# College football--deja vu all over again



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Disgusting: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/...ab-top-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

But same as it ever was:

The sad part is, it took the NYT to report on stuff that the media in Tallahassee should have been on top of long ago, and it took years for the media in Seattle to figure it out. And let's not talk about Penn State.

There was more honor and glory in Yale beating Army this season than any national championship won by hooligans masquerading as scholar athletes.


----------



## phyrpowr (Aug 30, 2009)

So, what else is new? There's been a huge "fanboy" culture in this country (and probably all others) since forever, it's just exacerbated by the enormous amounts of $$$ at stake. Colleges in the '20s and '30s used travelling "ringers" as players, and most likely any US citizen on this site knew some kid in high school who got away with a ton of crap because he was the quarterback, pitcher, whatever. Without knowing the actual figure, I'd bet there's twenty times the newspaper column inches devoted to promising high school sophomores than there are to Rhodes Scholars.

Colleges, and the pros, aren't forcing these people on an unsuspecting and unwilling public. Nike doesn't print those hundreds of millions of dollars they pay in endorsements: they're given willingly for tacky shoes and gear. There's a whole new and profitable industry now devoted to _*fantasy leagues!!

*_We have met the enemy, and he is us (Pogo, by Walt Kelly)


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

I am consistently struck by the predictive reality of that old saw, "Power corrupts...and absolute power corrupts, absolutely!" Perhaps this should be expanded to include, 'Celebrity corrupts and absolute celebrity corrupts absolutely'...yes, no? We put these young, immature kids on these make believe pedestals and then despair when they fall off! We create a system in which a coach must win decisively and consistently in order to keep their jobs and then act amazed when they try to cover for their star player(s).

Phyrpowr and Pogo are right, "We have met the enemy and he is us!"


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

It's just mind-blowing to me how a university and city would tolerate such crimes, and they are crimes. It's not uncommon for us here in the United States to look at soccer hooligans overseas and wonder how that sort of thing happens. This, I think, is worse.


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

eagle2250 said:


> I am consistently struck by the predictive reality of that old saw, "Power corrupts...and absolute power corrupts, absolutely!" Perhaps this should be expanded to include, 'Celebrity corrupts and absolute celebrity corrupts absolutely'...yes, no? We put these young, immature kids on these make believe pedestals and then despair when they fall off! We create a system in which a coach must win decisively and consistently in order to keep their jobs and then act amazed when they try to cover for their star player(s).
> 
> Phyrpowr and Pogo are right, "We have met the enemy and he is us!"





32rollandrock said:


> It's just mind-blowing to me how a university and city would tolerate such crimes, and they are crimes. It's not uncommon for us here in the United States to look at soccer hooligans overseas and wonder how that sort of thing happens. This, I think, is worse.


First off, I think y'all need to slow your roll a tad.

I am pretty sure that scholarship athletes have lower criminal incident rates than the general student body. I know for almost all sports, the graduation rate is higher (basketball excepted as that is so easily skewed by one person out of a class going pro early).

Second, hooligans are not the athletes at all, but rather are the fans.

Finally, this type of favoritism exists in all kinds of ways. I am not saying that makes it right, but let's not pretend that athletics is the only place it happens.

The bottom line is that these incidents are higher profile and receive an inordinate amount of attention than similar cases where non famous people are involved. None of this is to validate or excuse Winston or potential wrong doing on the Tallahassee or FSU police departments (or in any other case), but let's not pretend that the potential for bias only goes one direction.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Charlotte, NC. Division One town, IIRC.

'Nuff said.



vpkozel said:


> First off, I think y'all need to slow your roll a tad.
> 
> I am pretty sure that scholarship athletes have lower criminal incident rates than the general student body. I know for almost all sports, the graduation rate is higher (basketball excepted as that is so easily skewed by one person out of a class going pro early).
> 
> ...


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> Charlotte, NC. Division One town, IIRC.
> 
> 'Nuff said.


You do not recall correctly. There are no D1 football schools in Charlotte.

But do we now get to discount opinions based on location? Does this apply to all arenas of life or just athletics?


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> You do not recall correctly. There are no D1 football schools in Charlotte.
> 
> But do we now get to discount opinions based on location? Does this apply to all arenas of life or just athletics?


No. I was just trying to figure out how someone could pooh-pooh domestic violence, grand theft auto, sexual assault, discharge of weapons in crowded areas and various other crimes by football players in the way that you did. If it's not geography, it must be something else.


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> No. I was just trying to figure out how someone could pooh-pooh domestic violence, grand theft auto, sexual assault, discharge of weapons in crowded areas and various other crimes by football players in the way that you did. If it's not geography, it must be something else.


I didn't pooh pooh it at all, thank you. These are obvious very serious acts. But they are not more serious because the person doing the hitting, stealing, shooting, or assaulting is great at throwing a fade, picking up a blitz, or doing the blitzing. Just like sexual harassment is no more or less serious if committed by a certain occupant of a certain non-square office. The acts simply are what they are.

So what is different? The publicity. I highly doubt that any regular student is going to have his actions and the resulting investigations comprehensively studied by the NYT or SPI (unless he was particularly note worthy or his acts particularly heinous).

And I stand by my statements that athletes in general and also football players as a whole have lower crime rates than the population in general and overall student body, so unless you are going to start a thread every time a flute player, astronomy club sergeant at arms, fraternity pledge, or french club president commits the exact same crimes then perhaps then I don't understand why you would single out these athletes.

And if you would like for me to point out the obvious bias that the press - and many of the groups seeking publicity there in - bring to the table, I will start with Hope Solo.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> I didn't pooh pooh it at all, thank you. These are obvious very serious acts. But they are not more serious because the person doing the hitting, stealing, shooting, or assaulting is great at throwing a fade, picking up a blitz, or doing the blitzing. Just like sexual harassment is no more or less serious if committed by a certain occupant of a certain non-square office. The acts simply are what they are.
> 
> So what is different? The publicity. I highly doubt that any regular student is going to have his actions and the resulting investigations comprehensively studied by the NYT or SPI (unless he was particularly note worthy or his acts particularly heinous).
> 
> ...


Oh.

Let's say I'm good at football. The police pull me over on a stolen scooter and I give them a laughably flimsy story and they nonetheless send me on my way. That's OK? Or, let's say I'm shooting up the community with a pellet gun and the cops find me with a pellet gun where all the shooting is going on and they let me go after I tell them I'm in search of squirrels. That's OK? Or, let's say I'm a woman who got raped by the star quarterback and I called the cops and the cops didn't investigate. That's OK? Or, let's say, after I've been accused of rape and I've confessed to shoplifting and I've put derogatory things about women on the Internet, I then stand up in a crowded dining hall and shout a sexually graphic term about women while others, with my knowledge, are recording it, and my punishment is suspension for a whole half of football against an opponent that didn't have a snowball's chance in the first place, that, too, is OK?

All this is to say, you're missing the point. Whether football players are better behaved than the general populace--and we can save that debate for another day--is irrelevant. What we're dealing with here is a university and a community and a law enforcement system that doesn't appear to give a rat's you-know-what about accountability, integrity or justice. That's the point. And don't go blaming it on the media. That's a load of cow pucky. Are you seriously suggesting that these athletes-cum-criminals aren't getting special breaks? Seriously? You don't see any problem here? Is your name Stevie Wonder or Ray Charles?

If I had had my way, Penn State would have gotten the death penalty from the NCAA over the Sandusky matter. It was richly deserved. Why didn't Penn State get the death penalty? Because a bunch of folks who've lost all touch with reality said it wasn't fair to punish innocent athletes and, besides, look at how long it took SMU to recover from the death penalty, sniff, sniff, whine, whine. I'm not aware that academics suffered at SMU, and isn't that supposed to be the point of having a university? If football was so gosh darn important to those kids at Penn State, then they should have let them transfer (and, in fact, transfers were allowed) but the football program at Penn State should have been canceled for a minimum of one season, not so much to punish, but to do what is necessary to shake a university/community by its proverbial shoulders so that they might wake up and understand, finally, that there are more important things than football. Because, by all appearances, there is no more important thing than football in way too many places.


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> Oh.
> 
> Let's say I'm good at football. The police pull me over on a stolen scooter and I give them a laughably flimsy story and they nonetheless send me on my way. That's OK? Or, let's say I'm shooting up the community with a pellet gun and the cops find me with a pellet gun where all the shooting is going on and they let me go after I tell them I'm in search of squirrels. That's OK? Or, let's say I'm a woman who got raped by the star quarterback and I called the cops and the cops didn't investigate. That's OK? Or, let's say, after I've been accused of rape and I've confessed to shoplifting and I've put derogatory things about women on the Internet, I then stand up in a crowded dining hall and shout a sexually graphic term about women while others, with my knowledge, are recording it, and my punishment is suspension for a whole half of football against an opponent that didn't have a snowball's chance in the first place, that, too, is OK?
> 
> ...


You are making some big assumptions in your rant. Which is why I said, you need to slow your roll.

But telling me that I am blaming it on the media is laughable. No where did I do any such thing. What I said - and very much stand by - is that these incidents will get more press than your average college student doing exactly the same thing.

And you are doing what you have a tendency to do. You are taking isolated cases and then using them as representative as a failure of the entire system.

You say that I am missing the point. Well, what exactly was your point with this sentence? "There was more honor and glory in Yale beating Army this season than any national championship won by hooligans masquerading as scholar athletes."

The problem is that you want action NOW, regardless of where the facts may lead. But facts have a habit of getting in the way sometimes. In fact, many of the same things that you write here were said almost verbatim in the Tawana Brawley case, which turned out to be false. I also am dubious that if I replaced the name Jameis Winston with Bill Clinton that you would be quite so gung ho in your condemnations.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> You are making some big assumptions in your rant. Which is why I said, you need to slow your roll.
> 
> But telling me that I am blaming it on the media is laughable. No where did I do any such thing. What I said - and very much stand by - is that these incidents will get more press than your average college student doing exactly the same thing.
> 
> ...


Yes, when a woman says she's raped, I want the police to investigate. Now. Because if you wait, then any case that might have existed is ruined--even the prosecutors in Florida have blasted the police for the way they handled it. When thugs disguised as scholar-athletes go shooting up things with pellet guns, I want them charged ASAP, not months after the fact and only when reporters from NYT show up and start asking questions about the apparent free-for-all that exists in the FSU athletic department. When the star quarterback admits to shoplifting, I think that he should be suspended from the football team. Now. That way, perhaps he wouldn't have stood up months later at the student union and shouted "F her in the you-know-what." And when that did happen, yes, I think that he should have faced more serious consequences than a 30-minute suspension against a weak opponent--three games, even, would seem lenient, given the aforementioned shoplifting incident that resulted in discipline from the baseball team, which no one cares about, but no sanction from the football team, which folks seem to worship. When the cops stop a player riding a stolen motor scooter and he has no good explanation and the story he tells doesn't hold water, I want him arrested, not sent on his way, and I certainly don't want the cops shaking down the scooter's rightful owner, as was done in this case.

So, yeah, I guess I am kind of an action-now fellow when it comes to people who break the law and skate while others who do the exact same thing get thrown in jail. Call me old fashioned, but I think that there should be consequences for illegal behavior, or even behavior that, while not illegal, falls outside the boundaries of acceptable human interaction. I could be knee jerk, but I've always believed that when there are consequences, people tend to comport themselves in more civil fashions. And I may be jumping the gun here, but what's happened at Florida State (see above) sure sounds like a pattern of behavior, leastwise by the powers that be, as opposed to an isolated incident.

And I don't get the Bill Clinton thing. At all. What's up with that?


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> Yes, when a woman says she's raped, I want the police to investigate. Now. Because if you wait, then any case that might have existed is ruined--even the prosecutors in Florida have blasted the police for the way they handled it. When thugs disguised as scholar-athletes go shooting up things with pellet guns, I want them charged ASAP, not months after the fact and only when reporters from NYT show up and start asking questions about the apparent free-for-all that exists in the FSU athletic department. When the star quarterback admits to shoplifting, I think that he should be suspended from the football team. Now. That way, perhaps he wouldn't have stood up months later at the student union and shouted "F her in the you-know-what." And when that did happen, yes, I think that he should have faced more serious consequences than a 30-minute suspension against a weak opponent--three games, even, would seem lenient, given the aforementioned shoplifting incident that resulted in discipline from the baseball team, which no one cares about, but no sanction from the football team, which folks seem to worship. When the cops stop a player riding a stolen motor scooter and he has no good explanation and the story he tells doesn't hold water, I want him arrested, not sent on his way, and I certainly don't want the cops shaking down the scooter's rightful owner, as was done in this case.


Now we are getting somewhere. I don't disagree with you on this. What I DO disagree with you on is that this is normal or systemic or even limited to athletes.

Winston was investigated and they chose not to file charges - at least that is the last I saw.

And while I was not the one that faced a similar allegation, 2 friends of mine were charged with a rape that became very high profile when I was at school. Lots of recriminations and calls for action RIGHT NOW by the expected groups, including the student paper. Turns on once on the stand and faced with conflicting evidence, she admitted that she made the whole thing up. Sorry, my bad. Have a nice day. You can probably guess that the number and volumes of the retractions and apologies - if there were any - were not quite as loud as the screams for justice.

So, bottom line. Do young men sometimes perform the heinous act of rape? Yes. Do young women sometimes perform the heinous act of lying about a rape afterwards? Yes.



> So, yeah, I guess I am kind of an action-now fellow when it comes to people who break the law and skate while others who do the exact same thing get thrown in jail. Call me old fashioned, but I think that there should be consequences for illegal behavior, or even behavior that, while not illegal, falls outside the boundaries of acceptable human interaction. I could be knee jerk, but I've always believed that when there are consequences, people tend to comport themselves in more civil fashions. And I may be jumping the gun here, but what's happened at Florida State (see above) sure sounds like a pattern of behavior, leastwise by the powers that be, as opposed to an isolated incident.


Fair enough, I guess, but that type of shoot first, ask questions later approach is bound to end up with mistakes that are much more difficult to deal with than waiting until you have a solid investigation, then making a decision. It is also very interesting that you seem to take all of anti football player points of view totally at face value. Pardon me for being a little more skeptical.



> And I don't get the Bill Clinton thing. At all. What's up with that?


Well, I figured that an action-now fellow when it comes to people who break the law and skate while others who do the exact same thing get thrown in jail would want a serial sexual harasser and perjurer called to account. You know, cause you believe that there should be consequences for illegal behavior, or even behavior that, while not illegal, falls outside the boundaries of acceptable human interaction and all.

But the biggest issue that I have with all of this is the extrapolation of bad behavior from a few as the norm for a larger group. Which is how all of this started.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> Now we are getting somewhere. I don't disagree with you on this. What I DO disagree with you on is that this is normal or systemic or even limited to athletes.
> 
> Winston was investigated and they chose not to file charges - at least that is the last I saw.
> 
> ...


Never said that athletes get in trouble more than the general population. Never even suggested it.

As for Winston, prosecutors have publicly criticized the police for a slipshod investigation into the rape allegation. It's now before some sort of student disciplinary committee, which should be a cakewalk, given the apparent propensity of people in Tallahassee to let football players do whatever they want. Here's a pretty thorough summary of deficiencies in the investigation that hampered any chances of charges and/or the truth coming out: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...e-allegations-against-fsu-jameis-winston.html

As for false allegations, of course that happens. Ask the Duke lacrosse team. But it is equally true that rapists, like other forms of criminals, often walk. Parenthetically, I'm aware of a case from many years ago in which two men were convicted of gang-style rape and were facing 20 years in prison. Fortunately, one of their parents had sufficient means to hire a private investigator post conviction who determined that the rape could not have happened because the victim was doing time in the county jail at the time of the alleged offense--she'd been booked under her maiden name and it was somehow missed. The defendants, already convicted, were freed after each serving more than a year pending trial and awaiting sentencing. In my book, the victim-who-wasn't should have been prosecuted and sentenced, if not to the time the defendants were facing, at least to the time they had served. She wasn't charged with anything.

Still don't get the Clinton thing--if you want to talk about one of the best presidents of the post-war era, we can start a separate thread.


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

Apparently they had a reporter down there for 4 whole months digging this stuff up, lol. If you put a reporter in my kids' elementary school for 4 months you could probably come up with worse....


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> Apparently they had a reporter down there for 4 whole months digging this stuff up, lol. If you put a reporter in my kids' elementary school for 4 months you could probably come up with worse....


I am not sure that you could. And NYT should be praised, not vilified, for exposing this. There was plenty of low-hanging fruit, but it looks to me like they took the time and effort to get it right. No one should complain about that. Would you prefer a hatchet job?


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> I am not sure that you could. And NYT should be praised, not vilified, for exposing this. There was plenty of low-hanging fruit, but it looks to me like they took the time and effort to get it right. No one should complain about that. Would you prefer a hatchet job?


I don't agree that they took the time to get it right be ause there is very little in there that is not hearsay. And most of the quotes are obviously played up for maximum effect. To be honest, i would say that - based on what I have seen so far - this piece is a lot closer to hatchet job than good reporting.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> I don't agree that they took the time to get it right be ause there is very little in there that is not hearsay. And most of the quotes are obviously played up for maximum effect. To be honest, i would say that - based on what I have seen so far - this piece is a lot closer to hatchet job than good reporting.


I'm out. Been nice knowing ya.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> I don't agree that they took the time to get it right be ause there is very little in there that is not hearsay. And most of the quotes are obviously played up for maximum effect. To be honest, i would say that - based on what I have seen so far - this piece is a lot closer to hatchet job than good reporting.


Is this another hatchet job?

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/...o-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> Is this another hatchet job?
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/...o-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


From what I have read in that article, no it does not appear that way. And I certainly hope you can understand the glaring difference in the sets of articles.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> From what I have read in that article, no it does not appear that way. And I certainly hope you can understand the glaring difference in the sets of articles.


Nope. Not seeing any difference at all. Both strike me as well-researched and fair. And damning.


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> Nope. Not seeing any difference at all. Both strike me as well-researched and fair. And damning.


Really? Perhaps I missed it in the original article you posted, but where did they have quotes from the FSU or Tallahassee PD? Or even saying that they requested information but they had declined comment?

And honestly, how in the world do you know if they were well researched or not? Exactly how knowledgeable are you on these specific situations to be able to tell that?

Tell me, would you have bumped this thread if there had been new findings or events that were not in line with your thinking?


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

vpkozel said:


> Really? Perhaps I missed it in the original article you posted, but where did they have quotes from the FSU or Tallahassee PD? Or even saying that they requested information but they had declined comment?
> 
> And honestly, how in the world do you know if they were well researched or not? Exactly how knowledgeable are you on these specific situations to be able to tell that?
> 
> Tell me, would you have bumped this thread if there had been new findings or events that were not in line with your thinking?


Ack. I'm out again.


----------



## MaxBuck (Apr 4, 2013)

So. How about those Buckeyes?


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Then there's this. A local high school football coach has apparently been given use of a new car by a booster who owns a car dealership. Actually, several new cars. They get switched fairly frequently, perhaps to comply with state law that says it's illegal to drive a car with dealer plates for more than 25 consecutive days if you don't work for a dealership. Meanwhile, the governing body for high school athletics has this in its bylaws: "All remuneration for high school athletic coaching must be from the Board of Education of the member school employing the coach." So, what gives? An official with the governing body says that it's OK because a car isn't cash--"renumeration" means money, and so long as the coach isn't getting money from a source outside the school, it doesn't violate the rule.

What wonderful role modeling for impressionable young scholar athletes.


----------

