Orlando Sentinel doing hatchet job on O'leary...

law_bee

law_bee

Dodd-Like
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Messages
6,399
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/orl-oleary2408sep24,0,2663933.story?page=1


There are things to criticize to O'leary about but BEING TOO ROUGH on players is NOT one of them.

Do these people watch NCAA football? On ANY given down someone could be killed. Concussions have become common place and this is the nature of the sport. But it is a voluntary sport and anyone who plays assumes the risk. While that guy dying is a tragedy it is no more tragic then the guy who dies cutting his grass or working out at the gym.
 
law_bee said:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/orl-oleary2408sep24,0,2663933.story?page=1


There are things to criticize to O'leary about but BEING TOO ROUGH on players is NOT one of them.

Do these people watch NCAA football? On ANY given down someone could be killed. Concussions have become common place and this is the nature of the sport. But it is a voluntary sport and anyone who plays assumes the risk. While that guy dying is a tragedy it is no more tragic then the guy who dies cutting his grass or working out at the gym.
Click to expand...

the Sentinel has had a hard on for O'leary since he cut them off from interviews when one of the players died after mat drills.
 
From what I understand, the Sentinel and O'Leary aren't really close. The Sentinel is also only just a few steps better then our own beloved AJC in quality.
 
Didn't seem like a hatchet job to me. A lot of quotes from players who like him and noted that the admin supports him.

Scrutiny? Yes. Hatchet job? Nah.
 
No way a hatchet job, but does show some negative sides.

If that other player had died or had a stroke, I doubt O'L would ever coach again.
 
It is a Hatchet job. O'Leary was tough and didn't do some things right, but using the Dustin V. interview and the Zach Pillar interview to show a coach who is too tough is the biggest load of bull**** I have ever seen. Why you ask? Zach Pillar is a lying scum bag. how do I know? I was in the bar when he got tossed out the window. The guy who tossed him was close friends with my buddies who were also there and saw Zach get tossed through a plate glass window by a guy half his size. I also knew the three girls Zach was hassling and being very ugly too after they asked him politely to leave them alone several times. The guy who tossed Pillar (6'8" 300 lbs) was only 5'9" 170 lbs, was merely standing up for the women who became scared and felt threatened when Pillar refused to leave them alone.

O'Leary went to bat for Pillar, but when the truth came out O'Leary had egg on his face when he found out Pillar was lying and O'Leary threw him off the team.

Dustin V woudln't cut it on anyone's field.

the reporter dredging this bull**** up to smear O'Leary is really showing his agenda.

I thought the only legitimate interview was with Ken Celaj who was very good summing up O'Leary.
 
the reason it is a hatchet job is b/c they found people that had a beef w/ O'leary then printed their side of the story.

ANYONE who has ever had success will have people that will rip them. You could find just as many people who are unhappy with Richt, Bowden, and etc.

While that kid dying is a tragedy it is not O'leary's fought and if they get rid of O'leary their program will slip back to where it was b/f he got there.

I have ripped O'leary on numerous occasions but I have to recognize that his success at UCF is a testament to his abilities. He has had close games w/ Texas, USF, and other quality teams.
 
Before it can called a hatchet job, one has to have a pretty good idea what the writer's motivation was for writing it.

Of course he called Dustin and the other guy - he heard about those two because of the publicity surrounding their cases. How does the reporter determine for himself whether Dustin is a wuss or just being picked on or whether Pillar was credible or not? The reporter wasn't in the bar or on the field that day.

When the reporter indicates in the article that he tried to contact twenty more football players he's not just looking for dirt - he's looking for a complete picture. That's not a hatchet job. It would be a hatchet job if he spoke to Dustin and Zach and called it a day.

I don't know why I have to defend the reporter other than I think that there is a tendency to defend O'Leary (who I remain a staunch supporter of) even when folks not privy to first hand information about him try to decide for themselves whether George is a misunderstood genius or a genuine arsehole.

Given all the controversy surrounding the guy I don't think simply asking the question betrays an attempt to condemn the guy. He's not having a good year and when the record starts falling, people start looking under rocks just to see what's there.
 
I can sum up O'Leary with this story.

My fraternity brother in the mid 90's was the field goal kicker for GT. He went into O'Leary's office to tell him he coouldn't practice. Here was the dialogue.

Player: Coach O'Leary, I can't practice today, my leg is still bothering me.

