Hoopmeister's IU Update Page

Another Basketball Season is upon us but without the General. In the heat of much controversy, Myles Brand the University President fired Coach Knight.
I have spent a great deal of time digging through the various claims, statements, inuendo and such to try and understand just what this was all about. The following is my summary of the what, who, how and why of the firing of Coach Knight.

Follow The Money and you will have all of your Questions Answered.

A little background:
Bob Knight can be a pain in the butt or the most charasmatic individual you would ever want to meet. He is the quintisential Dr. Jekyl & Mr. Hyde. There is no denying that, even amongst his strongest supporters and by his own admission. Yes there have been times that Coach has embarassed the University by the things he has done over his 29 years at the helm of the IU Basketball program, but Bob Knight was never alone in this. Due to his success at his chosen profession, Bob Knight has lived his life in a fishbowl while at IU. The more successful Bob Knight became the more transparent the fishbowl became. Indiana University took advantage of this to gain recognition that it would have likely not recieved and actually relished the fact that they, because of Bob Knight, were in the national spotlight. The press realized early on that the mere mention of Coach Knight in an article, story or column was almost a guarantee that they would also grab some time in that spotlight. What Bob Knight did for basketball and Indiana university allowed him to basically write his own ticket, which he did in the form of a contract to be Indiana's basketball coach.
The contract that Coach Knight had was an employment contract between himself and the board of trustees of Indiana University. Remember this for later because it is important in the whole scheme of things.
The contract was not really very lucrative by todays standards in terms of salary dollars. His salary was only $170,000 per year. There were, however, other sources of income such as his TV and radio shows and money from a shoe contract. The contract did give him complete control of the basketball program. Another point to remember.

Now lets get down to the why.
In the minutes of the meetings of the board of trustees meetings about a year or more ago we find a report given by Clarence Donniger as to the financial state of affairs in the atheletic department. In his report he outlined that the department was in the black as it had been during all of the years of his being the AD at IU. He also stated that this was the case under his predecessor for the previous 10 or more years. He continued saying that with the implementation of the remaining title 9 programs and increased costs that the surplus would be eaten up and there was the potential that the department could end up in the red. You can just imagine the look on the trustee's faces when this bomb was dropped. Clarence was asked what were the prospects of raising more revenues to offset this potential shortfall and he responded by saying that monies could be raised by doing things with the basketball program such as advertising space in Assembly Hall and other things, but there was an obstacle. The problem here was Bob Knight! Coach Knight's contract gave him complete control of the basketball program and inspite of the fact that Clarence Donniger had violated that part of Coach's contract previously (more later) it was a sticky issue that would have to be gotten around.
So now we know what was behind the campaign of Lets Get Bob Knight.

The First Signs:
Some time back an endowment was made to the basketball program in which Coach Knight was to be the executor. Given free reign by the individual granting the monies, Coach wanted to use the money to supplement the salaries of the assistant coaches. Instead of this happening, Clarence Donniger used the money to update the airconditioning system at Assembly Hall. This was not money wasted because I have enjoyed the benefits of the new system and appreciated it. This was just an early outward sign of the things to come. CD just decided that the donor's wishes were not important and that he should be the one to make the decision of what to do with someone else's money. This was all kept pretty hush hush because if the general public were aware that any donation that they make with stipulations as to it's control or useage would be accepted with crossed fingers and then handled any way they wanted. The first question that comes to mind here is, Was that Legal? If not, who would be the one to have to take issue with it? I believe the donor had died and left the money as a bequest in his will.
The Basketball and Football teams at IU are the only programs in all of IU sports that are in the black and have to support all of the other activities of the athletic department.

Knight can't recruit any more.
In the middle of the whole mess IU is trying to recruit Jarred Jefferies a hometown kid with skills that could help turn the program around and send IU back to the final four. A secretary in the AD's office is supposed to have sent an email to Jarred advising him to go elsewhere. Was this part of a plan early on by CD to unseat Coach? Many were saying that if IU didn't land Jefferies that Coach would be out. Jefferies of course did sign with IU and that plan if it was one, failed miserably. A good recruiting class and Coach on his way to another successful season and maybe even a good tournament run was not what the powers that be wanted for sure.
After all of the brau ha ha surrounding the Neil Reed issue and CNN/SI's releasing the infamous choking tape on the eve of IU's appearance in the tournament, the trustees voted to keep Coach Knight and Myles Brand made public the Zero Tollerance Policy that was never explained. My understanding of the "Policy" was that Coach had to refrain from grabbing kids and not give the press such a hard time. I also felt sure that technical fouls would be mentioned some place as well. Coach claims that the "policy was never outlined to him on a point by point basis and I also understood that a committe chaired by CD was to hammer the thing out prior to the season.

Whassup Knight? or Why do the rules apply only to some?
Then we get to the Kent Harvey issue. When I was in school, (late 60's) if we had addressed a professor or staff member at IU in this manner we would have been grabbed, and hauled in for a disciplinary meeting. I am reasonably sure that the kid was just trying to be cool in his friends eyes. Kids today have no respect for their elders or superiors and letting this thing go and making Bob Knight the bad guy out of this just sets the precedence for all of the Kent Harvey's of the future. The police report and all of the eye witnesses corroborated Coach's telling of the situation that he didn't raise his voice nor curse the kid.
What does this thing tell a professor in class? Can he not put a roudy student in his place? The leak of the story to the press almost suredly came from inside. Christopher Simpson, the chief minion of Myles Brand, has totally dismembered the PR set up that was in place for years for the athletic department citing a need for a more centralized and focused PR group. That same new policy all but abandoned Bob Knight in the face of the inside leaked information about the Kent Harvey issue. Then when Bob Knight calls a press conference without the permission of Brand and his minion, Brand considers it insubordination. Where was the help and support from the University PR corp?, Out leaking the story most likely. Murray Sperber can call all of the press conferences that he wants and badmouth Myles Brand and the trustees on national television and never get a word of caution about treading a thin line. The code of ethics and conduct in effect for professors and staff at IU states that when speaking in public a professor or staff member must state a disclaimer that the views they express are their own and not necessarily the views of the university.   Surely Murray wasn't speaking on behalf of the university with all of his CNN/SI interviews and the other press conferences that he held over the summer. If he wasn't speaking for the university, where was his disclaimer? Why wasn't he punished?

Let's Build a New Golf Course.
Clarence Donniger was also involved in the golf course project that is another shady deal that Myles Brand and the trustees seem to just turn the other way on. There was reported to be a conflict of interest involving CD and the project because of giving a contract without the proper bidding proceedure as required by law. It is claimed however that the contract was bid and the acceptable bid just happened to go to a certain firm. In reality, that firm had advanced knowledge and was able to virtually complete their proposal before anyone was invited to bid. The invitations to bid that went out allowed only 30 days for the contractors to do site studies, materials costing and everything involved to submitt a bid. This is an impossible task when working on a project of this magnatude. Again this may not be a case of breaking the law but it is very suspect at least and should be fully investigated.

Bob Knight Continues To Exhibit a Pattern of Defiance.
This is why Myles Brand claims to have fired Coach Knight.
First he cites an abusive argument with a female lawyer for the University. Why is it so important to point out that the lawyer was a woman? Because it will draw more sympathy so naturaly Myles played the "Gender Card"
Next he cites that Coach Knight has not complied with his request to work through or to re-establish the "Chain of Command"
1) Coach's contract gives him the sole control of the Basketball Program so there is no need to be working or re-establishing anything. Remember from above Coach's contract was between him and the Board of Trustees therefore Coach should answer to them.
2) This statement was made on September 10, 2000 and to that point since the "Zero Tolerence Policy" was placed in effect in May there was no business going on that would have required Coach to interact with CD.
This smells like CD has an ego problem and wants to be the boss and why should he let a little thing like a contract stand in his way. We have already seen that he doesn't think that the laws apply to him.
3) "Angry and inflammatory remarks he made, in public and private, about University administrators
and the board of trustees." Here I use a direct quote from Myles Brand's September press conference to point out the fact that Murray Sperber has been doing the same thing without any consequences whatsoever. Murray has repeatedly called Brand and the trustees cowards and made other remarks in print and on TV. But what gets me the most about this statement is the "in public and private" part. Does that mean that IU has been in the wire tapping business or planted stoolies to report back what Bob Knight says in private? Myles Brand in the same statement pointed out that "The University would protect the right of freedom of speech" This sure doesn't sound like he recognizes that Coach Knight has any rights of free speech.
4)"A lack of cooperation in fulfilling the sanctions handed down on May 15. It is important to note that the coach has agreed to fulfill these obligations, but has forced the university to go through a protracted, unpleasant and completely unnecessary process." The University here was trying to get $50,000 and not $30,000 as Coach was fined. Protracted means the four meetings that it took to get the University to do what they said they were going to do and that was to fine Coach Knight $30,000.
5)"His refusal to appear at previously scheduled pre-season Varsity Club events in Indianapolis,
Bloomington and Chicago." The events mentioned were not scheduled before Coach advised the university that he couldn't do these things under "Zero Tolerance" Coach became somewhat paranoid about being baited and was advised by his attorney to only make the public appearances that were called for in his contract and that all other volunteer activities for the university should be dropped. Thus Coach dropped the class he taught for free and the other appearances that he himself originally instituted.

Coach Knight never had a chance to explain one single event of which Myles Brand speaks concerning his alleged misconduct between May 2000 and the termination date. How is that for due process? Then when he has a press conference to explain his actions, he is criticized by the president for exercising the same free speech rights President Brand claims the university will protect. At best, I suggest that position is disingenuous, at worst hypocritical!
My question here is: If Coach was in the wrong back when the arguement with the female lawyer took place and Coach was under Brand's "Zero Tolerance Policy, why didn't Brand fire him right then and there as he said in May, One more thing and Coach was fired?

When you're on a roll why stop
Myles Brand had 3 meetings with trustees before the firing. This was done to prevent a quorum which would cause them to follow certain laws. This purposeful skirting of the law says exactly what this administration is all about.

I surmise that Brand knew that he would fire Knight in May but decided for ticket sales and donation raising the best thing to do was to continue the trail of deciet and not say anything until September.

This could be borderline fraud. I wonder how many people made donations based on Bob Knight being on the bench this year. How many tickets were sold with the purchaser buying because they would see a Hall of Fame Coach on the sidelines coaching the Hoosier's for the 30th season?

It is indeed all about the money. Watch this year and you will see lots of changes that put money in someones pockets and the Glory of old IU prostituted at an alarming rate.

I will continue to support the team and do all I can to bring the fans who visit here information on a timely basis but I will also continue to speak out about the shady dealings of the IU administration and the board of trustees. Lets see how they like living life in a fishbowl and under Zero Tolereance.
CK