Do you think that Debbie Keller and Jennings had never been exposed to coaches in all of their years of soccer who used profanity and yelled at them? This is in no way shape or form about AD's use of profanity. Sexual harassment is not about profanity. It is about I'm really powerful and sweetie pie you are not. I own this situation and and you don't matter. I am so powerful that I can do or say anything that I want about you or to you. The problem with asking someone, "Say who are you F***ing" is not the use of the word F***. Until people understand that then we will continue to argue about whether sexual harassment is even real. Your ability to sit in a room and tolerate someone yelling profanity at you has absolutely nothing to do with a discussion of sexual harassment. The really creepy thing about all of this is what do you think that AD has learned from all of this? I can do anything I want, say anything I want. Admit to it and UNC will support me all the way. Anyone else would have been canned 10 years ago. I am really powerful.
Now look up ad hominem tu quoque, which objects to an argument by characterizing the arguer as acting or arguing in accordance with the view that he is arguing against. Just saying look it up....
That is blatantly untrue. He has never admitted to harassing anyone and has in fact denied it. He apologized as part of a lawsuit settlement. You are taking a lot of liberty with the truth and are in fact acting like a bully. I don't know what the truth is. I wasn't there. There is a statement from 16 players who were there and it vehemently contradicts Keller and Jennings account. I will ask again, what do these woman have to gain from issuing that statement now. Their days of playing soccer at the highest level are over and Dorrance does not have the influence in that arena that he did anyway.
Nope not ok to harass 20 year old women. Also not ok to drink while underage (from the deposition) or participate in university related hazing activity (also from the deposition). Deporable acts by everyone involve. Definitely not ok (morally) to swear like a sailor, well, unless you are on a ship with a bunch of other sailor, and even then not appropriate. Firstly, I can't find any mention of the word "sweetie" in the appeals court document, so clearly he didn't admit to doing that, because that quote simply doesn't exist. What he admitted to was (and unfortunately this has already been posted many times, but here you go... What seems overlooked is that some of the alleged quotes pre-dated August 1996. I don't have the affidavits to know which alleged quotes those are, but at least the alleged incident with Keller can be ruled out. Ah, this statement does seem correct. His behavior is in-line with behavior deemed to be sexual harassment both in the legal documents and the NCAA reference manual. Do I support that? No. He failed there. Nope that isn't tap dancing, it seems to be the legal system. I think what you are failing to realize is that the decision isn't going to be used to say Anson Dorrance said (random f*** bomb quote) "going to f*** [her boyfriend] and leave him," but it will be used to say, "if a coach used language like, "going to f*** [her boyfriend] and leave him" and had behavior in a manner consistent with the behavior that the majority opinion was required to take as fact, then it will in the future be more easily construed as sexual harassment. The agreement puts the disputed facts of the majority opinion to rest as being unresolved, correct? So I personally would start putting alleged on any quote that you directly attribute to someone from that document. It would almost seem libelous to do otherwise. Maybe I'm reading too much into the agreement?
Actually, I think you can draw the conclusion that he did admit to sexual harassment, since by NCAA definition sexual harassment involves "unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal, nonverbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature"... I'm sure I saw something very similar in the court decision. Basically it seems that he admitted to item 3... although, I'd have to wonder whether the "and other" should be changed to "or other." The other two criteria were, by Jennings signed judgement statement, not met... my assumption being that Erhinghaus would have used that as the guideline for deciding whether this was sexual harassment... and for further handling it as such. Fascinating, right?
Another opportunity to expand my horizon and understand how lawyers think... since I'm definitely not following you. ...so I'm characterizing you as someone who sexual harasses people and therefore denies you are capable of arguing that Dorrance could have sexually harrassed someone? I'm dense. Straighten me out with some free Big Soccer legalese... Ah, maybe that's the base of it? I'm arguing that these are legal issues and you aren't a lawyer and therefore you are implying that I'm implying that your argument isn't valid because of that? Maybe? I'm just not following, but I have been presenting quite a few direct quotes that you haven't taken issue with... on the other hand you are very quick to focus on my quirkiness about worshipping someone other than my God. Is this a religious issue? Maybe you are implying that I can't make an argument against Dorrance because you have an self-admitted reverent love for a different soccer coach and you attribute a similar feeling to me which renders my points and/or your points invalid? I'm at a loss. So much like reading those textbooks that left the "hard" parts as an exercise for the stupid reader. So how much to retain your services so that I can get your answer? You must be tracking your billable time with all this legal advice, right? I know you aren't one of those attornies who gives free legal advice... "Yeah right - an attorney who doesn't track fees. Do pigs have wings in N. Carolina?"
