tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post2947590485407892392..comments2023-10-18T03:37:34.580-04:00Comments on Portal 31: Patrick Witt responds to allegations raised in New York Times storySean Barkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10515714654641788090noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-78308932892259168752012-02-04T04:59:37.200-05:002012-02-04T04:59:37.200-05:00follow-up article in NYT where Rhodes and Yale off...follow-up article in NYT where Rhodes and Yale officials confirm a timeline under which Witt was informed his candidacy required a re-endorsement by Yale prior than what Witt claimed; also Rhodes official says it is fair to characterize his candidacy as suspended at the time he withdrew, contrary to Witt's agent's view. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/sports/ncaafootball/rhodes-trust-gives-account-of-quarterbacks-candidacy.html?_r=1&hpAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-13555610341264697202012-01-31T10:56:18.535-05:002012-01-31T10:56:18.535-05:00Assuming you're the same Anonymous as above, y...Assuming you're the same Anonymous as above, you are missing one telling piece of information before your story makes any sense -- was Yale prepared to back Witt? If so, long odds or not, it is not clear that it would have made any difference to the Rhodes Committee. In addition, I have not seen any indication from anyone (including the Times) that Witt was going to go through with the interview even without the accusation. Finally, I still have no idea what lie you think Witt told. The Times certainly hasn't published any lie he told.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-54753495651578745102012-01-30T21:55:29.704-05:002012-01-30T21:55:29.704-05:00It is an incredible achievement and honor to be na...It is an incredible achievement and honor to be named a Rhodes scholarship finalist. But, even at that penultimate stage of the process, the odds are long against winning. There are sixteen finalists named for each district, of whom only two are selected for Oxford.<br /><br />When the Rhodes trust received an anonymous tip that Witt had been accused, they didn't want to be the ones to terminate his candidacy. They had no hard facts, only an unsolicited tip of unknown accuracy.<br /><br />So they called Yale and hit the ball into Yale's court, saying in effect: "We don't have the information necessary to adjudicate Witt's guilt or innocence, so we're making you do it." If Yale does not issue a second endorsement, Witt's candidacy is over. <br /><br />It was very likely that this is the outcome the Rhodes trust wanted. They didn't want to name somebody a winner who is at risk of being indicted for a felony before he even shows up at Oxford. But they wanted Yale to be the ones to pull the trigger on Witt's application.<br /><br />Witt knew this. He knew that, with the assault complaint hanging over his head, the normally long 8-1 odds against any finalist winning were even worse for him.<br /><br />At that point, he wasn't going to win a Rhodes scholarship. But, lucky for him, there was still a way to make lemonade out of lemons: annnounce to the media that playing Harvard with his teammates was more important than a scholarship whose interview date of November 19 was known to him and all candidates from the very first day of the application.<br /><br />Similarly, by the time the press release was issued, Yale also knew Witt's chances of winning were effectively over. But the university had gotten pretty comfortable basking in the reflection of Witt's achievement and Hamlet-like decision.<br /><br />Patrick Witt and Yale University still had one card to play: Tell the world a lie.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-31670514500492601102012-01-29T09:01:13.437-05:002012-01-29T09:01:13.437-05:00My take is that he could have gone to the intervie...My take is that he could have gone to the interview with a new letter from Yale which they may or may not have provided ..however he had already made his decision as was printed in the Nov 8 New Haven Register.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-79857332305672090962012-01-28T21:55:02.851-05:002012-01-28T21:55:02.851-05:00I still don't get what Anonymouses 3:12 and 6:...I still don't get what Anonymouses 3:12 and 6:45 are saying. How do they know his candidacy was fatally compromised? We know from several sources now that someone told the committee that Witt had been accused of something. We have absolutely not a shred of evidence from anyone that this accusation had any bearing on whether or not he could have been a Rhodes Scholar. At least nothing that the Times has printed or that Yale or the Rhodes Trust has said (since they've said nothing.) We do not know that Yale would or would not have acceded to the Rhodes request for reaffirmation, and presumably whether or not they would have done so would have deended on the outcome of an investigation about which we know nothing. What possible fraud is being commited by Witt or Yale?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-12614068518399703602012-01-28T18:45:52.657-05:002012-01-28T18:45:52.657-05:00Anonymous 3:12 is correct that Witt's statemen...Anonymous 3:12 is correct that Witt's statement contains numerous irrelevant details, seemingly designed to obfuscate, not clarify, the reality of his actions during the two weeks of the Princeton and Harvard games.<br /><br />But Anonymous 3:12 misidentifies the one and only important question: At the time Patrick Witt announced with great fanfare that he would play in the Harvard game, did he and Yale already know that his Rhodes candidacy was fatally impaired?<br /><br />The answer to that question is "yes."<br /><br />It doesn't matter when Witt made his decision. After all, he knew from the very beginning that the finalist interviews were already scheduled for November 19. That was communicated to all applicants on day one of the process.<br /><br />The only important issue in this whole sad, sordid affair is that Patrick Witt and Yale University tried to create the false story that he was nobly choosing to forego an individual honor to play with his teammates.<br /><br />The reality is both Witt and Yale knew that he would not be winning, whether the Rhodes trust used the word "suspended" or another euphemism. Witt's candidacy was irreparably damaged.<br /><br />Witt and Yale University committed fraud.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-86638299202125750432012-01-28T15:12:35.142-05:002012-01-28T15:12:35.142-05:00Jim- this is a complex story. But let's not ge...Jim- this is a complex story. But let's not get bogged down in irrelevant details. Question: could he have gone to the interview? Answer: no. Who cares when he decided to withdraw, if he was withdrawing from something that now by his own admission he couldn't have gone to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-37839214663526060962012-01-27T23:24:16.886-05:002012-01-27T23:24:16.886-05:00Sounds like a nice spin, authored, no doubt, by a ...Sounds like a nice spin, authored, no doubt, by a lawyer -- and, quite curiously, makes no mention of the other brushes with the law mentioned in the Times article. Looks like PW and his "Rhodes Candidate" former coach were a good match !!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-43225182427962504572012-01-27T19:56:57.247-05:002012-01-27T19:56:57.247-05:00http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/scarborough-sl...http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/scarborough-slams-times-story-on-yale-qb/17ycccojo?cpkey=db555739-6430-4feb-963e-bc3fd7156431||||Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-63234198184058465592012-01-27T17:31:27.114-05:002012-01-27T17:31:27.114-05:00Witt disagrees with your take on the timing:
As t...Witt disagrees with your take on the timing:<br /><br />As this decision process unfolded, Patrick became aware that an anonymous source had contacted the Rhodes Trust with false information purporting to reference an informal – and confidential – complaint within the University. In light of this, and given the short period of time between this occurrence and the potential final interview, the Rhodes Trust asked for an additional letter of reference for Patrick from Yale. By that time, however, Patrick had already informed Athletic Department officials that he intended to withdraw his candidacy due to the inability to reschedule his final interview, and that he would issue a statement to this effect following the Princeton game on November 12.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-54804778289545864362012-01-27T15:56:53.461-05:002012-01-27T15:56:53.461-05:00I don't read it that way, since there is no hi...I don't read it that way, since there is no hint that Yale wouldn't have provided the reiteration of candidacy if asked.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-11912406005282512272012-01-27T15:56:36.347-05:002012-01-27T15:56:36.347-05:00The previous response presumes the Rhodes inquiry ...The previous response presumes the Rhodes inquiry told Witt a Rhodes was not in his future, which resolved for him whether to go to the interview or play in the Harvard game. In short, whether to play was still up in the air.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-6466056232007616592012-01-27T15:00:20.730-05:002012-01-27T15:00:20.730-05:00As I was reading Patrick Witt's statement, my ...As I was reading Patrick Witt's statement, my first reaction was, "Wow, this is explosive. The New Haven Register just gave Witt a forum in which he directly contradicts the New York Times and essentially accuses them of libel."<br /><br />In the first four paragraphs of his statement, Witt seemed to be completely refuting what the Times printed in terms of whether the Rhodes Trust had already "suspended" Witt's candidacy by the time he supposedly withdrew.<br /><br />But then I read the fifth paragraph which begins, "As this decision process unfolded, Patrick became aware. . . the Rhodes Trust asked for an additional letter of reference for Patrick from Yale."<br /><br />Wait a minute. The fifth paragraph acknowledges the Rhodes Trust *DID* inform Witt that there was a problem with his application and he would need a non-standard addendum to his paperwork, a second endorsement from Yale.<br /><br />It's not easy to reconcile the seemingly contradictory information in the fifth paragraph and the remainder of Witt's statement. If I'm reading the carefully parsed words correctly, the timing is as follows: The Rhodes Trust informed Witt that they would need a second endorsement from Yale, indicating that his application had run into a serious challenge, but he had already told the athletic department of his plans to withdraw. <br /><br />The most important issue is whether, at the time that he issued his press release through a university statement, was Witt aware that his candidacy was nonviable due to the alleged assault?<br /><br />It seems as if the answer is yes.<br /><br />As I said above, it's a chore to read through all the language in Witt's statement which is highly exculpatory and integrate it with the fifth paragraph which is incriminating. Maybe I'm not getting the sequencing correct.<br /><br />But, if I'm right, Witt is saying, "The Rhodes Trust informed me that my candidacy was essentially over. But instead of replying to their request for a second endorsement letter, I withdrew my application and, by the way, I had already told the athletic department that I would play in the football game."<br /><br />In this version of the old joke, "You can't fire me, I quit," Witt's version is, "The Rhodes Trust fired me but I had already told Yale that I quit."<br /><br />If my interpretation is correct, then the New York Times article is essentially true.<br /><br />Now it appears that the New Haven Register gave Patrick Witt a forum to issue a carefully worded statement which puts a very positive spin on his situation, but ultimately acknowledges that he knew there was no Rhodes scholarship in his future when he withdrew.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33599217.post-23595939584440410042012-01-27T14:28:02.130-05:002012-01-27T14:28:02.130-05:00What happened to Williams' recruits? Why is Y...What happened to Williams' recruits? Why is Yale not honoring its commitments to them? When did Yale lose its way from being an institution of honor and integrity? Someone needs to look into this chapter of the story that is yet to be told.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com