OT: FL Gators - Strike up the Grand Inquisition
Checked, didn't see elsewhere:
FL Red-Shirt Frosh assaults two women. Think Sharp will pick this up?
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/football/ncaa/02/15/florida-brown…
February 16th, 2010 at 9:07 AM ^
I don't know who this "Sharp" person is that you speak of.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:08 AM ^
He "slapped" two women and caused "scratches"? This is a DL? What a sissy. I'm trying to picture in my head how a guy that big can slapp a woman and cause "scratches" on her arm. Sounds like a cat fight.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:14 AM ^
Men slapping is funny in and of itself (not that he is slapping a woman, but that a man slaps at all) especially when it is a guy who is supposed to be a DL. Leaving scratches makes it all the more bizarre. I think you are right, they had a cat fight.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:17 AM ^
His only punishment is going to be more one-on-one time with the DLine coach so he can "learn to use his hands better".
February 16th, 2010 at 10:01 AM ^
should be used as a chance to off show your amazing incredible wit...this is one.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:31 AM ^
I don't understand. Are you somehow offended that I'm trying to picture an event that is described in an article in my head and I am having trouble doing it.
This isn't a life or death situation; the girl has scratches on her arm. You really need to learn to relax. You act like this is some deeply tragic event. Meanwhile there have been thousands of posts making light of the MSU situation where people were injured much worse than "scratches" on their arm.
Maybe we should have a moment of silence and pray that she doesn't require neosporin.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:10 PM ^
The neosporin part got me...
February 16th, 2010 at 10:18 AM ^
... an assault by 12,13 football players on a potluck can be considered an incident or a scuffle.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:13 AM ^
Urban Meyer will suspend him for a pregame meal for this. Maybe he'll think twice next time before he goes around hitting people.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:33 PM ^
Based on Meyer's previous disciplinary decisions...
February 16th, 2010 at 9:14 AM ^
Thanks for the link and all, but
the point, for people who are writing articles like Sharp's, ISN'T that there aren't college football players who commit crimes elsewhere. It's that Michigan ought to do everything it can to keep from having any on its team, because historically (and ideally) Michigan has always been, for the most part, above that fray.
Now you can take issue with the idea that Bo never had future criminals on his team (he did; one of his former players from the 1970s, Michael Guy Smith, sold 6 kilos of cocaine to an undercover officer in the 1980s), or that Lloyd never recruited formerly or currently troubled youths (examples too numerous to name), but the idea that there's a double standard involving Florida getting a free pass and Michigan getting raked over the coals isn't even really a contentious point. In fact, I bet if you asked them, Sharp et al. would agree: of course there's a double standard at work; there SHOULD be a differentiation made between Michigan and Everybody Else.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:25 AM ^
I'm not saying you are wrong, but I don't agree with you on this. Full disclosure, I am not a UM alum, but I would be hard pressed to believe anyone is any bigger a fan of UM than I am.
The notion that UM should be held to a higher standard than other schools is just bizarre to me. The USA has laws, the NCAA has rules as does the big ten. As long as UM and its players stay within these laws and rules I think it is fine. I don't believe we have to make up more laws and rules that hold our players and university to a standard higher than that of the rest of the schools in the coutry.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:15 AM ^
First off...
you wrote:
I am not a UM alum, but I would be hard pressed to believe anyone is any bigger a fan of UM than I am.
LOL.
Second off, you are basically arguing the line between rules and ethics. What the law says is right and wrong, and what your conscience tells you is right and wrong, are normally two quite different things.
It's not illegal to call another kid a "poo poo head", but under no circumstances will I ever tell my daughter she can go ahead and do it just because the Minnesota Code doesn't forbid it. That's called respect and the difference between right and wrong.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:27 AM ^
You don't think it's possible for someone who didn't attend the esteemed UofM to be a huge fan? Perhaps a bigger fan, or more emotionally invested than those who did attend?
I did not go to UofM, though I wanted to. I was brought up a Michigan fan from childhood. I would argue that I'm far more of a "fan" than your average Michigan grad, especially those who grew up out of state, or in another country. There are many M alums I know who could care less about the football team, or sports in general.
Granted, as an alum you have a deeper connection to the school, but it doesn't mean that it applies to all M grads.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:56 AM ^
i'm with TIMMMAAY on this one. I didn't go to UofM but not b/c I didn't want to but b/c i lived in OH. Out of state tuition at michigan is insane and I chose to stay in state. i still had season tics for football and attended every home game I could with the additional away game (ex: minnesota in 2008 where nick sheridan actually looked competent as a college football qb...maybe a DIII college qb, but a college qb nonetheless). I would consider myself a huge UofM football fan and feel that I can call them my team even though I didn't go there.
Here's to hoping Michigan and Ohio work out some type of reciprocity deal, so us guys down south can get an opportunity to go to a real University.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^
TIMMMAAY-
My laugh was at someone proclaiming themselves the "biggest" Michigan fan. That's a funny argument, to me.
I didn't go to Michigan either (I'm a Minnesota alum), but I've supported the football team since my father adopted me.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^
I have been around here long enough to know that you are a crank ass for the most part, but I always gave you credit for at least being intellegent......perhaps I gave you too much credit.
First, nowhere in my post was I arguing between rules and ethics, you did that. I said there are rules and laws to govern how the athletic department carries itself and as long as they stay within those boundries I am happy. If you think that UM was acting ethically irresponsible by giving a second chance to a kid who had trouble in his past than I think you are a self-righteous fool and have no idea what ethics is really about.
I would argue that it is far more ethical to give a person a second chance than it is to condemn a person for making a mistake.
Second, just because you went to UM, have a nice degree and carry yourself like a pompous ass doesn't make you a bigger fan than me or anyone else, so how about LOL at you.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^
points of clarification, Blue:
(1) I was simply pointing out the difference between ethics and laws. While I use the lessons of ethics with my kids, Drew Sharp and many others use them in connection with Michigan athletics. I was NOT stating an opinion that Michigan was "better" than other universities, and I APPROVED of Michigan signing Dorsey because I believe in second chances;
(2) My LOL was at someone claiming to be the world's biggest Michigan fan. I, like you, didn't go to Michigan. I've supported Michigan since my father, who went to Michigan, adopted me, and I've supported the team ever since. That allegiance survived when I got my degree from Minnesota.
February 16th, 2010 at 2:48 PM ^
I didn't proclaim myself to be "The worlds biggest michigan fan". I said I would be hard pressed to think there were bigger ones which was a poorly phrased way to say I count myself among the biggest. I guess that one is on me for not being more specific.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:17 AM ^
If you don't understand that Michigan should hold itself to a higher standard, it's clear you really don't understand Michigan all that well.
We have a tradition of excellence at our University, and I think any alum would tell you that. We have high expectations on the University that granted us our degree, to hold itself to a higher plateau than the status quo. We're Michigan. They're not. In Ann Arbor, we expect our coaches do things the right way, not cut corners and be slick just because everybody else is.
If you're such a "big" Michigan fan, you would get that.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:35 AM ^
Graduated from Engineering and lived in Michigan for 20 years.
AND I DO NOT GET THAT!
EDIT*** I guess that is what Sparty means when they say "The Michigan Arrogance".
February 16th, 2010 at 10:42 AM ^
Why such a dick?
February 16th, 2010 at 2:58 PM ^
I think this is directed at me so I will give my retort.
I didn't say I expect our coaches to cut corners or break rules. I didn't even say I want them to act like other coaches.
What I said was people like you that think they have to be F'ing saints in order to caoch at UM are insane. If they aren't breaking the rules or the laws in their approach to coaching and recruiting I am fine with their actions.
I don't think we need to apply some saintly code of conduct for our coaches to adhere to that far exceeds the rules and laws as we know them. Do so puts our teams at an unfair disadvantage when compared to the other universities of the NCAA.
I will be clear because despite the fact that you claim to have a UM degree, I don't find your interpretation of the english language to be that good considering how you understood my post:
I am not saying I want RR to act like Saban or Meyer etc. I am saying that the NCAA and Big Ten have rules, and I expect our coaches to follow those rules. I do not, however, expect them to be given nor follow a set of fantastical rules that have been developed by a bunch of self-righteous UM alums who care nothing about football.
If you want to stay on your high horse and shout your crap that is fine. Just move that old nag to another location so I don't have to hear it.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:29 AM ^
not guilty = troubled past?
Why even have a legal system if you are found not guilty, but treated as if you are guilty?
February 16th, 2010 at 9:41 AM ^
who are you or who is the Freep to decide what equals a "troubled past" and then decide who deserves a second chance?
Also, if our coaching staff believes in the character of a player, why is that not enough for you or for the Freep? Did you (or the Freep) do any research into the background of a player? Did either of you talk to his coaches, parents, teammates, have a relationship with a long time recruiter in Vance Bedford of Florida? I know Rich Rod and the Michigan coaching staff did.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:10 AM ^
The 12 people in a jury box can never have much sway in the court of public opinion. People will believe what they want to believe. Is it fair? Probably not. The fact is just being accused of a crime leaves a mark on someone's reputation. It sucks, but don't be surprised by it.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:13 AM ^
That reputation exists in a jury box, too. "If he was arrested, he MUST have been doing something wrong, or it wouldn't have happened." That is a big hurdle for the defense to overcome in many cases. But innocent people are arrested and charged all the time.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:41 AM ^
For the whole "we recruit better people" along with Brian's post about the matter. Anyone can recruit White guys who went to Private Schools and not have them screw up. I agree with Brian when he says that it's morally RIGHT to take kids with troubled pasts and turn their lives around.
So we can make fun of ND that they have "higher recruiting standards" and thus can't win because they don't take "troubled athletes" but Michigan is supposed to do the same thing. I'll give you a hint if this is true and Michigan thinks that it should be held to a higher standard than every other D-1A school then Michigan will NEVER EVER win another National Title.
Raback'd it.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^
Hey guys -- I'm not saying that I hold Michigan to a higher standard, or that anybody should. I'm just saying that the people who are writing articles criticizing the Dorsey decision do so, and think it's the right thing to do.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:48 AM ^
I bet if you asked them, Sharp et al. would agree: of course there's a double standard at work; there SHOULD be a differentiation made between Michigan and Everybody Else.
With the emphasis on the SHOULD!!!! Which lead us to believe that you felt the same way...
February 16th, 2010 at 11:25 AM ^
Apologies for the lack of clarity. Whole thing after the first colon should maybe have been in quotes.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. Florida has enough talent that they can pretty much kick him off the team if he is found guilty. It does smell like gross exaggeration, though.
If the women were attacking him, trying to grab their arms to restrain them or putting his up in defense would be reasonable. However, if he intentionally struck a girl half his size (if you are a DL, most girls are around half your size) in the face, he should be kicked off the team with no second chance.
As for Sharp, he has no reason to mention it unless he can somehow relate it to UM, as in:
"Florida player attacks two girls: RR at fault."
February 16th, 2010 at 9:43 AM ^
Of course Sharp is a cockhole, but he's not a Florida writer, is he? No need to apply the double standard theory unless it's Michigan State getting in trouble. Like if they, I dunno, dressed up in ski masks and invaded a fraternity cookout beating up everyone they saw. I know, farfetched, but still. I'm sure if that ever happens, the Free Press will be holding them to a high standard of behavior.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:38 AM ^
Your avatar, it's--I don't know what to say.
Oh wait: it's pretty awesome.
I'm making as many new MGoaccounts as I can today just so I can pos-bang you into oblivion. And even if that sounded the least bit homoerotic (or a lot), then so be it.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^
Form, not content, right?
Harbingers of doom, beware...
February 16th, 2010 at 10:57 AM ^
Slapping and scratching wont even get him on campus in EL.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^
Beyond this "higher standard" (i.e., do not take ANY kids with potential problems) and "same standard" (i.e., follow NCAA rules, compete just like everyone else), can I suggest a third way? I want U of M to be better than other Div 1-A schools in all three areas (grad rates, kids not getting in trouble while they are at school, success on the field) but not necessarily the best at one individual category. I think trying to be "just" above average on all three is hard enough.
For example, less than 50% of Texas' football players graduate (even accounting for transfers); U of M is at 70%. If, to get back to 10+ win seasons, we have to field teams mostly made up of people who are, for the most part, non-students, that wouldn't work for me as a fan. On the flip side, would it be great to be at 92% grad rate like Northwestern? Sure, but I realize that would limit U of M to long-term football mediocrity (notwithstanding NU was better than U of M the last two years; I'm talking long-term).
In another area, comparing Florida to U of M in the "criminal" dept, Florida has recently far outstripped U of M both on and off the field in terms of wins & arrests. Again, Florida has been the most successful program for the last five years in terms of wins, but if the only way Michigan could get to similar heights is to recruit kids resulting in having 27(!) arrests in five years, count me out. We should be able to do significantly better than that, but my expectation is not zero.
In short, doing all three well, but not be perfect/near in just one, which U of M has largely done over the history of its program, that's a real achievement in itself. Plus, it allows you to not obsess over one or two arrests or one kid who flunks out. It keeps a big picture in mind.
Links for above info, if you're interested:
http://tinyurl.com/ylbdudc
http://nusports.cstv.com/genrel/120909aab.html
http://tinyurl.com/yfdwktn
February 16th, 2010 at 1:51 PM ^
And I actually think that RR has kept his kids out of trouble more-so than Lloyd Carr. So in my mind he's definitely doing that right.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:45 PM ^
You hit the nail on the head. Where in any of these posts getting negged to oblivion did anyone say we shouldn't be recruiting kids with troubled pasts? That is WAY different than holding yourself to a higher standard, which we should and do.
What Saban does that drives Brian crazy, over-recruiting and then shoving players out to make room for them isn't illegal. But it sure as hell isn't right either. We could follow the rules and do stuff like that. Or be Kiffin-like and push the limits of the law every chance we get. That wouldn't be the Michigan I know. That wasn't what Bo believed in.
That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with taking a chance on a kid like Dorsey. It just means that if it turns into a Feagin-like case, we don't let it slide. And we try and act in the best interest of the student athlete, and also try to, you know, get him (or her) an education.
Michigan SHOULD hold themselves to a higher standard, and not become just another football factory. But as Rob says, this doesn't mean never taking a chance, just trying to excel in most things most of the time. Not being perfect or pristine.
If that makes me an Arrogant Ass, so be it.