EDITORIAL: Dzik not seen in new athletics agenda

By Staff Writer
February 10, 2005

The reasons supplied for Dzik’s dismissal as coach have been both weak and confusing. The college has repeatedly said that they have a policy that prohibits them from releasing information on employees. Although this would appear a reasonable explanation, this policy has forced the community to be left in the dark regarding one of Cabrini’s most recognizable sports figure.

In recent days the www.keepjohndzik.com campaign has posted a letter they say came from President Iadarola in response to the alumni letters she was receiving. In the letter it states, “After thoughtful consideration, college officials determined that new leadership would align the men’s basketball program more closely with the athletic department’s strategic agenda for the future. As President, I fully support this decision.”

President Iadarola has acknowledged that she sent this response to the alumni indicating that she supports the NCAA’s recent efforts for academic reform. Iadarola stated that she has strong feelings towards the NCAA Division III’s focus on reforming the relationship between athletics and academics.

Iadarola continues to say that the decision not to renew Dzik’s contract was one that was made over a long period of reflection. She has said that she supports the athletic department and its director, Leslie Danehy in looking to the future with a new strategy plan without Dzik as the men’s basketball coach that supports the NCAA’s plans.

The letter goes on to clarify that the decision not to renew Dzik’s coaching contract was partially if not ultimately made by the athletic department. “Our Athletic Director, Leslie Danehy, is committed to responding to the changing environment of NCAA Division III athletics, emphasizing that rigorous academic programs and participation in sports contributes significantly to the student’s overall collegiate experience.”

Danehy stated that along with her department, other administrators were involved with the process to decide to find a new men’s basketball coach that would fit more appropriately into the college’s new student-athlete agenda. Danehy went on to say that an advertisement would be sent out looking for possible candidates for the new position as head coach of the men’s basketball team.

It would appear at this point that the administration’s reason for not renewing Dzik’s contract is due in part to a change in the focus between athletics and academics. The question still remains did Dzik fail to fulfill his responsibilities as a coach to demand that his athletes continue to strive for academic achievement over athletic success? If not then why did the administration not believe Dzik could handle these new changes in the relationship between academics and athletics?

For the time being, the letter sent out by Iadarola has stated that the decision not to bring back Dzik for another year was related to their new academic plan to coordinate with the NCAA Division III’s changes. This still leaves open many questions that need to be addressed.

Posted to the web by Ryan Norris

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Staff Writer

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Special Project

Title IX Redefined Website

Produced by Cabrini Communication
Class of 2024

Listen Up

Season 2, Episode 3: Celebrating Cabrini and Digging into its Past


Scroll to Top
Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap