Mike Rice: A Coach That Deserved To Be Fired But Shouldn’t Have Been

The video struck a sour chord with a lot of people. Kobe Bryant weighed in the Mike Rice scandal. In an interview Bryant said that he would not have tolerated Coach Rice’s abuse. The Laker basketball star stated that he “…woulda smacked the hell out of him…no question about it.” It is noteworthy that none of the Rutgers players have expressed any revulsion to Rice’s rough coaching techniques or alleged homophobic statements.

While playing sports during my scholastic and collegiate years most of my coaches, both women and men, used harsh training tactics. They more often than not used language that would not be heard in public. I never felt harassed by these coaches nor offended by the language they use or what they said. I think that, today, too many people are hyper-sensitive to what other people say and do. In the past Liberals championed the right of free speech and expression. It seems like today’s Liberals have abandoned their historical position and have become more intolerant of opposing points of views and the expression of them. Mike Rice has not been vilified by the people closest to him, but by mostly Liberals who believe that his treatment of his players was socially unacceptable. I think Rutgers initially reacted appropriately to Mike Rice’s abusive behavior towards his players.

Clearly Coach Rice’s reputation has taken a seriously hit. Prospective future employers will not hire a person who the public deems to be danger to people in his charge. His anti-gays slurs will not endear him to many employers. Yet, Christopher Demers, a well known image consultant at IDEA Brokerage of New York City, believes that with hard work Coach Rice could fully rehabilitate his image. Demers fully understands that the video portrays Rice as out of control and homophobic. It is possible that the facts are the opposite. The public has to see this side of the man. If that can be done, Coach Rice will have a good chance to remake his current “bad boy” image. Ultimately Mike Rice must convince his skeptics that he is truly sorry for his behavior and that he has taken steps learn to control his anger and emotions. He must show that he has learned from this incident and is now a better person.

Karen Heller, a 2001 Pulitzer Prize finalist and the provocative soul of the Philadelphia Inquiry, takes a cynical view of Rutgers decision not to have immediately terminated Rice’s employment. The title to her April 11, 2013 article -“Rutgers Coach’s Ouster: Big Stakes in Big Ten”- embodies the theme of her post. According to Heller Mike Rice is nothing more than a typical Div. 1 coach, a product of a corrupt system. She states that Div. 1 sports is about winning and money. Consequently universities tend to be tolerant of abhorrent and intolerable behavior on the part of their coaches. Heller is correct in stating that an economics professor would have been immediately terminated if he or she engaged in this type of behavior. Yet, a classroom full of economic students is a completely different environment than a gym being used by the men’s basketball team. A coach, female or male, often shouts at his or her players and engages in other behavior that might be viewed as rough or inappropriate. That having been said; in my opinion Rice’s behavior cannot be viewed as an acceptable teaching or motivation technique.

Concerning Rutgers’ jump to the Big Ten Conference (BTC), Heller is correct in pointing out the school is set to join the conference in of 2014. The BTC invited Rutgers (and Maryland) to join the conference. Clearly, conferences official and the university presidents wanted access to the lucrative mid-Atlantic and NYC media centers. The BTC will be able to market its brand in these areas via Rutgers and Maryland. Additionally the inclusion of these two schools gives Penn State University two conference foes on the east coast. This is a win-win situation for everyone.

Rutgers joined the BTC for financial reasons and that the fact that the Big East Conference has fallen apart. The school will benefit from membership in nation’s #1 money producing conference. Heller is wrong in assuming (wishing) that the scandal surrounding Rice will adversely impact Rutgers’ or the BTC’s marketability. Rutgers is free of Rice and the scandal will soon blow over.

In her piece Heller did not hide her disdain for big time Division 1 sports when she closed by saying:

“Rutgers bet big on enhancing its reputation, its alumni gifts, its revenue stream, by joining the Big Whatever. For now, the cash and glory seem to be flowing in the wrong direction, and the Scarlet Knights won a scarlet letter before ever joining the big league.”

I do not agree with Heller’s analysis of the facts or the conclusions that she reaches. Rutgers’ basketball program had hit hard times before Rice’s arrival on campus. Rutgers hired Rice to turn around the program, which he did not do. During his tenure as coach Rutgers did not have a winning record in Big East basketball play. From what I have read, Rice was a poor recruiter of top-notch basketball talent. Regardless of the team that he might have fielded, Rutgers had to have known that its men’s basketball team would not be competitive. Consequently if Rutgers was so concerned about “the money and its reputation” school officials would have (should have) taken advantage of this deplorable incident and immediately terminated Rice. Thereafter the university could have hired a coach who could have built a program capable of competing at a higher level.

If Heller’s analysis is on point then Rutgers would have done almost anything to enter the new conference without Rice’s baggage. After the Jerry Sandusky scandal I believe that the BTC would have counseled Rutgers to part ways with Rice. The University could have announced that at the end of this season it would part ways with its basketball coach in additional to the disciplinary action taken against Rice. If this would have been done there would be no scandal. Everyone would have gone their separate ways. There is no doubt in my mind that Rutgers’ economic interests would have been better served by immediately firing Rice or terminating his contract at the end of the season. Keeping Coach Rice on the payroll was a bad business decision.

It must not be overlooked that Rutgers was asked to join the BTC because of its football program and not its basketball program. Ms. Heller and others who echo her point of view seem to be caught up in the politics surrounding big time college sports.