Bobby Hauck

[Gametime]

There is so much banter on this forum of Hauck coming back to missoula.. Is there ANY merit to all this talk of Bobby coming back? or is it a pipe dream? is it something that is in the realm of possibility?

Booby would love to come back. He's made his money, he misses Montana and wants to fix this mess we have going on. Facts

 

[MTGRZ]

There is so much banter on this forum of Hauck coming back to missoula.. Is there ANY merit to all this talk of Bobby coming back? or is it a pipe dream? is it something that is in the realm of possibility?

Booby would love to come back. He's made his money, he misses Montana and wants to fix this mess we have going on. Facts

I hope you are right.

 

[AllWeatherFan]

The question isn't whether or not Bobby "wants" to come back to the University of Montana. The question is whether or not he'll ever get the opportunity to come back. I think there's a snowball's chance in Las Vegas of that happening.

You know, if he hadn't quit, he'd already have 7 FCS national championships (I read it on eGriz!) and his salary would be $275K. But he quit.

I don't blame him for taking the UNLV job. But you make your money and you take your chances. UM will always be the place that took a chance on Bobby Hauck. And when he's head coach at SDSU (not NAU), he'll always look back fondly on that experience.

 

[CFallsGriz]

Who the F is Hallam??? I think somebody is drunk or an idiot you pick!!

You can not fix stupid Hammer

But maybe u can *with* a hammer. Just tryin to help


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cmtgrizzly]

Is the SDSU job opening soon?

 

[cclarkblues]

Serious question for those of you who think Bobby Hauck could come back to UM. Considering everything that the University of Montana (not just the football program) has been through since 2011, and the efforts they have made to distance themselves from those events. Which of the UM presidential candidates do you think would have the political will to hire Bobby Hauck back early in their tenure?

Right or wrong, fair or not, in the public's perception, is Bobby Hauck too closely tied to the football team and everything that has transpired over the last few years?

Even if Haslam wants to bring Bobby Hauck back, you better believe that he is getting his new president's blessing before making any major coaching hires. How does Main Hall factor into this discussion?

Good question. Don't know, but I think Hauck could get hired back. A lot of big boosters would likely "insist" on it, if he was interested. Not aware of any real or imagined issues that he's had since he left UM.

Question for you. What do you think that the football program did or went through since 2011, or before, that would cause someone not to hire back Hauck? And what did he do that would cause himself not to be hired?

I just don't get this continuing perception.

So, because JJ had his thing and there was a lot of bad presss, and even though he was exonerated, allowed to continue with football and graduate, and was recruited after Hauck left, then Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, the feds came in and investigated sexual assault in Missoula, and came up virtually empty handed, and virtually none of this had to do with Hauck or his recruits, and occurred after he left Missoula, he should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited a white kid from Missoula, and after Hauck departed, the kid had a sexual assault problem (which came to light over 2 years after Hauck left), so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, while Hauck was here, 3 players got in trouble with a house burglary, and Hauck booted them off the team immediately and they left school, so Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited Wilson, who got charged and was acquitted, and allowed to come back to UM after Hauck had departed (and then played in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, sexual assault allegations involving 4 or so guys who were not recruited by Hauck (to my knowledge), in an incident that occurred after Hauck was gone, and the allegations turned out to be unproven, so that should disqualify Hauck?

Or, Hauck had a single issue with one nosey Kaimin reporter, and refused to talk to him, and then had nice relationships for student sports reporters at UNLV, so he should be disqualified for something that was probably largely the fault of the Kaimin reporter.

Or, Hauck recruited Tru, who had a fight night pursued by legal authorities, and then Tru, after Hauck had been gone 2 years, ended up with a publicized nolo plea to misdemeanor disorderly conduct, and now is one of the highest paid corners in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Lots of fluff, but virtually no substance. Over the 7 years Hauck was the coach at UM, and several years thereafter.

Maybe what UM needed or needs to get away from were the misleading, exaggerated and false claims pushed by Florio, the Missoulian and Krak.

Player, you deal in facts. The better part of the nation doesn't. They probably don't even know (or care) that JJ was innocent. As far as the better part of the nation is concerned the U of M is a rape mill. Unfortunately the perception is more far more damaging to the school than the actual facts are and people won't take the time to investigate or follow up on the situations. The 10 seconds of national news is all they know or care to know.

 

[TCCGRIZ]

There is so much banter on this forum of Hauck coming back to missoula.. Is there ANY merit to all this talk of Bobby coming back? or is it a pipe dream? is it something that is in the realm of possibility?

Booby would love to come back. He's made his money, he misses Montana and wants to fix this mess we have going on. Facts

Truth is stranger than fiction .
More facts to this than most people realize !!!

 

[Jaredkuehn]

Serious question for those of you who think Bobby Hauck could come back to UM. Considering everything that the University of Montana (not just the football program) has been through since 2011, and the efforts they have made to distance themselves from those events. Which of the UM presidential candidates do you think would have the political will to hire Bobby Hauck back early in their tenure?

Right or wrong, fair or not, in the public's perception, is Bobby Hauck too closely tied to the football team and everything that has transpired over the last few years?

Even if Haslam wants to bring Bobby Hauck back, you better believe that he is getting his new president's blessing before making any major coaching hires. How does Main Hall factor into this discussion?

Good question. Don't know, but I think Hauck could get hired back. A lot of big boosters would likely "insist" on it, if he was interested. Not aware of any real or imagined issues that he's had since he left UM.

Question for you. What do you think that the football program did or went through since 2011, or before, that would cause someone not to hire back Hauck? And what did he do that would cause himself not to be hired?

I just don't get this continuing perception.

So, because JJ had his thing and there was a lot of bad presss, and even though he was exonerated, allowed to continue with football and graduate, and was recruited after Hauck left, then Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, the feds came in and investigated sexual assault in Missoula, and came up virtually empty handed, and virtually none of this had to do with Hauck or his recruits, and occurred after he left Missoula, he should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited a white kid from Missoula, and after Hauck departed, the kid had a sexual assault problem (which came to light over 2 years after Hauck left), so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, while Hauck was here, 3 players got in trouble with a house burglary, and Hauck booted them off the team immediately and they left school, so Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited Wilson, who got charged and was acquitted, and allowed to come back to UM after Hauck had departed (and then played in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, sexual assault allegations involving 4 or so guys who were not recruited by Hauck (to my knowledge), in an incident that occurred after Hauck was gone, and the allegations turned out to be unproven, so that should disqualify Hauck?

Or, Hauck had a single issue with one nosey Kaimin reporter, and refused to talk to him, and then had nice relationships for student sports reporters at UNLV, so he should be disqualified for something that was probably largely the fault of the Kaimin reporter.

Or, Hauck recruited Tru, who had a fight night pursued by legal authorities, and then Tru, after Hauck had been gone 2 years, ended up with a publicized nolo plea to misdemeanor disorderly conduct, and now is one of the highest paid corners in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Lots of fluff, but virtually no substance. Over the 7 years Hauck was the coach at UM, and several years thereafter.

Maybe what UM needed or needs to get away from were the misleading, exaggerated and false claims pushed by Florio, the Missoulian and Krak.

PR, for the record, if Bobby were to come back to Missoula, I would be the first to welcome him with open arms.

I agree with all of your points, and agree that he is guilty of nothing that should prevent him consideration for the job if he wants it...That's my personal opinion.

The public opinion is what's going to matter. Unfortunately truth and perception are two different things. The truth is everything that you noted above. The perception is that there is a national best seller on books stands with a picture of Main Hall on the cover that is about a Grizzly Football player that was involved in a rape allegation.

The perception, because of the book, is that UM is an unsafe place for kids to go to school, which is causing an enrollment decline. This was brought up during the president search presentations...So, true or not, that is the perception that is out there and probably more prevalent than the truths noted above.

The truth is that the DOJ investigation did prompt a major review and overhaul of campus safety protocols, which is now regarded as one of the best in the country. Most people won't know that because you haven't seen a word spoken about it in any local or national media.

The truth is that the Jon Krakauer's and Gwen Florio's of the world exist and are looking for any salacious story that they can spin and sell to the Missoulian and the New York Times. Can you imagine how they could take your points noted above and spin them to fit their narrative? I can.

The Grizzly Head Football coaching position is one of the highest-profile public positions in the state. Grizzly coaches ultimately answer to the President, you'd be crazy to think that Grizzly coaching positions aren't being influenced by Main Hall.

Hiring Bobby Hauck, because of the perceptions that exist, would be too much of a PR liability for a new President that's being tasked with reversing declining enrollment and triaging the University of Montana's reputation on a national level.

For the record, I believe that this applies not only to Bobby Hauck, but any previous head football coach, AD, etc. I'm not even sure that Joe Glenn could sing his way back into WA Griz Stadium.

This discussion is not about football, gentlemen. Its about a University that is in crises mode trying to move forward from the recent past, not about reliving the glory days. Its a political decision that transcends football, athletics, and even the University.

Too politically risky in my opinion, but I could absolutely be wrong. I wonder if Vegas has any action on this yet?

 

[Jaredkuehn]

Serious question for those of you who think Bobby Hauck could come back to UM. Considering everything that the University of Montana (not just the football program) has been through since 2011, and the efforts they have made to distance themselves from those events. Which of the UM presidential candidates do you think would have the political will to hire Bobby Hauck back early in their tenure?

Right or wrong, fair or not, in the public's perception, is Bobby Hauck too closely tied to the football team and everything that has transpired over the last few years?

Even if Haslam wants to bring Bobby Hauck back, you better believe that he is getting his new president's blessing before making any major coaching hires. How does Main Hall factor into this discussion?

Good question. Don't know, but I think Hauck could get hired back. A lot of big boosters would likely "insist" on it, if he was interested. Not aware of any real or imagined issues that he's had since he left UM.

Question for you. What do you think that the football program did or went through since 2011, or before, that would cause someone not to hire back Hauck? And what did he do that would cause himself not to be hired?

I just don't get this continuing perception.

So, because JJ had his thing and there was a lot of bad presss, and even though he was exonerated, allowed to continue with football and graduate, and was recruited after Hauck left, then Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, the feds came in and investigated sexual assault in Missoula, and came up virtually empty handed, and virtually none of this had to do with Hauck or his recruits, and occurred after he left Missoula, he should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited a white kid from Missoula, and after Hauck departed, the kid had a sexual assault problem (which came to light over 2 years after Hauck left), so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, while Hauck was here, 3 players got in trouble with a house burglary, and Hauck booted them off the team immediately and they left school, so Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited Wilson, who got charged and was acquitted, and allowed to come back to UM after Hauck had departed (and then played in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, sexual assault allegations involving 4 or so guys who were not recruited by Hauck (to my knowledge), in an incident that occurred after Hauck was gone, and the allegations turned out to be unproven, so that should disqualify Hauck?

Or, Hauck had a single issue with one nosey Kaimin reporter, and refused to talk to him, and then had nice relationships for student sports reporters at UNLV, so he should be disqualified for something that was probably largely the fault of the Kaimin reporter.

Or, Hauck recruited Tru, who had a fight night pursued by legal authorities, and then Tru, after Hauck had been gone 2 years, ended up with a publicized nolo plea to misdemeanor disorderly conduct, and now is one of the highest paid corners in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Lots of fluff, but virtually no substance. Over the 7 years Hauck was the coach at UM, and several years thereafter.

Maybe what UM needed or needs to get away from were the misleading, exaggerated and false claims pushed by Florio, the Missoulian and Krak.

Player, you deal in facts. The better part of the nation doesn't. They probably don't even know (or care) that JJ was innocent. As far as the better part of the nation is concerned the U of M is a rape mill. Unfortunately the perception is more far more damaging to the school than the actual facts are and people won't take the time to investigate or follow up on the situations. The 10 seconds of national news is all they know or care to know.

Bingo. Sad but true.

 

[PlayerRep]

Serious question for those of you who think Bobby Hauck could come back to UM. Considering everything that the University of Montana (not just the football program) has been through since 2011, and the efforts they have made to distance themselves from those events. Which of the UM presidential candidates do you think would have the political will to hire Bobby Hauck back early in their tenure?

Right or wrong, fair or not, in the public's perception, is Bobby Hauck too closely tied to the football team and everything that has transpired over the last few years?

Even if Haslam wants to bring Bobby Hauck back, you better believe that he is getting his new president's blessing before making any major coaching hires. How does Main Hall factor into this discussion?

Good question. Don't know, but I think Hauck could get hired back. A lot of big boosters would likely "insist" on it, if he was interested. Not aware of any real or imagined issues that he's had since he left UM.

