Mel Tucker just fired

[psu00]

He's being fired (eventually) for having the audacity to take 90 mm and then lose more than he won the following year.

This was just to keep from paying him.

I have no doubt MSU is happy to get out of a lousy contract but let’s be fully honest. If true, he deserves to be fired and would be appropriately fired under the terms of his contract.

It’s more of a 2 for 1. He’s fired for his behavior…..and it also gets Sparty out of a huge contract error. 2 birds, 1 stone.

 

[lazydave841]

He’s fired for his behavior

If he had 2 straight playoff appearances, they'd probably pay her off and sign an NDA to keep him.

 

[LandoComando]

If he had 2 straight playoff appearances, they'd probably pay her off and sign an NDA to keep him.

Agreed though given her job she wasn't signing a NDA. Regardless of what happened or didn't happen, he's an absolute idiot for getting involved with her.

 

[ryoder1]

If he had 2 straight playoff appearances, they'd probably pay her off and sign an NDA to keep him.

Yep. They want out of this contract as they probably have realized he ain't the guy they were paying for and now what do you know they have the smoking gun. Can you imagine if he won the natty last year? My God who knows what he could have done before he would have to go in front of a review board and actually get canned. "Okay, let's see here, is the woman plaintiff still alive? Yes. Well then nothing to see here, next."

 

[RussianEagle]

I typically agree but Tucker has already admitted that he had phone sex with the woman among other things. Now, I get she could simply hang up the phone and put him on block. But to me, that act, even is she was a willing participant, is enough to get him fired. He is married with kids. At the same time, he hired her to lecture to the team about what harassment is and how to avoid it.

it triggers his contract clauses and, beyond that, is so stupid that he deserves to be fired.

I agree. I think a college football coach engaging in an extra-marital affair should be a fireable offense.

Problem is we have this ultra-liberal leadership at most universities who don’t want to sound old-fashioned or conservative by condemning adultery. So they attempt to transform it into an act of sexual harassment or even sexual assault. Therefore, while the man suffers the traditional consequences, the female gets recast not as an adulteress, but as a victim or even a “survivor”. I don’t believe it is good for our society to not hold woman morally accountable.

 

[Marylovesthelions]

LMAOROFL If telling someone that you are masturbating while talking to them on the phone does not violate MSU standards for a person in leadership, what would? This guy is a greedy no-goodnik based on the incident with the $200,000 team bonus.

 

[LandoComando]

I agree. I think a college football coach engaging in an extra-marital affair should be a fireable offense.

Problem is we have this ultra-liberal leadership at most universities who don’t want to sound old-fashioned or conservative by condemning adultery. So they attempt to transform it into an act of sexual harassment or even sexual assault. Therefore, while the man suffers the traditional consequences, the female gets recast not as an adulteress, but as a victim or even a “survivor”. I don’t believe it is good for our society to not hold woman morally accountable.

I'm not remotely liberal but why I'd a coach being fired for having an affair? Why would anyone be?

I also don't agree that the woman did anything wrong if she's single and enters into a relationship with someone married. The married person is the only one that made a commitment. She's free to do whatever she wants. That's on him not her.

There's tons of valid examples of liberals taking over things for the worse without reaching on something like this. Tucker was wrong for cheating on his wife but it doesn't impact his ability to do his job.

 

[SLion]

I'm not remotely liberal but why I'd a coach being fired for having an affair? Why would anyone be?

I also don't agree that the woman did anything wrong if she's single and enters into a relationship with someone married. The married person is the only one that made a commitment. She's free to do whatever she wants. That's on him not her.

There's tons of valid examples of liberals taking over things for the worse without reaching on something like this. Tucker was wrong for cheating on his wife but it doesn't impact his ability to do his job.

You mean like how the liberal bastion, Liberty University had no problem with Falwell Jr's private life. Give us a break with the liberal vs conservative non-sense here. Universities don't like sex scandals for higher ups..period. They are getting paid tons to promote clean image so suckers pay 60k to attend. It is all optics and image.

 

[ryoder1]

I agree. I think a college football coach engaging in an extra-marital affair should be a fireable offense.

Problem is we have this ultra-liberal leadership at most universities who don’t want to sound old-fashioned or conservative by condemning adultery. So they attempt to transform it into an act of sexual harassment or even sexual assault. Therefore, while the man suffers the traditional consequences, the female gets recast not as an adulteress, but as a victim or even a “survivor”. I don’t believe it is good for our society to not hold woman morally accountable.

