Willie Taggart interview with KEZI's Kristen Rodgers

[pezsez1]

Thank you. It sounds like this is the part Taggart would like retracted, or maybe amended.

But there's nothing there to correct. The media simply used adjectives that Taggart doesn't like -- but they came from members of the athletic department staff. And, according to the University, the adjectives were appropriate. They weren't used unfairly.

What Taggart SHOULD HAVE DONE was invite the media to cover the first day of workouts with Coach O being back, and then they could have shown the kind of team-building workouts they're putting the players through. That would have set the record straight WITHOUT the bush-league tantrum and reporter ban.

Grief reached out to Taggart via text and told him he wanted to review this incident -- Taggart said he ignored him.

Seriously, what does "blame no one" and "make no excuses" even mean to Taggart?

[pezsez1]

I said this earlier, but "Win the Day" resonated because Chip walked the walk (and taught the lessons) on and off the football field. It wasn't just about gameday, and it wasn't just the football team. "Win the Day" was something everyone could buy into, kind of like Fleck's "Row the Boat."

I want "do something" to mean something.

[Phalanx]

Thank you. It sounds like this is the part Taggart would like retracted, or maybe amended.

But there's nothing there to correct. The media simply used adjectives that Taggart doesn't like -- but they came from members of the athletic department staff. And, according to the University, the adjectives were appropriate. They weren't used unfairly.

What Taggart SHOULD HAVE DONE was invite the media to cover the first day of workouts with Coach O being back, and then they could have shown the kind of team-building workouts they're putting the players through. That would have set the record straight WITHOUT the bush-league tantrum and reporter ban.

Grief reached out to Taggart via text and told him he wanted to review this incident -- Taggart said he ignored him.

Seriously, what does "blame no one" and "make no excuses" even mean to Taggart?

I've already addressed this. The report, taken as a whole, was very negative, and it didn't include any response from Taggart, even though he took the time to respond to Greif's questions. Greif is well within his rights as 'independent media' to report on it from whatever angle he chooses, and Taggart is well within his rights to call that angle into question and view talking to Greif as a waste of time and energy (plus, helping Greif keep the story alive is not exactly in Taggart's best interests). Everyone is independent and exercising free will. I'm comfortable leaving it there.

[pezsez1]

I've already addressed this. The report, taken as a whole, was very negative, and it didn't include any response from Taggart, even though he took the time to respond to Greif's questions. Greif is well within his rights as 'independent media' to report on it from whatever angle he chooses, and Taggart is well within his rights to call that angle into question and view talking to Greif as a waste of time and energy (plus, helping Greif keep the story alive is not exactly in Taggart's best interests). Everyone is independent and exercising free will. I'm comfortable leaving it there.

I'm going to say one more thing, only because I feel like we may have a bit of common ground here.

I'm not blaming Taggart for having a negative reaction to this coverage. Rather, I'm calling him out for how he chose to vent his frustration. This totally isn't the first time that a sports coach has publicly aired grievances with the local media, nor is it the first time a coach has flipped out over a story that's totally fair. That happens all the time. It's not much different than coaches yelling at referees during games. Even if they know the ref was correct, there are certain psychological (and messaging) advantages to being in the ref's ear. So I'm not surprised that Taggart made his general feelings known.

What surprises me is how far Taggart took what amounts to a sports/media non-issue. And then to refuse to talk to the Oregonian's reporter over this is just weird.

What's going to happen when the media reports on an argument between players? Or a three-game losing streak? Or a players-only meeting in which grievances are aired? Is Taggart going to throw a public fit every time a story doesn't paint the Ducks in a positive light?

Seriously, the fact that we're even still talking about this is an indictment of Taggart's judgement. This story would have been dead and buried weeks ago had he just accepted responsibility and moved on.

[Groundswell]

I would like to know if Taggart knew the DailyEmerald was going to post some of his quotes verbatim and if he was ok with that. Those quotes should have never seen the light of day as reported.

[Phalanx]

In no way was the article Greif wrote 'fair', so I'm not sure where that is coming from. The article was clearly painted to make it look like Oregon is killing their players with military-style, grueling workouts. The only way that is fair is if it's true, and it isn't. If he wanted to be 'fair', Greif should have included comments from the coach regarding intent of the workouts, as well as the fact that the players were allowed to tap out at any time. That is covering all the bases. As the article stands, it is skewed in one direction, like if a ref continually calls traveling on one player, but not on anyone else.

I actually agree though that Taggart's reponse was not very wise from a pragmatic standpoint. The way to handle media is to either court them and get on their good side, like Taggart often has done up to now, or just ignore them and institute the Greif block without talking about it and let Greif be the one to do the public whining (kinda like Chip did with Canzano). So I guess we can agree that Taggart blew this episode, anyway.

[pezsez1]

In no way was the article Greif wrote 'fair', so I'm not sure where that is coming from.

The Emerald's story said that the University investigated the fairness of the story and concluded that the coverage was fair.

I'm guessing the University investigated to see if it had grounds for demanding a correction or retraction, which (if memory serves me right) would be a first step toward a libel suit.

Otherwise, I'm not even sure why the University bothered to look into this. This whole thing is dumb.

[Phalanx]

Well, as Duck07 might say, the University is entitled to their opinion. I would not expect to get an opinion back from a journalist professor trashing on journalists, but that's just me. They took the diplomatic, wishy-washy approach, and nobody with experience with university heads would expect anything different. We all remember how stupid the OU president looked when he demanded that the results of the game with Oregon in 2006 be nullified. Not a good look, even if he had a good point. Most admins want to keep their own name out of it, so having a 'reasonable' neutral outcome to an investigation like that is to be expected. I don't consider it an authority on anything as you apparently do. It's just an exercise in CYA.

[pezsez1]

Important to note is the journalism dean isn't actually a journalist -- he's a University employee. His job may be to oversee a department that teaches a civic-minded profession, but the dean would also be biased to represent his employer.

Bottom line though is if the coverage was fair, then Taggart's response isn't justified. The University deemed the coverage was fair, and other AD sources confirmed it was fair. Players are saying the workouts weren't that bad (and Grief reported on that in one of his stories), but obviously the players would say anything to downplay this.

Taggart just needs to end this, apologize, and move on. There's no excuse for this still being an issue. Nobody would be talking about this still if not for Taggart. The negative perception from this is literally HIS fault, not the media's fault.

[Phalanx]

Important to note is the journalism dean isn't actually a journalist -- he's a University employee. His job may be to oversee a department that teaches a civic-minded profession, but the dean would also be biased to represent his employer.

Bottom line though is if the coverage was fair, then Taggart's response isn't justified. The University deemed the coverage was fair, and other AD sources confirmed it was fair. Players are saying the workouts weren't that bad (and Grief reported on that in one of his stories), but obviously the players would say anything to downplay this.

Taggart just needs to end this, apologize, and move on. There's no excuse for this still being an issue. Nobody would be talking about this still if not for Taggart. The negative perception from this is literally HIS fault, not the media's fault.

Before I rain blows on your head Frank Costanza style, I should probably confirm that we are reading the same article. This is the one I was reading:
http://www.dailyemerald.com/2017/02/23/ ... -reporter/

A few quotes:

"Tim Gleason, a journalism professor, conducted an investigation of the workout incident at the request of UO President Michael Schill in his capacity as UO’s Faculty Athletics Representative (FAR)."

"Note: Greif is a former sports editor for the Emerald and Gleason is a former member of the Emerald board of directors. Neither one is affiliated with the Emerald anymore."

Anyway, carry on.

[pezsez1]

My bad about Gleason! FORMER dean. Didn't realize he stepped down a few years ago.

He's still not a journalist -- he is a University employee.

Also, the fact he was once affiliated with The Emerald is completely irrelevant here. Taggart's beef isn't with The Emerald. And it's not like Gleason and Grief went to college together... they were probably separated by at least a couple decades.

Again, Phalanx, you are trying so hard to find reasons for the media to be biased, yet you're completely ignoring the very obvious reasons why Taggart is biased.

And unlike the media, Taggart is under no professional obligation to attempt to remain impartial.

[Phalanx]

My bad about Gleason! FORMER dean. Didn't realize he stepped down a few years ago.

He's still not a journalist -- he is a University employee.

Also, the fact he was once affiliated with The Emerald is completely irrelevant here. Taggart's beef isn't with The Emerald.

Well, for you, the players' opinions are irrelevant even though they were actually there and participating in the workouts, and to me they are relevant. For you, it isn't significant that the guy who did the investigation for the University is also a journalism professor with all of the relationships with journalists and that perspective that implies, and he used to work for a newspaper, and for me it is relevant. That's fine. Everyone sees the data they want to see, I guess.

[pezsez1]

Well, for you, the players' opinions are irrelevant even though they were actually there and participating in the workouts, and to me they are relevant. For you, it isn't significant that the guy who did the investigation for the University is also a journalism professor with all of the relationships with journalists and that perspective that implies, and he used to work for a newspaper, and for me it is relevant. That's fine. Everyone sees the data they want to see, I guess.

I didn't say the players are irrelevant -- I said they're incredibly biased. And they are. They have a huge stake in the narrative. This is their team, and these are their coaches, and it was their friends in the hospital. Nobody has more reasons to circle the wagons than they do.

As for how the University investigated this, as I said before -- it's all kind of dumb anyway.

Looking at this mess, I can honestly find just two things that Taggart can actually be upset about.

1) Grief didn't use quotes that Taggart allegedly gave him (which Grief disputes)

2) Taggart didn't like the adjectives "grueling" and "military-style."

Seriously, the University even bothered to investigate that? Why? What was the crime here? Who was seriously wronged? Is Taggart's ego so easily bruised that he called for an investigation?

This whole thing is just whack, and it should have been over weeks ago.

Taggart had better learn from this or he'll be in over his head when an actual crisis happens.

[bdkipe]

Everyone here has some pretty good takes on this. Some are from the side of those who have worked in journalism, some from those who are willing to let the staff settle in through the Spring Game before they cast judgement, here is my own take:

Taggart is not stupid or tone-deaf, not by any stretch. Far from it. This is a very calculated message he is trying to get out to his team. The man has won virtually every press conference, interview and public meet-and-greet he has been at since he accepted the job. He isn't just magically changing out of character and a taking a sudden right turn.

There is a reason he is making a seemingly big deal out of this, a reason he is letting his temper and four-letter words come out in certain interviews regarding this. There is a message he is trying to send and I think we might be missing the forest for the trees. This coach wants his team to come together and fight perception and he is leading the charge in a very public way, fighting perception.

That is just my own opinion.

[pezsez1]

Everyone here has some pretty good takes on this. Some are from the side of those who have worked in journalism, some from those who are willing to let the staff settle in through the Spring Game before they cast judgement, here is my own take:

Taggart is not stupid or tone-deaf, not by any stretch. Far from it. This is a very calculated message he is trying to get out to his team. The man has won virtually every press conference, interview and public meet-and-greet he has been at since he accepted the job. He isn't just magically changing out of character and a taking a sudden right turn.

There is a reason he is making a seemingly big deal out of this, a reason he is letting his temper and four-letter words come out in certain interviews regarding this. There is a message he is trying to send and I think we might be missing the forest for the trees. This coach wants his team to come together and fight perception and he is leading the charge in a very public way, fighting perception.

That is just my own opinion.

I think we can all agree on this, to an extent. It's like what I said earlier... what Taggart is doing with Grief isn't much different than coaches yelling at referees during games. It's definitely a form of gamesmanship to attempt to control the narrative.

I just think he went way too far. Yes, I want our team to win games, but I also want a coach who is a man of integrity. I'm too old to respect someone who is all talk and no substance. Not saying Taggart isn't a man of integrity, but so far he's just talk.