An External Data Driven Audit of Michigan and OSU football Discipline Response From 2013 to Present

Submitted by Arb lover on August 4th, 2018 at 12:14 PM

Image result for mgoblog ref slapping OSU player butt


Given all of the heartbreaking incidents we are becoming aware of in our conference, it is important to also review Ann Arbor institutional behaviors.  

Does Michigan hold to its words highlighted in the Amazon Prime Series answering when we will know if we had a good team?  

"When you guys come back 15, 20 years from now, when we know what type of men you are, what kind of husbands you've become, what kind of fathers you are, then we'll know how good this football team is."-Bo Schembechler

The strong bond of brothers on a football team formed with players willing to commit violations absolutely influences behavior and thought with those around them, and any violence itself is felt by the victims and those around them, often for years. It is therefore never simply a single player issue, and never an issue that does not require attention of the football coach, the athletic department, university, local police department, and media (if these institutions are not doing their job).

Go through the gallery to view the Michigan football

[David Guralnick, Detroit News]

I have omitted player names in this audit. While they are publicly available (with some exceptions), I believe that just because we can doesn’t mean we should. While I do not mean to excuse their behavior, being in the spotlight at a formative age is not easy and as such it is up to the local institutions to develop them as good citizens. I firmly believe that the presence of heightened levels of player violation is really a result of institutional issues, and naming players provides an easy scapegoat for any institutional or fan based response to this study. Secondly, it wasn’t necessary to include these for purposes of replicability, as anyone can reconstruct this study based on publicly available information. This is as a result, more of an audit of the football programs and local institutions on how they treat, instruct, and mentor these young players. Do these institutions (the local police, university, athletic department and coaches and local media) place a reasonable demand that players follow the law, discipline players as appropriate to prevent repeated behavior, dismiss players from the team for larger issues, or do they give players some form of Carte Blanche, allowing poor behavior to fester?

         Image result for urban meyer police handshake

[NBC Sports Chicago]

OSU was picked as a good comparator school to Michigan over this same time period out of the B1G in lieu of in-state MSU, as they are a national football program with an equally large recruiting footprint, and often recruit the same players, all important for this study.  Also important to this study OSU has a comparable number of players on NFL rosters, and like Michigan faced similar scrutiny in early 2013 for prior handlings of football discipline, so both programs had equal incentive from early 2013 forward to improve. Additionally, MSU football has had so many player issues over the last several years that it appears more of an outlier. Putting aside the 2016 MSU football fiasco, one current MSU star athlete has had six cases of recidivism (subsequently committing similar illegal offenses) with no discipline. Comparing UM to MSU would, as a result, simply serve to make Michigan look good, and that was not my intent here. On the other hand, OSU refers to itself as “THEE”* Ohio State University (*A reference not lost on me) and as such I expected to find a comparative institution that upholds the highest values and regard for the enforcement of law and good order, as well as an institution that cultivates the most noble level of off-field behavior by its current and graduated players.

                       images (1).jpg

In addition to comparing these teams, I compare each team cohort over the five years to itself for players who graduated starting after the first year of the study (graduating in 2014 or later) and continuing to present, as this is the most logical comparison for the actual environment within the school. How are these same players behaving post-graduation once the potential for favoritism and cover ups is gone? Importantly, the major outside factor between these two cohorts, whether the local environment had any impact on change in player behavior pre and post-graduation, is actually part of the same question, are coaches and these institutions molding these players into good men. As such sample size is 550 player/years vs 250 player/years on average for the graduated cohort.  It was doubly important to find the school with the closest number of drafted players to Michigan at, 42 vs 35 as some former player arrests may not make the news if they were not star players or are not now drafted. Given this, actual numbers under the post-graduation study may be higher, but this is at minimum a baseline. Conversely, it may be that the players with the highest chance of future violations are those who ended up drafted, the environment has the greatest inherent desire to protect them, bolstering entitlement.

                                  Image result for headline former OSU football player arrested

Professionally my experience is that more times than I’d like, where there are internal issues with an organization, it is often a case of good people making a string of small and perceived logical (due conflicting pressures or motivations), but ultimately wrong choices. We need to hold the actual institutions responsible for fostering a good environment free of conflicting pressures and inferred preferences, and that is a leadership issue and as such one that the public should be holding coaches, the athletic department, university board, and local (and university) police departments to standard.

These are the days that make it all worth it! The amount of love & respect I received from @UMichFootball players and staff today was unreal. From the bottom of my heart, Thank you. #SetTheExpectation #GoBlue

— Brenda Tracy (@brendatracy24) August 2, 2018

Consider the mostly harmless impact of police officers being large fans of the local university, feeling that they know the players and coach. A large section of the local police force may be rabid fans of the local football team. Do you, as an officer, arrest a star player for an incident that did not necessarily harm someone, knowing that you will be ribbed by your co-workers for the entire season should your team lose a game because of it? Alternatively, an officer may feel that they know coach or the player (a good kid, in a bad situation), and that if the officer simply brings the issue to coach, that the program will “handle it” internally, and in doing so their duty ends. Coach may even have given a speech to the police force, telling them that his otherwise good players only only do bad things because of bad external influences, and that if the police can remove the bad influences from his players he will take care of them, insinuating that coach knows how to handle player discipline instead of the police. Coaches at a bare minimum must avoid placing any form of pressure or collaboration towards the police department that might lead to favoritism. Likewise prosecutorial discretion starts at the officer level. On all sides, environment needs to be managed top-down and it is never simply a coaching or police officer issue. It is senior leadership’s job to know and act.



A) Sample sizes are small here, and as an outsider I was only able to pull data that the institutions (university, police and/or media) publicly report. Knowing this, I attempted to compare certain reported statistics that could be indicative of internal corruption. The strength (if any) of this study is therefore within the trends over all of the metrics rather than simple results of aggregating incident totals.

B) Data was included where there was a publicly known player incident or infraction involving police (either citation or arrest or police report when the police report had information whereby a reasonable officer could have made an arrest or citation) that had been reported to the athletic department or coach involving a violation or likely violation of law.

C) Any errors are either my own, or a product of lack of transparency. Any errors in press transparency, likely only reduced reported results rather than inflated them. I pulled this data from a high end search engine, using around 40 words in combination or separate.

I have included spreadsheets for both UM Violations and OSU Violations where you can find full breakouts (absent player names) for the two base cohorts. Taken as a whole, these provide a broad technical picture from the outside of potential lack of discipline and or likelihood for cover ups. For simplicity I have counted every negative situation as having a value of one, and the positive ones as having a value of negative one. Simply put, numbers are indicative of potential issues, and the higher the total number, the more likelihood that potential corruption, cover ups, lack of oversight, lack of adequate mentoring and monitoring exist.

Base metric- Recorded instances of potential violation of law by current players- 2013 to present

This metric simply tells us what was publicly recorded. It is useful, but only to a point as the data may be recorded in a higher percentage of occurrences at certain institutions, for example. Additionally, I don’t meant to make light of this, many of these incidents caused substantial harm to the victim, and there may have been more instances the public was not made aware of.

UM; 11                 OSU; 18

Base metric- Weighted instances (by player/year) of potential violation of law by former players- 2014 to present cohort

This metric tends to show us how these same players acted after they were no longer protected by the local system. It tends to show two things, whether there was underreporting or cover up for this same cohort while within the local system, and secondly, whether or not the local system did anything to develop and mature the players into the men we want them to be. I will note that the combination of these two cohort comparisons is the cleanest and broadest possible. Based on these results alone, Michigan has changed something so that it is producing only good members of society while it appears that either OSU players have gotten worse post-graduation, or the local environment is no longer around to quietly clean up some devastating conduct.

UM; 0                    OSU; 20

Potential cover-ups

Instances where the player was charged with a violation, but where no discipline was assessed. This might indicate that discipline is not impartial or that the athletic department feels it cannot afford to lose a player. Within this metric I have included instances where discipline was handled “internally” but there was no obvious suspension or real “harm” to the team or player.

UM; 1                    OSU; 2

Instances where evidence indicates a player did violate a law, but no discipline was assessed and where the local police did not arrest or charge the player. This does not include the above instances, and may tend to indicate the potential for police involvement in actual cover-ups.

UM; 0                    OSU; 3

Non-dismissals for verified assault by the player 

Both of these metrics may indicate that the coaching staff or athletic department believes that it is more valuable to have a player who assaults people on the team, than it would be to get bad influences away from the rest of the team or otherwise do the right thing.

Instances where video evidence makes clear that a player was the aggressor and made contact with a person but where the player was not dismissed as a result.

UM; 0                    OSU; 3

Instances where both parties agree that the player was the aggressor and that contact was made by the player, but where the player was not dismissed as a result. This did not include instances involving video or photo evidence as displayed above.

UM; 0                    OSU; 4

Unfair discipline for starters vs non-starters for similar violations

This metric may indicate that the coaching staff is more interested in appearance of discipline and in winning at all costs than actually making players into better members of society, acting fairly, and rooting out non-performance issues within the team.

UM; 0                    OSU; 6

Recidivism (same player subsequently committing the same or similar violations)

This may indicate that the environment is not fostering good behavior in players; that coaches are not serious about discipline, and that players feel that they may do as they wish regardless of the law.

UM; 1                    OSU; 8

Documented instances of players trying to get out of violations of law due to their status as a player

This may indicate that the environment is so toxic to the law of good order that players have experience getting out of violations due to their status as a player. I was really hoping not to see any of these.

UM; 0                    OSU; 1

Documented instances of coaches or the athletic department attempting to fight against discipline for players accused of serious violations.

This may indicate that the coaching staff or athletic department has more focus on winning than in doing the right thing relative to a reasonable disciplinary result.

UM; 0                    OSU; 1

Instances of documented victims of assault withdrawing their claim with no prosecutorial/investigative follow up

This may indicate that a victim was silenced or pressured into withdrawing a claim, and that the local prosecutors’ office or police department placed a higher value on the player’s ability to play than the victim’s rights and what the law required.

UM; 0                    OSU; 2

Incidents only covered by news outlets in other cities with no subsequent known local reporting.

This metric tends to indicate if there is local reporting bias or intent to assist cover ups, possibly for increased access. As an underhand lob to the underdog I included 11warriors as a local media channel as upon review traditional local Columbus media really did not cover OSU scandal more than 50% of the time (essentially when national media was also reporting).

UM; 0                    OSU; 6

Additionally, I have included two metrics that might support that the local environment is acting appropriately. These below instances count in the negative as we hope to see some of this if the system is working appropriately.

Charges filed against players that were overturned by courts or did not otherwise result in convictions or guilty pleas.

This metric might indicate that local police are willing to arrest, and prosecutors to charge, in cases where they do not have to but where they might, in short that the system is working as it should. I included within this metric instances where the main or serious charge was dismissed due to lack of evidence and not simply due to plea bargain.

UM; -3                  OSU; 0

Citations that did not require appearance.

This metric may indicate that local police are willing to cite players for small issues that officers typically have some discretion over. For example, public urination behind a building, jaywalking, jumping off a bridge into the Huron River, or other things done by many college students every year.

UM; -1                  OSU; 0

Full Tally

This combined metric may indicate over all data points that potential corruption, incident cover ups, lack of oversight, lack of adequate mentoring and other issues exist within a program and the local environment, in short that there is a lack of local leadership and accountability within multiple local institutions from the coaching staff, athletic department, police department, local news, and even university and local government oversight. (Higher numbers are bad as each value indicates one instance of potential non-compliance with various requirements).

UM; 9                    OSU; 74

To cross check this I have briefly added percentages over several criteria to determine whether there is some support for the output of our metrics.

Percentage of recorded instances involving verified assault.

This may indicate, if documented assault percentages are high in relation to the comparator school, that there are more frequent cover ups of lesser violations, as logically players are more likely to commit lesser violations than greater ones and at a rate that may be consistent across schools. Note here that it appears that Michigan has lower instances of verified assault, even though the local environment appears more willing to fully investigate rather than cover up these issues. Also of note, according to his new contract, Urban Meyer was required to have reported these seven instances. If he has not, the university has cause should it care about such things.

UM; 3=27%         OSU; 7=39%

Percentage of player violations that resulted in dismissal.

This may indicate, relative to the comparator school, if the school has a focus on doing the right thing, or winning at all costs.

UM; 4=36%         OSU; 3=17%

Percentage of known incidents not fully reported in any venue.

This may indicate the presence of cover up schemes not only within the coaching staff and local police, but within the local media circles as well.

UM; 0=0%           OSU; 4=22%

                                          Image result for jim harbaugh celebration

[Indiana Sports Coverage]

Full Results: Surprisingly, there is a drop off in non-victim local arrests for OSU post championship season. On the Michigan side, it appears that discipline was significantly harsher over the full course of this study; even for small infractions, and local police do not grant Michigan players as many free passes. As a result, there has been only one marginal case of a Michigan player (or former player) recidivism. Possibly the most interesting aspect of this data is that it tends to show that treating players as if they are above the law or handling potential law enforcement issues internally has the undesired outcome of recidivism. I have high hopes that in 10-15 years, these Michigan players will have become the men the University wants them to be. As well, I hold out hope that there is a buckeye out there somewhere with the courage and leadership to fix what’s going on in Columbus.

                                  Image result for urban meyer no answer

[Yahoo Sports]

Four Ohio State Football incidents uncovered that require some explanation. (No less known Michigan football incidents were uncovered during this same time period)

Most incidents can likely be easily verified from expeditious internet browsing, however some may be harder to do so given the lack of information put out by the media, local police department, and athletic department, so they require some explanations below. 

1) The rape investigation into two or three football players that went nowhere.

Here’s what we do know: In February of 2013 OSU police began to investigate a rape charge filed by a student against two football players that occurred in the dorm room of the two players, and involved a third football player and possibly a cell phone recording of the encounter. According to the girl, she was interested in one player, but his roommate came in and forced himself on her as well. According to one player who was interviewed by campus police sometime in February of 2013, he was fooling around with the girl and started to have second thoughts so he left, and when he came back she was doing something with his roommate. According to the campus police warrant, they had cause to believe a player’s cell phone contained a video of the encounter and as of 3/13/2013 were going to try to get that phone.  No explanation as to why it took one month for university police to begin to proceed to get a warrant for the phone (or had not done so within one month), or why the other players had not been interviewed over that month period, especially as the one player’s version of events substantiated the victims allegations that both players had been involved with the girl and that the girl had come to his room to see only one player.  The only related discipline from that year was when a non-starter was dismissed from the team for obstruction of police handed out four months later. As the only known investigation for which a player could be charged with obstruction of police at the time was this one, it is the simplest explanation to assume these are related. However local news never reported the player names and the university police never explained what they found or what actions they took in their investigation, and when they took that action, or when the complaint was filed.  Any internal investigation should examine who these players were, and whether appropriate action was taken, as well as whether or not Meyer accurately reported the incident. As an additional note, the local media should be questioned on why they did not release these player names "as they had not been charged", when they have done so in other situations.

2) The player accused of harassing a female university tutor.

A player was reported by his female athletic department tutor for harassment (I have a hard time believing it was anything but sexual harassment, but we don’t know for sure, and any way you dice it, it’s super creepy and wrong). The university itself (outside of the athletic department) decided to suspend the football player for the fall semester (we have no idea if it was after an investigation or if there was evidence, etc, and Meyer stated publicly that he vehemently disagreed with this decision. The university did not give a reason for the suspension, but Toledo news reported the actual allegation. Any internal OSU investigation should consider whether that whistleblower employed within the athletic department remains employed, if she suffered any retaliation, or whether if gone, she left on her own terms.

3) The star player cited at fault in a crash while driving with a suspended license.

A third incident that raises concerns of lack of past reporting was when the star running back was cited for his fault in a crash, and for having driven with a suspended license. Obvious concerns exist as he was not given any discipline when similarly situated employees had been, however of more concern is that there was no publicly reported indication prior indicating that he had done anything to get his license suspended, so whatever incident resulted in a suspended license was not reported to the public. As this event occurred in his fourth year at OSU, it is safe to say whatever had happened to get a suspended license happened while he was a player. As a caveat there are reasons a player could have his license suspended that did not involve prior incidents, but this was a star player and we simply do not know because it appears local media did not want to ask.

4) When police had enough evidence to establish a star player was the aggressor and physically violent towards a woman, but nothing happened.

A fourth incident uncovered that raised some concerns was when a star player had the police called to his apartment for domestic violence. The victim alleged she was choked on the bed. The player admitted to pushing the victim into furniture but nothing else. While there was no doubt between the parties statements that the star player had been the aggressor and had committed violence, police made no arrests but did send a police report to the prosecutor's office for referral where it died, no explanation given. The most likely scenario is that the victim withdrew her complaint, potentially after being told what would happen to the player if she didn’t, however we do not know for sure due to lack of any transparency. As a result of the lack of formal charge or an arrest, the star player received no discipline. Any internal investigation should consider whether Meyer reported this incident. While he gave no discipline and no charges were assessed, evidence was clear that domestic violence had occurred and as such he was required to report it.

5) When Urban Meyer pressured the county prosecutor and a victim.

In addition to these incidents, I would suggest that any internal OSU investigation consider the player who in 2013 struck a woman in a bar, on camera, according to a reporter who watched the video. The victim decided to withdraw her complaint, and the prosecutor not to pursue charges, the victime possibly based on fear of being kicked out of school or simple harassment from students, and the prosecutor possibly to protect his seat, after Urban Meyer stated that if charges were filed the player would be kicked off the team, and as such the player received a suspension for three non-conference games. Unknown is whether any threat was made against this victim or whether she voluntarily elected to withdraw her complaint, or whether the prosecutor’s office elected not to file charges based on Meyer’s public statement regarding the star player. As the video indicates the player made contact with a female student, Meyer should have reported this, and any investigation should look into whether he reported this incident as well as examine whether the institution, athletic department, or students pressured this victim into withdrawing her complaint. Finally, any investigation should look into whether Meyer’s public comment that if the player were charged, he would have to dismiss him, had any impact on the prosecutor’s decision to not charge the star player; did Ron O’Brien, long time unchallenged Franklin County prosecutor who has been accused of acting with favoritism, have reason to believe an action against Meyer’s wish would potentially place, for the first time, a challenger to his position in the general election?


Arb lover

August 4th, 2018 at 12:17 PM ^

Executive Summary (since I can't place it above):

I tallied every potential violation of a law committed by Michigan and OSU players on the team, beginning in 2013 to present (11 violations at UM vs 18 at OSU). I then compared these same players to themselves as they began to graduate and were no longer protected by the local environment. I weighted these 250 player years to the 550 player years and determined on average that players at UM committed 0 violations after graduating or leaving the program, and players at OSU committed 20 violations after graduating or leaving the program. I also compared sub metrics on a number of fronts, analyzing police, prosecutor and media decisions to ignore or address issues. Finally I compared these results to certain key percentages to add some verification. I observed that UM instances involved only 27% verified assault, compared to OSU's 39%, yet UM was more than twice as likely to issue a dismissal, at 36% vs 17%. I also observed that local media was all over every one of UM's potential violations, yet local media did not even report on  six OSU violations, and no media fully reported on four. 

As a follow up I provided certain examples of how Urban Meyer appears to have influenced the police force, and provided five clear examples along with associated links that any legitimate investigation by OSU would need to examine if they were actually interested in doing the right thing and determining whether serious leadership issues exist within the OSU football program.

Also, apparently one can only post pictures here after uploading them, even though it works in preview, so I apologize for the wall of text with not much else. I'd make this prettier, but I don't appear to be able to edit, either.

Edit: ty whoever fixed that.

Arb lover

August 4th, 2018 at 8:07 PM ^

I'll try do do this, and maybe re-post a diary since I think I can make it not so horribly ugly now that I know we have to upload every picture/image. 

Two caveats though, if I can't finish before the ND game, it's probably not happening until after the season. Also, my guess is that the potential cover-ups metric will be sky high, as will the lack of discipline for starters. If these are as high as I think they are, their reported numbers might be lower than OSU's in practice, but not actuality. 


August 4th, 2018 at 1:26 PM ^

How does Urbz continue to claim the high moral/character ground with this track record?  This is the stuff that drives me crazy.  Do as you will, but don't claim in public to be something that your behavior and actions behind the scenes clearly shows you are not.  Just do your thing and shut up.

Section 1.8

August 4th, 2018 at 11:03 PM ^

Oh, that .gif is way too weird because the great character actor on the right is J.K. Simmons.  A huge Ohio State fan, who was born in Grosse Pointe, but grew up in Columbus when his father (a music teacher) moved the family there in 1965.  Simmons went to the University of Montana, but he considers himself a Buckeye.

yossarians tree

August 4th, 2018 at 2:06 PM ^

Great post. Facts are the best repellent when being attacked by a swarm of wounded, delusional Buckeye or Sparty fans.

All of this illustrates why I will absolutely fight any Michigan fans who are putting heat on Harbaugh. Of course we'd all like to win every game, but I am far more concerned with him assembling a roster of high-character guys that I as an alum can be proud of--and he clearly and absolutely holds that as a preeminent value (so too did Brady Hoke, by the way). I know that he believes, as do I, that he can field a national championship team that meets these high standards of conduct. It won't be easy, but as they say, "If it was easy everyone would do it." We can do it because we're Michigan.


August 6th, 2018 at 2:36 PM ^

This 1000%. 

Winning a national title, then finding out that some woman had to pay the price so that 'Johnny Awesome' could still be eligible would disgust me. 

We aren't perfect. The Gibson situation shows that. I want us to be better. But so far Harbaugh appears to be on the right course. 


August 4th, 2018 at 2:49 PM ^

I am going to be the contrarian here. To me, comparing yourself with OSU when it comes to player discipline is like comparing your smell to a wet Labrador retriever.  A very low bar to get over.

I would rather know how Michigan compares with say Northwestern or the service academies or Stanford which we know won’t tolerate miscreants.


August 4th, 2018 at 5:58 PM ^

The issue there is lack of media coverage.  There just isn't that much written about Northwestern or Stanford or the service academies compared to Michigan or OSU.  It would be very hard to actually find the occurrences at those schools because they have a fraction of the media coverage.


August 4th, 2018 at 7:13 PM ^

If you understand history, then you get why Michigan holds itself as the benchmark for most standards.  And consider this: its inception as a school predates even Thomas Jefferson's romantic scholarly university vision in Charlottesville.

Let's be clear: Michigan taught Michigan State and Ohio State the game of football. Notre Dame was little brother too, in that regard. What more do you need to know than that about the evolution of attitudes about that pecking order and where people draw lines about their rivalry choices.

Michigan has always subscribed to doing the right thing. And it has done so to an annoying degree and extent over the years just to prove the point, in ways that have made it seem overly respectful to that concern in the process to many outsiders.

But I don't think we as university supporters need defend its reputation in that regard as a backstop to the Trumpian world of life in Columbus where anything goes as long as it promotes winning Buckeye football. Thus, coaches who nakedly lie to authorities and the press --which, believe it or not, is actually an extension of the public at large and serves as one of this nation's most redeeming institutional checks to power of any kind--are worshipped beyond their pay grade and status because they deliver an emotional fulfillment which cannot be debunked to a cultish following.

We don't need to justify where we stand in response to this behavior. We just have to recognize what it is and condemn it because it goes against all the principles of the Team, the team, the team, and the Michigan difference is tolerance with respect for the rule of law and standing up for others when it counts, being prepared in the face of adversity and admitting your mistakes while correcting them and then not repeating the same ones.

Ohio State hasn't had a winning coach who wasn't fired for either not beating Michigan or some other indiscretion since before Woody Hayes. Measure that against the Michigan experience. The record is starkly different.

Arb lover

August 4th, 2018 at 8:05 PM ^

I 100% agree with you. But please consider that I also compared Michigan to itself, and it appears that we have improved drastically once our players graduate. I consider that a testament to our university, coaching staff, as well as our local media and local police departments, all trying to do the right thing, so it appears. 

To me that's really what this was about. Yeah, OSU is some sort of cesspool, but you really can't save the world. I draw the line at simply highlighting their actual issues, and letting someone who actually breaths buckeye/ohio take that on. 

Section 1.8

August 4th, 2018 at 11:14 PM ^

I gotta say that this is an interesting post, but by the time I got to the end I was reminded of the quote that is so often misattributed to Mark Twain, who himself misattributed it to Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies, and statisics."

I don't think that the OP is a lie at all, but when we are talking about such tiny overall numbers, what is the point of these ad hoc classifications and number-tallies?  Why not just write a detailed 10,000 word investigative story on the comparison?  Remind us in words of all of the names, and allegations, and the official record (or lack thereof) in all of the cases.  Do the stats here illuminate anything?  Is it a fire producing more heat than light?  There might be a total of a dozen illustrative cases at Michigan, and a similar number at Ohio State, and from that we might draw a conclusion of how the two programs differ, if at all.  I'd learn more from a narrative than a home-made statistical narrative.

Actually, the thing I liked about the OP was his effort at trying to use words to position his little counts of this or that kind of illicit or questionable activity.  I'd have liked more of that.


Arb lover

August 5th, 2018 at 10:11 AM ^

You get an actual response not just this first paragraph because after reviewing your post history based on your use of troll words ("effort at trying", etc.), I do not doubt that you got a JD at Michigan and your BA at OSU. Every one of your posts is on an OSU related topic and is either protesting (too much I dare say) that you are not a buckeye fan, lavishing praise on that institution or most of the OSU fan base or 11 warriors writers, speaking about your extensive time spent reading and posting over the years on 11 warriors, talking about some past UM scandal, or bringing up random trivia about OSU alum or fans that only an OSU fan/alum would know or care about. 

You have enough of an understanding of some things that it's clear you are simply arguing one side here, in clearly ignoring and not raising what does not do your institution (OSU) any good. 

There is, in fact, some statistical significance in some of this, There are two things that contribute to sampling error, though you reference only sample size. You make no mention of variation, discussed briefly below. In particular the fact that there have been nine instances of misconduct by former OSU players who graduated post 2013, and none by former UM players who graduated post 2013, is of some significance given actual variation within the population. Are you looking for a 95% CI?

Conversely would you really argue that the next violation committed by a former player from one of these two schools is 50% likely to be an OSU former football player, and 50% a michigan football player? My guess is you are very willing to invest in a company for much weaker reasons than statistical significance calls for- most people are, and that is actual money. This is simply posturing.

Instead, what this article is an exercise in, is by and large practical significanceEach instance has many distinct properties and interactions that make up the data point; it is not simply a binary result. Combining this with validated assumptions we make about the world around us, and noting the observed trends in aggregate, is a useful tool for practical significance. 

Secondly you attempt to play off that we are talking similar numbers to begin with- we aren't. 

There might be a total of a dozen* illustrative cases at Michigan, and a similar** number at Ohio State...

*11 is not a dozen.

**27 is not similar to 11, and neither is 18 when considering actual normal variation between number of violations committed by players on division one college football teams, and or also following the cohort that graduates over that same time period, over 5 year spans (likely high of 32, low of 7... you can play with those numbers some, but not much), instead it is 245% more and 64% more, respectively, and importantly, on opposite sides of any bell curve.


Arb lover

August 5th, 2018 at 3:54 PM ^

Clark was counted in his DV incident.  His tweet years after he left the program was not counted as it was unfortunate, but "free speech". I didn't find any additional Clark incidents. Graduation was not important per se, I used that word synonymously with joining the second cohort of players who left the program. I apologize for the confusion. 

Also of note for some of the Michigan guys like Clark, the program booted them before prosecution had decided if it was going to charge or not. So there is definitely news post player cohort as that specific incident works its way through the system. I can only speculate on Michigan's usual process, but the athletic department probably spoke to the police department and asked for a copy of the police report, etc., saw it, and didn't play the "we will wait to see what the law does to decide if he is kicked off the team" card Meyer has been known to use.

Section 1.8

August 6th, 2018 at 1:48 PM ^

Arb lover, I promise you that I have never attended Ohio State nor gotten a degree there.  Your presuming that is just a big fail on your part.  I am a Michigan grad, and a Victors Club member, and a Michigan season ticket holder 25+ years.

You won't see me lavishing any general praise on Ohio State fans, just like I wouldn't lavish much praise in general on the MGoBlog commentariat.  My personal credo is in illustrating the excesses of fanboyz on both sides.

I had some nice acquaintances among the 11W staff; none among their rank and file membership.  I personally like Jason Preistas, and Kevin Harrish.  DJ Byrnes is a kind of a funny freak.  And Ramzy Nasrallah hates my guts; the feeling is mutual.  He personally kicked me off the site for disputing his branding of Brendan Gibbons as a "rapist."  When he did that, he literally freaked out in print and in the past I have linked to the places where you can find those old posts if he hasn't gone to the trouble of ditching them. 

I liked reading much of their content, and I even contributed a tiny bit of content to them.  Oh, and I liked calmly debunking the worst rumors on that site's Forums.  Just like I enjoy debunking fanboy extremisms on the MGBoard.

Yes, I am a lawyer and as such I have an acute interest in due process and particularly procedural due process.  Things like the Meyer investigation, and Title IX, and legal stuff is what I post about mostly.  I don't post about the games because I am virtually always at the games.  I don't post much about other stuff because I am not a former player, or a coach, or an expert.


Section 1.8

August 10th, 2018 at 4:38 PM ^

Goddamn right I am "defending myself."  I didn't come here to attack anybody personally.  But Arb Lover accused me -- completely falsely -- of being an OSU agent.

I don't give a rip how anything "looks."  I care about facts.

Now, in this case, I have been careful not to fight about stats with anybody.  But by all accounts, we are talking about small sample sizes.  "Groups" of 3, or 4, or 8 players/occurrences.  And what I am saying is that instead of shoehorning them into spreadsheets or data sets, we could just, like, discuss them.  We could simply talk about particular OSU cases, and similar Michigan cases, and ask whether the discipline or culture is vastly different.  I don't think it is much different, but that's me.  I wrote that Arb Lover's OP was interesting, and he wrote that I must be an OSU grad...

I say again; if I have any "angle" at MGoBlog, it is in being a contrarian to the worst excesses of rabid fans.  When OSU fans were freaking out about the Brendan Gibbons expulsion and presuming that for five years, Michigan football had sheltered a rapist, I tried to knock that narrative into the dumpster where it belonged.  The MGoBoard is really no better; same rabid fan excesses, just in different colors.



August 5th, 2018 at 9:26 AM ^

Not trying to nit-pick this fine diary, but you list M has having zero "non-dismissal[s] for verified assault by the player."  I'm wondering why the Grant Perry situation wouldn't count there.  

Arb lover

August 5th, 2018 at 10:29 AM ^

I'm sort of glad you raised this. As you indicated we are talking verified assault. That player was charged with assault because he ran from the police (after realizing he was in an o-shit situation). It was essentially a case of tacking on additional charges because.

No reasonable prosecutor would have actually felt they had a case to charge him, though I do sort of hate writing this because I strongly believe victims need to be believed. I had posted links to the court documents and media articles showing the below at some point last year, but I couldn't find it with a quick search on mgoblog.

1) there was video of the incident from the night club and it indicated that no contact took place.

2) the bouncer witnessed the confrontation and did not see any contact

3) the victim's friends witnessed the confrontation and did not see any contact

4) the victim indicated that prior to the incident she knew who Perry was, and that he was taunting her because she was a MSU student and he was a UM student/football player, and as a result she was pissed off at him (for then having cut in line). 

5) the victims clothing did not have any of Perry's DNA

6) Perry was covertly recorded by the ELPD speaking to his "representative" on the phone (he asked to call his mother with his one call). He thought he was alone, and was honest, and his recorded call confirms he was consistent with his statement of events.

7) the victims statement, being the only thing indicating Perry had touched her, was startlingly inconsistent, as in night and day, as in touched her front or her back. 

8) Perry did not simply run (so he must be guilty) as some have put it out. By all accounts (including the bouncer), Perry was very fine with the bouncer calling the police because he said nothing happened. It was only after the police showed up and began asking for ID that he realized he might be in violation of a different law (underage drinking), and panicked and ran.



August 6th, 2018 at 7:59 AM ^

I appreciate the thorough response.  But I still disagree.

An assault occurs when a person is put in fear of an imminent, unwanted contact, even if there is no contact. Even if Perry never touched her, his threats and taunts could have been enough on their own for assault.  And while there may have been conflicting evidence, Perry ultimately pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault & battery, which establishes (for legal purposes, at least) both that he committed an assault and that there was contact (i.e., the battery). 

Arb lover

August 6th, 2018 at 10:11 AM ^

You raise a good point, and you could definitely classify it either way in the test I did above, but I did not do so for several reasons.

I was considering first whether there was video evidence (exculpatory or inculpatory), witness testimony or their own admissions, and for the specific question on assault and the questions on whether the system was working (did prosecution charge for a more serious crime that ultimately did not have evidence to support (sexual assault)). That's part of why it was marked no with caveats under guilty plea or charge.

This particular situation was also unique because the player did not make his plea until well into the following year, after all the evidence was collected, so Michigan was not basing it's discipline on the final outcome, but rather on the incident. It's very likely Perry's counsel also asked the AD how, if at all, a lesser plea would impact his team status, and the university made it's own internal call based on the merits of the case, prior to any plea.

In hindsight I really should have added another whole column to both teams, but it would have been applicable to only Perry's situation, instead of trying to count everything within my set parameters. There's probably some other things like that as well. I tried to include caveats in cases like these on the spreadsheets.


August 5th, 2018 at 10:22 AM ^

Where does Lewan's threats fall in all of this?  A buckeye fan on the board was pointing that one out, and it is one of the only instances I can remember where Michigan (Hoke) didn't appear to respond appropriately (at all).  

When I was a student back in the last century,  there were all sorts of incidents with athletes (and students in general) that didn't get reported and I'm sure there still are.   There is no way to account for those, but I'm guessing that if the reported incidents are much greater at OSU,  the unreported are also much greater.  


Arb lover

August 5th, 2018 at 11:17 AM ^

So Lewan is on the list, but not for that incident. 

As best as I can tell from the record regarding the threat to the victim in the Gibbons case, and we have actual police reports and closing letters, it looks like they followed leads and such but there was nothing tangible. At the end they told him to be safe he was to have no contact with the victim and that any threatening, etc., would be met seriously, and to go on his way. 

To give a little more detail it appears from the police report that the victim in the Gibbons incident told officers that she heard the main threat second hand from a friend, that Lewan had walked up to ask if the victim was going to press charges, which the person didn't know, and that he then said he was going to rape her if she did. The person then told the victim this, and the victim stated told she someone herself, presumably after the player said something to the victim that sounded off.

When she later told the officer what she had heard from her friend, they followed up, but the actual person who allegedly heard the comment would not return the police's call, and the officer was not able to contact the other person who allegedly was later told by the victim. (Police run into this a lot on open investigations, sometimes its just people who know something of the original situation and have an affinity with the victim, making up stories to get in close or bond with the victim. From what I've seen police will make a decent try to get the person to talk, but don't want to push them too hard in case they might resort to making a false statement so as to not look bad to the police or the victim). I am simply glad the university followed up on this serious allegation at the time. 

This didn't meet the test for inclusion for two reasons, one because the alleged violation took place in 2009, and secondly because there was a lack of any evidence or tie in, essentially the standard I was looking for here.

To give an example that would count, a player accused of rape by a victim he did admit to having relations with. There is first hand knowledge by the victim, and the player acknowledges that he did have relations with the victim. 

gustave ferbert

August 5th, 2018 at 10:25 AM ^

and I believe it's even much worse.  I don't buy that Tresselgate only had to do with tattoos.  I think it went  a lot deeper but very powerful forces managed to prevent a lot of the information from getting out.  


Powell Police dept behavior seems reinforce that notion.  


August 6th, 2018 at 10:55 AM ^

Gosh damn that was boring. Let’s stick to most important metrics during your measuring period. Face it, deep down you ultimately care about this:

National championships: UM 0, OSU 1

B1G championships: UM 0, OSU 2

Head to Head: UM 0, OSU 5


August 6th, 2018 at 2:27 PM ^

I can't think of anything else that would reinforce the main point of the analysis than your emphasis to on-field results over all these "boring" character-aligned behavioral issues.  Who cares about character as long as we win games brah.....

And yes every UM fan badly wants to even the results or return to the "John Cooper is our favorite coach" days.  But not if we become a character cesspool in the process.   


August 9th, 2018 at 12:24 PM ^

Statistics are pretty much way over my head but this was an interesting read. Thanks for doing all that digging. I'm pretty sure that the police/prosecutors in the Columbus area are closely related to the same crew in East Lansing/Ingham County. They are not doing these players any favors by looking the other way.

Section 1.8

August 10th, 2018 at 5:54 PM ^

Arb Lover I finally took the time on a slow Friday to check on your five numbered anectdotal references supposedly demonstrating supposedly lax discipline at Ohio State.

Wow, you are a bad reporter.  If I were your editor, you'd be doing a re-write.  You should stick to spreadsheets and stats.  On non-controversial topics.

1)  First item was "the rape investigation ... that went nowhere."  You don't know the details, or why the investigation went nowhere.  But you presume the worst at every turn where you could possibly make an adverse presumption.  One of your worst presumptions was that local Columbus news media was corrupt for not reporting the names of players.  They N-E-V-E-R report names of persons not arrested and not charged as somehow being accused of crimes.  No reputable news outlet does.  The only rare exception is when (as in the case of Gareon Conley in another incident) another media outlet reports a name, and so it can be said that "XYZ magazine reported that..."

2) Torrance Gibson.  A pure Title IX case.  No arrest, no charges, no court process, no police involvement as far as I know.  You can presume all that you want about Urban Meyer.  I shall do the same.  And I presume that Meyer was pissed off beyond belief because a Title IX Kangaroo Court booted Gibson out of school under circumstances that did not warrant it.  Torrance Gibson, meet Brendan Gibbons.

3) Ezekiel Elliott.  You couldn't figure out why his drivers license had been suspended?  I found out in about 30 seconds.  He had a previously unpaid speeding ticket.  What do you think Elliott's team punishment should have been?

4) J.T. Barrett.  And you know what that situation reminds me of?  Jourdan Lewis.  Like, it was almost the same case.  Lewis -- and Michigan -- were fortunate that he wasn't a team discipline issue.  I'm glad that Lewis was acquitted and it sounds like acquittal was the correct result.  As I think it would have been if Barrett had been charged.

5) Urban Meyer "pressured" a prosecutor not to do his job?!?  WTF?  You cite no evidence, you claim no evidence, apart from Meyer's having made a blandly true statement that would have been made by Lloyd Carr, Jim Tressel, Brady Hoke, or any other UM/OSU head coach; if the guy is charged with a felony, chances are that he'll be suspended until it is sorted out.  THAT is pressuring a prosecutor?

What a lot of baloney, when we get down to it.


Arb lover

August 15th, 2018 at 9:17 PM ^

I'd like to thank a friend for letting me know there was another scathing rebuke with no corresponding evidence from a buckeye on this weeks old thread. Feel free to fill in some links to justify your claims, or don't. 

These five instances are things that bear further investigation. Your statement is rife with misquotes of inferences and statements I haven't made above, followed by your reasoning why these things I have not stated aren't so. You can, I suppose, argue with yourself all day, or in your case on a Friday night. However your post did not provide anything of substance to the conversation.

I will respond to some of your claims, laid with no factual basis below. I will ignore, of course, your leading with disparaging remarks (because everyone in the know understands that is a sure sign of a weak argument). 

1) The only presumption here is that nothing further was reported and that no player received discipline given the fact that no player received visible discipline. The circumstances that were reported were significant enough that there should have been follow up. You (without evidence) cite that Columbus media never reports player names not accused of crimes (to paraphrase). They sure did for the star quarterback, but quickly removed it from their online news pages, itself something that raises eyebrows. (That article cites Columbus news, and links to it, but the local station has since deleted the actual web page)- which is another sign that there may be a coordinated cover up down there. Your claim is void per actual evidence provided. Finally, this diary does not suggest that the news should accuse people of crimes they have not been charged with. 

2) Shame on you for suggesting without evidence, that the administration at OSU was without a valid reason after receiving a complaint from a female tutor that she was being harassed by a football player, in removing that player from the team. Based on my experience in this area, where a low level employee brings possible misconduct of someone of importance to important people's attention, I would hazard an educated guess that she had at a minimum a recording of what was happening once she realized it was going to keep happening absent her actions. Most harassment never gets reported, that's fairly well understood, so yes, I'm saying, lets open this can of worms, we knew enough from the Michigan situation to make an informed public opinion of the matter. Contrasting Meyer to Michigan, Michigan's coach did not publicly dispute discipline levied against any player. That OSU's coach did, points to an actual power struggle between the world of football, and the rest of the OSU institution. That along with the woman's claim is worth investigating if we are investigating Meyer's conduct.

3) I have to take you at your word that you found out about the star running backs reason for suspended licence as you have provided no link  or evidence. Can I assume you looked up information in the court system given your status as a lawyer? Remember please I was drawing purely from publicly available news sources that obviously do not include the court system documents. Assuming arguendo that this is true, the issue is not that the player received a ticket, it's that this displays a potential culture of entitlement where star OSU players feel that laws do not apply to them; that they neither need to appear in court or pay the associated citation. We have seen the exact same culture of entitlement and lack of institutional leadership from MSU's coach, in a situation where their star running back felt he also didn't need to pay his tickets. What should have been done? I argue that you are part of the culture problem down there. A reasonable coach finding out his player had made the news for deciding to not pay his tickets? "Son, you made us look bad. I apologize, if I've given  you the mistaken opinion that the rules do not apply to you. Sit this one out, Mr. Anderson", would suffice


4) Thanks, I think? This diary was about, to an extent, the contrast between local cultures of Ann Arbor and Columbus. A similar incident, though I would argue that it was very unclear if Lewis was the aggressor. Both circumstances had a lack of physical evidence and relied initially on the testimony of the involved parties. In the Columbus case, both parties agreed that the player had initiated violence against the woman by shoving her into a bed (his words), or choking her etc, (her words). In the Ann Arbor instance, the woman indicated he had put his hands around her neck but did not strangle her (squeeze). The player indicated that the woman was attempting to prevent him from leaving and he was trying to get her off him and may have touched her in the process, possibly on her neck, he was unsure, but was clear that he had not hurt her in doing so. Yet only one player was arrested, and only one player was charged, and yes, the system had a chance to defend the victim, and he was not found guilty. That system had no chance to defend the victim in Columbus. Shamefully, Urban Meyer had previously stated he has a zero tolerance policy for violence towards women. What then, would you call it when your player admits to pushing a woman into furniture? foreplay? A sign that your player is ready to take it out on his opponent and should be given a chance to start? An impartial investigation into Urban Meyer's lack of leadership in this area, would warrant looking into this incident. 

5) Meyer did not state that if he was charged with a felony, the player would be suspended. He stated that if he had been charged at all, this star player was going to be kicked off the team. Surprise, he wasn't even charged with a littering offense. Feel free to pull up Facebook or twitter chatter from July 20, 2013 to July 30, 2013; you will find a significant amount of potential rage if the system decides to charge this guy. I recall observing it, but am not tech saavy enough to bring that to light. This is not simply a case of potential pressuring of a prosecutor; the woman also appears to have been an OSU student, and as such a decent investigation into Meyer's conduct should examine whether this student was pressured by the school or some officials into not pressing charges or not wishing to cooperate with prosecution. Guy strikes the face of girl less than half his size, on camera? Any reasonable prosecutor would have taken that case in a heartbeat. This chronology of events is clear enough to raise the need for further investigation. It is a shame that your buckeye loyalty is higher than your loyalty to womankind.