Keith Murphy's interview with Chris Doyle

[Fryowa]

Yeah, I agree with all that. Realizing some kids need to be handled differently than others is one characteristic of a great coach (or leader, manager, etc.). It doesn't mean they necessarily need special accommodations. But the end goal for both player and coaches is to maximize the athlete's potential. Sometimes it takes problem solving and different approaches to reach peak performance.

It seems like Doyle reflected on that with a little space and time, which is cool. But yeah, to your point, that reflection seems to fall short. Didn't Dolph come right out and say he had some hard conversations with good friends after his King Kong comparison, plus went through some education, and learned about implicit bias?

We are all on our own journeys of self awareness. I would have found the interview more compelling if Doyle would have swallowed hard and described some tough conversations he had with black players since his departure...maybe some incidences where there is great mutual respect, but upon his request, he got some feedback that was tough for him to hear but important nonetheless. Maybe those conversations haven't happened. I'd think those would be important for reflection and growth.

Doyle seems to be one of those guys who has an almost impossible time saying he was wrong because it’s to him a show of weakness and shows a lack of awareness, which he can’t do. I think he feels like the lesser of the two evils is for him is to admit shortcomings in his training style but die on the hill of never allowing himself to admit any racial bias period. Whether intentional or not.

That’s where it falls short for me.

 

[justwinbaby]

Doyle seems to be one of those guys who has an almost impossible time saying he was wrong because it’s to him a show of weakness and shows a lack of awareness, which he can’t do. I think he feels like the lesser of the two evils is for him is to admit shortcomings in his training style but die on the hill of never allowing himself to admit any racial bias period. Whether intentional or not.

That’s where it falls short for me.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

I appreciate everyone else's comments.

I would just add that one thing that this does show is that if you are a general asshole to those around you, that tends to come back and bite you in the ass. Whether you want to call that Karma or Zen or whatever. The golden rule applies. When you treat others like shit, you might get wrongfully accused of being a racist, or a bully, or sexist, or bad at your job, or a host of other things that separates you from your job. If you treat your employees, or in this case, student athletes, with dignity and respect, the odds of someone accusing you of wrongdoing drop dramatically.

I don't know whether he was racist or not, but in a sport made up of majority black athletes, being a universal jerk may lead to the perception from some minority players that his jerkiness had a racial component. Once that is put out there, its hard to put back in the bottle these days.

I have zero sympathy for this guy. Be a better human and this never would have happened. Same for guys like Bobby Knight. That sort of asshole could, unfortunately, exist in high school and college in the 80s and 90s. Times have changed. For the better.

 

[trj]

I appreciate everyone else's comments.

I would just add that one thing that this does show is that if you are a general asshole to those around you, that tends to come back and bite you in the ass. Whether you want to call that Karma or Zen or whatever. The golden rule applies. When you treat others like shit, you might get wrongfully accused of being a racist, or a bully, or sexist, or bad at your job, or a host of other things that separates you from your job. If you treat your employees, or in this case, student athletes, with dignity and respect, the odds of someone accusing you of wrongdoing drop dramatically.

I don't know whether he was racist or not, but in a sport made up of majority black athletes, being a universal jerk may lead to the perception from some minority players that his jerkiness had a racial component. Once that is put out there, its hard to put back in the bottle these days.

I have zero sympathy for this guy. Be a better human and this never would have happened. Same for guys like Bobby Knight. That sort of asshole could, unfortunately, exist in high school and college in the 80s and 90s. Times have changed. For the better.

The sport is made up by a majority of black athletes. However, the racial makeup of the Iowa roster in most years is around 50/50. It may skew 60/40 one way or the other occasionally, but normally it is around a 50/50 split.

Not sure if that supports your argument or counters it I am just throwing it out there.

 

[Fryowa]

I appreciate everyone else's comments.

I would just add that one thing that this does show is that if you are a general asshole to those around you, that tends to come back and bite you in the ass. Whether you want to call that Karma or Zen or whatever. The golden rule applies. When you treat others like shit, you might get wrongfully accused of being a racist, or a bully, or sexist, or bad at your job, or a host of other things that separates you from your job. If you treat your employees, or in this case, student athletes, with dignity and respect, the odds of someone accusing you of wrongdoing drop dramatically.

I don't know whether he was racist or not, but in a sport made up of majority black athletes, being a universal jerk may lead to the perception from some minority players that his jerkiness had a racial component. Once that is put out there, its hard to put back in the bottle these days.

I have zero sympathy for this guy. Be a better human and this never would have happened. Same for guys like Bobby Knight. That sort of asshole could, unfortunately, exist in high school and college in the 80s and 90s. Times have changed. For the better.

+1

If he could give up an ounce of his pride and admit he might have a chance at redeeming what’s left of his career. I honestly think he believes that nothing he did could’ve been perceived as racially biased, and if that’s what he really believes he’s not going to admit it.

At this point I’m over it. He’s sleeping in the bed he made and both he and Iowa seem to have both moved on. It’s not something that’s keeping me up at night for sure.

 

[PCHawk]

+1

If he could give up an ounce of his pride and admit he might have a chance at redeeming what’s left of his career. I honestly think he believes that nothing he did could’ve been perceived as racially biased, and if that’s what he really believes he’s not going to admit it.

At this point I’m over it. He’s sleeping in the bed he made and both he and Iowa seem to have both moved on. It’s not something that’s keeping me up at night for sure.

It's probably not that he thinks nothing he said could've been percieved as racist and more that he doesn't think he bares responsibility for how people perceive him.

My main issue with him is one of the players who respected him (can't remember who) said it was the best when you make a big play, look over at Doyle, and see a small grin of satisfaction on his face. If you're going to be that big of an asshole, at least do a better job of praising players when they do good. Fran can be an asshole too and his players almost universally love him because he shows them love too. Seems like Doyle was all asshole and no love.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

I appreciate everyone else's comments.

I would just add that one thing that this does show is that if you are a general asshole to those around you, that tends to come back and bite you in the ass. Whether you want to call that Karma or Zen or whatever. The golden rule applies. When you treat others like shit, you might get wrongfully accused of being a racist, or a bully, or sexist, or bad at your job, or a host of other things that separates you from your job. If you treat your employees, or in this case, student athletes, with dignity and respect, the odds of someone accusing you of wrongdoing drop dramatically.

I don't know whether he was racist or not, but in a sport made up of majority black athletes, being a universal jerk may lead to the perception from some minority players that his jerkiness had a racial component. Once that is put out there, its hard to put back in the bottle these days.

I have zero sympathy for this guy. Be a better human and this never would have happened. Same for guys like Bobby Knight. That sort of asshole could, unfortunately, exist in high school and college in the 80s and 90s. Times have changed. For the better.

This is exactly right (though I'm not sure I entirely agree with your last sentence...).

The old-school abusive types have been weeded out, in both sports and other vocations where that kind of behavior was rewarded, and that is definitely for the better.

Where I give pause, is that in this day and age of "micro-aggressions" and the power and convenience of pulling out a "****-phobic" card when all else fails, perception has become more relevant/important than fact. That is a scary reality that can ruin peoples lives.

 

[SwirlinLingerie]

I also think Murphy left a lot on the table. These are difficult interviews/conversations, and neither one jumped into the critical nuances of the situation. It seems like Murphy was only able to go as far as asking Doyle if he ever used the N word. That feels like a very stereotypical, "white" way to define racism. It left Doyle a path out of a more complicated conversation by denying he ever used the word and then pivoting to talking points around empathy and old school coaching methods.

In my opinion, Murphy needed to probe on the Husch Blackwell report. That was an independent evaluation that found the program guilty of racial bias after interviews with players AND coaches. I was interested to hear reflection from Doyle on that. What was his take? Does he think he and Kirk contributed to that situation? Upon time and distance, does he agree with the assessment? Did he ever talk about racial issues with Iowa's black coaches? Why does he think Iowa's graduation rate and leadership group involvement was so much lower for black players? Did he ever think about that at the time or find it problematic? Was it something the coaching staff talked about?

 

[Fryowa]

I also think Murphy left a lot on the table. These are difficult interviews/conversations, and neither one jumped into the critical nuances of the situation. It seems like Murphy was only able to go as far as asking Doyle if he ever used the N word. That feels like a very stereotypical, "white" way to define racism. It left Doyle a path out of a more complicated conversation by denying he ever used the word and then pivoting to talking points around empathy and old school coaching methods.

In my opinion, Murphy needed to probe on the Husch Blackwell report. That was an independent evaluation that found the program guilty of racial bias after interviews with players AND coaches. I was interested to hear reflection from Doyle on that. What was his take? Does he think he and Kirk contributed to that situation? Upon time and distance, does he agree with the assessment? Did he ever talk about racial issues with Iowa's black coaches? Why does he think Iowa's graduation rate and leadership group involvement was so much lower for black players? Did he ever think about that at the time or find it problematic? Was it something the coaching staff talked about?

This. The interviewer focused 95% of the questions on the general asshole part of him rather than the race stuff. I fee; very confident that if his only fault was being to hard on people he'd still be employed here. They totally ducked the disparity between white and black players' viewpoints, team attrition, and graduation rates.

I love how Murphy went to great lengths to say how the interview wasn't screened or conditional, and then proceeded to softball the whole thing.

I do understand you have to be somewhat careful otherwise the interviewee is just going to cut it off and walk away, but the other side is that the whole reason for the interviewee even being there in the first place is because some pretty serious stuff took place, and his reaction to tough questions speaks more than just the answers (or lack thereof) themselves. If those questions you listed got asked, it would probably have been a waste of time because he'd just repeat the same vague answers over and over again.

 

[NorthKCHawk]

This is exactly right (though I'm not sure I entirely agree with your last sentence...).

The old-school abusive types have been weeded out, in both sports and other vocations where that kind of behavior was rewarded, and that is definitely for the better.

Where I give pause, is that in this day and age of "micro-aggressions" and the power and convenience of pulling out a "****-phobic" card when all else fails, perception has become more relevant/important than fact. That is a scary reality that can ruin peoples lives.

Bad things happen to good people. I won't deny that. Sometimes someone truly is wrongfully accused of something they did not do. Hell, Doyle may not, in fact, have treated the black kids any different than the white kids. Being an asshole is not illegal, as long as you are an equal asshole to everyone. If that were truly the case, he should not have been fired for cause but fired because Iowa should not tolerate a grown ass man bullying its players for kicks.

My point is this. Leaders who show respect, dignity, humanity, and praise for their subordinates, tend to be more effective leaders but they are rarely wrongfully accused of something awful like this.

You remember that one dude in high school or college that would always seem to find a way to get in a fight where ever he was? Games, bars, house parties, wherever. Was he just unlucky that jerks bumped into all the time? Nope. Trouble tends to find trouble.

Same principle here. Wrongful accusations tend to gravitate more towards assholes than really good humans.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

Bad things happen to good people. I won't deny that. Sometimes someone truly is wrongfully accused of something they did not do. Hell, Doyle may not, in fact, have treated the black kids any different than the white kids. Being an asshole is not illegal, as long as you are an equal asshole to everyone. If that were truly the case, he should not have been fired for cause but fired because Iowa should not tolerate a grown ass man bullying its players for kicks.

My point is this. Leaders who show respect, dignity, humanity, and praise for their subordinates, tend to be more effective leaders but they are rarely wrongfully accused of something awful like this.

You remember that one dude in high school or college that would always seem to find a way to get in a fight where ever he was? Games, bars, house parties, wherever. Was he just unlucky that jerks bumped into all the time? Nope. Trouble tends to find trouble.

Same principle here. Wrongful accusations tend to gravitate more towards assholes than really good humans.

Absolutely agree, and I'm definitely not defending people who essentially "make their bed" by being jerks.

My take on whether times have changed for the "better" relates more to the current culture of, "If I perceive what you do or say as offensive, be it racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, etc., etc., whether you factually did or said is irrelevant and less important than my perception of what you did or said."

No doubt, someone who is a jerk in a position of authority, such as Doyle, is more likely to suffer that consequence, but the interaction could be completely random.

For example, you may innocently refer to someone who identifies as a different gender as "sir" or "ma'am," only to be accused of transphobia. You may have been factually correct, and your intent may have been completely innocent and honorable, but if the recipient perceives what you said as transphobic (or whatever), the current state of our society would be supportive of the self-proclaimed victim, and you are now labeled as such with no recourse or due process in the court of public opinion.

The actual facts and intent are deemed unimportant and irrelevant. The power lies in the perception, and that's a scary proposition.

 

[PCHawk]

Absolutely agree, and I'm definitely not defending people who essentially "make their bed" by being jerks.

My take on whether times have changed for the "better" relates more to the current culture of, "If I perceive what you do or say as offensive, be it racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, etc., etc., whether you factually did or said is irrelevant and less important than my perception of what you did or said."

No doubt, someone who is a jerk in a position of authority, such as Doyle, is more likely to suffer that consequence, but the interaction could be completely random.

For example, you may innocently refer to someone who identifies as a different gender as "sir" or "ma'am," only to be accused of transphobia. You may have been factually correct, and your intent may have been completely innocent and honorable, but if the recipient perceives what you said as transphobic (or whatever), the current state of our society would be supportive of the self-proclaimed victim, and you are now labeled as such with no recourse or due process in the court of public opinion.

The actual facts and intent are deemed unimportant and irrelevant. The power lies in the perception, and that's a scary proposition.

Also if he did yell at black players at a higher rate, there's two possible reasons why, not one. One is he's either biased or unbiasly racist. But the other reason is in each instance he yelled at a player, they "deserved" it and it just so happened that the black player maybe "deserved" it more often. What are the odds that the players who got yelled at happened to be split 50/50 down the middle by race? The reasons the black players could possibly struggle more with disipline are reserved for a different board.

I think the most likely scenario is he was an equal opportunity asshole and yelled at everyone fairly equally. If he yells at one player who brushes it off, uses it as motivation to improve, then ends up respecting the coach, then yells at another player who holds a grudge, then years later it will be remembered that he only yelled at one player.

 

[#1DieHardHawk]

Also if he did yell at black players at a higher rate, there's two possible reasons why, not one. One is he's either biased or unbiasly racist. But the other reason is in each instance he yelled at a player, they "deserved" it and it just so happened that the black player maybe "deserved" it more often. What are the odds that the players who got yelled at happened to be split 50/50 down the middle by race? The reasons the black players could possibly struggle more with disipline are reserved for a different board.

I think the most likely scenario is he was an equal opportunity asshole and yelled at everyone fairly equally. If he yells at one player who brushes it off, uses it as motivation to improve, then ends up respecting the coach, then yells at another player who holds a grudge, then years later it will be remembered that he only yelled at one player.

To be clear, I wasn't referring to the Doyle situation specifically. As others have rightly pointed out, if he chose to exert his power in a bully fashion, he got what he deserved.

Perception trumping facts is a much broader issue, but probably can be applied in his case.

IIRC, one player complained that Doyle told him he could "go back to the ghetto" if he didn't like the way things were, but someone observing that interaction said that Doyle told him he could go back to (whatever city he was from) and didn't use the word ghetto. The player perceived the phrase differently through the lens of someone who grew up in a poor oppressed environment, and assumed Doyle's implication was racist.

Was Doyle implying that due to subconscious bias, or, in a worst case scenario, as someone who is frankly racist? We'll never know, but either way, the facts of the statement took a back seat to the perception. That's a dangerous power right now, and akin to the witch hunts of the late 1600s - if a group of people perceived you as a witch, you were deemed a witch. Facts didn't matter.

 

[NCHawker]

I said this then and I'll say it now.

There are some people who go through life without anyone to tell them that their full of sh**. Usually everyone knows someeone like that. Even if they got honest feedback, they ignore it.

whatareyagonado?

 

[SwirlinLingerie]

Not super interested in going way down this path again, but some of you guys are overlooking some significant facts here.

Black players left Iowa at a higher rate than almost any other Big Ten school. We're not just comparing black and white players at Iowa. We're comparing Iowa with other Big Ten schools. Iowa was the outlier.

The Husch Blackwell report was based on an independent evaluation, and not limited to a couple players reacting to negative feedback. It was based on interviews with over 100 people, including 36 current and former employees/coaches.

The independent evaluation found Iowa's football program suffered from racial bias.

 

[Hawkboys]

Not super interested in going way down this path again, but some of you guys are overlooking some significant facts here.

Black players left Iowa at a higher rate than almost any other Big Ten school. We're not just comparing black and white players at Iowa. We're comparing Iowa with other Big Ten schools. Iowa was the outlier.

Iowa City, while very diverse for IA, is likely the least diverse by a large margin of B1G campuses. I'm not saying you're wrong, only that the true cause is a little more nuanced that evidence that you are using.

For context, I live in the DSM area and manage a large IT Support Team. One of my employees moved to Atlanta from here because the DSM area wasn't "urban" enough for him. Our team was very diverse (< 50% white). And the area of DSM that he lived in is by far the most urban area of the state. There are probably some areas in Waterloo and Davenport that might be close.

 

[HawkPowerlifter]

I think there's a lot of truth to what is being posted. Unfortunately, we likely will never get the full story. It is likely somewhere in the middle. It was very cringy to hear he and KF had not talked since 2020, but I'm sure when this hit the fan, all personal friendships were out the window.

KF likely entrusted Doyle with the strength and conditioning and was seeing the fruits of his labor on the field and questioned nothing. He appeared to be doing his job and getting results. And results obviously are what get you paid. Some would say that KF is the head coach and the buck stops with him. Although, I'm guessing KF didn't set foot in the weight room and would not have the foggiest idea about what transpired under Doyle's supervision.

I, too, found it half-hearted how Doyle reflected on how he was "tough" on players and etc. Much like many of your takes, Doyle possessed that hard ass old school mentality that many of us had coaches like this. Nobody questioned it because of the results. And likely nobody knew until someone had had enough.

I wasn't present and like mentioned, Doyle may not have had to utter a racial slur per se. It could have been other indirect comments or etc. Times have changed and the social climate is much different than it was 20 years ago. Much like the detractors saying the game has passed KF, this is just an example of a coach potentially not conforming to how things are in the present.

I've heard Doyle speak, and have been around him outside of speaking engagements in less formal events. He is a bit gruff and one could easily think he is abrasive. I can only imagine what he was like in the weight room being the master of his own domain.

Did KF let him fry or did allow the process to run it's course and chips fall where they may and take his own accountability? Tough to know.

 

[haydensly]

One of the things that the Black players resented was that they weren't allowed to be "themselves", i.e. couldn't wear hoodies, were not allowed to have the music on that they wanted to hear etc. Things like that. Cultural differences that were not respected.

 

[SwirlinLingerie]

Iowa City, while very diverse for IA, is likely the least diverse by a large margin of B1G campuses. I'm not saying you're wrong, only that the true cause is a little more nuanced that evidence that you are using.

For context, I live in the DSM area and manage a large IT Support Team. One of my employees moved to Atlanta from here because the DSM area wasn't "urban" enough for him. Our team was very diverse (< 50% white). And the area of DSM that he lived in is by far the most urban area of the state. There are probably some areas in Waterloo and Davenport that might be close.

Did you read the report? The black players interviewed generally love the community. They specifically said that wasn't the problem.

I grew up in Iowa City in the '80s and early '90s. Iowa City was less diverse then, yet Iowa had basketball and football teams with lots of black players. We even had two black head basketball coaches! This isn't some situation where a university in a po-dunk town suddenly recruited black players for the first time recently.

It's ok to accept the report's findings.

 

[Fryowa]

One of the things that the Black players resented was that they weren't allowed to be "themselves", i.e. couldn't wear hoodies, were not allowed to have the music on that they wanted to hear etc. Things like that. Cultural differences that were not respected.

See that's stuff I think Doyle could or could have gotten past and worked through if he'd have admitted to it. That's a little different than racial slurs, etc. Admit you're old, white, out of touch, and that you didn't see what you were doing for what it was...treating black people differently and not respecting them to the same level as white athletes. Apologize for it.

But all I got from the interview was, 'I never used the N-word and I have plenty of black friends...'