Jim Svoboda Fired By Text Message? [3rd Update]
UPDATE NO. 3: Hold the phone ladies and gents. It looks like this story just got more interesting. As reported by Dump Dorrell, a "second, well-placed source (an NCAA football coach that knows Svoboda well)" has confirmed that Svoboda was fired by text message.
Obviously, this changes things. Is it possible that Svoboda's earlier denial of this story isn't accurate? Any member of the small coaching fraternity understandably has an incentive to not trash his former boss. That might be what I like to call a "career limiting event." But, it's still takes moxie to explicitly deny something, as Svoboda did earlier, if the facts don't bare that out, and a number of family members and colleagues know it.
Also, though I didn't pick up on it at the time (and credit goes to Dump Dorrell for doing so), Svoboda did not respond to my inquiries regarding his mother-in-law, despite the opportunity to do so.
So, there you go. Jim Svoboda may well have been let go via text message. Developing.
-Menelaus
UPDATE NO. 2: I thought I'd look into this one a bit more. And there's no one better to ask than Jim Svoboda himself, who is currently the quarterbacks coach for the Montana State University Bobcats.
Jim was gracious enough to respond to my emails and made clear that is there is "no truth to the rumor" that he was let go via text message. He was also quick to add that he was "grateful for my time at UCLA" and the he held "no ill feelings" toward UCLA or KD.
So, there you go. Jim Svoboda was not let go via text message. Many thanks go out to Coach Svoboda for helping us clear this up.
-Menelaus
UPDATE: I just got off the phone with Marc Dellins, UCLA SID, after speaking with him regarding the Svoboda firing AND Scott's hiring. He was professional in answering all my questions and knew he was speaking to an editor of DumpDorrell.com:
- Dellins disputes Svoboda's mother in law's story and says IT DID NOT HAPPEN. Svoboda first learned he was being fired in a face to face meeting with Dorrell, according to Dellins. No word yet from the mother in law.
- Interestingly, Eric Scott DID NOT FILL OUT ANY APPLICATION at all. He said no coaches do (which is contrary to what UCLA HR told us). FWIW. We seem to remember Brian Dohn being told that Scott filled out a different application (if anyone finds the link let us know so that we can add it).
- Dellins could not say if Eric Scott was EVER asked about his arrest and conviction record, whether in interviews or otherwise, due to privacy laws.
- Dellins could not say what the results of the UCLA PD background check were due to privacy laws.
- Dellins says Dorrell never contradicted himself in statements to the press regarding the Scott hiring. He said Dorrell only knew of Scott's hard life background NOT his arrests or convictions. That contradicts the LAT's report. I told him that and he said, Dorrell never knew and that report was incorrect. I have an email into Chris Foster who co-wrote the report in which he reported Dorrell said he knew of Scotts priors.
cross-posted from DumpDorrell.com Jim Svoboda is our son-in-law and we are proud of him. Seems like he should have been given a chance but - chances are not what Dump Dorrell hands out.Jim is hard working dedicated and reliable and gives 100% of himself even when he is not appreciated. Too bad he wasted his time at UCLA because he certainly will make a come back - and he hasnt fallen - he was pushed! Too bad for Dorrell because it seems that he is a racist - Jim is not black - and evidently that is a no no where Dorrell is concerned. Thank goodness he is somewhere where he is valued - eventually I guess Dorrell has done him a favor - although he did not intend to. Jim deserved more than a TEXT MESSAGE TO let him know he was out. We have more guts than that in Texas - we can look a man in the eye. Fairness is not something Dorrell is long on - this coming season I hope the team does well - at least they dont have to worry about job security. Good luck UCLA you are going to need it. Elizabeth
This comment was left this morning on (DumpDorrell.com) by someone posting as Elizabeth Merworth on our Dec. 8 post last year that discussed the expected firing of Jim Svoboda. We did not edit this comment, except to add bold highlights. The one point about this comment that we would like to comment on is the way "Elizabeth Merworth" says Svoboda was told he was fired ... by text message. We obviously have to question the comments of someone who claims Dorrell is racist which we will take as absurd, but the firing by text message seems to us to be a simple case of being either factually correct or not.
If this is the way Dorrell handled the firing of Svoboda it is shameful and beneath Dorrell and UCLA football. Moreover, it was absolutely unnecessary. The image of the program and the University is quite possibly going to take another hit on this news. Dorrell hyped Svoboda like he did every one of the 25 assistants he has hired in just 4 1/2 years. Svoboda may have been ill-suited for the job, and we certainly gave him a licking here, but he put his best effort forth and no one, including us, ever quarreled with that. To not give Svoboda the decency of a meeting or at least a phone call is disgraceful. Jim Svoboda and the UCLA community deserve better. We want to know if this is the way Dorrell is conducting himself in the name of UCLA and UCLA football. At the very least, could Dorrell conduct himself with a little more class. Obviously, Jim Svoboda did by not telling anyone about this. Make your calls and send your emails to Morgan Center and to reporters to get answers and voice your disapproval.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
0 recs |
55
comments
Comments
CKD a racist?
by justwatching on Aug 13, 2007 9:16 AM PDT 0 recs
Heh
by Tydides on
Aug 13, 2007 9:20 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I don't want to touch the racism allegation, but
"...CKD should have recognized that he was not a div 1A offensive coordinator..."
Uhhh...so...KD recognized that Scott, who has zero experience, was a div 1A wide receiver coach?
by bluegold on
Aug 13, 2007 10:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Biased view...
by uclaike on Aug 13, 2007 10:37 AM PDT 0 recs
Uhm
The bit about Dorrell being racist in the comment is of course out of line. But all I want to know is whether Dorrell did fire Svoboda by texting him? If that is so, then that is one of the most classless things I have ever heard from a college program since Mike Garrett fired John Robinson by leaving a message on machine.
Then again these days in terms of integrity I am not seeing a lot of difference between Dorrell's no so clean program v. the gutter trash from cross town (except for the results on the field).
by bluestreet on
Aug 13, 2007 10:41 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Im sorry why cant we call Morgan Center?
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 11:50 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Well....
by uclaike on Aug 13, 2007 11:00 AM PDT 0 recs
If we knew
Where else should we go for confirmation or denial, seriously?
by Barnes2JJ on
Aug 13, 2007 11:10 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Point taken...
Wow, this is starting to scare me, I'm sounding like I'm defending KD's coaching.
by uclaike on
Aug 13, 2007 11:58 AM PDT
up
0 recs
not true
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 12:00 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Here's what bothers me
But because it's Dorrell, you jump all over him. It's just shameful. I would bet all of my possessions and money that Dorrell didn't fire Svoboda simply with a text message. For the record, you are also calling Dorrell a liar if you say that because Dorrell said in a conference call that he met with Svoboda before firing him.
by Chick Hearn on
Aug 13, 2007 11:13 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Poor poor Dorrell
Perhaps because an actual coach like Howland usually doesn't get us into this kind of f*cking mess.
by bluestreet on
Aug 13, 2007 11:18 AM PDT
up
0 recs
What mess?
And I don't care if you bash Dorrell or criticize him when its legitimate. I do the same thing! But Christ, some of the stuff that you pick to get him on is just batty insane.
by Chick Hearn on
Aug 13, 2007 11:21 AM PDT
up
0 recs
What "mess"?
by bluestreet on
Aug 13, 2007 11:23 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Not sure you are right
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 11:52 AM PDT
up
0 recs
not if howland did it
by Chick Hearn on
Aug 13, 2007 2:09 PM PDT
up
0 recs
wow
by Chick Hearn on
Aug 13, 2007 2:09 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Im glad you can read my mind
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 2:44 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Oh, and one more thing...
BC, I agree with you on some things, disagree with you on others, but I find it extremely hypocritical of you to not only post Ms. Merwood's comment, but to even allow it on your website when you obviously reject most of the comments. You always say that you defend Dorrell as a stand-up guy and person, yet any chance you get, you ASSAULT his character.
You've called him a liar and a scape-goater so many times, I can't even count and I'm not even going to get into what I think of your wisdom regarding the Eric Scott case. I could go on, but I don't want to. This represents an all-time low for you guys in my opinion.
by Chick Hearn on Aug 13, 2007 11:33 AM PDT 0 recs
Huh?
You have completely lost it.
by bluestreet on
Aug 13, 2007 11:36 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I think
by Barnes2JJ on
Aug 13, 2007 11:39 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You are probably right ...
In the diaries someone actually invoked Coach Wooden's name defending the decision to retain a convict like Eric Scott.
Now I can see why Bruin Blue referred to these guys as a "cult of Dorrell" or something like that.
by bluestreet on
Aug 13, 2007 11:41 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Chick
And you should check your own integrity. We have never called Dorrell a liar. We have questions WHETHER he lied, which is entirely appropriate given his proven CONTRADICTORY comments to the press about the Scott hiring. We have called Dorrell a scapegoater and his record on this issue is almost beyond dispute. But please feel free to enlighten us.
Hey you are entitled to your own opinion, and feel free to disagree with us always, but dont lie about our record and what we print. That is what is low.
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 11:47 AM PDT
up
0 recs
KD bottom line
I hope this year he makes a championship run and proves me wrong, as I would want nothing more than to eat crow. The threshold is very high for this year because he has been so mediocre for 4 years. It is either get it done or get lost. It is very binary at this point.
Bill
by BillSouthBay on Aug 13, 2007 11:44 AM PDT 0 recs
Once Again
KD's actions or inactions get picked apart because of his W-L record
BillSouthBay, you said that "At the end of the day".... KD's actions or inactions get picked apart because of his W-L record."
If you are suggesting that its OK to make up and support blatant lies that attack a person's character (specifically, the Jim Svoboda comment) because his football team doesn't perform, then I would say that shows low character on your part.
And yes bluestreet, I was addressing BruinCore (BC) in the second part of my previous message. And I'm not a Dorrell supporter btw. I am of the opinion that his teams have underperformed to date, bu I do see some positive signs as well and am reserving my judgment until the end of this season. But I don't want to debate that, that's not the issue. I understand why you disagree with me about that.
The issue is the Svoboda comment and the immediate reaction towards it, which I think is completely out of line.
by Chick Hearn on
Aug 13, 2007 11:51 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Uhm
All it takes right now for Morgan Center to come out and clear the whole deal up.
Did Dorrell fire Svoboda by a text message? Yes or No?
I will certainly make the call and I hope everyone else does it too.
by bluestreet on
Aug 13, 2007 11:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Chick
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 11:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You said
And yes, W-L records DO have an effect on what type of scrutiny is placed on how a program is run. That's just the way it is.
by godblesstyus95 on
Aug 13, 2007 11:59 AM PDT
up
0 recs
It's a blatant lie
Dorrell said in January right after Jim was fired:
"I had a chance to visit with Jim yesterday. We decided to go in a different direction offensively. This season was a good season in a lot of respects, but we did not perform as well as my expectations."
Is Dorrell lying about that? I mean c'mon guys.
Also, don't you think Svoboda would've said something if all he got was a text message?
And yes, I think it's unethical to even throw this out there considering the fact that your source called Dorrell a racist, wasn't close to the football program, and may not even be the person she claims to be. I don't care what kind of question marks you attached to it, you are attempting to damage his reputation and have resorted to a very low tactic in your quest to get the man fired.
by Chick Hearn on
Aug 13, 2007 12:13 PM PDT
up
0 recs
So that is one piece of info
Its not something new in the world of college football. Often classless programs like USC does this sort of thing when they decided to fire Robinson by leaving a message on his answering machine.
I just want to know whether this took place or not. Just because Dorrell said something doesn't mean that the story is not true.
And given how Dorrell has handle the Scott fiasco pardon us for not taking his word and running with it.
Dorrell doesn't have much credibility left as the head coach of this pathetic program. Thats what happens when he reinstates a convict with 5 arrests and 3 convictions without providing any decent explanation. His credibility suffers.
by bluestreet on
Aug 13, 2007 12:20 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Good find
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 12:23 PM PDT
up
0 recs
that's fine
Even if you get clarification, Svoboda's mother-in-law has absolutely zero credibility and below-zero credibility when she says that Dorrell is a racist. That is abominable, and I know you agree with me on that.
I just think it's wrong to use this as a another way to bash Dorrell. By all means, if you have actual proof that he did this, then throw it out there.
It's true, you're not a journalist. You don't have the responsibility to the community to report facts. But I personally would have a big ethical problem with throwing something that's probably not true out there for the sole purpose of bashing Dorrell. That to me, is low.
And if this isn't another way of creating a forum to bash Dorrell on yet another topic, what is it? You could easily obtain more facts yourself before deeming it worthy to throw the question out there so that other people could criticize and "investigate." And if you were really interested in investigating, you could've taken exactly two seconds to look up on google "Svoboda, fired, UCLA" click "I'm feeling lucky" and find the link to the Daily Bruin story which has the conference call quote. That's what I did.
by Chick Hearn on
Aug 13, 2007 2:00 PM PDT
up
0 recs
"probably not true"
"We obviously have to question the comments of someone who claims Dorrell is racist which we will take as absurd, but the firing by text message seems to us to be a simple case of being either factually correct or not."
If a reader doesn't understand that comment then there is nothing we can do. As for investigative journalism, the DB isn't exactly winning awards. We have had calls into Marc Dellins, UCLA SID, and an email to the mother in law. We are not the LA Times and dont have to "sit" on a story. This was a very odd comment on our blog that was very worht reporting on the face of it and we reported it. Deal with it or start your own blog.
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 2:41 PM PDT
up
0 recs
The Daily Bruin has won awards
As for the Daily Bruin article in question, Dorrell does say he met with Svoboda, but that doesn't necessarily mean he didn't text him first. Of course, I have no idea exactly how Svoboda found out -- none of us do except for the people involved. I'd like to believe (and I hope) that Dorrell did tell him in person.
I do find it hard to believe anyone would ever get fired over a text, but the post on DumpDorrell's site seems random if it's not at least partly true. As of now, if I had to bet on what happened, I'd guess it happened in-person, not because I believe in Dorrell, but that's because what most people would do.
by gilbert on
Aug 13, 2007 3:48 PM PDT
up
0 recs
gilbert .. nice pick up
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 4:05 PM PDT
up
0 recs
A reasonable comment except
by Nestor on
Aug 13, 2007 4:12 PM PDT
up
0 recs
You're right
I guess the idea of someone getting fired over a text message is so ridiculous to me that I just can't believe it. Even from someone with as many faults and problems as Dorrell.
I, like most people reading this thread, am waiting and curious to see if there is any further response from the mother-in-law. If this turns out to be true, I'd be tempted to fire Dorrell on the spot, even right before a season.
by gilbert on
Aug 13, 2007 4:22 PM PDT
up
0 recs
also
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 12:25 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Misleading
Second of all, is it IN ANY WAY possible that Dorrell sent a text message to Svoboda BEFORE he met with him? It IS possible, but WE DON'T KNOW. Just as we don't know who that lady is or if she is who she claims to be. Is it worth investigating? I think so. If you don't, that's fine, say so and stop attacking people.
We don't have to "attempt" to damage Dorrell's reputation. He does it himself with his idiotic comments to the press. Furthermore, this is not a news outlet. It's a blog. We are not bound by journalistic integrity, though most people here will back up their stories diligently and disclose unfounded rumors far better than most reporters. What BruinCore gave us was a rumor. We don't know if it's true, and he admits as much, but we can try to find out if it is.
by tasser10 on
Aug 13, 2007 12:28 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Chick - don't confuse the issue
As far as I can discern, the only person making an assumption and labeling it as a fact is you. You assume that Mr. Dorrell first informed Coach Swoboda that he was fired at a meeting. You then state that assumption as a fact. A person identifying herself as Coach Swoboda's mother in law says that Coach Swoboda first learned of his demise by text message. I can't discern if this statement is an exposition of fact from someone with first hand knowledge or simply an assumption on that person's part.
There are probably only two people who know whether Mr. Dorrell in fact fired Coach Swoboda by text message. We cannot expect Coach Swoboda to say anything that would be construed as disloyal to a head coach, because of the obvious implications that any such statement would have on his relationship with his current boss.
So that leaves Mr. Dorrell as the person to ask. And that is all anyone is saying here, as far as I can tell. The thrust of these posts is that Mr. Dorrell needs to be asked straight out if he first informed Coach Swoboda of his firing by text message.
Two weeks ago, I would have dismissed this lady's allegation as being basically an irrelevant attack on a person whose integrity had never been in doubt. The response to the Coach Scott boondoggle has changed that. I think we are entitled to know the brand of integrity being carried by our coach. We know he is a horrible football coach, but we (or at least I) want to know about this aspect of his character.
by Fox 71 on
Aug 13, 2007 12:57 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Court of public opinion
Bill
by BillSouthBay on Aug 13, 2007 12:45 PM PDT 0 recs
Update
by BruinCore on Aug 13, 2007 3:34 PM PDT 0 recs
Marc Dellins Report
- He disputes Svoboda's mother in law's story and says IT DID NOT HAPPEN. No word yet from the mother in law
- Eric Scott DID NOT FILL OUT ANY APPLICATION. He said no coaches do (which is contrary to what UCLA HR told us). FWIW.
- He could not say if Eric Scott was EVER asked about his arrest and conviction record, whether in interviews or otherwise, due to privacy laws.
- He could not say what the results of the UCLA PD background check were due to privacy laws.
by BruinCore on Aug 13, 2007 3:45 PM PDT 0 recs
Never mind
Dellins is calling you back? Is this new?
by gilbert on
Aug 13, 2007 3:49 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Gilbert yes
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 4:02 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I'm impressed
I'm impressed because of what I've gathered from past experiences and stories I've heard -- sports information directors, media relations people and PR people aren't always big on responding to blogs and internet sites. If Dellins is, he (and the UCLA athletic department) are recognizing that a lot of people get their news on the internet now. That's encouraging -- and for you Bruins Nation people, it's even a greater likelihood that they read this site (and DumpDorrell, for that matter).
by gilbert on
Aug 13, 2007 4:09 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Oh one more thing
by BruinCore on
Aug 13, 2007 3:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
So very sad
If BC can get answers like this through a couple of phone calls, it really makes you wonder how much work these reporters are putting into their articles. Shameful.
by tasser10 on
Aug 14, 2007 6:46 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Not fair, Tasser
by Fox 71 on
Aug 14, 2007 8:06 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Good job BC
by Barnes2JJ on
Aug 13, 2007 3:58 PM PDT
up
0 recs
great work BC
by Nestor on Aug 13, 2007 4:16 PM PDT 0 recs
How could you take what that woman says seriously?
could it be that UCLA's offense went from being one of the best to being one of the worst in the conference?
Dorrell wouldn't have fired Cable. Was he black?
If that mother in law has any spine at all she will answer my question.
It sounds like she's using a bs excuse for Svoboda. He was a very good qb coach and it's a shame things didn't work out well at OC.
by True Blue and Gold on Aug 13, 2007 9:38 PM PDT 0 recs
I don't take the race card seriously
Does it make a difference? If someone can coach, he can coach. If he can't, he can't. We know, for example, that Mr. Dorrell can't coach, and his skin color has nothing to do with it. Tony Dungy can coach really well, and his skin color has nothing to do with it.
It will be interesting to see whether there is any follow-up from this person. The whole thing may be total BS. Or it may be totally true. Or the answer may be somewhere in between. We only know what the SID told DD, and the SID almost certainly does not have first hand knowledge.
But the principals won't talk and won't answer questions, so we continue our speculations. I guess they feel they are not obligated to tell us anything, and maybe they're right. Maybe we will blindly accept whatever comes out of Morgan Center.
by Fox 71 on
Aug 14, 2007 5:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs













