Tin Man
Dirt's Childhood Playmate
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2015
- Messages
- 51,670
- Likes
- 49,642
What did you think she was going to say? “Well, Phil was just a crap AD and that’s all I can say about him.” That was never going to happen to a UT legend.Again, here you are with baseless opinions when all I've brought is cited quotations, all without the need for hurling personal insults. After all Chancellor Plowman has done for this university and football program, she deserves more respect than to say or even insinuate that she's making things up to save face. To question her integrity is baseless, useless, and insulting to everything she's done. She could have said a million things about Fulmer, but she carefully worded her publicly available statements, which I linked, literally stating in quotation that Fulmer was a bridge gap hire and had no intention of staying a long time. The terms of his retirement were a part of that conversation where they discussed his retirement, negotiated settlement of his contract, etc, according to her statements. At no point did anyone say he was fired. According to her, Fulmer volunteered to step down to make way for the new administration/AD so the new coach would have more stability, again all in black and white if you care to read it.
If you choose not to believe it, that's on you. But spreading your baseless insinuations as fact is irresponsible at the least and insults the integrity of our great leadership, who I might add, is the best leadership we have seen at UT in 30 years or more.
I didn't think you would stoop to name calling and insults to try and win an argument. How sophomoric of you. Whenever you decide you can have an adult conversation, feel free to reach out.
Until then, good day sir.
She could’ve said that Phil has decided to step down as athletic Director and we appreciate his time and dedication to this university that he has loved for so long.What did you think she was going to say? “Well, Phil was just a crap AD and that’s all I can say about him.” That was never going to happen to a UT legend.
Again, bosses use that kind of language all the time when letting go a loyal long term employee. She was being kind and saw no need to pile on. Why you can’t understand that is beyond me. Evidently you are the only one because everyone else gets it. Generally when everyone disagrees with you, you need to realize when you are wrong and gracefully back away from the discussion. As it is, I guess you are going to die on that hill. Oh well.
He knows. This is an act. Was reading his post history to make sure my next action is justified.What did you think she was going to say? “Well, Phil was just a crap AD and that’s all I can say about him.” That was never going to happen to a UT legend.
Again, bosses use that kind of language all the time when letting go a loyal long term employee. She was being kind and saw no need to pile on. Why you can’t understand that is beyond me. Evidently you are the only one because everyone else gets it. Generally when everyone disagrees with you, you need to realize when you are wrong and gracefully back away from the discussion. As it is, I guess you are going to die on that hill. Oh well.
You've lost me. Can you clarify which side of this you are on?The why say what she said, specifically that he was absolved of any wrongdoing and volunteered to retire? She chose those words very carefully, as she has proven time and again when making public statements. Accusing her of not telling the truth is in fact a form of deceit, is it not?
To clarify, I believe that Plowman chose her words carefully and don’t believe that she lied, covered for, or told misleading information about Fulmer, his plan for employment as the AD, retirement, the terms of his contract buyout, or anything that would make me believe Fulmer was fired for cause as argued by numerous others ITT. I also believe that she cleared him of any wrongdoing prior to the press conference and that is why they allowed a negotiated settlement as a part of his retirement.You've lost me. Can you clarify which side of this you are on?
I certainly agree that she chose her words carefully. And she did not lie or cover up. She just chose nicely not to address the elephant in the room.To clarify, I believe that Plowman chose her words carefully and don’t believe that she lied, covered for, or told misleading information about Fulmer, his plan for employment as the AD, retirement, the terms of his contract buyout, or anything that would make me believe Fulmer was fired for cause as argued by numerous others ITT. I also believe that she cleared him of any wrongdoing prior to the press conference and that is why they allowed a negotiated settlement as a part of his retirement.
Apparently this was an unpopular opinion to some but I do sincerely believe she is calm, calculated, intelligent, and chose her words carefully. (See articles i posted for her statements if you need a refresher). Hopefully she continues serving the university with integrity and honesty because she has done a better job stabilizing the university and football program than anyone else in her role in a long time.
So indulge the unenlightened. If his long-term plan of retiring a year after signing an extension had been recalculated and he had wanted to remain and help fix the mess? IYO would he have been allowed to do so?I certainly agree that she chose her words carefully. And she did not lie or cover up. She just chose nicely not to address the elephant in the room.
He obviously was not fired for cause because he was given a buyout. Nobody in any business that I’ve been associated with ever got a buyout when fired with cause.
I really didn’t finish my original thought. Hit the button too quickly. I think there was more to the situation that went unsaid. No, I don’t believe he was ever going to be allowed to stay on. The administration said all the right things and as VolinBama said, they “chose their words carefully”. I believe they allowed the buyout so that he would go away quietly and to not embarrass a UT legend.So indulge the unenlightened. If his long-term plan of retiring a year after signing an extension had been recalculated and he had wanted to remain and help fix the mess? IYO would he have been allowed to do so?