M-Borg vs. THE Flavortown U Thread, Orig. by Buckeye Paul, absconded w/by talent.

[drok]

I have a problem with the scholarship part of this for the reasons already addressed. The 1 game seems about right, but I'm not sure what that's based on, really.

What do people think about standardized punishments for different infractions? Take it out of the coaches' hands. Giving coaches the ability to choose punishment for these types of things seems as crazy as giving coaches the ability to vote in a poll to determine their team's rankings.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I'm unclear as to precisely what it means, but my guess is that JTB will get his summer scholarship package back.

I suspect you are right and this is just another way of letting fans know he is running stairs until he pukes.

I stand by my position though. If we are going to pretend these kids are compensated with Schollies, the Schollies should be sancrosanct. Period.

[iam416]

I stand by my position though. If we are going to pretend these kids are compensated with Schollies, the Schollies should be sancrosanct. Period.

Well, hmmm. I guess I could make a couple arguments contrary.

First, scholarships aren't "sacrosanct." There is, e.g., a long history of kids being kicked off the team and/or kicked out of school and losing that scholarship.

Perhaps the better view is that the scholarship is compensation for services rendered. If an athlete opts to quit the team after two years, then should he remain on scholarship? I think not. You ought to be guaranteed a 4-year scholarship so long as you live up to your end for 4 years.

If scholarships are properly viewed as consideration for services rendered, and failure to provide those services justifies not providing that consideration, then what about a 1 or 2 or 3 game suspension? In the NFL, e.g., players are not paid for suspended games as they haven't provided the agreed upon services for those games. Could that reasoning extend to CFB players? Is it fair to say that a player suspended for an entire season is off scholarship for that season? If so, what about smaller suspensions?

If one buys this line of reasoning, then it is "fair" to penalize 1/12th of JTB's scholarship aid for a semester because he has missed 1 game due to his own actions. Now, it sure seems like summer financial aid is well beyond that amount, so it's probably excessive. However, if you view scholarships as consideration for playing athletics then I think you reach a conclusion where the idea of the penalty if ok, but the degree is open for debate.

I'm not sure whether I buy that or not, but it doesn't seem like a poppycock position to me.

[Rocky Bleier]

In light of the OSU QB situation:

http://ericpetersautos.com/2015/11/02/drinking-and-driving-vs-drunk-driving/#comments

What do you think, Talent?

[hack]

I stand by my position though. If we are going to pretend these kids are compensated with Schollies, the Schollies should be sancrosanct. Period.


Those there are some words to live by. Find another way to punish the kid. One that doesn't download all the risks to that kid and his family whilst preserving all the potential benefits to the school and team. It's not hard.

[iam416]

Rocky:

I'm not a particularly big fan of drunk driving laws as currently constituted. I view them as, more or less, an unholy alliance between insurance companies and MADD wherein MADD is the public messenger and insurance companies get PAID!!!

That said, law is the law. Pay attention to checkpoints. If you're driving, be very reasonable in your consumption and extra cautious in your driving.

I guess JTB got a call from a friend to pick him up or something. So he drove to get him and ran smack into a checkpoint. I'm sure he didn't think he was "drunk" (he wouldn't have been 20 years ago). But that's life.

[UMStan White]

40 years ago when I started practice. a reading of .15 or higher was considered a presumption that you were driving while intoxicated. (there was no offense of driving with a certain BAC as there is now--there was merely a presumption that could be rebutted with other evidence or testimony) A breathalyzer test of between .10 and .14 you were presumed to be driving while visibly impaired (a much less serious offense than DWI). Anything below .10 and you were presumed to be driving sober and not under the influence or visibly impaired. My how times have changed. I agree with Talent that the major push to lower the limits has been fueled by MADD and the Highway Traffic Safety Institute which has led to the feds requiring lower limits or the loss of road funding.

As for JB's punishment, it is consistent with what seems to be the norm for college athletes. I wouldn't say that Urban is going easy on him or he's gotten a break because he's a starter.

I do have one question. What is "summer financial aid"? Does an athlete have to bet asking classes to qualify for it or merely staying on campus and working out?

[Prime2]

Still .10 for boats and snowmobiles in many states, which I find odd.

[WM Wolverine]

It won't be out-of-state rates. Athletes pay in-state rates, at least I know partial and non scholarship Div I baseball players only pay in-state rates.

[UMStan White]

I think that's wrong. I understood that if a player was out of state the athletic dept. reimbursed the University for out of stat tuition.

[WingsFan]

I view them as, more or less, an unholy alliance between insurance companies and MADD wherein MADD is the public messenger and insurance companies get PAID!!!

MADD organization and it’s local chapters is nothing but anti-alcohol extremists who have adopted a political agenda that threatens the second coming of Prohibition. (sorry for getting political) carry on.

[The Oracle]

Every experience I've ever had with them they just don't want people to drink and drive. Political people tend to see "political agendas" in almost everything. I'm glad I'm not a political person.

[WingsFan]

Ugh Whatever, the principal founder of MADD has left the organization long ago around 2000 I think. (?) Citing a lack of focus on the real public safety issue, MADD maintains an adversarial position against the alcohol industry. Under MADD’s definition, "alcohol industry" includes distillers, brewers, wineries, distributors, wholesalers, retailers, alcohol related trade associations, and any non-profit organization.


MADD advocates the imposition of "significant" additional federal excise taxes, particularly on beer and wine. The intent is to tax beer and wine at the same rate as hard liquor. But MADD is a tax exempt 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) charitable organ-ization, individuals and business entities that give money to MADD are able to write off their donations to MADD as tax deductions on their income tax returns. In this way, MADD manages to receive tens of millions of tax exempt dollars that are used to fund MADD’s political agenda.

[UMStan White]

I advocate for DAMM (Drunks against mad mothers)

[Ghengis Jon]

One former MADD exec calls it Malicious A-holes Dispensing Dollars.