Not for his hire but for his introduction. I guess I wasn't the only one wondering why you open a presser defending your hire.

 

From Decourcy:

 

Calipari shines while Barnhart blunders at introduction

Wednesday, April 1, 2009, 7:53 p.m. ET

In his effort to "win the press conference," Kentucky athletic director Mitch Barnhart opened with a sweet score: He pronounced the last name of his new head basketball coach correctly. It's John Cal-a-PEAR-ee, not Cal-a-PAR-ee.

So many people get that wrong, but not Mitch. And good for him, because it might have been the last moment in which he did not comport himself like a complete buffoon.

 

Barnhart was precisely 253 words into his introduction of Calipari when he said the magic word: compliance. You know how long it takes to say 253 words? About 90 seconds. That's all the time it took Barnhart to turn what should have been a celebration into an apology.

 

Kentucky, which has a fairly blemished history with the NCAA rulebook, has been criticized by some in the media for hiring a coach with "baggage." All of that "baggage" involves assumptions; although Calipari's 1996 Final Four appearance at Massachusetts was vacated because star Marcus Camby was accused of consorting with an agent, Calipari never has been found to have violated NCAA rules. He has not been a regular in the principal's office.

 

Still reeling from the failed hire of Billy Gillispie only two years back, though, Barnhart was so stung by the media's aspersions he began defending Kentucky's decision almost immediately and pounded home his point. He said the word "compliance" four times in all. He dropped the name of UK's compliance director and the NCAA enforcement chief, proclaiming both gave Calipari marks for good conduct.

 

Essentially, Barnhart said: We've called the cops, and they say he's not a crook.

 

 

 

http://www.sportingnews.com/experts/mike-decourcy/blog/

I kind of thought the same thing, BUT since it's what everyone has been talking about I thought it was a fair topic. I personally think it was one of those situations where if he didn't mention it, people would've said "well Barnhart sure skirted around Cal's shady past, didn't he?" It was slightly unpleasant, but I doubt it caught Calipari off guard.

I kind of thought the same thing, BUT since it's what everyone has been talking about I thought it was a fair topic. I personally think it was one of those situations where if he didn't mention it, people would've said "well Barnhart sure skirted around Cal's shady past, didn't he?" It was slightly unpleasant, but I doubt it caught Calipari off guard.

 

As Decourcy said be prepared to answer questions but don't frame the presser around it.

I don't think much of Barnhart and Cal taking the job doesn't change my opinion much.

Never thought nothing of it honestly...what Mitch said.

Also mentioned graduation rates...

I think from MB's perspective or the administrations perspective, they are showing up front that this hire was vetted much more at length than the previous one.

The powers that be were stung hard by their handling of the last hire and to an extent rightfully so.

The supposed "air of impropriety" is out there and you have Pat Forde and such saying things..

I think you lay it out there...as to show you are not hiding everything.

 

Mike D is a little perturbed that his good friend TOm Crean didnt get a call last time when he openly promoted him for the job two years ago. This year he was promoting Jeff Capel.

Nothing wrong...still one of the best in the biz.

I didn't think anything of it at all.

What's wrong with answering a question before it comes up? I liked the fact that he took it head on.

 

As for Woodsider's dislike of Mitch, I don't get it. He's a class act that cares greatly about the welfare of ALL of UK's student athletes. UK is extremely fortunate to have him.

What's wrong with answering a question before it comes up? I liked the fact that he took it head on.

 

.

 

"Mom and Dad, I'd like you to meet the woman I'm going to marry."

 

"Tell us about her, son."

 

"Well, she has no jail record. I've had her tested for STDs and she came back clean. I even had her checked TWICE! I called all of her former teachers to make sure she never cheated on any tests. I asked her former neighbors if she ever threw rocks at their dogs. I verified that her breasts are real."

 

"Uh huh."

What's wrong with answering a question before it comes up? I liked the fact that he took it head on.

 

As for Woodsider's dislike of Mitch, I don't get it. He's a class act that cares greatly about the welfare of ALL of UK's student athletes. UK is extremely fortunate to have him.

 

Absolutely. After all, didn't Pat Forde base an entire article on why this could be a bad hire? That was the talk 2 years ago about why they didn't talk to Calipari then. They did their homework and now have their guy. Like I said before, I bought into some of the talk and have been a little leery, but I do believe that they are very comfortable with this hire, so I will bite. They knew this would be the talk, ... Mitch knew it, Calipari knew it and they dealt with those issues up front and head on. The best defense is a good offense and I think they did a very good job of going on the attack first.

