The comparison to the jealousy regarding Switzer is invalid. As Sally Jenkins and Michelle Voepel tried to explain, there is a difference in women's sports. The world of men's sport has been contaminated since their inception. Indeed, the entire reason for the NCAA rules arose as a result of what happened when there was no NCAA. Those who complain against rules tend to forget that they are the result of violation, not drawn out of thin air.
The world of sport around men, whether in college, pro, whatever you want to call Olympic, or whatever has always been replete with any form of cheating that would result in victory. To criticize Switer at a time when football had spent eighty years in complete corruption was nonsense, and Switzer was probably among the more pure in the sport. A good deal of the hostility towards Switzer involved his being the first in this area to be receptive to the black athlete.
All of that has absolutely nothing to do with Kim. As Sally and Michelle tried to assert, the sport of college basketball has been pretty clean. There have been few allegations. They were despondent at the actions of Kim regarding the AAU team that produced six of her players, a course of action that was not a matter of accusation, but of admitted fact.
Is it simply a case of jealousy? Why is it considered jealousy to place Kim on permanent probation when those who have done so have been quite complimentary of Geno and Muffet? Is it OK for Geno to win, but not Kim? Why is nobody exhibiting great jealousy of a coach who has won seven national titles? That doesn't exactly make sense. Does it? If it were jealousy, Geno would probably be the most hated coach in basketball right now, as would John Wooden before him. Yet, they are among the most revered (except by USC).
Kim has earned her absence.
