All Things Gopher Players Appeals Process

[Pompous Elitist]

The standard they used to charge or not was not probable cause. Not saying there was or wasn't based on what they had, just saying they generally use a somewhat higher standard when making a charging decision. You used the definitions to make your case and all I am saying is that PC was not the standard used by the police or the county attorney.

You seem to have some insider knowledge. You're going to need to spell it out for the readers here. Exactly how and why a sexual assault case will be brought to trial in MN. What evidence, in detail, does a prosecutor need to pursue a case? What standard is used? Be specific, please.

 

[Ewert86PC]

The man just got fired moments earlier...moments...nobody in America wouldn't be pissed!!! That's pretty good restraint. Imagine you JUST got fired (period! but it's also millions of dollars gone, it's humiliation, it's betrayal, it's injustice, you just lost 120 players who you love, you feel responsible for 20 guys with families losing their jobs, you won 9 games, on and on)
and RIGHT NOW some clown puts a microphone in your face and says how do you feel about getting fired? Come on man!!! Have just a smidge of walking in the guys moccasins.

It's a matter of character. Didn't his mother tell him that "if you can't say something nice, then don't say anything all?"

Yes, he had had the humiliation of being fired, but that is not an excuse for lashing out. It is also an easy shot to take. What kind of character example is that for his players? He immediately became a "do as I say, don't do as I do" example of character modeling and coaching.



Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

It's a matter of character. Didn't his mother tell him that "if you can't say something nice, then don't say anything all?"

Yes, he had had the humiliation of being fired, but that is not an excuse for lashing out. It is also an easy shot to take. What kind of character example is that for his players? He immediately became a "do as I say, don't do as I do" example of character modeling and coaching.



Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

My pompous brother, we've all said things that were a bit harsh in hindsight. He didn't call Coyle a spineless, communication-challenged bureaucratic weasel, he didn't insult Kaler, he didn't run down the school or the City. It was a flippant remark by a guy that didn't want to talk, be interviewed, and was probably actually cold. And yeah, he was just fired and insulted by a weasel. MN has some truly terrible winter weather at times. I'm not sure he meant it as a insult to all upper midwesterners and even if he did I'd give him a pass. I'd guess most of us have said something similar as we leave for a cruise or Florida.

 

[Ewert86PC]

My pompous brother, we've all said things that were a bit harsh in hindsight. He didn't call Coyle a spineless, communication-challenged bureaucratic weasel, he didn't insult Kaler, he didn't run down the school or the City. It was a flippant remark by a guy that didn't want to talk, be interviewed, and was probably actually cold. And yeah, he was just fired and insulted by a weasel. MN has some truly terrible winter weather at times. I'm not sure he meant it as a insult to all upper midwesterners and even if he did I'd give him a pass. I'd guess most of us have said something similar as we leave for a cruise or Florida.

No, he insulted a bigger audience, the entire state of Minnesota. It was not what I would do. It is not what I would expect someone who I had supported and gone to my legislators to try to retain to do.

KSTP has done ambush questioning like this with other U of M coaches, J Robinson most notably. It is their Modus Operandi with men's sports at the U. They even did it with PJ Fleck at his introductory news conference. Every other coach has brushed it off and gone past it.

The last straw is not the heaviest burden nor the most egregious. It is the one that crosses the boundary from support to nonsupport.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Ok

 

[CentralGopher]

Y'know, this is the thing that swayed me over to being okay with the firing of Claeys. If Kill tells the players that they have huge behavioral targets on their backs, didn't Claeys hear this message, too? He had to have heard the message and not impressed it's importance enough to the players. Especially before the first game of the season, which is when the incident in question occurred.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

You have no way of knowing Claeys didnt. Pure speculation on your part and not likely correct anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#coacheslivesmatter

 

[CentralGopher]

The point is that Clays didn't understand how much to impress the point to his players. Saying "be careful and don't get in trouble" is a half hearted attempt at coaching CYA. Since it was the beginning of the season, he needed to say "be careful and don't get in trouble because there are people who told me (and coach Kill) that they are looking to punish this program for off the field behavior."

