weberwildcat
Active member
http://www.egriz.com/grizboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=39481
by AllWeatherFan on Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:05 am
From today's Missoulian:
Because of his absence from Montana, Foley referred questions to O'Day, who understands negative publicity comes with the territory. It's not the first time and it's not likely to be the last, he said.
"I would prefer (Hauck) did talk, but I respect the decisions he's made," O'Day said. "I'm against forcing someone to do something against their wishes and would prefer an amicable solution."
Hauck's behavior has brought unwelcome attention on the entire university. As an administrator, balancing an employee's right not to talk to the media with protecting the university's image is a tricky situation, O'Day admits.
"You rely on others who have been in similar situations," he said. "You talk with them. You visit with players and the coach and other administrators, and you hope that the best works out. I've been doing all of that. There's no easy answer."
While O'Day said UM is handling the situation internally, he wouldn't elaborate on what that means - other than to say it will be addressed in Hauck's annual review, and that's private.
"We've spent a lot of time on this issue," O'Day said.
How does he see the issue being resolved?
"In a professional manner with both parties respecting each other," he said.
When asked whether that's possible at this time, O'Day declined comment, saying that, out of respect for the football players, the matter is private.
Wow. I don't even know where to begin.
The AD doesn't want to force Bobby to do the right thing, even though he acknowledges Hauck has embarrassed the program and the university.
Aside from being the most spineless thing that's ever come out of an AD's mouth, I have one news flash for Jim O'Day: Jim, you are one of the parties. Bobby Hauck is representing you and the University of Montana in this dispute.
Show some courage. Don't pawn it off on Hauck like he's tried to pawn it off on his own players.