In Defense of Butch Davis

What a wonderful time it must be to be a sports writer. Who could have an easier job? Wake up, shower, shave, jump on soap box, and print the latest column bashing UNC and head football coach Butch Davis. Sensationalize any rumor, euphemize it as the latest "report," exaggerate the occasional fact, and predict daily how it will all "get worse before it gets better." It's a recipe for success any two-bit columnist from any struggling newspaper can follow with sanctimonious pride.

Yes, sports journalists are approaching Nirvana. It's so easy to call for a coach's head under such circumstances, particularly when the media is so wildly fixated on the subject. What could be easier than to kick a man when he's down and to take the pious position?

Well, at the risk of raining on the parade, I for one have had it up to my ears with this hypocritical, holier-than-thou, feeding frenzy. It needs to end for several reasons.

First, shouldn't any objective journalist allow the process to conclude before jumping to conclusions and judgments? Haven't we seen the folly of this rush to judgment mentality before? Have we already forgotten the infamous Duke lacrosse rape case? You know, the monumental miscarriage of justice in which journalists, commentators, "civil rights activists," and some eighty-eight Duke professors immediately presumed innocent players guilty and ran a respected and equally blameless coach off campus? For several months of that controversy sports writers similarly demanded the termination of Duke's coach for his "lack of control." How did that one turn out for the high and mighty preachers of collegiate sports integrity?

Will the UNC football controversy prove to be as bogus as what happened to the Duke lacrosse team? Probably not. But from day one the media has gone out of its way to sensationalize the story with a similarly sloppy, half-cocked rush to judgment and false innuendo. And from this cauldron of half-truths and conjecture we are seeing myths steadily evolve.

For example, to read the daily columns of the UNC detractors, one would think that Davis was a known dirty coach who was directly responsible for the scandal-ridden University of Miami program of the Jimmy Johnson-Dennis Erickson era. To Ed Hardin and Carlton Tudor - two of the small potato sports writers attempting to make a name of themselves out of the affair - UNC knew full well that it was taking a chance bringing on damaged goods, and it's now time to pay the piper.

But what a bunch of bunk this is. The reason Butch Davis was so highly sought in the first place was his proven ability to win within the rules. In large part because of the media's slant, the masses now assume that Davis deserves the blame for what unfolded in Miami during the 1980s and early 90s. Actually, he came in to clean the program up, and what he accomplished was nothing short of amazing. Just before Davis' first season as the Hurricanes' head coach, Sports Illustrated ran an extensive cover story on why Miami should shut down its football program. The article opined that too many lines had been crossed, that integrity could never be restored, and that the old jokes - (e.g., that Miami was the one school where the team picture was taken from the front and the side) - were funny no more.

Davis did not cause or promote this environment at Miami; he corrected it. And do we think that, just maybe, the integrity of the Miami program was under a high-powered microscope throughout his tenure there? That Davis succeeded in righting Miami's ship, both on and off the field, should be testament enough to his credibility. Instead, sloppy, biased journalism attempts to associate him with the problems that he fixed.

What else about the attacks on Davis makes no sense? This entire suggestion that he came to North Carolina for the purpose of practicing his evil ways. Again, a simple review of the actual facts exposes the absurdity of this suggestion. Davis made it known that he was interested in the Carolina job when John Bunting was let go because he wanted to get back in the college game. A smoking hot commodity, Davis could have gone anywhere he pleased. Michigan State and other larger schools looking for coaches at the time were salivating at the prospect of landing him. Does anyone truly believe that if Davis intended to coach a dirty program he would have chosen a school as squeaky clean as UNC? Doesn't it make a bit more sense to believe that he was interested in the Carolina program because of, rather than in spite of, its respected history?

In other ways, the media has taken on a bizarre interest in blowing meaningless facts all out of proportion. Greensboro's Ed Hardin, who seems fixated on leading the chorus against Davis, wrote one of the more mindless pieces in the September 20^th edition of the Greensboro News & Record. There, he chastised Davis for - get this - referring to the team's summer camp as training camp. "Summer football practice isn't a camp," wrote Hardin, who suggested that Davis' use of the term proved his intent to turn the UNC program into a pro team.

