Calipari is allowed to keep coaching for the same reason Knight was allowed to stamp, scream and bully his way through Bloomington from 1971 to 2000. They both win.
Winning’s a lot of it.
But audiences like to see the same aggression in coaches that they like to see in players.
Coaches who are sons of bitches are exciting to watch.
************************
There’s a whole charismatic world of violence and destruction off the university or professional football field that people find exciting to follow. Players and coaches with their drunken assaults, crashed sports cars, and gun play — these aren’t things universities tolerate because they only care about winning. They’re things the fan base adores. Football wouldn’t be football without them.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:03AM
I think this is right as to Knight. Calipari is a different case, though — he’s one of the very few coaches who has been able to take a no-name program and bring it to national prominence, and that’s worth a lot. But he’s a cheater, and sooner or later that’ll tell against him.
Coaches can go too far. Frank Leahy and Chuck Fairbanks were football coaches with .800 winning percentages who were essentially blackballed (though Fairbanks got a job under dicey circumstances). Tark the Shark’s career options were limited. It’s not quite true that anything goes.