[Mick]

Listening to the players at the press conference, I had to be impressed with the integrity and motives of the rest of the team.  Whether right or wrong, they believe an injustice was done to their team mates and they have unified and rallied around them.  Unlike most people who only talk and fail to act, the players have put their bowl game and their scholarships on the line.  That takes courage.

But this looks to me like a tragedy in the making.  If indeed those 10 suspended players deserve their discipline, then I can't see the University giving in.  It also has to take a principled stance.  And if that means pulling out of the bowl and removing the scholarships for the entire team and starting a new team, then that might be what it has to do.  I imagine Minnesota would receive very high praise for taking a principled stance along those lines.  It would take years to recover.

At the core of the dispute is whether a university can discipline students whose behavior was deemed not worthy of prosecution.  Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can.  The fact that a prosecutor felt that he could not prove to a jury that the act was non consensual has nothing to do with the University's codes of ethics.  For example, a football player can be suspended for not showing up to a practice or for talking back to a coach, and those are obviously not offenses that a prosecutor would bring before a court of law.  So, do multiple teammates having sequential semi-public sex with a woman qualify for discipline, regardless of whether she consented?  Of course--any responsible person would recognize the dangers of the situation and high likelihood of it ending badly.  Whether or not it was a violation of the law, it was clearly a gross error in judgment and it did wind up having very negative consequences for many people.

So...I see this ending badly, either way.

I don't see the University giving in any way short of a total capitulation and apology from the football players...which they aren't going to get.  This might mean the end of the UM football team, no kidding.  If this goes unresolved, and the punishment sticks, I could see such a large number of players demanding transfers that it might mean the end of the team.

BTW, what's most interesting to me is that there is only one upperclassman -- a junior -- among the 10 suspended students.  The majority are freshmen.  The team must really believe in the boycott for them to rally around their young teammates.

[Mick]

Listening to the players at the press conference, I had to be impressed with the integrity and motives of the rest of the team.  Whether right or wrong, they believe an injustice was done to their team mates and they have unified and rallied around them.  Unlike most people who only talk and fail to act, the players have put their bowl game and their scholarships on the line.  That takes courage.

But this looks to me like a tragedy in the making.  If indeed those 10 suspended players deserve their discipline, then I can't see the University giving in.  It also has to take a principled stance.  And if that means pulling out of the bowl and removing the scholarships for the entire team and starting a new team, then that might be what it has to do.  I imagine Minnesota would receive very high praise for taking a principled stance along those lines.  It would take years to recover.

At the core of the dispute is whether a university can discipline students whose behavior was deemed not worthy of prosecution.  Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can.  The fact that a prosecutor felt that he could not prove to a jury that the act was non consensual has nothing to do with the University's codes of ethics.  For example, a football player can be suspended for not showing up to a practice or for talking back to a coach, and those are obviously not offenses that a prosecutor would bring before a court of law.  So, do multiple teammates having sequential semi-public sex with a woman qualify for discipline, regardless of whether she consented?  Of course--any responsible person would recognize the dangers of the situation and high likelihood of it ending badly.  Whether or not it was a violation of the law, it was clearly a gross error in judgment and it did wind up having very negative consequences for many people.

So...I see this ending badly, either way.

I don't see the University giving in any way short of a total capitulation and apology from the football players...which they aren't going to get.  This might mean the end of the UM football team, no kidding.  If this goes unresolved, and the punishment sticks, I could see such a large number of players demanding transfers that it might mean the end of the team.

BTW, what's most interesting to me is that there is only one upperclassman -- a junior -- among the 10 suspended students.  The majority are freshmen.  The team must really believe in the boycott for them to rally around their young teammates.

[Mick]

Listening to the players at the press conference, I had to be impressed with the integrity and motives of the rest of the team.  Whether right or wrong, they believe an injustice was done to their team mates and they have unified and rallied around them.  Unlike most people who only talk and fail to act, the players have put their bowl game and their scholarships on the line.  That takes courage.

But this looks to me like a tragedy in the making.  If indeed those 10 suspended players deserve their discipline, then I can't see the University giving in.  It also has to take a principled stance.  And if that means pulling out of the bowl and removing the scholarships for the entire team and starting a new team, then that might be what it has to do.  I imagine Minnesota would receive very high praise for taking a principled stance along those lines.  It would take years to recover.

At the core of the dispute is whether a university can discipline students whose behavior was deemed not worthy of prosecution.  Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can.  The fact that a prosecutor felt that he could not prove to a jury that the act was non consensual has nothing to do with the University's codes of ethics.  For example, a football player can be suspended for not showing up to a practice or for talking back to a coach, and those are obviously not offenses that a prosecutor would bring before a court of law.  So, do multiple teammates having sequential semi-public sex with a woman qualify for discipline, regardless of whether she consented?  Of course--any responsible person would recognize the dangers of the situation and high likelihood of it ending badly.  Whether or not it was a violation of the law, it was clearly a gross error in judgment and it did wind up having very negative consequences for many people.

