Report: U Followed Rules & Law in Suspensions

Donate To GopherHole
Pompous Elitist said:
It's a bit surprising to see factual errors within the first two paragraphs of the report. Their statistics regarding sexual assault include things like unwelcome kisses and advances, and affirmative consent violations. They describe these acts as not only student conduct violations but criminal matters which is false. For example, incapacitation not simply having a drink or "affirmatively (verbally) consenting throughout the act" is the legal standard for consent. They need to revisit their source data.

Jillian Kornblatt is an expert in employer defense litigation in suits brought by employees.

This should be good reading if the opening statement is any indication of the quality. Here is the full report:

http://regents.umn.edu/sites/regents.umn.edu/files/AUG_2017_-_Special_Oversight_Docket.pdf
Click to expand...

Thanks!
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Let me try to explain a position many of us take. Simply because something is legitimized by executive order, rule, law, code, doesn't mean it is right.

Banning travel and refugees from Muslim countries the US may cut down on terrorism but goes against what many consider fair and ethical principles.

Slavery was protected by law and religious decree for centuries (and still exists in some localities) but goes against what most consider fair or ethical.

Internment camps possibly reduced espionage activities during WWII. Again,....

Simply because the EOAA exists in its current form doesn't mean it should. It may cut down on rape (is there any evidence if this since 2011?) but as with the above activities the cost is too high.

Do you want to understand?
Click to expand...

FIFY
 



Ski U Master said:
By the athletic department, sure. So are lots of athletes across the country when they act foolishly.
Click to expand...

Right - but you said that they weren't punished, when they clearly were. The AD has to abide by the same garbage Title IX laws that the EOAA has to.

Also, I appreciate your continued implication that they did something wrong. The second five were cleared of all wrongdoing, legal and otherwise, and yet for some reason you have it in your head that they "acted foolishly". Keep pushing that agenda.
 


The problem I see in the report is at it doesn't address the weaknesses in the initial procedure. Having one entity be the investigator, prosecutor and judge, in the initial process can lead to confirmation bias. That bias of one investigator, resulted in five of the accused having there results overturned by the SSMS, a more robust procedure, where at least one aspect was done by someone outside the U might have kept the proceeding to the five players ultimately disciplined.
 

I just find it interesting how you can draw a pretty direct line between how certain posters feel about the sex scandal and their expectations/mandates for Fleck in season 1 (on both sides of the issue...I'm trying not to be partisan and include myself in the description). I really cannot recall a brand new coach being disliked by so many supposed hard-core fans (especially one as qualified and nationally lauded as Fleck). I mean, many of us were skeptical of Jerry Kill and if he was "big-time" enough (definitely proved himself) but I don't recall outright dislike. I truly think most of the Fleck angst stems from a certain cohort that really doesn't want Coyle to have made a successful hire.

I will always side with our great Public University (hence the name)...players come and go, the U is forever.
 

GopherHomer said:
I just find it interesting how you can draw a pretty direct line between how certain posters feel about the sex scandal and their expectations/mandates for Fleck in season 1 (on both sides of the issue...I'm trying not to be partisan and include myself in the description). I really cannot recall a brand new coach being disliked by so many supposed hard-core fans (especially one as qualified and nationally lauded as Fleck). I mean, many of us were skeptical of Jerry Kill and if he was "big-time" enough (definitely proved himself) but I don't recall outright dislike. I truly think most of the Fleck angst stems from a certain cohort that really doesn't want Coyle to have made a successful hire.

I will always side with our great Public University (hence the name)...players come and go, the U is forever.
Click to expand...
The hatred in this forum towards the U and the skepticism of Fleck is so thick in here. People seem to act like Kill and Claeys won 5 Rose Bowls or something.
 

GopherHomer said:
I just find it interesting how you can draw a pretty direct line between how certain posters feel about the sex scandal and their expectations/mandates for Fleck in season 1 (on both sides of the issue...I'm trying not to be partisan and include myself in the description). I really cannot recall a brand new coach being disliked by so many supposed hard-core fans (especially one as qualified and nationally lauded as Fleck). I mean, many of us were skeptical of Jerry Kill and if he was "big-time" enough (definitely proved himself) but I don't recall outright dislike. I truly think most of the Fleck angst stems from a certain cohort that really doesn't want Coyle to have made a successful hire.

I will always side with our great Public University (hence the name)...players come and go, the U is forever.
Click to expand...

Brewster. Right after his first press conference.

Sex scandal and expectations? Seriously? With 54% of people voting on the front page that they'll match or better last year's 8 regular season record. Or more than 84% saying they'll win at least 7 ?

More likely that people think that Fleck and his staff are good coaches with a track record of success. That they won't fall on their faces trying to sustain the recent success around here.

Only on Gopher Boards are there more than a handful of people who'll say "They're gonna stink this year" and people call them supporters of the team and Fleck.:rolleyes:

"What will the Gophers regular season record be in Fleck's first year?

12-0 - 4%

11-1 - 1%

10-2 - 4%

9-3- 14%

8-4 - 31%

7-5 - 30%

6-6 - 10%

5-7 - 3%

Less than 5 wins - 4%

Total Votes: 729"
 



I scanned through the report - do not claim to have read every word.

The one thing I found most interested was that the lawyers from Dorsey & Whitney talked about the EOAA report becoming public, and then gave several recommendations to prevent a future report from becoming public. Those recommendations included

b. Implement a system where reports are not distributed but are available for viewing only in person or by a controlled portal.

so much for openness.

The headline is the criticism of the coaches. But if you read the entire report, they also criticized the AD and his office, the administration and the regents. They also admitted that one of the contributing factors to the boycott was the lack of accurate information provided to the players, and talking about the breakdown in communications between the athletes and the athletic department. In short, no one is blameless in this situation, and mistakes were made on all sides. (damn, now that I read that last sentence, it sounds like Trump......)
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I scanned through the report - do not claim to have read every word.

The one thing I found most interested was that the lawyers from Dorsey & Whitney talked about the EOAA report becoming public, and then gave several recommendations to prevent a future report from becoming public. Those recommendations included

b. Implement a system where reports are not distributed but are available for viewing only in person or by a controlled portal.

so much for openness.

The headline is the criticism of the coaches. But if you read the entire report, they also criticized the AD and his office, the administration and the regents. They also admitted that one of the contributing factors to the boycott was the lack of accurate information provided to the players, and talking about the breakdown in communications between the athletes and the athletic department. In short, no one is blameless in this situation, and mistakes were made on all sides. (damn, now that I read that last sentence, it sounds like Trump......)
Click to expand...

They recommended a portal that can be defeated by screenshots and smartphone cameras?

Perhaps they should have also suggested the report should self-destruct within 60 seconds .

If someone wants to distribute the information...that's not going to stop them.
 

Ski U Master said:
Is that not part of the student conduct hearing and appeal process?
Click to expand...

Again, the SSMS not the EOAA overturned the EOAA findings. The EOAA is the entity that conducts the school investigation and forwards their recommendations to OCS. The SSMS ruling can be overturned by the provost. The provost is also not part of the EOAA.
 

Starting to get into this piece, it occurred to me: the university is on a hiring spree of law firms and internal attorneys, external faculty and supposed neurobiology experts to investigate/defend their EOAA practices and related procedures, not to mention the incredible mobilization for the Randy Handel incident.

Where is the "public defender" for the students in these cases? Are the students aware of their rights prior to their (unrecorded) interviews?

How does the university have millions to spend on legal counsel to defend its interests but cannot spare a dime for their students?
 



Pompous Elitist said:
They recommended a portal that can be defeated by screenshots and smartphone cameras?

Perhaps they should have also suggested the report should self-destruct within 60 seconds .

If someone wants to distribute the information...that's not going to stop them.
Click to expand...

They want the reports sent via snapchat?
 

dpodoll68 said:
Right - but you said that they weren't punished, when they clearly were. The AD has to abide by the same garbage Title IX laws that the EOAA has to.

Also, I appreciate your continued implication that they did something wrong. The second five were cleared of all wrongdoing, legal and otherwise, and yet for some reason you have it in your head that they "acted foolishly". Keep pushing that agenda.
Click to expand...

You have it wrong, Oh Wise One. The second five players were in no way cleared of all wrongdoing. The most that can be said was that there was not sufficient evidence to punish them any more than they were already punished by being suspended from the bowl game. And as the report states, Kaler clearly had the authority to suspend all 10 players based on the evidence and findings provided in very specific detail by the EOAA Report. Futhermore, Tracy Claeys also had the authority to suspend all 10 players for violating team rules. If Claeys had disciplined the players like he should have most Gopher fans would have applauded him for it.
 

Cruze said:
You have it wrong, Oh Wise One. The second five players were in no way cleared of all wrongdoing. The most that can be said was that there was not sufficient evidence to punish them any more than they were already punished by being suspended from the bowl game. And as the report clearly states, Kaler had the authority to suspend all 10 players based on the evidence and findings provided in very specific detail by the EOAA Report. Futhermore, Tracy Claeys also had the authority to suspend all 10 players for violating team rules. At a minimum, underage drinking and providing alcohol to a high school recruit were violations of the football team rules. If Claeys had disciplined the players like he should have most Gopher fans would have applauded him for it.
Click to expand...

