DMN...Whatever

[Big10Ponyfan]

I don't agree with anything the two of you have written.

If they were really dedicated to finding out about the violations beyond what they had reported -- and I know people over there who know they know more than they reported -- then I think it's lazy reporting or agenda-driven journalism.

We keep calling the media the watchdog industry. They could have dug harder into this.

We're not kids here. We know there was more involved. SMU has the right to keep its matters private. Should they have come clean with this? That's up for debate. But remember, Tubbs has kept his mouth shut since his dismissal. It's reasonable to presume the two go hand-in-hand.

But really, leave SMU out of this. The focus is on the DMN and what it chooses report and what it chooses not to report.

My argument is if the DMN really wanted to get after this, they have an investigative reporter over there in Jeff Miller who could have gotten after the other issues and secure confidentiality. Not once, was his name attached to any of these stories.

I find that odd. The DMN only put the work into that story that it wanted.

[jtstang]

Congrats, that's the second most ridiculous DMN post ever on this board. You start with the premise that the Tubbs coverage was somehow unfair, then you want to keep SMU out of this? The whole point is SMU decided to make public that alleged "violations" resulted in the firing, and then never said what they were!! The DMN reported everything SMU made public. If SMU wanted to avoid the PR gaffe that was the Tubbs firing, it had business to make the reasons public itself. That's part of the problem with a private school, no applicability of the Open Records Act, which is a major source of information for "investigative reporters" like your buddy Jeff.

[OC Mustang]

I know better than to wade into this, but I gotta pipe up. I feel similarly to jtstang that the university has a compelling reason to detail what Tubbs did for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it would be the truth. But Big10 is on to something specifically about Tubbs not commenting either. I haven't read previous posts in this thread, so I may be covering something already, but I gotta ask both of you, jtstang and Big10, notwithstanding the fact that DISD coaches went to bat for him publicly, why didn't Tubbs go on the offensive? I dunno, but if I got the public shaft, I'd be pretty p.o.-ed, and if I were clean, or these violations were trivial, I'd be pretty hot just as publicly.

If Tubbs felt that Copeland and/or Orsini were being opportunistic, or worse, if he felt this was a wrongful termination and a mark against his professional reputation, why didn't he say anything? It's not as if the DMN camped out on his lawn and kept bugging him for a story (or SMU for that matter), is it? Or did they to no avail?

Either way, it is true SMU did not detail the reasons for the personnel change. Neither did Tubbs, right? Hmm. I wonder why (not a straw man...I really do wonder why)?

[Big10Ponyfan]

Then why hasn't Tubbs said anything?

[RGV Pony]

Then why hasn't Tubbs said anything?

Because he likes the $$ just fine, thank you, and doesn't want to void the agreement.

[jtstang]

I know better than to wade into this, but I gotta pipe up. I feel similarly to jtstang that the university has a compelling reason to detail what Tubbs did for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it would be the truth. But Big10 is on to something specifically about Tubbs not commenting either. I haven't read previous posts in this thread, so I may be covering something already, but I gotta ask both of you, jtstang and Big10, notwithstanding the fact that DISD coaches went to bat for him publicly, why didn't Tubbs go on the offensive? I dunno, but if I got the public shaft, I'd be pretty p.o.-ed, and if I were clean, or these violations were trivial, I'd be pretty hot just as publicly.

If Tubbs felt that Copeland and/or Orsini were being opportunistic, or worse, if he felt this was a wrongful termination and a mark against his professional reputation, why didn't he say anything? It's not as if the DMN camped out on his lawn and kept bugging him for a story (or SMU for that matter), is it? Or did they to no avail?

Either way, it is true SMU did not detail the reasons for the personnel change. Neither did Tubbs, right? Hmm. I wonder why (not a straw man...I really do wonder why)?

Well, you ask interesting questions. As part of what has been reported as a firing for NCAA violations in the papers, it was apparently revealed that his contract was bought out for some $600k. Now as a practical matter I imagine it went something like this: "You're gone either way--do you want $600k to go quietly, or not?" So in settlement of the remainder of the contract, SMU undoubtedly bought his agreement to remain silent. It happens all the time in settlement of legal disputes.

[Stallion]

Bobby Collins, Jackie Sherrill and the other great cheaters of our time were paid off to "Shut Up". That's how the game is played so reporters from WFAA and DMN can't spill the dirty laundry. To blame the DMN for this is simply ludicrous.

[EastStang]

The reason that many of us are unhappy about the Tubbs firing involved three issues. (1) Putting out information that we were violating NCAA rules and not being open about what they were. Given what we have been through, you don't say the words, "NCAA Violations" without some complete information. (2) Many of us were worried that we would not be able to hire a decent replacement. That worry has been put aside with the hiring of Doherty (which of course raises some concerns that the NCAA violations rumors were a smoke screen so that Orsini could get his guy in). (3) Would we have trouble recruiting in the DISD after firing Tubbs with only 2 years on the job? The jury is still out on that one. So, yes, we still want some answers because if we get those answers, perhaps issue number three becomes less of an issue.

[jtstang]

That is a pretty good summary EastStang, but I would contend that #1 is the most important issue (at least for me). SMU's response to charges of NCAA violations are an infamous legacy around here, and ultimately what led to the death penalty. If there were serious enough violations for Tubbs to be fired, it clearly would have to be for something more than Doherty was recently popped for, secondary practice violations. And Copeland already said it was more serious than the burgers and Cheer we all read about in the papers. Why won't they tell their interested fans and alumni? Unless, of course, there is a double standard in place on the Hilltop, which would be another shameful situation altogether.

[mavsrage311]

from what I have heard, and as all of us can assume, there was a lot more to it than burgers and cheer. The reason SMU did not go public with anything else is because they had no hard, concrete evidence. Although they knew he was comitting serious violations, they could only report what they could prove, it's as simple as that

[jtstang]

from what I have heard, and as all of us can assume, there was a lot more to it than burgers and cheer. The reason SMU did not go public with anything else is because they had no hard, concrete evidence. Although they knew he was comitting serious violations, they could only report what they could prove, it's as simple as that

But they could fire him based on what they couldn't prove. That's a nice policy.

[The XtC]

It’s not every day that I agree completely with Stallion, so mark your calendars. You’re all making a mountain out of a molehill with the verbal commitment of Harp. So it took a couple of days for the paper to report it, so what? Papers usually don’t report on verbals unless they hear from the kid, himself. Sometimes that takes a few days, sometimes it takes weeks. When Bryan Morris verbally committed to SMU in the spring of 2005, it wasn’t reported anywhere for six weeks. Not in Rivals, the DMN, or in the kids hometown paper, because Morris didn’t say anything to them. Your martyr complex has gotten to the point that your grasping at any tiny straw. Calm down, the world isn’t out to get poor little SMU, most of our problems are self inflicted.

The DMN hasn’t done a story on any major violations because there isn’t a story to do. Why in the world would the DMN ignore or help cover up a story of that nature? These are, after all, the same people that so many of you claim are out to get SMU, or to make the school look bad at every opportunity. But now they’re trying to cover up a story on violations? And it’s because of Jimmy Tubbs? Do you know how laughable that sounds? Calvin Watkins and Jimmy had a good working relationship, but there’s no way he would intentionally cover up or even ignore a good story because of Jimmy. And something of this nature would go well beyond Calvin, his editors would have to be in on it. And every TV station in town would have to be in on it, because they are also not reporting the same non-story. You think if there was a story on major violations that every news outlet in the city would sit on it? They aren’t looking for a story anymore because they didn’t find anything to indicate that there was one. All the allegations that you think you “know” don’t exist anywhere outside of this website.

Jimmy Tubbs isn’t saying anything in public, because there isn’t anything to say. His contract was paid off in full, and he’s found another job. He’s going about his life. There isn’t anything for him to deny or protest, there was no wrongful termination. If his contract hadn’t been paid, that would be wrongful termination, but he got his money. This website is the only place you’ll find anyone claiming anything happened beyond what was reported in the paper. No one that matters believes he was fired for any reason other than the team’s performance. Nothing has happened to his reputation. If anything, he’s seen as a victim. He doesn’t have to defend himself to anyone, most people in the athletic community are already pretty sympathetic. I don’t think most of you understand how bad this whole fiasco made the school look to people outside the SMU bubble.

I’ll say again what I’ve been saying for 9 months. There were no serious violations. Jimmy bought Bamba a hamburger, and he watched a game film on the team bus during a road trip. He ran his practices a little long sometime. Those fall into the same category of secondary violations as those Doherty committed. There’s nothing more. SMU can keep everything under wraps for now, but eventually the NCAA findings will be a matter of public record.

If there were major violations, why didn’t SMU self impose penalties to try and appease the NCAA? That’s the standard protocol these days, every school that gets into serious trouble makes an offer of penalties that they hope will convince the NCAA that they are making a good faith effort to clean up their own house. Sometimes the NCAA tacks on a few extra’s but sometimes they accept the schools penalties and don’t insist on anything else, or at least nothing drastic. The time to do it would have been this summer, the basketball team had extra scholarships they weren’t using anyway, it wouldn’t have hurt anything to give them up. But now that the school year has started, any penalties would affect next year, and the recruiting class that Doherty is currently pursuing.

Everyone needs to ask themselves this, seriously, whether you believe the violations happened or not. Maybe even more so, if you believe they happened. If there were major violations, why aren’t we trying to head off heavy sanctions by imposing our own? Given the school’s history with the NCAA, why aren’t we trying to dodge the hammer, or at least soften the blow? I eagerly await your responses, although I probably wont hold my breath.

[jtstang]

Well of course it was for failure to turn the team around, after only two years. That's the dirty little secret nobody is supposed to talk about. Wonder of Doherty will get the same type of review after his first two years of sub-.500 ball.

[ponydawg]

Well of course it was for failure to turn the team around, after only two years. That's the dirty little secret nobody is supposed to talk about. Wonder of Doherty will get the same type of review after his first two years of sub-.500 ball.

no, he won't.

[PonyPride]

I'm going with the assumption that he won't have two years of sub-.500 ball. One -- maybe. Not two.