At this point that is the only "win" left for Tucker to possibly achieve. He has already lost his job or will lose it in the next few weeks, most likely his wife dumps him so marriage also gone. What is left is him being able to prove it was consensual and not harassment. I think he will lose that as well. Even if it was somewhat consensual they can nail him on the fact he was in a position to fire her since she was a consultant working for him or at least he had considerable influence on her professional work at MSU. So they can argue he took advantage of his position to gain sexual favors. That is harassment, doesn't matter if they had consensual sex. Overall, it seems he has already been found guilty in the court of public opinion and nothing he can do at this point can stop the speeding freight train headed downhill squarely at him.

 

[87 Penn St8]

At this point that is the only "win" left for Tucker to possibly achieve. He has already lost his job or will lose it in the next few weeks, most likely his wife dumps him so marriage also gone. What is left is him being able to prove it was consensual and not harassment. I think he will lose that as well. Even if it was somewhat consensual they can nail him on the fact he was in a position to fire her since she was a consultant working for him or at least he had considerable influence on her professional work at MSU. So they can argue he took advantage of his position to gain sexual favors. That is harassment, doesn't matter if they had consensual sex. Overall, it seems he has already been found guilty in the court of public opinion and nothing he can do at this point can stop the speeding freight train headed downhill squarely at him.

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, and keep your eye on the sparrow." Baretta

Mel will be a punchline forever, in the vein of Pee Wee Herman in the movie theater, except he will forfeit a ton more money.

 

[marshall23]

LMAOROFL If telling someone that you are masturbating while talking to them on the phone does not violate MSU standards for a person in leadership, what would? This guy is a greedy no-goodnik based on the incident with the $200,000 team bonus.

Perhaps there was a connection between the bonus money and his entanglement.

 

[Parkland Fan]

Perhaps there was a connection between the bonus money and his entanglement.

Tucker is facing fourth down and long. MSU has the "for cause" language on its side. His best option is to punt. In other words, negotiate the best deal if he resigns and goes away quietly. Best deal could be a few $MM.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

I typically agree but Tucker has already admitted that he had phone sex with the woman among other things. Now, I get she could simply hang up the phone and put him on block. But to me, that act, even is she was a willing participant, is enough to get him fired. He is married with kids. At the same time, he hired her to lecture to the team about what harassment is and how to avoid it.

it triggers his contract clauses and, beyond that, is so stupid that he deserves to be fired.

Exactly, I don't think it much matters if it were consensual, or not. The women was hired by the University so this triggers his contractual "for cause" clause - i.e., behavior embarrassing to the University (going at this women in this manner when she was brought to campus by the University as a consultant certainly qualifies as behavior embarrassing to the University). She can always claim that she played along in her professional capacity so she could report back to the school that they had a problem in regards to behavior and it started with the person running the program for the University.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Like everything the truth is somewhere in the middle. I agree that it appears the relationship was more consensual than she is admitting. He is not out of the blue going to do that unless the relationship had reached a point like that. That part of the case could come down to did she encourage that or did he "think" she would like it and she did not then objected. I think the former.

Although, I don't think any of it matters in terms of him keeping his job. No way he does that. I am sure he broke their standard of conduct rule or whatever they are calling it. I do wonder where the line is drawn. For example, let's say he had a random consensual affair with someone completely outside the university. Then his wife finds out and he gets a divorce. The university learns of the reason for the divorce. Is he then in violation of their behavior standard?

Disagree, she was hired by the University for her expertise in this area - she can always claim that she just let him hang himself without ever saying she wanted him to do this, or giving consent of any kind, because she wanted to see precisely what she was dealing with and where potential problems lied in the program so she could report them back to the University. She was being paid by the University to act as a Consultant on this topic/issue - Tucker is beyond moronic for making unsolicited sexual advances on a professional being paid by the University to consult on this very topic.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

I agree. I think a college football coach engaging in an extra-marital affair should be a fireable offense.

Problem is we have this ultra-liberal leadership at most universities who don’t want to sound old-fashioned or conservative by condemning adultery. So they attempt to transform it into an act of sexual harassment or even sexual assault. Therefore, while the man suffers the traditional consequences, the female gets recast not as an adulteress, but as a victim or even a “survivor”. I don’t believe it is good for our society to not hold woman morally accountable.

It's more than an "affair" - he made these sexual advances to a professional being paid by the University to act as a Consultant! You can't do that and expect not to be fired for your behavior. If the woman was not being employed by the University (and that employment being the basis of how Tucker initiated their relationship), then it's probably not a fireable event - but once he does this with someone there because the University is employing them as a Consultant, it's a whole different enchilada.

 

[LandoComando]

It's more than an "affair" - he made these sexual advances to a professional being paid by the University to act as a Consultant! You can't do that and expect not to be fired for your behavior. If the woman was not being employed by the University (and that employment being the basis of how Tucker initiated their relationship), then it's probably not a fireable event - but once he does this with someone there because the University is employing them as a Consultant, it's a whole different enchilada.

Are we pretending this isn't common?

 

[PAgeologist]

Are we pretending this isn't common?

Maybe it is. But she was brought in as a consultant speaking on sexual assault. Not for rebranding or marketing. Tucker did exactly what she was brought onto campus to speak about.

 

[Thomas1945]

Maybe it is. But she was brought in as a consultant speaking on sexual assault. Not for rebranding or marketing. Tucker did exactly what she was brought onto campus to speak about.

Well if you look at it that way, then she was successful in pointing out the potential pitfalls of these relationships.😀

 

[LandoComando]

Maybe it is. But she was brought in as a consultant speaking on sexual assault. Not for rebranding or marketing. Tucker did exactly what she was brought onto campus to speak about.

Oh I agree given her title he should have been smart enough to stay away from here. Hoping up with employees and contractors is likely very common.

 

[Obliviax]

It's more than an "affair" - he made these sexual advances to a professional being paid by the University to act as a Consultant! You can't do that and expect not to be fired for your behavior. If the woman was not being employed by the University (and that employment being the basis of how Tucker initiated their relationship), then it's probably not a fireable event - but once he does this with someone there because the University is employing them as a Consultant, it's a whole different enchilada.

Agreed.

And he isn't just a "football coach". Football coaches don't make $9m per year. He is a leader at MSU and a big part of their brand. He attracts kids to want to go to school there, companies to fund research there, professors to work there and TV contracts that want to show their sports. Not to mention put butts in seats along with paying outrageous prices for parking, food and drink.

You piss off 10,000 moms and that is a serious dent in total income opportunities.

 

[Marylovesthelions]

Are we pretending this isn't common?

NO! Extramarital sex is not COMMON, it is not rare but it is a small minority in the real world. "Everybody does it." is bullshit for dirt bags.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Oh I agree given her title he should have been smart enough to stay away from here. Hoping up with employees and contractors is likely very common.

What does "it's common" have to do whether it's fireable behavior under his contract clause??? What does "it's common" even mean - you're telling me that University Employees and Contractors should expect to be hit on and exposed to unasked for obscene sexual behavior??? They shouldn't expect an environment where they are not subjected to this behavior??? What precisely is your point, if you have one at all (no, I don't agree that "most" University Employees and Contractors are subjected to this type of behavior - or whatever the hell you mean by "it's common").

 

[Obliviax]

Are we pretending this isn't common?

Yeah, no.

Doesn't matter. And what makes this different she was a contract "employee" of the university. so there is a money element. Who's to say he didn't select her and use the contract money as payment for sex? It isn't just a simple case of two people that met and got drunk at the bar. Plus, it isn't some guy who puts up drywall for $22/hour. He's the face of MSU football, and probably the second face to MSU behind Izzo.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Yeah, no.

Doesn't matter. And what makes this different she was a contract "employee" of the university. so there is a money element. Who's to say he didn't select her and use the contract money as payment for sex? It isn't just a simple case of two people that met and got drunk at the bar. Plus, it isn't some guy who puts up drywall for $22/hour. He's the face of MSU football, and probably the second face to MSU behind Izzo.

He is the highest paid employee at the University by a factor of 5.

 

[Thomas1945]

I bet that in his rare, private and honest moments ole Mel bangs that bald head of his into the wall wondering why did he F’up an $80 million dollar gig. I bang my bald head into the wall just thinking about it.

 

[LandoComando]

What does "it's common" have to do whether it's fireable behavior under his contract clause??? What does "it's common" even mean - you're telling me that University Employees and Contractors should expect to be hit on and exposed to unasked for obscene sexual behavior??? They shouldn't expect an environment where they are not subjected to this behavior??? What precisely is your point, if you have one at all (no, I don't agree that "most" University Employees and Contractors are subjected to this type of behavior - or whatever the hell you mean by "it's common").

You don't believe it's common for staff to have some kind of romantic relationship with other employees and contractors? That's denial.
I never said anything about the contract as I haven't seen it.

 

[LandoComando]

NO! Extramarital sex is not COMMON, it is not rare but it is a small minority in the real world. "Everybody does it." is bullshit for dirt bags.

Studies show 20-25% of married men cheat--that's common

 

[LandoComando]

Yeah, no.

Doesn't matter. And what makes this different she was a contract "employee" of the university. so there is a money element. Who's to say he didn't select her and use the contract money as payment for sex? It isn't just a simple case of two people that met and got drunk at the bar. Plus, it isn't some guy who puts up drywall for $22/hour. He's the face of MSU football, and probably the second face to MSU behind Izzo.

The reality is most are making assumptions here. You can say it doesn't matter if these kind of relationships are common when discussing the contract but they are common. He's still an idiot for it simply because of her title.

 

[87 Penn St8]

You don't believe it's common for staff to have some kind of romantic relationship with other employees and contractors? That's denial.
I never said anything about the contract as I haven't seen it.

My dad burned into my brain when I graduated from college 10 simple words:
" Don't get your meat where you butter your bread." He was a Director of Industrial & Labor Relations for an international Fortune 500 chemical company.

I generally heeded his warning until my new boss wanted to introduce me to a friend she had worked with at her old agency who was a former Cuse volleyball athlete. We dated and continued to meet up from time to time when she got a job at our shop. I even pulled off the after Christmas party hook up one year. So stereotypically stupid.

As most early 20s relationships go, this one ended badly, and we eventually had offices across the hall from each other for an acrimonious 2 years, which impacted both of us socially and professionally.

Never. Again. As usual, the old man was right. We were the same level, so there were no subordinate considerations, but our relationship was well known and we were never put on the same account or even a project team together. Bosses don't want to worry about that shit.

It is likely that eventhough the university hired the consultant, Mel held the key to any future assignments at MSU. If he chose to say that her message "just wasn't received" by the players, and deemed her work ineffective, with or without data, that power dynamic puts him in an even worse spot as the de facto boss.

It makes sense that people date those whom they interact with in the workplace. Most of us spend at least 40 hours a week at our jobs. THAT is why there are rules against it. Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Mel is a dope

 

[LandoComando]

My dad burned into my brain when I graduated from college 10 simple words:
" Don't get your meat where you butter your bread." He was a Director of Industrial & Labor Relations for an international Fortune 500 chemical company.

I generally heeded his warning until my new boss wanted to introduce me to a friend she had worked with at her old agency who was a former Cuse volleyball athlete. We dated and continued to meet up from time to time when she got a job at our shop. I even pulled off the after Christmas party hook up one year. So stereotypically stupid.

As most early 20s relationships go, this one ended badly, and we eventually had offices across the hall from each other for an acrimonious 2 years, which impacted both of us socially and professionally.

Never. Again. As usual, the old man was right. We were the same level, so there were no subordinate considerations, but our relationship was well known and we were never put on the same account or even a project team together. Bosses don't want to worry about that shit.

It is likely that eventhough the university hired the consultant, Mel held the key to any future assignments at MSU. If he chose to say that her message "just wasn't received" by the players, and deemed her work ineffective, with or without data, that power dynamic puts him in an even worse spot as the de facto boss.

It makes sense that people date those whom they interact with in the workplace. Most of us spend at least 40 hours a week at our jobs. THAT is why there are rules against it. Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Mel is a dope

Mel is an idiot but there's no really rules against it, at least at most places, as long as you disclose it. Which I'm sure Mel didn't.

 

[87 Penn St8]

Mel is an idiot but there's no really rules against it, at least at most places, as long as you disclose it. Which I'm sure Mel Definitely non-frat

Mel is an idiot but there's no really rules against it, at least at most places, as long as you disclose it. Which I'm sure Mel didn't.

Sexual relationships with immediate subordinates is likely frowned upon in any organization. How the rule (beyond common sense) is written likely varies, but I can't imagine a company that would encourage it....

Sales is a different realm where "favors" may be common in order to secure orders/contracts etc. Ethically an organization could easily fire someone if they placed their own pleasure ahead of the companies business interests. Kickbacks, trips, jewelry and more carnal pleasures are all part of the game in many lines of business. Common? Maybe yes. Fireable? Of course.

My sister dated a colleague at an international non-profit organization and that was ok, but when they married one of the two had to go. They were both senior level execs so she quit.

Conversely I know of 2 married couples who work together at different unviversities. In both cases that husband reported to the wife- at work and likely at home : )

We agree that it is a bad idea. Of course many people marry colleagues. I very briefly worked on a project where my wife was part of the team from a different agency. Beyond awkward.

It would be really interesting to know what Mel was thinking. But like Bobby Petrino and Charlie Strong before him, these guys probably just got too amped up with their relative power and believed that these women were just throwing themselves at their feet because they are so awesome. Ended really badly for all 3.

As an old neighbor cautioned me about extramarital affairs after his bother got taken to the cleaners in a divorce: " The screwin' he got wasn't worth the screwin' he got." Amen.

 

[Marylovesthelions]

"Don't dip your pen in the company ink well" Lenny Kochuk, District Manager for the General Electric Lamp Division, 1967

 

[marshall23]

Certainly don't support Tuck and could care less about the outcome...but I recall a president who left his calling card on a dress worn by a young White House intern. He survived. Different era?

 

[Obliviax]

Sexual relationships with immediate subordinates is likely frowned upon in any organization. How the rule (beyond common sense) is written likely varies, but I can't imagine a company that would encourage it....

Sales is a different realm where "favors" may be common in order to secure orders/contracts etc. Ethically an organization could easily fire someone if they placed their own pleasure ahead of the companies business interests. Kickbacks, trips, jewelry and more carnal pleasures are all part of the game in many lines of business. Common? Maybe yes. Fireable? Of course.

My sister dated a colleague at an international non-profit organization and that was ok, but when they married one of the two had to go. They were both senior level execs so she quit.

Conversely I know of 2 married couples who work together at different unviversities. In both cases that husband reported to the wife- at work and likely at home : )

We agree that it is a bad idea. Of course many people marry colleagues. I very briefly worked on a project where my wife was part of the team from a different agency. Beyond awkward.

It would be really interesting to know what Mel was thinking. But like Bobby Petrino and Charlie Strong before him, these guys probably just got too amped up with their relative power and believed that these women were just throwing themselves at their feet because they are so awesome. Ended really badly for all 3.

As an old neighbor cautioned me about extramarital affairs after his bother got taken to the cleaners in a divorce: " The screwin' he got wasn't worth the screwin' he got." Amen.

It is OK until the law suits are filed. It is really just a risk factor. I am familiar with a law firm where the managing partner was called by the bank telling him that checks were bouncing. He asked the female exec assistant about the deposits she was making. She said she'd look into it after lunch and never came back. That evening he got an email saying she was depositing the checks into her personal account but she was also screwing two of the partners. Her offer was simply: don't file charges and she won't sue them for harassment. That was the end of that law firm.

I know another company where two guys started a software company. The business guy got caught screwing an employee and they lost a couple of million. So they formalized their HR department with a policy that no people could be having relations in the same reporting structure. The co-founder on the tech side left for an extended vacation at the same time one of his female employees left. The business guy put 2 and 2 together, asked around, and found out that the tech guy was with his employee in Hawaii. The biz founder let her go the day they got back citing the new HR policy. The two of them sued eachother and it was quite a mess. Dozens of people lost their jobs because they were forced to take sides and the company's revenues suffered. The biz guy eventually won but not after several of his affairs were uncovered and it cost him his marriage. It was like thunderdome.

There is simply no good way to handle this stuff other than to completely abstain. I know a lot of people that had affairs with coworkers and there was never a problem. It really comes down to the risk profile. If you are really successful making millions per year your risk profile is much greater than an individual making $25 per hour with no real power.

 

[creamery freak]

At this point that is the only "win" left for Tucker to possibly achieve. He has already lost his job or will lose it in the next few weeks, most likely his wife dumps him so marriage also gone. What is left is him being able to prove it was consensual and not harassment. I think he will lose that as well. Even if it was somewhat consensual they can nail him on the fact he was in a position to fire her since she was a consultant working for him or at least he had considerable influence on her professional work at MSU. So they can argue he took advantage of his position to gain sexual favors. That is harassment, doesn't matter if they had consensual sex. Overall, it seems he has already been found guilty in the court of public opinion and nothing he can do at this point can stop the speeding freight train headed downhill squarely at him.

I think a good attorney will have Mel use the ' Different strokes for different folks ' defense, and he walks away unscathed! Then again maybe not.

 

[Obliviax]

I think a good attorney will have Mel use the ' Different strokes for different folks ' defense, and he walks away unscathed! Then again maybe not.

Nope. First, this is a civil action, not a criminal one.

Mel will lose his job...done deal...and he should. So the long salary is gone. Next up in the termination fee. If fired for a violation of a morals clause, he is out the money. He may get them to pay him a little to avoid the embarrassment of a long court case but he really has no leverage; nothing to stand on. He cheated on his wife and family and even if they have an open relationship, suffered great embarrassment by having an affair that reflected poorly on the university with a contract employee. Meaning, a person who was paid by the university by Mel's request. This brings up the question "did he just hire her so he could pay for sex with the University's money?"

My guess is they'll give him $1m to go away and not file a lawsuit against the University. He'll try to reenter coaching as a coordinator with a lesser school (MAC?) and hope everyone forgets the scandal and he can ascend again. But that would only happen if he was wildly successful at the smaller school and a major school is open to taking the risk of hiring a guy with questionable morals to be the face of their football school.

My prediction is that this is the last you'll hear from Mel in any major way.

 

[marshall23]

Nope. First, this is a civil action, not a criminal one.

Mel will lose his job...done deal...and he should. So the long salary is gone. Next up in the termination fee. If fired for a violation of a morals clause, he is out the money. He may get them to pay him a little to avoid the embarrassment of a long court case but he really has no leverage; nothing to stand on. He cheated on his wife and family and even if they have an open relationship, suffered great embarrassment by having an affair that reflected poorly on the university with a contract employee. Meaning, a person who was paid by the university by Mel's request. This brings up the question "did he just hire her so he could pay for sex with the University's money?"

My guess is they'll give him $1m to go away and not file a lawsuit against the University. He'll try to reenter coaching as a coordinator with a lesser school (MAC?) and hope everyone forgets the scandal and he can ascend again. But that would only happen if he was wildly successful at the smaller school and a major school is open to taking the risk of hiring a guy with questionable morals to be the face of their football school.

My prediction is that this is the last you'll hear from Mel in any major way.

Wouldn't Tracy be an independent contractor?

 

[baircub1!]

Agreed though given her job she wasn't signing a NDA. Regardless of what happened or didn't happen, he's an absolute idiot for getting involved with her.

And his Lawyer is helping him play the PR game..its over for him and MSU..would be beyond shocked if he stays and they keep him..this is all about salvaging what he can from the $95 million contract..that's all..its over..but what can he still keep $$$$..they already have Mark D I'm sure scouting for their next Coach...

 

[baircub1!]

Nope. First, this is a civil action, not a criminal one.

Mel will lose his job...done deal...and he should. So the long salary is gone. Next up in the termination fee. If fired for a violation of a morals clause, he is out the money. He may get them to pay him a little to avoid the embarrassment of a long court case but he really has no leverage; nothing to stand on. He cheated on his wife and family and even if they have an open relationship, suffered great embarrassment by having an affair that reflected poorly on the university with a contract employee. Meaning, a person who was paid by the university by Mel's request. This brings up the question "did he just hire her so he could pay for sex with the University's money?"

My guess is they'll give him $1m to go away and not file a lawsuit against the University. He'll try to reenter coaching as a coordinator with a lesser school (MAC?) and hope everyone forgets the scandal and he can ascend again. But that would only happen if he was wildly successful at the smaller school and a major school is open to taking the risk of hiring a guy with questionable morals to be the face of their football school.

My prediction is that this is the last you'll hear from Mel in any major way.

Totally agree..would not be surprised if they ( or boosters) have already been putting out some feelers on interest from other Coaches to come to MSU...

 

[baircub1!]

Agreed.

And he isn't just a "football coach". Football coaches don't make $9m per year. He is a leader at MSU and a big part of their brand. He attracts kids to want to go to school there, companies to fund research there, professors to work there and TV contracts that want to show their sports. Not to mention put butts in seats along with paying outrageous prices for parking, food and drink.

You piss off 10,000 moms and that is a serious dent in total income opportunities.

He is gone.Impossible for him to survive this...very stupid move by him and shows...an incredible lack of judgement. Now its about..what can he and his Lawyer salvage $$$ from his contract..thats all this is ie talking to the media etc..but..he is done.