** Reply to note from Adam Wodon-Around the Rinks <[log in to unmask]>         Thu, 7 Nov 1996 17:01:52 -0500
 
> Had it been a coach that everyone like and thought was real good ... would UCLA
> have done the same thing?  Just something to consider before putting the UCLA
> president above those at Minnesota and Maine.
>
> AW
>
From what I was able to gather this morning from ESPN it sounded like they, the president and AD
were looking for excuses to fire Harrick. Apparently there was no love lost between Harrick and
the AD.
 
I opened this morning's paper and the article said he had been offered the choice of resigning or
being fired and chose resignation. Then I turned on ESPN and heard he had been fired. My original
thought was, "wow there's an adminstrator willing to make a stand". However, I'm begining to think
it was just a convenient excuse to get rid of someone they didn't like. ESPN had the obligatory
interviews with SAs. Some of the SAs seemed a little surprised by the move because "he had just
won us a national champioship".
 
I'd like to think someone finnaly had the guts to do the right thing, but given the offenses
and hearing about the relationship between Harrick and the adminstration, it just sounds as if
they used this as a excuse to get rid of him (am I too cynical or what).
 
Anyone know what the status of his salary is. Does he get paid even though he got canned?
 
 
 
 
Mike Smar (4248)
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.