ESPN: Arizona fires Rich Rodriguez amid sexual harassment allegation

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,580
Reaction score
15,671
Points
113
per ESPN:

The Arizona Wildcats on Tuesday fired football coach Rich Rodriguez after six seasons in the wake of a sexual harassment allegation the university began investigating in October and a recent notice of a hostile-workplace lawsuit to be filed against the school.

"After conducting a thorough evaluation of our football program and its leadership, both on and off the field, President [Robert] Robbins and I feel it is in the best interest of the University of Arizona and our athletics department to go in a new direction," athletic director Dave Heeke said in a statement.

Rodriguez issued a statement Tuesday night saying he found out about his firing by email. In the statement, he admitted to having an extramarital affair with someone not affiliated with the university, but Rodriguez denied any allegations of harassment. He also said the former employee threatened a $7.5 million lawsuit against him.

"The University initiated a thorough outside investigation. I fully cooperated with the investigation, including voluntarily taking and passing a polygraph," Rodriguez said. "The University determined that there was no truth to her accusations and found me innocent of any wrongdoing.

"This was a thorough investigation that lasted over 10 weeks and included multiple members of my current and former staff. Notably, the complainant refused to cooperate with the investigation. It was comforting to be reassured of what I already knew, the claims were baseless and false."

http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...a-wildcats-fire-football-coach-rich-rodriguez

Go Gophers!!
 

By all signs a gold digger. Won’t produce alleged communications, etc. I’m also not sure she understands that simply being stressed while female is not harassment. Not a good look.

“The former employee said in the claim that she "had to walk on eggshells at work, because of (Rodriguez's) volatility and sheer power over the department." Rodriguez would call her at all hours of the night, she said in the claim, to change travel plans or deal with Rodriguez's personal emergencies. In the claim, the former employee said she became increasingly troubled by Rodriguez's actions over the past year. She suffered migraines as a result, the claim states.

The UA's Office of Institutional Equity began investigating Rodriguez in October, three months after the former employee left for an off-campus job.”

http://tucson.com/sports/arizonawil...tm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share&id=201408
 

Yea, it really sounds like she's after money. From what I have read RR appears to have been cleared by their internal investigation, but the administration still wasn't happy that this affair stuff was true. And just the stain of a large civil suit where even more details will likely come out coupled with a few seasons in a row of average to below average on-field performance was enough to give him his walking papers.

I bet Sumlin is one of their first calls.

BTW, how about football coaches in the state of Arizona? The Cardinals, Wildcats, and Sun Devils all lost their HCs in the last 5 weeks or so.
 

By all signs a gold digger. Won’t produce alleged communications, etc. I’m also not sure she understands that simply being stressed while female is not harassment. Not a good look.

“The former employee said in the claim that she "had to walk on eggshells at work, because of (Rodriguez's) volatility and sheer power over the department." Rodriguez would call her at all hours of the night, she said in the claim, to change travel plans or deal with Rodriguez's personal emergencies. In the claim, the former employee said she became increasingly troubled by Rodriguez's actions over the past year. She suffered migraines as a result, the claim states.

The UA's Office of Institutional Equity began investigating Rodriguez in October, three months after the former employee left for an off-campus job.”

http://tucson.com/sports/arizonawil...tm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share&id=201408

ESPN's headline says he was fired over sexual harassment claim yet nowhere in that story or the one you linked is there anything about any sort of sexual harassment. She definitely sounds like a disgruntled ex-employee trying to cash in on some sort of payday. I would bet most administrative assistants rolled their eyes at the section you linked in regards to her take on Rich Rod's power leading to her migraines.

Wonder if Rich Rod would go after the University for any sort of wrongful termination? My guess is he won't since they are willing to pay him 5.6 million not to coach the rest of his contract. It would really suck to get fired but man would it be nice to get paid that kind of money not to work. :)
 

ESPN's headline says he was fired over sexual harassment claim yet nowhere in that story or the one you linked is there anything about any sort of sexual harassment. She definitely sounds like a disgruntled ex-employee trying to cash in on some sort of payday. I would bet most administrative assistants rolled their eyes at the section you linked in regards to her take on Rich Rod's power leading to her migraines.

Wonder if Rich Rod would go after the University for any sort of wrongful termination? My guess is he won't since they are willing to pay him 5.6 million not to coach the rest of his contract. It would really suck to get fired but man would it be nice to get paid that kind of money not to work. :)

I don't think he can go after them for wrongful termination as long as they pay the whole buyout. Even if he didn't do anything wrong they can still fire him whenever they want. The statement from U of A announcing he had been fired was obviously very carefully worded in that it never directly cited the harassment allegations as a reason for the firing. It was something like "before and during the investigation we became concerned about the direction and climate of our football program." It honestly reminded me somewhat of Coyle's remarks when he fired Claeys.

Here is a link with details about the alleged sexual harassment: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...cats-fired-claim-sexual-harassment/998822001/

- The coach called her into his office in January 2017 when he began discussing his marital problems and then grabbed her, “embraced her, touched the side of her breast, and tried to kiss her.” She managed to pull away. Two weeks later, he called her back to his office and said he wanted to "take care of her." Rodriguez handed her $300 in cash, but she refused the money.
- In February 2017, he called her into his office, and while talking she saw him "grasping his penis beneath his basketball shorts."
- Rodriguez asked Wilhelmsen to get him underwear from the equipment area. After she found a male staff member to bring them to him, Rodriguez told her how "his preferred style of underwear ‘visually enhanced’ his genitalia when worn."
- Rodriguez timed his workouts so would walk back to his office shirtless in front of Wilhelmsen.
- A coaching assistant made a comment that when Wilhelmsen raised money for the football program she did it by rubbing her breasts on donors. Rodriguez laughed at the comment.
- Rodriguez asked Wilhelmsen to come to his home alone to help him with his dog. Wilhelmsen texted the coach that she and her husband could come, but she would not come alone. “You know I love you,” Rodriguez texted back, with a kissing-face emoji.
- On Wilhelmsen’s last day of work on Aug. 11, 2017, Rodriguez’s wife cornered her in the office and demanded to know the truth about her husband’s affair. Wilhelmsen said she apologized for not informing his wife sooner.
 


How have we got to the point where you are fired for simply being accused? The slippery slope has become a waterfall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

The modern equivalent of being accused of being a witch in Salem, MA.
 

How have we got to the point where you are fired for simply being accused? The slippery slope has become a waterfall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think it was the sexual harassment allegations that got him fired. Being that he admitted to the affair I think it's more that he used people who worked for him to cover up that relationship. I don't know if it was in the article I linked or not, but there was something about him getting his girlfriend a sideline pass for a game and then making his admin people keep her separated from his wife. I'm sure it would be easy to verify if that was true being that lots of people would be there on the sideline. Couple incidents like that with the middling results the last few years and I think they decided that was enough to pull the plug.

If they thought there was any merit to the sexual harassment stuff I'd think they would have fired him with cause so they could save the $6M or whatever the buyout is.
 

I don't think it was the sexual harassment allegations that got him fired. Being that he admitted to the affair I think it's more that he used people who worked for him to cover up that relationship. I don't know if it was in the article I linked or not, but there was something about him getting his girlfriend a sideline pass for a game and then making his admin people keep them separated. I'm sure it would be easy to verify if that was true being that lots of people would be there on the sideline. Couple incidents like that with the middling results the last few years and I think they decided that was enough to pull the plug.

If they thought there was any merit to the sexual harassment stuff I'd think they would have fired him with cause so they could save the $6M or whatever the buyout is.

It's always the cover up...
 



ESPN's headline says he was fired over sexual harassment claim yet nowhere in that story or the one you linked is there anything about any sort of sexual harassment. She definitely sounds like a disgruntled ex-employee trying to cash in on some sort of payday. I would bet most administrative assistants rolled their eyes at the section you linked in regards to her take on Rich Rod's power leading to her migraines.

Wonder if Rich Rod would go after the University for any sort of wrongful termination? My guess is he won't since they are willing to pay him 5.6 million not to coach the rest of his contract. It would really suck to get fired but man would it be nice to get paid that kind of money not to work. :)

Sadly, he probably has a legitimate case for libel against some of the media outlets since he was cleared of wrongdoing, but will never pursue it as they could destroy any chance he has at getting employed.

My guess is Arizona found something that while not technically actionable as "with cause" was concerning enough they decided to move on. In other words, some of the specific things she said probably weren't true, but there were enough things said by enough people that they felt like it was a matter of time until something happened.
 


How have we got to the point where you are fired for simply being accused? The slippery slope has become a waterfall.

I agree with your sentiment, but I don't think that's the case here. I think this is irresponsible journalism - conflating the firing with the sexual harassment allegations, even though they're two separate things. I think Arizona was going to fire him regardless, and conducted the investigation both as due diligence (CYA) and to ideally have a condition to fire him with cause and save themselves $5.6M.
 

If there's one thing that can be said about public flagship universities, they have excellent legal representation.

Exactly as dpo said -- if they thought they had a solid legal case to fire him with cause and save the money, they would have done that.
 




I wouldn't mind having RR here. I think he's gotten a raw deal with ADs ever since he left Tulane, even at WVU.
 

I wouldn't mind having RR here. I think he's gotten a raw deal with ADs ever since he left Tulane, even at WVU.

Even if true, Minnesota (or any program) won't touch him before the litigation is settled, one way or another.
 