Guilty until there's insufficient evidence - then still guilty, morally bankrupt, and deserving punishment. You would do well in a Cardassian court.
 

Cruze said:
You have it wrong, Oh Wise One. The second five players were in no way cleared of all wrongdoing. The most that can be said was that there was not sufficient evidence to punish them any more than they were already punished by being suspended from the bowl game. And as the report states, Kaler clearly had the authority to suspend all 10 players based on the evidence and findings provided in very specific detail by the EOAA Report. Futhermore, Tracy Claeys also had the authority to suspend all 10 players for violating team rules. If Claeys had disciplined the players like he should have most Gopher fans would have applauded him for it.
Click to expand...

and...so did Coyle. Remember, he said he knew more than others did about the situation, meaning he had all the information he needed for some time.

Sounds like failure on multiple levels to me.
 

STPGopher said:
and...so did Coyle. Remember, he said he knew more than others did about the situation, meaning he had all the information he needed for some time.

Sounds like failure on multiple levels to me.
Click to expand...

Knowing more, and having "all the information he needed for some time" are not the same thing.

Certainly no one appears to have handled this perfectly, will not disagree with that.
 

The only person escaping unscathed from this is Mark Coyle. Which shouldn't be the case, the only leadership he showed stems from stepping on other people to avoid being swept away in a flood. He is such a snake in the grass. Regardless of how successful he is, and I admit that he is, I have zero respect for the man.
 

citywok said:
The only person escaping unscathed from this is Mark Coyle. Which shouldn't be the case, the only leadership he showed stems from stepping on other people to avoid being swept away in a flood. He is such a snake in the grass. Regardless of how successful he is, and I admit that he is, I have zero respect for the man.
Click to expand...

I've said this before, but Coyle played the situation to his benefit. He knew he wanted to fire Claeys and used the scandal as his excuse, hoping that it would make him look good for "cleaning house". I think it backfired to some degree. I don't think he got the savior status he was hoping for. He should have just fired Claeys and said he found his guy and wanted to go in a different direction. He didn't need to drag so many people through the mud to accomplish it.
 

bizzle22 said:
Knowing more, and having "all the information he needed for some time" are not the same thing.

Certainly no one appears to have handled this perfectly, will not disagree with that.
Click to expand...

The accusation was Claeys was a poor leader because he didn't act. IIRC Coyle also mentioned the videos and other evidence. He had that since September. Coyle needs to be judged as well.
 

STPGopher said:
The accusation was Claeys was a poor leader because he didn't act. IIRC Coyle also mentioned the videos and other evidence. He had that since September. Coyle needs to be judged as well.
Click to expand...

He did act initially. The players were suspended during the season until the legal situation was cleared up. The EOAA findings (which have nothing to do with Coyle) were obviously the driving factor in the bowl suspensions, and whether it was a legitimate investigation or not the smart choice would be for the AD to stay out of that until it had come to its conclusion which was December 7. How bad would it look if there was any sense at all that Coyle had involved himself in that investigation? As soon as the EOAA got involved it was over his head. I'm sure he knows more details than were included in the report, as well as the internal conversations between he, Claeys, Kaler, players, and other coaches and administrators.

Never said Coyle can't be judged, but you can't do so without putting yourself in his shoes. His hands were tied for most of it. As I said above, he should never interfere with an EOAA investigation. And once his boss stepped in (as Kaler did early on after the bowl suspensions) it's not like Coyle could overrule him. Lots of folks want to lump Kaler and Coyle together, but in reality they played very different roles in this situation if you paid close attention.
 

Word said:
I've said this before, but Coyle played the situation to his benefit. He knew he wanted to fire Claeys and used the scandal as his excuse, hoping that it would make him look good for "cleaning house". I think it backfired to some degree. I don't think he got the savior status he was hoping for. He should have just fired Claeys and said he found his guy and wanted to go in a different direction. He didn't need to drag so many people through the mud to accomplish it.
Click to expand...

Agree. This has been my issue with this situation all along.
 

Word said:
I've said this before, but Coyle played the situation to his benefit. He knew he wanted to fire Claeys and used the scandal as his excuse, hoping that it would make him look good for "cleaning house". I think it backfired to some degree. I don't think he got the savior status he was hoping for. He should have just fired Claeys and said he found his guy and wanted to go in a different direction. He didn't need to drag so many people through the mud to accomplish it.
Click to expand...

Who exactly did he "drag through the mud"? (Other than the coach he was firing, in which case, it is natural that the former coach is dragged through the mud. That's how it works,)
 

bizzle22 said:
Who exactly did he "drag through the mud"? (Other than the coach he was firing, in which case, it is natural that the former coach is dragged through the mud. That's how it works,)
Click to expand...

No, that isn't how it works. Watch just about any press conference with an AD and you won't see a visibly upset person with a wobbly voice talking about the lack of class, discipline, culture at great and unnecessary length. He may have intended to convey a different message, similar to when he attempted to communicate with the team and coaches, but he didn't do a good job if that's the case.

As always those of a particular persuasion, e.g. those more concerned about PR than the player's and coach's lives and reputations will perceive events one way, while those with a different mindset will see things in another shade. That's how it works.
 

Ski U Master said:
If so wouldn't all 10 players have been punished?
Click to expand...

All ten were punished. I don't know if they all deserved to be or not, but all ten were. Later, some were "unpunished", but to say some were not punished at all isn't accurate.
 

bizzle22 said:
He did act initially. The players were suspended during the season until the legal situation was cleared up. The EOAA findings (which have nothing to do with Coyle) were obviously the driving factor in the bowl suspensions, and whether it was a legitimate investigation or not the smart choice would be for the AD to stay out of that until it had come to its conclusion which was December 7. How bad would it look if there was any sense at all that Coyle had involved himself in that investigation? As soon as the EOAA got involved it was over his head. I'm sure he knows more details than were included in the report, as well as the internal conversations between he, Claeys, Kaler, players, and other coaches and administrators.

Never said Coyle can't be judged, but you can't do so without putting yourself in his shoes. His hands were tied for most of it. As I said above, he should never interfere with an EOAA investigation. And once his boss stepped in (as Kaler did early on after the bowl suspensions) it's not like Coyle could overrule him. Lots of folks want to lump Kaler and Coyle together, but in reality they played very different roles in this situation if you paid close attention.
Click to expand...

so just so I'm clear on this. Coyle could suspend the players when the police were investigating a sexual assault, and had the evidence that clearly showed there was an assault, but when they police ignored the evidence and didn't charge them, he let them back on the team?

So, if he knew about the EOAA investigation, which he did, why didn't he insist on keeping the original players suspended pending that outcome? Because his hands were tied?

One thing I do agree on, Kaler and Coyle played very different roles. Both were utterly incompetent, but they found different ways to be just that.

Nothing has changed in the culture at the U, which has been the bigger problem for decades. The fact that Kaler is still in place will have more to do with PJ Fleck's tenure as coach than any other factor.
 

What almost everyone in GopherHole neglects to consider is the fact that the U's General Counsel is heavily involved in every issue and decision that has legal ramifications for the U. Mark Coyle undoubtedly agreed with the suspensions of the players but those decisions were made with the input of everyone in senior leadership at the U. That is the way large organizations work. No AD in the country has the authority to make decisions on their own about such volatile and high profile matters.
 

Cruze said:
So, Kaler and Coyle followed the law and rules in suspending all 10 football players. That is just another way of saying that the players received all of the due process they had coming to them. And that is exactly what a few of us in GopherHole have been saying all along. And finally, there are 10 to 15 GopherHolers who were wrong about almost everything they posted on this subject. Of course, they will never admit it or apologize for the verbal abuse they administered to every poster who had the audacity to disagree with them.


Report: University of Minnesota followed law, rules in suspending 10 football players

Marti told the oversight committee that much of the criticism stemmed from a misunderstanding of the university's obligation to investigate sexual assault complaints, even when the county attorney declines to file charges. "The university did not have a choice," he said. "You were required by law to do so."

The report also found that the university offers "substantial due process protections" for accused students, "including protections that far exceed the due process protections of other Big Ten universities." Among other things, the U permits students' attorneys to participate "in all stages" of the disciplinary process, and to cross-examine witnesses, unlike many other schools.

Read more at: http://www.startribune.com/universi...g-10-football-players-review-finds/440720013/
Click to expand...

Again, seeing the world thru your Coyle colored glasses. For many, it wasn't about whether Coyle and Kaler followed the rules. You can teach a dog to follow the damn rules. It was how things were communicated and managed between the lines. This is where leadership needs to show itself. And where the big boys and girls justify their high six figure or seven figure salaries. MC and EK let it turn into a fiasco on their watch. Anyone connected to the team and University deserved better.
 

Ski U Master said:
If so wouldn't all 10 players have been punished?
Click to expand...

You mean like missing a bowl game, having their names and pictures on the front of page of every major newspaper in the state and on ESPN and many others labeling sexual offenders, rapists, assaulters and so one...if you mean punished like that, then yes, they were all punished. Guilty or not.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom