you?
 

DLguy said:
A culture problem exists when you allow these things to happen without consequences. As long as it is properly handled, Coyle is not to blame. You cannot stop an adult employee from doing something like this, unless they were hired with a previous pattern. Does not appear to be the case here. And of course, the regent that leaked the document did so before Coyle or the U had time to properly investigate and react accordingly.
Click to expand...

You are correct and I agree with you. With employees, as with players, you can never 100% control what they will do. It's all about how you deal with the problem and control the message to the public.
 

GopherBulldog said:
You are correct and I agree with you. With employees, as with players, you can never 100% control what they will do. It's all about how you deal with the problem and control the message to the public.
Click to expand...

Agreed, which is the crap part about this leak. The U didnt have time to control the message to the public, because there was nothing to report until their investigation was complete. This regent put them in a very bad position, and I hope they are outed for it.
 

Mulligan said:
Should ignore it, but the culture reference is so clever and original I can't. The guy has been there since 2010 and was promoted by Mega-Tongue so what's your point?
Click to expand...

Not seeing your point. It would be like saying if a current player Fleck didn't recruit gets in trouble 6-8 months from now, given the situation that brought him here, he should not be open for criticism about his leadership of the program. Am I missing something in you post?
 

GopherHomer said:
I'm reserving judgement until I hear from Jim Carter.
Click to expand...


You just knew this would come sooner rather than later.

Jim Carter, a onetime Gophers football star who ran unsuccessfully for regent, said he learned about the investigation at least three weeks ago. He declined to identify the person who gave him the information but added, “It didn’t come from a regent.” Carter said he didn’t see the report but was told “the EOAA found in favor of the victim.”
Click to expand...


http://www.startribune.com/top-goph...-of-minnesota-coworker-report-says/422014193/
 

PMWinSTP said:
Not seeing your point. It would be like saying if a current player Fleck didn't recruit gets in trouble 6-8 months from now, given the situation that brought him here, he should not be open for criticism about his leadership of the program. Am I missing something in you post?
Click to expand...

My point is the "changing the culture" bit is brought up almost whenever another negative thing about U athletics comes out, big or small. Yes, by all means, Mark Coyle should be criticized for missteps. However, the venom a few still hold for him here is over the top in my opinion. You apparently are missing the point that he didn't hire this guy. He didn't promote this guy. He inherited this guy. Yet again he's being ridiculed over something he might not have had any control over. And it's something that also might be a whole lot of ado over nothing.

As others have also noted, "changing the culture" was taken by many to mean that the U was going to go first class and attempt to make every effort to reach the top. That's welcome by me, who for too long has seen the U go the cheap route: low salaried coaches and poor facilities. PJ's hiring signaled setting higher goals for me and I welcome that. I was hoping TC would be retained, but, in all honesty, it was because he seemed like a safer bet. PJ might flame out spectacularly, but you would have a hard time convincing me his ceiling isn't a lot higher than TC.

Coyle could have done better with the boycott and he didn't need to denigrate TC, but the rest of his moves have been solid IMO.
 

Mulligan said:
My point is the "changing the culture" bit is brought up almost whenever another negative thing about U athletics comes out, big or small. Yes, by all means, Mark Coyle should be criticized for missteps. However, the venom a few still hold for him here is over the top in my opinion. You apparently are missing the point that he didn't hire this guy. He didn't promote this guy. He inherited this guy. Yet again he's being ridiculed over something he might not have had any control over. And it's something that also might be a whole lot of ado over nothing.

As others have also noted, "changing the culture" was taken by many to mean that the U was going to go first class and attempt to make every effort to reach the top. That's welcome by me, who for too long has seen the U go the cheap route: low salaried coaches and poor facilities. PJ's hiring signaled setting higher goals for me and I welcome that. I was hoping TC would be retained, but, in all honesty, it was because he seemed like a safer bet. PJ might flame out spectacularly, but you would have a hard time convincing me his ceiling isn't a lot higher than TC.

Coyle could have done better with the boycott and he didn't need to denigrate TC, but the rest of his moves have been solid IMO.
Click to expand...

I did not miss this at all...my post example goes right to this point. It does not matter who hired/recruited the person, or when. If you are the leader and it happens under your watch, you own it.
 

Interesting that some prominent boosters and others connected to the athletic department are coming out in support of Handel, saying that they can't believe the allegations. Among those in his corner is Dick Ames - a big-time booster.

Also interesting - the regents seem to be more concerned about the leak than about the actual allegations. I don't recall a similar desire to root out the source of the leak when the EOAA report on the football players became public.

Something about this whole deal seems off to me. there's a piece of the puzzle we don't know about.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Interesting that some prominent boosters and others connected to the athletic department are coming out in support of Handel, saying that they can't believe the allegations. Among those in his corner is Dick Ames - a big-time booster.
Click to expand...

He was a fund raiser.... if folks didn't like him he wouldn't bring in much money / likely have the job long.

I'm not sure support there really means much.
 

Mulligan said:
My point is the "changing the culture" bit is brought up almost whenever another negative thing about U athletics comes out, big or small. Yes, by all means, Mark Coyle should be criticized for missteps. However, the venom a few still hold for him here is over the top in my opinion. You apparently are missing the point that he didn't hire this guy. He didn't promote this guy. He inherited this guy. Yet again he's being ridiculed over something he might not have had any control over. And it's something that also might be a whole lot of ado over nothing.

As others have also noted, "changing the culture" was taken by many to mean that the U was going to go first class and attempt to make every effort to reach the top. That's welcome by me, who for too long has seen the U go the cheap route: low salaried coaches and poor facilities. PJ's hiring signaled setting higher goals for me and I welcome that. I was hoping TC would be retained, but, in all honesty, it was because he seemed like a safer bet. PJ might flame out spectacularly, but you would have a hard time convincing me his ceiling isn't a lot higher than TC.

Coyle could have done better with the boycott and he didn't need to denigrate TC, but the rest of his moves have been solid IMO.
Click to expand...

All very well put. Agreed.
 

PMWinSTP said:
I did not miss this at all...my post example goes right to this point. It does not matter who hired/recruited the person, or when. If you are the leader and it happens under your watch, you own it.
Click to expand...

What exactly do you mean by "own it"? He didn't handle the football situation perfectly, but he did admit that poor communication on his part contributed to the problem. Always have thought Kaler was more of the problem there, but that's just my opinion.

As far as the current situation with Handel goes, well, we really don't know what happened yet. Coyle definitely doesn't need to take ownership for the leak considering it happened at the BOR level, way over his head. Let's see what actually happened here before we go pointing fingers. Is there actually any merit to this? Not saying there is or isn't, but we just don't know. I wouldn't expect to hear much from Coyle or anyone else until there is more clarity considering the actions Dean Johnson and the BOR have taken to ensure this stays under wraps for now.

I'd add that I 100% agree with whoever said above that there is only a culture problem when you sweep incidents like this under the rug, or let them go without investigating. But you have to let the process play out (for legal reasons, and also to make sure you get it right) and that takes time.

Meanwhile the U is having a pretty good year on the field/court/ice/etc. By your logic Coyle gets some credit for that even though he didn't hire those coaches right?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Interesting that some prominent boosters and others connected to the athletic department are coming out in support of Handel, saying that they can't believe the allegations. Among those in his corner is Dick Ames - a big-time booster.

Also interesting - the regents seem to be more concerned about the leak than about the actual allegations. I don't recall a similar desire to root out the source of the leak when the EOAA report on the football players became public.

Something about this whole deal seems off to me. there's a piece of the puzzle we don't know about.
Click to expand...

To me that speaks to how minor the allegations likely are. They mentioned in the Strib article that Handel is a hugger. Did he hug one of his employees one too many times and they reported it? Did someone else report him hugging someone they thought was inappropriate? Both would be violations of the policies, but are relatively minor and would be put in his record and he'd have to probably take some sensitivity training or the like and apologize. It easily could have been something completely innocent that was by the letter of the policy inappropriate but minor.

