Reader does have a problem with Knight
By LARRY VAUGHT
The best thing about vaughtsviews.com is the insightful opinions so many of you have and share here.
Reader Bill Smith didn’t need long to respond to Mike Campbell’s defense of Bobby Knight not coming to GameDay Saturday after ripping UK coach John Calipari earlier this season.
Again, you can read his post, but I thought it was so good I didn’t want you to miss his perspective, either.
Here is what Smith posted in response to Campbell’s theory about Knight:
I appreciate the comments from Mr Campbell and yes it is true about the three national championships and the NCCA most wins by a coach. I am fine with the assessment that Bobby can make comments on issues. But to say you he has earned the right to spew (while only getting some facts right and embellishing on others) does not work for me.
As a coach Bobby would blast the media if he felt they spoke without due diligence on the facts. Yet as a media person himself he does not feel obligated to be factual about his comments. I do take exception about the portrayal many give about Bobby’s high integrity and moral values. To me he has demonstrated the opposite (punching a police officer from Puerto Rico, Throwing chairs without regard to who it may strike, suggesting if rape is inevitable enjoy it, striking and choking players and students, cursing and demeaning the media at press conferences, smacking opposing coaches, slamming a phone off the scorers table at the NCAA tourney with Dale Brown).
To suggest Bobby does not like Kentucky because of it’s past may not be accurate. There was a time when Bobby enjoyed fishing and was friends with Joe B Hall. I recently listened to Joe B. mention when their relationship with UK went south. It was when Joe B started beating Bobby in games. Then Bobby became mean towards both UK and Joe B. It was also mentioned by another writer that Bobby Knight was interested in the UK coaching position after we parted company with Billy G. So much for his dislike.
And yes it is true that Bobby never had any reported NCAA violations. But I remember a time when Bobby was the Pan American coach. During the tryouts he CUT one Charles Barkley while saving the last spot for a then high school player Delray Brooks, you remember him. He committed to play for Indiana, while some may not call that a violation, I would question the spirit in which Delray landed of the team.
I am fine that Bobby will not attend the UK game, what value would it bring to us.
I not saying my views are right, I’m just offering a different view of Bobby Knight.



Bobby Knight is irrelevant, petty, gutless, and a bully. I have now officially spent enough time on him.
There’s More Than One Way to Lack Integrity – An article by William C. Holden on NYTimes.com on Dec 20, 2009. I think it is a must read.
In this article Mr. Holden says “Bob Knight and John Calipari are cousins of the cloth, the NCAA cloth.” “The only condition is that they win, and in this Knight and Calipari are linked.”
Mr. Holden went on to say “Calipari might have violated the spirit, if not the letter, of the NCAA rules, but Knight has consistently violated the spirit of the rules governing decorum. His legions of friends and the institutions for whom he worked looked the other way at his boorish and abusive behavior.” Mr. Holden then cites 5 of Knight’s incidents with fans, media and during games.
Mr. Holden’s final thoughts. “Knight wonders why Calipari is still coaching. He is because Kentucky wants championship banners. Why was Knight allowed to keep going? Because Indiana wanted championship banners. Let’s stop the moralizing. Knight and Calipari: first cousins of the NCAA cloth.”
I couldn’t agree more!
Barry,
Your are certainly entitled to your opinion on Coach Cal and Knight. However, I’m still puzzled why you agree with the statement that Calipari has broken the spirit if not the letter of the NCAA rules. How has this been done? Because Camby accepted money that Calipari didn’t know about? By playing Derrick Rose when he was cleared by the NCAA? That would be like a pastor working at two different churches over time. At one a member of the church has an affair and at another a different member embezzles money. Because the pastor just happened to be working at both institutions but did not know of the acts, He is responsible. It doesn’t make sense to me. When do the individuals who actually did the act be held responsible instead of guilt by association. It doesn’t add up to me.
put a bobblehead of Knight in one hand, the same of Calipari in the other. Then think about the ways each have ingratiated their constituencies, their teams, their communities, their states. Splat. Guess which one hit the turf, hard?
Tony – I was agreeing with his comment about moralizing. You need to read the article by Mr. Cohen. Why was UK’s Eddie Sutton allowed to go to Okla State and be very successful after $1,000 slipped out of a postal package addressed to a recruit? There was that SI cover of Kentucky’s Shame. How about Pete Carroll? All Mr. Cohen is saying is that Knight and Calipari are the products of the NCAA and how it penalizes schools and the players more than the coaches, especially if the coaches are “winners”.
I think Barry meant that Knight had no right to be throwing stones at anyone, including Calipari