[needle]

Luck has spoken (reportedly):

 A source with direct knowledge told ESPN's Thai that Luck met with the team in Taylor's presence on Thursday, and that Luck doubled down on standing by his coach.

Wetzel: Bad behavior is on Stanford coach Taylor, but this is Andrew Luck's program

[needle]

Luck has spoken (reportedly):

 A source with direct knowledge told ESPN's Thai that Luck met with the team in Taylor's presence on Thursday, and that Luck doubled down on standing by his coach.

Wetzel: Bad behavior is on Stanford coach Taylor, but this is Andrew Luck's program

[82lsju]

Luck has spoken (reportedly):

 A source with direct knowledge told ESPN's Thai that Luck met with the team in Taylor's presence on Thursday, and that Luck doubled down on standing by his coach.

Wetzel: Bad behavior is on Stanford coach Taylor, but this is Andrew Luck's program

so does this mean he's here for at least another season or is this the "he's got our 100% support" statement by management/ownership just before being fired?

[82lsju]

Luck has spoken (reportedly):

 A source with direct knowledge told ESPN's Thai that Luck met with the team in Taylor's presence on Thursday, and that Luck doubled down on standing by his coach.

Wetzel: Bad behavior is on Stanford coach Taylor, but this is Andrew Luck's program

so does this mean he's here for at least another season or is this the "he's got our 100% support" statement by management/ownership just before being fired?

[Goose]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootbal...roy-taylor

A shorter article that basically says the same thing. It appears that Stanford management in the person of Andrew Luck has indeed decided TT will be here to coach the 2025 team. If this is a "Coach has our 100% support" quickly followed by a firing IMO that will do LOTS of damage to Andrew Luck as GM. It will make him appear either two-faced or indecisive. Both are bad. For that reason I hope it doesn't evolve that way.

OTOH if there is continuing "bad conduct" by TT that can be credibly documented, they should let him go immediately. It is quite probable that 2025 is going to be his last year either way. We all may hope to be surprised and that the 2025 team is a big improvement over 2024. That is not where the betting line is right now. Saving his "buyout" might be nice if it is truly justifiable and warranted. We already have all the bad publicity out there, so no additional damage done.

[Goose]

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootbal...roy-taylor

A shorter article that basically says the same thing. It appears that Stanford management in the person of Andrew Luck has indeed decided TT will be here to coach the 2025 team. If this is a "Coach has our 100% support" quickly followed by a firing IMO that will do LOTS of damage to Andrew Luck as GM. It will make him appear either two-faced or indecisive. Both are bad. For that reason I hope it doesn't evolve that way.

OTOH if there is continuing "bad conduct" by TT that can be credibly documented, they should let him go immediately. It is quite probable that 2025 is going to be his last year either way. We all may hope to be surprised and that the 2025 team is a big improvement over 2024. That is not where the betting line is right now. Saving his "buyout" might be nice if it is truly justifiable and warranted. We already have all the bad publicity out there, so no additional damage done.

[Mick]

They really, really need to get this decision right. They don't have enough time to properly plan for bringing a new coach on board. And remember: failing to plan is planning to fail. It's going to be a lot easier to plan for a new coach in 2026 than 2025:

1) It would help them have another year of evidence about the NIL and portals.
2) It is critical to study the competition during this season.
3) They need to list and evaluate candidates, interview, check references, observe games, etc. over the course of a season.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were individuals that they've identified for certain roles that are a year away from joining them. I know I've done that in the past, I suspect many others on this board have too. It's why coaches draft the best player available, rather than one at a position of need.

Take your time and do it right, Andrew...

[Mick]

They really, really need to get this decision right. They don't have enough time to properly plan for bringing a new coach on board. And remember: failing to plan is planning to fail. It's going to be a lot easier to plan for a new coach in 2026 than 2025:

1) It would help them have another year of evidence about the NIL and portals.
2) It is critical to study the competition during this season.
3) They need to list and evaluate candidates, interview, check references, observe games, etc. over the course of a season.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were individuals that they've identified for certain roles that are a year away from joining them. I know I've done that in the past, I suspect many others on this board have too. It's why coaches draft the best player available, rather than one at a position of need.

Take your time and do it right, Andrew...

[MarinCard]

I could totally see a situation where this is just buying time for a negotiated wind-down that allows everyone to save face publicly - TT gets to say he didn't want to be a distraction to the team, AL gets to say he respects TT's decision and thanks him for his tenure, and AL + new AD get to go shopping. Lord knows the university has its fill of controversy the last 12+ months and Levin no doubt wants to turn the page from all that. At the same time, they dont' want to present the program as one that kicks guys when they're down or on their way out.

[MarinCard]

I could totally see a situation where this is just buying time for a negotiated wind-down that allows everyone to save face publicly - TT gets to say he didn't want to be a distraction to the team, AL gets to say he respects TT's decision and thanks him for his tenure, and AL + new AD get to go shopping. Lord knows the university has its fill of controversy the last 12+ months and Levin no doubt wants to turn the page from all that. At the same time, they dont' want to present the program as one that kicks guys when they're down or on their way out.

[Griffins78]

Both incidents and investigations occurred last year BEFORE Andrew Luck was named the GM in Nov. 2024. We’re just hearing it about it now. Me thinks (speculation) a big reason to create the GM position over TT was because of these incidents. And the decision to keep TT on as coach, probably on a probationary basis, was already made - probably after the second investigation for last season and perhaps for this coming season. 

Andrew came in to manage this mess and perhaps Bernard left because of it too. All my speculation.

Now that it has been made public - AL has to decide what to do with TT. It is a big decision

[Griffins78]

Both incidents and investigations occurred last year BEFORE Andrew Luck was named the GM in Nov. 2024. We’re just hearing it about it now. Me thinks (speculation) a big reason to create the GM position over TT was because of these incidents. And the decision to keep TT on as coach, probably on a probationary basis, was already made - probably after the second investigation for last season and perhaps for this coming season. 

Andrew came in to manage this mess and perhaps Bernard left because of it too. All my speculation.

Now that it has been made public - AL has to decide what to do with TT. It is a big decision

[MV72018]

If Andrew Luck made the call to keep TT as head coach in 2025, and did so knowing full well the findings of both investigations, then I've got serious questions about Andrew Luck's judgment. Maybe he's reluctant to pull the trigger on TT because he (and, if I'm not mistaken, Condi and Muir) were on the football-coach-search committee. This fiasco suggests strongly that that committee didn't do adequate due diligence re TT's character. The last search process seemed quite rushed to me, which is a risky way of proceeding.

[MV72018]

If Andrew Luck made the call to keep TT as head coach in 2025, and did so knowing full well the findings of both investigations, then I've got serious questions about Andrew Luck's judgment. Maybe he's reluctant to pull the trigger on TT because he (and, if I'm not mistaken, Condi and Muir) were on the football-coach-search committee. This fiasco suggests strongly that that committee didn't do adequate due diligence re TT's character. The last search process seemed quite rushed to me, which is a risky way of proceeding.

[drnoodleman]

I could totally see a situation where this is just buying time for a negotiated wind-down that allows everyone to save face publicly - TT gets to say he didn't want to be a distraction to the team, AL gets to say he respects TT's decision and thanks him for his tenure, and AL + new AD get to go shopping. Lord knows the university has its fill of controversy the last 12+ months and Levin no doubt wants to turn the page from all that. At the same time, they dont' want to present the program as one that kicks guys when they're down or on their way out.

Gee, I like this idea. And name Bob Gregory as the interim head coach (see Boise State and UW) to sustain recruiting efforts.

[drnoodleman]

I could totally see a situation where this is just buying time for a negotiated wind-down that allows everyone to save face publicly - TT gets to say he didn't want to be a distraction to the team, AL gets to say he respects TT's decision and thanks him for his tenure, and AL + new AD get to go shopping. Lord knows the university has its fill of controversy the last 12+ months and Levin no doubt wants to turn the page from all that. At the same time, they dont' want to present the program as one that kicks guys when they're down or on their way out.

Gee, I like this idea. And name Bob Gregory as the interim head coach (see Boise State and UW) to sustain recruiting efforts.

[cardbored]

Stanford has a losing football culture. The transition into a winning football culture, if that is to occur, cannot take place without conflict, hurt feelings, and changes in staffing and the broader institutional culture. From ESPN's reporting, we know that someone leaked privileged and confidential "documents" concerning two investigations. We do not know the nature or provenance of those documents, including whether they were final reports, preliminary reports, drafts, summaries, or even forgeries. Even accepting the reporting at face value, it is possible that the compliance officer is niggling or flat-out wrong in her rules interpretations. It is possible that one or more of these staffers does have poor personal hygiene and thus "smells," dresses inappropriately, or has insufficient interest in football. Given our recent football history, it may be that several folks around the football department have insufficient interest in football, and some may even be there to undermine the football program.

Stanford doesn't strike me as a place conducive to misogyny. People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled. Among the most egregious abuses of the modern press is its reliance on anonymous sources. That Taylor is still employed after two investigations and with a losing record implies that the university is not protecting him for nefarious reasons.

Taylor may or may not be the best person to serve as the head coach for Stanford football. That remains to be seen. But nothing in this ESPN report persuades me that he should be terminated because of these supposed accusations.

[cardbored]

Stanford has a losing football culture. The transition into a winning football culture, if that is to occur, cannot take place without conflict, hurt feelings, and changes in staffing and the broader institutional culture. From ESPN's reporting, we know that someone leaked privileged and confidential "documents" concerning two investigations. We do not know the nature or provenance of those documents, including whether they were final reports, preliminary reports, drafts, summaries, or even forgeries. Even accepting the reporting at face value, it is possible that the compliance officer is niggling or flat-out wrong in her rules interpretations. It is possible that one or more of these staffers does have poor personal hygiene and thus "smells," dresses inappropriately, or has insufficient interest in football. Given our recent football history, it may be that several folks around the football department have insufficient interest in football, and some may even be there to undermine the football program.

Stanford doesn't strike me as a place conducive to misogyny. People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled. Among the most egregious abuses of the modern press is its reliance on anonymous sources. That Taylor is still employed after two investigations and with a losing record implies that the university is not protecting him for nefarious reasons.

Taylor may or may not be the best person to serve as the head coach for Stanford football. That remains to be seen. But nothing in this ESPN report persuades me that he should be terminated because of these supposed accusations.

[needle]

People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled.

The first person to file a complaint did so after going to Tara VanDerveer to ask for advice on what to do, and it was Coach VanDerveer who then brought forward concerns to the athletic department administration, per this reporting (about the 2:55 mark in the video):

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/u...n/3825246/

[needle]

People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled.

The first person to file a complaint did so after going to Tara VanDerveer to ask for advice on what to do, and it was Coach VanDerveer who then brought forward concerns to the athletic department administration, per this reporting (about the 2:55 mark in the video):

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/u...n/3825246/

[cardbored]

People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled.

The first person to file a complaint did so after going to Tara VanDerveer to ask for advice on what to do, and it was Coach VanDerveer who then brought forward concerns to the athletic department administration, per this reporting (about the 2:55 mark in the video):

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/u...n/3825246/

Thank you for posting that NBC Bay Area report, which includes—at roughly the 1:00 mark—images of the purported O'Brien report. To the extent the O'Brien report is real, it appears that source of the original complaint is a male who identifies as a female and that the department employs multiple such individuals. Given the accusation by this person that Taylor discriminated against "her" both for her gender and sexual orientation, it must be the case—assuming the document is real—that the original complainant is a male who presents himself as a homosexual female. That information was left out of the ESPN report to bias readers against Taylor. Many people would be sympathetic to the plight of a female staffer in a male-dominated football environment. They will have far less sympathy for a man in the athletic department who dresses as a woman but still prefers to have sex with women.

This kind of stuff is why Stanford is not likely to be able to compete in football with, say, SEC schools anytime soon. Anyone who thinks high school kids from the south, or their families, are going to be okay with cross-dressing staffers in the football program is delusional.

[cardbored]

People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled.

The first person to file a complaint did so after going to Tara VanDerveer to ask for advice on what to do, and it was Coach VanDerveer who then brought forward concerns to the athletic department administration, per this reporting (about the 2:55 mark in the video):

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/u...n/3825246/

Thank you for posting that NBC Bay Area report, which includes—at roughly the 1:00 mark—images of the purported O'Brien report. To the extent the O'Brien report is real, it appears that source of the original complaint is a male who identifies as a female and that the department employs multiple such individuals. Given the accusation by this person that Taylor discriminated against "her" both for her gender and sexual orientation, it must be the case—assuming the document is real—that the original complainant is a male who presents himself as a homosexual female. That information was left out of the ESPN report to bias readers against Taylor. Many people would be sympathetic to the plight of a female staffer in a male-dominated football environment. They will have far less sympathy for a man in the athletic department who dresses as a woman but still prefers to have sex with women.

This kind of stuff is why Stanford is not likely to be able to compete in football with, say, SEC schools anytime soon. Anyone who thinks high school kids from the south, or their families, are going to be okay with cross-dressing staffers in the football program is delusional.

[martyup]

To the extent the O'Brien report is real, it appears that source of the original complaint is a male who identifies as a female and that the department employs multiple such individuals. Given the accusation by this person that Taylor discriminated against "her" both for her gender and sexual orientation, it must be the case—assuming the document is real—that the original complainant is a male who presents himself as a homosexual female. That information was left out of the ESPN report to bias readers against Taylor. Many people would be sympathetic to the plight of a female staffer in a male-dominated football environment. They will have far less sympathy for a man in the athletic department who dresses as a woman but still prefers to have sex with women.

This kind of stuff is why Stanford is not likely to be able to compete in football with, say, SEC schools anytime soon. Anyone who thinks high school kids from the south, or their families, are going to be okay with cross-dressing staffers in the football program is delusional.

Wow!  That sheds a whole new light on the situation.  Not exactly consistent with the "intellectual brutality" characteristic stamped upon the football program by Harbaugh.

[martyup]

To the extent the O'Brien report is real, it appears that source of the original complaint is a male who identifies as a female and that the department employs multiple such individuals. Given the accusation by this person that Taylor discriminated against "her" both for her gender and sexual orientation, it must be the case—assuming the document is real—that the original complainant is a male who presents himself as a homosexual female. That information was left out of the ESPN report to bias readers against Taylor. Many people would be sympathetic to the plight of a female staffer in a male-dominated football environment. They will have far less sympathy for a man in the athletic department who dresses as a woman but still prefers to have sex with women.

This kind of stuff is why Stanford is not likely to be able to compete in football with, say, SEC schools anytime soon. Anyone who thinks high school kids from the south, or their families, are going to be okay with cross-dressing staffers in the football program is delusional.

Wow!  That sheds a whole new light on the situation.  Not exactly consistent with the "intellectual brutality" characteristic stamped upon the football program by Harbaugh.

[WindyCityCard]

full post deleted, because I was going "political" by saying people deserve to be treated decently, by coaches and by message board posters.

[WindyCityCard]

full post deleted, because I was going "political" by saying people deserve to be treated decently, by coaches and by message board posters.

[cardcrimson]

I fear this thread is on its last legs.

I don't give a rats ass who TT bullied. According to two separate reports, he is a bully and has treated people horribly. He needs to go, there should be no place for mental abuse. 

And trust me, people in the South believe the same thing. . . .

[cardcrimson]

I fear this thread is on its last legs.

I don't give a rats ass who TT bullied. According to two separate reports, he is a bully and has treated people horribly. He needs to go, there should be no place for mental abuse. 

And trust me, people in the South believe the same thing. . . .

[Mudhead]

If this is accurate, it explains why Luck is staying with TT. Firing a football coach because he wasnt nice to a male cross dresser would pretty well end your program.  I am not saying it’s ok to bully anyone or that the Team would support bullying. I am suggesting that whoever decided to choose a male cross dresser to be compliance advisor for the football team ought to rethink their profession.  It was an error.

Once the error is made, TT and everyone associated with the football team has to live with it and treat the person with respect. But come on, we can do a better job of matching people with jobs than that.

[Mudhead]

If this is accurate, it explains why Luck is staying with TT. Firing a football coach because he wasnt nice to a male cross dresser would pretty well end your program.  I am not saying it’s ok to bully anyone or that the Team would support bullying. I am suggesting that whoever decided to choose a male cross dresser to be compliance advisor for the football team ought to rethink their profession.  It was an error.

Once the error is made, TT and everyone associated with the football team has to live with it and treat the person with respect. But come on, we can do a better job of matching people with jobs than that.

[PalmTree]

People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled.

The first person to file a complaint did so after going to Tara VanDerveer to ask for advice on what to do, and it was Coach VanDerveer who then brought forward concerns to the athletic department administration, per this reporting (about the 2:55 mark in the video):

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/u...n/3825246/

Thank you for posting that NBC Bay Area report, which includes—at roughly the 1:00 mark—images of the purported O'Brien report. To the extent the O'Brien report is real, it appears that source of the original complaint is a male who identifies as a female and that the department employs multiple such individuals. <SNIP>

To start, I was taught early on in my professional career to avoid including"...it appears..." in any written communiction like the plague.  I slo-mo'ed the clip at about that point and NBC Bay Area made a MAJOR mistake by failing to fully redact the complainant's (last) name from the shot of the report they included at the ~1:00 mark.

My question is, is this name the basis on your assertion that the the complainant is a transgender (male) staff member, or is there other information you have to back up your assertion - if the former, I think you should retract your post unless you have evidence to the contrary, in which case, I'll accept the facts/circumstances as they actually occured - but not condone the bullying - and move on.

Don't get me wrong - to reiterate, I'm more interested in just the facts of the situation, and not speculation/suspicions, which as we all know can easily send us off on tangents &/or down really ugly rabbit holes.  

Last, what I <really> friggin want is for the football ship to right itself and start an unprecedented chain of post-season bowl appearances, though this may have to wait until the 2026 season.

[PalmTree]

People who are unwilling to put their names to accusations for fear of losing their jobs are cowards and unprincipled.

The first person to file a complaint did so after going to Tara VanDerveer to ask for advice on what to do, and it was Coach VanDerveer who then brought forward concerns to the athletic department administration, per this reporting (about the 2:55 mark in the video):

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/sports/u...n/3825246/

Thank you for posting that NBC Bay Area report, which includes—at roughly the 1:00 mark—images of the purported O'Brien report. To the extent the O'Brien report is real, it appears that source of the original complaint is a male who identifies as a female and that the department employs multiple such individuals. <SNIP>

To start, I was taught early on in my professional career to avoid including"...it appears..." in any written communiction like the plague.  I slo-mo'ed the clip at about that point and NBC Bay Area made a MAJOR mistake by failing to fully redact the complainant's (last) name from the shot of the report they included at the ~1:00 mark.

My question is, is this name the basis on your assertion that the the complainant is a transgender (male) staff member, or is there other information you have to back up your assertion - if the former, I think you should retract your post unless you have evidence to the contrary, in which case, I'll accept the facts/circumstances as they actually occured - but not condone the bullying - and move on.

Don't get me wrong - to reiterate, I'm more interested in just the facts of the situation, and not speculation/suspicions, which as we all know can easily send us off on tangents &/or down really ugly rabbit holes.  

Last, what I <really> friggin want is for the football ship to right itself and start an unprecedented chain of post-season bowl appearances, though this may have to wait until the 2026 season.

[JohnR34231]

If this is accurate, it explains why Luck is staying with TT. Firing a football coach because he wasnt nice to a male cross dresser would pretty well end your program.  I am not saying it’s ok to bully anyone or that the Team would support bullying. I am suggesting that whoever decided to choose a male cross dresser to be compliance advisor for the football team ought to rethink their profession.  It was an error.

Once the error is made, TT and everyone associated with the football team has to live with it and treat the person with respect. But come on, we can do a better job of matching people with jobs than that.

I tend to agree with you, but whoever hired the person perhaps thought he was just honoring the University's commitment to diversification.

[JohnR34231]

If this is accurate, it explains why Luck is staying with TT. Firing a football coach because he wasnt nice to a male cross dresser would pretty well end your program.  I am not saying it’s ok to bully anyone or that the Team would support bullying. I am suggesting that whoever decided to choose a male cross dresser to be compliance advisor for the football team ought to rethink their profession.  It was an error.

Once the error is made, TT and everyone associated with the football team has to live with it and treat the person with respect. But come on, we can do a better job of matching people with jobs than that.

I tend to agree with you, but whoever hired the person perhaps thought he was just honoring the University's commitment to diversification.

[Mick]

If this is accurate, it explains why Luck is staying with TT. Firing a football coach because he wasnt nice to a male cross dresser would pretty well end your program.  I am not saying it’s ok to bully anyone or that the Team would support bullying. I am suggesting that whoever decided to choose a male cross dresser to be compliance advisor for the football team ought to rethink their profession.  It was an error.

Once the error is made, TT and everyone associated with the football team has to live with it and treat the person with respect. But come on, we can do a better job of matching people with jobs than that.

I tend to agree with you, but whoever hired the person perhaps thought he was just honoring the University's commitment to diversification.

I know you were kidding with that comment, but...we were on the verge of losing a brobdingnagian Midwestern client when Arthur Andersen was imploding. We did all the attest/audit/accounting work, and AA did all the tax work. The tax partner at AA told another Big Five firm that if they made him a direct admit partner, he would deliver all of the work of this brobdingnagian client (pre-Sarbanes Oxley, it happened regularly). The CFO was both his best friend and chairman of the audit committee.

Our head of sales and I headed to the client to try to save it. In our meeting, the client spent 45 minutes describing how poorly we had administered the account over the past decade -- and they didn't repeat themselves. The capper was that our choice of partner on the account was literally as tone-deaf as possible, a spectacular cultural mismatch.

Ignore cultural integration at your peril...

[Mick]

If this is accurate, it explains why Luck is staying with TT. Firing a football coach because he wasnt nice to a male cross dresser would pretty well end your program.  I am not saying it’s ok to bully anyone or that the Team would support bullying. I am suggesting that whoever decided to choose a male cross dresser to be compliance advisor for the football team ought to rethink their profession.  It was an error.

Once the error is made, TT and everyone associated with the football team has to live with it and treat the person with respect. But come on, we can do a better job of matching people with jobs than that.

I tend to agree with you, but whoever hired the person perhaps thought he was just honoring the University's commitment to diversification.

I know you were kidding with that comment, but...we were on the verge of losing a brobdingnagian Midwestern client when Arthur Andersen was imploding. We did all the attest/audit/accounting work, and AA did all the tax work. The tax partner at AA told another Big Five firm that if they made him a direct admit partner, he would deliver all of the work of this brobdingnagian client (pre-Sarbanes Oxley, it happened regularly). The CFO was both his best friend and chairman of the audit committee.

Our head of sales and I headed to the client to try to save it. In our meeting, the client spent 45 minutes describing how poorly we had administered the account over the past decade -- and they didn't repeat themselves. The capper was that our choice of partner on the account was literally as tone-deaf as possible, a spectacular cultural mismatch.

Ignore cultural integration at your peril...

[cardcrimson]

What alternative universe am I living in? What alternative Cardboard is this? 

Multiple posters here don't appear to see an issue with bullying a person in the football program because simply they are trans. What does that matter? Are they good at their job is what matters. Do they do the work and are respected for their work? 

Bullies are bullies and mental abuse shouldn't be accepted anywhere, especially at places like Stanford where we supposedly hold ourselves to a higher standard. 

Finally, why am I seemingly the only one here thinking that tolerance of bullies should be color, and gender blind, no matter how fluid it is. . . .

[cardcrimson]

What alternative universe am I living in? What alternative Cardboard is this? 

Multiple posters here don't appear to see an issue with bullying a person in the football program because simply they are trans. What does that matter? Are they good at their job is what matters. Do they do the work and are respected for their work? 

Bullies are bullies and mental abuse shouldn't be accepted anywhere, especially at places like Stanford where we supposedly hold ourselves to a higher standard. 

Finally, why am I seemingly the only one here thinking that tolerance of bullies should be color, and gender blind, no matter how fluid it is. . . .

[Mick]

I fear this thread is on its last legs.

I don't give a rats ass who TT bullied. According to two separate reports, he is a bully and has treated people horribly. He needs to go, there should be no place for mental abuse. 

And trust me, people in the South believe the same thing. . . .

May we assume that your position is that anyone at Stanford who bullies anyone else and treats others horribly? They need to go, full stop?

[Mick]

I fear this thread is on its last legs.

I don't give a rats ass who TT bullied. According to two separate reports, he is a bully and has treated people horribly. He needs to go, there should be no place for mental abuse. 

And trust me, people in the South believe the same thing. . . .

May we assume that your position is that anyone at Stanford who bullies anyone else and treats others horribly? They need to go, full stop?