Another uninformed Dorsey/Ann Arbor.com comment

Submitted by bronxblue on
I noticed this article over at thebiglead.com, noticed it was written by tyduffy, and figured it would be a hatchet job. Good to know I wasn't disappointed. The premise is that Birkett should not have been reprimanded for his "snarky" comment regarding Dorsey in the chat a couple of days ago. Now, without rehashing what others have said, I'll remind people that we are talking about a grown man on one side, with a captive audience and the ability to have his voice heard across a broad range of mediums, and a teenager who was just accepted to the University of Michigan to play football but with some skeletons in his closet. Those skeletons were dealt with by the legal system and his record is officially clean, but in the court of public opinion he certainly has a stained and imperfect reputation. I think what people like tyduffy forget is that we are still talking about teenagers when we rail against recruits, and while this is not necessarily the case with Dorsey, oftentimes they come from less-than-ideal backgrounds both socially and economically. For some reason, we expect these young boys to act like professional athletes, scholars, and good citizens, completely ignoring the fact that many of their peers could barely qualify in one or two of these categories when they step onto campuses across America. 15- and 16-year-olds make mistakes all the time, breaking laws and social norms in ways that are perplexing to the 20, 30, 40, and 50-somethings that love to pass judgment on them. That doesn't mean we should condone delinquency in minors, but we should also not brand them as incurable and cast them off forever. To do so would be an unnecessary overreaction to the maturation process that everyone has gone through in their lives and needlessly imposing draconian punishment on relatively minor offenses; the proverbial "throwing out the baby with the bath water." It is clear that Demar Dorsey was involved in some activities that, at best immature and at worst criminal. But the legal system took stock of these offenses and meted out a punishment (community service and rehabilitation) it felt was appropriate. Now if you have an issue with the punishment, take it up with the Florida legal system, but don't impugn Dorsey's character simply because he complied with their orders. Tyduffy counters that while the legal system may be content, society at large should not be some quick to accept Dorsey back:
If someone pled down from convictions in two sexual assault cases and was acquitted at trial in a third, he doesn’t deserve to be treated as upstanding when he applies to coach the girls’ soccer team. AnnArbor.com acting as though he’s wholly innocent is laughable.
Now, beyond getting into the extremely tenuous and misguided logic applied here (comparing a potential rapist to a 17-year-old who stole some electronics), the author clearly is of the opinion that Dorsey is guilty of greater offenses than he admitted to, and that he escaped his "proper" punishment. Now, as an equal citizen under law, men like Tyduffy and Birkett is entitled to their opinions; but so is Rich Rodriguez, the UM athletic department, the admissions office, and everyone else who signed off on Dorsey being admitted to UM. Society allows you to be unhappy, but it doesn't mean everyone else has to share in your unhappiness. But the author goes on to argue the rather obvious:
Demar Dorsey is receiving a second chance, because he’s a talented football player. As a mere student, that marred past most likely would have kept him from being admitted. Apparently, improving the football team trumps kids feeling safe with their laptops in the dorms.
Yes, Demar Dorsey received a second chance because he is good at football. And guess what - this favortism has been going on since the beginning of organized sports, and will continue well after Demar Dorsey leaves UM. Of course, if both his parents were alums, he was a valedictorian from a disadvantage region, he penned a popular or critically-lauded short story, or was a genius programmer, perhaps his transgressions would also have been overlooked. We have no idea how often such "exceptions" are made for other students because those stories aren't bandied about on talk radio, dragged out in excruciating detail by talking heads on ESPN, or haphazardly vilified by largely anonymous bloggers. They occur behind closed doors and in dusky admissions offices across America, and those individuals go on with their lives. Some surely fall into recidivism, but others learn from their mistakes and become upstanding members of society. They are given second chances because someone, somewhere decides that just because you make a mistake when you were 17 shouldn't define who you are for the rest of your life. Now this post has gone on for far longer than I expected, so I'll be brief - Birkett's comment probably wasn't meant to be as offensive as it appeared, but it was also immature and unnecessary. This was acknowledged, and both sides would be best served to move on. But as for authors like Tyduffy who demand their pound of flesh from everyone who seems to have "beaten" the system, remember that just because you choose not to give someone the benefit of the doubt doesn't mean they shouldn't be given a second chance to prove you wrong.
Annarbor.com
Dorsey
thebiglead

Comments

Section 1

March 17th, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^

And that was the problem. A web-chat moderator at his organization's own website (wisely) "censored" the trashy, content-free comment by one "DemDors." The problem was that they couldn't, and didn't, "censor" Birkett! [One of the initial problematic parts of this story was that Birkett's comment, standing alone, looked even worse than it was; there was no context because the offending commenter's post was moderated out, leaving Birkett's post standing alone. It might make Birkett look worse, but of course it is just as clearly proof of Birkett's own bad judgment in the eyes of his own moderator, in wading into a pointless episode of Dorsey trashtalk.] It is akin to a radio call-in show where a caller utters some comment that is deleted by the seven-second delay -- but then the host, inexplicably, repeats the expletive, saying, "Yeah, #^@% that $#!&..." Nobody protested any intelligent discussion of Dorsey. What has happened is that Birkett's own editors have "censured" Birkett and apologized for him. "Censure" is not the equal of "censor," although the latter, as a prior restraint or otherwise, would have saved Birkett and AA.com a lot of trouble. Birkett just needs some adult supervision. Sort of like your cleavage-filled, Maxim-with-a-pointspread weblog.

Joined: 06/29/2009

MGoPoints: 16535

bronxblue

March 17th, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^

Ty: Good to see you stopped by to defend your original post. As an initial comment, I usually find your posts interesting and insightful when they fall into your wheelhouse - such as the Haiti/Paul Shirley comment. You are a good writer and a knowledgeable sports fan, and I respect what you have to say. But when it comes to UM, I've found your posts to be consistently reactionary and a bit cavalier, based on a couple of sources with limited credibility. But that's not why you stopped by, so I'll address your points in the only way I know how - verbosely. I won't care if you never read this. Just as you claim I mischaracterize your post because I don't agree with your sentiment, you attack mine because it clearly doesn't jive with yours. As I stated, you may feel that Dorsey owes you something more before you'll accept him into the Michigan family, but that doesn't mean everyone else has to agree or care about that. A vast array of individuals at UM did their due-diligence and felt that Dorsey should be admitted to UM, and my guess is that they were more connected and knowledgeable about the myriad issues surrounding his admissions than anyone on the blogosphere. And the legal system in Florida decided that accepting Dorsey's plea bargain was appropriate for the two offenses, and also found insufficient evidence to acquit him on the third charge. Now again, this might not be enough proof for you, but in the eyes of a major university and the legal system of one of the most populous states in America, Demar Dorsey has met their standards for a second chance. (And as a lawyer, I can state with some experience that pleading down to a lesser offense does not mean the individual is even guilty of that offense; oftentimes it is just "easier" to accept a lesser offense and move on with your life than to be dragged through a court process and place faith that a somewhat-arbitrary collection of your peers or a single judge will rule correctly. ) As for point 1, you challenge my equation as being "stupid", yet you make the analogy that an individual who broke into a home and stole some electronics is the same as an individual who sexually assaulted another and then wanted to coach high school girls softball team. Beyond the fact that these offenses are grossly different both in scope and purported victims, the analogy you make is strained by the reality of the situations. Dorsey is not trying to become a night watchman at an electronics store or a suburban community; he is trying to attend UM and play football. The contexts are completely different, and while I agree that Dorsey should be held on a shorter leash than others, to portray him as a predator about to strike his fellow classmates is dubious. As I tried to point out in my original post, it is foolish to believe that every other person at a particular college is a fine, upstanding citizen except for the couple of "hoodlums" who make it into the radio chatter. I am a member of a couple of state bars, and the past transgressions that some of my peers have on their records far exceed whatever offense Dorsey is guilty of. When I was at UM, there were kids on my hall who were guilty of DUIs, drug possession, an assault charge, home invasion, etc. Mind you, these kids largely turned out fine, graduating and becoming upstanding members of society. Heck, one of them is currently a doctor and helps to save lives every day. And yet, if you took stock of them at 17 with a jaundiced eye, you would apparently brand them as malcontents who needed to be watched like a hawk, with every possible misstep regurgitated ad naseum on blogs and the radio. But whatever, you don't agree with me so my arguments are "poorly" stated and you'll go back to your life posting articles at thebiglead. But rest assured, I'm not basking in any adulation from my like-minded peers here at the blog - if anything, you are the one benefiting the most from this discussion. For while my diary entry is limited to this site, your initial article is the top search result for "Demar Dorsey" in Google News. Listen, I'm not some ego-driven "crusader" - I'm just a guy who is a fan of UM and finds the level of vitriol dished out by national writers such as Rosenberg, Birkett, and even yourself toward the program excessive and misguided. Finally, don't take swipes at this site just because you disagree with my posts (and trust me, I know some of my posts suck), as it features some of the best writers I've found on the Internet. And let's be honest, it's not like thebiglead doesn't feature a fair bit of dribble - for God's sake, you let the corpse of Artie Lang post NFL picks all season. Ty, I respect what you do and wish you the best, but next time you disagree with somebody, keep your cross-hairs pointed on your target and don't waste your time making unsubstantiated jabs at a top-notch publication.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171035

Section 1

March 17th, 2010 at 4:19 PM ^

and has tried to comment at that site, I expect that your experience might be similar to mine. I posted a much-shorter version of the comment from me elsewhere in this thread. It was "moderated" out. Soon after, thinking perhaps it was a length thing (and, uh just wanting a second bite at the ol' apple), I posted a simple comment that ty law's beatdown was occurring in greater detail here, with an MGoBlog link. Moderated out. For a guy crying about "censorship" (under circumstances which don't amount to any kind of "censorship"), his website is doing a bang-up job in the Department of Censorship. Make no mistake; Ty Duffy can't possibly be concerned about any form of "journalism" as that term is conventionally understood. He's in the sports opiniontainment industry. Ty Duffy is a worm, and a weenie, and his site is the lower-tier blogospheric equivalent of a low-power AM sportstalk radio program where the programmers are there just to supply the hosts with suitable punching bags. Meanwhile Ty Duffy is punchin' himself up some dolphin...

