Are Barnhart and Todd out of touch with UK fans?

by Thomas Hunt Morgan on Mar 27, 2009 10:50 PM EDT

A number of weeks I posed a simple question to the A Sea of Blue Community: Should Gillispie be fired? This was before many of the events of the season transpired, but still just short of 400 votes were tallied. In the end, a small majority said Gillispie should be retained. More telling than the actual result, however, were the reasons supporting removal of Gillispie.

Reading through the comments, not one person mentioned any sort of mistreatment of fans, players, media or officials as the reason for firing the coach. Contrary to reasoning mentioned by Barnhart, fans quite justifiably siezed on Gillispie's on the court results. So the question arises: are Barnhart and Todd valuing a principle that is not held in high import by fans?

In the end, Barnhart cited not Gillispie's record for his dismsal but some sort yet-to-be fully elucidated "philosophical disparity." Barnhart's words are either profoundly telling or extremely poorly chosen.

A philosphy implies a deep-seated belief. Aristotle said, "We are what we repeatedly do." Either Barnhart, when interviewing Gillispie, failed to probe deeply into the coach's views (i.e., philosphy) or, less likely, he hired Gillispie knowing a gulf existed between the philosphy of UK (apparently determined by administrators) and the philosphy of the would-be-coach. Regardless, Barnhart did not discover the "philosophical disparity" at the point of intiation of employment. This is either gross negligence or gross indifrference or an absolute derilection of duty.

The absolute failure to expose the "philosphical disparity", calls into serious question the capacity of Mitch Barnhart and Lee Todd.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

My views inre Mitch are plain:

Get rid of him now, before he screws the pooch, again. He got lucky as hell that Rich Brooks gave him the oft-quoted “Why not me?” line which only in hindsight saved the football program. Without that fateful lucky stroke there wouldn’t be enough money to fund the various non-revevue UK sports programs to a level needed. I dare say, without Brooks the money is not there to get better coaches in the other sports.

He got lucky once. How long does he get to play that card; especially after this miserable spectacle of sports management?

by hoboat33 on Mar 27, 2009 11:13 PM EDT reply actions

Billy G is all on barnhart

And if Billy G was abusing his players, it is still on Barnhart for allowing it for 2 years.

by btcoop71 on Mar 27, 2009 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions

Or failing to vet him properly coming from A&M

by Thomas Hunt Morgan on Mar 27, 2009 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Failing To Vet Him AT ALL

It was a Shotgun Hire to be sure.

by FortyYearCatFan on Mar 28, 2009 8:15 AM EDT up reply actions

I think Mitch did the best he could do under the circumstances.

His main concern was the treatment of the players. He even went to the locker room with the kids during half time etc to see what was going on. After some parents complained, things started happening fast. I don’t think anyone knew how “crazy” BCG really was at first. Of course, the next school that hires him may not know either, because people are hesitant to say anything bad about someone. I do feel sorry for whatever school hires him.

by ikietoy on Mar 27, 2009 11:47 PM EDT reply actions

POST ANALYSIS

ITS PRETTY EASY TO SECOND GUESS WHAT SEEMS SOOOO APPARENT TO LOTS OF OF NOW , WHILE I WON’T DEFEND THE BARNHART GAFFE , I WILL DEFEND HIS OWNING UP TO MAKING THE MISTAKE AND INSTEAD OF WAITING TILL MORE DAMAGE WAS DONE STEPPIN UP AND MAKING THE CALL. I DON’T BELIEVE THAT BCG WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF WHAT THERE CONCERNS WERE IN REGARDS TO HIS " NOT FULFILLING THE CONTRACTUAL EXPECTATIONS " I THINK HE JUST HELD TO HIS VIEW THAT "HE WAS HIRED TO COACH AND THAT ANYTHING ELSE WAS NOT IN THE JOB DESCRIPTION " I BET THE ACTUAL JOB DESCRIPTION WHILE PROBABLY DIDN’T SPELL OUT PRECISE LANGUAGE THERES MORE THAN A LIKELY PROBABAILITY THAT NOBODY THINKS "ALL "YOU DO IS COACH

by rkhdbarry on Mar 28, 2009 12:09 AM EDT reply actions

I think the biggest problem is ...

… that Barnhart gave him no help at all. That’s undoubtedly because they never formed a good working relationship.

If your boss just hires you and throws you out there to sink or swim, odds are pretty good you are going to wind up getting the boot. I think that’s what happened at UK.

A Sea of Blue -- Kentucky Sports for the Discerning Fan

by Glenn Logan on Mar 28, 2009 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions

I agree

I agree that Mitch just hung Billy Gillespie out to dry, just as he did with Tubby. I think Mitch’s place at UK needs to be determined before a new coach can be hired. Any incoming coach would have to realize that they may not be getting the full support of the athletics department and that just isn’t a recipe for success.

by chicagoblues on Mar 28, 2009 12:51 PM EDT reply actions