My take on Calipari

By: Harvey

Unlike my esteemed colleague and good friend, Guido, I don't have a big problem with John Calipari bolting from Memphis to Kentucky. It happens all the time in college sports. As irrelevant as it should be, the history of programs like Kentucky plays a major role in their appeal. The money is nice, too.

I don't fault coaches for going to find the big paycheck as much as I blame the fans and boosters of these programs for being a bunch of shitheads.

This isn't 1950. Kentucky fans and boosters seem to have this idea that there are still only a handful of programs in the NCAA capable of winning a championship, and if they don't win they have been failed by their coach.

Let's get real and stop saying the only reason Billy Gillispie got the boot was because of the way he treated people and acted in public.

If Billy Clyde was in fact the raging tool most people are saying he is, then he probably deserved to go anyway. The problem is this — if he'd won more, I think we all understand we wouldn't be talking about John Calipari today.

Boosters and fans are always willing to ignore the shortcomings of a coach who wins. There's a pretty good deal of hypocrisy involved in this deal if you ask me . . . people wanting to to punish a guy for a character flaw, when they don't have particularly desirable characters themselves.