FSU again

I actually have no problem with this one. He pled guilty and received a "time served" sentence, probation, and community hours. FSU's penalty is actually more severe than the government's. Then again, the first two games are against two Div1aa teams.
 
But they are the next two games so it's hard to fault them for that. Are they supposed to pick their two harderst games? I don't think we would.
 
I rather think we'd kick him off the team, unless he was proven innocent.

Crap, we kicked Reub off the team and out of school even though he was innocent, before his thing ever went to trial. Then once he was cleared, it still took a lawyer to force the Hill to let him back in to finish his degree, and more lawyers to force the Hill to allow him to play.
 
beej67 said:
I rather think we'd kick him off the team, unless he was proven innocent.

Crap, we kicked Reub off the team and out of school even though he was innocent, before his thing ever went to trial. Then once he was cleared, it still took a lawyer to force the Hill to let him back in to finish his degree, and more lawyers to force the Hill to allow him to play.
Click to expand...

That's the difference between FSU and GT. One is considered a party/clown school and the other is considered one of the top schools in the nation.
 
I doubt we'd kick anyone off the team until it was settled and then I expect we have a policy about penalties for differing levels of crimes. If we don't, we're setting ourselves up to get sued again.
 
ncjacket said:
I doubt we'd kick anyone off the team until it was settled and then I expect we have a policy about penalties for differing levels of crimes. If we don't, we're setting ourselves up to get sued again.
Click to expand...

Much like we did with Houston, I'm pretty sure we'd have a knee jerk reaction and kick the guy off before the end of the week. The powers that be at Tech don't care much for sports anyway from my understanding. They aren't going to put up with anything at all off the field.
 
Many FSU fans have talked to me about this. He has to go to state High schools promoting against this type of behavior. FSU was pretty stern in the treatment of this crime. I don't have a problem with that. I don't condone the action, but its not like he was at the scene of a gang shooting or anything.
 
odw said:
Much like we did with Houston, I'm pretty sure we'd have a knee jerk reaction and kick the guy off before the end of the week. The powers that be at Tech don't care much for sports anyway from my understanding. They aren't going to put up with anything at all off the field.
Click to expand...
and like I said, we'd get sued, and we'd lose, and we'd have to take him back, etc., etc., etc. I don't condone what he did or what Reuben did either for that metter. But you have to use some common sense in these situations. Having a set policy so you can't be accused of bias is paramount.
 
I doubt we'd kick anyone off the team until it was settled
Click to expand...

Reub got kicked out of school before he ever went to trial. And best as I can recall, he never actually went to trial, the whole thing got dropped, and the Hill refused to let him back in to get his degree.

Now I agree that might have all been The Hill's doing, since apparently Chan had no problem taking him back. Which, btw, I think was the right move given the circumstances. (taking him back)

I'm just saying, the last high profile instance of what you're talking about, Tech approached in a vastly different way than FSU.
 
I know, but my point is that fiasco should have led to a more defined policy at Tech or they're idiots on the Hill. (although I know that Hill and idiots may be redundant)
 
I have mixed feelings about the requirement for him to speak to "at risk kids" about this issue... I honestly believe these opportunities need to be rendered to people who have earned the right to speak as a result of their personal success story....This student athlete has not done so...In some ways it glamorizes the issue IMHO...He has not provided sufficient evidence that he is beyond this issue in my opinion. The article says it is his second brush w/ the law as well...seems more like a pattern is developing...plus they pleabargined his felony charge down to a mis...Anyway... the talks to the "at risk kids" almost puts him on a pedestal ....Why not use their student athletes who grew up in similiar situations but don't have the criminal records to be used as evidence that they have allowed those negative influences to impact them....Who is a bigger success story...The student ath who overcomes it? Or the student ath who gives into and is caught & then is paraded around to give the entire event a "positive spin". No offense intended and I hope it is a wake up call. However, I think it is a dis-service to those who have overcome the odds of their back ground & succeed regardless.

Plus what good has any of it done if he fails & all the kids who he's spoken to on the issue....it weakens the validity of their stance...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top