Ten Gophers football players indefinately suspended

[Pompous Elitist]

Is there any room to operate between "I am really drunk and agreed to consensual sex" and "I am really drunk and now there is a group of friends participating and/or filming, I didn't agree to this"?
Can't both of those be the case?
Or is it still a marxist feminazi witch hunt?

The problem of course is that we don't know what actually happened that night. I prefer the term activist but the writings and interviews of these people are widely available. They aren't shy about it. Your past positions are consistent with said witch hunt mentality.

 

[tmvander]

I can tell you this much...if you can be in trouble for being in the same building where a violation of the college's code of conduct is being broken I wouldn't have lasted long in college. I'm sure none of us would have.

Hell, one of the players wasn't even there.

As someone else mentioned perhaps there was a harassment type of situation after the fact where the additional players all said something to the victim. Very possible.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

That sounds funny- but you just solved about 20 trillion societal problems, were that advice heeded going forward... It's a very good life plan, although I'd say that age 21 is an acceptable target as the male brain is almost fully formed by then.

If we could just ban the seven deadly sins all would be well.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Good point. I also worry about the double indemnity consequences, especially for the players who were dragged back in to this issue.

I don't think you should be worried about double indemnity consequences for the players. And I don't think double jeopardy will apply either.

 

[Breakin' The Plane]

That sounds funny- but you just solved about 20 trillion societal problems, were that advice heeded going forward... It's a very good life plan, although I'd say that age 21 is an acceptable target as the male brain is almost fully formed by then.

No. 25. If you can't rent a car, you can't have sex.

 

[Ewert86PC]

I don't think you are really worried about double indemnity consequences for the players. And I don't think double jeopardy will apply either.

Why not? This feels like fighting the same fight over and over?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[Block M]

How about holding players being fully supported by taxpayers and university to the tune of 100-150 K over 4-5 years accountable for their actions? How about setting a reasonable standard of behavior for student athletes that are visible ambassadors of the university? Additional suspension time, even expulsion for the real bad actor(s) seems reasonable to me.

These players are not irreplaceable. Hardly so.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Sex is only acceptable between a married man and woman who are both over 25, in a bedroom behind a locked door when no one else is in the house, for purposes of procreation only.
There. Now we'll never have problems like this again.

I am only willing to draw the line at gang bangs in dormitories at taxpayer funded public colleges in Minnesota. If you want your kids to be able to carry on like that because it is part of the "college experience", send them to a private school or help them rent an off-campus apartment.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

First of all, Kaler, and not Coyle, is going to be calling the shots from now on. Even if he or Coyle had influence over how fast the appeals will be heard (which is doubtful), there is no way they will exercise it. Millions of people in Minnesota and every media outlet in the state will be watching their every move to make sure they do nothing to tilt the scales of justice in this case.

Please don't refer to this investigation as the "scales of justice". They already faced potential criminal charges and the county decided not to press charges.

This has nothing to do with justice.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

I am only willing to draw the line at gang bangs in dormitories at taxpayer funded public colleges in Minnesota. If you want your kids to be able to carry on like that because it is part of the "college experience", send them to a private school or help them rent an off-campus apartment.

It actually works the EXACT opposite way.

If you want to have a say in the sexual activities between adults on a college campus, you should send your kids to a private school.

The fact that it is tax payer funded means that people are free to have the kind of sex that you don't like on the campus.

 

[UpnorthGo4]

Why not? This feels like fighting the same fight over and over?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Double jeopardy only applies when there has been a trial and jury verdict. After that the case can't be brought again against the defendant under the same facts and circumstances.

 

[Word]

How about holding players being fully supported by taxpayers and university to the tune of 100-150 K over 4-5 years accountable for their actions? How about setting a reasonable standard of behavior for student athletes that are visible ambassadors of the university? Additional suspension time, even expulsion for the real bad actor(s) seems reasonable to me.

These players are not irreplaceable. Hardly so.

I have no problem with the premise of your statement, but the problem is that we don't really know what happened. It also begs the question - what is the standard of behavior? If you assume this was consensual sex as the legal investigation found, would you ban that?

 

[GoodasGold]

That sounds funny- but you just solved about 20 trillion societal problems, were that advice heeded going forward... It's a very good life plan, although I'd say that age 21 is an acceptable target as the male brain is almost fully formed by then.

Not yours.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

How about holding players being fully supported by taxpayers and university to the tune of 100-150 K over 4-5 years accountable for their actions? How about setting a reasonable standard of behavior for student athletes that are visible ambassadors of the university? Additional suspension time, even expulsion for the real bad actor(s) seems reasonable to me.

These players are not irreplaceable. Hardly so.

How about holding players being fully supported by taxpayers and university to the tune of 100-150 K over 4-5 years accountable for their actions? How about setting a reasonable standard of behavior for student athletes that are visible ambassadors of the university? Additional suspension time, even expulsion for the real bad actor(s) seems reasonable to me.

These players are not irreplaceable. Hardly so.

It's not about the players right now.

It's about an absolutely broken system.

You made a reference to them drinking. . .fine, if the U wants to kick students out for underage drinking, they should. She should be kicked out of school too. The drinking has nothing to do with what's going on, it's a red herring.

Every student who steps foot on a state funded institution is being supported by taxpayers. If this was consensual, you want a student expelled for having a kind of sex that you think is icky. . . that's lunacy.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Even if a drunk girl doesn't say no to the first five players through the door - she still has the right to say no to the last five. I certainly hope it is a violation of the student code of conduct to have group sex with a drunk coed in a U of M dormitory regardless of consent. The mere fact that the players took advantage of a girl who had too much to drink is enough for me to want the players who were involved kicked off the team. They have no legal right to play football and I don't want them representing the U in any way.

You think very little of women.

 

[Some Day...Maybe]

Maybe there are guys out there that aren't interested in hanging around for 2nds, 3rds, or 4ths? And others that aren't interested in standing around, watching and cheering on the 2nds, 3rds, and 4ths? This may just be here say, but I bet there are plenty of guys like that either way.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hates Monikers]

Even if a drunk girl doesn't say no to the first five players through the door - she still has the right to say no to the last five. I certainly hope it is a violation of the student code of conduct to have group sex with a drunk coed in a U of M dormitory regardless of consent. The mere fact that the players took advantage of a girl who had too much to drink is enough for me to want the players who were involved kicked off the team. They have no legal right to play football and I don't want them representing the U in any way.

No fair. You're very certain of what went on that night. You have a big advantage over everybody else.

 

[PMWinSTP]

That sounds funny- but you just solved about 20 trillion societal problems, were that advice heeded going forward... It's a very good life plan, although I'd say that age 21 is an acceptable target as the male brain is almost fully formed by then.

You are joking, yes?

 

[westcoastgopher11]

can the puritanical crap about gang bangs - they didnt commit a crime and im not in the pearl clutching business like some of y'all

 

[PMWinSTP]

Good point. I also worry about the double indemnity consequences, especially for the players who were dragged back in to this issue.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Don't think indemnity is the word you are looking for here...

 

[PMWinSTP]

No. 25. If you can't rent a car, you can't have sex.

But go ahead and send them off to war at 18.

 

[bga1]

You are joking, yes?

No. Not about the plan design. The design is brilliant, in fact it is masterful. It should not be legally enforced- it's just good life advice.

 

[bga1]

Not yours.

You are slipping GAG - not a single sexual reference in your post.

 

[PMWinSTP]

No. Not about the plan design. The design is brilliant, in fact it is masterful. It should not be legally enforced- it's just good life advice.

Oh my. Should minorities be able to vote?

 

[MaxyJR1]

Maybe there are guys out there that aren't interested in hanging around for 2nds, 3rds, or 4ths? And others that aren't interested in standing around, watching and cheering on the 2nds, 3rds, and 4ths? This may just be here say, but I bet there are plenty of guys like that either way.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What were the O-linemen doing on September 2nd? Where were the LB's hanging out?

 

[MaxyJR1]

But go ahead and send them off to war at 18.

Pretty sure no one is forced to go to war. They sign up with the commitment if it happens. The last draft was 43 years ago.

 

[PMWinSTP]

Pretty sure no one is forced to go to war. They sign up with the commitment if it happens. The last draft was 43 years ago.

I fail to see your point, other than stating the obvious. You do understand my analogy, correct?

 

[Spoofin]

Can't see the logic for getting behind the players on this one. WTF are these guys out partying in the presence of alcohol after a game? WTF didnt they get the hell out of there when they saw what was going down with an inebriated cheerleader? How many F'ing times were these kids warned by coaches, administrators, etc to avoid exactly these types of situations? WTF didn't these guys pay attention to what happened with Dorsey last spring?

Playing football is a PRIVILEGE and the principals in this fiasco gave the university a black eye, not the EEOC or WTF its called.
Blaming this on "feminists" and "PC police" is total bull****. These guys deserved to be suspended. Hardin can join Dorsey wherever he ended up.

Memo to Claeys: next time recruit character.

You are judging a moral item (group sex) and missing the point. Sorry if you don't agree with group sex, but that isn't the issue here (assuming it was consensual). The issue is due process and the extent of punishment these kids face because they aren't getting it. That is the problem with the EOAA as it allows them to push their agenda.

Imagine you were at the apartment sleeping in another room and now had your name tagged to this. Missing football games isn't the problem, the problem is now that every time someone googles your name from now on (potential employer, the girl you like, etc.) what are they going to see? What will be the impact? No one on here would dispute the kids should be punished if they did something wrong - the issue is the witch hunt that folks worry is happening and that is an issue - whether or not you are offended by underage drinking and group sex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kuato Lives!]

Anyone that has sexual intercourse with their LAWFULLY wedded spouse should do so only with a sheet with a hole cut in it separating the two bodies. Further, if two unmarried adults find themselves to be unfortunate enough to be in the same bed together, a bundling board MUST be installed in order to prevent any pre-marital coitus. Any DECENT person knows this but i'm sure the degenerates on Gopherhole will try to rationalize their disgusting sexual ways.

 

[Pewterschmidt]

We're not giving women much credit in this thread. Kinda sad.

I wasn't some big stud in college but on multiple occasions I had women(most often in a relationship but not always) who had been drinking being the "aggressor." If I would have told them "no" because of the simple fact they had been drinking I can't imagine how bewildered/confused/pissed they would have been. News alert! Women also like sex. Some like it more then men. Some like it freaky. Some like the chase. Some like to be chased. Some have regrets. Some men have regrets too. Broad, sweeping codes of conduct (either real or proposed) trying to protect women is actually the opposite of feminism. If there's no evidence of sexual assault, end of the story. Period.

Her 4-6 shots of vodka should never been the only reason for non-consent. That's complete nonsense and it's insinuated by some.