AP: Gophers players almost reinstated boycott over suspensions

Donate To GopherHole
PMWinSTP said:
Would not be members of BoR position to negotiate or have something to offer, but more to hear both sides of the situation. The fact that they talked as long as they did with the team, that BoR Chair has publicly stated his concern with lack of due process, and that the BoR has been pretty much silent on Kaler and Coyle...feels like the other shoe is getting ready.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like the BoR is pro-rape.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

MennoSota said:
[emoji41] I will try. I find the tribalistic feminist to be someone you cannot negotiate with. Her utter contempt for any man who hasn't been castrated and made to wear a dress is appalling.
Click to expand...

Can't negotiate, so your saying this woman is a tea party'er? Your views and the feminazi guys views are just as entrenched as those you denigrate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Good to see some other folks looking at Coyle's role in this mess. I also believe that Coyle has handled this entire situation poorly.

The alleged victim has people looking out for her interests - so someone needs to be looking out for the players' interests. That should be Coyle- or at least someone in his office - but it looks like the entire AD's office is hiding under their collective desks. Claeys has already stuck his neck out.

I hope the Board of Regents does get involved - but in the past, the BOR has not shown a lot of inclination to rock the boat. They tend to rubber-stamp whatever the President wants. Maybe this will be different.
 

If you haven't listened to it, you should listen to the interview on MPR. AP sportsguy did a great job explaining what went down...makes Kaler and Coyle look pretty bad. Based on this reporting, Kaler's statement amounts to a mix of arrogance, personal grandstanding, very self-serving (which will come back to hurt him) and pretty much untruthful.

http://www.mprnews.org/listen?name=...2/27/161227_weber_krawczynski_20161227_64.mp3

BoR members are the ones who gave the players an open ear and whose time and discussion helped them make the decision to end the boycott.
 

So it looks like a very real possibility that the second five players that were not directly involved in the "activities" will be reinstated and not be suspended beyond the bowl game. If true, that is a major development.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 


alchemy2u said:
So it looks like a very real possibility that the second five players that were not directly involved in the "activities" will be reinstated and not be suspended beyond the bowl game. If true, that is a major development.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Did you get that from the interview with AP guy because I didn't catch that. Or are you saying that because two BOR members were willing to listen that the player hearing might have a different outcome?
 

WorkingMyTailOff said:
Did you get that from the interview with AP guy because I didn't catch that. Or are you saying that because two BOR members were willing to listen that the player hearing might have a different outcome?
Click to expand...

It was also in the link first posted which referenced the A.P. story. A.J. is the local A.P. guy.

Kaler and Coyle tried to re-engage the players before Hsu and Rosha could meet with them that night. They offered to reinstate the second group of five players for the bowl, but pulled that back when the university said the woman who made the accusations would have to approve that, four people involved in the discussions told the AP.
 


MennoSota said:
From the Pioneer Press:

They were playing, they said, because Kaler and Coyle had agreed to ensure that their teammates would get an appeals hearing before a diverse panel — something they insisted on because all 10 accused in the case are black.

But even with the boycott rescinded, they didn’t feel like they had a resolution, at least not with school leaders.

“I believe this could very well have been avoided,” Rosha said. “The team appeared to appreciate having a respectful dialogue.”
Click to expand...

And male, when I saw who was on the EOAA board, it was like, 9 women 2 men
 



Iceland12 said:
The original story about ending the boycott said that there were players who wanted it to continue, but they were voted down by teammates who wanted the boycott to end.
Click to expand...

You got that from a story with a false narrative. The players voted to keep the boycott in place after their meeting with Kaler and one of the 5 newly included players spoke to the team about not losing out on the bowl to support him and that the team should play even if they can't. The team deserved it. So another vote was taken and the boycott was ended.
 


alchemy2u said:
So it looks like a very real possibility that the second five players that were not directly involved in the "activities" will be reinstated and not be suspended beyond the bowl game. If true, that is a major development.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If that sounds like a reasonable course of action to you, and others, just forget about it happening. It will most likely go down like this: Kaler and Coyle will keep their jobs while all ten players will be gone as well as coach Claeys. Many will applaud this while others will wonder how in the world can Kaler and Coyle not get run out of town.

I'm still very much feeling that certain players should be reinstated immediately while the others that were involved in act should be gone. The two leaders mentioned above should be shown the door. I'm not sure about Claeys yet.
 





tikited said:
If that sounds like a reasonable course of action to you, and others, just forget about it happening. It will most likely go down like this: Kaler and Coyle will keep their jobs while all ten players will be gone as well as coach Claeys. Many will applaud this while others will wonder how in the world can Kaler and Coyle not get run out of town.

I'm still very much feeling that certain players should be reinstated immediately while the others that were involved in act should be gone. The two leaders mentioned above should be shown the door. I'm not sure about Claeys yet.
Click to expand...

You have two BoR members meeting with the players, not K & C, to get a fuller picture of their concerns, then the Kaler presser. Guessing the BoR members were a bit miffed as well with Kaler's comments. You also have the BoR Chair quoted as questioning due process and the process as a whole (said he spoke to Kaler many times about this concern).

Knowing that, you think those two keep their jobs?
 

bottlebass said:
"Kaler and Coyle tried to re-engage the players before Hsu and Rosha could meet with them that night. They offered to reinstate the second group of five players for the bowl, but pulled that back when the university said the woman who made the accusations would have to approve that,"

What the hell does that mean? Who is making these calls?
Click to expand...

Who exactly is this "university" we keep referring to:confused:
 

GopherinPhilly said:
You got that from a story with a false narrative. The players voted to keep the boycott in place after their meeting with Kaler and one of the 5 newly included players spoke to the team about not losing out on the bowl to support him and that the team should play even if they can't. The team deserved it. So another vote was taken and the boycott was ended.
Click to expand...

Or they, or the story you read, got the facts wrong or were talking about different things.
 

PMWinSTP said:
You have two BoR members meeting with the players, not K & C, to get a fuller picture of their concerns, then the Kaler presser. Guessing the BoR members were a bit miffed as well with Kaler's comments. You also have the BoR Chair quoted as questioning due process and the process as a whole (said he spoke to Kaler many times about this concern).

Knowing that, you think those two keep their jobs?
Click to expand...

In a world that makes sense...no they don't. This is a world created by the U of M...I expect that worst decisions to be made.
 

tikited said:
If that sounds like a reasonable course of action to you, and others, just forget about it happening. It will most likely go down like this: Kaler and Coyle will keep their jobs while all ten players will be gone as well as coach Claeys. Many will applaud this while others will wonder how in the world can Kaler and Coyle not get run out of town.

I'm still very much feeling that certain players should be reinstated immediately while the others that were involved in act should be gone. The two leaders mentioned above should be shown the door. I'm not sure about Claeys yet.
Click to expand...

Sadly, I also feel that the former scenario is what will play out. And also agree that the hypothetical, latter situation, actually might be more appropriate based on who is most responsible for failing to lead the University through this mess.
 

PMWinSTP said:
If you haven't listened to it, you should listen to the interview on MPR. AP sportsguy did a great job explaining what went down...makes Kaler and Coyle look pretty bad. Based on this reporting, Kaler's statement amounts to a mix of arrogance, personal grandstanding, very self-serving (which will come back to hurt him) and pretty much untruthful.

http://www.mprnews.org/listen?name=...2/27/161227_weber_krawczynski_20161227_64.mp3

BoR members are the ones who gave the players an open ear and whose time and discussion helped them make the decision to end the boycott.
Click to expand...

I would really like for President Kaler to strongly be encouraged to look for another job and another University to lead preferably one without athletics. It is time for the board of regents to offer a vote of no confidence on this President before he does more damage to the University and creates more lawsuits. His job is to represent all students, not just pick one side. He could have stopped all of this by suspending the original 4 from the team and had the coach kick them off the team. A lot of this PR nightmare could have been avoided with having the foresight to do that.
 

GoodasGold said:
Who exactly is this "university" we keep referring to:confused:
Click to expand...

I've heard two interviews with Krawcynski and he wasn't asked nor did he say who represented the "university". His reporting said the meeting included Kaler, Coyle and the players. Was the "University" present by phone, text, lawyer, oracle, smoke signals, or land grant? It remains a confusing unexplained paragraph.
 



tikited said:
If that sounds like a reasonable course of action to you, and others, just forget about it happening. It will most likely go down like this: Kaler and Coyle will keep their jobs while all ten players will be gone as well as coach Claeys. Many will applaud this while others will wonder how in the world can Kaler and Coyle not get run out of town.

I'm still very much feeling that certain players should be reinstated immediately while the others that were involved in act should be gone. The two leaders mentioned above should be shown the door. I'm not sure about Claeys yet.
Click to expand...

That's another sad part in a very sad story. They fact that Kaler was gonna do just that when he found out the players were going to meet with the Regents after all seems to say that he was aware that all 10 players shouldn't have been lumped together in this. May have made everything going on a little more understandable.
 


Here is the link to the original A.P. story:

http://collegefootball.ap.org/artic...alFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP_Top25

The team was also upset when he wouldn't discuss the timing of the suspensions, which left no time for an appeal before the bowl game, and punishing the five additional players, two of whom claimed to have not been in the apartment that night.

Twenty-four hours later, the players took a vote and announced they would boycott all team activities unless the players were reinstated.

With a deadline fast approaching to participate in the bowl and talks with Kaler and Coyle going nowhere, players asked for a meeting with Rosha and Michael Hsu, two of the newest members of the board of regents, on Dec. 16. They reached out to them because they had been vocal about the school's sexual assault policies before.

In July of 2015, Hsu and Rosha called for the president to delay implementing a new affirmative consent policy that was designed to help prevent sexual assaults on campus. Concerns emerged on other campuses that the policy shifts the burden of proof to the accused in rape cases, and Hsu wanted the board to discuss the possible legal ramifications.

Kaler and Coyle tried to re-engage the players before Hsu and Rosha could meet with them that night. They offered to reinstate the second group of five players for the bowl, but pulled that back when the university said the woman who made the accusations would have to approve that, four people involved in the discussions told the AP.

Kaler and Coyle left talks with the players before 9 p.m. without an agreement and players prepared to skip the game. The players invited the regents in, according to three people who were there, and a marathon discussion lasted until dawn.

 

PMWinSTP said:
If you haven't listened to it, you should listen to the interview on MPR. AP sportsguy did a great job explaining what went down...makes Kaler and Coyle look pretty bad. Based on this reporting, Kaler's statement amounts to a mix of arrogance, personal grandstanding, very self-serving (which will come back to hurt him) and pretty much untruthful.

http://www.mprnews.org/listen?name=...2/27/161227_weber_krawczynski_20161227_64.mp3

BoR members are the ones who gave the players an open ear and whose time and discussion helped them make the decision to end the boycott.
Click to expand...

Just listened. Thanks very much for posting. The lack of communication, leadership and selfish PR spin from EK and MC is absolutely epic and shameful. Sadly, the sh*t will likely float downhill which means the coaches and team will experience the brunt of the fallout.
 

Iceland12 said:
Kaler and Coyle tried to re-engage the players before Hsu and Rosha could meet with them that night. They offered to reinstate the second group of five players for the bowl, but pulled that back when the university said the woman who made the accusations would have to approve that, four people involved in the discussions told the AP.



[/I]
Click to expand...

Can anyone explain to me why the accuser would get the final say of whether any player plays or not?
 

gopherdudepart2 said:
I would really like for President Kaler to strongly be encouraged to look for another job and another University to lead preferably one without athletics. It is time for the board of regents to offer a vote of no confidence on this President before he does more damage to the University and creates more lawsuits. His job is to represent all students, not just pick one side. He could have stopped all of this by suspending the original 4 from the team and had the coach kick them off the team. A lot of this PR nightmare could have been avoided with having the foresight to do that.
Click to expand...

The EOAA investigation would have happened no matter what Kaler did. NCAA eligibility and federal funding depends on the U abiding by Title IX requirements. NOBODY could have stopped the EOAA investigation.
 

First Norwood Teague, then this. I had hopes for Kaler but after this I think he and Coyle need to go. Sounds like those 2 BOR's would make a good President and AD. I just can't get over the ineptness of Coyle and Kaler. What are they there for if they need Board of Regents members to come in and do their jobs for them? After reading this there is no way they fire Claeys, no one would want to work for these 2 guys. They don't even know what they can and can't do! Two guys just following the blowing of the wind.

The powers that be sure make it hard to be a fan of the major sports at Minnesota's only D1 University.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom