OT: Black Missouri players threatening to strike from football activities of demands aren't met.
November 8th, 2015 at 12:43 PM ^
This has already been locked once. Maybe this one will survive ?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 12:44 PM ^
Ah, shoot. Didn't see the earlier thread.
Mods, delete if this isn't a kosher discussion for the board. Though I personally think it's an extremely interesting situation that can probably be discussed aside from the politics involved.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 12:57 PM ^
can we say "kosher" on here?
IBD!!
November 8th, 2015 at 1:06 PM ^
/thatsracist.gif
November 8th, 2015 at 1:52 PM ^
From the sounds of the mod edit last night, it was more that the mods didn't have the resources to police it late on a game night, not that the topic want appropriate.
November 8th, 2015 at 3:26 PM ^
of 1969 is considered water under the bridge by some...
November 9th, 2015 at 2:58 AM ^
http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/answered-common-questions-about-…
No idea if this ever got posted in this thread, but I figured it's useful to have this here. FAQ about the hunger strike and protests from a local paper.
November 8th, 2015 at 12:43 PM ^
This topic was already made, and locked, last night.
November 8th, 2015 at 1:33 PM ^
You guys are really annoying. It would be amazing if there was a way for the mods to set something up that automatically deleted any comment containing "IBD".
November 8th, 2015 at 2:19 PM ^
At least yours is funny. I don't think some of these other jokers will ever solve the puzzle.
November 8th, 2015 at 2:51 PM ^
so I was still in my normal wise-guy mood.
Sorry
November 8th, 2015 at 12:44 PM ^
IBD / IBL
November 8th, 2015 at 12:46 PM ^
IBD!!!
November 8th, 2015 at 12:47 PM ^
It was locked last night because it was midnight on a Saturday and mods didn't want to deal with moderating that thread. This should stay up as long as people can be reasonable.
November 8th, 2015 at 12:48 PM ^
you don't say...
November 8th, 2015 at 12:48 PM ^
It's honestly ridiculous that this can't be discussed here. This is one of the most interesting developments in the players-rights movement and has the ability to significant shift the balance of power in the structure of collegiate athletics.
November 8th, 2015 at 12:49 PM ^
I think it can, and farnn had a point as to why it was locked last night.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 12:49 PM ^
It can be discussed here and should, mod edit last night implied midnight on Saturday was the wrong time not that it couldn't be discussed.
November 8th, 2015 at 1:02 PM ^
You read that mostly right. This is, or at least has the potential to be, one of the biggest stories of the year even outside of sports, and that's not considering the NCAA/employment issues inadvertently raised.
Still, I don't think you or me or anyone else needs a map to see a bad ending eventually.
November 8th, 2015 at 1:40 PM ^
It's basically impossible for anything other than basic discussion of facts to occur on this topic without discussion involving a political position that some people will disagree with. IMO.
November 8th, 2015 at 1:02 PM ^
Well I found the thread that was locked last night, and to be fair my post has a bit more actual substance with the list of demands the student group has made. Don't see why it can't be discussed here.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 1:15 PM ^
At least, according to the typical definition, isn't players rights about getting paid, working conditions, whether there should be a union, etc.? This is about current players joining a campus protest that has nothing to do with football, or how football players are treated. Since football players are students, it's certainly legitimate of them to, as students, join campus protests, but I don't see this as a player or sports issue.
November 8th, 2015 at 1:21 PM ^
Exactly. As students they have every right to get involved in their community. If they use their platform as revenue-sport athletes that's just crafty marketing and/or the way the cookie crumbles.
November 8th, 2015 at 1:38 PM ^
It's not about players' rights as employees. It is about players' rights as people, visible members of a community with some leverage to use their status to affect some change they believe in.
November 8th, 2015 at 12:48 PM ^
No. It's ALL players and coaches and IBD
November 8th, 2015 at 12:52 PM ^
I'm going to make some popcorn just in case this thread survives.
November 8th, 2015 at 12:54 PM ^
IBL. In before Locked
November 8th, 2015 at 12:56 PM ^
Yeah, I still suck at embedding tweets, but Mizzou head Coach Pinkel is tweeting his support. That level of involvement makes it a national-media level movement. Has anyone here been following this story prior to this weekend?
November 8th, 2015 at 12:59 PM ^
The Mizzou Family stands as one. We are united. We are behind our players. #ConcernedStudent1950 GP pic.twitter.com/fMHbPPTTKl
— Coach Gary Pinkel (@GaryPinkel) November 8, 2015
November 8th, 2015 at 1:52 PM ^
Pinkel's had quite the tenure at Mizzou. It's a wonder he's had time to coach football.
November 8th, 2015 at 1:49 PM ^
If they don't play Saturday Pinkel should be let go immediately. You can't have a football team holding hostage the academic leadership of the university. He's obviously in a tough spot, but wedging the entire team into a spot like this is reckless.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 1:52 PM ^
Why can't they? If they feel strongly about what's going on, they have every right to protest about what's going on at their school
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 1:56 PM ^
They have every right to do so outside of the operations of the football team. Don't be so dense, you know what SEC football means to the community down there. These kids are being provided with an all expenses paid education because of football, and the sport they play shouldn't be a part of their protests.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 2:06 PM ^
They have every right regardless of the circumstances. Who cares about football when people are being socially persecuted?
November 8th, 2015 at 2:13 PM ^
Says who? At the end of the day football is nothing more than a game...so if they feel that social injustice trumps football then go for it!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 2:16 PM ^
Then they should be prepared to have their scholarships pulled. Football is, after all, the only reason their school is being paid for, and for many athletes (who knows how many in this group but if it's a normal percentage than it's most of them) the reason they were admitted to the school.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 8th, 2015 at 2:23 PM ^
Then they'll play somewhere else. Mizzou ultimately loses because the repercussions for this will be felt for a long time. Why do people act like pulling scholarships is going to cause these kids major problems. They have the talent to play football, ultimately they will be ok. But good luck trying to recruit African-American kids to play football in the future for Missouri if they don't play this right.
November 8th, 2015 at 2:33 PM ^
I can see you're mad they're doing this, but I think these kids know full well their scholarships could be pulled. They also know they have the leverage here because it would look terrible for the school to do that.
Implicit in this is that the athletes provide more value to the school than the school provides them. And the athletes are going to demonstrate that. Sometimes tables turn.
November 8th, 2015 at 2:36 PM ^
You're perspective evolves around football and not the real reason this issue is even viral. People are being marginalized because of their color in an environment that is supposed to be above unscientific conceptions such as race. If an institution is more concerned about football as opposed to the apprehension behind what is motivating 30 or more student athlethes to risk their education and not play football, then that speaks volumes about the negative culture that may be prevelant throughout the institution.
November 8th, 2015 at 2:20 PM ^
there are repercussions for what people do. Frankly, I think Mizzou should suspend the football program. Even if the chancellor deserves to lose his job a football program should not be able to subvert the academic side of the university.
It's their right as Americans to protest, but they don't have a right to subvert the power of the office of chancellor. If they can do it who can't? It's a slippery slope.
November 8th, 2015 at 2:55 PM ^
It's not the "academic side" of the institution. It is the institution of which these athletes are a part. They go to school there, they are on the same campus as the other students. They are using the tools they have.
November 8th, 2015 at 3:00 PM ^
by using their position as athletes. A position quite unlike that of almost every other student. Taking away that privileged positon is a perfectly fine reaction to their actions.
November 8th, 2015 at 3:14 PM ^
Is it privileged? It's a transactional relationship. "The university" doesn't invite the athletes to go to school there for nothing. They get something, Mizzou gets something.
And I totally agree that the university could definitely take away what it offers in that transaction--well within its rights. But it won't, because it would look very bad and it doesn't want to sabotage an athletic program from which it derives tremendous value.
November 8th, 2015 at 3:44 PM ^
yes. Remember those kids pay to attend Mizzou and unlike football players have to meet more than the 2.0 minimum to get int. Football players are OFFERED the opportunity to attend Mizzou. That is not the case for most of Mizzou's students who have to apply.