Forcier: I wanted to stay but DB wouldn't meet with my family about it
The freep ran an interview with Tate, and in it, Tate claims that he really wanted to stay at Michigan and that he and his family tried to meet with DB, but that DB had no interest in meeting with him.
The quote:
• On leaving Michigan: “I felt like things could have been handled better. (Athletic director) Dave Brandon made his mind up. We tried hard (to stay). I took care of my incompletes. I needed a certain amount of credits. The incompletes, I took care of those. Dave Brandon still wouldn’t let me stay. He refused to even meet with us. That’s his decision; we really didn’t want to fight it. That was his decision, that’s the head guy. I didn’t want to challenge him. I’m not going to win something like that with somebody as high up as he was. When he did that, it was time to turn a new chapter.
If this is true, than to me, this reflects poorly on DB. Tate is 19 years old kid who, while under intense media scrutiny, intense pressure, messed up. He messed up big time, failing to complete his classes. And, from Tate's account (self serving, but all that we have to go on at this point), he learned from his mistake, completed his incomplete classes and expressed a genuine desire to earn his way back on to the team. The fact that DB took such a trong position, and did not allow Tate a new chance, to me speaks poorly of DB.
Tate was 19 years old - kids that age will tend to mess up. I won't even print on here what my first semester GPA was at Michigan - I would imagine that my blood alcahol content was higher, though. After being put on probation, I turned things around sharply, did very well and move on successfully. That hard lesson was the kick in the ass that I needed to realize that I actually had to do some work in college. I would imagine that many a college student has learned the exact same lesson. And most of us that did we just ordinary students. We didn't have the demands of the football team, the intense media scrutiny surrounding our program or the pressure of transitioning from a home schooling environment that Tate's father subjected him to into full university life.
Perhaps we don't know the whole story. But, one thing that came across from the interview with Tate is that he loves Michigan. If what Tate is saying is true, then shame on DB for not allowing this kid a second chance.
The print link:
http://www.freep.com/fdcp/?1297351094586
EDIT:
As some on this thread have pointed out, the athletic department said that there was a meeting with someone in the department because DB was out of town, and that this other individual told the Forciers that they could follow-up for a meeting with DB, but that they didn't. Obviously, there will be some he said - she said, and like I said in my original post, we likely don't know the whole story.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:22 AM ^
This was probably this 3rd or 4th chance.
Still DB should have met with his family.
February 10th, 2011 at 12:09 PM ^
if the kid really wanted to stay he would have done his damn homework.
I'm sorry, but I'm not buying this sob story from Mr. Self-Important.
February 10th, 2011 at 1:04 PM ^
Tate no doubt knew about whatever deadlines and requirements in his coursework and he bailed on those. It cost him his bowl game eligibility and that is huge. He has much more experience that DG. If Denard had gone down and the game was close, Tate would have been needed badly. You have to lie in the bed you make. Hard life lesson for the kid, but this is not on Brandon.
February 10th, 2011 at 2:32 PM ^
It's not on Brandon. But it does make him look like a dick, and he has no way to defend himself because Tate's school records are private. So either rightly or wrongly, I think DB looks bad.
February 10th, 2011 at 4:02 PM ^
It only makes him look like a dick if you're willing to believe that a kid with a reputation as problem child, from a family of problem children, should get special treatment that other students - and even other student-athletes - don't get.
February 10th, 2011 at 4:32 PM ^
This is only a problem if "being a dick" is always bad. Sometimes you are bound to come across that way if you are doing your job as a leader. Notice, again, that with the Forciers the blame is always on someone else. They tried... they really tried... but they couldn't get the AD of a great university to give them special treatment for blowing off class and not turning in assignments. Sorry to be such a dick, but it sounds likely that DB did the right thing, even if he was imperfect in how it came across.
February 10th, 2011 at 6:03 PM ^
It's easy to see it like that from our perspective. But for Average Joe Freep/MSM reader I think Brandon came off in a bad light. If some of the stuff being said about Tate is true, then DB could have well made the right decision not to meet with Tate.
I think a better way to handle this would have been to meet and not give Tate the chance to come back. At least then the headlines won't be reading that he wouldn't meet with a student-athlete from his own department, and the Forcier's wouldn't have this new talking point.
February 10th, 2011 at 6:25 PM ^
How do you do that if the Forciers don't reschedule the meeting?
February 10th, 2011 at 6:43 PM ^
No idea. All I've said is that Tate can talk all he wants and DB cannot. Therefore, Tate's story is printed as the only side. I then said that if I was DB I probably would have wanted to handle the situation a bit differently.
I'm not trying to argue Tate's case at all here, just pointing out that one has a microphone and one is legally required to stay silent.
February 11th, 2011 at 12:06 AM ^
Hate to break it to you, but the average Freep/MSM reader already thought Tate was a douchebag and, as such, is not likely to take his side in this matter.
February 10th, 2011 at 3:47 PM ^
Something did not smell right about this whole thing when Tate's dad, in an interview just before he was flying to Ann Arbor, said he didn't know what this was all about and was going to AA to find out.
Huh? You are going to get on an airplane and fly to AA becasue there was "some mix-up about some courses not completed"? I think Mr. Forcier was being a bit disingenious--he knew pretty much what the story was before we headed east, and it did not bode well for Tate.
February 11th, 2011 at 12:27 AM ^
It's generally a sickly-sweet kind of smell, usually with smoky tones.
February 10th, 2011 at 1:12 PM ^
...if CRex's post is to be believed:
February 10th, 2011 at 1:20 PM ^
I hadn't read that before. Obviously, it may or may not be true, but it seems to fit the other information.
February 10th, 2011 at 3:42 PM ^
My key problem is I can't source it. The prof and GSI of that class can't talk without breaking student privacy laws and I doubt Tate would confirm it. All I can do is state that is that people in the department where one of the I's occured have hinted heavily at this. They aren't happy that Tate is claiming Michigan is being the unreasonable party here when it appears he cheated.
Personally all I can say is a good, but often drunken, friend of mine failed out of Michigan twice. Took him 7 years but he was always let back in after a stint at Eastern and he has a degree from here. For a 4 star QB that wins games to get the door slammed in his face means he really pissed off Acadamic Standards.
February 10th, 2011 at 3:29 PM ^
Yeah, to me, it seems like Tate got punishment from the academic side of things, just like any other student would have (possibly even with a few leniencies as an athlete), and when the punishment came through and couldn't be reversed for an athlete, he was upset.
Obviously, if I got kicked out and couldn't return, I would probably call, email, write to whomever I could and beg them on my knees to let me back. If they said no, though, I would have to accept it and say I did everything I could to return (like Tate is saying). Though I hate losing him, I'm glad knowing the school doesn't relent on its policies even for athletes. I know a lot of places would think differently.
It sounds like he's deserving of sympathy, but looking at the issue closer brings more clarity and I'm proud of the U. [Note: read the post linked that I'm replying to, otherwise this will be taken differently]
February 10th, 2011 at 10:00 PM ^
I believe it. They put the kid on a plane and sent him home two days before the bowl game. You don't do that if the kid just didn't make grades and can't play.
You take things to that level if he REALLY f'ed up and is no longer fit to be on the team. My first reaction back in December was "Uh oh, somebody cheated on an exam." Plagarising a paper seems even more likely.
Given the family history of blaming everybody not named Forcier, I believe this even more.
Brandon wouldn't meet with them because it was a waste of time. Brandon can't clear up the academic issues.
Gee I wonder if he picked Miami because of their strong desire to return to the old days where football is more important than anything else.... hmmmmmm.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:23 AM ^
I would feel a lot better agreeing with you if this hadnt' been Tate's second screw up this year alone. He did get his wings clipped for not living up to team standards in the Spring right? To say he wasn't given a second chance is a bit disingenious.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:33 AM ^
Look, Tate had some growing up to do - big time. It seems like this whole year was a huge maturing process.
