The boosters have Gruden locked up...
Just as they did in 2012.
What is the hold up with the athletic administration?
What do you think he is doing with the Gruden deal?
I thought about that, but the AA side has no leverage in this situation if the reports about boosters forming a unified front on this are true. If the report is untrue and they are more disorganized like they were in 2012, then it could be used as leverage for sure.
I'm sorry, you can explain what both you and MIT mean here? I think I missed a step somewhere.
Had to post again after this.... CONFIRMATION!!!!
Now we KNOW :hi:
All thread on any board are simply opinions.... we are NOT the News
Agreed. But the only thing imo that would justify their poor handling of everything would be having Chuckie in the bag as Tennessee's next coach. The positive attention that it would bring to our brand would be so immense. Even greater than the Saban hire at that time. Any negativity about UT would be a forgotten thought
If Gruden is indeed a done deal I could see Currie being handcuffed knowing this storm will soon pass
Soon!
I'd said before, Currie must have the deal wrapped up and is just waiting to announce. Otherwise, this whole situation is one where other AD's would reference on how not to handle a coaching change. I just can't believe any AD could manage the situation this poorly on purpose.
Im on board with this
I'm leaning strongly this direction based on a couple of things.
I don't believe Currie is the bad guy here. I'm told he's very well liked by the power brokers, and they were very impressed with his prep for the coaching "search".
I think he is actually the one pushing for the shift back to more of an independent AD...and it's causing academic heartburn . He may end up being the hero in all of this when he pulls it off.
We'll see....I think we are trending correctly, and recent "events" have been a speed bump.
I understand your position now and completely agree with you as to the uncertainty of the legality aspect of releasing him for cause.
My position was that ultimately the culture influenced and policies set forth are the HC's responsibility. Any breach in policy or deviation from the SOP would require action. Especially in this case, where there is a protocol in place, a culture of safety first, and his responsibility to ensure dissemination of information and education of staff on the concussion protocol. That places the ultimate responsibility on him. Alot of different scenarios here, such as, his staff were not properly trained, there was an atmosphere of win at all cost, an atmosphere on some level of fear to tell the HC about this and not continuing to try to keep play him, or his staff took it upon themselves to deviate from protocol or SOP.
I am not versed in the legalities of the evidence needed for releasing for cause so my opinion is there is alot of grey here. So, yeah, I definitely agree with you on the ability to release him for cause. And also agree that it would look very underhanded on the Universities part in the court of public opinion. Lord knows the UT brand has been tarnished enough as is.
Haslam has controlled the AD for some time (see 2012 & Currie hire). The other booster's are tired of it and presented an ultimatum to the school in the form of a new coach/restructured AD or they go home. UT needs their $$ (see Neyland renos, other new buildings). Academic obstructions cleared out by the introduction of VC into the mix. Only obstacle now is Haslam. Only card he has is control of Currie. Ergen led boosters have all the other cards. Turning up the pressure on Haslam bit by bit.
