Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

This forum is for Football related topics only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
User avatar
NowhereLandAggie
Posts: 3237
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 4:25 pm
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 94 times

Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by NowhereLandAggie » January 13th, 2021, 1:41 pm

It will occur behind closed doors, press conference to follow. No one in the know will divulge anything, so there is no inside information on this.

https://www.sltrib.com/sports/utah-stat ... president/



User avatar
Sl7vk
Posts: 1339
Joined: November 18th, 2018, 9:07 pm
Location: Holladay Utah
Has thanked: 464 times
Been thanked: 637 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by Sl7vk » January 13th, 2021, 2:02 pm

This should be super interesting.
Seems like this is ahead of schedule? If that's the case I would lean towards no fault being assessed and we can all just move on.
These users thanked the author Sl7vk for the post:
JSHarvey



User avatar
USU78
Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
Posts: 9282
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
Location: Sandy
Has thanked: 2416 times
Been thanked: 759 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by USU78 » January 13th, 2021, 2:07 pm

Just heard that on the radio.

Alrighty then.


You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

User avatar
ViAggie
Posts: 11457
Joined: June 16th, 2011, 6:49 pm
Location: Temecula, California
Has thanked: 705 times
Been thanked: 478 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by ViAggie » January 13th, 2021, 2:45 pm

Unless she has sort of history of this kind of stuff, or had some ongoing and underlying personnel issues that we were not aware of, I'm guessing she keeps her job.


Just another day in the (Aggie) Brotherhood

User avatar
3rdGenAggie
Pick'em Champ - '16 Kickoff
Posts: 6775
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:53 pm
Location: The City of the Salty Lake
Has thanked: 572 times
Been thanked: 257 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by 3rdGenAggie » January 13th, 2021, 2:58 pm

We have a dozen threads saying this, but I can't imagine with full context, that she said what she was accused of saying.

Maybe she did. I'm glad we'll find out.


"I have no idea what I'm doing, but I know I'm doing it really, really well." -Andy Dwyer

User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7340
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 277 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by GeoAg » January 13th, 2021, 4:36 pm

Even if she said what the explanation was, it isn't ok. She blew it. I hate to say it because I don't think there is a discrimination problem, at least I hope not. But if I did a similar thing in a hiring situation at my job and it let to this kind of a black cloud, I would be gone.


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

BleedAggieBlue0
Pick'em Champ - '14 Bowl
Posts: 2628
Joined: January 8th, 2012, 10:18 pm
Has thanked: 242 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by BleedAggieBlue0 » January 13th, 2021, 4:39 pm

GeoAg wrote:Even if she said what the explanation was, it isn't ok. She blew it. I hate to say it because I don't think there is a discrimination problem, at least I hope not. But if I did a similar thing in a hiring situation at my job and it let to this kind of a black cloud, I would be gone.
Yeah that’s basically how I feel. Whether or not there’s a discrimination issue really doesn’t matter one bit. In a position like that, or really most jobs, you don’t have the luxury of saying idiotic things. Every common friend I have with her only has great things to say about her, so I hope it turns out she’s not guilty of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



AggieUprising50
Posts: 798
Joined: January 31st, 2015, 4:31 pm
Has thanked: 86 times
Been thanked: 212 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by AggieUprising50 » January 13th, 2021, 5:19 pm

Good, glad we could get this over with quickly. Regardless of the outcome it’s the only part of the 2020 season that remains. Time to rip the bandaid off and move on



gomretat
Posts: 697
Joined: November 27th, 2013, 10:16 am
Has thanked: 34 times
Been thanked: 72 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by gomretat » January 13th, 2021, 5:39 pm

I hope she is cleared and sticks around.
These users thanked the author gomretat for the post (total 2):
ViAggiebluegrouse



Aggie formerly in Hawaii
Posts: 4460
Joined: October 22nd, 2016, 1:06 am
Has thanked: 342 times
Been thanked: 778 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by Aggie formerly in Hawaii » January 13th, 2021, 5:42 pm

Good news.



User avatar
CaptainChaos
Posts: 946
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:58 am
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by CaptainChaos » January 13th, 2021, 6:20 pm

I thought there was supposed to be a statement last Tuesday... I have been wondering what has been going on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Elkaggie
Posts: 4151
Joined: August 26th, 2011, 5:21 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by Elkaggie » January 13th, 2021, 6:33 pm

CaptainChaos wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 6:20 pm
I thought there was supposed to be a statement last Tuesday... I have been wondering what has been going on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Same! Last week I heard the exact same thing in the radio.



User avatar
USU78
Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
Posts: 9282
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
Location: Sandy
Has thanked: 2416 times
Been thanked: 759 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by USU78 » January 13th, 2021, 7:05 pm

This and Frank's new job get announced on the same day.

Pure coincidence, I'm sure.
These users thanked the author USU78 for the post:
aggies22


You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 10686
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 6615 times
Been thanked: 4072 times
Contact:

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by aggies22 » January 13th, 2021, 7:10 pm

USU78 wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 7:05 pm
This and Frank's new job get announced on the same day.

Pure coincidence, I'm sure.
Or is it.......?
These users thanked the author aggies22 for the post:
USU78



1TruAggie
Posts: 150
Joined: November 17th, 2010, 7:27 pm
Location: Gilbert, AZ
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by 1TruAggie » January 13th, 2021, 9:56 pm

My guess? Dr. Crockett said something along the lines of this:

"We appreciate you athletes and how you've represented the school in a uniquely challenging year. We appreciate your sacrifices. We acknowledge the ringing endorsement and character witness you've given Coach Maile. He's been a steadying influence and a bright spot here for 14 years as a player and coach and is a true Aggie. Coach M is a strong candidate for the head coaching position. He's done everything that's been asked of him."

"That said, hiring a head coach with the program in it's current state is a monumental challenge and involves many considerations. The athletic director and I have to objectively look at all the candidates and their body of work. We have to weigh everyone that's ready, willing and able to become the next head football coach at USU. We wouldn't be doing our jobs if we simply hired someone because he's local due to his current affiliation with the program, or factors like his race and religion."

Dr. Crockett has navigated her 30-yr career too well to trip up like the players stated. Just a hunch. She may have been responding to arguments made by players that Coach M's hiring would continue the Poly, LDS, Utah pipeline, so she may have been directly responding in that context. We'll see.



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7340
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 277 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by GeoAg » January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm

1TruAggie wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 9:56 pm
My guess? Dr. Crockett said something along the lines of this:

"We appreciate you athletes and how you've represented the school in a uniquely challenging year. We appreciate your sacrifices. We acknowledge the ringing endorsement and character witness you've given Coach Maile. He's been a steadying influence and a bright spot here for 14 years as a player and coach and is a true Aggie. Coach M is a strong candidate for the head coaching position. He's done everything that's been asked of him."

"That said, hiring a head coach with the program in it's current state is a monumental challenge and involves many considerations. The athletic director and I have to objectively look at all the candidates and their body of work. We have to weigh everyone that's ready, willing and able to become the next head football coach at USU. We wouldn't be doing our jobs if we simply hired someone because he's local due to his current affiliation with the program, or factors like his race and religion."

Dr. Crockett has navigated her 30-yr career too well to trip up like the players stated. Just a hunch. She may have been responding to arguments made by players that Coach M's hiring would continue the Poly, LDS, Utah pipeline, so she may have been directly responding in that context. We'll see.
My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

User avatar
ShowMeAggie
Posts: 754
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 9:43 am
Has thanked: 106 times
Been thanked: 120 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by ShowMeAggie » January 13th, 2021, 11:51 pm

GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm
1TruAggie wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 9:56 pm
My guess? Dr. Crockett said something along the lines of this:

"We appreciate you athletes and how you've represented the school in a uniquely challenging year. We appreciate your sacrifices. We acknowledge the ringing endorsement and character witness you've given Coach Maile. He's been a steadying influence and a bright spot here for 14 years as a player and coach and is a true Aggie. Coach M is a strong candidate for the head coaching position. He's done everything that's been asked of him."

"That said, hiring a head coach with the program in it's current state is a monumental challenge and involves many considerations. The athletic director and I have to objectively look at all the candidates and their body of work. We have to weigh everyone that's ready, willing and able to become the next head football coach at USU. We wouldn't be doing our jobs if we simply hired someone because he's local due to his current affiliation with the program, or factors like his race and religion."

Dr. Crockett has navigated her 30-yr career too well to trip up like the players stated. Just a hunch. She may have been responding to arguments made by players that Coach M's hiring would continue the Poly, LDS, Utah pipeline, so she may have been directly responding in that context. We'll see.
My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
You're wrong. this statement here is clean and harmless. not even Farrakhan could find fault with this one. unfortunately, it probably wasn't as clean as this. which is why we're in this mess...



bluegrouse
Posts: 3361
Joined: November 9th, 2010, 5:04 pm
Has thanked: 438 times
Been thanked: 637 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by bluegrouse » January 14th, 2021, 1:07 am

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 4:39 pm
GeoAg wrote:Even if she said what the explanation was, it isn't ok. She blew it. I hate to say it because I don't think there is a discrimination problem, at least I hope not. But if I did a similar thing in a hiring situation at my job and it let to this kind of a black cloud, I would be gone.
Yeah that’s basically how I feel. Whether or not there’s a discrimination issue really doesn’t matter one bit. In a position like that, or really most jobs, you don’t have the luxury of saying idiotic things. Every common friend I have with her only has great things to say about her, so I hope it turns out she’s not guilty of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How do you know she said anything idiotic? Nobody has been told what she actually said.



User avatar
GUS
Posts: 2888
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:04 am
Has thanked: 107 times
Been thanked: 248 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by GUS » January 14th, 2021, 3:22 am

So, if it comes out as a big nothing. Does Frank look stupid for hiring an attorney?



User avatar
2004AG
Posts: 7502
Joined: November 16th, 2010, 11:42 am
Has thanked: 188 times
Been thanked: 486 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by 2004AG » January 14th, 2021, 7:13 am

GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 4:36 pm
Even if she said what the explanation was, it isn't ok. She blew it. I hate to say it because I don't think there is a discrimination problem, at least I hope not. But if I did a similar thing in a hiring situation at my job and it let to this kind of a black cloud, I would be gone.
I just don't know how you can say "it isn't ok" and "she blew it", without even knowing what she said.

:headscratch: :headscratch:
These users thanked the author 2004AG for the post (total 2):
NowhereLandAggiebluegrouse



BleedAggieBlue0
Pick'em Champ - '14 Bowl
Posts: 2628
Joined: January 8th, 2012, 10:18 pm
Has thanked: 242 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by BleedAggieBlue0 » January 14th, 2021, 7:22 am

bluegrouse wrote:
BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 4:39 pm
GeoAg wrote:Even if she said what the explanation was, it isn't ok. She blew it. I hate to say it because I don't think there is a discrimination problem, at least I hope not. But if I did a similar thing in a hiring situation at my job and it let to this kind of a black cloud, I would be gone.
Yeah that’s basically how I feel. Whether or not there’s a discrimination issue really doesn’t matter one bit. In a position like that, or really most jobs, you don’t have the luxury of saying idiotic things. Every common friend I have with her only has great things to say about her, so I hope it turns out she’s not guilty of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How do you know she said anything idiotic? Nobody has been told what she actually said.
So are you unable to read the part where GeoAg said if? And then my comment that was agreeing with his? So very very clearly talking about, IF she said what it’s been rumored that she said.

If she did that, it’s idiotic.
If she didn’t, it’s not.

Not sure how you missed that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
These users thanked the author BleedAggieBlue0 for the post:
aggies22



aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 10686
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 6615 times
Been thanked: 4072 times
Contact:

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by aggies22 » January 14th, 2021, 7:26 am

GUS wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 3:22 am
So, if it comes out as a big nothing. Does Frank look stupid for hiring an attorney?
Probably. And I like Frank.



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 7340
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 277 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by GeoAg » January 14th, 2021, 7:29 am

2004AG wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 7:13 am
GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 4:36 pm
Even if she said what the explanation was, it isn't ok. She blew it. I hate to say it because I don't think there is a discrimination problem, at least I hope not. But if I did a similar thing in a hiring situation at my job and it let to this kind of a black cloud, I would be gone.
I just don't know how you can say "it isn't ok" and "she blew it", without even knowing what she said.

:headscratch: :headscratch:
I am saying if she said what it is rumored she said. And frankly if she mentioned anything religious or racial at all. If she didn't, my comment wouldn't apply


"I don't think you become resilient right in the middle of the season when adversity hits. You learn how to face adversity in the offseason in football. That's when we win games around Utah State." -Coach Matt Wells #ArmsAround

User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 2645
Joined: August 30th, 2011, 1:22 pm
Location: Smithfield
Has thanked: 1499 times
Been thanked: 169 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by BLUERUFiO » January 14th, 2021, 7:33 am

GUS wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 3:22 am
So, if it comes out as a big nothing. Does Frank look stupid for hiring an attorney?
Do we even know if he hired an attorney?


GO AGGIES! GO AGGIES! HEY! HEY! HEY!

Madmartigan
Posts: 2919
Joined: November 19th, 2010, 11:30 pm
Has thanked: 211 times
Been thanked: 331 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by Madmartigan » January 14th, 2021, 8:37 am

BLUERUFiO wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 7:33 am
GUS wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 3:22 am
So, if it comes out as a big nothing. Does Frank look stupid for hiring an attorney?
Do we even know if he hired an attorney?
One of the articles stated he had retained counsel, yes.



User avatar
BLUERUFiO
Posts: 2645
Joined: August 30th, 2011, 1:22 pm
Location: Smithfield
Has thanked: 1499 times
Been thanked: 169 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by BLUERUFiO » January 14th, 2021, 8:46 am

Ah, gotcha. I missed that part. Him getting another, presumably better paying job fast should minimize some of the case value.


GO AGGIES! GO AGGIES! HEY! HEY! HEY!

Madmartigan
Posts: 2919
Joined: November 19th, 2010, 11:30 pm
Has thanked: 211 times
Been thanked: 331 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by Madmartigan » January 14th, 2021, 8:54 am

BLUERUFiO wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 8:46 am
Ah, gotcha. I missed that part. Him getting another, presumably better paying job fast should minimize some of the case value.
Or they settled quickly? Who knows. I wish him the best and want to move on from this mess ASAP.
These users thanked the author Madmartigan for the post:
BLUERUFiO



User avatar
NIrishAg
Posts: 515
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 4:45 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by NIrishAg » January 14th, 2021, 9:08 am

GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm

My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
What in that statement could she have not said? Recent judicial decisions have come down on the side of saying you can NOT hire someone based solely on a protected class. The USU counsel and HR have made it clear that this is the policy that the University should follow. So Cockett saying, "we can't hire someone solely based off of [insert protected class]" is completely in line with both recent judicial decisions and direction she will have received from USU's legal and HR arms.
These users thanked the author NIrishAg for the post (total 4):
splintorbSlim80Sl7vkNowhereLandAggie



User avatar
NowhereLandAggie
Posts: 3237
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 4:25 pm
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 94 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by NowhereLandAggie » January 14th, 2021, 10:23 am

NIrishAg wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 9:08 am
GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm

My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
What in that statement could she have not said? Recent judicial decisions have come down on the side of saying you can NOT hire someone based solely on a protected class. The USU counsel and HR have made it clear that this is the policy that the University should follow. So Cockett saying, "we can't hire someone solely based off of [insert protected class]" is completely in line with both recent judicial decisions and direction she will have received from USU's legal and HR arms.
And since no one really knows what was said, all we have had is speculation. But that narrative you state could have been exactly what was said. I guess we will know more Friday.



User avatar
3rdGenAggie
Pick'em Champ - '16 Kickoff
Posts: 6775
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:53 pm
Location: The City of the Salty Lake
Has thanked: 572 times
Been thanked: 257 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by 3rdGenAggie » January 14th, 2021, 10:41 am

We'll find out.

Given what we know now, Occam's razor suggests that between the two options (1. A 30 year veteran of the very politically correct university system said something beyond the pale regarding hiring, or 2. Several 20-something football players were emotionally charged over a call regarding a coach they love and heard something they didn't like and took it out of context) the simplest explanation is number 2.
These users thanked the author 3rdGenAggie for the post:
USU78


"I have no idea what I'm doing, but I know I'm doing it really, really well." -Andy Dwyer

User avatar
USU78
Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
Posts: 9282
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
Location: Sandy
Has thanked: 2416 times
Been thanked: 759 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by USU78 » January 14th, 2021, 10:44 am

NowhereLandAggie wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 10:23 am
NIrishAg wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 9:08 am
GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm
My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
What in that statement could she have not said? Recent judicial decisions have come down on the side of saying you can NOT hire someone based solely on a protected class. The USU counsel and HR have made it clear that this is the policy that the University should follow. So Cockett saying, "we can't hire someone solely based off of [insert protected class]" is completely in line with both recent judicial decisions and direction she will have received from USU's legal and HR arms.
And since no one really knows what was said, all we have had is speculation. But that narrative you state could have been exactly what was said. I guess we will know more Friday.
Whatever was said is written on the wind, and yes, every player could easily have heard it wrong.

More importantly, both of the following could be true at the same time: NC dislikes Mormons, Men, and Polynesians and disfavors them in hiring decisions; and NC said nothing that would give rise to a discrimination in employment claim in that Zoom meeting.


You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

BleedAggieBlue0
Pick'em Champ - '14 Bowl
Posts: 2628
Joined: January 8th, 2012, 10:18 pm
Has thanked: 242 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by BleedAggieBlue0 » January 14th, 2021, 11:06 am

USU78 wrote:
NowhereLandAggie wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 10:23 am
NIrishAg wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 9:08 am
GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm
My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
What in that statement could she have not said? Recent judicial decisions have come down on the side of saying you can NOT hire someone based solely on a protected class. The USU counsel and HR have made it clear that this is the policy that the University should follow. So Cockett saying, "we can't hire someone solely based off of [insert protected class]" is completely in line with both recent judicial decisions and direction she will have received from USU's legal and HR arms.
And since no one really knows what was said, all we have had is speculation. But that narrative you state could have been exactly what was said. I guess we will know more Friday.
Whatever was said is written on the wind, and yes, every player could easily have heard it wrong.

More importantly, both of the following could be true at the same time: NC dislikes Mormons, Men, and Polynesians and disfavors them in hiring decisions; and NC said nothing that would give rise to a discrimination in employment claim in that Zoom meeting.
Can’t speak to all of those, but I at least know she hates Mormons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



User avatar
USU78
Pick'em Champ - '16 Weekly
Posts: 9282
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 6:43 am
Location: Sandy
Has thanked: 2416 times
Been thanked: 759 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by USU78 » January 14th, 2021, 11:07 am

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 11:06 am
USU78 wrote:
NowhereLandAggie wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 10:23 am
NIrishAg wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 9:08 am
GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm
My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
What in that statement could she have not said? Recent judicial decisions have come down on the side of saying you can NOT hire someone based solely on a protected class. The USU counsel and HR have made it clear that this is the policy that the University should follow. So Cockett saying, "we can't hire someone solely based off of [insert protected class]" is completely in line with both recent judicial decisions and direction she will have received from USU's legal and HR arms.
And since no one really knows what was said, all we have had is speculation. But that narrative you state could have been exactly what was said. I guess we will know more Friday.
Whatever was said is written on the wind, and yes, every player could easily have heard it wrong.

More importantly, both of the following could be true at the same time: NC dislikes Mormons, Men, and Polynesians and disfavors them in hiring decisions; and NC said nothing that would give rise to a discrimination in employment claim in that Zoom meeting.
Can’t speak to all of those, but I at least know she hates Mormons.
And I can't speak to that. I know both of my brothers think that.


You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

BleedAggieBlue0
Pick'em Champ - '14 Bowl
Posts: 2628
Joined: January 8th, 2012, 10:18 pm
Has thanked: 242 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by BleedAggieBlue0 » January 14th, 2021, 11:13 am

USU78 wrote:
BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 11:06 am
USU78 wrote:
NowhereLandAggie wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 10:23 am
NIrishAg wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 9:08 am
GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm
My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
What in that statement could she have not said? Recent judicial decisions have come down on the side of saying you can NOT hire someone based solely on a protected class. The USU counsel and HR have made it clear that this is the policy that the University should follow. So Cockett saying, "we can't hire someone solely based off of [insert protected class]" is completely in line with both recent judicial decisions and direction she will have received from USU's legal and HR arms.
And since no one really knows what was said, all we have had is speculation. But that narrative you state could have been exactly what was said. I guess we will know more Friday.
Whatever was said is written on the wind, and yes, every player could easily have heard it wrong.

More importantly, both of the following could be true at the same time: NC dislikes Mormons, Men, and Polynesians and disfavors them in hiring decisions; and NC said nothing that would give rise to a discrimination in employment claim in that Zoom meeting.
Can’t speak to all of those, but I at least know she hates Mormons.
And I can't speak to that. I know both of my brothers think that.
Yeah that’s the only part I’m certain of- we have the same close friend group. Definitely doubt she hates Polys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



slcagg
Posts: 6357
Joined: December 15th, 2010, 6:29 pm
Has thanked: 1361 times
Been thanked: 1082 times

Re: Verdict on Cockett to be released Friday

Post by slcagg » January 14th, 2021, 11:16 am

BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 11:13 am
USU78 wrote:
BleedAggieBlue0 wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 11:06 am
USU78 wrote:
NowhereLandAggie wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 10:23 am
NIrishAg wrote:
January 14th, 2021, 9:08 am
GeoAg wrote:
January 13th, 2021, 11:02 pm
My guess too...and like I said, you can't say that. She has to know better.
What in that statement could she have not said? Recent judicial decisions have come down on the side of saying you can NOT hire someone based solely on a protected class. The USU counsel and HR have made it clear that this is the policy that the University should follow. So Cockett saying, "we can't hire someone solely based off of [insert protected class]" is completely in line with both recent judicial decisions and direction she will have received from USU's legal and HR arms.
And since no one really knows what was said, all we have had is speculation. But that narrative you state could have been exactly what was said. I guess we will know more Friday.
Whatever was said is written on the wind, and yes, every player could easily have heard it wrong.

More importantly, both of the following could be true at the same time: NC dislikes Mormons, Men, and Polynesians and disfavors them in hiring decisions; and NC said nothing that would give rise to a discrimination in employment claim in that Zoom meeting.
Can’t speak to all of those, but I at least know she hates Mormons.
And I can't speak to that. I know both of my brothers think that.
Yeah that’s the only part I’m certain of- we have the same close friend group. Definitely doubt she hates Polys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What does hate Mormons mean? Just talks poorly of them? Unfortunate if she feels that way since a large percentage is Mormon.



Post Reply Previous topicNext topic