Burns on podcast, "fully expects players to be cleared"

Donate To GopherHole
dpodoll68 said:
A football team isn't a governmental entity. Players aren't owed due process. The team/University can basically do anything it wants with players as long as it's within the law. Prohibiting them from playing football temporarily isn't a violation of their rights, legal or otherwise.

I don't get the hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth over this. The University is never, ever going to compromise on its reputation or integrity.
Click to expand...

I actually feel the University is compromising it's integrity with it's assumption of guilt.

In your opinion the did the lacrosse coach at Duke, who was fired for believing his players side of the story, which was eventually proved true, compromise his reputation and integrity? Or was it the Duke officials who fired him for not calling his players rapists despite the complete lack of evidence against them? It's not always the high road to throw the people your supposed to be loyal to under the bus.
 

^ Really? You are going to compare this to the Duke case? These guys are in an ongoing investigation. To ignore that and let them play would not only set a terrible example, but would be a PR nightmare if they got charged. I would much rather be the school that holds student-athletes accountable for their actions, than a school like Baylor that tried to ignore everything. Even if they are not charged, which they likely wont be, they still put themselves in a situation to be a part of an investigation. That in itself is enough to warrant punishment by the school/team.
 

DLguy said:
^ Really? You are going to compare this to the Duke case? These guys are in an ongoing investigation. To ignore that and let them play would not only set a terrible example, but would be a PR nightmare if they got charged. I would much rather be the school that holds student-athletes accountable for their actions, than a school like Baylor that tried to ignore everything. Even if they are not charged, which they likely wont be, they still put themselves in a situation to be a part of an investigation. That in itself is enough to warrant punishment by the school/team.
Click to expand...

To some people every case is the Duke case...
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
To some people every case is the Duke case...
Click to expand...

Very true. To those people, I would argue that Duke made several statements basically saying the players were guilty, found the coach guilty by association, and had the school and many representatives of the school throwing the players under the bus at every possible chance. The U I don't think has done anything more than stated the 4 players are suspended from team activities. Nothing else, which is the way it should be.
 

DLguy said:
^ Really? You are going to compare this to the Duke case? These guys are in an ongoing investigation. To ignore that and let them play would not only set a terrible example, but would be a PR nightmare if they got charged. I would much rather be the school that holds student-athletes accountable for their actions, than a school like Baylor that tried to ignore everything. Even if they are not charged, which they likely wont be, they still put themselves in a situation to be a part of an investigation. That in itself is enough to warrant punishment by the school/team.
Click to expand...

Investigation = guilt. Got it. FYI the Duke boys were having a hell of a party and hired a stripper so yeah they put themselves in harms way and deserved to be punished for violating the team rules they broke. If you want to punish these boys for being at a party fine, apply team rules set the punishment, move on. IF it turns out they did more, act on it as soon as that is known. Not sure why it would be a PR nightmare to support your guys until presented with evidence that they don't deserve that support.
 


LakerFan said:
Investigation = guilt. Got it. FYI the Duke boys were having a hell of a party and hired a stripper so yeah they put themselves in harms way and deserved to be punished for violating the team rules they broke. If you want to punish these boys for being at a party fine, apply team rules set the punishment, move on. IF it turns out they did more, act on it as soon as that is known. Not sure why it would be a PR nightmare to support your guys until presented with evidence that they don't deserve that support.
Click to expand...

I don't necessarily disagree with this line of thinking.
 

LakerFan said:
Investigation = guilt. Got it. FYI the Duke boys were having a hell of a party and hired a stripper so yeah they put themselves in harms way and deserved to be punished for violating the team rules they broke. If you want to punish these boys for being at a party fine, apply team rules set the punishment, move on. IF it turns out they did more, act on it as soon as that is known. Not sure why it would be a PR nightmare to support your guys until presented with evidence that they don't deserve that support.
Click to expand...

Um, you do realize that because they violated team rules is why they are suspended, right? If they are found guilty of something in the court of law, they will likely be let go from their scholarships. Their current suspension is for violation of team rules. The length of that suspension is not your decision. Let the people in charge handle that.
 

DLguy said:
Um, you do realize that because they violated team rules is why they are suspended, right? If they are found guilty of something in the court of law, they will likely be let go from their scholarships. Their current suspension is for violation of team rules. The length of that suspension is not your decision. Let the people in charge handle that.
Click to expand...

BUT FOOTBALL!!!!!!!
 

DLguy said:
Um, you do realize that because they violated team rules is why they are suspended, right? If they are found guilty of something in the court of law, they will likely be let go from their scholarships. Their current suspension is for violation of team rules. The length of that suspension is not your decision. Let the people in charge handle that.
Click to expand...

But if the only team rule they broke is "don't be part of a police investigation"...

When they were first suspended the fact they were people of interest in a sexual assault case was not public. Since that has become public, I believe Claeys has stated he is waiting for the legal side to clear up. So on that standpoint, it's not for violating team rules as much as they don't want them playing then being charged.

I personally think that if the University had a published policy stating athletes will be allowed to play unless they have charges formally filed on them for a gross misdemeanor or felony (or whatever classification), then I don't think the U's reputation would be on the line because each situation could point to the specific published policy. As soon as they are charged, suspend them indefinitely. I've got no issue with that. But this whole, "well, they might get charged some day so we'll just drag our feet just in case" is frustrating.
 



bronco.jpg

Why have some schools taken a different approach to player suspensions? Examples include Florida State, Mississippi State, Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, Southern Cal, and Oregon with sordid pasts regarding player behavior who did not get suspended while under police investigation. It may have something to do with a the number of stars a player has when recruited. A five star player disciplined sends a message to other ego inflated five star players that their shenanigans will not be tolerated. What school that wants to vie for a national championship wants to send that message? Ethical and moral outrage aside, schools want to please boosters and suspending a one or two star player or players is much easier for those boosters to accept and perhaps even applaud. The five star stud, not so much.
 



die hard gopher said:
I don't necessarily disagree with this line of thinking.
Click to expand...

No offense, but then you don't understand politics.

The overwhelming minority of Minnesota tax payers have no idea who these three players are. They might know that three football players who accused of something awful. If things go south on this case, the overwhelming majority of people are going to know that we played three players who were under investigation for sexual assault. That doesn't look too good.

The cost compared to the benefit, politically, is overwhelmingly on the side of sitting these guys.
 



DLguy said:
Um, you do realize that because they violated team rules is why they are suspended, right? If they are found guilty of something in the court of law, they will likely be let go from their scholarships. Their current suspension is for violation of team rules. The length of that suspension is not your decision. Let the people in charge handle that.
Click to expand...

I don't believe this is the case at this point. Of course, we're all speculating, but I'd guess that if the investigation took a week and they were cleared by police, the suspension would've lasted one game. As it is, we're on game three. The rule hasn't changed, what they did hasn't changed, but the punishment has.
 


gopherveteran said:
Any young man that goes into a room with a woman is risking trouble. You never know
what she will say the next day.

For example, I was on a jury in Dakota County that found a young man not guilty after deliberating 30 minutes.
Click to expand...

Try looking at your comment through the eyes of your daughter.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Now that it is in the hands of the Hennepin County Attorney for review, I wonder how long this will take. They go at their own pace.

If they clear the HCA review, there is still Kaler's & Coyle's approval.

Do we we really know how long this will take? The four players potentially can lose a year of eligibility if the case drags on into next year.
 

The players put themselves into this yet unknown situation.
Whatever it was Claeys thought the risk to the University was significant enough to suspend them until it is cleared up.
It is not the legal system, not Claeys, and not the U at fault here.
 

hungan1 said:
Do we we really know how long this will take? The four players potentially can lose a year of eligibility if the case drags on into next year.
Click to expand...

Yep. A lot of actions have consequences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Spoofin said:
But we know their actions were against team rules.


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

And clearly there is something there because its not like the coaches are just going to suspend guys for the heck of it. I know fans want to see these guys out on the field but I for one am willing to defer to the people with direct connections to what is going on to make the best decision in regards to whether these players should be cleared or not.
 

MNVCGUY said:
And clearly there is something there because its not like the coaches are just going to suspend guys for the heck of it. I know fans want to see these guys out on the field but I for one am willing to defer to the people with direct connections to what is going on to make the best decision in regards to whether these players should be cleared or not.
Click to expand...

Tell that to Nate Mason.
 

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

Enough said. Suit them and let them play providing they still want to play for a University who crapped all over them. Innocent till proven guilty should still apply even in a liberal institution like the U.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom