UT did former AD Currie a favor in firing Davenport
KNOXVILLE — Things are looking up for former Tennessee athletic director John Currie, and not just because he received a $2.5 million going-away gift from the school that fired him last December.
UT president Joe DiPietro’s recent assessment of former Chancellor Beverly Davenport also could serve as a glowing job recommendation for Currie, whom Davenport fired.
Incompetent chancellors are nothing new for UT. But no previous chancellor has been so vilified in a public document as Davenport was by DiPietro.
He accused her of just about everything but practicing witchcraft.
One line from the president to the chancellor: “You have problems with lack of organization, attention to detail, timely follow-up.”
Another line: “Your one-on-one, small group and business transactional skills are very poor.”
Makes you wonder how she ever made it through the interview process. Or lasted more than a year on the job.
Contrast DiPietro’s evaluation of Davenport with Davenport’s appraisal of Currie after she fired him.
“I was impressed with John’s commitment to our athletic program and to our student-athletes in particular,” she said.
“We forged a productive partnership that led to several key initiatives while he was here.”
Imagine how all of this might be interpreted by an outsider – or a university chancellor or president who needs an athletic director. They might regard Davenport or UT as the problem, not Currie.
Even Currie's awkward search for a football coach to replace Butch Jones could be viewed in a different light. If Davenport's shortcomings were as numerous and profound as DiPietro specified, then perhaps Currie could be excused for not keeping her in the loop during his coaching search.
You also could argue that Currie’s dilemma was exacerbated by Phillip Fulmer’s role. Currie beat out Fulmer for the athletic director’s job, only to see DiPietro create a job for Fulmer as a special adviser to the president. Then, as the coaching search dragged on, Davenport began leaning on Fulmer for advice.
For all that went wrong in Currie’s pursuit of a coach, he supposedly had worked out a deal with Washington State’s Mike Leach just before Davenport summoned him back to Knoxville and fired him.
You might not believe Davenport was fired for ineptitude. You might think she was fired for bucking the Haslam family, which has contributed millions of dollars to UT and consequently has a huge say-so in who Tennessee hires and fires.
You also might wonder whether Fulmer sabotaged Currie’s coaching search for payback and his personal gain. After all, Currie didn’t just beat out Fulmer for the AD job; he also was the chief aide to former Tennessee athletic director Mike Hamilton, who fired Fulmer as UT’s football coach in 2008.
But no matter who you believe or how conspiratorial you might be in your thinking, you have to agree that Currie’s chances of again becoming an athletic director are much better now than they were when he was fired five months ago. He can thank DiPietro for that. John Adams is a senior columnist. He may be reached at 865-342-6284.