Comments on: NCAA levies 1 year of no postseason for UH men’s hoops

By: 808

808 — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 21:03:52 +0000

DR, It was a great article this morning.

Instead of doing what is right, the chancellor says “it’s not always as simple as what’s right.” There in lies the problem at UH. A leader with that sentiment permeates that same attitude throughout the various departments at UH.

I am not saying UH doesn’t need state support. But, they were given autonomy with what the state gives them. Perhaps, if the leaders at the school took better care of the tax money given to them and they made more wise decisions, they wouldn’t be in this deep in debt as they are now.

If I were a big money donor, why would I give to a school who has little regard to doing what is right. Matlin announcing Rolovich as the new football coach presented a ray of hope for the football program with 5 consecutive years of losing seasons. Now, this announcement by the ncaa regarding men’s Bb!

The report by the ncaa said the dysfuctional relationship by the compliance office (paterson) and Arnold was a major factor in the sanctions.

Having anti-Arnold forces exert their influence to get Reilly Wallace in again? This is the same kind of power struggle that got Chow in as the football HC. Who is in charge at the school?

By: 808

808 — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 07:39:39 +0000

With regard to Paterson and Arnold, if the working relationship was so dysfuctional, where were their bosses? There was no one who could help mediate their differences?

And, Paterson gets promoted? Again, this is another black eye to the athletic department.

Wonder blunder, Gib Arnold fiasco, attorney fees associated with all the mess up?

Fiscal responsibility is obviously not practiced at UH.

By: mctruck

mctruck — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 03:34:02 +0000

What the??, it’s mighty confusing; “dysfunctional relationship?’ how the heck did this come about and no body intervened?, furthermore, Ms. Paterson is promoted because of this mess; or did her bosses promote her because of their inaction, therefore, almost like buying her silence, “hush,hush.”

By: Tempmanoa

Tempmanoa — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 03:30:45 +0000

The “show cause” penalty on Gib is unfortunately common in sanction cases since coaches often cannot be shown to know of violations. NCAA can hold them responsible even if they did not know or even if they tried to stop the violations as Gib did. With such a high standard for coaches, the NCAA waters down the penalty for the high standards . For example, Gib has to sit out 10 games if he is hired in the next three years, but nothing after that. There are several coaches in the NCAA with show cause orders on their names. These things happen even at cleanest of schools– Eran Ganot coached several games at St. Mary’s while the head coach was under NCAA sanction before he came here.

By: H-Man

H-Man — Wed, 23 Dec 2015 02:00:55 +0000

The NCAA report was enlightening by citing the dysfunctional relationship between Arnold and UH’s compliance administrator, Amanda Paterson. I think Gib will be back coaching in the collegiate ranks sometime in the future. The penalty assessed against him by the NCAA was an equivalent to a 10-game ban. Small potatoes, plus people have short memories.