So...I see this ending badly, either way.

I don't see the University giving in any way short of a total capitulation and apology from the football players...which they aren't going to get.  This might mean the end of the UM football team, no kidding.  If this goes unresolved, and the punishment sticks, I could see such a large number of players demanding transfers that it might mean the end of the team.

BTW, what's most interesting to me is that there is only one upperclassman -- a junior -- among the 10 suspended students.  The majority are freshmen.  The team must really believe in the boycott for them to rally around their young teammates.

[Mick]

Listening to the players at the press conference, I had to be impressed with the integrity and motives of the rest of the team.  Whether right or wrong, they believe an injustice was done to their team mates and they have unified and rallied around them.  Unlike most people who only talk and fail to act, the players have put their bowl game and their scholarships on the line.  That takes courage.

But this looks to me like a tragedy in the making.  If indeed those 10 suspended players deserve their discipline, then I can't see the University giving in.  It also has to take a principled stance.  And if that means pulling out of the bowl and removing the scholarships for the entire team and starting a new team, then that might be what it has to do.  I imagine Minnesota would receive very high praise for taking a principled stance along those lines.  It would take years to recover.

At the core of the dispute is whether a university can discipline students whose behavior was deemed not worthy of prosecution.  Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can.  The fact that a prosecutor felt that he could not prove to a jury that the act was non consensual has nothing to do with the University's codes of ethics.  For example, a football player can be suspended for not showing up to a practice or for talking back to a coach, and those are obviously not offenses that a prosecutor would bring before a court of law.  So, do multiple teammates having sequential semi-public sex with a woman qualify for discipline, regardless of whether she consented?  Of course--any responsible person would recognize the dangers of the situation and high likelihood of it ending badly.  Whether or not it was a violation of the law, it was clearly a gross error in judgment and it did wind up having very negative consequences for many people.

So...I see this ending badly, either way.

I don't see the University giving in any way short of a total capitulation and apology from the football players...which they aren't going to get.  This might mean the end of the UM football team, no kidding.  If this goes unresolved, and the punishment sticks, I could see such a large number of players demanding transfers that it might mean the end of the team.

BTW, what's most interesting to me is that there is only one upperclassman -- a junior -- among the 10 suspended students.  The majority are freshmen.  The team must really believe in the boycott for them to rally around their young teammates.

[CTcard]

Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can. 

In fact, according to the Department of Education universities are required to do so with respect to allegations of sexual harassment and assault.

[CTcard]

Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can. 

In fact, according to the Department of Education universities are required to do so with respect to allegations of sexual harassment and assault.

[CTcard]

Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can. 

In fact, according to the Department of Education universities are required to do so with respect to allegations of sexual harassment and assault.

[CTcard]

Can Universities have lower standards of evidence or higher standards of behavior than the law?  Of course they can. 

In fact, according to the Department of Education universities are required to do so with respect to allegations of sexual harassment and assault.

[TrumpCard]

If UM were to back down in any way from the proposed punishments of the 10 accused players, it would look like a capitulation to the boycott.  And this is not about "a gross error in judgment."  These aren't just football suspensions, they are expulsions and year-long suspensions from the university.  That clearly implies a finding of sexual assault by the university's investigative process.  The university first needs to be a place where ordinary students want to go to college.  I would not want to send my daughters to a school that gave unprincipled leniency to perpetrators of sexual assault.  So the university is not going to meet the demands of the football team, period.

The question is:  How will the university respond to the boycott, assuming it goes forward?  If the university revokes scholarships of the boycott participants, that will be the end of football at UM, at least for while.  Everyone will transfer and the program will have to start over, if that's even possible.  If the university thinks it can hold the football team together, I could imagine a decision to pardon the boycott participants.  Yes, the university will lose a lot of money, and yes, it sets a bad precedent, but the alternative may be worse.  I imagine that some players will transfer even if they have the option to stay on scholarship, but enough would probably stay to make it possible to rebuild instead of start over. 

[TrumpCard]

If UM were to back down in any way from the proposed punishments of the 10 accused players, it would look like a capitulation to the boycott.  And this is not about "a gross error in judgment."  These aren't just football suspensions, they are expulsions and year-long suspensions from the university.  That clearly implies a finding of sexual assault by the university's investigative process.  The university first needs to be a place where ordinary students want to go to college.  I would not want to send my daughters to a school that gave unprincipled leniency to perpetrators of sexual assault.  So the university is not going to meet the demands of the football team, period.

The question is:  How will the university respond to the boycott, assuming it goes forward?  If the university revokes scholarships of the boycott participants, that will be the end of football at UM, at least for while.  Everyone will transfer and the program will have to start over, if that's even possible.  If the university thinks it can hold the football team together, I could imagine a decision to pardon the boycott participants.  Yes, the university will lose a lot of money, and yes, it sets a bad precedent, but the alternative may be worse.  I imagine that some players will transfer even if they have the option to stay on scholarship, but enough would probably stay to make it possible to rebuild instead of start over. 

[TrumpCard]

If UM were to back down in any way from the proposed punishments of the 10 accused players, it would look like a capitulation to the boycott.  And this is not about "a gross error in judgment."  These aren't just football suspensions, they are expulsions and year-long suspensions from the university.  That clearly implies a finding of sexual assault by the university's investigative process.  The university first needs to be a place where ordinary students want to go to college.  I would not want to send my daughters to a school that gave unprincipled leniency to perpetrators of sexual assault.  So the university is not going to meet the demands of the football team, period.

The question is:  How will the university respond to the boycott, assuming it goes forward?  If the university revokes scholarships of the boycott participants, that will be the end of football at UM, at least for while.  Everyone will transfer and the program will have to start over, if that's even possible.  If the university thinks it can hold the football team together, I could imagine a decision to pardon the boycott participants.  Yes, the university will lose a lot of money, and yes, it sets a bad precedent, but the alternative may be worse.  I imagine that some players will transfer even if they have the option to stay on scholarship, but enough would probably stay to make it possible to rebuild instead of start over. 

[TrumpCard]

If UM were to back down in any way from the proposed punishments of the 10 accused players, it would look like a capitulation to the boycott.  And this is not about "a gross error in judgment."  These aren't just football suspensions, they are expulsions and year-long suspensions from the university.  That clearly implies a finding of sexual assault by the university's investigative process.  The university first needs to be a place where ordinary students want to go to college.  I would not want to send my daughters to a school that gave unprincipled leniency to perpetrators of sexual assault.  So the university is not going to meet the demands of the football team, period.

The question is:  How will the university respond to the boycott, assuming it goes forward?  If the university revokes scholarships of the boycott participants, that will be the end of football at UM, at least for while.  Everyone will transfer and the program will have to start over, if that's even possible.  If the university thinks it can hold the football team together, I could imagine a decision to pardon the boycott participants.  Yes, the university will lose a lot of money, and yes, it sets a bad precedent, but the alternative may be worse.  I imagine that some players will transfer even if they have the option to stay on scholarship, but enough would probably stay to make it possible to rebuild instead of start over. 

[TreesAndBirds]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

[TreesAndBirds]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

[TreesAndBirds]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

[TreesAndBirds]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

[dabigv13]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

It's a fun idea, but they'd be slaughtered. They'd probably be slaughtered by a D2 school. The playbook would be incredibly limited, and the players and coaches would put about 20% of the effort in as WSU. And then there's a whole host of liability and financial concerns. Maybe back in the 40s something like this could'be been pulled off.

Also the Minnesota HC is covering himself in glory here...Check out @GoldenGopherHFC's Tweet: https://twitter.com/GoldenGopherHFC/stat...11877?s=09

Better world? Seriously???

[dabigv13]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

It's a fun idea, but they'd be slaughtered. They'd probably be slaughtered by a D2 school. The playbook would be incredibly limited, and the players and coaches would put about 20% of the effort in as WSU. And then there's a whole host of liability and financial concerns. Maybe back in the 40s something like this could'be been pulled off.

Also the Minnesota HC is covering himself in glory here...Check out @GoldenGopherHFC's Tweet: https://twitter.com/GoldenGopherHFC/stat...11877?s=09

Better world? Seriously???

[dabigv13]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

It's a fun idea, but they'd be slaughtered. They'd probably be slaughtered by a D2 school. The playbook would be incredibly limited, and the players and coaches would put about 20% of the effort in as WSU. And then there's a whole host of liability and financial concerns. Maybe back in the 40s something like this could'be been pulled off.

Also the Minnesota HC is covering himself in glory here...Check out @GoldenGopherHFC's Tweet: https://twitter.com/GoldenGopherHFC/stat...11877?s=09

Better world? Seriously???

[dabigv13]

Interesting idea....big 10 all stars from non bowl teams replace UM. Although doesnt seem very feasible in short time frame.

http://www.hammerandrails.com/2016/12/15...am?ref=yfp

It's a fun idea, but they'd be slaughtered. They'd probably be slaughtered by a D2 school. The playbook would be incredibly limited, and the players and coaches would put about 20% of the effort in as WSU. And then there's a whole host of liability and financial concerns. Maybe back in the 40s something like this could'be been pulled off.

Also the Minnesota HC is covering himself in glory here...Check out @GoldenGopherHFC's Tweet: https://twitter.com/GoldenGopherHFC/stat...11877?s=09

Better world? Seriously???

[TRD]

I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(

[TRD]

I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(

[TRD]

I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(

[TRD]

I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(

[paloalto]

This is not going to end well for the Minnesota football program.  All the articles I read indicate the university is not going to back down.  From what I read, the players could have tried to discuss this more with the administration before going public.  They said some of the players were not present.  If they could have provided some evidence to the administration it could have been helpful. 

Everyone will likely end up losing and the players will not get their demands.

[paloalto]

This is not going to end well for the Minnesota football program.  All the articles I read indicate the university is not going to back down.  From what I read, the players could have tried to discuss this more with the administration before going public.  They said some of the players were not present.  If they could have provided some evidence to the administration it could have been helpful. 

Everyone will likely end up losing and the players will not get their demands.

[paloalto]

This is not going to end well for the Minnesota football program.  All the articles I read indicate the university is not going to back down.  From what I read, the players could have tried to discuss this more with the administration before going public.  They said some of the players were not present.  If they could have provided some evidence to the administration it could have been helpful. 

Everyone will likely end up losing and the players will not get their demands.

[paloalto]

This is not going to end well for the Minnesota football program.  All the articles I read indicate the university is not going to back down.  From what I read, the players could have tried to discuss this more with the administration before going public.  They said some of the players were not present.  If they could have provided some evidence to the administration it could have been helpful. 

Everyone will likely end up losing and the players will not get their demands.

[OutsiderFan]

I don't get why the admin needs to threaten loss of scholarships and expulsions.  Yes the school will take a financial hit, but the players are sacrificing something too. 

Frankly, it sure seems to me UM has bigger fish to fry than worrying about playing in a bowl game anyway. The time that would have been spent on the game can now be spent dealing with the much more important issue facing the university and its students.

[OutsiderFan]

I don't get why the admin needs to threaten loss of scholarships and expulsions.  Yes the school will take a financial hit, but the players are sacrificing something too. 

Frankly, it sure seems to me UM has bigger fish to fry than worrying about playing in a bowl game anyway. The time that would have been spent on the game can now be spent dealing with the much more important issue facing the university and its students.

[OutsiderFan]

I don't get why the admin needs to threaten loss of scholarships and expulsions.  Yes the school will take a financial hit, but the players are sacrificing something too. 

Frankly, it sure seems to me UM has bigger fish to fry than worrying about playing in a bowl game anyway. The time that would have been spent on the game can now be spent dealing with the much more important issue facing the university and its students.

[OutsiderFan]

I don't get why the admin needs to threaten loss of scholarships and expulsions.  Yes the school will take a financial hit, but the players are sacrificing something too. 

Frankly, it sure seems to me UM has bigger fish to fry than worrying about playing in a bowl game anyway. The time that would have been spent on the game can now be spent dealing with the much more important issue facing the university and its students.

[Phogge]

[quote author=TreesAndBirds link=topic=16291.msg182648#msg182648 date=1481858000]
I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(
[/quote]

I love the Bills offense. McCoy and Taylor are electric. Better draft a defense however.

[Phogge]

[quote author=TreesAndBirds link=topic=16291.msg182648#msg182648 date=1481858000]
I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(
[/quote]

I love the Bills offense. McCoy and Taylor are electric. Better draft a defense however.

[Phogge]

[quote author=TreesAndBirds link=topic=16291.msg182648#msg182648 date=1481858000]
I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(
[/quote]

I love the Bills offense. McCoy and Taylor are electric. Better draft a defense however.

[Phogge]

[quote author=TreesAndBirds link=topic=16291.msg182648#msg182648 date=1481858000]
I think the Browns are looking for a game they could win this year and would probably be favored against WSU.

Ummm, they are playing my Rex Ryan coached Buffalo Bills. They have a shot at an NFL win this weekend  :(
[/quote]

I love the Bills offense. McCoy and Taylor are electric. Better draft a defense however.

[dabigv13]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...liday-bowl

Boycott over, Minnesota will play. No word on any concessions.

[dabigv13]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...liday-bowl

Boycott over, Minnesota will play. No word on any concessions.

[dabigv13]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...liday-bowl

Boycott over, Minnesota will play. No word on any concessions.

[dabigv13]

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...liday-bowl

Boycott over, Minnesota will play. No word on any concessions.