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Again, there is no f'n way you have a clue what claeys did or didnt say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#coacheslivesmatter

 

[Ewert86PC]

Again, there is no f'n way you have a clue what claeys did or didnt say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#coacheslivesmatter

If you think that i have to quote him verbatim to have an understanding of his lack of control over the players off the field, then you are delusional. Whatever he said or didn't say, his players didn't understand the severity of not behaving properly and got in deep sh*t trouble off the field which is something that stains his leadership.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

More from the FIRE paper. Posting snippets because it is very long and probably most don't have time to read through.

"Be aware that a hearing panel’s impartiality is by no means a given. Indeed, it may be endangered by training that panel members are required by your college or university to attend as a condition of participation in the hearing process. For example, in 2011, FIRE released training materials used by Stanford University to train student jurors hearing sexual harassment and sexual assault cases that were aimed not at ensuring a fair trial for all parties, but rather at encouraging convictions of accused male students.

The training materials for Stanford’s “Dean’s Alternative Review Process” were largely derived from a book titled Why Does He Do That: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men and informed student participants that they should be “very, very cautious in accepting a man’s claim that he has been wrongly accused of abuse or violence.” The materials claimed that “[t]he great majority of allegations of abuse—though not all—are substantially accurate,” and that “an abuser almost never ‘seems like the type.’” Shockingly, the materials told jurors to believe that “act[ing] persuasive and logical” is a sign of guilt. Stanford also instructs campus tribunals that taking a neutral stand between the parties is the equivalent of siding with the accused."

 

[Iceland12]

No, he insulted a bigger audience, the entire state of Minnesota. It was not what I would do. It is not what I would expect someone who I had supported and gone to my legislators to try to retain to do.

KSTP has done ambush questioning like this with other U of M coaches, J Robinson most notably. It is their Modus Operandi with men's sports at the U. They even did it with PJ Fleck at his introductory news conference. Every other coach has brushed it off and gone past it.

The last straw is not the heaviest burden nor the most egregious. It is the one that crosses the boundary from support to nonsupport.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Speak for yourself. Most Minnesota residents are quite aware that it gets cold up here.

 

[60's Guy]

And if

If you think that i have to quote him verbatim to have an understanding of his lack of control over the players off the field, then you are delusional. Whatever he said or didn't say, his players didn't understand the severity of not behaving properly and got in deep sh*t trouble off the field which is something that stains his leadership.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

And if it is determined these players had consensual sex and the girl had remorse after the fact, then what? The attorney for the players said he can prove consensual sex via video but the school hearing wouldn't allow it to be shown or allow the testimony of the trained police investigator who also determined it was consensual. Still Tracy's fault then?

What are you going to say when one of the guys gets in trouble for PJ? It's going to happen. There are 120 young men going to college...they too might even be innocent but they are going to be part of some incident or altercation. They are going to party. It's not preventable. How often something happens is another story but perfect isn't realistic. imo No head football coach can control 120 kids year after year without incident.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

The 2011 OCR mandates are not supported by prior court decisions. From the FIRE paper:


OCR’s mandate is in tension with Supreme Court rulings like Goss v. Lopez (1975) and Addington v. Texas (1979). In Goss, as discussed earlier in this Guide, the Court held that when “a person’s good name, reputation, honor, or integrity is at stake because of what the government is doing to him,” due process requires “precautions against unfair or mistaken findings of misconduct and arbitrary exclusion from school.” The Court made these observations about due process protections at the elementary and secondary school level, finding at least minimal requirements of due process necessary because disciplinary action “could seriously damage the students’ standing with their fellow pupils and their teachers as well as interfere with later opportunities for higher education and employment.” Given the increased likelihood of much further-reaching negative consequences for a college student found guilty of sexual harassment or sexual violence in a campus judicial proceeding, greater protections are required, not lesser.

And in Addington, the Court—“mindful that the function of legal process is to minimize the risk of erroneous decisions”—noted that an intermediate standard of proof (i.e., the clear and convincing standard) might properly be used “in civil cases involving allegations of fraud or some other quasi-criminal wrongdoing by the defendant.” The Court arrived at this conclusion because the “interests at stake in those cases are deemed to be more substantial than mere loss of money,” and using the clear and convincing standard “reduce the risk to the defendant of having his reputation tarnished erroneously by increasing the plaintiff’s burden of proof.” As FIRE pointed out in a May 2011 response to OCR’s “Dear Colleague” letter, college sexual assault hearings involve allegations of felony criminal conduct, and the interests implicated certainly go beyond the mere loss of money.

In the 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter, OCR argued that the preponderance of the evidence standard is appropriate for adjudicating sexual assault and sexual harassment claims because it is the same standard that federal courts use when deciding civil lawsuits, including civil rights lawsuits. But as FIRE and others have noted, the use of this low burden of proof in federal civil cases is counterbalanced by the many procedural safeguards provided to defendants in those cases—safeguards that aren’t present in campus cases. To provide just a few examples:

Defendants in civil trials have their hearings conducted by experienced and impartial judges.

Either party can ask a jury to determine findings of fact.

Either party may be represented by an attorney.

The rules of “discovery” allow each party to gather necessary evidence from the other side upon request.

Hearsay and other forms of unreliable evidence are typically excluded from the proceeding, and all testimony is given under sworn oath.

None of these protections are guaranteed in campus sexual assault hearings, rendering the comparison between the use of the preponderance of the evidence standard in civil court and campus hearings wholly inappropriate. And while defendants in civil lawsuits have the option to settle out of court and keep the matter private, students found guilty by campus tribunals have no such option, virtually guaranteeing that a negative outcome will have a lifelong effect.

 

[Spoofin]

Can we get this conversation back on track to what matters. He insulted our weather. He said it was cold and we will freeze. How dare he. Not sure how anyone could support TC in any way after that. It's our weather guys. Weather.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ewert86PC]

You have no way of knowing Claeys didnt. Pure speculation on your part and not likely correct anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#coacheslivesmatter

Again, there is no f'n way you have a clue what claeys did or didnt say.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#coacheslivesmatter

Again, I don't have to know what he said. I know what harm the actions of players who didn't know what acceptable behavior off the field is. It is evident there was a breakdown between what the players thought they could do and what the hunters in the EOAA would use to try to crucify the football program.

All the parties responsible for the football program, players, coaches, trainers, athletic department personnel, were not in agreement with what "outsiders" would use to attack the program. They had no idea what they were up against. That is obvious because here we are struggling with the potential expulsion of players from the University.

Whatever was said, or expressed, was not enough to keep five players and a recruit from engaging in behavior off the field that was harmful to reputation of the football program. Behavior that opened the door for the EOAA to harm the reputations of five additional players with their wide ranging investigation.

So if you are hung up on people being accurate about what was said, then you are missing the point that it wasn't enough to keep players from harming the football program and drawing an administrative monster down on them.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Regarding "affirmative consent", adopted by the U recently and championed by the provost. The same provost that will decide on an appeal. You can't make this up.


There is no practical, fair, or consistent way for colleges (or, for that matter, courts) to ensure that “affirmative consent” rules for sexual intercourse are followed. It is impracticable for the government to require students to obtain affirmative consent at each stage of a physical encounter and to later prove that attainment in a campus hearing. Under affirmative consent regimes, a student could be found guilty of sexual assault and deemed a rapist simply by being unable to prove she or he obtained explicit verbal consent to every sexual activity throughout a sexual encounter. How might an innocent student demonstrate he or she received affirmative consent under California’s new law, for example? In response to this question, the statute’s co-author, Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal, simply said, “Your guess is as good as mine.”

The concept of affirmative consent was first brought to national attention when it was adopted by Ohio’s historic Antioch College in the early 1990s. When news of the college’s policy became public in 1993, the practical difficulty of adhering to the policy prompted national ridicule so widespread that it was lampooned on Saturday Night Live. (Indeed, the fallout from the policy’s adoption has been cited as a factor in the college’s decline and eventual closing in 2007. It has since reopened.) The awkwardness of enforcing “affirmative consent” rules upon the reality of human sexual behavior has continued to be a popular subject for comedy by television shows such as Chappelle’s Show and New Girl. The humor found in the profound disconnect between the policy’s bureaucratic requirements for sexual interaction and human sexuality as a lived and various experience underscores the serious difficulty that affirmative consent now presents to administrators across California, New York, and other campuses nationwide.

 

[Ewert86PC]

And if it is determined these players had consensual sex and the girl had remorse after the fact, then what? The attorney for the players said he can prove consensual sex via video but the school hearing wouldn't allow it to be shown or allow the testimony of the trained police investigator who also determined it was consensual. Still Tracy's fault then?

What are you going to say when one of the guys gets in trouble for PJ? It's going to happen. There are 120 young men going to college...they too might even be innocent but they are going to be part of some incident or altercation. They are going to party. It's not preventable. How often something happens is another story but perfect isn't realistic. imo No head football coach can control 120 kids year after year without incident.

The EOAA investigation proves that none of that matters to them. Their chair told Jerry Kill to get his program in line with their behavioral standards or the football team would suffer the consequences. Here it is. It doesn't matter that we think it is biased, unfair and discriminatory that is the EOAA trap they walked in to.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Ewert86PC]

Speak for yourself. Most Minnesota residents are quite aware that it gets cold up here.

Right, but lashing out made him look petty and small by needing to take a shot at a larger group. It doesn't matter that he was goaded, he took the bait. He chose to respond when he could have brushed it off.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[WoodburyTim]

Again, I don't have to know what he said. I know what harm the actions of players who didn't know what acceptable behavior off the field is. It is evident there was a breakdown between what the players thought they could do and what the hunters in the EOAA would use to try to crucify the football program.

All the parties responsible for the football program, players, coaches, trainers, athletic department personnel, were not in agreement with what "outsiders" would use to attack the program. They had no idea what they were up against. That is obvious because here we are struggling with the potential expulsion of players from the University.

Whatever was said, or expressed, was not enough to keep five players and a recruit from engaging in behavior off the field that was harmful to reputation of the football program. Behavior that opened the door for the EOAA to harm the reputations of five additional players with their wide ranging investigation.

So if you are hung up on people being accurate about what was said, then you are missing the point that it wasn't enough to keep players from harming the football program and drawing an administrative monster down on them.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

This is pure drivel.

If you don't like Claeys, but don't have actual information or the cognitive ability to make a reasoned case against him, this Ewert86PC clown should be your spokesperson.

 

[60's Guy]

The EOAA investigation proves that none of that matters to them. Their chair told Jerry Kill to get his program in line with their behavioral standards or the football team would suffer the consequences. Here it is. It doesn't matter that we think it is biased, unfair and discriminatory that is the EOAA trap they walked in to.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Exactly. So you don't think it'll happen under PJ? Or some other incident? A fight, a theft, or whatever...where do you draw the line what a head coach is responsible for? You seem to be advocating one and done? I don't think that is near realistic....that's what I disagree with about your stance.

 

[Ewert86PC]

Exactly. So you don't think it'll happen under PJ? Or some other incident? A fight, a theft, or whatever...where do you draw the line what a head coach is responsible for? You seem to be advocating one and done? I don't think that is near realistic....that's what I disagree with about your stance.

No, this is their failure to understand their situation with an administrative organization that is targeting them.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Ultimately I think many of the "off the field incidents" cited when coaches are fired are simply a smokescreen to help with the body of rationale get rid of a coach that's worn out their welcome for any number of reasons. There are obviously times where coaches truly do look the other way on behavior or even promote it and that's obviously fireable.

No reason for Claeys to get kicked in the head on his way out of town by Coyle and some fans. Like evert said, if you don't have something nice to say don't say anything at all.

 

[Ewert86PC]

This is pure drivel.

If you don't like Claeys, but don't have actual information or the cognitive ability to make a reasoned case against him, this Ewert86PC clown should be your spokesperson.

Hmm... you obviously don't have the attention span ad to what was previously said in this thread and I am not inclined to repeat it for your sole benefit.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Hmm... you obviously don't have the attention span ad to what was previously said in this thread and I am not inclined to repeat it for your sole benefit.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

So, what was Claeys supposed to say to earn your approval? In the end, it's immaterial whether some outside group had it in for the FB program or not. No coach wants his players to get involved in a situation that will make the program look bad. Every coach in the country is telling his players to be smart and be safe. Some understand - some don't.

You are using the incident as proof that Claeys did not deliver a stern enough message to his players. But, you don't know what Claeys said to his players. You are making an assumption after the fact. Claeys can't lock the players in their rooms after dark. He can't tell them "don't have sex unless you get a signed, written statement of consent." Well, he could try, but that would create its own issues. Under your logic, every parent whose child has gotten arrested for something is at fault because they didn't warn them strongly enough about the possible consequences of their behavior. That's an awfully high standard you're setting.

 

[Ewert86PC]

So, what was Claeys supposed to say to earn your approval? In the end, it's immaterial whether some outside group had it in for the FB program or not. No coach wants his players to get involved in a situation that will make the program look bad. Every coach in the country is telling his players to be smart and be safe. Some understand - some don't.

You are using the incident as proof that Claeys did not deliver a stern enough message to his players. But, you don't know what Claeys said to his players. You are making an assumption after the fact. Claeys can't lock the players in their rooms after dark. He can't tell them "don't have sex unless you get a signed, written statement of consent." Well, he could try, but that would create its own issues. Under your logic, every parent whose child has gotten arrested for something is at fault because they didn't warn them strongly enough about the possible consequences of their behavior. That's an awfully high standard you're setting.

He was politically over his head. The on field performance of the team and their record wasn't sufficient to get them out of the political mess. As, I said, I contacted my state legislators about retaining him. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt in previous things, but tak8ng KSTP'S bait and using in to immature lyrics express his displeasure showed that he wasn't a coach that did well with politics on campus.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

 

[Pompous Elitist]

He was politically over his head. The on field performance of the team and their record wasn't sufficient to get them out of the political mess. As, I said, I contacted my state legislators about retaining him. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt in previous things, but tak8ng KSTP'S bait and using in to immature lyrics express his displeasure showed that he wasn't a coach that did well with politics on campus.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

How then do you feel about Coyle repeatedly and loudly (for him) impugning the integrity and character of Claeys, Sawvel, Sherels, Kill and the rest of the coaches that built this program up from rubble? Any kind words for him?

 

[GopherBulldog]

He was politically over his head. The on field performance of the team and their record wasn't sufficient to get them out of the political mess. As, I said, I contacted my state legislators about retaining him. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt in previous things, but tak8ng KSTP'S bait and using in to immature lyrics express his displeasure showed that he wasn't a coach that did well with politics on campus.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

MC and EK selfishly and dispicably amplified the internal political swirl around this issue to maximum effect. I believe it would have been incredibly difficult for any first year coach to survive your President and AD playing those kind of dirty games.

 

[bigticket1]

He was politically over his head. The on field performance of the team and their record wasn't sufficient to get them out of the political mess. As, I said, I contacted my state legislators about retaining him. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt in previous things, but tak8ng KSTP'S bait and using in to immature lyrics express his displeasure showed that he wasn't a coach that did well with politics on campus.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

So how many wins would it have taken to "get out of the political mess". 10 ? , !2 ?, National Championship ?

 

[Jack jones]

I don't think it would/will make any difference as to who was/is the coach, in the present political environment, any "one" time violation that comes before the EOAA, that coach is gone. Kahler doesn't have the political clout to win that battle. The football program - perhaps the entire men's athletic department, is at war with the PC crowd. And Trumps comments have just poured salt on the wound. Any opportunity to claim the victim card will cause that coach to be fired. That's one of the reasons that I was shocked that PJ took this job. Every college in America will have a finger pointed at some of their male athletes accusing some them of some kind of action meriting the EOAA to get involved. Those colleges with strong presidents, those coaches won't be affected.

 

[Iceland12]

Right, but lashing out made him look petty and small by needing to take a shot at a larger group. It doesn't matter that he was goaded, he took the bait. He chose to respond when he could have brushed it off.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Or to most people I've talked to made him seem funny.

Can't believe anybody was really bothered by it unless they just want to say "there's ANOTHER reason he should have been fired!"

 

[GFBfan]

He was politically over his head. The on field performance of the team and their record wasn't sufficient to get them out of the political mess. As, I said, I contacted my state legislators about retaining him. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt in previous things, but tak8ng KSTP'S bait and using in to immature lyrics express his displeasure showed that he wasn't a coach that did well with politics on campus.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

Had some reading to do tonight and boy have I missed out!
So you are saying Claeys had your support until he made the comment about it being cold here in MN? That was the last straw for you?