Why should college athletes be held to higher standards than others?

[PlayerRep]

I am beginning to think that you won't say the name of the engineering firm because you made up what you said.

Because I think you are a "stalker", that's why.

Not a stalker, but looks like you are a fibber.

II repeat: I think you are an internet stalker, and have thought so for years. And, if I am wrong, I do think you spend an inordinate amount of time with Griz athletes and hangers on..

Reading and posting on eGriz, reading Griz articles, and having a good memory does not equal stalking.

I spend almost no time with Griz athletes.

For someone who brags about all his schools and degrees, you dont seem to be very smart.

 

[ordigger]

Name the engineering group, and I will see if what you are saying is correct.

How about USC med school? Young woman OD's when with the older dean in his hotel room, and meth is found in the room, this gets reported to the school, and the deans stays on the payroll, keeps seeing patients, and keeps representing the school. School keeps getting contacted by the LA Times for a year, and nothing changes with the dean.

I no longer have interest in that USC, sorry. And, you being such a sleuth, find out which of the two major engineering groups point you to the door for a DUI...you can do it. I am beginning to think you a person that is not highethically inclined.

I am beginning to think that you won't say the name of the engineering firm because you made up what you said.

Because I think you are a "stalker", that's why.

Understatement of the year. He even admits it ....

Name the engineering group, and I will see if what you are saying is correct.

 

[PlayerRep]

Following up on 75's comments about the brand and Engstrom, how about the Dean who bungled the Saudi student and Jordan Johnson sexual assault matters--and probably many more. Talk about harming the brand. And the Dean, and Engstrom to some extent, cost UM a lot of money to pay the Johnson settlement, related
legal fees and time, and now legal fees fighting Krakauer.

 

[PlayerRep]

I no longer have interest in that USC, sorry. And, you being such a sleuth, find out which of the two major engineering groups point you to the door for a DUI...you can do it. I am beginning to think you a person that is not highethically inclined.

I am beginning to think that you won't say the name of the engineering firm because you made up what you said.

Because I think you are a "stalker", that's why.

Understatement of the year. He even admits it ....

Name the engineering group, and I will see if what you are saying is correct.

It isn't stalking to contact a company about its employment policies. The policies may be online. Seems
Odd that a big engineering company would have a policy to terminate people who got a dui.

Are you stalking beau Donaldson?

 

[ordigger]

I am beginning to think that you won't say the name of the engineering firm because you made up what you said.

Because I think you are a "stalker", that's why.

Understatement of the year. He even admits it ....

Name the engineering group, and I will see if what you are saying is correct.

It isn't stalking to contact a company about its employment policies. The policies may be online. Seems
Odd that a big engineering company would have a policy to terminate people who got a dui.

Are stalking beau Donaldson?

lol.....For a guy that likes to talk about how smart he is, sometimes you come up with the dumbest things. As for termination of employees, it is very common for any company in the oilfield to terminate an employee for a DUI. You pop on anything and you're gone. Red light. A very big no-no. It may not be their written policy but I've seen it happen.

 

[PlayerRep]

Because I think you are a "stalker", that's why.

Understatement of the year. He even admits it ....

Name the engineering group, and I will see if what you are saying is correct.

It isn't stalking to contact a company about its employment policies. The policies may be online. Seems
Odd that a big engineering company would have a policy to terminate people who got a dui.

Are stalking beau Donaldson?

lol.....For a guy that likes to talk about how smart he is, sometimes you come up with the dumbest things. As for termination of employees, it is very common for any company in the oilfield to terminate an employee for a DUI. You pop on anything and you're gone. Red light. A very big no-no. It may not be their written policy but I've seen it happen.

College football is not the oil fields. Of course, there are some industries and some jobs that have policies with dui's as a cause for termination. How about journalism? Do people who work at newspaper get terminated for dui's?

 

[EverettGriz]

There are many, many reasons. I'll list just two:

(1) because it is a privilege to represent the University of Montana, and before you earn the honor of doning a uniform that says "Montana" on the front, you make a commitment that you will not do anything to harm that brand. Part of sports is teaching about honoring one's commitments, and that there are consequences to one's actions.

(2) for precisely the same reason that you do not brag incessantly about having chess club members at your cabin.

I am glad someone else sees it as a privilage to wear Montana on their jersey contrary to PR.

I find it interesting that posters who have never worn a college football jersey on the playing, i.e. haven't played the game, believe it is a privilege that requires intense scrutiny and extreme punishment beyond what is required by law (and even the athletic code of conduct).

I find it interesting that posters who cannot offer any knowledgeable counter-argument when they're being beaten and bloodied in a discussion instead turn to deflection with meaningless phrases such as "never played the game".

In other words, don't bring that weak-assed shit in here. Do you not agree that every athlete at Montana makes a commitment to the University, to the staff, to their teammates and to themselves that they will, in fact, be held to a higher standard than the average student purely BECAUSE they're a student-athlete? They do that knowingly and willingly, because they understand that with great privilege comes great responsibility.

 

[UMGriz75]

Following up on 75's comments about the brand and Engstrom, how about the Dean who bungled the Saudi student and Jordan Johnson sexual assault matters--and probably many more. Talk about harming the brand. And the Dean, and Engstrom to some extent, cost UM a lot of money to pay the Johnson settlement, related legal fees and time, and now legal fees fighting Krakauer.

This wasn't a staff that handled anything with either professionalism or tact. It was bungled all the way around and, at the end of day, the only "punishment" was to the kid who knew the girl since they were neighbors at Frenchtown and had grown up together. Engstrom couldn't plead guilty fast enough, but he was sure that by making "publicity" out it, he would be the hero. Instead, he was the knave, and UM continues to lose enrollment and funding. Hundred of people/families have lost their UM jobs thanks to Royce Engstrom's fecklessness.

He didn't even bother to read the final "Settlement Agreement," just "tell me where to sign."

And UM became "infamous."

 

[PlayerRep]

There are many, many reasons. I'll list just two:

(1) because it is a privilege to represent the University of Montana, and before you earn the honor of doning a uniform that says "Montana" on the front, you make a commitment that you will not do anything to harm that brand. Part of sports is teaching about honoring one's commitments, and that there are consequences to one's actions.

(2) for precisely the same reason that you do not brag incessantly about having chess club members at your cabin.

I am glad someone else sees it as a privilage to wear Montana on their jersey contrary to PR.

I find it interesting that posters who have never worn a college football jersey on the playing, i.e. haven't played the game, believe it is a privilege that requires intense scrutiny and extreme punishment beyond what is required by law (and even the athletic code of conduct).

I find it interesting that posters who cannot offer any knowledgeable counter-argument when they're being beaten and bloodied in a discussion instead turn to deflection with meaningless phrases such as "never played the game".

In other words, don't bring that weak-assed shit in here. Do you not agree that every athlete at Montana makes a commitment to the University, to the staff, to their teammates and to themselves that they will, in fact, be held to a higher standard than the average student purely BECAUSE they're a student-athlete? They do that knowingly and willingly, because they understand that with great privilege comes great responsibility.

Well, we all know you never played the game. You became the head of an alumni group, and then became a joke in the athletic department because you were such suck up without any knowledge of the game of football. Then you lied about your tennis prowess.

Yes, I agree with much of your second paragraph. But that doesn't mean that it's some great "privilege " to play for the Griz, which translates into being held to some incredibly high standard. and allows unknowledgeable fans like yourself to criticize them at every turn.

However, none of that means that players should be crucified for mistakes, especially small mistakes. You really don't understand, do you? Pretty pathetic.

Weak assed shit? Pretty funny. Nobody on the board has more weak assed shit than you. You are a total joke when it comes to Griz athletics. Does anyone want to step up to support Everett, by saying what a knowledgeable football poster he is? Can't wait to see this avalanche of support. Can't imagine that even the total idiots will support you.

 

[mtgrizrule]

I am glad someone else sees it as a privilage to wear Montana on their jersey contrary to PR.

I find it interesting that posters who have never worn a college football jersey on the playing, i.e. haven't played the game, believe it is a privilege that requires intense scrutiny and extreme punishment beyond what is required by law (and even the athletic code of conduct).

I find it interesting that posters who cannot offer any knowledgeable counter-argument when they're being beaten and bloodied in a discussion instead turn to deflection with meaningless phrases such as "never played the game".

In other words, don't bring that weak-assed shit in here. Do you not agree that every athlete at Montana makes a commitment to the University, to the staff, to their teammates and to themselves that they will, in fact, be held to a higher standard than the average student purely BECAUSE they're a student-athlete? They do that knowingly and willingly, because they understand that with great privilege comes great responsibility.

Well, we all know you never played the game. You became the head of an alumni group, and then became a joke in the athletic department because you were such suck up without any knowledge of the game of football. Then you lied about your tennis prowess.

Yes, I agree with much of your second paragraph. But that doesn't mean that it's some great "privilege " to play for the Griz, which translates into being held to some incredibly high standard. and allows unknowledgeable fans like yourself to criticize them at every turn.

However, none of that means that players should be crucified for mistakes, especially small mistakes. You really don't understand, do you? Pretty pathetic.

Weak assed shit? Pretty funny. Nobody on the board has more weak assed shit than you. You are a total joke when it comes to Griz athletics. Does anyone want to step up to support Everett, by saying what a knowledgeable football poster he is? Can't wait to see this avalanche of support. Can't imagine that even the total idiots will support you.

PR, you are right, Everett won't get much, if any, support on this. However, the lack of support will likely be due to not derailing this thread further, or getting into an unnecessary battle with you. For the sake of many, I honestly hope we don't go into further derailing a thread, or having yet another unwanted pissing match here.

 

[EverettGriz]

Rule, I'm curious: do you disagree with my position on this, that it's a privilege to be a student-athlete at Montana,and doing so comes with heightened scrutiny? I fail to see how explaining why wearing a Montana uniform demands higher personal responsibility is derailing a thread with this particular topic, but I guess I'll leave that to a few self-appointed board content managers.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

The simple answer is they are being provided free college and represent that institution.

I disagree with how our nation as a whole considers marijuana use...the NCAA may be worse.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Rule, I'm curious: do you disagree with my position on this, that it's a privilege to be a student-athlete at Montana,and doing so comes with heightened scrutiny? I fail to see how explaining why wearing a Montana uniform demands higher personal responsibility is derailing a thread with this particular topic, but I guess I'll leave that to a few self-appointed board content managers.

I think you may only find two people on this board that disagree that its a privilege to be provided with a scholarship to wear the uniform and play football or any sport for the University of Montana. Not only does it help you through college in general...it opens many many avenues after college that most kids arent exposed to.

The pride and the tradition of the Montana Grizzlies will not be entrusted to the TIMID or the WEAK.......

AKA...if you cant handle the pride and the tradition to be held to a higher standard....dont take the scholly asshole!!!!

 

[EverettGriz]

Rule, I'm curious: do you disagree with my position on this, that it's a privilege to be a student-athlete at Montana,and doing so comes with heightened scrutiny? I fail to see how explaining why wearing a Montana uniform demands higher personal responsibility is derailing a thread with this particular topic, but I guess I'll leave that to a few self-appointed board content managers.

I think you may only find two people on this board that disagree that its a privilege to be provided with a scholarship to wear the uniform and play football or any sport for the University of Montana. Not only does it help you through college in general...it opens many many avenues after college that most kids arent exposed to.

The pride and the tradition of the Montana Grizzlies will not be entrusted to the TIMID or the WEAK.......

AKA...if you cant handle the pride and the tradition to be held to a higher standard....dont take the scholly asshole!!!!

Boo-effin-YA! Right on the money as usual, BGF.

 

[Ursa Major]

I can't understand how anyone wouldn't agree with this unless they have a systemic and long-term agenda to mitigate the criminal behavior of student athletes for no other reason than because they are members of a football team.

Character matters.

Worst thread of the year/POTY

 

[fanofzoo]

Teachers in small rural towns are held to high standards.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

You do realize that things like this would be the "standard" if not for people that keep trying to undercut "the standard" hence the need for "high standards".

 

[PlayerRep]

I can't understand how anyone wouldn't agree with this unless they have a systemic and long-term agenda to mitigate the criminal behavior of student athletes for no other reason than because they are members of a football team.

Character matters.

Worst thread of the year/POTY

The question in the thread is WHY? Not WHETHER? What is the reason and rationale? I don't think anyone would disagree that college athletes, especially football players and to a lesser extent basketball players (and I would say anyone who represents the university), should be subject to a code that promotes and requires good behavior, at least in this day and age.

I find it hypocritical and unfair that college football players are actually held to an even higher standards, get their mistakes publicized and often put on the front page, and get crucified by some on the internet.

I'm sorry but I just don't think a normal dui, by a player who has not been a problem or gotten into a lot of trouble, should disqualify the player from playing for the program or result in a huge suspension. A normal dui is a misdemeanor. Some citations end up getting pled down or being dropped. Some don't. There are many worse things that could happen. Murder, sexual assault, robbery, burglary, felony assault, and most anything that is a felony (except maybe have one illegal pill at a party).

I find it incredibly hypocritical that texting/driving and extreme speeding don't get the same attention or result as a dui, even though, depending on the study, it is at least as dangerous and probably more dangerous. This is not just in college athletics, but everywhere. My impression is that many on this forum would not look upon a texting/driving, or big speeding ticket, as as harshly as they do with dui.

I'm fine with following the athletic code of conduct, and of allowing the coach to take separate action. People put considerable work into putting the code together.

No one is trying to promote or support criminal behavior in college athletics. What a BS comment, by a poster who recently makes BS comments and doesn't know what he is talking about. However, some people do believe in fundamental fairness and general consistency.

Of course, character matters. However, it is not possible to judge or know the character of someone like Strahm by reading that he was cited for a dui. Character is much much more than making a single mistake. The coaches know whether a senior, and senior starter, has character. While I don't know, I would guess that the coaches would rate Strahm fairly high on the character scale.

My view is that a lot of people, including some of you, take pleasure in seeing certain people or higher profile people, get into trouble. To me, that shows lack of character, and as you said, character matters.

I had to laugh at some of the rationales and comments. A dui hurts the "brand". Sure, a dui results in some bad press, but really, the brand doesn't suffer anymore than perhaps a tiny tiny bit. And then 75 points out how Engstrom has almost killed the brand (and ruined the school). And the Dean. And people like Everett give them a pass, and even used to cheer lead for them, but want to clobber a kid who goofs up and get cited for a dui. Where's the prospective?

And on privilege, I just don't agree that it is some huge "privilege" to play college sports. To me, that is just some cliche. Sure, it is a small privilege or honor, and people will say that, but at least some people like me, who did play college sports, didn't see it as some big privilege. But in this day and age of all the neutral stuff that athletes say to the press, they often just spew player-speak, just like coaches learned coach-speak.

And I stand by my observations that posters like Ursa never played the game, at least at any higher level. I can see it in their posts.

 

[ari gold]

The question in the thread is WHY? Not WHETHER? What is the reason and rationale? I don't think anyone would disagree that college athletes, especially football players and to a lesser extent basketball players (and I would say anyone who represents the university), should be subject to a code that promotes and requires good behavior, at least in this day and age.

I find it hypocritical and unfair that college football players are actually held to an even higher standards, get their mistakes publicized and often put on the front page, and get crucified by some on the internet.

I agree with your thought process here, as it really shouldn't be news. But, to play devils advocate, one could argue that there would be no news if this principle existed. If the president of the united states got a DUI is that news? He is just a guy like everyone else, but his affiliation with the presidency would make it newsworthy. News exists because people write about things that intrigue the readers, whether it is negatively or positively.
Again, I am on your side with this. If I got DUI it wouldn't be newsworthy, so why should it be when someone else gets one, football player or not. Just the way the world seems to work these days.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

I can't understand how anyone wouldn't agree with this unless they have a systemic and long-term agenda to mitigate the criminal behavior of student athletes for no other reason than because they are members of a football team.

Character matters.

Worst thread of the year/POTY

The question in the thread is WHY? Not WHETHER? What is the reason and rationale? I don't think anyone would disagree that college athletes, especially football players and to a lesser extent basketball players (and I would say anyone who represents the university), should be subject to a code that promotes and requires good behavior, at least in this day and age.

I find it hypocritical and unfair that college football players are actually held to an even higher standards, get their mistakes publicized and often put on the front page, and get crucified by some on the internet.

I'm sorry but I just don't think a normal dui, by a player who has not been a problem or gotten into a lot of trouble, should disqualify the player from playing for the program or result in a huge suspension. A normal dui is a misdemeanor. Some citations end up getting pled down or being dropped. Some don't. There are many worse things that could happen. Murder, sexual assault, robbery, burglary, felony assault, and most anything that is a felony (except maybe have one illegal pill at a party).

I find it incredibly hypocritical that texting/driving and extreme speeding don't get the same attention or result as a dui, even though, depending on the study, it is at least as dangerous and probably more dangerous. This is not just in college athletics, but everywhere. My impression is that many on this forum would not look upon a texting/driving, or big speeding ticket, as as harshly as they do with dui.

I'm fine with following the athletic code of conduct, and of allowing the coach to take separate action. People put considerable work into putting the code together.

No one is trying to promote or support criminal behavior in college athletics. What a BS comment, by a poster who recently makes BS comments and doesn't know what he is talking about. However, some people do believe in fundamental fairness and general consistency.

Of course, character matters. However, it is not possible to judge or know the character of someone like Strahm by reading that he was cited for a dui. Character is much much more than making a single mistake. The coaches know whether a senior, and senior starter, has character. While I don't know, I would guess that the coaches would rate Strahm fairly high on the character scale.

My view is that a lot of people, including some of you, take pleasure in seeing certain people or higher profile people, get into trouble. To me, that shows lack of character, and as you said, character matters.

I had to laugh at some of the rationales and comments. A dui hurts the "brand". Sure, a dui results in some bad press, but really, the brand doesn't suffer anymore than perhaps a tiny tiny bit. And then 75 points out how Engstrom has almost killed the brand (and ruined the school). And the Dean. And people like Everett give them a pass, and even used to cheer lead for them, but want to clobber a kid who goofs up and get cited for a dui. Where's the prospective?

And on privilege, I just don't agree that it is some huge "privilege" to play college sports. To me, that is just some cliche. Sure, it is a small privilege or honor, and people will say that, but at least some people like me, who did play college sports, didn't see it as some big privilege. But in this day and age of all the neutral stuff that athletes say to the press, they often just spew player-speak, just like coaches learned coach-speak.

And I stand by my observations that posters like Ursa never played the game, at least at any higher level. I can see it in their posts.

So receiving a discount or maybe full discount ( I dont know your scholly status when you played there) to go to school at Dartmouth, which is a very expensive school, isn't a privilege?

If you receive a scholly and have to pay less or sometimes nothing for your athletic ability it is your REWARD for being good at something that most people aren't as good at.

If you mess up, or make the place look bad that gives you the reward, you should expect that place to take your reward away.

I dont understand the your questioning this process. Unless it is your opinion that once given a REWARD you can mess up as much as possible, get into as much trouble as you'd like all while being able to keep your REWARD?