Recruiting Forum Football Talk [RIP 9.3.2019]

Status
Not open for further replies.
#182,527
#182,527
SweetasSoda said:
So the whole needing HT desperately was just to maintain where they have been.
Click to expand...
With the Moses injury they are likely starting 2 true freshman at ILB with 3 sophomores (2 true So and one RS So) backing them up. So yeah, they're hurting. Now they're all talented guys. One 3 star and four 4 stars, but very young and inexperienced. More so than our DL.

MIKE -- Shane Lee Freshman 4 star / Markail Benton RS So 4 star

WILL -- Christian Harris Freshman 4 star

Jaylen Moody So 3 star / Ale Kaho So 4 star
 
  • Like
Reactions: SweetasSoda and Devo182
#182,531
#182,531
hotcypress said:
One point on BT that I believe has been made here but is important: If whatever UT body makes a decision on BT has never had to deal with a threat of "shooting up the school" or mass violence, they'll have to determine how they want to set down a precedent. The last thing any governing body at UT wants is to have two standards set up: one for athletes and one for everyone else. That may lead them to make an example out of BT if they can collect enough evidence to meet their standard, which as a poster above has identified is basically preponderance of evidence, so 51% likely.
Click to expand...

I find it funny that people think a threat has never been made on the school and that UT has never had to make a decision like this before. That is if what he said was even in that context.

The school has been around for how long?

The only reason this is even being discussed right now is because BT is a student athlete.

Any normal student and this would not have been in the spotlight at all, the domestic assault would be dropped, the student would have to pay for the damages, probably do some community service, etc. to appease the Courts and the University.

My two cents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brillovol, jlawso21, SweetasSoda and 2 others
#182,532
#182,532
hotcypress said:
One point on BT that I believe has been made here but is important: If whatever UT body makes a decision on BT has never had to deal with a threat of "shooting up the school" or mass violence, they'll have to determine how they want to set down a precedent. The last thing any governing body at UT wants is to have two standards set up: one for athletes and one for everyone else. That may lead them to make an example out of BT if they can collect enough evidence to meet their standard, which as a poster above has identified is basically preponderance of evidence, so 51% likely.
Click to expand...

His fact pattern just seems to be very unique. It was in the heat of an argument, no premeditation. Also very out of place, he went from arguing with his girl to "shoot up the school"? Just seems weird all around.

I just doubt this would be an applicable precedent, given the circumstances. It wasn't written or made with any previous thought. No one even saw him as he apparently said it. Such a ridiculously rare circumstance, it would be silly to use it as a precedent imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SweetasSoda and cHiZzLeVOL
#182,535
#182,535
Sleegro said:
With the Moses injury they are likely starting 2 true freshman at ILB with 3 sophomores (2 true So and one RS So) backing them up. So yeah, they're hurting. Now they're all talented guys. One 3 star and four 4 stars, but very young and inexperienced. More so than our DL.

MIKE -- Shane Lee Freshman 4 star / Markail Benton RS So 4 star

WILL -- Christian Harris Freshman 4 star

Jaylen Moody So 3 star / Ale Kaho So 4 star
Click to expand...

Had no idea 1 injury (outside of QB) would affect bammers so much, but their board is melting down and already onto "lost season" mode. I'm sure Dabo kicking their teeth in has plenty to do with it too. No longer have their cape of invincibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SweetasSoda
#182,536
#182,536
Devo182 said:
Had no idea 1 injury (outside of QB) would affect bammers so much, but their board is melting down and already onto "lost season" mode. I'm sure Dabo kicking their teeth in has plenty to do with it too. No longer have their cape of invincibility.
Click to expand...
It’s arguably the equivalent to losing Tua but on the defensive side of the ball. It’s a big hit for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SweetasSoda and Devo182
#182,538
#182,538
Devo182 said:
His fact pattern just seems to be very unique. It was in the heat of an argument, no premeditation. Also very out of place, he went from arguing with his girl to "shoot up the school"? Just seems weird all around.

I just doubt this would be an applicable precedent, given the circumstances. It wasn't written or made with any previous thought. No one even saw him as he apparently said it. Such a ridiculously rare circumstance, it would be silly to use it as a precedent imo.
Click to expand...
all your points are valid, but how many times has silly stopped the government?
 
#182,539
#182,539
SweetasSoda said:
You're wrong. Actual proof of a restraining order only proves that someone said someone did something so that is only hearsay even if there is a restraining order. The rest you are correct on.
Click to expand...
But does it not also mean that there was enough said or did to put it into effect? I will say that the authorities in SC never charged him with anything and I hope that means that they at least investigated, so that much is in his favor. I do not know all the facts, but not everyone gets a restraining order. I am going to have to trust the coaching staff and AD to do the right thing once they have all the facts and once the university makes a judgment regarding this incident.
 
#182,542
#182,542
hotcypress said:
all your points are valid, but how many times has silly stopped the government?
Click to expand...

In cases like this the “government - certain agencies” would investigate the threat and come to a conclusion if it is viable or not. The “government” does not play with in-betweens. You are either a threat or not a threat. If you aren’t then you are of no interest to the “government.” I suppose Police Departments are the same.

So your statement makes no sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: titansvolsfaninga
#182,544
#182,544
Sleegro said:
Just a little perspective on the perception of our roster losses this camp. So far we've lost Gooden, I guess we technically got one back in Garland, and Buchanon. We'll see about Bryce. Which is less than we've had at this point in camp in years. Texas was down to 2 RBs due to injuries in camp to 3 of their scholarship RBs and one walkon that they like a lot, so they had to move their highly ranked true freshman qb to RB to start the season so they could have 3. Which leaves them with only 2 scholarship qbs right now. One of the RBs, 4 star 2019 signee Derrian Brown had a stroke in January and it's not for sure he will ever play again. They also lost another 2019 highly rated signee in 4 star LB De'Gabriel Floyd, who was diagnosed with Spinal Stenosis earlier this year and will be out for at least the season. This hasn't affected their hype much and maybe it won't affect them much. There's probably teams that have had even worse luck this preseason, I just have to hear about Texas all the time. Personally I think they're overrated right now because they surprised in the bowl game. They lost a ton of production to the draft and graduation. They have a good qb though which can cover some of that up. But they basically lost their whole front 7 on defense. I'm actually thinking about betting some of my longhorn friends on this opening game vs LA Tech. I think there's a real solid chance for an upset there.
Click to expand...
Excellent post. Just about every team loses a player or more in the preseason or early in the season and that is why every coach worries about having enough depth. Except, apparently, Ohio State, and we already know that Urban made all kinds of deals with the devil so that explains that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SweetasSoda and Sleegro
#182,546
#182,546
cHiZzLeVOL said:
In cases like this the “government - certain agencies” would investigate the threat and come to a conclusion if it is viable or not. The “government” does not play with in-betweens. You are either a threat or not a threat. If you aren’t then you are of no interest to the “government.” I suppose Police Departments are the same.

So your statement makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Any action to come out of a UT administrative body is a government action. To say that the govt doesn't play with in-betweens shows a lack of knowledge or experience in dealing with governing bodies in general. With an evidentiary standard so low, almost anything can convince a group of peers or administrators that BT "more likely than not" made his verbal threat. I'm not making references to criminal actions because as you point out above, the evidentiary standard is much higher.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top