UCONN Donor Letter and the Response

[GP1]

This story is very interesting. Read both the letter and the response by the UCONN player and tell us who the better person is. My vote is the donor is the a-hole of a child and the former player is the better person.

[Buckzip]

This story is very interesting. Read both the letter and the response by the UCONN player and tell us who the better person is. My vote is the donor is the a-hole of a child and the former player is the better person.

The donor sounds like a major prick. He really thinks he should have input into coaching decisions.

I hope he doesn't get 1 cent back. He donated. That is without condition.

Screw him.

[Dave in Green]

Insufficient data. All we know at this point is he said, she said. The key point to me is the following item from the ex-player:

1. Burton, in all likelihood, should have been involved (ceremoniously) in the hiring process. And it is undoubtedly the job of the AD to make donors like Burton feel as though their input matters (however untrue that may be).

According to Burton, he was totally ignored. When the AD finally called to tell him who they had selected as the new coach, Burton had already heard through other sources. If true, that's not good.

Money is critical to big sports programs. Multi-million-dollar donors are rare and need to be nurtured and cherished. Rules need to be set and clearly understood by both sides. If UConn didn't work this out in advance, shame on them.

But multi-millionaires can also be incredibily egotistical jerks. For some, the only rules that matter are the ones they set.

So was Burton an egotistical jerk who was eventually going to blow up no matter what UConn did, or did someone at UConn screw up and not give Burton the level of respect he deserved as a multi-million-dollar donor?

Insufficient data.

[Spin]

I think you nailed it. I think there's blame on both sides.

[GP1]

I think you nailed it. I think there's blame on both sides.

This is like LBJ leaving the Cavs. There was a right way and a wrong way to do it. The letter was clearly the wrong way to do it.

According to DIG, there is insufficient data. How much more do you need? A tree worth of paper was used to print the letter. I think the donor expressed himself pretty clearly. He wanted this to become public as he copied everyone except the governor's bathroom attendant. Unless he is a complete moron, he had to have known this was going to make the internet. The personal attacks toward the AD were over the top as well. If he had a problem he should have picked up the phone and chewed him a new a-hole if that is what he wanted to do. It takes more guts to chew someone out in person than it does to write a letter. The letter was gutless. If he doesn't want to donate further, it is his right to do so. The next time this guy donates money, he should think about whether the donation is for him or the people it is supposed to help.

The ex-player puts a good spin on what college athletes really think, or how they don't even think, about the big donors at a school. It is funny to see one admit that is the case; especially when it was directed at this Burton guy so soon after the letter.

There are some ideas I have always lived by. There is always someone better looking. There is always someone smarter. There is always someone richer. So don't worry about those things. There are some extremely rich people in CT. Somewhere, someone out there in CT is going to donate a bunch of money to the school just to stick it up this guy's ass. Somewhere in CT there is someone richer than Burton and would like nothing more to make a fool of him in public. We will know that someone before next football season.

[Dave in Green]

The letter is the only solid evidence. Over the top is a pretty good description. I agree the donor could have handled his end of the matter in a more civilized manner. The donor obviously bears at least some degree of responsibility in this.

But is the donor mostly or completely to blame for this whole matter, or did the AD and others at UConn contribute a little or a lot to the implosion?

Insufficient data.

[GP1]

But is the donor mostly or completely to blame for this whole matter, or did the AD and others at UConn contribute a little or a lot to the implosion?

Insufficient data.

The donor is almost completely to blame. Should the AD have stroked his ego? I don't know. The AD has a job to do and he has to live with that job and the results of his decisions. His decisions involve a lot more than just the ego of one man. I'm sure the blowhard who wrote the letter doesn't think about UCONN athletics all day. The AD does.

Whenever I think about guys like this donor, I think about the readings from Ash Wednesday:

Jesus said, "Beware of practicing your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven.

"So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your alms may be done in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

"And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

"And whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that your fasting may be seen not by others but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

We have too many people in this world who are impressed by themselves and their actions. It's too bad.

[Dave in Green]

I agree that the donor is almost completely to blame for the character of the letter that was intended to be public. The donor apparently didn't realize that publicly stating what you privately feel often results in turning public opinion against yourself rather than your target. That does not necessarily mean that it was almost completely the donor's fault that he arrived at the point that resulted in his ill-advised public letter.

The primary question remains who was to blame for the situation reaching this point? Exactly what did UConn promise the donor in return for his extremely generous financial contribution to UConn's football program, and did they deliver on what they committed to?

In any case, different people have different standards on data required to pass judgment. There's insufficient data for me to judge whether the donor was almost completely or even almost equally to blame for the situation reaching the critical mass that resulted in the ill-advised public letter.

Situations like this also bring to mind different biblical passages to different people. The one that comes to my mind is:

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

[Zip Watcher]

As a proud UConn alumn .. and NOT an athlete in pretty much any way, I thought I might add the following:

I think the donor isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer if he thought that a FB donor, even as prolific has he was, should have immediate and substantive input into the daily life and decisions of the AD. There's one simple reason for this.

Memo to joe donor: It's a hoops school! H O O P S. And Jim & Geno don't need your money.

Go Zips!