You're Not Worth the Money, Happy?
33 comments so far
February 26, 2007 by
I realize I'm weighing in kind of late on this, but that's because I was hoping all this nonsense would have gone away by now. There's been a whole lot of negativity surrounding the termination of Doak Ostergard, the long-time trainer for the University of Nebraska. Among the major problems people cite with his firing, is that he "wasn't given a reason". Talk about grasping at straws. You think Doak would be all smiles if they gave him a reason? Come on. He'd be just as disappointed.
First of all, just because he was not presented with a reason, doesn't mean there wasn't one. I could speculate on whether they felt he had some culpability in Marlon Lucky's hospitalization, the seeming rash of shoulder injuries, or some other reason that people would roundly agree justifies a termination. But not only won't I do that, but there'd be no point even if those things were knowable. The fact is, a termination always happens for the same reason. In the judgement of the person doing the firing, the organization is better off not paying the person to remain. That's it, end of story.
Some will say that he served many years, worked long hours, and was dedicated, etc. etc. Spare me. Until this news broke, I'd bet over 95% of Husker fans (and maybe over 99%) had never heard of Ostergard. Everything we know about him is second-hand information at best. Haven't we all seen someone work somewhere a long time and not give a great effort. The army has a term for that, "retired on active duty". Again, I'm not saying that's the case with Doak, but it also means I don't take the fact that he's been there a long time to mean he is the best man for the job today. Football is competitive and if the coach feels he can do better, I wouldn't fault him for making a change.
Former Dallas coach Jimmy Johnson said that was a vital part of putting together the Cowboy dynasty of the 1990's. His first season there they cycled through dozens of players to find the ones worth keeping. He said as hard and painful as it is to cut someone, in a competitive sport like football, you can't hesitate to make a change you think needs to be made.
Does anyone really think that it was easy for Callahan? That he enjoyed firing Ostergard? That he enjoys catching all the heat he's getting today? The sad truth is that there are good reasons to provide little or no explanation to someone for their dismissal. First, the truth can hurt. Do you really want to kick someone while their down? Do you want to spell out every place where they have been underpeforming? It would be very easy for Callahan to run to the press and throw Ostergard under the bus (the way Ostergard did to him). He could give us all reasons why Ostergard can't cut it. But you know what, he stayed above that and didn't further damage Ostergard's reputation.
Also, organizations often have policies against giving reasons. Terminations can often lead to litigation. Once the cat's out of the bag that someone's going to be fired, they often will latch onto anything they can use to hurt the person doing the firing and the organization they work for. So despite all the claims you hear people making (most of whom have never had to fire anyone), it's not necessarily good business to try to "sell" the person on why they're being fired. All that matters is that it's over. The sooner everyone moves on (vs. rehashing the past), the better.
Further, reasons can be used as the basis for an argument which can get ugly and go nowhere. Rather than being a counseling session to the terminated employee on what's happening it can become a heated debate, filled with denials, circular arguments etc., etc. A lot of wasted energy on everyone's part postponing the inevitable. I've had on more than one occasion the unenviable task of letting someone go, and unfortunately, I've had to trot out the phrase, "we're not seeking to convince you that you deserve to be fired, we're just letting you know that you are being fired". What's done is done.
Finally, given a reason, the terminated employee can twist it and use it to poison other employees against management. Certainly, in this case Ostergard's proven he's not above that. He hasn't exactly gone away quietly.
So can we stop listening to questionable characters like Jason Peter lecture us on how Bill Callahan is supposed to fire a trainer and just understand that Bill had to do something hard and probably approached it in the manner he felt best?
» Enjoy this article?
Send it to your friend or get Husker news by email!
Related Stories: Bill Callahan
Post a comment
Gregory Feb 26 07
When Callahan was hired, my only concern was how the players would be treated. Well aware of his pro background (don't worry it's only a sprain) I was concerned the team would be run like a pro team. I'm just not concerned about that anymore. Along with what I believe is a fine charactor and fine reputation, Callahan has use of and is subject to support mechanisms built in place to prevent abuses.
