In the eyes of the court, 'In Pop We Trust' is just a mantra
Gregg Popovich broke his silence on Friday in the wake of a lawsuit filed against the Spurs organization, but public sentiment will only matter so much from this point forward.
SAN ANTONIO — One day removed from the San Antonio Spurs being named codefendants in a lawsuit filed by former team performance psychologist Dr. Hillary Cauthen, Gregg Popovich took his place at the podium for pre-game media availability on Friday.
There weren’t many expectations. After all, in the week since Joshua Primo had been waived by the team ahead of allegations he’d exposed himself to Dr. Cauthen on nine different occasions, the organization had released just two statements comprised of only 70 total words between them. San Antonio was on lockdown, opting to stand by the brief and intentionally vague comments issued by Spurs Sports & Entertainment CEO R.C. Buford in the face of an imminent legal battle.
And once again, at least for a short time, it seemed that was the direction Popovich was taking.
“I understand your question and your desire to get as many details as you can,” he told a reporter. “As you also know, this is in the hands of lawyers now … we can’t talk about details.”
He didn’t stop there, however. Throughout all of this, the Spurs have wanted to offer more of an explanation. The calls for further detail have not fallen on deaf ears, but the request from attorneys for silence beyond the general acknowledgement of the ongoing situation had become the priority. As anxious as both the San Antonio fan base and the national audience have been during this process, remaining quiet under circumstances that involve a lawsuit was never the wrong thing for the Spurs to do. A lack of words may drive speculation and paint an ugly picture in the eyes of the public, but the wrong words can kill you in court.
And yet, Popovich continued. Whether he did so on his own accord or was given an opening by his group to expound upon San Antonio’s thought process behind the scenes, it was decided he would break said silence.
“I will say, I stand by the statement that came out yesterday from the Spurs organization, in contrast to many of the things that were said at the news conference. I would only add that anybody that has observed the Spurs over a very long period of time knows that an accusation like this would be taken very seriously. Without any doubt whatsoever, no equivocation, the Spurs organization would be on top of it,” he said. “I’m absolutely confident the men and women on the managerial staff who dealt and are dealing with this did so purposefully, efficiently, promptly, and did it with the utmost care for everybody concerned — the accuser, the accused, people in the organization — to make sure everybody still felt comfortable and safe. I’ll leave my comments at that.”
For years, the “In Pop We Trust” mantra has been ubiquitous in San Antonio, born from an unbreakable and undying vote of confidence in a man who, in the eyes of most, had always sought to do and say the exact right things both on and off a basketball court. His record has been as unimpeachable as his values, and the standard under which the organization has operated is one others have consistently attempted to emulate.
One could easily argue no franchise in sports has built up the public equity and trust the Spurs have during Popovich’s tenure. From its extensive community-outreach efforts, to its progressive hiring practices, to its attention to civic duty, San Antonio has been a unique model for success in the corporate world of professional sports — a place that all too often exists as a playpen for an ultra-rich boys club.
But now, a feel-good slogan used to express playful appreciation for the longtime coach has suddenly become a literal statement by which a portion of the Spurs’ fan base will stand in the wake of troubling accusations. And between the team and Popovich’s recent comments, there is a strong implication of doubt in the veracity of the allegations made against the organization by Dr. Cauthen and her attorney Tony Buzbee.
“We disagree with the accuracy of the facts, details and timeline presented (Thursday). While we would like to share more information, we will allow the legal process to play out,” Buford’s statement following Buzbee’s press conference read. “Our organization remains committed to upholding the highest standards and will continue to live by our values and culture.”
While no further information has emerged since the press conference, it’s relevant to point out how unlikely it is the Spurs would have flatly waived Primo if they felt he was innocent. Teams do not part ways with a former lottery pick in his second year for temporary relief from a public-relations hit. Instead, the statement read as a denial of the facts presented by Buzbee in relation to the way the organization dealt with the reporting of the alleged incidents internally, and Popovich is standing firmly with his team.
The preamble to the proceedings has laid the groundwork for what could be an uncomfortable battle, and it’s difficult to imagine a case in which either side emerges as the true “winner” when all is said and done. There may be victory in court (as there could be for any invested faction seeking justice for Dr. Cauthen or the Spurs), but there won’t be largescale celebration in any sense.
On one hand, there is yet another woman in the world of sports who has accused a man in the building of sexual misconduct, and again, a situation in which that woman’s account of alleged incidents and subsequent follow-up action is being challenged; on the other, an organization with a pristine public image mired in what is likely its ugliest controversy to date — one that will leave the franchise at least partially smeared, even in the event of a favorable outcome.
But for Dr. Cauthen, the risks of taking these allegations public are immeasurable, and a person as qualified and credible as she is fully understands them.
Dr. Cauthen is standing by serious accusations that Primo exposed his penis to her — not once or twice, but on NINE occasions over the course of multiple sessions — and that a reputable and powerful corporate entity failed to address the problems appropriately. A fight of this magnitude is not one to take on with inaccurate information or without evidence, as the potential for life-altering consequence and backlash is all too real. So one would assume Dr. Cauthen believes she has a solid case, especially considering any potential misstep or mix-up could cause serious damage.
The public has almost always and without hesitation put blind faith in Popovich and his group to do what’s best for the organization, its people, and the community as a whole. But this time he’s indirectly asking for that consideration — not simply assuming it will be given — and he’s staking the San Antonio Spurs’ reputation on his belief the team acted appropriately throughout the process.
While it is part of Popovich’s job to represent the Spurs as President of Basketball Operations, it seems almost impossible to expect him to speak with “no equivocation” for all those beneath him in the organizational hierarchy. Improprieties can happen anywhere, and anyone is at least capable of acting selfishly or with an agenda in mind if they feel being transparent could cost them their job or harm their reputation. Human beings are as fallible as they come.
But this isn’t to say he is wrong in his assessment either, or that his confidence in the team’s hiring process and workplace standards is unwarranted. Neither Popovich nor the Spurs have ever given anyone a reason to question their practices, and if they come out on the other side of this having been exonerated from their alleged inaction and wrongdoings, that doesn’t have to change. Still, while historical evidence of San Antonio’s track record might inform some of the forecasting of its future in this case, it will be the depositions given, the stories told, and revelation of further information that will determine it.
“In Pop We Trust” has always meant something to those who believe in the Spurs and their culture. But now, the only belief of significance will be what the court determines to be the truth.