Bradley wrote, “Vince Dooley must delight in the knowledge that he, the old football coach, has outflanked university president Michael Adams, the old political operative. With the Georgia athletics department trying to ride out the tempest wrought by Tony Cole, the athletic director himself has managed to dance between raindrops. His rival, meanwhile, has gotten drenched . . .”
“Such a thing could happen again,” Bradley continued. “Adams tried to run Dooley off two years ago, haggling over months in a contract extension, but this athletic director may remain long after the president is gone. Adams has come off looking scared and silly . . . Dooley, on the other hand, has seemed serious and statesmanlike.”
Bradley misread the situation.
Unlike former President Davison, forced out in the Jan Kemp controversy, Adams lined up powerful backers including Governor Sonny Perdue, Chancellor Tom Meredith, and a majority on the Board of Regents, including Don Leebern (who would be reappointed by Perdue to a third term after Leebern made a $200,000 contribution to the Georgia Republican Party).
When Adams subsequently denied Dooley’s request for a contract decision in June 2003, it stirred a firestorm. Many Georgia alumni and boosters were critical of Adams’s treatment of Dooley, but many influential insiders saw the Dooley contretemps as simply another opportunity to express their profound displeasure with Adams’s leadership and spending habits.
Seeing that the Harrick controversy was hurting the university, Dooley issued a statement asking the people of Georgia not to associate his name with issues that they may have with Adams’s leadership. Adams seized the olive branch saying he would seek Dooley’s advice, which Dooley said he did.
“He asked me what would make me happy,” Dooley said. “I gave him my advice, not for me, but what I thought was best for the university. If you will give me just one more year then I think that most Georgia people will be very pleased with that and that you have extended an olive branch. And all it is, is just one more year, and I would be very happy with that and I think that many Georgia people would be. And it would help toward the healing.”
Adams said he would think about it but later turned down Dooley’s offer, apparently confident he had the power base to refuse the compromise. In his memoir, Dooley speculates that Adams used the time to line up support from “key people” not to grant a contract extension. Dooley said Adams frequently referred to unnamed “key people” during their contract discussions. As events have subsequently shown, Adams’s “key people” certainly included Governor Sonny Perdue and Dooley’s old friend, Regent Don Leebern.
Truth be told, Adams already had Perdue in his pocket by the time Dooley proposed his compromise. Dooley’s contract extension wasn’t denied by Adams until June 2003, but Perdue had already declared his support for Adams on March 12, 2003, two days after the president suspended Harrick.
Many of Dooley’s close supporters, including his wife Barbara, believe that Adams conspired with Perdue and Leebern to end Dooley’s career. Barbara Dooley didn’t approve of Leebern’s abandonment of his wife and she let Leebern and Yoculan know it. She is convinced that this and Vince Dooley’s refusal to name Yoculan as deputy athletic director did in her husband.
Vince Dooley doesn’t share his wife’s view of the split with Leebern. After his contract was not renewed, he wrote a somewhat cryptic letter to the editor which he sent to several newspapers saying so, and forwarded a copy to Leebern with a “heads up” note:
There have been a number of articles, editorials, and letters in recent in recent weeks regarding our gymnastics program and some have mentioned my relationship with Don Leebern.
It is true that Don Leebern and I have been longtime friends since I arrived at Georgia over 40 years ago. It is natural that during a friendship over a long period of time, people will not always agree on various issues and thus we have not been as close as we once were.
However, the assumption that the current situation was caused by Leebern’s support of President Adams in his decision not to honor my contract extension request is absolutely false from my perspective. In fact, if I had been a Regent at the time, I would have supported President Adams’s decision (despite privately not agreeing with that decision). The president has a right to make those personnel decisions and therefore I would expect all the Regents to support that decision—which they did—including several friends of mine.
Dooley consistently laid blame for his departure squarely on Adams, who had gained the power broker support that he needed. “He obviously wanted to make a change early on and waited for the right opportunity to make the move,” Dooley said.
Regardless, it was the president’s prerogative to make that decision, Dooley said. When the chance came, Dooley said he felt that Adams was not forthright. “He was constantly posturing, drawing from his political background. Had he been straightforward with me, more than likely, this situation would not have caused such an unfortunate controversy for the university.”
The issue was not whether Adams had the authority to remove an athletic director; that was a university president’s call. But as we have seen, the events leading up to Adams’s decision had already left a bitter taste in the mouths of Dooley and his close supporters, and the infighting was about to get much worse.
An opinion poll commissioned by the Atlanta-based Insider Advantage internet newsletter in May 2003 found that 64 percent of Georgians held a favorable opinion of Dooley while only 18 percent felt the same way about Adams. Nevertheless, on June 10, 2003, four days after Adams shut the door on Dooley’s career at UGA, the Regents met to formally respond to the developing schism. At the beginning of the Regents meeting, chairman Joe Frank Harris, a former Georgia governor, read a statement.
Please allow me to take a moment of personal privilege as your Chair to comment on a current issue that has generated a great deal of attention. I’m speaking of the publicity surrounding the University of Georgia and its athletic program.
First, let me recognize the extraordinary contribution of Vince Dooley to the University of Georgia in a career spanning four decades. He has established a legacy envied by athletic programs across the country. We deeply appreciate all Mr. Dooley has done and will continue to do for UGA and the state of Georgia.
In February 2001, President Michael Adams and Mr. Dooley both agreed on the term of service of Mr. Dooley as UGA’s athletic director. The president has decided to honor the agreement and the Board of Regents unanimously supports the president’s commitment. Let me just add another personal comment. Chancellor, members of the Board, I want to take this moment and personally salute President Adams for his leadership at UGA. We point with great pride to the progressive and positive positions President Adams has taken to move UGA to new academic heights. We are proud of Michael Adams and of the record he has established. He has our unanimous support. The statement stands on its own. President Adams is here today. We just want you to know we appreciate the leadership you are providing and you have this Board’s unanimous support.
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской
