John Shipley: Tracy Claeys has to go; this isn’t about X’s and O’s

Donate To GopherHole
GophersInIowa said:
Because they only won 8 games. That's the difference between Pitino and Claeys. Many wanted Pitino gone before the incident with the three players last year. That just was the icing on the cake for many.

For like the 100th time, very few if anyone is defending what they did. If it is true, get rid of them. People are criticizing the process. People are defending the teammates of the 10 players because they did what they felt was right at the time. And then Claeys said he was proud of the team for standing up for what they felt was right.
Click to expand...

Everyone who follows the basketball team knew last year was going to be a rough season. That's why Pitino's buyout was so high.

The football players were only suspended because of the legal investigation. Had there been none, would they have been suspended? No one knows. Yet the basketball players were suspended, and one was kicked off without any police investigation outside of Dorsey reporting his cell phone stolen.

I know no one is defending what the football players did. But what process did the basketball players get? Especially Mason and McBrayer? They broke team rules and were suspended for it, dealt with it, and moved on.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
Everyone who follows the basketball team knew last year was going to be a rough season. That's why Pitino's buyout was so high.
Click to expand...

That still doesn't make my statement false. There were a lot of people calling for Pitino to be fired before the players were suspended.

The football players were only suspended because of the legal investigation. Had their been none, would they have been suspended? No one knows. Yet the basketball players were suspended, and one was kicked off without any police investigation outside of Dorsey reporting his cell phone stolen.
Click to expand...

Right, we don't know. So why even try to speculate? Also, who was the player that was kicked off the team because of this?

I know no one is defending what the football players did. But what process did the basketball players get? Especially Mason and McBrayer? They broke team rules and were suspended for it, dealt with it, and moved on.
Click to expand...

You're comparing missing a few games to a year long suspension or expulsion. The 10 players are being labeled as rapists even though allegedly some of them weren't even there.
 

GophersInIowa said:
Right, we don't know. So why even try to speculate? Also, who was the player that was kicked off the team because of this?

You're comparing missing a few games to a year long suspension or expulsion. The 10 players are being labeled as rapists even though allegedly some of them weren't even there.
Click to expand...

Dorsey was the player. My point about suspending the players for the bowl game is as an AD what else are you going to do? Let them play in the bowl game? No matter what they broke team rules, regardless if she is making up the rape allegations. What happens if she is right and they did play? How much worse does that look?

There is still time for the process to play out. They are not guaranteed a year long suspension or expulsion. I just don't have a problem with the AD suspending them because he didn't have a choice. I brought up the basketball comparison because Mason and McBrayer had a right to be as mad about being suspended last year as any football player who was at that apartment that night and didn't do anything illegal. But they dealt with those suspensions and moved on.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I'm still slightly amazed at how many continue to defend the players or Claeys in this situation. Compare it to last year's basketball situation.

Dorsey, McBrayer, and Mason had consensual sex with a woman. It was posted to Dorsey's twitter account where you could only tell for sure Dorsey was in the video and possibly part of McBrayer. The woman never pressed charges and there was never a rape investigation. Mason and McBrayer had no idea Dorsey was going to post it online. Legally those two did nothing wrong. No one had any idea Mason was even involved until he was suspended. Yet it was a violation of team rules where all 3 were suspended for the last 4 games, and Dorsey was eventually booted. There were no cries for due-process, they owned their moral mistakes and moved on.

Yet so many wanted Pitino fired. When Kaler introduced Coyle, he pretty much threw Pitino under the bus and said that type of sexual behavior will not be tolerated.

Then after only the first game of the football season, 10 football players were involved in a situation that was far worse than what the basketball players did. Yet there are far more defenders of the football players and coaches then there were for the basketball team. Outside of wins and losses, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

Do you read other people's posts? Or, just post blindly every 15 minutes? There have been many well written explanations about why some would back the intentions of TC and the players. If you disagree with them, I completely understand. But to be surprised that others take that position suggests you're not even listening to the other side.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
Dorsey was the player. My point about suspending the players for the bowl game is as an AD what else are you going to do? Let them play in the bowl game? No matter what they broke team rules, regardless if she is making up the rape allegations. What happens if she is right and they did play? How much worse does that look?

There is still time for the process to play out. They are not guaranteed a year long suspension or expulsion. I just don't have a problem with the AD suspending them because he didn't have a choice. I brought up the basketball comparison because Mason and McBrayer had a right to be as mad about being suspended last year as any football player who was at that apartment that night and didn't do anything illegal. But they dealt with those suspensions and moved on.
Click to expand...

Was Dorsey kicked off the team? I thought he just decided to transfer. Maybe it was a mutual decision?

The basketball players were never really faced with a year long suspension or expulsion like these guys are. They were never labeled as rapists. I'm not saying some are or aren't. I'm just saying the two situations are so different.
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
He was suspended for months until he was cleared by everyone. Now he's allowed to play.
Click to expand...

That entire suspension was during the off-season or during his redshirt year. I don't believe he missed any actual game time.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
I'm still slightly amazed at how many continue to defend the players or Claeys in this situation. Compare it to last year's basketball situation.

Dorsey, McBrayer, and Mason had consensual sex with a woman. It was posted to Dorsey's twitter account where you could only tell for sure Dorsey was in the video and possibly part of McBrayer. The woman never pressed charges and there was never a rape investigation. Mason and McBrayer had no idea Dorsey was going to post it online. Legally those two did nothing wrong. No one had any idea Mason was even involved until he was suspended. Yet it was a violation of team rules where all 3 were suspended for the last 4 games, and Dorsey was eventually booted. There were no cries for due-process, they owned their moral mistakes and moved on.

Yet so many wanted Pitino fired. When Kaler introduced Coyle, he pretty much threw Pitino under the bus and said that type of sexual behavior will not be tolerated.

Then after only the first game of the football season, 10 football players were involved in a situation that was far worse than what the basketball players did. Yet there are far more defenders of the football players and coaches then there were for the basketball team. Outside of wins and losses, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

I don't think you're really following the due process argument.

If these players weren't facing suspension and expulsion from the University, it would be a different standard. These players are being labeled as rapists. There would be a different standard of due process required for a player who was, lets say, suspended for being late to a practice.

The expulsion, the removal of a scholarship for sexual assault demands a much higher standard.

As far as your last statement, what the 10 players did was far worse IF IT WAS NOT CONSENSUAL than what the basketball players did. If it was consensual, they didn't really break any rules.

If it was consensual, the basketball players was much worse. Releasing a video of someone without their permission is worse than any kind of consensual sex that people can have.

Your last sentence kind of sums up why you're having a hard time understanding the due process issue, you refuse to acknowledge the possibility that it was consensual.
 



MennoSota said:
It's unfair because punishment was meted out before players could even know they were under threat of punishment (think Antoine Winfield Jr.). There was never a chance for the accused to argue their case. They merely answered questions and those hearing the questioning made up their own opinion and then enforced their opinion.

Due process was clearly denied.

So getting back to the topic, you are entirely wrong and Claeys was right to stand up and praise his team for calling out the unfair practice of the EoAA.
Click to expand...

Is this a joke? Or maybe you seriously think that these students thought they were being questioned because the administration was just curious.

No, it must be a joke. har har, Mennosota. You made me laugh.
 

everybody knows my name said:
Is this a joke? Or maybe you seriously think that these students thought they were being questioned because the administration was just curious.

No, it must be a joke. har har, Mennosota. You made me laugh.
Click to expand...

Thought I read he was questioned as a potential witness? Makes a difference. Either way, punishment without benefit of due process.
 

everybody knows my name said:
Is this a joke? Or maybe you seriously think that these students thought they were being questioned because the administration was just curious.

No, it must be a joke. har har, Mennosota. You made me laugh.
Click to expand...

They were being questioned to find out what happened. Some of the kids who are suspended did not even participate as sexual partners with the woman. They were entirely blindsided. Why do you think Antoine Winfield Sr was so pissed?
Go back to living under your rock.
 

I wasn't trying to add anything to the discussion.

everybody knows my name said:
Thanks so much for the constructive remark. I'm sure it'll persuade everyone who doesn't agree with you.
Click to expand...

I freely admit I wasn't trying to persuade anyone or add anything to this discussion or speculation. The report done by the EoAA council and submitted to the OSCID office isn't worth the paper it is printed on in my opinion. If I were the coach I would take the Title IX report, the bogus EoAA investigation, and use it to pick my dog crap up with. Again not trying to be persuasive, The main reason the EoAA office went into the investigation with an agenda to get these guys kicked out of school, without at the same time passing judgement on the alleged victims roll, just saying her account is more believable. Also what about that texting cheer team member(the other two friends that left this person at this apartment knowing she was somewhat intoxicated, why do they not share culpability but get to skate by). In particular that cheer team member in the report that sent the text "Run her a$$", Hardin's ex girlfriend said about the alleged victim. Why isn't anyone appalled by that?
Why that particular cheer team member that is Hardins ex-girlfriend isn't being investigated by the OSCID office and having her name publicized to the media as well as other students facing suspension over this incident is unfair.

This scandal runs a lot deeper than just the football team, it is beyond ugly and a lot used poor judgement.
Someone of legal age provided them with alcohol? A recruit had video taken of him a minor under age of 17 by other people presumably University of Minnesota students in a sex act. Other suspensions that should be publicized have not been just the players. There should be a lot more people facing public disciplinary action linked to this incident then just the 10 reported in the media. The media should be segregating what each student is supposedly being threatened suspension or expulsion for and not lumping the entire group together.
The whole incident is disgusting and is conduct by people who take personal responsibility and have maturity about adult relationships should not have ever involved themselves in. But I guess the hook up culture that is perpetuated in college since the 1970's is A Ok. Not
 



everybody knows my name said:
Is this a joke? Or maybe you seriously think that these students thought they were being questioned because the administration was just curious.

No, it must be a joke. har har, Mennosota. You made me laugh.
Click to expand...

Hearsay and not proof, but AWsr said when his son was questioned he was told he doesn't need a parent or lawyer present as they aren't looking in to him other than as a potential witness. Now you could say that AWsr has an agenda and might twist what happened to support that, but you seem to believe the EOAA report as fact so that doesn't seem your style.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

gopherdudepart2 said:
I freely admit I wasn't trying to persuade anyone or add anything to this discussion or speculation. The report done by the EoAA council and submitted to the OSCID office isn't worth the paper it is printed on in my opinion. If I were the coach I would take the Title IX report, the bogus EoAA investigation, and use it to pick my dog crap up with. Again not trying to be persuasive, The main reason the EoAA office went into the investigation with an agenda to get these guys kicked out of school, without at the same time passing judgement on the alleged victims roll, just saying her account is more believable. Also what about that texting cheer team member(the other two friends that left this person at this apartment knowing she was somewhat intoxicated, why do they not share culpability but get to skate by). In particular that cheer team member in the report that sent the text "Run her a$$", Hardin's ex girlfriend said about the alleged victim. Why isn't anyone appalled by that?
Why that particular cheer team member that is Hardins ex-girlfriend isn't being investigated by the OSCID office and having her name publicized to the media as well as other students facing suspension over this incident is unfair.

This scandal runs a lot deeper than just the football team, it is beyond ugly and a lot used poor judgement.
Someone of legal age provided them with alcohol? A recruit had video taken of him a minor under age of 17 by other people presumably University of Minnesota students in a sex act. Other suspensions that should be publicized have not been just the players. There should be a lot more people facing public disciplinary action linked to this incident then just the 10 reported in the media. The media should be segregating what each student is supposedly being threatened suspension or expulsion for and not lumping the entire group together.
The whole incident is disgusting and is conduct by people who take personal responsibility and have maturity about adult relationships should not have ever involved themselves in. But I guess the hook up culture that is perpetuated in college since the 1970's is A Ok. Not
Click to expand...

There are many layers to this onion yet to be peeled...
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
I don't think you're really following the due process argument.

If these players weren't facing suspension and expulsion from the University, it would be a different standard. These players are being labeled as rapists. There would be a different standard of due process required for a player who was, lets say, suspended for being late to a practice.

The expulsion, the removal of a scholarship for sexual assault demands a much higher standard.

As far as your last statement, what the 10 players did was far worse IF IT WAS NOT CONSENSUAL than what the basketball players did. If it was consensual, they didn't really break any rules.

If it was consensual, the basketball players was much worse. Releasing a video of someone without their permission is worse than any kind of consensual sex that people can have.

Your last sentence kind of sums up why you're having a hard time understanding the due process issue, you refuse to acknowledge the possibility that it was consensual.
Click to expand...

I understand due process in legal terms, and I agree it's not fair to label the players as rapists or supporting rape if they in fact did not rape her. However, if you put yourself in a situation involving gang banging a drunk girl, or being around while a girl is getting gang banged, you have to realize that could be a possibility.

To my knowledge none of the players have been suspended or expelled or even kicked off the team for next year. They were suspended for the bowl game until this could be further sorted out.

As for what I bolded, if that is the case, then what did Mason and McBrayer get suspended for? They had consensual sex, and didn't post the video. What they did was morally, not legally wrong, and they were still suspended 4 games for it. There wasn't an outcry saying they shouldn't be suspended, or deserved due process on morally incorrect behavior.
 

Who the f is Jack Shipley and why is his opinion worth publishing?
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
I understand due process in legal terms, and I agree it's not fair to label the players as rapists or supporting rape if they in fact did not rape her. However, if you put yourself in a situation involving gang banging a drunk girl, or being around while a girl is getting gang banged, you have to realize that could be a possibility.

To my knowledge none of the players have been suspended or expelled or even kicked off the team for next year. They were suspended for the bowl game until this could be further sorted out.

As for what I bolded, if that is the case, then what did Mason and McBrayer get suspended for? They had consensual sex, and didn't post the video. What they did was morally, not legally wrong, and they were still suspended 4 games for it. There wasn't an outcry saying they shouldn't be suspended, or deserved due process on morally incorrect behavior.
Click to expand...

This just isn't correct. This was not an action by the athletic department, like the game suspensions the BBall players you use or the game suspensions handed out earlier in the season with the initial four FB players. Please go read the cover letter from the leaked report. It is clear.
 


PMWinSTP said:
This just isn't correct. This was not an action by the athletic department, like the game suspensions the BBall players you use or the game suspensions handed out earlier in the season with the initial four FB players. Please go read the cover letter from the leaked report. It is clear.
Click to expand...

Yes it is clear that the outcome has not been finalized: Each party has the option to request a formal hearing by the Student Sexual Misconduct Subcommittee (SSMS) if the outcome is unacceptable
 

GopherWeatherGuy said:
Yes it is clear that the outcome has not been finalized: Each party has the option to request a formal hearing by the Student Sexual Misconduct Subcommittee (SSMS) if the outcome is unacceptable
Click to expand...

You conveniently left out what came before and after that sentence.
 

PMWinSTP said:
You conveniently left out what came before and after that sentence.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, here's the whole paragraph:

As a result of these violations, you are being offered the following sanctions to resolve this matter informally:
EXPULSION: Effective immediately your University of Minnesota studentship will be ended with resultant loss of
all student rights and privileges. A disciplinary hold will be placed on your record. The hold will prever1t you from
registering at the University and from obtaining your records through routine channels.

Both you and the reporting student are being notified of this outcome at the same time. Each party has the option to
request a formal hearing by the Student Sexual Misconduct Subcommittee (SSMS) if the outcome is unacceptable. If
I have not heard from either party within five business days (by December 20, 2016) of sending this letter, then the
decision will stand.

So I was wrong and the player who received this and 4 others are expelled. 5 others are facing a 1 year suspension. A fair hearing could still reverse this.

I understand people's complaints about some of the things Kaler said. I still don't understand you and others calling for Coyle's head. I've already agreed that his communication was poor. But what was he supposed to do? He couldn't allow these players to play.
 

alchemy2u said:
No, the Neanderthal man culture is gone for good, some just haven't realized it yet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Asking women with an agenda to hold off on their public hangings of men until all the facts have come out and various investigations have run their course, is hardly Paleolithic. There are too many examples of men being falsely accused of actions against women.
 

Theodore Calvin said:
Asking women with an agenda to hold off on their public hangings of men until all the facts have come out and various investigations have run their course, is hardly Paleolithic. There are too many examples of men being falsely accused of actions against women.
Click to expand...

And giving a voice to thousands of victims that have been ignored is a major step forward in our development. There are too many examples of women that have been disregarded because they were asking for it in the minds of Paleolithic men.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

alchemy2u said:
And giving a voice to thousands of victims that have been ignored is a major step forward in our development. There are too many examples of women that have been disregarded because they were asking for it in the minds of Paleolithic men.
Click to expand...

So let's just lynch 10 guys, and now their coach because he didn't "control" them? That's the answer?

Clayeys donation has done 10x as much for assault victims than anyone in any of this.

Certainly more than the EOAA, who assured that this story will follow this girl forever by extending the scope to 10 men, 5 of which were not involved (but were NAMED because of the EOAA) and pushed this into the national spotlight, and onto thousands of websites forever.
 

alchemy2u said:
And giving a voice to thousands of victims that have been ignored is a major step forward in our development. There are too many examples of women that have been disregarded because they were asking for it in the minds of Paleolithic men.


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

i don't believe that anyone on this board condones rape. However, I'm not sure everyone here agrees how we define rape. For example, let's say a 120 lb woman who doesn't drink frequently goes out and has four cocktails with friends and then approaches a guy at a bar who's had a few drinks and asks him to go home with her and she initiates sex and they guy goes along with it. Then the next day she claims that she wasn't in a position to consent. I don't think the guy raped her, but it seems as if the EOAA would.

I believe that there is a case at Indiana U that is similar to this.
 

kellyleeks said:
i don't believe that anyone on this board condones rape. However, I'm not sure everyone here agrees how we define rape. For example, let's say a 120 lb woman who doesn't drink frequently goes out and has four cocktails with friends and then approaches a guy at a bar who's had a few drinks and asks him to go home with her and she initiates sex and they guy goes along with it. Then the next day she claims that she wasn't in a position to consent. I don't think the guy raped her, but it seems as if the EOAA would.

I believe that there is a case at Indiana U that is similar to this.
Click to expand...

If you think something is too good to be true, too easy, it might be. Walk away.
 

kellyleeks said:
i don't believe that anyone on this board condones rape. However, I'm not sure everyone here agrees how we define rape. For example, let's say a 120 lb woman who doesn't drink frequently goes out and has four cocktails with friends and then approaches a guy at a bar who's had a few drinks and asks him to go home with her and she initiates sex and they guy goes along with it. Then the next day she claims that she wasn't in a position to consent. I don't think the guy raped her, but it seems as if the EOAA would.

I believe that there is a case at Indiana U that is similar to this.
Click to expand...

The definition of rape is pretty clear and involves consent. What we have heard is that there was evidence of consent with the first two guys. But do you really believe that this girl freely consented to the third guy, how about the fourth or fifth guy? These last three guys where not involved with the first actions and appear to have taken advantage of the situation.

The problem that I see is that some "old style" guys assume that if you are able to have sex with a coed that it is by definition consensual. And if the lady later objects to what happen that it is only because they have an agenda and they are out to get the guy. Look at the situation from your daughters point of view.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

alchemy2u said:
And giving a voice to thousands of victims that have been ignored is a major step forward in our development. There are too many examples of women that have been disregarded because they were asking for it in the minds of Paleolithic men.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Your statement represents the scary revenge porn that so many feminists like yourself fantasize about. You do not care about the lives that are ruined due to public hanging. In your crazy mind, the reputations of innocent men being ruined is justified because so many guilty men have gotten away with it. The Duke lacrosse case is lost on people like you. Brian Banks losing years of his life is lost on you.

Let the process play out. If someone is guilty of any wrong doing, they should be held responsible. Stop using this to push your agenda.
 

alchemy2u said:
The definition of rape is pretty clear and involves consent. What we have heard is that there was evidence of consent with the first two guys. But do you really believe that this girl freely consented to the third guy, how about the fourth or fifth guy? These last three guys where not involved with the first actions and appear to have taken advantage of the situation.

The problem that I see is that some "old style" guys assume that if you are able to have sex with a coed that it is by definition consensual. And if the lady later objects to what happen that it is only because they have an agenda and they are out to get the guy. Look at the situation from your daughters point of view.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The definition of rape has been expanded by people like you in order to fit your man-hating agenda. And the fact the you must resort to the "daughters" card further expresses your desperation; a desperation to play on emotion due to the fact that anything logical escapes you.

Let the facts come out. Stop ascribing victimhood.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom