By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Adams apologizes for inaccuracies in latest clash with Dooley
Placeholder Image
ATLANTA (AP) — More than two years after his forced retirement, Vince Dooley showed this week he won’t stand for his legacy being tarnished — especially by UGA president Michael Adams.
    In an exchange of guest editorials in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that ended with an apology from Adams, the two demonstrated that their feud is still alive and still very much public.
    Adams refused to extend Dooley’s contract as Georgia’s athletic director three years ago, leading to Dooley’s exit two years ago. But even in retirement, Dooley bowed up in indignation this week in response to a Monday guest editorial by Adams about the poor graduation rate of Georgia’s student-athletes under Dooley.
    Dooley challenged some of Adams’ facts as inaccurate, and Adams acknowledged as much in an apology. Adams asserted in the editorial that from 1996-99, when Dooley was athletic director, ‘‘the philosophy at UGA was ’athletic eligibility,’ not graduation. That philosophy has changed.’’
    Adams wrote that the school had moved academic counseling from the athletic department to UGA’s chief academic officer.
    Dooley challenged both statements in his own guest editorial that ran in the paper Friday.
    Adams agreed his words were overstated in the case of Georgia stressing eligibility, not graduation, under Dooley. And Adams said he was wrong about the school moving academic counseling from the athletic department.
    ‘‘... This was not intended as finger-pointing,’’ Adams told the paper. ‘‘The sentence just as easily could have read, and probably should have, ’For some time, the philosophy at many institutions was academic eligibility and graduation.’ ‘‘
    Of the statement regarding academic counseling, Adams said the change had been considered.
    ‘‘It was an overstatement of this change to say the program had been moved under the provost, and I apologize for the error,’’ he said.
    Adams said he meant no offense to Dooley and was ‘‘sorry any offense was taken.’’
    Adams’ apology came after the paper had committed to running Dooley’s response.
    In his editorial, Dooley wrote: ‘‘Using his skills as a spin doctor is commendable. But Adams crossed the line’’ with his statement that past athletic administrations were not focused on graduation rates.
    In an interview, Dooley said ‘‘You want to take the high road, but if a person is clearly wrong, I have an obligation to correct it.
    ‘‘In all cases I try to restrict my remarks to what I know to be factual. And in this case, some of Dr. Adams’ facts are just wrong. I would rather have not written the letter, but in good conscience I just couldn’t fail to respond when I knew he was wrong in what he said.’’