[Goose]

On our disagreement on Bailey:

The sleaziest, most dangerous, most inexcusable play I have ever seen as a Stanford fan was by Leigh Torrence in the Big Game on a punt coverage when in his frustration he just annihilated the defenseless Cal punt returner Tim Mixon in the 2004 Big Game blowout. It was the coup de grace on Teevens' tenure. One of our most admired, disciplined, and classy players of all becoming full thug, far worse than pretty much anything I have ever seen an opposing player do to us in the last 40 years. He was frustrated. I give our players a lot more grace than the highly paid coaches responsible for the demoralization.

We do look at it differently. One of the supposed virtues of athletic competition is that it helps one learn to deal with demoralization and learn how to use that emotion to make you better. Of course, another version of that is that athletics doesn't build character, it reveals it.

That big game was a mess. I don't actually remember the game but I do remember the season. Trent Edwards is the guy who totally deserved to be demoralized that year. Regarding the game itself:
https://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/Th...633950.php

Quoting Tedford

"It's always very scary when a guy is defenseless when fielding a punt," Tedford said. "It's our job to see that our guys play with class and don't do things like that.
I think that was a little retaliation and frustration. If that had been one of our players, he would not have seen the field for a long, long time. But I know Buddy, and that was not a reflection of him at all. That's not what he stands for."

Of course, Tedford himself wasn't necessarily a paragon of virtue. Teevens was fired and never had to decide how to deal with Leigh Torrence. Torrence was a 5th year senior, so that was his last Stanford performance in any case. He signed as an UDFA with Green Bay and played 8 seasons in the NFL. He too could "make plays".

David Bailey isn't in that situation, nor is TT. How will TT deal with it? Will Bailey "see the field"? What does TT stand for?

IMO everybody involved with Stanford Football is "demoralized". The coaches didn't create the demoralization by themselves. The players are the ones that play (or don't). I give none of them any extra "grace". They all signed up for where they are right now. They all need to be better. TT can't go all Woody Hayes on us when things go wrong. That will get him fired. Similarly David Bailey can't behave like a thug and expect no consequences. I don't buy the idea that adversity excuses bad conduct. It may need to be a definite learning experience.

I fully understand others may not quite see it that way :-).

[Goose]

On our disagreement on Bailey:

The sleaziest, most dangerous, most inexcusable play I have ever seen as a Stanford fan was by Leigh Torrence in the Big Game on a punt coverage when in his frustration he just annihilated the defenseless Cal punt returner Tim Mixon in the 2004 Big Game blowout. It was the coup de grace on Teevens' tenure. One of our most admired, disciplined, and classy players of all becoming full thug, far worse than pretty much anything I have ever seen an opposing player do to us in the last 40 years. He was frustrated. I give our players a lot more grace than the highly paid coaches responsible for the demoralization.

We do look at it differently. One of the supposed virtues of athletic competition is that it helps one learn to deal with demoralization and learn how to use that emotion to make you better. Of course, another version of that is that athletics doesn't build character, it reveals it.

That big game was a mess. I don't actually remember the game but I do remember the season. Trent Edwards is the guy who totally deserved to be demoralized that year. Regarding the game itself:
https://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/Th...633950.php

Quoting Tedford

"It's always very scary when a guy is defenseless when fielding a punt," Tedford said. "It's our job to see that our guys play with class and don't do things like that.
I think that was a little retaliation and frustration. If that had been one of our players, he would not have seen the field for a long, long time. But I know Buddy, and that was not a reflection of him at all. That's not what he stands for."

Of course, Tedford himself wasn't necessarily a paragon of virtue. Teevens was fired and never had to decide how to deal with Leigh Torrence. Torrence was a 5th year senior, so that was his last Stanford performance in any case. He signed as an UDFA with Green Bay and played 8 seasons in the NFL. He too could "make plays".

David Bailey isn't in that situation, nor is TT. How will TT deal with it? Will Bailey "see the field"? What does TT stand for?

IMO everybody involved with Stanford Football is "demoralized". The coaches didn't create the demoralization by themselves. The players are the ones that play (or don't). I give none of them any extra "grace". They all signed up for where they are right now. They all need to be better. TT can't go all Woody Hayes on us when things go wrong. That will get him fired. Similarly David Bailey can't behave like a thug and expect no consequences. I don't buy the idea that adversity excuses bad conduct. It may need to be a definite learning experience.

I fully understand others may not quite see it that way :-).