That's not how the game is played. Attorneys I've dealt with don't tell you their whole fee structure, they always surprise you a bit at the end. The thrill of the gasp, I think. I'll give you a starter to get you going, but I think it will be more fun if you research the list of common arguement fallacies yourself. I've been noticing that this thread has hit just about argumentative fallacy known to man (or woman). so I've been ticking them off as they appear, in order to try and maintain some sanity. Yes, I include myself here (don't gloat, you're racking them up, too). a few of the recent ones (I ain't namin' no names) Straw man: Person A has position X. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X). Person B attacks position Y. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed. burden of proof: Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B. Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X. appeal to ridicule: (close ally, appeal to mockery) X, which is some form of ridicule is presented Therefore claim C is false. (typically directed at the claim in appeal to ridicule, and to the claimant in appeal to mockery.) Appeal to personal attack: "X isn't even a good Christian like we are, so we don't need to pay attention to what he says" Strong corollary- "X is a goody two shoes Christian, so we don't need to listen...." Begging the question: "If such actions were not illegal, then they would not be prohibited by the law." red herring fallacy: Topic A is under discussion. Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A). Topic A is abandoned. slippery slope fallacy: Event X has occurred (or will or might occur). Therefore event Y will inevitably happen. relativistic fallacy: Claim X is presented. Person A asserts that X may be true for others but is not true for him/her. Therefore A is justified in rejecting X. Badwagon fallacy: X number of people assert Y therefore Y must be true. appeal of special circumstance: "yes, ordinarily X might be bad, but not here. here its different, because its so special here." There are lists of these sorts of fallacies all over the internet. A typical list will run to 40-50 of them. Its good to read them to remind yourself why no progress is being made in a discussion. This discussion has become so emotionally charged, that I don't think any person who has posted on this subject has been able to avoid at least of them on almost every post, with perhaps one or two exceptions. I'll let you draw any conclusions you want about which you think fit where. I think the "did he do it/is she lieing" portion of this thread has pretty much played out, except for the level of creativity (or lack of it) that people can bring to the same old arguments. In about two weeks North Carolina will present the first pass at the change in the harassment policies. Why don't we focus on that? of all the things you have said, though, there is one thing that's puzzling me. You said: After 25 years (or whatever) at the University, do you feel he has no system or people in place who can pick up where he left off? Or is his coaching so charismatic in your view that there is no possible replacement? And, I don't know how to say this without sounding like I'm attacking him (again) but here goes: Has anybody there noticed that an NCAA championship isn't automatic for UNC anymore? It's still successful, but It doesn't exist at the level it did 9 or 10 years ago. Do you think no one else could meet the standards as set by the new realities of NCAA soccer?
ENOUGH ALREADY! He made some huge mistakes, has changed his ways, has admitted and apologized. Can we please talk about something else? Like lesbian coaches and players. I have a niece that has just finished her basketball career with 4 lesbian coaches and 7 lesbian players. Think how she felt every time she had to undress in front of them... and listen to their sexual escapades....Let's all do a better job of educating our children...
Wow. I thought this thread had scraped the bottom of the barrel, but that turned out to be a false bottom. A hatch was found, beneath which this was hidden.
I love it. I feel like I'm watching a game of three card Monty. You have absolutely no action on this board for a month. Some Powder Blue Homer thinks he has found the smoking gun "letter" from five UNC players over 20 years that turns out to have been repudiated a month ago on this very board. But while they're here the faithful decide everyone should take one more stab at canonizing everyone's favorite sexual harasser. And when the vast majority responds and squashes that we then turn to the perfectly logical progression, Lesbian Bball. God Bless America! Except for the Lesbians, people who have had abortions and signers of NAFTA. Redneck Rampage! Blessed be the Sexual Harassers because they know Political Correctness when they see it.
Let's see, although Clive Charles was Head of Soccer Operations at Portland in 2002, he was in the final year of his life and was very ill. The Portland coach responsible for the women's team that year was Garrett Smith. So, starting with 2002, here's how Portland and North Carolina's NCAA Tournament records compared: 2002: Portland National Champion; North Carolina Semifinals 2003: North Carolina National Champion; Portland Sweet 16 2004: Portland Quarterfinals; North Carolina Sweet 16 2005: Portland National Champion; North Carolina Quarterfinals 2006: North Carolina National Champion; Portland Quarterfinals 2007: Portland Quarterfinals; North Carolina Sweet 16 Those two records look pretty equivalent to me. So, speedoblobb, do you also believe that North Carolina has been losing ever since? Or, were you just venting without having actual knowledge? Or ...?
NCAA Regs GoCourage (or anyone else), where does the NCAA define this? Not asking because of the UNC/AD case. I'd like to research the NCAA regs in this area. And since you appear to have some knowledge of NCAA regs in this area or at least where to find them, does the NCAA have regs on relations/conduct between coaches and players or coaches and recruits? Or more specifically inappropriate relations/conduct? If so, where would I find them?
That quote is taken from an article in the ncaa news. I don't believe the NCAA actually has a harassment policy. There are no occurrences of the word "harassment" and only one occurrence of the word "sexual" in the NCAA D1 Manual. The first few pages talk about goals and guidelines, but leave policy and enforcement to the institutions. For instance, article read pages 4 and 5 of the manual. Also, the NCAA does require provisional institutions to have a gender issues policy in place, but doesn't specify what it should be, excepting that There are also only 10 occurrences of "gender equity". 5 are in contents and indexes. the NCAA does maintain a Gender Equity website
Well, two years and more later, I'm finally reading this thread. I'm a huge fan of UNC Women's Soccer, and have followed the team to California (two years), Virginia, etc., to experience the joy and thrill of Tar Heels Women's Soccer. That said, this Tar Heel believes that all the allegations made by Keller and Jennings are true. This Tar Heel agrees with Dorrance that his conduct was inappropriate, to say the least. We Tar Heels aren't all clueless homers. I'm sorry to differ with my good buddies GoCourage and SpeedoBlob. This UNC fan says that what happened at UNC was wrong -- morally and legally. I'm deeply saddened but not surprised that the University (where I earned my degrees) and the State (for which I worked for over 20 years) have cast their lot with Power and against Truth.
Talk about beating a dead horse.From one Tar heel to another,(WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE YOU ARE).At some point everyone involved must move on with their lives.The man said he was sorry. What do you want? his 20th National Championship trophy.You can pick it up 2 years later.
Heeligan, your post says nothing about the situation which was thoroughly dissected and laid to rest over 2.5 years ago. It says everything about your needs -which look like a compulsion to publicly beat your chest. Assuming that you feel better having done so, can you take what you can learn, leave this behind, and move on? Everyone else has. Long since.
The case is closed. Can we not close this thread? There are enough UNC-haters out there without people digging up ancient and settled history to give them more stuff to rag about.