If players had to practice or play while not healthy enough, I have no doubt we'd have heard about it. The players who apply themselves with effort and dedication in the classroom, still seem to have top notch support with that too.
Once, years ago, there seemed to be a rash of groin strains and pulls. Some severe enough to end players careers. I thought it was creatine at the time, but who knows.
If Doak it talented enough, he'll land of his feet. If he continues to be the victim....
Bob Feb 27 07
Bravo! though its only for stating obvious points that so many people seem to be missing, such as: "a termination always happens for the same reason".
Critics contend the reason was, simply, that he was part of the "old staff"; but that "reason" has been applicable for 3+ years, and they only just now decided to oust him because of it? That just doesn't make any sense.
However, contending there was a legit reason and Callahan is taking the high road and not spouting off to the press about it, is a bit more believable.
Swenson Feb 27 07
This article states many questions that should be answered. It may be true that the reason for the change could have hurt Doak Ostergard and the University. As in all businesses, change is inevitable.
Allways a Nebraska Fan!
Scott Feb 27 07
Great article Steve. People get fired all of the time in this world. Do we as the general public need to know why? Absolutely not. Just like if a co-worker gets fired, the other employees generally don't know why it happened but all of them speculate. Being a good person does not necessarily make them a good employee, as some ex-huskers are implying.
Since when does Jason Peter pass judgement anyway?
Steve Feb 27 07
Totally with you there Scott. If I'm Doak, Peter's the last guy I want speaking out on my behalf. It's like getting fired from BALCO only to have Barry Bonds step forward to say it's unfair. Not exactly the man you want pleading your case.
Husker Mike Feb 27 07
So it's ok to insinuate that Ostergard was responsible for Lucky's situation, or that Ostergard is lazy? Please.
If your point was that Ostergard shouldn't take his case to the public, I could buy that. After a while, it starts looking petty. But to start trying to guess at justifications for the firing is even worse.
I can accept that not giving a reason might be the best strategy from a legal perspective. But that still doesn't make it right. I'd like to think there are people who interact with others at a higher level than the minimum level required by law. Call it the "golden rule" or whatever you want, but Ostergard deserves better.
Andrew Feb 28 07
Really, who is this guy, and what does he really do. It is not like he is a real coordinator. Lets get over it, and talk about some real football things!
Steve Feb 28 07
Husker Mike,
My major issue is that so many people that are screaming about the Ostergard firing have no basis for understanding whether or not he had it coming. I threw out some specific possibilities only to help these folks picture a scenario where the guy deserved it. Maybe he didn't, but in my experience most people who get fired are done so with good reason.
Instead of Callahan getting any benefit of the doubt, people assume that he had little or no reason and that Ostergard was a completely innocent victim. That's flat out contrary to the overwhelming majority of terminations that happen in organizations.
I listed about four different justifications for not to giving a person a reason for their termination. Legal issues was only one of them. You may not agree with any of them, but that still doesn't mean it is unthinkable or outrageous not to paint a picture to someone on their way out the door.
JP Anderson Feb 28 07
Good article, Steve. It gets so tiring continually having to listen to people like Husker Mike who are trying with all their might to find a reason to criticize Pederson and Callahan. These Solichistas still haven't turned the page.
Megan Mar 28 07
I don't know Callahan, but I did know and observe Doak Ostergard in the training room a few years back. He's a good guy...the real deal. Quiet and extremely hard working. Truly competent, and has even patented a couple of medical devices.
I understand that people that didn't know him or know who he was would have their doubts. To some of us old alumni, though, his firing raises a red flag of concern.
darren Mar 29 07
Wow, this seems to be a topic that just won't die.
This just in from the are-you-kidding-me section of the Omaha paper - http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=1200&u_sid=2355896
When oh when will things stop being so divided and devisive? Can't we all just get along and play golf?
Jake Apr 08 07
Ha trying to defend Callahan and Pederson for their own dumbass moves. Doak was a fixture in a program that used to be based on integrity. Now all you have to do is pass the blame on somebody and fire them. Maybe its time to fire Callahan and get a coach that actually can coach players to become better? Here's a real article, not just some slop throwen together to defend Callahan.
Jason Apr 09 07
Jake,
Where did you get the impression that anyone was passing blame to Doak? I certainly haven't seen that reported anywhere.
Also, care to back up the claim that Callahan can't develop players?
Thanks for the link, but that's not news to any BRN readers. We linked to it in The Wire section of the front page the day it came out.
-Jason
Jake Apr 09 07
Well jason why would somebody fire a trainer with no reason given? Callahan obviously thought Doak was doing a bad job with the injuries, the same job that was good enough for osborne and his championships. it's just sad that cally tries to find the quick fix to everything rather than build up some integrity and pride. like not developing players than go for the JUCOS and pre madonnas all the time. NO real walk on program anymore hmm wonder why, they cant handle that many players and dont give the time to work with them. Jason how many years have there been where the Huskers actually lose fans??? And as for the link, people needed to be reminded after reading that bs that Hanway wrote.
Steve Apr 10 07
Jake,
One word..."decaf".
Did you even read the "bs" I wrote. You'll find multiple reasons why it would be reasonable not to give someone a reason for their termination.
As for the JUCO issue, there are a few flaws with that criticism. First, Osborne did bring in jucos (remember Michael Booker and Terrell Farley?) as did Solich (remember Darren DeLone, Donald Defrand, Demorrio Williams, Cliff Brye, Rodney Burgess, Thunder Collins, Larry Henderson, and Wali Muhammad?) Next, Osborne brought in Prop 48 kids until the Big 12 disallowed the practice. Now those kids must go the JUCO route to play in the Big 12. Third, not seeking to fix the team in short order ignores the impatience of the fans. The fans weren't going to wait 4 to 6 years for the Huskers to get back to the Big 12 title game, they needed to see results sooner.
No walk-on program? Really? Tell that to Stewart Bradley, Dan Titchener, Jake Wesch, Kyle Moore, Hunter Teafatiler, Andy Poulosky or any of the candidates at fullback, punter, etc. There are no fewer than 30 walk-ons on the current roster. But hey, don't let those inconvenient facts get in the way of a good diatribe.
Jake Apr 10 07
Yes i did read your article and you provide several points to beat around the bush on callahans no reason given but when it comes down to it shouldnt the head football coach be man enough to sit down with a veteran staff member and let them know why he's firing them?? Sure osborne did bring in some jucos but not near as many, thats probably why you only named 2. i said nothing about solich so i'm not sure why thats even relavent, you're more than likely trying to gradually build up to the number of jucos that callahan currently has so he doesnt look so bad. Impatience could explain the situation but either way its a quick fix. 30 walk ons wow thats a ton and you even named a fifth of them. thats roughly one person for each position i'm sure theres just a ton of pressure on the scholorship athletes to perform better from that, probably why our DB's are so good. And you never did answer my question of when the last year was that the Huskers LOST fans??
Steve Apr 10 07
Jake,
You question Callahan's manhood and yet I'm betting you haven't done it to his face. Yes, Callahan may have had a chance to thoroughly humiliate Doak by providing a laundry list of his failures. I'm sure Doak would be a much happier man today in that event.
You need more JC recruits under Osborne? Fine. He also recruited Jake Cabell, Ray Phillips, Randy Rick, Rene Andersen, Mark Dufresne, Frank Lockett, Mike Ruzich, Billy Todd, Mark LeRoy, John Minor, Brent Williams, Mark Tuck, Henry Waechter, Mike Rozier, Kevin Waechter, Bryan Carpenter, Brian Davis, Junior Monarrez, Bruce Pickens, Omar Soto, Vincent Hawkins, Kenny Wilhite, Ernie Beler, Trumane Bell, Anthony Cole, Kareem Moss, Toby Wright, Eric Alford, Jason Jenkins, Brian Knuckles, John Livingston, Mike Fullman, Brandon Harrison, and Glen Matthews)
If 30 walk-ons isn't enough. What's the number? 40? 50? 60? You could bring in 100 and it doesn't strike fear into the hearts of a scholarship athlete. Nearly all of the walk-ons are walk-ons because they didn't have scholarship offers..
I never answered the question because it's based on a completely false premise. Just exactly how can you PROVE that the Huskers have lost fans? Is there an official fan registry somewhere I don't about?
Jake Apr 11 07
Ha! congradulations you've now found roughly 30 more good job. either way at the rate callahan is going he will more than quadruple that number. and why not say this to callahans face? well sorry let me just jump on my jet miss my job and fly to lincoln to tell callahan something many others already have, either through the papers or message boards callahan knows many fans dissapprove of his actions. As for the walk-ons i beg to defer. A scholarship athlete having fear of losing his spot to a walk-on WOULD push him much more than not having the walk-on there at all and yes the more walk-ons you have the more competition there will be. i never said an exact number because idk what the magic number is all i know is its more than 30 thats for sure. and the husker fan comment. are you that ignorant that you cant open your eyes and see whats going on around the state? Personally i've heard countless times how the old days are over with and theres no tradition anymore, i guess you were just deaf to all of that. The old Husker ways are over with but sadly people like you continue to find ways to defend Callahan for everything he does. Maybe you should come to terms and stop defending and realize he's changing everything that USED to be the pride of all nebraska.
Steve Apr 11 07
Jake,
You're questioning Callahan's manhood because he chose not to tell Doak negative things on the way out the door. So I try the same to you for not saying negative things to Callahan's face and you recoil. Do you see the irony?
One minute you have to quit your job and get on a jet to get to Lincoln, the next you have your thumb firmly on the pulse of "what's going on around the state". Which is it?
I'll grant you that some FAIRWEATHER fans have jumped off the bandwagon. That's what happens when 60-3 is followed by 56-19 or 79-35. But in my mind, they were never true fans to begin with. And it hardly means that things shouldn't change. 60-3 only happened because the Huskers changed from the 5-2 front to a 4-3. Even the best have to change to keep up with the competition.
So you can't set a minimum number of walk-ons? Well none other than David Kolowski is on record as saying there's such a thing as too many. He felt too many walk-ons were "just happy to be on the team" and that it created an environment of apathy that lead to the seven-loss season of 2002. Only the good walk-ons are going to make a scholarship player feel any pressure, and it's very easy to believe that if you keep 30 out of 50, 80, or 100 you'll be keeping the ones that can ACTUALLY compete with the scholarship players.
Jake Apr 12 07
No i dont see any irony at all. When doak is just down the hall for the past 5 years as compared to me who has never met callahan, are two completely differnt things. How can you even compare that? its not a question of me saying it to callahans face its the matter that doak has been there for 25 years and DESERVES an explanation. What would be ironic is when you are fired and you get no explanation at all. I'm sure you'll be perfectly content to sit there and take it. As for the jet it was an exaggeration i figured an editor such as yourself might catch on, guess not. Once again i never have said an exact number and David Kolowski is probably right too many could be bad. 30 however is too low and roughly 15 more would be solid assuming that they all can play.
Steve Apr 12 07
Jake,
So now the Huskers have gone from "NO real walk on program" to 2/3 of your ideal number? And you can't give these coaches the benefit of the doubt on 15 bodies? It's not like they know anything about football or the practical implications of overseeing another 15 guys (probably less talented than the first 30). They should really defer to your judgment on this one.
I've worked for the same organization for 14 years and I wouldn't be at all surprised to be there 11 years from now. If I were fired, I don't know what an explanation would do for me, but then I've always had this affliction where I can see two sides of an issue. I might actually consider that the boss had some rational reason for not spelling out why I was let go (especially, as I've pointed out, I've been there myself too many times). In truth, I can't even see myself asking for one.
But I guess some of these lessons are learned in childhood. A friend would ask if I could spend the night at their house. My Mom says "No". The friend goes, "Did you ask her why?". And I'd always think the same thing, "he just doesn't get it, there's no point". She's not changing her mind and it will just get ugly.
But it wasn't just one friend who acted that way, most of my friends did. So maybe I shouldn't be surprised that the response to any piece of bad news should be, "But why? You have to tell me why!". Never mind that it doesn't change a blessed thing and probably just makes things uglier. Too many children grow up whining to get there way, and apparently many never grow out of it.
Jake Apr 12 07
Like i said roughly 15 more is what i would like to see. i never did mention an "ideal" number so i'm not sure why you keep going there. but no i cant give the coaches the benefit of the doubt. how can you go wrong by bringing extra competition? Maybe you get 3-4 good ones out of that additional 15 i suggested, thats worth it to me. Then you can cut the others or do whatever you want with them. And as for you not asking for an explanation, thats all easy to say now but we'll see how you feel 11 years from now when you get fired out of random and have no where else to go. But lets go way back to socrates, the man who was knowen for asking questions and learning from them was he not? Doak has a right to know what he did wrong so, at the least, he can learn and grow from it. And what makes you such a supreme being to put yourself higher up than most people and judge them?? And i have to question your credibility because that was dumbest metaphor i have ever heard. What's sad is you probably think it was a profound way to get your point across while trying to take a shot at me. I guess being a sports writer all you really have to do is string some facts and numbers together into a story and call it good.
Steve Apr 12 07
Jake,
Kolowski's whole point was that too many walk-ons means guys feel they have no opportunity to play and give a half effort. That can be as true with 130 guys competing for 22 spots as it was for 185. Having 115 guys to competing for 22 spots is plenty of competition. Ask Joe Ganz if there's competition. Ask Lance Brandenburgh. Ask Kenny Wilson.
If I get fired in 11 years, I'm sure I'll be 100% happy about it if they give me a reason. If they give me no reason, I'll never find work again. Thanks for setting me straight on that.
I'll admit I haven't read a great deal of Socrates, but I'd wager he didn't have a whole lot to say on the topic of athletic training or employee termination policies.
Odd that you call me out for being judgmental when you throw out a number of harsh judgments about Callahan.
You don't like the metaphor that's your prerogative. It feels like an apples-to-apples comparison to me. You say I wouldn't be content to "sit there and take it" if I were fired without explanation. I gave a pretty concrete example of how asking why about things I can't change was trained out of me at a very early age.
I'm trying to see both sides here. There are people that think that a person "DESERVES" an explanation and that it's outrageous to think otherwise. Having actually been the employer, I can see pretty clearly how it can make sense not to rehash everything on the way out the door, even with a long-term employee. It's clear you're in the "DESERVES" camp but that doesn't mean there aren't reasonable people who think otherwise.
It seems unlikely given your statements that you were pro-Callahan prior to Doak's departure. Rather, it just seems like one more thing to grab onto for those who never embraced Callahan in the first place.
Jake Apr 12 07
Maybe there is enough competition and i'm just not seeing it. thats probably why the o-line is so good and our cornerbacks can cover everybody. i never said you would never find work again maybe you would judging by your last metaphor but it doesnt look likely. And the whole socrates thing is deeper than just athletic training its the principel of learning what you either a) did wrong or b) dont know yet, by asking questions. once again i figured you "the all-knowing sports writer" might be able to think a little deeper there but it seems you've surprised me again. Yes i did judge callahan because thats part of his job being an NCAA DIV.I coach. i see no reason calling out a whole group of people calling them "whiners". It seems you've been ingrained with this mindset of just "taking it" and not fighting back which is ok i guess if it works for you. i have never been for or against callahan i just feel he mistreated a long time staff member that deserved better.
Steve Apr 13 07
Jake,
Here's some detail on how the offense line deteriorated under Solich:
http://bigrednetwork.com/archives/2006/04/lining_up_nicely.html
And cornerback wasn't any better at the end of the Solich era. Remember Pat Ricketts? I was at the Penn State game and on seemingly every play, a Nittany Lion would point to Ricketts as if to say "I've got a mismatch here". The walk-ons you'd add would be no better than the Pat Ricketts or Cory Timms. They do not strike fear in the hearts of starters that they're going to lose their job. Richie Incognito was never looking over his shoulder even though a guy with his short arms had no business playing tackle. The legions of walk-ons under Solich did nothing to change that.
You never said I'd never find work again? Actually, you did, "we'll see how you feel 11 years from now when you get fired out of random and have no where else to go" were your exact words. How else does one interpret "no where else to go"?
So where did Socrates say that asking questions ENTITLES you to answers. And actually, where did we see that Doak ever ASKED for a reason. I just heard Doak say that he didn't get one, not that he asked and they refused.
Part of Callahan's job is being judged by you? I'd be shocked to find that clause in his contract. Even if it somehow is his job, I have to ask (and I'm sure Socrates would approve) "what makes you such a supreme being to put yourself higher up than" Callahan and "judge" him?
When did saying "But why? You have to tell me why!" become "fighting back"? Whining isn't fighting. It's just whining.
"i have never been for or against callahan". Really? Here's from your opening salvo:
"Maybe its time to fire Callahan and get a coach that actually can coach players to become better?" Never mind that he turned guys like Zac Taylor and Brandon Jackson into all-conference players. Then part two of your love letters to Callahan: "it's just sad that cally tries to find the quick fix to everything rather than build up some integrity and pride. like not developing players than go for the JUCOS and pre madonnas all the time." Here's another affectionate line: "you continue to find ways to defend Callahan for everything he does. Maybe you should come to terms and stop defending and realize he's changing everything that USED to be the pride of all nebraska." Why would anyone think you were against Callahan?
Jake Apr 17 07
As you probably have noticed i've been away for awhile and was unable to read/respond to your tyrants. I'm glad you did your research but nobody cares about solich and his cornerbacks. callahan is the savior isint he?? But i'm not going to argue anymore because every point you bring up just brings up a different argument. I did enjoy reading however how you said that incognito was not good enough for the o-line. and the whole socrates thing you obviously dont understand the true meaning of it or just choose not to i'm not sure. I also enjoyed reading how Callahan's job, a job completely open to the public to watch how's he doing, a job that hundreds of people critique everyday, and not to mention a job that hundreds of thousands of nebraskans are trusting he does right, cannot be judged by the public. he knows people are doing it and that's part of it if he likes it or not. But good try to use my words against me in your research thats great i'm glad you have time in the day to do that. I'm done posting on this nonsense site, i believe i've made my point and see no need to drag out anything. So farewell to big red network i've lost all respect for this site after the support it gives from firing Doak.
Jason Apr 18 07
Hi Jake,
Sorry you feel that way.
Instead of us bickering back and forth about the past, would you offer any solutions that would fix the rift that exists between the NU program and fans such as yourself that feel things are headed the wrong way?
In the scheme of things it doesn't really matter if we, on this site, agree with your opinions or not. Obviously there are other fans who feel similar to you.
If Steve Pederson and Bill Callahan read this, what constructive solution would you offer them?
-Jason
Steve Apr 20 07
I think it was Socrates who said it best, "Why wouldst a team, with a wealth of walk-ons need to move a player obviously suited to be an interior lineman to tackle? It must be that they didn't have a single other option they liked despite all the bodies".
Andy Apr 24 07
As an Athletic Trainer at a major Division I university, I can tell you first hand that Doak Ostergard's termination without explanation is becoming more and more common in the "business" of collegiate athletics. As in any organization, people do not ascend to the top tier of any department and then after 30+ years it is discovered all of a sudden that they aren't good at their job. When was it exactly that high profile college coaches became Gods? The comment posted earlier by Andrew that Mr. Ostergard isn't a "real coordinator" is absurd, all Certified Athletic Trainers (not personal trainers in a healthclub, requiring no degree or advanced medical training) has a much greater responsibility...the health and welfare of someone else's child. I see it everyday where coaches in our department become angry to get injury or illness reports on their athletes, but just because they don't like the information doesn't mean that the coaching staff can or should ignore it. The coach's job is to put the best team "possible" on a fiels for every contest and game, not to make healthcare decisions. "Possible" does not mean to disregard the medical advice on the kid with an enlarged spleen from mononucleosis that could suffer a potentially fatal injury if hit in the wrong place during practice. Obviously, not every situation is critical with a kid's life on the line, but if you had been the athlete to tackle someone the wrong way, would you want the Head Coach or the Certified Athletic Trainer to make the decisions that could permanently decide if you ever walk again? I don't believe that having your healthcare provider be a "yes man" and the kind of person who will cave into the pressure of an egomanical head coach should be given the responsibility of making tough healthcare decisions for someone else's child. There may be more to the termination of Mr. Ostergard, there always is, but my point is that someone who has given 30+ years of service is entitled to an explanation, I think he has earned that right. The fact that there was no reason at all given to Mr. Ostergard soldifies the impression in my mind that they couldn't come up with a good reason at all. Just because the general readership watches the games, doesn't make them capable of summing up this gentleman's career as worthless simply because he isn't a coach.
Steve Apr 24 07
Andy,
I must disagree on a few points.
"People do not ascend to the top tier of any department and then after 30+ years it is discovered all of a sudden that they aren't good at their job." Actually, it happens all the time. Sometimes it's the Peter Principle and sometimes it's "retired on active duty".
No one said coaches were "Gods" (Tom Osborne excluded).
If you believe the rumors, then your spleen example is almost the opposite of why Doak's said to have been fired. A star player ended up hospitalized and people are saying that it's in part due to an error by Doak. We've seen no indication he was fired for protecting athletes but rather that he may not have done enough to protect them.
Please read the article above if you can't fathom why you don't try to convince someone they deserve to be fired (regardless of their years of service). There are several good reasons not to get into that kind of rehashing. A reason doesn't make being fired feel any better.
Andy Apr 26 07
Steve,
I am familiar with the Peter Principle and all that reiring on active duty entails, however, this is straying from the topic. Not knowing the whoole story I cannot, nor should you, speculate on the details of Marlon Lucky's situation. One thing to keep in mind is that as a healthcare provider, we MUST rely on everything the kids tell us that pertains to their health status. Most athletes nowadays know what the "right" answers are to the common questions we use to help make decision that allow or not allow athletes to participate. Certfied Athletic Trainers are not mind-readers, and hindsight is always 20/20; therefore, just like a monday morning quarterback it is easy to say what he or she would have done in their shoes, but not was the most prudent thing to do at the time of the situation with the information they currently had on hand. People may say some of the reason for Mr. Ostergard's termination was related to that situation, but if that is the case, the athletic dept could have said just that. All things being equal, I would prefer to know what situation(s) may have spurned on the decision, rather than just simply saying that my services were no longer required. If the FB coach had a good reason, why not say so...obviously he doesn't care if he hurts someone's feelings. I don't believe that Mr. Ostergard was even taking his "feelings" into consideration, but rather if they didn't have a good reason the athletic department may have left themselves open to a grievance procedure to keep his job. As to the Head Coach and Athletic Director, be men and give Mr. Ostergard a hint as to his termination, unless of course you can't come up with any kind justification (in which case....SAY THAT)!!!
Jake Oct 07 07
LMAO o my god what has happened?!?! Nebraska football cant even score a touchdown vs Missouri ( 94th ranked defense). With this "high powered" offense and the mastermind Bill Callahan at the helm you would think Nebraska could score at least 3 TD's right?? It's a good thing you guys sceduled Nevada, Balls State, and Wake Forest. But go ahead Big Red Network defend Callahan again i look forward to hearing the new excuses you guys make every week. Quoted from another message board i think it says it best "Yet, CorncoastNation sits idly by for the most part, golf-clapping for opponents running roughshod over the trampled legacy that is Cornhusker football and nodding mindlessly while drooling on its "Restore the Order" T-shirts saying that yes, this is the offense that we needed to modernize and get recruits. Notwithstanding the fact that top teams nationwide are going back to offenses featuring a quarterback with running ability and an offense with a material QB running game component." Who was the man that brought this onto nebraska?? Bill Callahan. But go ahead drool over how big and slow the offensive line is, or how many stars the next recruit has it makes my day more enjoyable. I look forward to a response. Yours Truly, Jake
TD Nov 16 07
It's not the football team that I dislike, I've met several players throughout the years, and all were gentlemen. It's their FANS!!!!
All one has to do is look at the sports page today in Omaha. The defensive coordinator is receiving death threats, his children are being accosted. I guess if you read the print, sooner or later, you start to believe it.