They are all very courageous.Also, the Kardashians released a statement assuring the public that things are going very well with whomever it is they're dating or married to these days.
They are all very courageous.Also, the Kardashians released a statement assuring the public that things are going very well with whomever it is they're dating or married to these days.
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise that you follow the Kardashians.Also, the Kardashians released a statement assuring the public that things are going very well with whomever it is they're dating or married to these days.
They are all very courageous.
Haden's a ****ing prick for apparently giving Sark a chance to clean things up and a day later firing his ass. Don't get me wrong, Sark did some things that are obviously fireable offenses, but if that's the case, then fire him. Don't act compassionate one day and cold as ice the next.
Really though, if you think about it, as much as we all laughed at Kiffin, Haden's handling of firing him was pathetically classless, too.
Haden needs to be shown the door, but good luck doing that without causing a serious rift among SC supporters.
Agree with this. The only way I can see Haden being defendable in this case is if Sark decided to openly defy the offer for assistance and tried to force himself back into the head coaching job without admitting his problem or being willing to seek treatment.
We don't know what goes on behind closed doors but I am unimpressed with Haden and wouldn't be surprised if he misshandled this.
Unless someone above Haden, someone like the President and Univ Attorney, told him to **** can Sark.
The leave of absence may have been nothing more than cover while they looked into what was going on and determined if they had enough cause to get rid of him.
My guess would be the University has addressed this issue with Sark multiple times, with the last straw coming during the booster event, and he couldn't get it together so he was shown the door.Unless someone above Haden, someone like the President and Univ Attorney, told him to **** can Sark.
The leave of absence may have been nothing more than cover while they looked into what was going on and determined if they had enough cause to get rid of him.
My guess would be the University has addressed this issue with Sark multiple times, with the last straw coming during the booster event, and he couldn't get it together so he was shown the door.
Spurrier says he is resigning, not retiring...hmmmm.
Also, the Kardashians released a statement assuring the public that things are going very well with whomever it is they're dating or married to these days.
Which "big time" opening will Kyle Wittingham interview for in the offseason?
Not formalized like the NFL with required opportunities for minority candidates etc.Is there an interview process in college like in the NFL? Wouldn´t a guy like Whittingham´s "interview" be the game tape from this season?
Also, there's the coach combine and all its events.Not formalized like the NFL with required opportunities for minority candidates etc.
Depending on the opening and the candidate the interview may be more of a recruiting pitch with the school trying to convince their first choice that he should go to them instead of staying where he is or going to another school.
In some situations they truly are trying to decide between "qualified" candidates. In these cases the game tapes can tell a lot about their football background but the schools want to know about how they will handle the other elements of the job. These are mainly managing the program and the most important off-field item which is how will they relate to the donors and sponsors.
My guess is that Whittingham would fall into the first category.
Also, there's the coach combine and all its events.
Chip Kelly is very unlikely to return to CFB. Sumlin already makes a fortune, already in the SEC, and aTm is a better gig than being the head ****. Finebaum's ears don't hear much IMO.
And my argument is that it's easier to win big at SC than ATM. SC is the really only big dog. The only blue blood. Aggy thinks they are blue blood as do a lot of teams in that division. But then you've got Auburn and Bama and everyone else. Aggy would be lucky to win it every 4 years. At SC it's 1 out of every 2. You start talking playoffs than you do the conference.
He'd still be more coherent than Corso or Holtz.
And my argument is that it's easier to win big at SC than ATM. SC is the really only big dog. The only blue blood. Aggy thinks they are blue blood as do a lot of teams in that division. But then you've got Auburn and Bama and everyone else. Aggy would be lucky to win it every 4 years. At SC it's 1 out of every 2. You start talking playoffs than you do the conference.
I've read multiple things this afternoon saying that Sarkisian could have cover under the ADA if he wanted to sue claiming he was rehabbing. The question with that is did they waive any public intoxication clauses in Sarkisian's contract by allowing him to continue working after the Salute to Troy fiasco, as Darren Rovell tweeted today?
Darren Rovell @darrenrovell 3h3 hours ago
If public intoxication was part of the for clause in Sark's contract, USC might have waived that right when they allowed him back at work.
Darren Rovell @darrenrovell 3h3 hours ago- If USC fired Sarkisian for cause, he might have a case if he says he was rehabbing. Possible he's protected by American Disabilities Act.
118 retweets118 favorites
They need Dan Hawkins!!!All USC needs is a mad scientist type football coach who has the best football mind on the field each week. Don't worrry about him recruiting what so ever, his assistants will take care of that. Sark was the complete opposite and it really hurt them at times.
Seriously,Why hasn't anyone mentioned Neuheisel for USC - he is an alum (Law Degree).
It would be a reach that he would have a case under ADA. Most alcoholism cases lose under ADA and from what we know Sarkisian denied he had a problem earlier.
Rovell is a smart guy but he is spit balling in this case. Under ADA Sarkisian's situation would not pass any of the tests - The employer has the right to discipline an alcoholic for poor performance or on the job misconduct including termination - that is expressly called out in ADA. .