I see your point - how many chances are we going to give the kid? But, to me, the other stuff, to the extent that we are aware of it - was minor. This seems to be his first real serious screw up, so I think that refusing to even work through the issue with him wasn't a great move. Hell, DB could have told Tate, if you want to come back, take this year to work your way back onto the team, and if you can meet the following goals (insert goals), you can rejoin in 2012 and compete playing time." Not saying that Tate would have taken such an offer, but to just close the door on a 19 year old kid seems too strong for my tastes.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:48 AM ^
If by first serious screw up you mean first thing that has gotten him kicked out of school, then you are correct. However, in the traditional sense, I have a feeling that he screwed up immensely in the summer, enough to get called out by a senior and to get his wings taken away.
If you are going to continue to push this, then I suggest you never criticize MSU for having criminals on their teams.
February 10th, 2011 at 11:09 AM ^
I am not really pushing this. I simply posted it because I thought it was of interest and expressed my opinion that based upon what Tate was saying, I thought he should be given another chance. Not really making a big issue, but it is my feeling that with kids who are like 19, DEPENDING ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES, kids should be given a few chances.
What were Tate's other screw-ups? Was he involved in a nerd beat down? Was he involved in theft? Fraud? Passing off other students' work as his own? Sexual assault? Dealing drugs? Taking improper benefits (i.e. tattoos)? If yes to any of these, that would obviously be a huge difference.
It was my understanding that Tate had his wings clipped and was called out for not putting in maximum effort. This is a huge difference than what the MSU kids have done.
Also, I never said that Tate should be given a blanket pass to come back with welcome arms. I said that they should explore the possiblity and try to work with him. Like I said in response to another post, DB could have told Tate that he has been given too many chances, and that if he REALLY wanted to be at Michigan like he claimed, he could take 2011 away from the team to try to reach certain personal academic goals, and that if those goals were reached, Tate could re-join the team in 2012 and compete for playing time. If Tate doesn't take this, fine. But, if he does, maybe DB helps a kid learn some life lessons that make him a better person (which is what we claim is still important when dealing with student athletes).
February 10th, 2011 at 11:41 AM ^
He wasn't putting in maximum effort on the team because he was making up classes during the summer. At least that's what he told reporters.
February 10th, 2011 at 4:12 PM ^
Michgoblue - do you feel this same level of sympathy for the hundreds of students who flunk out of Michigan every school year? Or do you only feel sorry for football players who can't hack it?
February 10th, 2011 at 9:16 PM ^
And only starters.
February 10th, 2011 at 2:37 PM ^
Did Tate have to meet with DB in order to have a shot to remain on the team, or did he want to meet because he's a high level official with some sway in the administration?
In other words, was this about Tate playing football or remaining a student?
February 10th, 2011 at 11:57 AM ^
with your solution. if i'm running an educational institution, i would try to work with the students and do everything possible to get them on the right track and earn a degree. isn't what colleges should be about?
i would given tate a choice to take a redshirt in 2011 to get his academics in order and prove himself worthy of rejoining the team.
it's not the only decision process of DB's that puzzles me. but we're not privy to all of the info at his disposal. so we are only left to guess the true story.
February 10th, 2011 at 3:20 PM ^
do you honestly believe that he ever faced the rigors of a tough HS cirriculum yet alone one of Michigan's standard. Now put him 3,000 miles from home and add the rigors of playing college football and the spotlight he was put in during the first four weeks of his career. Thanks for some great memories Tate. I hope you've got your head on straight and do well at the U.
February 10th, 2011 at 4:10 PM ^
Students that have been homeschooled often fare better in college than their non-homeschooled classmates. Of course, most go that route for academic reasons. Forcier was homeschooled for purely athletic reasons. His parents' misguided priorities seem to have become his as well.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:23 AM ^
The freep is at it again. Load your muskets....CHARGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
February 10th, 2011 at 10:48 AM ^
You ruin your joke with the /s
February 10th, 2011 at 10:24 AM ^
Do I have to take sides on this?
On one hand, Dave Brandon remains dead to me and I don't see why he wouldn't meet with him at least. On the other hand, there have been rumours of problems with Tate for the past year or so and I have to wonder how many headaches he's caused Brandon over that time.
