Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Bo Pelini's "AudioGate" Is Over . . . Or Is It?

On Wednesday, NU Chancellor Harvey Perlman and Athletic Director Shawn Eichorst accepted Bo Pelini's apology over the released audio from the aftermath of the 2011 Ohio State game, declaring it over:
Coach Pelini has given us his assurance that he understands the seriousness and inappropriateness of his comments. We believe he is sincere in his apology and in his regret. We are prepared to put the matter to rest.
But is it really? If anything, the story got more bizarre on Tuesday into Wednesday morning as Perlman said he was still reflecting on the situation:
“I’m not going to talk about football today,” Perlman told the Omaha World-Herald, adding, “We’re disappointed and we are reflecting on the situation.”
Why leave the coach hanging?  Is the idea to make him squirm?  Were they actually considering firing the coach over this?  Who knows... But then the story took a couple more left turns on Wednesday.  First, they acknowledged that Tom Osborne already handled the situation last year:
Former Director of Athletics Tom Osborne became aware of these comments and the existence of a recording more than a year ago, and addressed the matter with Coach Pelini. We have observed, and many others have commented, that Coach Pelini’s demeanor has significantly improved since the time of this incident.
If Osborne already took care of the matter, then why the 40 hour delay between the two statements? Why not announce this Monday night and put this whole ugly situation to bed?

There are no answers, just questions.  It's probably safe to say that Perlman and Eichorst didn't know about Osborne's actions on Monday. Why not?  Shouldn't Eichorst have gathered his staff to discuss the situation?  Since Nebraska associate athletic director Chris Anderson was identified early on as a voice on the tape, shouldn't she have been asked about what she knew of the situation?  And certainly wouldn't she have told Eichorst about her conversation with Osborne last year?  Osborne told the World-Herald tonight that he learned about the audio from Anderson.

So we're left with two possibilities:  Perlman and Eichorst never really bothered to look into this situation, or they were looking for an opportunity to dismiss Pelini only to have Osborne foil their plans.

Either option reflects rather badly on the current leadership at the University of Nebraska.  Pick your conclusion: incompetent, out-of-touch, indecisive, confused, wishy-washy.

And if Perlman and Eichorst's plan was indeed the latter possibility, then this situation isn't over.  Not in the least.

1 comment:

devnet said...

I think it took a long time because they wanted to speak with Osborne before they made any decisions. Getting 3 or 4 people in a room a the same time can be tricky scheduling so at the very least I'd expect them to wait a full day before the meeting took place. There's your lag between actions.