Like many others in the coaching community, I've spent the last several weeks attempting to find the right words to share regarding the dismissal of Pat Fitzgerald at Northwestern following allegations of hazing.
Before we go any further, something needs to be said.
Hazing is wrong. Full stop. There is no place for it in college football, or a workplace of any kind.
If you've been around the game for any length of time, chances are you can look back and reflect on at least one instance of hazing in a team setting.
What may, or may not, have been identified as hazing then almost certainly is now, and it's our job as coaches and leaders to recognize it and put a stop to it.
The scary part for coaches as the situation at Northwestern has unfolded is that, after initially being suspended two weeks without pay after the investigation failed to find sufficient evidence that he or the staff knew of any hazing, Fitz was ultimately fired with cause (that's the school's stance at this point that will eventually play out in the courts) based on alleged events that he should have known about as leader of the program.
When the university announced the decision to fire the longtime leader of the Wildcats, they stated it was for "his failure to know and prevent significant hazing within in the football program."
To many in the coaching profession, that signified a significant shift. Being fired for what you knew and didn't report is one thing, but precedent has now clearly been set for being dismissed for not knowing what you should have known.
Then, about a week after the Northwestern news broke, allegations began to surface regarding PJ Fleck and a "toxic culture" within the Gopher football program.
Those allegations were addressed quickly by Fleck and Minnesota, who called them out as out as "baseless," with athletic director Mark Coyle coming to Fleck's defense noting the "unique" nature of the Gophers program.
That story spent maybe 48 hours on the ticker before it essentially faded out of national headlines.
One big difference, at least the way I witnessed the news unfold, is Minnesota wasted no time in bringing to light their system of dealing with player concerns.
To be clear, that's not a criticism of Northwestern at all, as Fitz is a seasoned coaching veteran who had his own system in place (which we will get to in a bit), but simply pointing out the difference in how the two stories unfolded.
Fleck shared with ESPN that they have six ways players can report concerns of mistreatment, and that there had been "zero claims made through these avenues."
Those six ways that Fleck and his staff have laid out at Minnesota is likely similar to what a lot of other coaches have set up at their respective programs, with the basis of that system to be multi-faceted.
To be clear, this would be a good practice at any level - NFL, college, or high school.
- Provide players with concerns or allegations multiple avenues to report it. That includes with coaches, fellow players or a leadership council, as well as (and this part is very important) a neutral third party.
- In addition to multiple avenues, ensure that there are ample opportunities (end of season, start of spring, summer 1-on-1s, etc) to report any issues / allegations
- Document, in painstaking detail, every single one of those meetings, what was said, the dates and times, and log those meetings with a third-party facilitator
- Lastly, update your athletic director or leadership with any concerns brought forward immediately as well as a plan of action to correct those concerns.
Laying all that out brings me to the information shared last night from longtime former defensive coordinator Mike Hankwitz, who worked under Fitz from 2008-20.
After much reflection, Hankwitz put together a well thought out document detailing what he observed, first hand, to be Fitzgerald's system in dealing with player concerns.
Reading through it, Hankwitz lays out nearly every bullet point shared above, and while he doesn't explicitly state that concerns were documented, one can assume that is going to be something that comes to light during the upcoming legal proceedings between Fitzgerald and Northwestern.
To take that a step further, in order for the meetings being described by Hankwitz and us above to be effective for all involved, players need to be explicitly asked - through a document of some sort that can be legally upheld - of any instances of hazing that they were subjected to, participated in, or were made aware of.
At the end of each season every player and staff member should sign a document stating every hazing or inappropriate incident they were aware of, or affirmatively state that they were not aware of any hazing within the program over the course of the past year.
Doing something that includes that type of specific documentation should bring to the forefront any questionable situations within the program that would have, could have or should have been known by staff and/or players. And if they ultimately choose not to share anything, their experience in your program has been documented annually, and that can be brought forward.
As a small high school program, I know we've talked as a staff about ways to ensure the locker room is a safe place for players following the unfortunate events in Evanston, and those same conversations (and beyond) have most certainly taken place on another level in NFL and college staff rooms, as well as offices of athletic directors around the country as well.
The upcoming legal proceedings between Fitz and Northwestern, as well as the release of the full investigation will provide us additional details about the system that was in place, where it helped, and where it could be improved, but until then making sure you have something like what is laid out above could mean the difference between keeping your job, and a very steep uphill battle to find a new one.
Is there something your program is doing you feel like is also worth sharing with the rest of the coaching profession? Reach out to me on social media @CoachSamz or via email at doug@footballscoop.com.