I root for everyone to have fun in their future endeavours.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:39 AM ^
When I was in the Air Force it seemed like 5% of my subordinates took up 90% of my time. Needless to say it wasn't exactly heartbreaking when one of them would get new orders. We don't know the full story, but it does seem like Tate is a 5% kind of guy and maybe DB just reached the end of his rope.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:53 AM ^
I currently am in the Air Force. It sucks how that 5% of dirt-bag-airmen screw things up for the rest of us. If I ever find Airman Snuffy...
February 10th, 2011 at 12:28 PM ^
well, I guess I'm in the 95%, cause commander barely knows my name.
February 10th, 2011 at 3:53 PM ^
I really find it tough to believe that DB would not have met with Tate if there was, indeed, a grounds for discussion. I think Tate may may used up the allotment of "we'll give you the benefit of the doubt" that he had. Enough was enough.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:25 AM ^
I would venture a guess that there is more to it than printed, but if not, questionable decision-making by Mr. Brandon. I withhold judgment.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:38 AM ^
ditto.
February 10th, 2011 at 11:16 AM ^
That would certainly be more to the story...
February 10th, 2011 at 10:29 AM ^
I am with you. I think there are some things that are not being shared / being withheld. Either way, it is done and I wish Tate luck at Miami (YTM). He was a great player, but ultimately academics come first.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^
During the summer and early fall Tate fell behind and was allowed to catch up. He said this during his Gator Bowl interview with the freep.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^
Strike three --- you're out.
And arguing with the umpire never, ever, leads to a change in the fact that... you are out.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:27 AM ^
If there's a meeting to be had, it needs to be with the head football coach, not the athletic director.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:35 AM ^
No, when a lot of this was going on, Hoke wasn't even hired, yet. And when he was, he wasn't even in Ann Arbor for more than a few meetings and the pressers. He was on the road rapidly trying to make up the time in recruiting that DB wasted with his "process."
PLus, Tate had no relationship with Hoke - to the extent that he had a relationship, it was with DB. Also, if the issue was purely academics, that is not an issue for a football coach - it is an issue for the administration.
Blaming Hoke for anything to do with this is simply wrong.
February 10th, 2011 at 10:52 AM ^
I'm not sure of the timing of these attempts at meetings. Perhaps he was "gone" before Hoke was hired, seems Tate was still keeping that door open, at least in the media, after Hoke was hired.
"Tate had no relationship with Hoke." Holy shit, he's gotta build one then.
And an academic issue is most definitely not for the athletic administration, it is for the faculty and the college academic advising staff.
And to clarify, I'm not blaming Hoke. I'm blaming the Forcier family for seeking a meeting with the wrong person.
February 10th, 2011 at 11:12 AM ^
I am not sure that Hoke could have even met with Tate, since Tate is not on the team any more. Not sure if there are any regulations on that.
Also, given Hoke's recruiting deadlines and 23 hour days, I am not sure that he would have had time to spend building a relationship with a kid who may not even be on the team in late January.
February 10th, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^
Excellent point re: a busy schedule for Coach Hoke.
I still stand by my initial thought that any meeting should be with the head football coach, not the AD (assuming there was a head football coach at the time). And again, I'm not blaming Hoke for this. Ultimately my point being: I think the Forcier family was being pretentious thinking they deserved a meeting with the AD.
February 10th, 2011 at 11:30 AM ^
was to meet with the current players who were doing what was required of them to be on the team and available to the team. I don't remember the exact language, but Tate was already "gone," per DB. And judging from Hoke's words about strictness (his own three-strike rule?), I can't imagine with the late hire that his first priority would be to reach out to someone who'd already struck out rather than focus on his new charges and the recruits and commits.
I feel bad for Tate, but it seems to be the best for him and the team that remains that he tries to make it elsewhere.
February 10th, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^
Brandon stated during Hoke's introductory press conference that Forcier was no longer with the program. It seems like whatever window of opportunity there was had already closed.