what happened the night of the Foresters Ball?

[PlayerRep]

I disagree. We make or put conditions on people all the time. As a condition of their scholarship and the fact that they are often the face of a university, student athletes become defacto representatives of the University. No one would argue that the President of a University must be held to a higher standard. Why is it difficult to understand holding other representatives of the university to that standard?

Now, as far as the law, I do agree. Athletes don't have a higher standard to uphold there. But from a perception standpoint, they do.

I'm not disputing that athletes, as well as many other groups, represent the university. I just don't know why that should mean they have to be held to a higher standard. They already put in more time, work and effort, on behalf of the school. I trust that you're really not comparing athletes to the president of the university?

 

[WaGriz4life]

I disagree. We make or put conditions on people all the time. As a condition of their scholarship and the fact that they are often the face of a university, student athletes become defacto representatives of the University. No one would argue that the President of a University must be held to a higher standard. Why is it difficult to understand holding other representatives of the university to that standard?

Now, as far as the law, I do agree. Athletes don't have a higher standard to uphold there. But from a perception standpoint, they do.

I'm not disputing that athletes, as well as many other groups, represent the university. I just don't know why that should mean they have to be held to a higher standard. They already put in more time, work and effort, on behalf of the school. I trust that you're really not comparing athletes to the president of the university?

I was just going to say this. Really bad analogy.

 

[EverettGriz]

Of course it was a stretch analogy. It was made purposely so to prove a point. Which obviously it did since you now agree that athletes represent a university and therefore need to be held to a higher standard; consequently it was a very effective analogy.

You're welcome.

 

[getgrizzy]

the people that want them to live up to a higher standard are the ones that go around bragging them up and blowing money on them, so when the athletes end up doing something stupid, they get all butt hurt over it, because they're embarrassed. boo-hoo. the ones that don't do that just deny that the athletes did anything wrong in the first place and blame the cops and the media or say the other teams do it, but just don't get caught, or some other lame excuse.

bottom line is we'll all be there this fall rooting them on and saying we've got everything all straightened out now or something to rationalize our griz football habit. we'll just drink more.

 

[PlayerRep]

the bottom line is being an athlete is a privledge, and with that comes standards. no one is forcing these guys to play football. but they choose to because it's a great sport....and there are MANY perks that come with being a college athlete.

there needs to be higher standards because fair or unfair, these kids represent our entire universities. take your latest rape allegations. it's all over the news. it's in the papers. it's on the message boards. it simply comes with the territory. meanwhile, there was a rape on msu's campus last night and it is getting nearly no attention at all. so sure, one could make a case that jj is getting screwed in his situation as "regular" students don't have the same scrutiny. however, the other thousands of students could make a case that it's not fair that athletes get special treatment either....

in the end, i doubt these kids would trade being a college athlete for anything. the good far outweighs the bad that comes with being an athlete on campus. but if you do stupid crap....even though other students do too...you need to understand the consequences.

imagine what a shit-show every campus would have daily if they held their athletes to the same standards as every other student. i drove by campus this morning and saw some kid still hammered, wearing a banana costume. i wouldn't want this guy to represent the cats and i'm sad that he represents msu to anyone driving by watching him walk to the dorms. :?

What special treatment to athletes get? Just curious as to what you think.

I'm not so sure that I agree that playing sports in college is really a privilege. That is sort of the same argument that governments make regarding driving and drivers license, i.e. it's a privilege. I don't really buy that argument either.

Athletes, especially in high profile sports, provide huge benefits for a university, both in terms of revenue generation from football, fund-raising, and raising the profile of the university. I believe the universities owe them more than they owe the university for letting them play.

 

[PlayerRep]

Of course it was a stretch analogy. It was made purposely so to prove a point. Which obviously it did since you now agree that athletes represent a university and therefore need to be held to a higher standard; consequently it was a very effective analogy.

You're welcome.

Nope, I agree that athletes represent the university and are held to a higher standard, but I don't know why they "must" be held to a higher standard. I don't agree that they "need" to be held to a higher standard.

 

[EverettGriz]

Of course it was a stretch analogy. It was made purposely so to prove a point. Which obviously it did since you now agree that athletes represent a university and therefore need to be held to a higher standard; consequently it was a very effective analogy.

You're welcome.

Nope, I agree that athletes represent the university and are held to a higher standard, but I don't know why they "must" be held to a higher standard. I don't agree that they "need" to be held to a higher standard.

Mehh. Semantics. I'm not going to get into a pissin' match over word choice.

 

[ilovethecats]

What special treatment to athletes get? Just curious as to what you think.

I'm not so sure that I agree that playing sports in college is really a privilege. That is sort of the same argument that governments make regarding driving and drivers license, i.e. it's a privilege. I don't really buy that argument either.

Athletes, especially in high profile sports, provide huge benefits for a university, both in terms of revenue generation from football, fund-raising, and raising the profile of the university. I believe the universities owe them more than they owe the university for letting them play.

first, let me clarify that you are preaching the quoir in regards to what athletes are worth. i think the ncaa is a joke, and i think athletes deserve more than they are getting, i.e. scholarships and tuition and the like. they make millions of dollars for their schools, yet can be suspended over a couple hundred bucks like the k-state kid last week.

as far as the perks go, i was mainly talking about those NOT affiliated with the university. being known throughout the community, getting girls, going to peoples cabins on the lake, getting free drinks downtown, and many others that i can think of but don't want to elaborate on as i've seen them at both schools and don't know if there was any wrongdoing. i guess my point was the good things are much more plenty than the bad things when it comes to being a college athlete. especially in our state when msu and um might as well be pro teams as far as fan support an passion.

that make sense or am i just rambling along?

 

[PlayerRep]

Of course it was a stretch analogy. It was made purposely so to prove a point. Which obviously it did since you now agree that athletes represent a university and therefore need to be held to a higher standard; consequently it was a very effective analogy.

You're welcome.

Nope, I agree that athletes represent the university and are held to a higher standard, but I don't know why they "must" be held to a higher standard. I don't agree that they "need" to be held to a higher standard.

Mehh. Semantics. I'm not going to get into a pissin' match over word choice.

No one's trying to get into a pissing match. However, I'm still curious as to whether you have any reasons that athletes "must" be held to a higher standard, other than that they represent their university.

 

[PlayerRep]

What special treatment to athletes get? Just curious as to what you think.

I'm not so sure that I agree that playing sports in college is really a privilege. That is sort of the same argument that governments make regarding driving and drivers license, i.e. it's a privilege. I don't really buy that argument either.

Athletes, especially in high profile sports, provide huge benefits for a university, both in terms of revenue generation from football, fund-raising, and raising the profile of the university. I believe the universities owe them more than they owe the university for letting them play.

first, let me clarify that you are preaching the quoir in regards to what athletes are worth. i think the ncaa is a joke, and i think athletes deserve more than they are getting, i.e. scholarships and tuition and the like. they make millions of dollars for their schools, yet can be suspended over a couple hundred bucks like the k-state kid last week.

as far as the perks go, i was mainly talking about those NOT affiliated with the university. being known throughout the community, getting girls, going to peoples cabins on the lake, getting free drinks downtown, and many others that i can think of but don't want to elaborate on as i've seen them at both schools and don't know if there was any wrongdoing. i guess my point was the good things are much more plenty than the bad things when it comes to being a college athlete. especially in our state when msu and um might as well be pro teams as far as fan support an passion.

that make sense or am i just rambling along?

Not rambling at all. Thx.

 

[WaGriz4life]

What special treatment to athletes get? Just curious as to what you think.

I'm not so sure that I agree that playing sports in college is really a privilege. That is sort of the same argument that governments make regarding driving and drivers license, i.e. it's a privilege. I don't really buy that argument either.

Athletes, especially in high profile sports, provide huge benefits for a university, both in terms of revenue generation from football, fund-raising, and raising the profile of the university. I believe the universities owe them more than they owe the university for letting them play.

first, let me clarify that you are preaching the quoir in regards to what athletes are worth. i think the
ncaa is a joke, and i think athletes deserve more than they are getting, i.e. scholarships and tuition and the like. they make millions of dollars for their schools, yet can be suspended over a couple hundred bucks like the k-state kid last week.

as far as the perks go, i was mainly talking about those NOT affiliated with the university. being known throughout the community, getting girls, going to peoples cabins on the lake, getting free drinks downtown, and many others that i can think of but don't want to elaborate on as i've seen them at both schools and don't know if there was any wrongdoing. i guess my point was the good things are much more plenty than the bad things when it comes to being a college athlete. especially in our state when msu and um might as well be pro teams as far as fan support an passion.

that make sense or am i just rambling along?

Not rambling at all. Thx.

I agree with ILTC about those kinds of perks. That's what I was talking about. More just generally how they are treated around town and on campus.

 

[OldtiredGRiz]

I think the "must be held to a higher standard" stems from the benefit of the bargain as much as it does representing the university. In exchange for hard work, dedication and effort, a student athlete receives essentially a free college eduction. (Granted, at this level, some are partials.) Most students don't receive those benefits. I think UM has something like 400 scholarship athletes out of a total of something like 15,100 students. I agree that student athletes should get more benefits, but they don't, so those are the parameters within which they have to function. But of course, you could take it further and for example use Student A and Student B...A is on an academic full ride and B is on an athletic full ride. Both go out on Saturday night and get a DUI; under the law, they should be treated equally. But Student B, because he or she is an athlete, will face additional sanctions, such as suspension from the team for a determined period or loss of financial aid. I've never heard of an academic scholarship student facing loss of aid over something like a DUI, but I suppose it's possible. But those who peruse the Missoula County jail roster will jump all over Student B and skip right past Student A. It comes with the turf. Is is fair? I honestly don't know but it's not for me to decide.

 

[WaGriz4life]

I think the "must be held to a higher standard" stems from the benefit of the bargain as much as it does representing the university. In exchange for hard work, dedication and effort, a student athlete receives essentially a free college eduction. (Granted, at this level, some are partials.) Most students don't receive those benefits. I think UM has something like 400 scholarship athletes out of a total of something like 15,100 students. I agree that student athletes should get more benefits, but they don't, so those are the parameters within which they have to function. But of course, you could take it further and for example use Student A and Student B...A is on an academic full ride and B is on an athletic full ride. Both go out on Saturday night and get a DUI; under the law, they should be treated equally. But Student B, because he or she is an athlete, will face additional sanctions, such as suspension from the team for a determined period or loss of financial aid. I've never heard of an academic scholarship student facing loss of aid over something like a DUI, but I suppose it's possible. But those who peruse the Missoula County jail roster will jump all over Student B and skip right past Student A. It comes with the turf. Is is fair? I honestly don't know but it's not for me to decide.

I believe The University of Notre Dame was close to throwing Michael Floyd out of school after he got his
DUI because this was his second arrest after he beat the sh!t out of some guy in downtown Minneapolis when he was a Freshman. This was a student conduct code issue and Brian Kelly had no say in the decision. I'm assuming this was a Code of Conduct issue that applies to all students, but who knows.

 

[PlayerRep]

I think the "must be held to a higher standard" stems from the benefit of the bargain as much as it does representing the university. In exchange for hard work, dedication and effort, a student athlete receives essentially a free college eduction. (Granted, at this level, some are partials.) Most students don't receive those benefits. I think UM has something like 400 scholarship athletes out of a total of something like 15,100 students. I agree that student athletes should get more benefits, but they don't, so those are the parameters within which they have to function. But of course, you could take it further and for example use Student A and Student B...A is on an academic full ride and B is on an athletic full ride. Both go out on Saturday night and get a DUI; under the law, they should be treated equally. But Student B, because he or she is an athlete, will face additional sanctions, such as suspension from the team for a determined period or loss of financial aid. I've never heard of an academic scholarship student facing loss of aid over something like a DUI, but I suppose it's possible. But those who peruse the Missoula County jail roster will jump all over Student B and skip right past Student A. It comes with the turf. Is is fair? I honestly don't know but it's not for me to decide.

Without disagreeing with what you said, what about players who are walk-ons? They don't get their education paid for. The argument you made is not as good for the walk-ons. Also, you have pointed out the inconsistently between the full-ride academic scholarship kid and the scholarship athlete.

I've asked this basic question various times in the past. I've never seen a good answer. Maybe there isn't a good answer to support the argument that they "must" be held to a higher standard. Maybe it's just that they "are" held to a higher standard, whether fair or not.

 

[WaGriz4life]

I think the "must be held to a higher standard" stems from the benefit of the bargain as much as it does representing the university. In exchange for hard work, dedication and effort, a student athlete receives essentially a free college eduction. (Granted, at this level, some are partials.) Most students don't receive those benefits. I think UM has something like 400 scholarship athletes out of a total of something like 15,100 students. I agree that student athletes should get more benefits, but they don't, so those are the parameters within which they have to function. But of course, you could take it further and for example use Student A and Student B...A is on an academic full ride and B is on an athletic full ride. Both go out on Saturday night and get a DUI; under the law, they should be treated equally. But Student B, because he or she is an athlete, will face additional sanctions, such as suspension from the team for a determined period or loss of financial aid. I've never heard of an academic scholarship student facing loss of aid over something like a DUI, but I suppose it's possible. But those who peruse the Missoula County jail roster will jump all over Student B and skip right past Student A. It comes with the turf. Is is fair? I honestly don't know but it's not for me to decide.

Without disagreeing with what you said, what about players who are walk-ons? They don't get their education paid for. The argument you made is not as good for the walk-ons. Also, you have pointed out the inconsistently between the full-ride academic scholarship kid and the scholarship athlete.

I've asked this basic question various times in the past. I've never seen a good answer. Maybe there isn't a good answer to support the argument that they "must" be held to a higher standard. Maybe it's just that they "are" held to a higher standard, whether fair or not.

This

 

[Bay Area Cat]

The "higher standard" is in place for one simple reason -- because athletics is a marketing arm of the university, and whatever makes athletics look bad also has the potential to damage the reputation/business of the entire university.

A kid with an academic scholarship isn't someone that is generally used by the school to market itself within the state or around the country, so their actions just aren't generally followed nearly as close. But athletes are put out there as the face of the university, and are therefore treated differently.

So schools apply a higher standard to the athletes because it is trying to protect its brand.

Is that fair to the student-athletes? Not really. But that's the reality. If those standards weren't in place, and athletics was no longer useful to the school as a marketing arm, athletics wouldn't exist in the form they do today, so I guess the higher standard is just part of the grander bargrain that allows intercollegiate athletics to exist in the first place.

 

[EverettGriz]

No one's trying to get into a pissing match. However, I'm still curious as to whether you have any reasons that athletes "must" be held to a higher standard, other than that they represent their university.
PlayerRepeGriz Lifer Posts: 6591Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:06 am

And suddenly I'm in a pissing match over word use.....

I use "must" in the same way we might say, "I must get the lawn mowed today or the neighbors will really wonder about me". In the true definition of the word, "must" you mow the lawn? Of course not. Your life won't end if you don't. But you use that word because in your neighborhood, there's an expectation that your place look nice and if you don't do it, it will reflect poorly on you. In the same way, since athletes directly represent a university, they "must" be held to a higher standard or it could reflect poorly on the university.

 

[PlayerRep]

No one's trying to get into a pissing match. However, I'm still curious as to whether you have any reasons that athletes "must" be held to a higher standard, other than that they represent their university.
PlayerRepeGriz Lifer Posts: 6591Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:06 am

And suddenly I'm in a pissing match over word use.....

I use "must" in the same way we might say, "I must get the lawn mowed today or the neighbors will really wonder about me". In the true definition of the word, "must" you mow the lawn? Of course not. Your life won't end if you don't. But you use that word because in your neighborhood, there's an expectation that your place look nice and if you don't do it, it will reflect poorly on you. In the same way, since athletes directly represent a university, they "must" be held to a higher standard or it could reflect poorly on the university.

Got it. I now understand.

 

[big kahuna]

Who on this board can name UM's starting quarterback? Now, who can name UM's president?

Just sayin.

 

[George Ferguson]

I'm curious how many of you "higher standard" ducks would preach as you do if NO Grizzly football player had been accused of or charged with a crime over the last year, yet 2 pole vaulters and a tennis player were accused of gang raping a girl. Would there be a discussion on EGRIZ? And yes, there are forums on here for other sports. Would you even care? Would you be going on and on about how your university has been shamed? Would you talk about stopping contributing to the GSA? The GSA is used for all sports you know. Somehow, I think If some of you took a look in the mirror you could not answer the question with an honest yes. The fact is, you ONLY care because it is the beloved football team. Most of you could care less about "Athletes being held to a higher standard". And no need to respond with answers like "football generates millions of dollars" or "football is the face of the university" ect...Because that's not the things you're staying in your posts. Everettgriz is saying "Student-Athletes Must be held to a hgiher standard." And people are saying they don't like "the university has been embarrased".