Mental Health, Abuse and reporting in Women's Lacrosse

[njbill]

Be careful? Be careful of what? Hmm. Sounds like a threat. Is it?

This first time poster obviously seems to be a former player who does not like Taylor. She is an adult entering the fray. In her first post, she took a bunch of shots at me. Which is completely fine. But it does not immunize her from responses that may be critical of her.

[Nigel]

I put their over/under at 2 games. With 1 win under their belt it will be challenging to get to 2 wins. The only toss up game left is with Lafayette which is traditionally the worst team in the Patriot League. Btw, I put the over/under for Lafayette at 2 games as well with the only winnable game left being against Colgate. But both coaches remain in place and in fact, the Lafayette coach just got a 3 year extension for some reason.

I'll take the over and would expect them to compete for the 6th playoff spot in the league. But I also wouldn't be surprised if they fell short and broke their string of four years in a row of making the playoffs (all done through coaching turnover, covid, and KT reign). Losing talented upperclass girls as they have may finally be too much to overcome.

[laxlaxlax]

Kathy has responded via Instagram

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cp24sJduIh ... MyMTA2M2Y=

[Dasher]

Be careful? Be careful of what? Hmm. Sounds like a threat. Is it?

This first time poster obviously seems to be a former player who does not like Taylor. She is an adult entering the fray. In her first post, she took a bunch of shots at me. Which is completely fine. But it does not immunize her from responses that may be critical of her.

It’s not ok to victim shame. There is a lot of emotional energy in that post that your can’t causally discount. It’s weak on your part to not be empathetic.

[Dasher]

Be careful? Be careful of what? Hmm. Sounds like a threat. Is it?

This first time poster obviously seems to be a former player who does not like Taylor. She is an adult entering the fray. In her first post, she took a bunch of shots at me. Which is completely fine. But it does not immunize her from responses that may be critical of her.

It’s not ok to victim shame. There is a lot of emotional energy in that post that you can’t causally discount. It’s weak on your part to not be empathetic.

[Dasher]

Be careful? Be careful of what? Hmm. Sounds like a threat. Is it?

This first time poster obviously seems to be a former player who does not like Taylor. She is an adult entering the fray. In her first post, she took a bunch of shots at me. Which is completely fine. But it does not immunize her from responses that may be critical of her.

It’s not ok to victim shame. There is a lot of emotional energy in that post that you can’t causally discount. It’s weak on your part to not be empathetic.Not my first post. Adult

[njbill]

Be careful? Be careful of what? Hmm. Sounds like a threat. Is it?

This first time poster obviously seems to be a former player who does not like Taylor. She is an adult entering the fray. In her first post, she took a bunch of shots at me. Which is completely fine. But it does not immunize her from responses that may be critical of her.

It’s not ok to victim shame. There is a lot of emotional energy in that post that your can’t causally discount. It’s weak on your part to not be empathetic.

Thanks for the lecture.

Here's mine to you.

I didn't victim shame. Learn what the term means so you don't improperly use it again.

I didn't "causally [you meant casually; learn to spell] discount" the "emotional energy" in the post. I didn't substantively respond to the poster so I didn't discount anything.

It appears the poster may not be a former player, but rather someone well into adulthood (you can put 2+2 together). Perhaps I made an incorrect assumption, which you then doubled down on. Does that change what you said? Is it OK with you if I respond to a mature adult?

I do have some disagreements with what was said and I have some responses to the shots taken at me. You seem to think it's OK for a poster to take shots at me, but it's not OK for me to respond. Yeah, OK.

FTR, I don't mind this poster taking shots at me. This is a forum; we discuss things here. I do mind Mr. Sanctimonious Buttinski sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong telling me what I can and cannot do.

"It’s weak on your part to not be empathetic." I didn't express a view either way. I'm empathetic if someone has a bad experience they didn't cause, which appears to be the case with some of the Colgate players. I'm not empathetic with assertions that are evidently untrue.

You and I have been butting heads about this Colgate situation for some time now. I've told you my connection. What's yours?

[championxxx]

Another similar case

https://ysusports.com/sports/womens-lacrosse/coaches

https://www.2adays.com/coaches/kendyl-clarkson-49684

https://www.2adays.com/coaches/theresa-walton-56124

[MDlaxfan76]

Be careful? Be careful of what? Hmm. Sounds like a threat. Is it?

This first time poster obviously seems to be a former player who does not like Taylor. She is an adult entering the fray. In her first post, she took a bunch of shots at me. Which is completely fine. But it does not immunize her from responses that may be critical of her.

It’s not ok to victim shame. There is a lot of emotional energy in that post that your can’t causally discount. It’s weak on your part to not be empathetic.

Thanks for the lecture.

Here's mine to you.

I didn't victim shame. Learn what the term means so you don't improperly use it again.

I didn't "causally [you meant casually; learn to spell] discount" the "emotional energy" in the post. I didn't substantively respond to the poster so I didn't discount anything.

It appears the poster may not be a former player, but rather someone well into adulthood (you can put 2+2 together). Perhaps I made an incorrect assumption, which you then doubled down on. Does that change what you said? Is it OK with you if I respond to a mature adult?

I do have some disagreements with what was said and I have some responses to the shots taken at me. You seem to think it's OK for a poster to take shots at me, but it's not OK for me to respond. Yeah, OK.

FTR, I don't mind this poster taking shots at me. This is a forum; we discuss things here. I do mind Mr. Sanctimonious Buttinski sticking his nose in where it doesn't belong telling me what I can and cannot do.

"It’s weak on your part to not be empathetic." I didn't express a view either way. I'm empathetic if someone has a bad experience they didn't cause, which appears to be the case with some of the Colgate players. I'm not empathetic with assertions that are evidently untrue.

You and I have been butting heads about this Colgate situation for some time now. I've told you my connection. What's yours?

At the risk of being called sanctimonious or buttinski, , let me first say that I'm glad these sorts of discussions are allowed on FanLax. The former LaxPower, by contrast, regularly censored any such deeply emotional critique of coaches, (seemingly particularly those coaches favored by the moderators). This site decided to open that up, albeit to restrict direct personal attacks of fellow posters and trolling.

I've read with considerable interest these various stories, including this particular one re Colgate, as my son and several of his college teammates at another institution went through at least somewhat similar situations being pressured to play on serious injuries, which worsened as a result, and with considerable mental abuse as well. Should have had surgery earlier, and mental health should be considered. Not ok.

So, I come with a bit of bias that leads me to suspect that when such stories surface, they are more likely to be true than not, as, at least in some families' like ours experience, there's definitely an effort to bury them to protect institutions and coaches from critique (or liability). Thus, my bias.

I've read your (NJBILL) rationale on why you're willing to weigh the possibility that the stories may not be 100% fair, and it's a reasonable point.

I also read NJM's post, which is clearly closely informed, likely by a parent, (possibly player but less likely), and quite undertandably emotional.

I don't however, see that post as "taking shots" at you, NJBILL, personally, rather they are addressing points you and others they've encountered have made. IMO, those aren't "shots", nor, at least in this buttinski's opinion, deserve a "shot" back.

They do deserve, IMO, some empathy, at a minimum, regardless of whether one finds them overwhelmingly persuasive...or not.

Last, of course, if you'd like to respond to NJM's specific points, I'm quite sure that no one on here was suggesting that such was inappropriate. The "weak" comment by Dasher was overly sharp, IMO, but not the suggestion that empathy in your responses would be appropriate...but that doesn't mean specific points can't be engaged.

[rc13]

This Youngstown State situation seems a bit of a mess, and I should add that I have a loose family connection to that program.

My understanding, and it's not direct knowledge, is that a handful of parents are running the asylum. A few players were suspended, allegedly for excessive drinking, and it's the suspended players' parents who have seem to have been filing the complaints.

The previously posted 2aday links really lack specifics. Gaslighting, playing favorites. There was one story about team-issued cleats but not much beyond that. The complaint against former coach Walton, now at ODU is similarly vague (written by the same person(s)?).

We'll see what happens, but my understanding is that Sunday's game at Canisius may not happen and that the season is in jeopardy.

[Brownlax]

This Youngstown State situation seems a bit of a mess, and I should add that I have a loose family connection to that program.

My understanding, and it's not direct knowledge, is that a handful of parents are running the asylum. A few players were suspended, allegedly for excessive drinking, and it's the suspended players' parents who have seem to have been filing the complaints.

The previously posted 2aday links really lack specifics. Gaslighting, playing favorites. There was one story about team-issued cleats but not much beyond that. The complaint against former coach Walton, now at ODU is similarly vague (written by the same person(s)?).

We'll see what happens, but my understanding is that Sunday's game at Canisius may not happen and that the season is in jeopardy.

https://www.wfmj.com/story/48562295/ysu ... -of-duties

[njbill]

Haha, as perhaps the preeminent Mr. Buttinski on these boards (which I say with all great affection, a comment with which I’m sure you’ll 100% agree, MD), I have no problem with hearing your calm and rational perspective on this.

Absolutely agree that it is a good thing that discussions like this are permitted on FanLax.

I understand your point that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” though I disagree with your (admittedly biased) conclusion that such stories “are more likely to be true than not.” Each situation is different so I think one can’t say “more likely.”

The coach says she was “cleared.” (600+ likes on Instagram. Is that meaningful? I don’t know.) I suspect she wasn’t fully “cleared” as otherwise you wouldn’t have seen the remedial measures instituted. But I also suspect she was at least largely cleared of the most extreme allegations. As I have said, I’d be interested in what the trainers said. What do the contemporaneous documents show? If the trainers had fully sided with the players’ allegations, you’d expect the coach would have been fired. So I conclude they did not.

The six players and (likely) their parents (perhaps including njm) tried to get the coach fired. That is what their lawyers’ letter expressly sought. Colgate investigated and determined not to fire the coach. The teas leaves suggest the investigation did not credit or corroborate at least some of the allegations. The report hasn’t been made public, but presumably it explains why they didn’t fire Taylor. As an alum, I am standing behind my school on how they handled the situation. If you (not you, personally, MD) want to ask how I can do that without seeing the report, that’s a fair point. But I have trust in the college.

If njm is a parent, sure, I can understand the emotional content. But that doesn’t immunize her from being accountable for some of the pretty evidently untrue things she said.

My take on what seems to be going on here now is that the six complainants were sorely disappointed they weren’t able to get the coach fired. So now they are taking to the legacy media and social media to continue their fight. Some sour grapes to be honest it seems. The lawyer letter was sent out a year ago. One of the players interviewed on camera alleges stuff from 2½ years ago. She, herself, graduated almost two years ago. The university has made its decision. Unless new evidence is brought to bear, I doubt Colgate is going to reconsider. As I used to hear from judges in my old profession, “counsel, I have ruled. Move on.”

My use of the word “shots” was too strong perhaps; however, it was in response to the unwarranted diatribe from Dasher. BTW, I never said njm was being “personal” to me in her post. I said twice I was OK with her “taking shots” at me. njm certainly was critical of things I said though what she said didn’t cross any line. It was just wrong in a few instances. If someone comes on this board with stuff, they have to expect someone else may disagree with them (you agree with that, I think). I agree that njm doesn’t deserve a “shot” back, but if you reread what I said, you’ll see I never said I wanted to take a “shot” at her; I said I should be able to “respond.” Dasher deserved a shot back which is what he got.

Of course empathy is appropriate for those negatively impacted, but that is not what Dasher said at all. He didn’t “suggest[] that empathy in your responses would be appropriate.” His comment was, to use your phrase, “overly sharp.” As I said, I do empathize with anyone in an undesirable situation they didn’t create, which seems to be true for some of the players. I’d like everyone to have a great college experience, in the classroom and on the playing fields. Unfortunately, that isn’t reality. What I don’t empathize with is some of the apparently unfair and even untrue stuff that gets written. The coach thinks she’s being unfairly defamed. If she's right, does she deserve empathy?

[Brownlax]

Haha, as perhaps the preeminent Mr. Buttinski on these boards (which I say with all great affection, a comment with which I’m sure you’ll 100% agree, MD), I have no problem with hearing your calm and rational perspective on this.

Absolutely agree that it is a good thing that discussions like this are permitted on FanLax.

I understand your point that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” though I disagree with your (admittedly biased) conclusion that such stories “are more likely to be true than not.” Each situation is different so I think one can’t say “more likely.”

The coach says she was “cleared.” (600+ likes on Instagram. Is that meaningful? I don’t know.) I suspect she wasn’t fully “cleared” as otherwise you wouldn’t have seen the remedial measures instituted. But I also suspect she was at least largely cleared of the most extreme allegations. As I have said, I’d be interested in what the trainers said. What do the contemporaneous documents show? If the trainers had fully sided with the players’ allegations, you’d expect the coach would have been fired. So I conclude they did not.

The six players and (likely) their parents (perhaps including njm) tried to get the coach fired. That is what their lawyers’ letter expressly sought. Colgate investigated and determined not to fire the coach. The teas leaves suggest the investigation did not credit or corroborate at least some of the allegations. The report hasn’t been made public, but presumably it explains why they didn’t fire Taylor. As an alum, I am standing behind my school on how they handled the situation. If you (not you, personally, MD) want to ask how I can do that without seeing the report, that’s a fair point. But I have trust in the college.

If njm is a parent, sure, I can understand the emotional content. But that doesn’t immunize her from being accountable for some of the pretty evidently untrue things she said.

My take on what seems to be going on here now is that the six complainants were sorely disappointed they weren’t able to get the coach fired. So now they are taking to the legacy media and social media to continue their fight. Some sour grapes to be honest it seems. The lawyer letter was sent out a year ago. One of the players interviewed on camera alleges stuff from 2½ years ago. She, herself, graduated almost two years ago. The university has made its decision. Unless new evidence is brought to bear, I doubt Colgate is going to reconsider. As I used to hear from judges in my old profession, “counsel, I have ruled. Move on.”

My use of the word “shots” was too strong perhaps; however, it was in response to the unwarranted diatribe from Dasher. BTW, I never said njm was being “personal” to me in her post. I said twice I was OK with her “taking shots” at me. njm certainly was critical of things I said though what she said didn’t cross any line. It was just wrong in a few instances. If someone comes on this board with stuff, they have to expect someone else may disagree with them (you agree with that, I think). I agree that njm doesn’t deserve a “shot” back, but if you reread what I said, you’ll see I never said I wanted to take a “shot” at her; I said I should be able to “respond.” Dasher deserved a shot back which is what he got.

Of course empathy is appropriate for those negatively impacted, but that is not what Dasher said at all. He didn’t “suggest[] that empathy in your responses would be appropriate.” His comment was, to use your phrase, “overly sharp.” As I said, I do empathize with anyone in an undesirable situation they didn’t create, which seems to be true for some of the players. I’d like everyone to have a great college experience, in the classroom and on the playing fields. Unfortunately, that isn’t reality. What I don’t empathize with is some of the apparently unfair and even untrue stuff that gets written. The coach thinks she’s being unfairly defamed. If she's right, does she deserve empathy?

NJBill - what specifically did NJM say that was untrue? I also feel that you are being completely one-sided on this because of your affiliation with Colgate. A few years ago (alright many years ago) the Brown Men's team had major issues with their coach. The players (mainly seniors and juniors) had to go to the AD and to people like me (Alumni) to help them with their situation. I sided 100% with the players after hearing their stories from multiple players. I did not let my allegiance to my alma mater affect my decision to support the players.

The one thing I am 100% in favor of is good - positive coaching that helps elevate each player rather than demeaning them.

[njbill]

Brownlax, I have to run out for a bit. I will PM you later to respond to your question. Unless njm wants to further engage me, I'm not sure it's productive to lay that out here.

Again, I understand why you think I am being one-sided. I don't think so, but I am taking a different side than most here.

I am standing behind Colgate's handling of this and the measures they have implemented. Do you disagree with how they handled it? If so, why?

Did you talk to the coaches before siding with the players?

We can do all this by PM if you like.

[Brownlax]

Brownlax, I have to run out for a bit. I will PM you later to respond to your question. Unless njm wants to further engage me, I'm not sure it's productive to lay that out here.

Again, I understand why you think I am being one-sided. I don't think so, but I am taking a different side than most here.

I am standing behind Colgate's handling of this and the measures they have implemented. Do you disagree with how they handled it? If so, why?

Did you talk to the coaches before siding with the players?

We can do all this by PM if you like.

We don't need to use PM's - this is all public anyhow right now and we can keep it that way. I have not spoken to any Colgate coaches or players (nor have most forum posters). However, that does not stop me from forming an opinion.

One thing I can not stand - and this is my personal pet peeve - I hate when coaches take over a program and then talk about their recruits or talk about their existing players as not having been recruited by the new staff. When you take on a new head coaching position - they are all your players. Every single one of the kids on that team deserves to be coached up and treated equally regardless of how they ended up at the school.

Secondly - you asked me how I thought Colgate handled the situation. Well the first thing that seems strange to me is that Colgate did not release the findings of their own investigation. Having been involved with situations like this in the past - AD's usually defend their coaches and the school. I'd like to see what Colgate uncovered. How did they handle it? If they did not think the coach did anything wrong, then why are they continuing the scholarships for players who wanted to quit the team? Something happened!

[njbill]

Brownlax, I have to run out for a bit. I will PM you later to respond to your question. Unless njm wants to further engage me, I'm not sure it's productive to lay that out here.

Again, I understand why you think I am being one-sided. I don't think so, but I am taking a different side than most here.

I am standing behind Colgate's handling of this and the measures they have implemented. Do you disagree with how they handled it? If so, why?

Did you talk to the coaches before siding with the players?

We can do all this by PM if you like.

We don't need to use PM's - this is all public anyhow right now and we can keep it that way. I have not spoken to any Colgate coaches or players (nor have most forum posters). However, that does not stop me from forming an opinion.

One thing I can not stand - and this is my personal pet peeve - I hate when coaches take over a program and then talk about their recruits or talk about their existing players as not having been recruited by the new staff. When you take on a new head coaching position - they are all your players. Every single one of the kids on that team deserves to be coached up and treated equally regardless of how they ended up at the school.

Secondly - you asked me how I thought Colgate handled the situation. Well the first thing that seems strange to me is that Colgate did not release the findings of their own investigation. Having been involved with situations like this in the past - AD's usually defend their coaches and the school. I'd like to see what Colgate uncovered. How did they handle it? If they did not think the coach did anything wrong, then why are they continuing the scholarships for players who wanted to quit the team? Something happened!

I meant had you spoken to the Brown coaches in connection with the incident you referenced. Sorry if I was unclear.

I agree with you 100% about former/new coaches. That is certainly the ideal. But is a reality, driven, at least in part, by human nature, that sometimes the new coach and the players recruited by prior coaches don't mesh. (Yes, what is alleged here is well beyond not "meshing.") I have seen lots and lots of unfortunate situations as perhaps have you. I am seeing one right now that makes me unhappy. I continue to believe the old/new dynamic had a role here. Whose fault? Coach? Players? Some combination? No one's fault? I don't know. My gut feeling, though, is that this doesn't fall entirely on the coach.

It does not seem strange at all that Colgate did not release the report. They did the right thing in not doing so. I conducted some similar (not college coach/player, but HR type) investigations back when I practiced. My report was never publicized or widely disseminated within the company. It only went to those execs in the company that had a need to know. You have to be able to assure witnesses that what they say will remain as confidential as possible. Otherwise, you are less likely to get the truth. Here, the report no doubt contained personal medical info for some of the players. It would have been essential that those who talked to the investigators were assured of confidentiality. The investigation was run by an outside law firm, which is common practice these days. I'm sure the AD was involved, but I'd be almost positive she had no role in writing the report or in deciding what steps to take. Those decisions would have been made at the President or Board level.

I'd like to see the report, too, but neither you nor I will be able to do so.

I have said all along that I think "something happened." "What" is the $64,000 question. I've said from the beginning that the fact that Colgate took some corrective steps suggests to me that some of the allegations were found to have merit. But, I think, not enough of them and likely not the most serious ones were found to be sufficiently credible to warrant terminating the coach.

You and I are reading the same tea leaves and reaching different conclusions. You keep saying I'm defending the coach (I disagree as I have said). Isn't that simply the other side of the same coin as to what you are doing?

I honestly don't see the point of the complainants keeping at this. Many have graduated. The others have left the team. It appears no one impacted still has any dealings with Taylor. The decision has been made. It's not going to be reversed. Why are these folks still trying to run her out of town?

One way of looking at this is that the school has given Taylor a second chance, now with some guiderails in place. I haven't heard of any similar complaints coming up this year. Hopefully this situation is now in the past. If not, and if the problems are ongoing, that's an entirely different kettle of fish.

[Can Opener]

Brownlax, I have to run out for a bit. I will PM you later to respond to your question. Unless njm wants to further engage me, I'm not sure it's productive to lay that out here.

Again, I understand why you think I am being one-sided. I don't think so, but I am taking a different side than most here.

I am standing behind Colgate's handling of this and the measures they have implemented. Do you disagree with how they handled it? If so, why?

Did you talk to the coaches before siding with the players?

We can do all this by PM if you like.

We don't need to use PM's - this is all public anyhow right now and we can keep it that way. I have not spoken to any Colgate coaches or players (nor have most forum posters). However, that does not stop me from forming an opinion.

One thing I can not stand - and this is my personal pet peeve - I hate when coaches take over a program and then talk about their recruits or talk about their existing players as not having been recruited by the new staff. When you take on a new head coaching position - they are all your players. Every single one of the kids on that team deserves to be coached up and treated equally regardless of how they ended up at the school.

Secondly - you asked me how I thought Colgate handled the situation. Well the first thing that seems strange to me is that Colgate did not release the findings of their own investigation. Having been involved with situations like this in the past - AD's usually defend their coaches and the school. I'd like to see what Colgate uncovered. How did they handle it? If they did not think the coach did anything wrong, then why are they continuing the scholarships for players who wanted to quit the team? Something happened!

Excellent post. I agree with your view on "my recruits" vs. "her recruits." Recruiting 16 and 17-year old kids is more art than science and will result in many mistakes. Are the folks recruited by a former coach definitionally such bad people that they can't adapt to or buy into a new culture? Are the new recruits to a program with a losing record over the past 15 years really so much better as people and players than their predecessors? Also agree that Colgate should release at least a redacted version of their report.

[Njm]

To be clear. I wasn’t talking to you in my post Mr Bill. But I am now.

“But that doesn’t immunize her from being accountable for some of the pretty evidently untrue things she said. “

So I’m curious.
Tell me, as someone who has zero attachment to or any firsthand knowledge of the matter - what does “pretty evidently untrue” look like to someone like you?
You know nothing. You’ve said that yourself several times on this thread - and I believe you bc it shows in your very limited knowledge. The only assets you can claim in the conversation are 1. a friend 4x removed who has a favorable opinion of KT and 2. a biased, mindless loyalty to an institution run by people whom you don’t know.
I wasn’t going to reply but you’ve peaked my curiosity here. Tell me - what falsehood did I preach? And be careful (NOT a threat)….bc you’re right, I am absolutely involved in this and have firsthand knowledge. My mind is not weighted down by misplaced loyalty to anyone or anything except the truth. So I’d love for you to hold me accountable. Correct me, Mr Bill, bc then maybe our difficult truth won’t seem so difficult anymore.

[totc]

Re: Youngstown.

The last time I have seen a collegiate field hockey or women's lacrosse coach fired in mid-season, it was because of compliance issues. The coach was a hall-of-fame caliber athlete, but when she got fired, it was with such a thud that she hasn't coached again and is working for a major investment firm.

Kendyl Clarkson had to have done something very, very wrong in order for the department of athletics to come down on her like this. I wonder if this is the kind of thing where she will be obligated to make a career change. Wow.

[njbill]

To be clear. I wasn’t talking to you in my post Mr Bill. But I am now.

“But that doesn’t immunize her from being accountable for some of the pretty evidently untrue things she said. “

So I’m curious.
Tell me, as someone who has zero attachment to or any firsthand knowledge of the matter - what does “pretty evidently untrue” look like to someone like you?
You know nothing. You’ve said that yourself several times on this thread - and I believe you bc it shows in your very limited knowledge. The only assets you can claim in the conversation are 1. a friend 4x removed who has a favorable opinion of KT and 2. a biased, mindless loyalty to an institution run by people whom you don’t know.
I wasn’t going to reply but you’ve peaked my curiosity here. Tell me - what falsehood did I preach? And be careful (NOT a threat)….bc you’re right, I am absolutely involved in this and have firsthand knowledge. My mind is not weighted down by misplaced loyalty to anyone or anything except the truth. So I’d love for you to hold me accountable. Correct me, Mr Bill, bc then maybe our difficult truth won’t seem so difficult anymore.

Njm, first, apologies for initially thinking you were a player. It appears to me that you have a daughter who formerly played for Taylor at Colgate. If that is wrong, and if you care to set the record straight, please do so.

Second, I am very sorry your daughter had a bad experience playing under Taylor. I hope she has been able to get past that or at least is on the path to doing so.

Third, some of your post was directed at me, notwithstanding your denial. You clearly referenced things that only I have said in this thread. Again, I have no problems with your directing some of your comments at me.

Now, as to the things you said which I think are “pretty evidently untrue.”

You say Taylor rarely if ever discussed injuries with the trainers. She denies that. I find her denial believable as, I think it is fair to say, did the outside law firm that conducted the investigation. It doesn’t ring true to me that a D1 coach would never discuss injuries with the trainers. You say I “know nothing.” Yes, I don’t have first-hand knowledge of communications between Taylor and the trainers, but, with respect, I doubt you do either. Are you saying the trainers told you or the investigators they never discussed injuries with her? In any event, that is my belief. If you have solid evidence backing up your statement that you care to share, please do so.

You said the investigator (that is, the law firm) said the report would be open to third parties. I find that hard to believe. As I said yesterday, I did somewhat similar investigations as an outside lawyer. I didn’t have the authority to tell anyone how or to whom my report would be disseminated. That would be up to the client. Nor would I have ever said anything of that nature before the report was finished (with findings and recommendations) and delivered to the client.

You twice said there was a lawsuit. I don’t believe that’s true. I have never heard of a lawsuit. If you are calling the lawyer’s letter a “lawsuit,” again, with respect, that is a pretty material mix up. Letters and lawsuits are two entirely different things.

The AD was not fired. Given that Colgate decided to retain the coach, it would be illogical to fire the AD but keep the coach. Furthermore, if the AD had really been fired for misconduct, why would Cornell hire her? Doesn’t make any sense since Cornell is a promotion in the AD world.

I do want to respond to your “friend 4x removed who has a favorable opinion of KT” comment. You may not have been reading LaxPower in years past, and may not know this individual, but a very well respected former poster who I know and who has been very involved in the glax and wlax communities for many years had a daughter who played for Taylor at a prior school. He spoke highly of Taylor. Also a friend of mine from high school knows Taylor quite well and speaks well of her. So not fourth hand, but I understand what you are saying. As I said some number of posts ago, those good experiences with Taylor don’t necessarily mean others at Colgate couldn’t have had bad experiences. Just that those accounts are inconsistent with what I have been told by people whose opinions I trust.

I understand my “pretty evidently untrue” comment prompted your post of last night. I did not intend to go into detail since I didn’t think it would be productive to do so. But you are entirely within your rights to ask me to elaborate, which I have now done. I realize you may disagree with everything I have said. I don’t think it would be useful to continue with a t i t for tat, but you are of course free to respond if you care to do so.

I do not in any way mean to minimize your daughter’s experience and what you also went through as her mother. Your account is full of what I believe to be earnest pain and emotion. Nevertheless, I do disagree with some of what you have said. I hope you understand that on this lacrosse forum we discuss and sometimes strongly disagree about matters involving the lacrosse community.

I wish you and your daughter nothing but the best.