Without knowing any of these people directly, I suppose we will never know exactly what happened, but I can agree that they haven’t been great on the field. It is also true as upprv stated above, it’s not hard to find disgruntled people everywhere. One of my colleagues once worked for the Ellen show. She told us some nightmarish stories about Ellen and she despised working for her. How true who knows. It is unquestionably unfortunate for these ladies and I do feel for them though
The AD did not hire him. That could factor. Anyone know his latest contract terms? Here is all I could find. It took him through January 2020. Obviously he was extended after that. But, perhaps only annually. https://calbears.com/news/2017/3/3/womens-soccer-neil-mcguire-signs-contract-extension
Unless you are inside a program it’s difficult to know what is really going on. People will rationalize whatever suits their agenda. Winning, however you define it seems to cause people to justify standards of behavior that maybe they would not otherwise.
I think if we have actual examples of what happened that would give us an idea of if McGuire will survive this or not. The anecdotes are not good for sure but I don’t see any actual and specific proof.
Dude you won’t get any actual facts because this is all a part of the cancel culture bs and after Cal did an investigation they need report says the accusations are without merit. Just because someone complains about something doesn’t make it true. This is a bunch of pissed spoiled brats complaining because they don’t get everything their way.
I have no idea what is or isn't true. But if you read everything and listened to the video, there is NO EVIDENCE that Cal did any investigation. If anything it smells like they ignored it. The players said no one was contacted. The university had no documents in response to a records request about a said investigation.
correct. Administrations don’t do anything via email/written documentation until they know they have something. Easier to make phone calls between people until you distinguish if something is up since everything is public record. As we all know from social media context can be misconstrued in writing so easier to just do everything verbally.
That statement is not true. I thought you were in this business? If the AD decides to circle the wagons and protect their coach, then they don't document much at all and try to appease the complaintants as best they can and want to avoid any media and any documentation. I think that appears to have happened in this case. You may never know why. Sometimes there just was a public mess and they just don't want another one. Sometimes its just about loyalty. The boss saved your arse so now he has a highly loyal coach. If the coach thinks he's innocent but it appears the AD won't support him, then he wants everything documented. Wants HR present, maybe a union rep, maybe a lawyer, wants recorded statements. All of it. One of my favorite sayings is that everyone has a boss. The AD, the President, even the Board has a boss called "Your Honor". Look at the Buff State case. Coach wanted the investigation. Turns out he was harsh, unkind, but not abusive. He was censured I think but kept his job. The players did not make their case. But then the AD didn't renew the coach. So, the coach is suing the school now. Not sure if its over entirely but he was a fighter. I think in this case at Cal, if the school decides to defend McGuire, they are going to pay. Even if there wasn't abuse, a civil jury will listen to those players and make Cal pay and Cal's lawyers probably just realized they are paying. Even UNC had to pay in the Dorrance case while admitting no wrong doing. Either the players make their case to get him fired or the school ends up paying a settlement to keep their coach. And say they "won" but still pay up. I'd bet the AD gets quietly fired as well. Suddenly resigns. He had his chance to not renew or buy out McGuire and his boss will blame him for not doing so. It's ugly either way if any one of the players want to press their case and it seems they do.
LOL that is what you do when you are trying to cover your ass. You conveniently ignore the part about the players saying the administration did not contact any players or parents despite their claim that they did. An unbiased investigation would want a paper trail to get to and show the truth. But, public universities are subject to public records laws. So Cal either does no investigation or they make sure there is no paper trail of one. Either one stinks to high heaven. The administration is the worst culprit in all of this. I am not taking sides between the players and coach, but the admin has handled this very sketchy, and that is why it is in national publications such as Sports Illustrated, Yahoo news, etc today. It blew up in their face.
the lawsuit seems bizarre though: a girl Is cut from the team and decided to sue? Does this mean that any athlete around the country who is cut from their team can now sue?