Did anyone actually read the complaint? If even half the stuff is true, (forcibly trying to kiss and groping the complainant, grabbing his penis in front of her, etc.) he was correctly fired for sexual harassment, as well as other things that have no place in a workplace setting (forcing employees to lie to his wife to cover up an extra-marital affair). Not sure why people are defending this guy.
 

Rich Rod Wasn't May Not Have Been Very Popular Out There

Greg Hanson Tucson.com:

Today, Chuck and I were in agreement — both of us need to be back at Arizona. We both want to be there.”

Hunley was Arizona’s first consensus All-American, in 1982. Cecil was the second, five years later. The Wildcat Hall of Famers, who were at the scene of epic victories over No. 1 USC, undefeated Notre Dame and Rose Bowl-bound Arizona State, went on to coach for a combined 24 years in the NFL.

“We have been treated like outsiders,” said Hunley. “They wouldn’t even introduce recruits to Chuck this year.”

Hunley, who also coached at USC, Florida and Missouri, applied to be Arizona’s defensive line coach in 2015. He was not granted a formal interview by Rich Rodriguez. Cecil became one of the school’s defensive analysts seven months ago.

“Low man on the totem pole,” said Hunley. “RichRod didn’t even tell Chuck if he was going to bring him back next season.”

When Arizona fired Rodriguez on Tuesday night, Hunley fielded a dozen calls from former Wildcats. There was neither resentment nor rejoicing. It was simply and clearly time for a change.

The man who led a double life, unfaithful to his wife while operating Arizona’s football program with a dictatorial bearing, is accused by a former administrative assistant of sexual harassment and operating a hostile work environment.

For six years, RichRod surrounded himself with sycophants and yes men. Few were bold enough to challenge him; after he failed in an attempt to be the head coach at South Carolina in December 2015, he refused to answer questions about his desire to leave the UA.

It was sometimes as if he was in exile in Tucson, the last place on the football planet he wanted to be...

They will pay him about $6.28 million to go away, after which they will cleanse the program of RichRod’s often pouty, uncivil and mean-spirited behavior.

Maybe Arizona football can be enjoyable again.

Maybe this time the school will hire a coach who embraces the past and the Tucson football community and not just himself...

When Arizona’s football program was at its highest points, from 1980-2000, the late Larry Smith installed a list of five goals on the wall outside of his McKale Center office.

No. 1 was “Have Fun.”

There was a shortage of fun in RichRod’s six seasons. There was, instead, rancor and discord. You didn’t have to go far to experience the tension...

During August training camp, the Pac-12 Networks always spends a day in Tucson, spotlighting the Wildcats. On that day in 2015, the defending Pac-12 South champions allowed local media members to spend the first 20 minutes of a normally closed workout at the Kindall/Sancet practice facility.

I was standing near what used to be a dugout when RichRod began shouting at a manager/maintenance worker. The shouting turned into something so X-rated and crude that I was stunned RichRod had not noticed there were many outsiders within earshot.

He was enraged that the “HARD EDGE” sign carved into the grass, on a berm near the first-base line, looked shaggy and had not been watered to a greener shade.

I asked a team official if this was the coach’s typical behavior.

“We walk on eggshells,” he said.

I began to hear those “eggshell” stories with frequency, experiencing them in the interview areas at Autzen Stadium, Stanford Stadium and after almost every UA loss, especially those on the road...

After a humbling 49-3 loss at Washington’s Husky Stadium on Halloween night 2015, I sat with Star sports editor Ryan Finley in a small interview room about 30 yards from the UA dressing area.

RichRod’s voice boomed down the corridor, threatening to fire someone if the buses weren’t quickly loaded. The expletives made me shake my head, especially because UA athletic director Greg Byrne and RichRod’s wife, Rita, were standing at the back of the room. You could almost feel the rage.

When RichRod entered the room, Rita tapped him on the arm and said, “Take a deep breath.”

After a quick interview session, RichRod returned to the corridor and resumed the expletive-filled tirade.

For six seasons, those at the UA, including Byrne, enabled RichRod to continue such behavior. Perhaps the tipping point came at Sun Devil Stadium in November, when Arizona blew a lead and lost the Territorial Cup.

RichRod’s oafish responses to reporters’ questions came as Heeke stood in the interview room. Six weeks later, the school fired RichRod.

You wonder what took it so long.

“The football job at Arizona has been lacking people who have passion for the school and the program,” Hunley said. “For whatever reason, any kind of UA connection seemed to be avoided. It’s time to go back like a lot of other schools and take care of your own and be proud of what you’ve built.”

That doesn’t necessarily mean Cecil or Hunley expect to be Arizona’s next head coach, but it would be a sharp disappointment if one or both of those men, or other ex-Wildcats like Oregon assistant coach Joe Salave’a or Philadelphia Eagles special teams coordinator David Fipp, aren’t fully examined during the process of replacing RichRod and his staff.


http://tucson.com/sports/arizonawil...075ef1ce10.html#tracking-source=home-featured
 

Did anyone actually read the complaint? If even half the stuff is true, (forcibly trying to kiss and groping the complainant, grabbing his penis in front of her, etc.) he was correctly fired for sexual harassment, as well as other things that have no place in a workplace setting (forcing employees to lie to his wife to cover up an extra-marital affair). Not sure why people are defending this guy.

I read the whole thing. They already did an investigation and could not substantiate those allegations. That's why he wasn't fired for sexual harassment. If he was then the U of A wouldn't have to pay his buyout. Sounds like the school actually hoped the allegations were true so that they could fire him with cause and not pay the buyout.

I don't really think anyone is defending him other than simply pointing out that the complaint is only one side of the story. I'm not saying those sexual harassment allegations did or did not happen, but the only thing confirmed by the investigation (and by Rich Rod himself) was that he had an affair.
 

They already did an investigation and could not substantiate those allegations.

Unless folks are going to start wearing dashcams on top of their heads 24/7, these types of allegations will always be nearly impossible to "prove" with hard evidence.

That's where you start hearing people talk about "why would a person make up these allegations". Opponents will say she's just trying to hustle for money, while proponents will say that making the allegations is incredibly difficult, requires a lot of courage, she should be believed, etc. etc.
 

Unless folks are going to start wearing dashcams on top of their heads 24/7, these types of allegations will always be nearly impossible to "prove" with hard evidence.

That's where you start hearing people talk about "why would a person make up these allegations". Opponents will say she's just trying to hustle for money, while proponents will say that making the allegations is incredibly difficult, requires a lot of courage, she should be believed, etc. etc.

Which is exactly why this Country settles these debates for us. Innocent until proven guilty. Really shouldn't be a debate nor negotiable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Did anyone actually read the complaint? If even half the stuff is true, (forcibly trying to kiss and groping the complainant, grabbing his penis in front of her, etc.) he was correctly fired for sexual harassment, as well as other things that have no place in a workplace setting (forcing employees to lie to his wife to cover up an extra-marital affair). Not sure why people are defending this guy.

What if that half isn't true?

I'm not sure why half has to be true...
 



Slab, would encourage you to recognize the use of the word IF there.

He’s saying IF half is true .... then x, y, z. He’s not assuming half or any of it is true.
 

Which is exactly why this Country settles these debates for us. Innocent until proven guilty. Really shouldn't be a debate nor negotiable.

Rich Rod may be guilty - I have no idea. But the amount of people that in the last year that seem to believe in guilty until proven innocent is frightening. Feels like we're throwing out one of the greatest ideals in American law. I guess none of them have ever been falsely accused of something. I can guarantee if they had, they'd change their minds in a hurry.
 

Slab, would encourage you to recognize the use of the word IF there.

He’s saying IF half is true .... then x, y, z. He’s not assuming half or any of it is true.

goldy93 seemed to not like the idea of people "defending" this guy "IF" it is true.

I don't see why any of the "defenders" can't play their own IF just like goldy93.... they're all making assumptions.... none seem more right than any other.
 

Rich Rod may be guilty - I have no idea. But the amount of people that in the last year that seem to believe in guilty until proven innocent is frightening. Feels like we're throwing out one of the greatest ideals in American law. I guess none of them have ever been falsely accused of something. I can guarantee if they had, they'd change their minds in a hurry.

It is scary. To be fair, many/most are too young to have life experience and know any better, and the rest seem to have an agenda.
 

Rich Rod may be guilty - I have no idea. But the amount of people that in the last year that seem to believe in guilty until proven innocent is frightening. Feels like we're throwing out one of the greatest ideals in American law. I guess none of them have ever been falsely accused of something. I can guarantee if they had, they'd change their minds in a hurry.

Well he won't be guilty of a crime, unless hard evidence suddenly surfaces. I don't believe any criminal charges are being filed. So he IS innocent there ... which is really what your saying is all about, crime.

In civil suits, the bar is set significantly lower than beyond reasonable doubt. And this is a civil suit. All she and her litigation team need to do is convince a panel of folks who weren't clever enough to get out of jury duty that it is more likely than not that the allegations are true. Guessing he will settle, and with a signed NDA.
 

Well he won't be guilty of a crime, unless hard evidence suddenly surfaces. I don't believe any criminal charges are being filed. So he IS innocent there ... which is really what your saying is all about, crime.

In civil suits, the bar is set significantly lower than beyond reasonable doubt. And this is a civil suit. All she and her litigation team need to do is convince a panel of folks who weren't clever enough to get out of jury duty that it is more likely than not that the allegations are true. Guessing he will settle, and with a signed NDA.
I wasn't talking about the legitimacy or chance of success of a civil suit.
 




Top Bottom