Question for you. What do you think that the football program did or went through since 2011, or before, that would cause someone not to hire back Hauck? And what did he do that would cause himself not to be hired?

I just don't get this continuing perception.

So, because JJ had his thing and there was a lot of bad presss, and even though he was exonerated, allowed to continue with football and graduate, and was recruited after Hauck left, then Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, the feds came in and investigated sexual assault in Missoula, and came up virtually empty handed, and virtually none of this had to do with Hauck or his recruits, and occurred after he left Missoula, he should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited a white kid from Missoula, and after Hauck departed, the kid had a sexual assault problem (which came to light over 2 years after Hauck left), so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, while Hauck was here, 3 players got in trouble with a house burglary, and Hauck booted them off the team immediately and they left school, so Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited Wilson, who got charged and was acquitted, and allowed to come back to UM after Hauck had departed (and then played in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, sexual assault allegations involving 4 or so guys who were not recruited by Hauck (to my knowledge), in an incident that occurred after Hauck was gone, and the allegations turned out to be unproven, so that should disqualify Hauck?

Or, Hauck had a single issue with one nosey Kaimin reporter, and refused to talk to him, and then had nice relationships for student sports reporters at UNLV, so he should be disqualified for something that was probably largely the fault of the Kaimin reporter.

Or, Hauck recruited Tru, who had a fight night pursued by legal authorities, and then Tru, after Hauck had been gone 2 years, ended up with a publicized nolo plea to misdemeanor disorderly conduct, and now is one of the highest paid corners in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Lots of fluff, but virtually no substance. Over the 7 years Hauck was the coach at UM, and several years thereafter.

Maybe what UM needed or needs to get away from were the misleading, exaggerated and false claims pushed by Florio, the Missoulian and Krak.

I think this all legit, well substantiated and provides a some insight to the folks who might not know how things really went down. That said, that could be the problem. While everything you said is correct, I think a lot of the public, and a handful of people on this board either dont know those facts, dont believe those facts or have settled on their own version of how things went down. Perception is powerful, and unfortunately really hard to control. I think if the public was better informed and the real narrative of what happened was more well known, the possibility of Bobby coaching here again wouldn't be met with so much push back, at least from the general public/fan.

Yes, I thought of that while I was typing the fairly long list. On the other hand, I have always believed in doing what is right, and not allowing people who don't know what they are talking about, are wrong or are stupid, to dictate or influence decisions that my clients or I are involved in. If it were me, I figure build a plan to address incorrect perceptions and plow ahead. I am not afraid of risk. I deal with risk and evaluate risk everyday in my work. Not saying wimpy college presidents do these things.

Not sure what the downside would be. Dump stuff from Florio/Missoulian for awhile. In my view, Hauck just wanted around when much of the bad press occurred, or the related events. A new UM president who would go along with decision would have to step up and support it. Bodnar would seem to be someone who might do that. If I were the president, I would go right to the Missoulian and set them straight. I just don't think anyting negative would be more than a limited amount of press. I don't respect people who are afraid of their shadows and don't think they get far in life.

Plus, getting the Griz back on top would do a lot for the school and the press. That being said, I hope Stitt/Semore and team get onto winning ways, and all of this type of discussion is moot.

 

[Hammer]

Great post by Rep and very accurate statement by Gametime!

 

[PlayerRep]

Serious question for those of you who think Bobby Hauck could come back to UM. Considering everything that the University of Montana (not just the football program) has been through since 2011, and the efforts they have made to distance themselves from those events. Which of the UM presidential candidates do you think would have the political will to hire Bobby Hauck back early in their tenure?

Right or wrong, fair or not, in the public's perception, is Bobby Hauck too closely tied to the football team and everything that has transpired over the last few years?

Even if Haslam wants to bring Bobby Hauck back, you better believe that he is getting his new president's blessing before making any major coaching hires. How does Main Hall factor into this discussion?

Good question. Don't know, but I think Hauck could get hired back. A lot of big boosters would likely "insist" on it, if he was interested. Not aware of any real or imagined issues that he's had since he left UM.

Question for you. What do you think that the football program did or went through since 2011, or before, that would cause someone not to hire back Hauck? And what did he do that would cause himself not to be hired?

I just don't get this continuing perception.

So, because JJ had his thing and there was a lot of bad presss, and even though he was exonerated, allowed to continue with football and graduate, and was recruited after Hauck left, then Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, the feds came in and investigated sexual assault in Missoula, and came up virtually empty handed, and virtually none of this had to do with Hauck or his recruits, and occurred after he left Missoula, he should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited a white kid from Missoula, and after Hauck departed, the kid had a sexual assault problem (which came to light over 2 years after Hauck left), so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, while Hauck was here, 3 players got in trouble with a house burglary, and Hauck booted them off the team immediately and they left school, so Hauck should be disqualified for that?

Or, Hauck recruited Wilson, who got charged and was acquitted, and allowed to come back to UM after Hauck had departed (and then played in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Or, sexual assault allegations involving 4 or so guys who were not recruited by Hauck (to my knowledge), in an incident that occurred after Hauck was gone, and the allegations turned out to be unproven, so that should disqualify Hauck?

Or, Hauck had a single issue with one nosey Kaimin reporter, and refused to talk to him, and then had nice relationships for student sports reporters at UNLV, so he should be disqualified for something that was probably largely the fault of the Kaimin reporter.

Or, Hauck recruited Tru, who had a fight night pursued by legal authorities, and then Tru, after Hauck had been gone 2 years, ended up with a publicized nolo plea to misdemeanor disorderly conduct, and now is one of the highest paid corners in the NFL, so Hauck should be disqualified?

Lots of fluff, but virtually no substance. Over the 7 years Hauck was the coach at UM, and several years thereafter.

Maybe what UM needed or needs to get away from were the misleading, exaggerated and false claims pushed by Florio, the Missoulian and Krak.

PR, for the record, if Bobby were to come back to Missoula, I would be the first to welcome him with open arms.

I agree with all of your points, and agree that he is guilty of nothing that should prevent him consideration for the job if he wants it...That's my personal opinion.

The public opinion is what's going to matter. Unfortunately truth and perception are two different things. The truth is everything that you noted above. The perception is that there is a national best seller on books stands with a picture of Main Hall on the cover that is about a Grizzly Football player that was involved in a rape allegation.

The perception, because of the book, is that UM is an unsafe place for kids to go to school, which is causing an enrollment decline. This was brought up during the president search presentations...So, true or not, that is the perception that is out there and probably more prevalent than the truths noted above.

The truth is that the DOJ investigation did prompt a major review and overhaul of campus safety protocols, which is now regarded as one of the best in the country. Most people won't know that because you haven't seen a word spoken about it in any local or national media.

The truth is that the Jon Krakauer's and Gwen Florio's of the world exist and are looking for any salacious story that they can spin and sell to the Missoulian and the New York Times. Can you imagine how they could take your points noted above and spin them to fit their narrative? I can.

The Grizzly Head Football coaching position is one of the highest-profile public positions in the state. Grizzly coaches ultimately answer to the President, you'd be crazy to think that Grizzly coaching positions aren't being influenced by Main Hall.

Hiring Bobby Hauck, because of the perceptions that exist, would be too much of a PR liability for a new President that's being tasked with reversing declining enrollment and triaging the University of Montana's reputation on a national level.

For the record, I believe that this applies not only to Bobby Hauck, but any previous head football coach, AD, etc. I'm not even sure that Joe Glenn could sing his way back into WA Griz Stadium.

This discussion is not about football, gentlemen. Its about a University that is in crises mode trying to move forward from the recent past, not about reliving the glory days. Its a political decision that transcends football, athletics, and even the University.

Too politically risky in my opinion, but I could absolutely be wrong. I wonder if Vegas has any action on this yet?

Good points and analysis, but I believe enrollment can be built up by a good new president and his people, without regard to what the likes of Krak, Florio and the Missoulian (of old) says at this point. I just am not one who backs down to incorrect perception and idiocy. Just not my nature. If Krak were to defame Bobby, I would be happy to try to convince my firm to represent him in a case again Krak.

 

[cclarkblues]

Great post by Rep and very accurate statement by Gametime!

Hammer, you're alive! :clap:

 

[Hammer]

Great post by Rep and very accurate statement by Gametime!

Hammer, you're alive! :clap:

Yeah just dont partake in this dumpster fire nearly as much anymore. Tailgate still in the same spot.