Bio not provided
@OOreo To answer your question, I would guess UT doesn't want Pearl back because he embarrassed the university and put the athletic department at serious risk with his actions. He conspired with his staff to lie to his boss and the NCAA, and tried to get recruits and their families to go along with the lies and help him cover his tracks. The fact that he lied about something so trivial just makes him look that much less trustworthy. If you or I lied both to our boss and the regulatory agency overseeing the industry we're involved in and put our company at serious financial and competitive risk because of this, do you think the company would ever hire us back?
After the Deon Thomas incident many years ago, Pearl put himself in a position where he had to be cleaner than any other coach, because the coaching fraternity would jump on him and report ANY potential violations he might have committed. He failed, and going forward, things will only get tougher for him on the recruiting trail should he land a D-1 job in the next few years. Just my opinion.
1 month, 3 weeks ago on UT’s Martin Angles For A Raise? That’s Quite The PR Blunder
I didn't intend to slight UF when I made my "standard bearer" comment about Duke and UNC. UF has a very impressive research profile (and you could add A&M to that category as well). I was referring just as much to the reputation of Duke and UNC's undergraduate programs as I was to the quality of their graduate programs and research capabilities when making that statement, and it's my fault for not mentioning that. UF, UGA, and A&M are all highly thought of public undergraduate instittions, but UNC is generally considered, along with UVA, Michigan and Cal-Berkeley, to be amongst the top 4-5 public universities in the country.
3 months, 2 weeks ago on SEC Pushing Its Academic Oomph
I don't think anyone could reasonably argue that the SEC's academic consortium is anywhere close to being in the same ballpark as the CIC. You're right, we're presently far behind the B1G in that regard. The good thing is the conference does have one now, and though it's relatively small in scope and scale right now, it's starting to have some impact. In my opinion, it will take at least a couple of decades of strong financial and political support and the full commitment of all SEC members before SECU could even begin to be mentioned in the same breath with the CIC. That said, I do remember reading that both A&M president Loftin and Mizzou chancellor Deaton (both leaders of AAU institutions) mentioned the SECU and the opportunity to participate in academic symposia such as the upcoming one in Atlanta as a reason (not saying it was THE reason by any stretch) for their leaving the Big 12 for the SEC. At the very least, events such as these demonstrate a desire by SEC leaders for the conference to be viewed as much more than just a collection of football factories with suspect academic reputations.
Regarding the ACC and which conference some of its members would prefer if the ACC collapsed, that's a subject I have very mixed feelings about. I just have a hard time imagining college athletics without UNC, Duke and UVA competing in the ACC. The ACC is an important part of the fabric and culture of the states of Virginia and North Carolina, and I would hate to see that come to an end. But if that day does come, I would agree that most of the faculty and administrators at those universities would prefer the B1G over the SEC due to its superior academic reputation and membership in the CIC. But there are other factors at play, at least in North Carolina, namely geography and politics, which could mitigate that advantage. Also, the SEC could sell UNC and Duke on being, along with Vandy, the unquestioned academic standard bearers of the conference (notwithstanding UNC's current academic issues). And the SEC, by already adding two AAU institutions in their previous expansion and setting up and moving forward with their consortium, could show Duke and UNC that they're serious about improving the conference's academic standing.
But, who knows what will actually happen? Certainly makes for an interesting discussion.
I have to admit that the potential to use our conference's academic consortium, SECU, as a tool to attract prestigious, AAU-affiliated academic institutions as possible expansion candidates was the first thing that entered my mind as i read this article. That said, I'm just glad the SEC has gotten around to establishing a consortium that can organize high-level symposia such as this one in Atlanta, as any initiatives that can enhance the overall academic credibility of our conference are both helpful and welcome. Hopefully in the not-too-distant future, SECU can be as effective in its role as the Big Ten's CIC has been for many, many years.