Just because someone violated a harassment policy doesn't mean they raped someone or did something awful. 90% of the time it's something innocent that they just didn't consider that the other person involved might not appreciate. More often than not, the behavior is OK or even appreciated by most people (hugs for example). Doesn't make it alright, but it's usually just a teaching moment that leads to a change of behavior and that's the last of it...
 

bizzle22 said:
What exactly do you mean by "own it"? He didn't handle the football situation perfectly, but he did admit that poor communication on his part contributed to the problem. Always have thought Kaler was more of the problem there, but that's just my opinion.

As far as the current situation with Handel goes, well, we really don't know what happened yet. Coyle definitely doesn't need to take ownership for the leak considering it happened at the BOR level, way over his head. Let's see what actually happened here before we go pointing fingers. Is there actually any merit to this? Not saying there is or isn't, but we just don't know. I wouldn't expect to hear much from Coyle or anyone else until there is more clarity considering the actions Dean Johnson and the BOR have taken to ensure this stays under wraps for now.

I'd add that I 100% agree with whoever said above that there is only a culture problem when you sweep incidents like this under the rug, or let them go without investigating. But you have to let the process play out (for legal reasons, and also to make sure you get it right) and that takes time.

Meanwhile the U is having a pretty good year on the field/court/ice/etc. By your logic Coyle gets some credit for that even though he didn't hire those coaches right?
Click to expand...

All is in reference to your "he didn't hire the guy" comment. Doesn't matter. He's the leader of that department, has been there a year so whatever happens (issues, successes, etc) with teams, players or personnel regardless of when they were hired or recruited, he owns. So, yes as AD he gets credit and/or blame for the performance of the department and its parts.

I agree on Kaler.
 

DLguy said:
Agreed, which is the crap part about this leak. The U didnt have time to control the message to the public, because there was nothing to report until their investigation was complete. This regent put them in a very bad position, and I hope they are outed for it.
Click to expand...

Yes. Agreed. It certainly makes Coyle's job more difficult. However, haven't we seen this movie before with the release of emails, the EOAA report, etc. Part of me feels the administration is lacking thoroughness in the quality control of their process. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...
 

Mulligan said:
My point is the "changing the culture" bit is brought up almost whenever another negative thing about U athletics comes out, big or small. Yes, by all means, Mark Coyle should be criticized for missteps. However, the venom a few still hold for him here is over the top in my opinion. You apparently are missing the point that he didn't hire this guy. He didn't promote this guy. He inherited this guy. Yet again he's being ridiculed over something he might not have had any control over. And it's something that also might be a whole lot of ado over nothing.

As others have also noted, "changing the culture" was taken by many to mean that the U was going to go first class and attempt to make every effort to reach the top. That's welcome by me, who for too long has seen the U go the cheap route: low salaried coaches and poor facilities. PJ's hiring signaled setting higher goals for me and I welcome that. I was hoping TC would be retained, but, in all honesty, it was because he seemed like a safer bet. PJ might flame out spectacularly, but you would have a hard time convincing me his ceiling isn't a lot higher than TC.

Coyle could have done better with the boycott and he didn't need to denigrate TC, but the rest of his moves have been solid IMO.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the culture lingo is here for good. Coyle made it so with his statements and pressers prior to and during the hiring of PJF. The baton has been enthusiastically pressed into the entire fabric of the department. It's not going anywhere. Like it or not. The fact is that during the most poignient and important moments of Coyle's turn at the tiller, he fell flat. That's not venom. It's just that he needs to prove that he can maneuver expertly through these situations. The jury is out. I'm afraid you are the one missing the point. I'm not blaming Coyle that this has happened. I'm awaiting a strong response and management of the issue. Without firm administrative commitment to dealing with these type of situations, the "culture" will have an anchor around its neck. Regardless of how hard PJF is rowing das boat.
 

Sexual harassment investigation should run its course. The leaker should be outed and perhaps punished. He is opening up the U of M to potential legal ramifications. You aren't allowed to divulge information about employees.
 

GopherBulldog said:
Yes. Agreed. It certainly makes Coyle's job more difficult. However, haven't we seen this movie before with the release of emails, the EOAA report, etc. Part of me feels the administration is lacking thoroughness in the quality control of their process. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...
Click to expand...

Yes, we have seen this before. Only last time it HAD TO BE one of the accused that was leaking info. This time must be totally different then.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom