Larry Vaught

[Badinage]

If you have something you'd like to say, drop him an email or a private message. He's very receptive to viewpoints of all types. It is what establishes his integrity, and has earned him the respect of millions.

(1) This suggests some hidden explanation for what I perceive as an anti-Mitch bias in Larry's recent writing. Why would his explanation need to be via email or private message? If we are up front about the whole thing, it seems that an open discussion is reasonable.

(2) My feeling is you have a personal relationship and, perhaps, business relationship with Larry. No problem with that, but it might not make you completely objective.

I understand that people love Larry here. I get that, as I too have enjoyed his insights and UK stories in the past. I do not recall having any previous beefs and have attempted to keep this respectful, and appreciate that most have done the same; however, if I were a writer, I would want to know if readers saw something biased in my writing, especially if it was not intended. If intended, it does not seem the sort of thing an honorable writer would do.

Then, I admit that I just do not get the bash Mitch mentality that I read on this and other boards. Not at all. I appreciate that the disconnect probably lies in that fact, to some degree.

[MickintheHam]

(1) This suggests some hidden explanation for what I perceive as an anti-Mitch bias in Larry's recent writing. Why would his explanation need to be via email or private message? If we are up front about the whole thing, it seems that an open discussion is reasonable.

(2) My feeling is you have a personal relationship and, perhaps, business relationship with Larry. No problem with that, but it might not make you completely objective.

I understand that people love Larry here. I get that, as I too have enjoyed his insights and UK stories in the past. I do not recall having any previous beefs and have attempted to keep this respectful, and appreciate that most have done the same; however, if I were a writer, I would want to know if readers saw something biased in my writing, especially if it was not intended. If intended, it does not seem the sort of thing an honorable writer would do.

Then, I admit that I just do not get the bash Mitch mentality that I read on this and other boards. Not at all. I appreciate that the disconnect probably lies in that fact, to some degree.

Larry made a statement addressing addressing this issue.your He says he has no problem with MB, he just has different views on the coaching search. Judging from the media reaction in the press box Saturday the majority of folks in the media have issues with way MB is handling the firing of Joker and the hiring of a new coach. There was so much uproar Saturday that MB had to hold an impromptu presses after the game. MB is making enemies by the minute and so far it seems to be all on him. He's behaving as a jerk.

For the record I have no business relationship with Larry and everything Darrell posted is 100% correct. You seem to have major issues with Larry that go way beyond any issues over MB. Why not drop him a line. It's the only forthright way to deal with it.

[Badinage]

You seem to have major issues with Larry that go way beyond any issues over MB. Why not drop him a line. It's the only forthright way to deal with it.

This is the behavior of baseless accusations I was hoping to avoid in this discussion.

[Badinage]

Larry made a statement addressing addressing this issue.your He says he has no problem with MB, he just has different views on the coaching search. Judging from the media reaction in the press box Saturday the majority of folks in the media have issues with way MB is handling the firing of Joker and the hiring of a new coach. There was so much uproar Saturday that MB had to hold an impromptu presses after the game. MB is making enemies by the minute and so far it seems to be all on him. He's behaving as a jerk.

.

BTW, I never saw a statement from Larry. If I missed his response, I apologize.

And, the second part of your post seems to add a justification for the media to be upset with MB. A journalist who uses his or her space for personal animus is not acting ethically. I hope this is not the case for anyone qho covers UK and you speak out of turn.

[Darrell KSR]

(1) This suggests some hidden explanation for what I perceive as an anti-Mitch bias in Larry's recent writing. Why would his explanation need to be via email or private message? If we are up front about the whole thing, it seems that an open discussion is reasonable.

(2) My feeling is you have a personal relationship and, perhaps, business relationship with Larry. No problem with that, but it might not make you completely objective.

I understand that people love Larry here. I get that, as I too have enjoyed his insights and UK stories in the past. I do not recall having any previous beefs and have attempted to keep this respectful, and appreciate that most have done the same; however, if I were a writer, I would want to know if readers saw something biased in my writing, especially if it was not intended. If intended, it does not seem the sort of thing an honorable writer would do.

Then, I admit that I just do not get the bash Mitch mentality that I read on this and other boards. Not at all. I appreciate that the disconnect probably lies in that fact, to some degree.

(1) Wow, because I suggest contacting Larry where you can find him, there's some hidden explanation, and less than an open discussion offered?

Wow.

There's no hidden explanation, no Loch Ness Monster, and no Sasquatch. It's pretty simple. Larry does not hang out on this board. He has made hundreds of posts on the premium board, and visits it either daily or near daily. He had something like 20,000 posts on the premium board on Scout. If you were a premium member, I'd say just post. You're not, so I tried to give you an avenue to address something you saw as needing addressing directly with him. Contact him or avoid contacting him, doesn't matter. He's accessible.

(2) I've known Larry for years. There's no doubt that knowing him puts me in a unique position of being able to gauge just how poorly your foundation may be. To the extent you want to characterize that as being less than objective, fine.

I make my living on being able to separate personal opinions from other opinions, fact from conjecture, and being able to sift through ill-supported positions. Your attack on Larry Vaught in this thread is ill-supported.

It is evident you haven't read 5% of what he has written. He has written numerous articles, posts, follow-ups on many coaches, and the search. Feel free to contact him directly, as has been suggested to you several times, if you have some beef with him. He'll listen, and he'll be courteous.

From a personal standpoint, you have excelled in this thread in making snarky little innuendos about being a "hidden explanation" and implying an "open discussion" was being avoided, and then questioning objectivity when you were called out with your ill-supported position. That's the intelligent poster's way of being disrespectful and "getting away with it." I don't question your intelligence, but I do question your motives and your basis.

[Darrell KSR]

He didn't speak out of turn.

Mick said, "Judging from the media reaction in the press box Saturday the majority of folks in the media have issues with way MB is handling the firing of Joker and the hiring of a new coach."

You then leap to the conclusion

a) this adds a "justification for the media to be upset with MB,"

and then further another huge leap to

b) "A journalist who uses his or her space for personal animus is not acting ethically,"

with your caveat that,

c) "I hope that is not the case....and you speak out of turn."

He didn't speak out of turn--many media have issues with how Mitch is handling the coaching situation--that is true. Isn't be the first time media will have issues with how an A.D. or a coach handle something; won't be the last time.

But a + b does not equal c, that **any** media has used it for personal animus, and that he spoke out of turn. He's accurate with his comment. It just doesn't say what you want it to say.

BTW, I never saw a statement from Larry. If I missed his response, I apologize.

And, the second part of your post seems to add a justification for the media to be upset with MB. A journalist who uses his or her space for personal animus is not acting ethically. I hope this is not the case for anyone qho covers UK and you speak out of turn.

[Badinage]

Being less than objective, because you have a financial and personal relationship is not a slap, just a fact that people often have to admit to themselves. I realize that people believe they can overlook their relationships, but that is often not the case.

I have not attacked Larry. I believe that characterization is an example of your bias.

I have read many of Larry's creations here and at Views and enjoyed most. In the past 10 days or so, he has had an annonymous ex-player, an unnamed tester, and a guest writer all personally slam Mitch's approach. To me, that seems like a method of making your point without having to actually say it yourself. And, I found the comments of those to which he deferred to be immature and not worthy of print. It seemed personal. You can call that an attack, but it sincerely comes from a reader who has enjoyed Larry's offerings. Something seemed to change to me, but not overtly.

And, finally, I did not leap to any conclusions. I stated an opinion, based upon Mick's comment about media anger. Mick's comment must have some relevance to the current discussion. I merely stated what I believe is true about journalists who cannot keep their personal feelings from skewing their published offerings. I perceive negative feelings in some of Larry's columns. Hence, the reason for my inquiry.

This is Larry's spot, so I presented my question here. I agree that smart people can be snarky. You see that in my posts. I see it in your posts. I will pursue this here no more and apologize for continuing this line.

[Catfan73]

I think Larry is a fan, just like the rest of us. As a fan, I'm sure he has his own opinions as to whom he would like to see hired, just like the rest of us. I think he's done a pretty good job of keeping those opinions from tainting his reporting, but a little bit of prejudice is still bound to creep in every now and then. It's probably inevitable, even if it's just subtext stuff.

The way Mitch has remained so reticent about the search certainly hasn't helped anything though, and he would have been a lot better off to get the media on his side in this endeavor. Regretfully, haughtiness seems to have become one of his trademarks in the last few years.

[MickintheHam]

Being less than objective, because you have a financial and personal relationship is not a slap, just a fact that people often have to admit to themselves. I realize that people believe they can overlook their relationships, but that is often not the case.

I have not attacked Larry. I believe that characterization is an example of your bias.

I have read many of Larry's creations here and at Views and enjoyed most. In the past 10 days or so, he has had an annonymous ex-player, an unnamed tester, and a guest writer all personally slam Mitch's approach. To me, that seems like a method of making your point without having to actually say it yourself. And, I found the comments of those to which he deferred to be immature and not worthy of print. It seemed personal. You can call that an attack, but it sincerely comes from a reader who has enjoyed Larry's offerings. Something seemed to change to me, but not overtly.

And, finally, I did not leap to any conclusions. I stated an opinion, based upon Mick's comment about media anger. Mick's comment must have some relevance to the current discussion. I merely stated what I believe is true about journalists who cannot keep their personal feelings from skewing their published offerings. I perceive negative feelings in some of Larry's columns. Hence, the reason for my inquiry.

This is Larry's spot, so I presented my question here. I agree that smart people can be snarky. You see that in my posts. I see it in your posts. I will pursue this here no more and apologize for continuing this line.

Why not just man up and send Larry an email stating your concerns and asking him for a reply?

[ajp40505]

Badinage, have you ever had a face to face conversation with Mitch Barnhart?

[CatinIL]

(1) Wow, because I suggest contacting Larry where you can find him, there's some hidden explanation, and less than an open discussion offered?

Wow.

There's no hidden explanation, no Loch Ness Monster, and no Sasquatch.

Darrell, you've gone TOO FAR! To say there's no Loch Ness Monster, I can live with that, but to suggest that Sasquatch doesn't exist???

[ram]

Darrell, you've gone TOO FAR! To say there's no Loch Ness Monster, I can live with that, but to suggest that Sasquatch doesn't exist???

I'd heard Mr. Quatch was going to be our coach....as soon as mb could find him.

[Badinage]

Badinage, have you ever had a face to face conversation with Mitch Barnhart?

A friend said hello to him in the stairwell at the Galt House prior to Joker's lunch a couple of years back. I asked him if he was going to speak. He said he hoped not. I have hated him ever since!!!!

[Darrell KSR]

My financial interest in my job requires me to be objective with direct financial ties (not here). Sorry you are struggling so badly to recognize that. I am very well trained in being objective with more than one side, and have done so for more than 25 years in my job. It is not something that everybody can do, and I do feel very strongly about it. If I have a bias, it is shelved. I rarely respond quickly to an attack, which is one of the ways I preserve that objectivity. So you won't gain any traction with me, ever, with allegations of bias influencing my objectivity.

You probably will not be surprised that I disagree that you didn't couch it as an attack, and that I won't agree about your leaps made to the conclusions you desired. But I do agree with you about the dual snarkiness. I will apologize for the part I played in that.

Onward for me. I'm ecstatic with the head coach Mitch Barnhart secured, and think he did a terrific job in the face of adverse circumstances to land Coach Stoops. Big, big hire.

Being less than objective, because you have a financial and personal relationship is not a slap, just a fact that people often have to admit to themselves. I realize that people believe they can overlook their relationships, but that is often not the case.

I have not attacked Larry. I believe that characterization is an example of your bias.

I have read many of Larry's creations here and at Views and enjoyed most. In the past 10 days or so, he has had an annonymous ex-player, an unnamed tester, and a guest writer all personally slam Mitch's approach. To me, that seems like a method of making your point without having to actually say it yourself. And, I found the comments of those to which he deferred to be immature and not worthy of print. It seemed personal. You can call that an attack, but it sincerely comes from a reader who has enjoyed Larry's offerings. Something seemed to change to me, but not overtly.

And, finally, I did not leap to any conclusions. I stated an opinion, based upon Mick's comment about media anger. Mick's comment must have some relevance to the current discussion. I merely stated what I believe is true about journalists who cannot keep their personal feelings from skewing their published offerings. I perceive negative feelings in some of Larry's columns. Hence, the reason for my inquiry.

This is Larry's spot, so I presented my question here. I agree that smart people can be snarky. You see that in my posts. I see it in your posts. I will pursue this here no more and apologize for continuing this line.

[Badinage]

I am sure you are well trained Darrell. I am also sorry you took offense to the prospect that friendship and business ties might lead to someone less than objective. No offense was intended. Have a great day.

[catfan1029]

I am sure you are well trained Darrell. I am also sorry you took offense to the prospect that friendship and business ties might lead to someone less than objective. No offense was intended. Have a great day.

__________________________________________________ _______________________________________
Whew! Thank goodness. Have a nice day!

[catfan1029]

Mitch is a peach! Time will tell how ripe he is.