Not a good start to Dana Holgorsen era at WVU

Enlighten me then. What is it all about?

 

It's about a beat writer getting a phone call from the coach of the team he covers, a call and request that is definitely worthy of a story or at least further looking into, and the beat writer not doing anything until he's asked about it on the radio 7 months later, after he's gone from the paper.

Do you honestly think the coach asking the beat writer to dig up dirt on the assistant who is the coach-in-waiting is not a story?

And again I'll ask: If you were still the beat writer for West Virginia football at the P-G, and potentially would have to deal with Stewart as part of that daily beat, would you have talked publicly about that phone call he made?

It's very convenient that you would only talk about this now, after you're gone from the paper and gone from the beat.

 

The man's state of mind (Stewart) was undeniably frazzled in December. He had just had his dream job ripped out from under him using unusual circumstances. And then, on top of that, myself and another writer caught Stewart in a lie about going to Houston and meeting with Holgorsen. Again, it was a trying time for the man, definitely. So I gave him the benefit of the doubt when that call came with the request that he was just a desperate man. And let's not lose sight of this -- he called at least one other reporter with the exact same request. Down to the HED he wanted written with the story.
But when the person I was doing the show with last night spelled out if I could see a scenario in which Stewart could be the person in these latest Holgorsen character assassinations, I felt compelled to tell the truth if for nothing more than being honest. Some things have changed in my life (namely my children) and it is ultra-important for me to be honest. To teach them to be honest.
Would I have answered the question the same way if I were still on the beat? I don't know. That is a fair and valid question I don't have an answer to.
But last night, I didn't think of any of that. It sounds elementary, but I just used truth, that's all. Really, I don't want to be part of the news, I don't. And I have zero to gain by this --- actually a lot more to lose.
All I did was answer a question.

 

This, Colin, 1,000 times over. Why wouldn't you immediately go to the AD/coach in waiting, etc., get reax and write the story?

 

May not be a great start for Dana, but it's a worse ending for Bill Stewart.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/10/SP5K1JRTT3.DTL

 

What a mess. Luck and WVU look like a bunch of asses. Stewart was so emotionally distraught about getting his dream job ripped, he fucked himself royally with what has taken place over the past couple of weeks.

I have no sympathy for WVU. Neither does Rich Rod.

 

Man, what a mess all the way around.

First, no team/school should ever hire a "coach-in-waiting". We've seen this over and over. Nothing good will come from it. Either you support your current coach fully or you make a change now. None of this "we'll give him one more year and then replace him with so-and-so". Sheesh, what if he happens to win the national championship/Super Bowl? Still going to replace him with so-and-so? Damned if you do; damned if you don't.

Second, no team/school should be hiring assistants that the head coach doesn't want to work with. Head coach should have the final say-so on all staff hires. This arrangement is a disaster waiting to happen. Can't imagine going through a season where the two men don't have a disagreement over something. Head coach feels like he is being sabotoged. Assistant feels like he is warming up to stage a coup.

Third, reporters should know when to keep their mouths shut. There are a lot of things said and done, seen and heard, that are best left unprinted. It's like if a buddy calls me wanting to me to make a hit on his ex: I am not obligated to go along, but I don't need to go running my yap about it, either. Wash your hands of the mess and move on. You don't need to make any more enemies on all sides.

I feel a bit sorry for the players caught in the middle of all these shenanigans.

 

The Dunlap part of this should really be a separate thread on the Journalism board. It's an interesting issue that won't be seen by a lot of people who don't necessarily have an interest in a WV football thread.

 

Jeremy Foley had it right: "That which must be done eventually - must be done immediately."

The crapfest also pretty much undermines Halgorsen from the jump. Why didn't he just stay at OK State and tell Luck to call him when he's ready to pull the trigger?

 

If your buddy wants to put a hit on his ex, you either call the cops or call top bunk for the prison cell you will share with him.

 

I agree, and I think it's a good discussion point.

To respond to Colin's post above (and I appreciate him coming on here and talking about it), I think the excuse that he gave him the benefit of the doubt and didn't pursue the story was because Stewart was in a frazzled state of mind in December is a copout. I guarantee Stewart's state of mind was not any better or less-frazzled last week, yet it's OK to go on the radio and talk about it now?

And while I commend him for his dedication to being honest, does that mean he will never again tell even the smallest of white lies, and every question he is ever asked will be answered with only the 100 percent, full and complete God's honest truth? If so, it may be a little awkward if his wife gets a haircut that isn't flattering or she puts on a few pounds and asks him if her butt looks big, or if he gets pulled over and the officer asks if he knows why he was stopped, or if (when) his 5-year-old asks him where babies come from. Telling the whole and complete truth 100 percent of the time is not realistic, and using the "life changes" and trotting the children out as another reason he felt required to tell this whole story when he was asked is another copout, in my view.

But again, I salute him for telling his side of things.

 

Because Holgersen didn't want to wait until Mike Gundy stepped aside?

Look, I'm with you Dan in these "coach-in-waiting" crap in sports. To me, it's bascially a "kind and gentler" way to push the current coach out the door, without looking like that bad guy.

Hate Miser, had Dunlap sat on this and not said a thing, and then a blog or someone else came out and reported that Stewart contacted Dunlap, then we would ask why did Colin "sit' on this story and not say a word about it? Would you call him out for "withholding" information on a story, or commend him for staying silent on why Stewart would call him and ask him to dig up some dirt on Holgorsen?

Dunlap isn't the story. Bill Stewart is the story. What was Stewart's motivation for calling Dunlap, and allegedly "floating" rumors around about Holgersen's behavior?

Plain and simple to me is this: Stewart's the loyal assistant who finally landed his dream job, and then got served divorce papers at the wedding anniversary party. He was so "frazzled", or better yet pissed off, with Holgorsen replacing him, he goes on a clandestine campaign to smear Holgorsen, and paint Luck and WVU to a corner to backtrack and keep him, because in his view, "I was loyal to you, so it's only right that you let keep my job and be loyal to me."

http://www.bigeastcoastbias.com/2011/6/11/2218835/evil-blogosphere-got-holgorsen-story-right-from-the-beginning

Stewart was a desperate man who resorted to desperate measures not to get pushed out.

If you don't think his answer is appropriate and you want to understand more about it outside of what he has said publicly, Hate Miser, send him an IM.

And "saluting" him is kind of a slap in the face. He told his side of the story, and take it for what it is.