Livefyre Profile

Activity Stream

 @John at MrSEC Yes I did, and it confirmed what both of us stated.  The difference I had was with you stating the suspension was essentially out of Dooley's hands.  But from what had been reported in the first Knxville News-Sentinel online (Go Vols Extra) article, Dooley had stated the decision for the suspension was his, and from what people I knew close to the program had said was that the original suspension was either for one or two games (they weren't exactly certain which) due to failing a 2nd drug test.  That was obviously mandatory because of school policy.  But the word was the DR had "lost it" over the suspension and took it to a higer level, presumably the AD, and apparently "lost it" again.  At that point it can be assumed that Dooley and Hart conferred and the decision was made that Rogers was more of a detriemnt than he was worth. So the final decision to get rid of him was not based on school policy (which would have only come with a 3rd failed drug test), but was either a decision made by Dooley and/or Hart.  Since Dooley had been quoted in the GVX article as saying the final decision to "indefinitely" suspend DR had been his, I gave him the benefit of the dougt.  And then the following day he was quoted as saying he did not expect DR to return to the team.  So it seemed safe to assume DR was not dismissed due to a school policy as I took from your blog...

 

       When Tyrann Mathieu was given the boot from LSU a couple of weeks ago, many Tiger-backers 

   praised Les Miles for putting team discipline ahead of all else.  Yesterday, Da’Rick Rogers was

   suspended at Tennessee and the pattern repeated.  I personally received 12 emails from Vol fans all

   delivering some variation of the same message: “Let’s see you question Derek Dooley’s discipline

   now.”

   OK.

   In both cases — Mathieu’s and Rogers’ — athletic department policy dictated the action that was 

   taken.  Miles and Dooley didn’t punish their stars, their school drug policies did.

 

The school policy would have dictated the original 1-2 game suspension, but not the dismissal.  That decision would seemingly have been made by Dooley as I see it.

     

 

1 year, 11 months ago on Let's Stop Praising Coaches For Simply Following School Drug Policies

Reply

 

"Thanks for reading the site,"

 

You're welcome.  I like the site for the most part even though I don't always agree with you.  But I do agree with you that maybe UT needs to stop with the BBQs.

 

 

1 year, 11 months ago on Let's Stop Praising Coaches For Simply Following School Drug Policies

Reply

You, nor anyone else outside of the Ath Dept know exactly why he was suspended.  The 'failed multiple drug tests' is simply a rumor.  There is also the rumor that he failed a drug test and Dooley had suspended him for either 1 or 2 games (different rumors have alluded to both, and w/ a suspension would likelyt be his 2nd failed test), and Rogers threw a fit over it and went to Hart.  When Hart backed school policy, Rogers went off on him as well, and Hart suspended him indefinitely. Is this the truth?  I have no idea, but my point is, you don't know if he failed 3 drug test either but are nevertheless blogging based on that assumption.  But failing 3 drug tests is an automatic dismissal, and I have yet to see anyone connected with the university state that Rogers has been dismissed, only that he has been suspended 'indefinitely' and Dooely does not expect him to return.  Which gives more creedence to the rumor I mentioned being true than the rumor you based your blog on. 

1 year, 11 months ago on Let's Stop Praising Coaches For Simply Following School Drug Policies

Reply