Despicable K

In 2003, Dave Bliss, the head coach of the men's basketball team at Baylor University, engaged in some heinous acts, implementing a plan to cover up the murder of one of his players, Patrick Dennehy, by concocting a story that Dennehy was a drug dealer and that those dealings led to Dennehy's death. As this plan was developing, one of Bliss's assistant coaches, Abar Rouse, recorded a conversation with Bliss that would later expose Bliss's plan, lead to Bliss's ouster as coach and major sanctioning by the NCAA that may keep him from ever coaching again in college basketball, NCAA sanctions against the Baylor men's basketball program that included only playing a conference schedule one season, and a criminal investigation (though no formal criminal charges were initiated) against Bliss. For more on this story and Rouse's plight since the incident, check out this column by ESPN.com's Dana O'Neil.

One of the most striking elements contained in O'Neil's column (and plenty of other reports that have covered this story) is a quotation from Duke University men's head basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski. As Krzyzewski was quoted, "If one of my assistants would tape every one of my conversations with me not knowing it, there's no way he would be on my staff."

Now, I'm happy to reconsider my view of this statement should Krzyzewski demonstrate contrition for it or that it occurred within another context that would mitigate my concerns. As it looks, though, this statement is not only inaccurate, it's downright despicable. First of all, as I understand it, Rouse recorded one conversation with Bliss. He was not making a habit of repeatedly recording conversations, nor did he record "every one of" his conversations with Bliss. These points make Krzyzewski's comment inaccurate.

Secondly, and even more significantly, that Krzyzewski cannot tell the difference between what Rouse did and the kind of thing to which Krzyzewski seems to be alluding would appear to show that Krzyzewski has a very poor sense of judgment. I think I understand why Krzyzewski would be opposed to an assistant always or repeatedly recording him without his awareness. I would agree that that would violate trust that the head coach must be able to have in his assistants. Additionally, it would seem to reflect a suspicious degree of self-interest on the part of the assistant, who, assumedly, would be using this for some gain at the expense of the head coach. So, Krzyzewski's lack of tolerance for that does not bother me.

However, the case with Rouse and Bliss seems to be so clearly removed from that situation that lack of recognition of that difference suggests a similar degree of suspicious self-interest on the part of Krzyzewski. Namely, Bliss was doing things that were morally reprehensible, and without Rouse taping the conversation in order to have evidence to show Bliss's behavior, perhaps Bliss never gets caught and the story never comes to light. Indeed, given that Bliss was quite willing to concoct this story about one of his players (who had instilled his own trust in Bliss), it's not hard at all to see Bliss firing and publicly depicting Rouse as a problem (perhaps even concocting another story, this one about Rouse) had Rouse reported what happened to the NCAA without this kind of evidence. This seems so clearly to have been an appropriate thing to do in this specific instance that it's mind-boggling for Krzyzewski, at least based on the quotation above, not to distinguish between this and the situation I described in the above paragraph. In fact, it's not only mind-boggling; it's disgusting. In this context, Krzyzewski's comments make him sound so invested in imposing his own power on individuals whom he appears to consider subordinate and inferior that I have to wonder if he deserves to maintain that power--i.e., if he can be trusted to be using it in a fair and considerate manner. Correspondingly, I have to wonder seriously about whether or not Krzyzewski is fit to be in a position that makes him a guiding influence in the lives of his players and other individuals at his university. If Krzyzewski's judgment is a model to look up, what kind of world are we creating? Certainly, it would appear, not one that emphasizes practicing the kinds of good moral judgment about which we so often hear. Quite to the contrary, Krzyzewski wants to punish turning in someone who has done something that lacks regard for human life and decency. I also don't think he should be the the head coach of the USA Olympic men's basketball team. That's not in line with the kinds of ethic I want to represent my country.

I bring this up now because, after winning their respective games tonight, the men's basketball programs from Duke University and Baylor University will play each other in the NCAA basketball tournament on Sunday. Surely, much will be made of the amazing turnaround that the Baylor team has made under head coach Scott Drew, given where they were with their NCAA sanctions just a few years ago. However, I think this is the perfect juncture for a major line of discourse surrounding the game to focus on Krzyzewski's comments about Rouse from 2003 and what his lack of recognition of the good reasons for Rouse's actions potentially show about Krzyzewski.

Unfortunately, particularly given the deference that Krzyzewski (and many other sports figures) get from the media who cover them, I seriously doubt that Krzyzewski will be asked to confront this. At best, the issue might get a mention here or there in certain forums on ESPN coverage or in some columnists' work (hey, Gregg Doyel ... buddy ... this would be a great column for you ...). But CBS's coverage will likely steer away from it, most of the talking heads fronting ESPN coverage will likely steer away from it and/or deflect it if confronted with it, and Krzyzewski will be able to go on without really having to account for his despicable comments. From my very limited position, however, I will talk about this repeatedly and consistently all weekend. Perhaps that can count for something.