Such situations are reminiscent of the classic meme of the petrified man standing in front of a judge saying, "but your honor, can we just forget about the facts for a second?"

This is what has befallen followers of UConn football. Many have forgotten the facts. Or don't know them.

Lest we allow the latest narrative — there goes Randy Edsall bailing on UConn again — to fester into fact, I'm throwing the challenge flag.

Randy Edsall bailed on UConn? Au contraire. UConn bailed on Randy Edsall. Twice.

The first time involves a history lesson that's apparently too esoteric to have gathered acceptance. The second is the byproduct of the trumpeted move to independence — during which Edsall was never consulted — but left UConn football as Dead Program Walking.

Alas, this program would look drastically different if Edsall never left in 2011. And he wouldn't have gone anywhere had university and athletic department leadership not pulled a Sgt. Schultz when Edsall raised concerns about the future of the program.

If you're really interested in why UConn football is swirling the bowl — and why Edsall left the first time — here is what happened:

His decision to leave after the Fiesta Bowl in early 2011 came with the requisite hyperventilation from the galleries. It's easier, presumably, to tee off and call him a scoundrel for leaving rather than exploring the reasons.

Edsall's departure was tied to what he perceived a lack of support from the suits who sat above him, from admissions to former athletic director Jeff Hathaway to, ultimately, former president Michael Hogan.

A history lesson: In 2003, UConn was the only public I-A school to graduate at least 90 percent of its football players. In 2005, UConn was one of only eight schools to graduate 70 percent and win a bowl game. In 2007, UConn's APR, the measure of academic progress at the time, placed the Huskies among the top 20 percent of all football programs in the country.

I spoke to professors and teaching assistants at the time. They confirmed that, yes, football players were always in class.

And yet as players kept graduating and the program kept winning, Edsall realized that he was losing players to Big East rivals Louisville and West Virginia, among others. They were players whose transcripts used to get them admitted to UConn. He feared a competitive imbalance was beginning.

During one weekly media session, Edsall (off the podium) talked about how he spent UConn's first bye week of that particular season talking to admissions. His message: More stringent admittance requirements were imperiling the program.

That is not necessarily a bad thing. But Edsall — and I was with him then as I am now — believed that his track record of graduating his players earned him the benefit of the doubt for a few difference makers in recruiting.

Edsall said, essentially, the university was beginning to require its prospective athletes to have higher grade-point averages and higher standardized test scores "than a few years ago," on top of a more rigorous "second review" process for athletes who didn't meet the increased standards.

Later, Edsall showed me the "Admissions Athletic Review Procedures for Fall 2011," dated Sept. 23 of that year, detailing the requirements. Edsall said even players who earned their degrees in previous seasons probably wouldn't be admitted under this new plan. He said that making a kid wait on UConn was recruiting Russian roulette because they'd just go somewhere else. Moreover, he wasn't sure other schools in the league were as discerning.

Edsall was most irritated, though, at having the conversation with admissions without Hathaway. Edsall asked Hathaway more than once to join him, believing Hathaway could have aided in discussions heading toward compromise. He believed he'd earned that much, given how the football program was lauded frequently — and nationally — for academic achievement.

That's why he left. He honestly believed that his commitment to academic achievement should have earned him the benefit of the doubt with admissions and he simply wanted his boss there with him for support. He got neither.

Once again: Edsall knew that two primary Big East rivals, Louisville and West Virginia, started getting recruits that he wasn't. The rules were changing. The problem is that none of this was made public, leaving Edsall as The Bad Guy.

UConn's leadership followed Edsall's departure with the hirings of Paul Pasqualoni and Captain Queeg Diaco. Pasqualoni was a nice fellow who couldn't recruit. Diaco was knitting with one needle from the time he arrived.

Edsall took over for Diaco looking at an overmatched roster in a league that had its share of decent teams, but hardly the same sex appeal of the Power Five. It would have been hard enough to resurrect this project in the American. Now with the decision to placate basketball and give football its independence?

And the rest, as they say, is current events.

They imperiled the program during Edsall's first time around. They've officially killed it now. Forget about the money pit that is the FCS, as some have suggested. UConn football is dead. You know who UConn has to blame for it?

UConn.

This is the opinion of Day sports columnist Mike DiMauro