-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
Just heard
- Thread starter infiltrator
- Start date
I will try to make this very easy for you with an example. Two UM players were arrested for disturbing the peace (and other charges). Both immediately lawyered up, UM immediately announced it would let the legal systm run its course and (although it is not entirely clear whether it was before or after the public debate) Pflu suspended the players for one quarter. Seriously, one quarter what was even the purpose.
Back to your example which you keep brining up failing to get the point. Ash recruited an athletically gifted player, that happened to also be a straight A student, with prior issues. Offered him a second chance. Kid screwed up and was gone that day. Not after the legal system ran its course, not after the public debated the issues, not after trying to figure out whether it would have any impact on the future of the program. Gone......... Let's juxtapose that with a similar player recruited by UM. Issues in high school resulting in suspension from program comes to UM and has worked his way up the two-deep and ends up in a yard of someone while driving under the influence. And the immediate reaction of the program. We will let the legal system run its course. Interestingly, after the season pleads out to a lesser charge .............hmmmmm. Same approach when the son of legend comes to town, also carrying a little baggage, takes a little ride under the influence, arrested, lawyers up and once again UM decides to let the legal system run its course.
What makes these cases even more interesting is another UM player without prior baggage (at least not known) but nowhere near the top three of the depth chart ends up rolling a vehicle past someone's house and is arrested for driving under the influence. Immediately suspended. Why didn't he get to let the legal systme run its course.
Again, not claiming a massive conspiracy on the part of UM. Rather, a lack of focus on discipline and taking inconsistent actions without demonstrating a clear desire to put discipline ahead of winning.
Are you actually disputing that UM has a PR problem right now. Are you actually disputing that the way it has handled these situations has not contributed to that problem. This approach has been a direct cause of what is going on now. Right, wrong or indiffent, the approach taken has created a perception that winning is put ahead of all else. Because of that, UM is now being investigated by the DOJ, DOE and NCAA. It is almost a guarantee that one or all will find something UM did was wrong (whether true or not they have to justify the expenditures). UM's approach invited this controversy. Typically, you never get stung by taking a too conservative approach. What if UM had actually suspended those two players for a full game. Would it really have changed anything other than the percpetion of UM. The players would have still plead out at the end of the year and by in large people would have said the penatly (one game suspension) fit the crime (disorderly conduct). Instead, there is a raging public debate that continues to this day because of the way UM handled the situation.
UM has made their own bed and now has to live with the consequences. While in the end that may not result in any type of penalty, it has created a PR mess and left the decision in someone else's hands. The only one to blame for that is UM.
Back to your example which you keep brining up failing to get the point. Ash recruited an athletically gifted player, that happened to also be a straight A student, with prior issues. Offered him a second chance. Kid screwed up and was gone that day. Not after the legal system ran its course, not after the public debated the issues, not after trying to figure out whether it would have any impact on the future of the program. Gone......... Let's juxtapose that with a similar player recruited by UM. Issues in high school resulting in suspension from program comes to UM and has worked his way up the two-deep and ends up in a yard of someone while driving under the influence. And the immediate reaction of the program. We will let the legal system run its course. Interestingly, after the season pleads out to a lesser charge .............hmmmmm. Same approach when the son of legend comes to town, also carrying a little baggage, takes a little ride under the influence, arrested, lawyers up and once again UM decides to let the legal system run its course.
What makes these cases even more interesting is another UM player without prior baggage (at least not known) but nowhere near the top three of the depth chart ends up rolling a vehicle past someone's house and is arrested for driving under the influence. Immediately suspended. Why didn't he get to let the legal systme run its course.
Again, not claiming a massive conspiracy on the part of UM. Rather, a lack of focus on discipline and taking inconsistent actions without demonstrating a clear desire to put discipline ahead of winning.
Are you actually disputing that UM has a PR problem right now. Are you actually disputing that the way it has handled these situations has not contributed to that problem. This approach has been a direct cause of what is going on now. Right, wrong or indiffent, the approach taken has created a perception that winning is put ahead of all else. Because of that, UM is now being investigated by the DOJ, DOE and NCAA. It is almost a guarantee that one or all will find something UM did was wrong (whether true or not they have to justify the expenditures). UM's approach invited this controversy. Typically, you never get stung by taking a too conservative approach. What if UM had actually suspended those two players for a full game. Would it really have changed anything other than the percpetion of UM. The players would have still plead out at the end of the year and by in large people would have said the penatly (one game suspension) fit the crime (disorderly conduct). Instead, there is a raging public debate that continues to this day because of the way UM handled the situation.
UM has made their own bed and now has to live with the consequences. While in the end that may not result in any type of penalty, it has created a PR mess and left the decision in someone else's hands. The only one to blame for that is UM.
nzone said:
I have to agree here. As was the case in Bozeman in the early 2000's, the actions of a few have tarnished the reputation of a solid university and a good coach. The situations, crimes and status of the student athletes were different, but the outcome the same. I hope the U can move on because we need a strong Griz program in the BSC for the sake of the conference. I would guess there are alot of Ohio State, Michigan fans, etc., etc. gloating on the Nittany Lion blog right now too. To me this is all really short-sited. No one should want any conference school to have to go through this crap. It hurts the image for all.
Let's not try to revise history. Gatewood was never arrested for anything while he was on the active roster. Not saying he didn't have a bad character but when you are trying to build a team up from 0-11 as Kramer did, you take a few chances. But of all the people that ran a foul of the law in the big drug sting while Kramer was coach, only one was an active player (and he was probably the one player no one would have ever thought would be involved in such a thing). He definitely had his share of other situations involving active players, but those were all dealt with immediately (without letting the legal system run its course). I believe Kramer was good with discipline but ultimately got sunk with the academic issues which was really a catch 22. He had to build a program from the ground up and to do that he had to take chances on both character and academics. While he took immediate action on any issues of character that came to his attention, there was little he could do with academics. You either recruit kids that have the ability to be sucessful on the field and in the classroom or you don't. Kramer really didn't have a choice.
Agree; Mike was a victim of a "Beat Montana at All Costs" culture at MSU. He did what he was asked to do; he restored a rivalry. He remains a popular and respected coach among Griz fans who hope he is capable of turning ISU around.doebrmn said:
Then there was the assistant coach meth dealer; was he active when busted?
He was an active coach and I can tell you of all the people and problems at MSU he is the one that almost killed Kramer. He was like a son to him and never in a million years would anyone have thought he would be involved in such a thing. It turned out that, unbeknownst to anyone, he had grown up around it . He had a great college career and was building a great coaching career but had a darker side that got the best of him.
doebrmn said:
You are attempting to lump items together that have no actuall ties. And you are taking a recent incident regarding Tru and Kemp and painting a broad brush that the University created an atmosphere which allowed for this activity to take place along with your comments that Ash is getting players of much higher moral character. I would have more respect for your comments if you just said that the kids know IF they step out of line, the chances of them staying on the team are greatly reduced. However, there just is nothing factual to conclude that the recruiting process is limiting incidents from happening. Further, you are unable to back up your statement of the past "five years" because is simply isn't true.
1) Department of education is here because a complaint was issued and given all that was going on, failing to look into the matter would be irresponsible.
2) The DOJ is investigating the CA and the MPD, neither of which can actually be accused of being influenced by UM or UM athletics and involves the 80 reported sexual assults over a three year period. Which by the way is the same number reported in Bozeman.
3) The NCAA is here for reasons yet to be determined and I'm waiting to find out.
Obvisously there was a problem at UofM and I am embrassed of what has occured. However, as things came to light UM hired an outside person to investigate the issues. I don't blame The Missoulian for reporting on the issue, I object to the sensationalized version that the lack of facts presented. Further, in your example the implication is that the recruit we were talking about was just a good kid who made a mistake and deserved a second chance, only to be charged with felony distribution after his second fall from grace, you are simpley glossing over the facts that if Ash was really ONLY taking kids of high character he wouldn't have been considered at all. I'm just saying step off your high horse, because while some of the reaction to issues may be different, your belief that it is less likely to occur because of the supposed vetting process by the MSU staff is not accurate. Out of say 50 recruits both schools were after over the past five years, I bet you can actually name one that wouldn't be on the roster now had he picked MSU over UM . If you want to comment on what would have occured had said player stepped out of line, I think you have a valid arguement, but otherwise I believe you have your head in the sand.
bigforkgriz
Well-known member
Born2BaGriz said:
Superb assessment Born2. Lumping all of these investigations together is just a simplistic view that people can understand. It makes everything so nice in black and white.
I see the main point of this discussion being completely missed or twisted. No one in their right mind has said that Ash hasn't recruited or brought in kids that have either had some sort of baggage or ended up with some baggage after committing to MSU. What he has done though, is improve the image of MSU in terms of quality of character over what was there previously. This doesn't mean there are NO issues or NO chances being taken. The main point is what the perception of both programs are and how they compare. MSU has created a PR image where they appear to be the program with higher ethics and tougher dicipline through quick decision making. They appear to be doing things the right way in the public's eye. UM has created a PR image where they appear to wait and see what the legal process says, making it appear as if they do nothing of significance to deter these actions. Neither of these are 100% accurate across the board. But that is the perception. Everyone can find some form of anecdotal evidence to shoot holes in this and try to smear the opposing institution, but the perception will remain for now.
Blgs Griz Fan
Well-known member
Eventually Coach St. Ash will have a major issue and will not handle it well. Even angels fall from grace. The cats angelic mystique will be shattered and all will be righted in Montana and the Big Sky Conference. Now how long till kick off?
You will first need to go back and find where I have said that Ash has only recruited players with high character. What I actually said is he has placed an emphasis on it and as a result is seeing less problems. Also, where he has taken chances and they don't work out he doesn't hide behind the legal system he steps up and deals with them. That is exactly what has gotten UM in the situation it is now. If UM did not have the perception that is was not taking these situations seriously enough, they may not be in the situation they are in now and perhaps would not have had students filing complaints with the DOE or the DOE not taking the complaint to the level of an active investigation.
And I gave you recent examples because they are more relevant to the discussion, but we can rehash the biting, Bar fight, fraternity house fight, the home invasion, and DUI arrests (that all seem to get plead down after the season) if you really think that is going to support your position but I don't think it really will.
And again, to make the point, it is not that the kids engaged in these activities because kids (athletes or not) are engaging in the same situations at every college campus across America. It is how UM has handled these situations that has put them where they are now.
As for the NCAA (and this is just a guess but also why I was confident in stating that UM was under NCAA investigations months before it was confirmed... despite the rash of Sh*t I took from posters on here), it just might have to do with a large booster publically stating in the paper that it has provided no-cost services to student athletes which (even for those on here that don't understand what a redshirt is) know is a big no-no for the NCAA. Might be more, might be less, might not even be related, but given the timing, might be the first place you want to start looking.
And I gave you recent examples because they are more relevant to the discussion, but we can rehash the biting, Bar fight, fraternity house fight, the home invasion, and DUI arrests (that all seem to get plead down after the season) if you really think that is going to support your position but I don't think it really will.
And again, to make the point, it is not that the kids engaged in these activities because kids (athletes or not) are engaging in the same situations at every college campus across America. It is how UM has handled these situations that has put them where they are now.
As for the NCAA (and this is just a guess but also why I was confident in stating that UM was under NCAA investigations months before it was confirmed... despite the rash of Sh*t I took from posters on here), it just might have to do with a large booster publically stating in the paper that it has provided no-cost services to student athletes which (even for those on here that don't understand what a redshirt is) know is a big no-no for the NCAA. Might be more, might be less, might not even be related, but given the timing, might be the first place you want to start looking.
jagur1 said:
How did we compete last time we came to town? No, so some of you just don't get what we're trying to say about Ash. There is a huge difference in philosophy, and I'll try to make it as clear as possible for you. The Griz coaches, and probably most other college football coaches, usually try to do the right thing. They look for the best talent, and try to make sure the players are high character. Ash and co look at character first, talent second. Big difference. Additionally, it's also about what happens once the players get into the program. Ash preaches character probably too much (according to some players I've talked to), in hopes that it will have a better chance of sinking in. I can pretty much guarantee Hauck or Pflu, or Kramer, etc... aren't going burn half of a valuable team meeting talking about character.
This thread is like Dawn of the Living Dead for MSU trolls.
Somebody kill the power, announce the party is over and hopefully our “guests” will leave.
Somebody kill the power, announce the party is over and hopefully our “guests” will leave.
grizhunter
Well-known member
JCU, please go back to the corner of your mother's basement where she chains you on the wall and covers you with peanut butter.jcu27 said:
Just a joke, thats where I live.
KoolMoeDee
Well-known member
http://www.egriz.com/grizboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=24531&start=50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