Other pathetic examples of this yellow journalistic approach abound. Several columnists howled that a former Tar Heel, Chris Hawkins, was allowed to hang out in UNC's weight room as former running back Willie Parker's "manager." Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't much care if an individual player has a personal friend - professional or not - spot him during bench presses.

The lambasting of Davis for bringing aboard John Blake is also over the top. What we hear here is that Davis hired Blake despite his known connections with agents. Well, so what? Why is that a bad thing? And since when is "agent" a dirty word? Let's face it, blue chip prospects choose colleges with their professional aspirations in mind. Wouldn't any top notch recruit prefer to attend a school with connections and credibility at the next level? Does anyone honestly think that Mike Krzyzewski does not boast of his players' NBA placement rates when wooing a high school recruit? Are we to believe that Nick Saban doesn't tout his NFL experience and resulting contacts when making his pitch? Do we honestly think coaches of this caliber have no connections with agents?

Just a little objective perspective would not hurt with regard to the "tutorgate" issue either. The particular allegations here are that a tutor who worked with some of the football players may have gone too far by actually writing some of the players' papers and/or by being "too friendly" with the players. Because this same tutor reportedly worked with Butch Davis' high school son in the past, we apparently are to conclude that Davis knew she would do such a thing and that he happily put her on to his players to ensure that they would receive whatever improper help they needed.

But what we never hear is that the tutor, Jennifer Wiley, was already working for UNC's academic support department before Davis ever arrived on campus. Or that her contract was not renewed in 2009, a year before the NCAA investigation even began. The other thing we conveniently overlook is just how rampant this practice is. Tutors walk a fine line every day between helping the student with work and doing the work, particularly in subjects where writing predominates. In this age of email and instant messaging, students collaborate on written projects all the time. Probably every minute of every day, a student somewhere asks another to "proof my paper," only to receive an email with recommended revisions.

Having said that, if it turns out that players submitted papers authored by Ms. Wiley, then that is a problem, and the players should be punished. The players should be.

But to suggest that Davis should be burned at the stake for it is absurd. And, please, spare me the usual platitudes about Davis being the "captain of the ship," who is responsible for "institutional control." Truly, how on earth is the man supposed to know whether a handful of players on a team of 100+ submitted plagiarized papers? Does anyone actually believe that the players are telling him this? If not, then how should he know? As the head football coach of a Division I school, Davis has just a few other things on his plate: practices, game films, recruiting, constant travel, media appearances, game preparation and appearances - not to mention a bout with a little illness known as cancer. Someone, please, tell me when Davis should have the time to study his players' academic submissions and compare content for possible plagiarism red flags?

And while at it, tell me, preferably with a straight face, that things like this do not happen at every Division I school. No, that it happens elsewhere is not an excuse. That's true enough. But before condemning a coach for the actions of a handful of players, it is only fair and reasonable to consider the norm. When we do this, we suddenly realize that no one blasted media darling Mike Krzyzewski for his lack of "institutional control" when Greg Newton or Ricky Price were busted for cheating; or when Myron Piggie paid his star forward Corey Maggette; or when JJ Redick was busted in an on-campus dorm room pot party.

Perspective, you see, is a wonderful thing. And if just the slightest touch of it is applied to the case of Butch Davis, we'll quickly see how grossly unfair this ongoing witch-hunt has been. Indeed, the only thing confirmed to be "out of control" is a mindless sports media that does not hesitate to cherry pick facts and to print anonymous rumors for the sake of "out-scooping" competitors, sensationalizing stories, and selling seventy-five cent papers.

Wrap up this investigation. If hard evidence of misconduct by Butch Davis is found, then, yes, punitive action is needed. If, as I suspect, this all turns out to be a case of a few players making bad decisions, then it should be dealt with precisely as it has been - on a player by player basis. And unless something far more concrete is discovered, lay off Butch Davis.