 |
 |
|||||
 |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
||||||
| Lights Out on Bobby Knight
by John M. Curtis Copyright September 11, 2000
Reacting to Knight’s abrupt dismissal, "Some people believe I over-reached with that, and disagreed and think that May 15 should have been the end. But I believe then, and I believe now, that it was a moral act," reflected Brand, rationalizing his decision to finally terminate Knight’s contract. With Knight’s defenders claiming that he was 'set up,' Brand uttered the final word, "The fact is, having given Coach Knight one last opportunity, he failed to take advantage of it. It was his decision." But was it really? Like California’s controversial Three Strikes law, grabbing Indiana freshman Kent Harvey’s arm—for whatever reason—was the moral equivalent of stealing a 2-cent Tootsie Roll. Brand knew, along with his trustees and other reasonably-minded people, that his zero-tolerance policy was, of course, a smokescreen for finding any credible excuse for canning Coach Knight. While some view Brand’s recent move as courageous, others see it as gutless—gutless because no human being should be held to that standard. Even rehabilitated pedophiles are cut more slack. Having a short fuse, stomping your feet, shouting obscenities, throwing chairs or even pushing someone around, can’t be compared with illegal betting, sexual improprieties, drug or alcohol abuse, domestic violence or other types of criminal activity. Certainly employers—including universities—have the right to not renew contracts, or buy them out, or, under the most egregious conditions, to dismiss valued employees. With Knight’s contract renewed countless times over the past 29 years, it’s clear that Indiana University was more than satisfied with his job performance. As disturbed as Knight’s marriage was to IU, both sides no doubt profited. Suggesting now that Knight reigned by coercion and intimidation totally ignores the fact that their winningest coach put IU on the map—and had the support of Brand and the trustees. Most marriages have their ups and downs, but Brand’s recent excuse was no grounds for divorce. With TV revenue pouring into the university, Hoosier basketball is more than a tradition—it’s their lifeblood. No matter how many people found Bobby Knight offensive, that’s still not sufficient grounds for terminating tenured faculty with untenable conditions. Brand’s zero-tolerance contract denied Knight due process by setting conditions that no reasonable person could expect to follow. If Brand and the trustees really believed that Coach Knight had a serious problem with anger management, then they should have insisted on some type of therapy or rehab. Even the NBA tried to help Latrell Sprewell. Why not extend the same courtesy to Bobby Knight? Throwing out the baby with the bath water hardly seems like a win-win situation for Indiana University. "Coach Knight has contributed almost 30 years to this university and has been successful in many ways," admitted president Brand giving him one more chance back in May. With all the emotion swirling around Knight’s sudden dismissal, Brand hasn’t come to grips with the fact that his grounds for termination doesn’t hold water. Insisting that someone refrain from illegal betting, drug or alcohol abuse, or sexual misconduct, isn’t equivalent to grabbing someone’s arm or losing your temper. Holding Knight to a zero-tolerance contract on a condition that doesn’t violate any university policy or criminal code also seems unreasonable. It’s not unfair to dislike someone or find them offensive. But finding fault with someone’s quirks and using them to terminate their employment crosses a very different line. Dredging up past indiscretions for which Knight was never charged or disciplined and suggesting that his firing was long overdue, denies Knight reasonable due process. Expecting a personality overhaul from a man in his 60s is a tall order to fill. No, Brand’s ultimatum didn’t meet the test of reasonableness precisely because it was an unrealistic condition. Grabbing young Harvey’s arm wasn’t the right incident to pull the trigger on Coach Knight. Reacting to Harvey’s provocation—no matter how innocent or deliberate—didn’t display the kind of unacceptable behavior justifying Knight’s ejection. Stretching Knight’s recent incident to fit a flawed agreement says more about the hidden agendas than Knight’s legendary problems with his temper. Like so many other regrettable incidents in the workplace, Knight’s current infraction didn’t meet the necessary test for summary dismissal. After 29 years of supporting Knight’s work, Brand and the trustees failed to apply the right formula for discontinuing his employment. Booting him out for berating freshman Harvey says more about university politics—like Knight’s recent fishing trip—than enforcing untenable employment contracts. If the university found Knight so onerous, they should not have renewed his last contract, or had the savvy to buy him out. Playing the 'gotcha' game, they stepped into the legal quicksand, spending far too much time justifying what they knew was a bogus zero-tolerance contract and convenient excuse for termination. While there’s no turning back, Brand and the trustees must now face what they’ve done. Few have too much sympathy for Bobby Knight, but messing with his employment opens up a new can of worms. Without excusing his past conduct, even unsavory characters have certain rights. About the Author John M. Curtis is editor of OnlineColumnist.com and columnist for The Los Angeles Daily Journal. He’s director of a Los Angeles think tank specializing in human behavior, health care, political research and media consultation. He’s the author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma. |
||||||
etting the boot, the colorful—but sadly intemperate—Hoosier basketball coach Bobby Knight finally ended his tumultuous 29-year tenure at Indiana University, violating his controversial zero-tolerance contract imposed by university president Myles Brand back in mid-May. Unable to dismiss Coach Knight on May 15 after watching a videotape of Knight applying a 2.3 second choke-hold on Neil Reed in 1997, Brand finally pulled the plug on Knight’s contract. Defending his decision to give Knight a reprieve back in May, "That was the ethical and moral thing to do," said Brand ". . . I believe then and continue to believe that we had to give him one last chance." With Knight’s long history of abrasiveness, what was difference this time around? While some see Knights’s firing as long overdue, others question the justification. Sure, Knight exhibited some unsightly behavior, but his value to Indiana University for nearly three decades was incalculable. With 3 NCAA basketball titles and numerous regional and divisional championships, few can deny Knight’s uncanny success.|
Home || Articles || Books || The Teflon Report || Reactions || About Discobolos This site designed, developed and hosted by the experts at ©1999-2000 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc. |