O'Leary: Let me ask you a question. If I jumped over this desk and hit you in the face, which would hurt more? Your leg or your face?

Player: I guess my face would Coach.

O'Leary: Good, your practicing. See you on the field.

The player above really liked O'Leary to and enjoyed playing for him.


I don't have a problem with that toughness. Especially considering the fact that O'Leary took over for Lewis who let the team run rampant and we had major attitude problems across the entire roster. Not to mention many of the players were doing drugs.

O'Leary cleaned all of that stuff up and then some.

As far as it being a hatchet job, when you interview 10 players who had problems with O'Leary for every one who didn't, that is a hatchet job that is trying to cover its tracks. Who do you think is in the majority? The players who loved O'Leary or the players who hated him and he screwed over? He wouldn't have lasted 3 years as a coach if it was the later. Its a hatchet job.
 
I can sum up O'Leary by saying he was our Bobby Knight.

I liked the guy and never had an issue with all these code-red incidents. So for me, its case closed.

So if you are right and the reporter is fulfilling an agenda by trying to re-open it then I could have saved him some time.

He was good enough for Georgia Tech and, with full knowledge of these very incidents, Notre Dame felt he was still good enough to take over their program.

Given that, then who the hell is Central Florida to pose the question: "is he good enough for us?"
 
BarrelORum said:
I don't have a problem with that toughness. Especially considering the fact that O'Leary took over for Lewis who let the team run rampant and we had major attitude problems across the entire roster. Not to mention many of the players were doing drugs.

O'Leary cleaned all of that stuff up and then some.
Click to expand...

this is a common misconception.

i know FOR A FACT that there were still plenty of players "doing drugs" during O'Leary's time on the Flats.

the big joke was that instead of Gatorade, they all needed to drink a lot more cranberry juice

i like GOL. i spoke with him at length. he made fun of me during the Lunch with George sessions for the notes that i had, and asking me who i was working for. he was good for Tech. he IMPROVED the discipline on the team but after all, we are still talking about college kids and they are going to act like it sometimes

i will also say that to many of the players, things like having to show up for something 30 minutes in advance of the time that it was announced you should be there was starting to grate on them. why say 9 o'clock and then pull the bus out at 8:50? say 8:50 and mean it. whatever..

GOL is a good coach and a good man. he is gruff but not rough
 
O'Leary's always been a prick. What goes around comes around.
 
kirbee said:
O'Leary's always been a prick. What goes around comes around.
Click to expand...

In your words, 'a prick' who saved Tech football at its lowest time in recent history.

Thank you GOL for making that happen and giving us some damn good football!
 
BuzzCzar said:
this is a common misconception.

i know FOR A FACT that there were still plenty of players "doing drugs" during O'Leary's time on the Flats.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know that too. The difference is during the Lewis years they would openly smoke pot get their groove on, and during the O'Leary years they were sticking needles in their arms of "creotene" like substances. As far as football players go, if they are going to do drugs, I prefer the later.
 
If you are a public figure there's always some lizard in the media who'll come out from under his rock and slant a piece against you.

The old saw about teachers definitely applies to the media:

Those who can't report on those who can.


Seriously, is there a "profession" (other than acting) that is more self-important for less reason? Media people think of themselves as "stars" when in fact it wouldn't be hard to find somebody else to write/read the mediocre drivel they produce. If you are that easily replaced you aren't that important.
 
BarrelORum said:
Yeah, I know that too. The difference is during the Lewis years they would openly smoke pot get their groove on, and during the O'Leary years they were sticking needles in their arms of "creotene" like substances. As far as football players go, if they are going to do drugs, I prefer the later.
Click to expand...

the reference to cranberry juice was specifically referring to the players habit of smoking weed. PLENTY. Maybe it was reduced, but certainly DEFINITELY not eliminated. i am not talking about second hand knowledge on this
 
BuzzCzar said:
the reference to cranberry juice was specifically referring to the players habit of smoking weed. PLENTY. Maybe it was reduced, but certainly DEFINITELY not eliminated. i am not talking about second hand knowledge on this
Click to expand...

It's a rather effective pain reliever. So I could see where players might turn to it if they're being banged up quite a bit.
 
There are things to criticize to O'leary about but BEING TOO ROUGH on players is NOT one of them.
Click to expand...

Being too rough on players is most definitely one of the things you most definitely can criticize O'Leary on. Especially after he killed that sickle cell kid DOA and somehow didn't get prosecuted for wrongful death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top