It depends. We're talking about civil cases and damages. I am not a lawyer but I bet there are plenty in the bay area trying to contact those players. I do not mean to make light of this situation at all but I remember the Jackie Chiles lawyer from Seinfeld. Plenty of other caricatures out there I'm sure. The question seems pretty clear - did the employee cause harm or 'damage' to those under their supervision in the performance of their duties? If the coach acted in a way that violated any dept or school policies, then certainly there's a case. Even if the damage was caused "in a manner inconsistent with the values of the institution", a lawyer would take the case easily. The embarrassment of enshrining this coaches behavior in a public record at a hearing or trial and having to defend the behavior is why Cal will settle, and pay. The issue of not conducting a legitimate investigation when some of these issue were brought up to supervisors, which would have had some record keeping, is another issue. You can't prove you investigated something without any records or very corroborated first-hand accounts. Cal would have to defend that behavior as well. If any of these players could make that case to a jury, it could be costly. What is the value of a Cal Berkeley scholarship? What if one of them was cut and dropped out or transferred or just did not complete their degree? What is the lifetime value of a Cal Berkeley degree? Something tells me that math has been done at Cal and it's a large number. Easy to predict this coach is getting fired or these kids are getting paid, and likely both. The AD is toast as well, maybe others. Cal will be Very Lucky if all they have to do is hire another women's soccer coach, or AD. Dozens of good people will line up for those jobs. Lessons for you coaches out there- 1. Don't be an ass that has to use fear to motivate players. BUT #2 - whenever you make a tough decision, involve your boss and have witnesses/document things. For example, if you have to cut a kid, esp one on a scholarship, ask your AD/Asst AD for advice, ask them to be in the meeting. If you can't explain or defend your decision to your boss, then what the hell are you doing?? If the boss doesn't want to make the though decision, then they need to help you resolve it later. When that kid becomes a problem or other kids complain. In other words, CYA without looking like you're doing it all the time.
Not saying this is the case here, if real malice was done, a consequence is deserved. But, in general, it has gotten harder and harder for coaches to cut/reduce/eliminate scholarship money. Especially for those with 4 years, but even for those that are still on year to year.
I thought the PAC-12 policy was scholarships are guaranteed for four years or graduation.... http://es.pn/1wEVRUg
Not if the athlete quits. It’s very common practice at all pac 12 schools, in all sports, for the coaches to say “you won’t play, we will help you move on” to get a player to self select and the program get that money back. Many times it’s mutual as the player does want to be in a position to play and both parties see it won’t happen at the current spot.
That’s not my reading of Pac-12 policy. The scholarship payout remains even if the coach decides he doesn’t want the player. The player could move on, sure, but if the player wants to finish her academic career, the university is obliged to honor the scholarship amount. It doesn’t necessarily have to count towards the scholarship limit, since the student is no longer an athlete, per ncaa rules. If she were pressured or coerced to quit, for instance with what you call a “we won’t play you” threat, it’s a violation of the intent of the policy. A player can reasonably expect that effort and skill would be rewarded. What the 65 P5’s signed on to is a policy that includes the guarantee that https://informedathlete.com/the-facts-about-guaranteed-multi-year-ncaa-di-scholarships/ while the policy says protection is lost if a player quits, coercion, abuse, or threats can’t possibly enable that clause. if that isn’t true, then here is no guarantee whatever.
Yes the player can stay at the school and Keep their aid but coaches encourage them to move on to different schools. I know what the policy says. I’m telling you what actually happens.
maybe this report will detail some evidence on what he did to abuse the players as the first report was just a few girls complaining without providing anything of substance of what he did wrong.
Did you actually watch and listen to the entire video at the link that cliveworshipper posted? I would say that there was quite a bit of substance there and it is credible. Those women were willing to go on television and not hide their identities. I believe them. This isn't a good look for McGuire or administrators at the university or in the athletic department. They're in some shit. When are these clowns going to learn that women can't be coached the same as men are?
I did watch the segment. It was a lot of buzz words and a lot of ‘he was mean to me.’ Can someone here respond to this and give specific examples of what his abuse was: what he actually said, what he actually did?
@Collegewhispers , I mean Mrs. McGuire, I'm not sure how you missed this. We are not talking about a crime being committed (although we could be at some point). This is about what a jury will believe in a civil case and what the public believes about the coaches behavior and what CalU will tolerate and defend. If you think jurors in a civil court room will listen to those players and won't believe that coach McGuire caused 'damage' to them in the course of his duties, and that the school tolerated it and did not properly investigate it, then you are just day drinking already.
There is also testimony that Cal said it looked into complaints and that there is no documented evidence in Cal archives that happened. That would seem to be a titleIX violation all on its own.