 

I don't understand Woodsider's dislike of Mitch either. EVERY athletic program at UK (except basketball, but now most seem to think with this hire they are on the right track) is in better shape now then before he got here. He showed really backbone when he stood by Brooks and for good reason. The athletic program is one of the few in the entire country that is entirely self funded, ... they give money back to the university for other scholarships not athletic related (over $1 million last year per Lee Todd). He admitted that he made a mistake when he hired Gillispie, recognized the mistake, corrected it, and moved forward.

 

I think we are very fortunate to have him as our athletic director at UK. :thumb:

"Mom and Dad, I'd like you to meet the woman I'm going to marry."

 

"Tell us about her, son."

 

"Well, she has no jail record. I've had her tested for STDs and she came back clean. I even had her checked TWICE! I called all of her former teachers to make sure she never cheated on any tests. I asked her former neighbors if she ever threw rocks at their dogs. I verified that her breasts are real."

 

"Uh huh."

 

:puke:

"Mom and Dad, I'd like you to meet the woman I'm going to marry."

 

"Tell us about her, son."

 

"Well, she has no jail record. I've had her tested for STDs and she came back clean. I even had her checked TWICE! I called all of her former teachers to make sure she never cheated on any tests. I asked her former neighbors if she ever threw rocks at their dogs. I verified that her breasts are real."

 

"Uh huh."

 

That's pretty funny, but that would only apply if those were rumors that the parents had heard about the girl and the son wanted to deal with that up front. This has been the one knock or rumor about Calipari and everyone KNEW it was going to be an issue if he got the job at UK where compliance has been an issue on more than one occasion in the past. And even with that, we still saw Forde's article really question UK on this hire because of this. The other question was that UK didn't have enough info on BCG when they hired him, so why not kill 2 birds with one stone by addressing it head on?

 

Either way, Mitch was darned if he did and darned if he didn't. I happen to agree with addressing it up front and moving forward instead of their being all kinds of lingering questions.

Absolutely. After all, didn't Pat Forde base an entire article on why this could be a bad hire? That was the talk 2 years ago about why they didn't talk to Calipari then. They did their homework and now have their guy. Like I said before, I bought into some of the talk and have been a little leery, but I do believe that they are very comfortable with this hire, so I will bite. They knew this would be the talk, ... Mitch knew it, Calipari knew it and they dealt with those issues up front and head on. The best defense is a good offense and I think they did a very good job of going on the attack first.

 

I don't understand Woodsider's dislike of Mitch either. EVERY athletic program at UK (except basketball, but now most seem to think with this hire they are on the right track) is in better shape now then before he got here. He showed really backbone when he stood by Brooks and for good reason. The athletic program is one of the few in the entire country that is entirely self funded, ... they give money back to the university for other scholarships not athletic related (over $1 million last year per Lee Todd). He admitted that he made a mistake when he hired Gillispie, recognized the mistake, corrected it, and moved forward.

 

I think we are very fortunate to have him as our athletic director at UK. :thumb:

 

And that mistake was caused by Donavon's accepting the job verbally, and leaving Mitch (and UK) at the Altar.

And that mistake was caused by Donavon's accepting the job verbally, and leaving Mitch (and UK) at the Altar.

 

That's why I was surprised they even put out a feeler for him this time. But I guess we can finally close that door once and for all.

That's pretty funny, but that would only apply if those were rumors that the parents had heard about the girl and the son wanted to deal with that up front. This has been the one knock or rumor about Calipari and everyone KNEW it was going to be an issue if he got the job at UK where compliance has been an issue on more than one occasion in the past. And even with that, we still saw Forde's article really question UK on this hire because of this. The other question was that UK didn't have enough info on BCG when they hired him, so why not kill 2 birds with one stone by addressing it head on?

 

Either way, Mitch was darned if he did and darned if he didn't. I happen to agree with addressing it up front and moving forward instead of their being all kinds of lingering questions.

 

You don't introduce your coach in what should be a celebration and immediately yell "compliance" every other word. They hired Cal for his ability to coach and recruit. He has no transgressions in his file. Just say something like "we did our homework and got the best guy." It came off as defensive and as Mitch trying to say "hey, I didn't screw this one up this time." It made neither of them look good in what should have been a great day for both of them.

You don't introduce your coach in what should be a celebration and immediately yell "compliance" every other word. They hired Cal for his ability to coach and recruit. He has no transgressions in his file. Just say something like "we did our homework and got the best guy." It came off as defensive and as Mitch trying to say "hey, I didn't screw this one up this time." It made neither of them look good in what should have been a great day for both of them.

 

I agree. I thought that one mention would have been enough, but he pounded it several times for emphasis and it did come off as defensive. It was not necessary, once would have been enough to address it without beating it to a pulp.