I can't get there.
Should the university fire a Brad Pitt look-alike male concession worker who provided stud services for half the cheer leading squad one night? I would think so. Would you?
Minnesota players boycotting all football activities . . .
- Thread starter Sope Creek
- Start date
I can't get there.
Should the university fire a Brad Pitt look-alike male concession worker who provided stud services for half the cheer leading squad one night? I would think so. Would you?
No, I don't think so. But the cheerleading squad should be in trouble, assuming there was some kind of morals clause in their agreement to be on the squad. Concession workers are generally 3rd party contractors and do not have 'moral' clauses, unless it's something like spitting in someone's drink (or use your imagination), which is a violation of the law anyway.
Now, if the concession worker didn't wash his hands afterwards....
So, should the woman face consequences or should the players face less consequences or what? Lets agree she does have some culpability. Does that lessen the appropriate consequences for the players?
C'mon, man, all the nuance and legal shit aside, we're talking about a bunch of guys that gang banged a shitfaced drunk chick. That's despicable. No amount of "she was a slut" and "boys will be boys" changes that. In my mind, the only question to ask is "Were they involved?" If the answer is yes, I can see nothing to mitigate it and they need to be gone.
That's sort of a bogus argument for someone that already had career earnings of over $30M.
Like I have said repeatedly, I have no interest in whitewashing what the players did, or that they should be free of serious consequences.
I just think this situation is a whole lot more complicated than "they did it" . . . and the complications stem from what the woman did, and did not, do.
Including the high school recruit reported to be involved on 9/2 during his visit to the University of Minnesota and Dinkytown.
Will he land at one of 3 other schools he has visited in the Big Ten or will those 3 programs say no?
The answer is yes, we do. Intoxication does not excuse unwanted sexual conduct. In Indiana, anyway, you have a responsibility to stop if you suspect the person (woman) is not in a mental state to resist. If in doubt, put your pecker away.
I have a son, too, and he'll be taught that if he ever puts himself in that position with a woman, drunk or not, he'll have more trouble with me than he does with the law or the school.
I don't see how it's complicated. She said yes until she didn't. That's not complicated. The fact that she drank alcohol has zero to do with anything.
Should she lose her job? Maybe but only if a condition of her employment was to never have relations with players, though I don't see why that would be the case. Should she suffer "consequences" because she had consensual sex and some of the other guys there took it farther than she wanted? Absolutely not.
Here is a news article with a link to the 80-page report. It is incredibly disturbing.
http://kstp.com/sports/university-o...tive-report-gophers-football-players/4347059/
http://kstp.com/sports/university-o...tive-report-gophers-football-players/4347059/
When the players read that report I don't think they will want those guys as teammates. I think the coaching staff is going to have a hell of lot of questions to answer - particularly since they all seemed to be freshmen and sophmores. What the odds of collecting that group of dirtbags as scholarship players?
If the alumni read the report many of them will have trouble sleeping at night.
If the alumni read the report many of them will have trouble sleeping at night.
I'm not sure, as a leader of a team, I could get behind these guys. Because they didn't get "due process" the statement read by the player had a ring of "lawyer" to it. Asking for release of information to satisfy the "teammates" isn't required and may be against the law for privacy issues. I know they said they were going to boycott activities and then are now going to the bowl, so I wonder what has changed? Have some of them changed their stance within the team?
I wonder if this was all released and some of the more "stand up" guys said, "I can't get behind this and don't want these types of players to tarnish my reputation. And I don't want to miss a bowl game because some dumbass can't keep his pecker in his pants" Imagine the heat from the alums right now....they have got to be throwing fits.
I wonder if this was all released and some of the more "stand up" guys said, "I can't get behind this and don't want these types of players to tarnish my reputation. And I don't want to miss a bowl game because some dumbass can't keep his pecker in his pants" Imagine the heat from the alums right now....they have got to be throwing fits.
I would hope that's the case. My guess is that they ended the boycott without a fight immediately after reading that.
This happened more than three months ago and there was no sense of contrition before the players backpedalled with their response on Saturday. Regarding the woman's culpability, yes, there are continuing questions. No one is putting her on a pedestal; however, there isn't a point of no return where her behavior abrogates any right of basic human decency.
What questions could those possibly be? The only question that is relevant is "did she consent?" and the answer, backed up by testimony and video, is "sort of, but not really" to the first two men and "definitely not" after that. Wasn't it you who linked the article explaining why women in rape situations find it very difficult to resist?
As we get a little older and a little wiser our moral compass' get fine-tuned - hopefully from learning about the actions or inactions of others. I imagine a lot of lessons will be learned from this fiasco.
Participating in a drunken gang bang should get you at least suspended.
The players are wrong headed here and if the university gives in they have no place in the Big Ten.
The players are wrong headed here and if the university gives in they have no place in the Big Ten.
Has anyone at Indiana made the connection that the recruit involved in this mess is Quran Hafiz? He is set to commit and sign today. There are reports that ISU and Nebraska have pulled their offers, and it appears the Illini have as well. That leaves only Indiana from his final four.
Last edited:
In had not, others may have. A bit of research indicates that Neb believes they are the favorite as of Friday night. I am sure all involved want to vet this.
It will be interesting to see what happens tonight. He is scheduled to announce and sign at 6pm. He plans to enroll for the spring semester at the school he chooses. His final four are Indiana, Illinois, Iowa State and Nebraska.
It appears that Indiana may be the only offer that is still available unless that has been pulled as well.
I don't know what the kids involvement was but it sounds like he may spend a year in JC proving himself.
Word must be getting out that Quran will sign with Indiana. A number of so called experts at 24/7 are switching their picks to Indiana. If Indiana does accept his letter of intent, it will be interesting to see how fans react if it is shown to be true that he is the recruit referred to in the report.
http://247sports.com/PlayerInstitution/Quran-Hafiz-at-Sandalwood-138307/CurrentExpertPredictions
http://247sports.com/PlayerInstitution/Quran-Hafiz-at-Sandalwood-138307/CurrentExpertPredictions
Last edited:
I'd be shocked if IU hasn't pulled the offer already, and if it hasn't that it would take Quran if he's the recruit in the video.
Has this information not been available to coaching staffs before the last day or two? If it has been available, why the continued interest in the kid?
Has this information not been available to coaching staffs before the last day or two? If it has been available, why the continued interest in the kid?
The report that was released by a news organization in Minnesota did not provide names. The details of the events refer to a recruit. Per what I've read on other forums, it appears that he was the only recruit visiting that weekend. I believe that is how people made that connection. I can't verify the accuracy of that assumption, but I read a post on another site that said there was an article in which his mom confirmed it was him. I have not seen that article.
I cannot imagine Tom Allen taking the commitment if it is true that he was involved.
I can't either. But I also can't reconcile the signing of a NLOI what we've heard about this kid being the only recruit on Minny's campus the weekend the sex/assault occurred.
Can football recruits sign NLOIs in December? I thought they had to wait until February.
I think you are correct that it wasn't a national letter of intent. Per his twitter, it appears he signed financial aid papers. I don't believe those have the same meaning as a NLI.
Also, IU coaches have been fairly active on twitter regarding other early enrollees (legal for coaches to retweet recruits), and no coach has done so with Hafiz so far. Maybe reading too much into this, but perhaps the commit hasn't been accepted. Guy had set this date over a month ago I think and was holding an event, so could be embarrassed to have to publicly cancel like that had all offers been pulled.
Suggest we hold judgement until his involvement is understood. Also have seen tweets that several affects were still in place. Hopefully not what some are mailing it to be.
