When last we left our intrepid hero Mike Haywood, he was lobbing chilly letters at state officials over his unceremonious ousting at Pitt, following the surfacing of certain unsavory domestic violence charges against his person, a plan of action that mostly served to remind us all how Mike Haywood got fired. His new plan of attack involves claiming his firing was racially motivated, which rings odd since he was, y'know, hired in the first place. Our Pitt blog finds this all a touch suspicious:
Look, I'll never say something happened for sure when I really don't have any idea. But I have a hard time believing race played even a small part in this. In fact, it's so far fetched in my opinion that it's barely worth addressing. But, essentially, it can come back to this: If Pitt had any racial motivation in its hiring/firing, why would they have hired him in the first place while many other more popular white candidates were out there (i.e.Tom Bradley)?
As a black man who went to Pitt, I've got to say that I think the school does a pretty good job of not only promoting diversity, but going out of their way to do so.
For more Panthers news and discussion, visit SB Nation's Cardiac Hill.