3 minutes ago, InItToWinIt said:

Well, when he told the organizer of the event that he won't do it without the Ruthsatz there, it's possible they removed him from the event too. 

I believe he was already booked that night and it wasn't anything quite so nefarious, but heck, I guess anything is possible.  

18 minutes ago, Breds82 said:

that's the second time I’ve been told this. So the principal or AD would get fired because he allowed a person to be inducted into the schools athletic hall of fame. As I’ve stated my uncle is in NewCaths HOF. I don’t recall having the Bishops blessing as one the requirements for that HOF. Also my brother in laws state championship team, and my cousins state championship teams were teams of distinction. They never mentioned the bishop either. I don’t understand that part.

I don’t think I’d risk my job for an issue like this, but I also wouldn’t like the fact the Bishop can influence menial issues like this as well. He should have bigger things to deal with.

I don’t think the Bishop necessarily approves these type of decisions but he can certainly override what he believes to be a mistake. If CovCath wanted to give Roger Tieman a lifetime achievement award, that wouldn’t cause a stir.  If they wanted to give one to Bill Erpenbeck I think the Bishop would step in. 

21 minutes ago, The Double Deuce said:

My man, on this point you and I couldn't be more in lock-step.  The Diocese has a Superintendent of Schools, if they and their staff can't handle this situation then they may not be right for the job.  If the Super told CovCath they could include Scott since Nick was going in, and the Bishop found out later and overruled them, the Super should seek a better opportunity.  This may all be in his purview, but let's be honest, it isn't in his field of expertise.  

I think you nailed it and that is exactly what happened. 

Assuming that is true, the only missing piece is the Bishop's failure to "man up" and tell everyone the truth. 

17 minutes ago, InItToWinIt said:

Well, when he told the organizer of the event that he won't do it without the Ruthsatz there, it's possible they removed him from the event too. 

As far as I know of the story line about Joe Danneman telling the organizers of the HOF banquet that he was not going to emcee without the Ruthsatz family being there is completely false. They asked Joe to emcee quite a while ago - prior to anything involving the rescinding of Scott Ruthsatz's induction. Joe told them at that point that he couldn't make the banquet because he was already booked for the night.

I don't know who is feeding you a different story about that, but they're making things up.

This is such an interesting story to watch unfold. The truth needs to come out in the end. But if history tells anything, it hardly ever does in Park Hills. Until then, popcorn please…..

2 hours ago, Colonels_Wear_Blue said:

As far as I know of the story line about Joe Danneman telling the organizers of the HOF banquet that he was not going to emcee without the Ruthsatz family being there is completely false. They asked Joe to emcee quite a while ago - prior to anything involving the rescinding of Scott Ruthsatz's induction. Joe told them at that point that he couldn't make the banquet because he was already booked for the night.

I don't know who is feeding you a different story about that, but they're making things up.

My source spoke directly to Joe, and told me that's what he said. Our conversation took place this week... It would certainly make sense to me that Joe, being 1) a public figure 2) a CCH alum and 3) a veteran Covcath HOF emcee (see attached image), that he would be the first choice to emcee the 2025 event, and also (due to points #1 and #2) deflect any involvement so as to not get caught up in the drama of all this.  

Joe is a good guy and in both scenarios really isn't at fault.

 

How I see it, its either:

1) The Bishop/Diocese rescinded Ruthsatz's HOF induction, and refuses to address it or admit it, thus CCH leadership lacks the will to speak out against a clear injustice

or

2) CCH Leadership rescinded Ruthsatz's HOF induction on their own, and is deflecting blame to the Bishop/Diocese

 

A statement from either one would help move this all along...

This is some serious soap opera material.  
A few observations here:  When has the Catholic Church ever really told the truth?  Private schools can hide behind curtains and hash out whatever they want and out of public purview.

The superiors above the administration at Covington Catholic made the call.  The admin at Covington Catholic are just following orders.  Like it or not, that’s the deal.

Ironic that the son is going after and publicly flogging the administration that covered and protected the one who had their HOF induction rescinded.

There’s money involved   Be it donor’s or a single donor warning of a closing their purse strings that is likely involved in this deal.

It will be interesting to watch how this unfolds.  
 

 

Post #3 is up with a text from Nick to Tony and Bob. 

Nick is really going after Tony here, and IMO, Tony has the least amount of influence on the entire ordeal. 

13 hours ago, The Double Deuce said:

I believe he was already booked that night and it wasn't anything quite so nefarious, but heck, I guess anything is possible.  

Totally agree.  I really would doubt Danneman would make such a claim to not do it without Rutsatz there.  Top tier profession,  has a son on the JV team and an incoming Freshman, he's an alum himself.  Seems crazy.

 

I do think Nick is being way over the top with the FB posts, but he's an adult and lives out of town so not sure if Scott can really control any of his anger.

37 minutes ago, TheConch said:

Post #3 is up with a text from Nick to Tony and Bob. 

Nick is really going after Tony here, and IMO, Tony has the least amount of influence on the entire ordeal. 

I know its a sore subject, but posts like this probably aren't going to the help the case going forward, provided it either all gets worked out or other people are in charge of the process in the future.

8 minutes ago, gchs_uk9 said:

I know its a sore subject, but posts like this probably aren't going to the help the case going forward, provided it either all gets worked out or other people are in charge of the process in the future.

I agree, they are moving towards a burnt bridge that will never recover. But clearly, Nick feels like that has already occurred and feeling betrayed by Tony and Bob. 

I was also thinking, do you think Nick refusing to specifically state their names is out of fear of potential libel, slander, defamation situations arising? 

10 hours ago, InItToWinIt said:

My source spoke directly to Joe, and told me that's what he said. Our conversation took place this week... It would certainly make sense to me that Joe, being 1) a public figure 2) a CCH alum and 3) a veteran Covcath HOF emcee (see attached image), that he would be the first choice to emcee the 2025 event, and also (due to points #1 and #2) deflect any involvement so as to not get caught up in the drama of all this.  

Joe is a good guy and in both scenarios really isn't at fault.

 

How I see it, its either:

1) The Bishop/Diocese rescinded Ruthsatz's HOF induction, and refuses to address it or admit it, thus CCH leadership lacks the will to speak out against a clear injustice

or

2) CCH Leadership rescinded Ruthsatz's HOF induction on their own, and is deflecting blame to the Bishop/Diocese

 

A statement from either one would help move this all along...

   As an alumn, I understand your frustrations. This whole situation casts a bad light on not only the men involved, but also the school, the alumni, and the Church. I remember when the March for Life fiasco happened and I had similar feelings. I remember seeing Colonel "supporters" as well as people with a bone to pick dragging the school, the administration, the Diocese, and the Church as a whole through the mud. I remember thinking surely we don't have all of the information to make an informed opinion yet.

    I am not claiming that the Diocese, CCH, or the administration are free from blame, certainly this whole thing was handled poorly, but to make assumptions and to put out information as facts based on unvetted sources seems dangerous and unnecessary. 

I don't think I am revealing anything unknown, but our Colonels have had some issues beyond the basketball court over the past decade. I think it is entirely reasonable to believe that a new bishop came in, was informed of the prior issues, and said we want a clean start let's move on. It is reasonable to believe that the bishop was not initially informed about the HOF inductees and when he did find out, told the administration that he was trying to distance the school and diocese from the basketball teams prior transgressions. I admittedly have NO knowledge of the situation beyond what is on this site, but occam's razor would suggest the simplest explanation is typically the best. 

  Without facts, it is hard for me to judge anybody in this situation. I hate it for the people involved. I hate it for the alumni. I hate it for the kids at CCH who are having to defend themselves and their school. Please, let's wait until there are facts before dragging people through the mud.

13 hours ago, The Double Deuce said:

I believe he was already booked that night and it wasn't anything quite so nefarious, but heck, I guess anything is possible.  

Please, let’s get back to discussing basketball. This situation will be worked out overtime and the truth will not come out until then. Let’s quit trashing a great school that has great teachers, and in my opinion a great administration. 

2 minutes ago, chartman said:

Please, let’s get back to discussing basketball. This situation will be worked out overtime and the truth will not come out until then. Let’s quit trashing a great school that has great teachers, and in my opinion a great administration. 

There are usually threads for each individual game. Those specific threads are dedicated to basketball discussion. 

1 hour ago, TheConch said:

Post #3 is up with a text from Nick to Tony and Bob. 

Nick is really going after Tony here, and IMO, Tony has the least amount of influence on the entire ordeal. 

I understand his anger. If any of you had a time when your father was fired, it still burns you to think about it. I remember when my dad was fired from a church in 1999. He got over it, but it still bugs me to think about it 26 years later.

I remember back in 2008 when the Reds hired Dusty Baker and there was talk on the MLB Network that Eduardo Perez was in the running, Eduardo refused to even apply because the Reds fired his dad in 1993. It sticks with you when someone does your father wrong.

That being said, I think it is odd when grown men put emojis in their text messages.