clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

UCLA Needs To Find the Hiring of Bradley Is Too Problematic

New, 183 comments

The potential hiring of Tom Bradley leaves too many unanswered questions for an Athletic Department which has hired Steve Alford and is still recovering from an Associate Athletic Director pleading no contest to the possession of child pornography.

Mary Langenfeld-USA TODAY Sports

The possibility of former Penn State Defensive Coordinator Tom Bradley being hired as the Bruins' next DC has raised a lot of passion from the Bruins Nation community.

That's understandable. Considering the fact that UCLA already hired Steve Alford despite the Pierre Pierce debacle, the notation that UCLA Football could be about to hire someone who was affiliated with Penn State for so long and was hired as Jerry Sandusky's replacement when he retired is certainly problematic.

There are reasons to both support Bradley's hire and to oppose it.

Bradley's success as a defensive coordinator for an extended period of time certainly favors giving the guy the job. Bradley's name is not mentioned in the Freeh Report. It can also be argued that, by staying in the shower, as Victim #4 described, he may very well have prevented a situation.

Some proponents have argued that former WVU Athletic Director Oliver Luck is an attorney and because he read the Freeh Report twice before agreeing to hire Bradley there's enough proof to validate hiring him. Well, the only problem with that is that Luck's judgment can be called into question by the fact that he recently took a job with the NCAA.

Additionally, there is no evidence that Bradley ever reported the incident to anyone. That qualifies as a failure in judgment on Bradley's part. Based on the reports I read this morning, Bradley also was very close to Mike McQueary who was a central figure in the Sandusky scandal.

The problem with hiring Bradley is that there are more questions than answers. On one hand, you could point to the Freeh Report and say, "His name isn't mentioned!" and you would be factually accurate. However, based on the testimony of Victim #4, you could certainly argue that he knew something wasn't right and, despite staying around the shower area, still didn't report anything to the police. Both individuals would be factually correct and still not agree as to whether he is of sufficient character to be qualified to be hired by UCLA.

There simply is not enough evidence proving or disproving anything with respect to Bradley. At that point, it becomes a question of perception and the perception that Bradley may have known something even though he may not have simply becomes too strong.

UCLA cannot afford to have Dan Guerrero proudly proclaiming, "He has a clean slate" just like he did after hiring Steve Alford. UCLA cannot afford to hire someone associated with the Jerry Sandusky scandal after having former Associate Athletic Director Mike Sondheimer plead no contest to possession of child pornography.

For these reasons, UCLA needs to conclude that Tom Bradley should not hired to replace Jeff Ulbrich as Defensive Coordinator.