Joined: 06/29/2009

MGoPoints: 16535

Token_sparty

March 18th, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^

"The only hatchet job I read was this post." Come on now. Thin skin much? This was a reasoned response to your somewhat rash post at TBL. "I'm sorry to see the standards of mgoblog have slipped so markedly". Why, because someone had the temerity to disagree with you? What a crybaby. I went to State, I'm a State fan, I only come here for the articles (you've doubtless heard THAT before), and I know MSU has its own issues. Let it be said, your original post did provide some needed context- that Birkett was responding to a comment that was screened, so no one else saw it. Knowing that bit makes me a little less angry about the whole kerfuffle. But really- we have two grown men, actively involved in their own careers, taking time out to bash... a 17-year-old young man. Dorsey has admitted his mistakes and one of the express reasons for coming to Michigan was to remove himself from the environment that led to his legal troubles. What does it say about the two of you that you each felt compelled to make disparaging, disrespectful comments about a kid who is embracing the second chance offered to him? That's not unlike a high school kid burnishing his own ego by picking on middle schoolers. "Watch your valuables people, Dorsey's coming!" In point of fact, Birkett was a dumbass for not knowing which comments were being posted- if that indeed was the case. Bill Simmons does live chats with thousands, and manages to respond only to the people whose posts have been published. And as a final point, trying to make some passive-aggressive comment about 'Brian's standards have slipped' is revealing. Maybe you'd expect him to censor comments to posts, as you apparently do? No, that's our job- as you can see by your -60 or so rating, soon to be increased by another point. Dear self-important assclown: I wish you were as over yourself as we are over you.

Joined: 07/20/2009

MGoPoints: 256

Boo-erns

March 17th, 2010 at 10:24 AM ^

in general is a good one. I graduated from UM last year...and many of my friends (who were admitted to UM and other good schools) had previous brushes with the legal system. A well connected friend of mine with a shoplifting arrest, a few underage drinking citations and a DUI made it into Tulane after DROPPING OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL, because he was well connected, and got a 1500 on his SAT. I come from a wealthy DC suburb, and this happens all of the time. Lots of smart kids break the law and get in trouble...and still get into elite schools. Admissions offices realize that kids deserve a second chance.

Joined: 08/05/2009

MGoPoints: 75

michelin

March 17th, 2010 at 11:34 AM ^

IMO, the attitude reflected by Birkett, an MSU grad, is little more than a smoke screen for his own embarassment. It’s not just a simple slip but it reflects an underlying attitude, the attitude that has motivated continuing attempts to indirectly attack RR and,a feeble attempt to hide a far more serious problem: the culture of gang violence on the MSU football team. As for Ty Duffy, I can only guess his motivation for implying a threat of violence or rape from DD. Who has DD assaulted? Nobody. If Duffy is really concerned about the safety of students anywhere, I would think it should be directed where the safety of students has actually been threatened---at MSU---and where the perpetrators of violence against fellow students may actually be reinstated to the team by Dantonio (has he done that already or is he just waiting for the publicity to die down?). Ask yourself: Where would you feel safer...living in a UM dorm next to DD or in an MSU dorm next to the football team convicts? In fact, when would you feel safer... living next to DD or being subject to hypocritical moral arrogance of journalists like Birkett? And speaking of moral arrogance, if TD wants to point out the ethical deficits of those who assault others without justification, qualms or self-examination, either physically or verbally, he should be pointing at his mirror.... Also, if he wants to criticize UM fans for supporting each other on the net, then he should also admit how easily he can hurl baseless accusations at young kids, behind his own cloak of anonymity.

Joined: 09/22/2009

MGoPoints: 2541

Block IVI

March 17th, 2010 at 6:02 PM ^

Let the haters hate. Dorsey will explode on the field, everyone will eat their words and this will be just another fading memory from the rocky start RichRod had.

Joined: 03/16/2010

MGoPoints: 30

My name ... is Tim

March 18th, 2010 at 9:25 AM ^

This was an excellently reasoned and well thought out post. I also couldn't agree more about your analogy to a particularly talented student getting into Michigan. Just from my own experience while I was at law school, there are plenty of people who have offenses on their record by the time they are in their mid-to-late 20s who are given the opportunity to get a higher education because of their strong academic resumes and the fact that the school deems that these acts of moral turpitude have been learned from and are a thing of the past.

Joined: 12/20/2008

MGoPoints: 1613