Scott Garrett is a really good dude and I used to be tight with him, had a falling out over some choice words and heated discussions on the topic of oscar.
Go on, please
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Just a really great guy who is very good at what he does for the Department. After i reached out to him to say congrats on his new title/promotion we had a great conversation. The more guys like him in the department the better.
I'll take cut throat assholes as long as we win and raise lots of money and the cut throat bad person is more in line with doing everything we can to win as long as it's not egregious rule breaking and covering up major crimes. I am also open to discussion on what is or is not egregious rule breaking.
Outside fundraising and building things around good/great products already established was Currie really any of those things? Not really.
I get the mantra of 'we want a guy who gets things done, *enter caveats of "as long as he doesn't cheat TOO much"*.
I think you can directly link it to essentially every program that ultimately become embroiled in huge scandals. I'm sure Baylor started out with this exact same attitude of being so obsessed with winning/success that an attitude was taken of "as long as we dont do anything REALLY bad" we are fine with it if we are winning. Then when the success grew the willingness to allow gray areas to expand grew and the wllingness to turn blind eyes to things becomes more prevalent. And then when crap hits the fan the fanbase either straight up denies everything or stupidly acts astonished things got this bad.
It's really an inane type of thinking that if you invite bad people to do 'just certain bad things' you can tolerate on some level, that worse things won't come from it.
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind
