O'Day

[grizdoc]

I will own up to my vote.

It starts at the top, far too many incidents occurred on his watch. It was time for a change. As I stated in the other (Pflu) thread, I would not want my job hinging on the action of young adults.

While I found Jim to be a nice guy, he is not the right guy for the job. There have been questions since the day he was hired as AD.

Most of the incidents were allegations that turned out not to be accurate or were dui arrests. The taser matter ended in a per se plea to disorderly conduct. Donaldson's matter, brought up 16 months after it occurred, is obviously serious. No charge yet in the 4 months after the JJ incident. Some dui's went to reduced charges or went away. Supposed gang rape things appear to have gone away (and presumably didn't occur). See the former prosecutor's general comment on bogus allegations. Sure, too many things, but hardly enough to fire a good AD.

Again, thanks for responding.

Sadly, I don't think you will ever get it. Please take your lawyer hat off for a few minutes and look at this objectively. Sadly, to the typical or casual fan of the Griz, an allegation = a problem. Almost every allegation has appeared on the front page of the Missoulian while many of the plea deals are buried in the paper. Most fans do not follow each and every aspect of each players dealings with the law.

In my book, one allegation is too many.

Unfortunately, you don't understand allegations. In many cases, an allegation by an accuser, which has not yet been vetted by police and prosecutors or even a university to determine validity, should not be splashed the front page of newspapers.

You are pointed out much of the problem, and it was the over-reporting of mere allegations, or supposed allegations, by individuals, by the Missoulian, combined with several gross over-reactions by Engstrom. Of course, player behavior was also a significant factor, but without those other two things, this would not have spiraled out of control.

Another view of casual fans and observers is that they ought to pay more attention, and shouldn't get their news only from headlines on the front page of the Missoulian.

Allegations that turn out not to be valid or true are made all the time. Anyone can make an allegation, or make up an allegation. Responsible journalists will investigate raw allegations, and won't print them withoug some level of corroboration. Anyone who bases his knowledge only on allegations, and thinks allegations are facts, just doesn't get it and is part of the problem.

There are two things we agree on, 1) what an allegation is and 2) the Missoulian reporters have not done their job well or have kept fanning the flames.

However, I go back to my original point, the casual fan does not understand this. Also, lets be clear, while you do not specifically state it, your argument is true when it relates to the "sex" related allegations. Now with the "alcohol" (which there have been too many) incidents this is not the case. There have been too many alcohol offenses on O'Day's watch.

Knowing what your next argument will be, I will address it. Yes, we are innocent until proven otherwise and yes at times police officers are quick to write a ticket without fully investigate a matter. Yes, we both know, if a person has enough access and/or re$ources the charges can go away or reduced. Which has been the case. This is still not acceptable, an infraction is an infraction regardless if it is reduced. The students are representatives of the University.

With regard to fans, is it really any business of the casual fan to know all of the details or to investigate? I would say it is not.

Finally, I fully understand each and everyone of these students/athletes have the right to due process, both through the courts and through the school. That needs to be fair and well balanced.

 

[PlayerRep]

Most of the incidents were allegations that turned out not to be accurate or were dui arrests. The taser matter ended in a per se plea to disorderly conduct. Donaldson's matter, brought up 16 months after it occurred, is obviously serious. No charge yet in the 4 months after the JJ incident. Some dui's went to reduced charges or went away. Supposed gang rape things appear to have gone away (and presumably didn't occur). See the former prosecutor's general comment on bogus allegations. Sure, too many things, but hardly enough to fire a good AD.

Again, thanks for responding.

Sadly, I don't think you will ever get it. Please take your lawyer hat off for a few minutes and look at this objectively. Sadly, to the typical or casual fan of the Griz, an allegation = a problem. Almost every allegation has appeared on the front page of the Missoulian while many of the plea deals are buried in the paper. Most fans do not follow each and every aspect of each players dealings with the law.

In my book, one allegation is too many.

Unfortunately, you don't understand allegations. In many cases, an allegation by an accuser, which has not yet been vetted by police and prosecutors or even a university to determine validity, should not be splashed the front page of newspapers.

You are pointed out much of the problem, and it was the over-reporting of mere allegations, or supposed allegations, by individuals, by the Missoulian, combined with several gross over-reactions by Engstrom. Of course, player behavior was also a significant factor, but without those other two things, this would not have spiraled out of control.

Another view of casual fans and observers is that they ought to pay more attention, and shouldn't get their news only from headlines on the front page of the Missoulian.

Allegations that turn out not to be valid or true are made all the time. Anyone can make an allegation, or make up an allegation. Responsible journalists will investigate raw allegations, and won't print them withoug some level of corroboration. Anyone who bases his knowledge only on allegations, and thinks allegations are facts, just doesn't get it and is part of the problem.

There are two things we agree on, 1) what an allegation is and 2) the Missoulian reporters have not done their job well or have kept fanning the flames.

However, I go back to my original point, the casual fan does not understand this. Also, lets be clear, while you do not specifically state it, your argument is true when it relates to the "sex" related allegations. Now with the "alcohol" (which there have been too many) incidents this is not the case. There have been too many alcohol offenses on O'Day's watch.

Knowing what your next argument will be, I will address it. Yes, we are innocent until proven otherwise and yes at times police officers are quick to write a ticket without fully investigate a matter. Yes, we both know, if a person has enough access and/or re$ources the charges can go away or reduced. Which has been the case. This is still not acceptable, an infraction is an infraction regardless if it is reduced. The students are representatives of the University.

With regard to fans, is it really any business of the casual fan to know all of the details or to investigate? I would say it is not.

Finally, I fully understand each and everyone of these students/athletes have the right to due process, both through the courts and through the school. That needs to be fair and well balanced.

Yes, we agree on somethings. However, some allegations and even citations by police are just wrong/false. If an infraction didn't occur, then it didn't occur. For instance, pulling someone over for a mudflap infraction, and then charging with a dui when the person is the night's designated driver and not drinking, is not something that should be held against the kid or the school. At least with alcohol citations, they have been made/investigated by the police. It's not just some other student claiming that they saw an underage kid drinking or driving a car, and the Missoulian putting the accusation in the paper.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that there is something wrong with people getting off or having reduced charges if they hire a lawyer (or have access or resources). This is in fact part of the democratic process, and is generally constitutionally protected. If the police/prosecutors can't prove their case, then it means that they have over-charged the case.

In a democratic society, I believe it is the responsibility of all citizens to make some level of inquiry before jumping to conclusions. I realize that many citizens do not do this. I also don't think decisions of a university should be driven by the uninformed views of casual fans.

If the Missoulian puts allegations made by individuals and rumors on the front page, before they have been vetted by any third party investigating agency, where's the due process and fairness for the student/athlete.

 

[AZGrizFan]

People saying Engstrom was right in firing O'Day ought to say why. I assume most won't have the balls to own up to their vote.

There's at LEAST 30 threads on this very subject already. It's all been documented and nobody has had a shortage of "balls". :roll: :roll:

Okay, let's here your top 5 reasons he should have been fired. Please be specific. Even if you can't list them, you ought to be able to dig them out the supposed 30 threads. Of course, most of what is in the threads, is the questioning of why O'Day was fired.

You go dig them up if you want to know so badly. I don't feel like reliving it over and over and over again like some on here apparently do.

 

[PlayerRep]

People saying Engstrom was right in firing O'Day ought to say why. I assume most won't have the balls to own up to their vote.

There's at LEAST 30 threads on this very subject already. It's all been documented and nobody has had a shortage of "balls". :roll: :roll:

Okay, let's here your top 5 reasons he should have been fired. Please be specific. Even if you can't list them, you ought to be able to dig them out the supposed 30 threads. Of course, most of what is in the threads, is the questioning of why O'Day was fired.

You go dig them up if you want to know so badly. I don't feel like reliving it over and over and over again like some on here apparently do.

The reasons don't exist. I knew you couldn't back up your statement.

 

[AZGrizFan]

There's at LEAST 30 threads on this very subject already. It's all been documented and nobody has had a shortage of "balls". :roll: :roll:

Okay, let's here your top 5 reasons he should have been fired. Please be specific. Even if you can't list them, you ought to be able to dig them out the supposed 30 threads. Of course, most of what is in the threads, is the questioning of why O'Day was fired.

You go dig them up if you want to know so badly. I don't feel like reliving it over and over and over again like some on here apparently do.

The reasons don't exist. I knew you couldn't back up your statement.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah. whatever floats your boat. Go look up the threads if you must relive it, I dont' feel the need to. The football team and the university have moved on. You should try it too...you're gonna give yourself the vapors.

 

[grizdoc]

Yes, we agree on somethings. However, some allegations and even citations by police are just wrong/false. If an infraction didn't occur, then it didn't occur. For instance, pulling someone over for a mudflap infraction, and then charging with a dui when the person is the night's designated driver and not drinking, is not something that should be held against the kid or the school. At least with alcohol citations, they have been made/investigated by the police. It's not just some other student claiming that they saw an underage kid drinking or driving a car, and the Missoulian putting the accusation in the paper.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that there is something wrong with people getting off or having reduced charges if they hire a lawyer (or have access or resources). This is in fact part of the democratic process, and is generally constitutionally protected. If the police/prosecutors can't prove their case, then it means that they have over-charged the case.

In a democratic society, I believe it is the responsibility of all citizens to make some level of inquiry before jumping to conclusions. I realize that many citizens do not do this. I also don't think decisions of a university should be driven by the uninformed views of casual fans.

If the Missoulian puts allegations made by individuals and rumors on the front page, before they have been vetted by any third party investigating agency, where's the due process and fairness for the student/athlete.

It all comes down to perception vs reality. No, I do not have a problem with reduced or dropped charges. My issues deal with inequity in the democratic process, while in theory it is to be equitable for all. However, when access and resources (read money) come into play, the playing field is not level for all.

 

[polsongrizz]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

SERIOUSLY????

Exactly... :lol: :lol: :lol: :roll: