LG defense of Marcus Thomas,agree or not?

#1
volfan2024

volfan2024

“Wanna play ball scarecrow “
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
13,085
Likes
2,908
#1
Seems as though everytime mention is made of this of the way it was handled, LG refers back to University policy, or whatever.My question is "Why can't Coach Meyer quit hiding behind all of the red tape, be a man,and be responsible for enforcing the rules instead of "passing the buck"? Do you agree with LG stance on the issue as to how the Marcus Thomas case was handled?He is so adamant with his stance I just wonder how everyone else feels?I just don't recall Coach Fulmer ever using that avenue as a defense.
:popcorn:
 
#2
#2
utfantilidie said:
Seems as though everytime mention is made of this of the way it was handled, LG refers back to University policy, or whatever.My question is "Why can't Coach Meyer quit hiding behind all of the red tape, be a man,and be responsible for enforcing the rules instead of "passing the buck"? Do you agree with LG stance on the issue as to how the Marcus Thomas case was handled?He is so adamant with his stance I just wonder how everyone else feels?I just don't recall Coach Fulmer ever using that avenue as a defense.
:popcorn:
Click to expand...

LG was ready to hang Marsalous Johnson last year after his interstate incident. His stance with the Gators hardly seems consistent.
 
#3
#3
I am trying to remember the Johnson incident. Refresh me on that. As to Thomas, it is probably due in large part to my being an attorney. I view the process as very important and I understand better than most how much that process can limit your options at times.
 
#4
#4
lawgator1 said:
I am trying to remember the Johnson incident. Refresh me on that. As to Thomas, it is probably due in large part to my being an attorney. I view the process as very important and I understand better than most how much that process can limit your options at times.
Click to expand...
that's very weak
 
#5
#5
From the mouth of LG last fall:

Actually, we may have found something we can agree upon and that is that I agree that your player wasn't thinking much at the time. But that's my concern. Our society has gotten to the point where anyone lashing out in anger, without regard to the consequences, is given another chance. And another. And another. I'm not saying this kid should be banned from football altogether. Nor am I saying he ought to be deprived of a first rate education.

What I am saying is that, if I am the head football coach dealing with lives of 90 young men who think themselves invulnerable and who, by their actions, can endanger others, then one of the first things I want to teach them is that collectively we don't put up with such shennanigans and maybe its time they actually DO start thinking aobut consequences. That is a hard life lesson to learn, but this is not just about this kid. Its about the 89 others, and the ones that follow them, and the players after that.

Someone has to draw a line somewhere.

More from Gator:
As to the other post, that's the right approach. Suspend him while the court matter is underway. For one thing, he probably can't talk to Fulmer about what happened. I imagine his lawyer has put the kibosh on that. But when the case is over, plea deal or no plea deal, get the facts and if he pulled a gun on someone, he's gone.


...but we give Meyer a pass for passing the buck.
 
#6
#6
Who cares? Let the gators cast discipline to the side in favor of winning - it'll get 'em in the end.

Next time a player is at a party and someone pulls out a doobie, he'll think about the consequences Marcus Thomas faced and tell 'em to fire it on up.

When a recruit leaves this summer, he'll pack his heat knowing that having and even firing semiauto weapons is cool at UF.

Who cares what LG thinks. I am just enjoying watching Urban deal with real issues he's never had to consider before at a major campus since his experience is much more tame - ala Utah etc.
 
#7
#7
If my opinion counted - and I realize it doesn't - I would say I am not seeing the contradiction from earlier posts of mine. Guns = automatic bye bye. Pot = follow the rules.
 
#8
#8
LG and Meyer are both getting way too much heat on this issue. The concept of suspending or dismissing a college student for smoking pot is silly. It's nothing more than a concession to the clueless,piously puritanical, law and order crowd. We don't test the student body in general. We have no business testing athletes for anything other than performance enhancers.
 
#9
#9
I agree that pot is way less harmful than drinking shots of whiskey,etc.It is silly.It can't be helped that the laws are still stuck in the 60's.The law will change one day no doubt, until then we will have to continue to watch Cops and see how excited they get when they find a small dose of weed and God forbid paraphernalia.In a weird way Forida kind of reminds of two things 1. As George Castanza said "It's not a lie unless you believe it's a lie" and kind of like the Catholic Church when they have a preist go array and commit some foolish act, they just send him on to another church.The big coverup.
Of course on the other hand they can just follow normal protocol for each instance as they have in the past, worked then, should work now.Just basically anything to try and rattle LG suits me fine though.:)
 
#10
#10
hatvol96 said:
LG and Meyer are both getting way too much heat on this issue. The concept of suspending or dismissing a college student for smoking pot is silly. It's nothing more than a concession to the clueless,piously puritanical, law and order crowd. We don't test the student body in general. We have no business testing athletes for anything other than performance enhancers.
Click to expand...
We aren't paying the student body for performance or to be representatives of the university either.
 
#11
#11
volmanbill said:
We aren't paying the student body for performance or to be representatives of the university either.
Click to expand...
Not relevant. Do we test the scholarship students in the drama department who put on the shows at Clarence Brown Theater? Do we test those on engineering scholarships who repesent UT at national competitions? Do we test scholarship law students who represent the College of Law at moot court competitions? Also, unless you are a donor to the VASF, you're not paying anyone. The athletic department is self sustaining, they don't receive taxpayer money.
 
#12
#12
The thing is though, these guys know its a 50/50 chnace a test is coming.Kind of like being on probation where you must stay clean,, sometimes your checked sometimes your not, it's at your probation officer discretion but if you choose to take that calculated risk, you've screwed yourself basically. I think the military has random checks as well.
 
#13
#13
hatvol96 said:
Not relevant. Do we test the scholarship students in the drama department who put on the shows at Clarence Brown Theater? Do we test those on engineering scholarships who repesent UT at national competitions? Do we test scholarship law students who represent the College of Law at moot court competitions? Also, unless you are a donor to the VASF, you're not paying anyone. The athletic department is self sustaining, they don't receive taxpayer money.
Click to expand...
Not relevant to you. Of course, neither is your opinion as we all know.
 
#14
#14
volmanbill said:
Not relevant to you. Of course, neither is your opinion as we all know.
Click to expand...
As usual, you add nothing. Are you as VASF contributor? If not, you have run your mouth about something that is abjectly none of your business. Of course, given your history, that's no big surprise.
 
#15
#15
To me, the reason the issues are different has to do with where jurisdiction lies. In the case of Marcus Thomas, the policy at issue -- and the procedure for enforcing it -- were university policy as opposed to team policy. When Thomas violated the rule he became subject to the procedure created by the university. That's why things happened in the sequence they did.

In the case of the UF player who recently fired his weapon in anger, Meyer suspended him from the team. But, in doing so, Meyer said that the issue of discipline was not before him at the moment as the police were obviously investigating and it appears the player will be prosecuted. I don't see anything wrong with suspending him indefinitely and letting the criminal system do its job. My suspicion is that will end the debate as to his future, anyway.
 
#16
#16
It is not the nature of the case that I am arguing. I realize that 90% of UT's football team, has smoked a little hash. The point we are really trying to make is that Urban Meyer is a slimeball, and LG won't listen.

I understand your argument LG, but common sense tells me that there was collusion between the university and Meyer.
 
#17
#17
lawgator1 said:
To me, the reason the issues are different has to do with where jurisdiction lies. In the case of Marcus Thomas, the policy at issue -- and the procedure for enforcing it -- were university policy as opposed to team policy. When Thomas violated the rule he became subject to the procedure created by the university. That's why things happened in the sequence they did.
Click to expand...
In other words, it was OK for Meyer to drag his feet and not do anything to punish Thomas because the timing worked out conveniently for him.
 
#23
#23
GAVol said:
In other words, it was OK for Meyer to drag his feet and not do anything to punish Thomas because the timing worked out conveniently for him.
Click to expand...
Just follow normal "Florida Protocol" when you screw up, it's worked wonderful in the past.Until they(NCAA) make us change it, or rather call our hand.:crazy:
 
#25
#25
My point was that it was not up to Meyer to "drag his feet" or move quickly because it wasn't his call. The policy was the university's, as was the procedure for dealing with a violation.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top