In addressing Mulkey's attire, the article makes no logical connection between how she dresses (I could care less though it can be interesting-I find tattooing more distracting) and what that indicates for her success and position.
From the article:
"Mulkey’s treatment of Griner, thus, cannot be considered separately from her implicit support for the Baylor football players accused of sexual assault."
Mulkey's will to win was paramount no matter Griner's sexuality
. Mulkey's treatment of Griner could be seen as problematic especially when listening to Griner. But she recruited her, played her and won a NCAA WBB Championship with Griner. Then highly sought, Griner moved to the WNBA. Maybe Griner and Mulkey should have had a talk during those years. Maybe that's a lot to expect. Yet maybe, it could of eased the tension and misunderstandings.
Here is a big problem with pointing to Mulkey's protecting the culture of rape at Baylor. Now take a look where she was coming from. Mulkey saw the the authorities taking control and her players nor program being involved. It was bad and she didn't want to dwell on it. Mulkey should have made some statement to the effect to Baylor's responsibility in the enormity of the scandal.
She seemed to be pushing too hastily to get beyond the tragedy. She made a bonehead mistake in her "wanting to punch in the face" statement and apologized. She was looking to protect what she saw as the good of Baylor! She was not considering what she said would be taken as protecting lawlessness. As a coach she has few peers. In thinking some things through for
appearances she has issues.