Players Arrested (Old news)

[butchna]

You need committment to excellence and as of today they don’t have it.

Go to tomorrow with them and the odds go up.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Fortunately we’re not bound by your “guts”. The “likely” part is YOUR interpretation which is an interpretation of actual facts. I think somebody heard loud noise and ruckus and panic called. The University Police are bound by available FACTS. They don’t get to make it up as they go along. If holding yourself up as morally superior keeps you warm at night...bully for you. We kicked Kivon Bennett out of school because he had possession AND a firearm. Kicked Emmitt Gooden out because he clear cut assaulted his girlfriend. There’s no AND established with this case. All we KNOW is that they were cited for misdemeanor possession. Reading anything else out of it as far as motivation of witnesses for calling the police is desperate speculation. Are they going to kick them out for first time offenses of possession? That would be your quoted “message sent”. My guess (and Austin Price’s for that matter) is no.

I'm not morally superior, by any measure, but I am used to leadership.

You seem to subscribe to the idea that "whatever they can prove is all they can charge and that's all that happened." That's BS when it comes to being a leader.

You're called to a room, someone seems to have been roughed up, nobody present "knows nothing" about what happened but you were called about an "assault and robbery" so let's search some people. Hey, look! Weed! Well, that's not legal..... write 'em up for possession and that's all that actually happened, right?

Can for police prove more? I doubt it because people involved in certain businesses don't generally talk to the police about much of anything. (It's not just about snitches, it's bad for business to discuss your illegal business with the police.)

Can Coach Heupel prove anything happened more than possession? Nope. He wasn't there either, I'm assuming. So as long as he can't prove anything, he shouldn't do anything....... that's your idea of good leadership for a coach?

You must be a heck of an easy mark as a parent. If you didn't see the kid do it....... they didn't do it. That's how you lead kids or young men?

 

[butchna]

I'm not morally superior, by any measure, but I am used to leadership.

You seem to subscribe to the idea that "whatever they can prove is all they can charge and that's all that happened." That's BS when it comes to being a leader.

You're called to a room, someone seems to have been roughed up, nobody present "knows nothing" about what happened but you were called about an "assault and robbery" so let's search some people. Hey, look! Weed! Well, that's not legal..... write 'em up for possession and that's all that actually happened, right?

Can for police prove more? I doubt it because people involved in certain businesses don't generally talk to the police about much of anything. (It's not just about snitches, it's bad for business to discuss your illegal business with the police.)

Can Coach Heupel prove anything happened more than possession? Nope. He wasn't there either, I'm assuming. So as long as he can't prove anything, he shouldn't do anything....... that's your idea of good leadership for a coach?

You must be a heck of an easy mark as a parent. If you didn't see the kid do it....... they didn't do it. That's how you lead kids or young men?

I know using “I heard” or “you’d have to think” as a basis of my decisions wouldn’t command respect from my minions. Inventing justice isn’t justice served. I raised a daughter who was always other parents favorite sleepover guest and received compliments on her report card for “a joy to teach” because I was an “easy mark”? I taught her to respect others especially those in position of authority and I stand by my record. Are you presenting new FACTS with the “roughed up” comment? Haven’t seen that cited in any report. Police update us with open head wounds and broken jaws and I’ll reevaluate. Currently all we KNOW is there was some noise and some young men had some weed. You want to turn that into kidnapping and 1st degree felonious assault, then you’re going to need a little help...you LEADER OF MEN you. Innuendos got you the gulag in the Soviet Union and disappears families in North Korea. I don’t take my LEADERSHIP cues from either.

 

[sjt18]

So you don't like my "snitches" thinking while you see the folks who were ripped off ACTUALLY adhering to it? What.... does reality bother you?

When reality is dishonesty... yeah. It does. If these kids are covering for them because of who they are then I hope they all get busted.

And again, you are filling a LOT of huge gaps with assumptions.

The attitude I'm seeing from you is: as long as we can keep down to the misdemeanor level for actual charges, who gives a dang what the athletes did.

Well... your imagination has once again assumed facts... that aren't true.

I believe the charges should match whatever occurred. The difference between us is that I am not assuming what occurred or trying to fill in between the lines. Maybe people called because they mistakenly thought something violent was happening but it wasn't. Maybe they called because they were aggravated with the neighbor making too much noise all the time and saw a convenient opportunity to get them in trouble. We could talk maybes from now on. But that does nothing except maybe build up some harmful perceptions.

I'll agree there's little chance we'll hear the real story and I'm not worried whether VN gets a full report but if UTAD doesn't know what the athletes are doing...... we're going to have a problem. What you're seeing is "testing of the mettle" of the new Athletic Department. This isn't about weed, even if the charges turn out to be nothing but a simple possession misdemeanor, and you likely suspect it isn't also. That I'll say it and you won't doesn't matter either.

What White, Heupel, et.al. do is what matters. What we're seeing is where the lines are going to be drawn for the behavior of UT football players by these new leaders. Let's hope THEY aren't afraid to address the reality of the situation head on.

I think there is a measure of that. It might be helpful if we knew what White's practice had been before. I will be surprised if it is zero tolerance... but I don't know.

 

[sjt18]

You seem to subscribe to the idea that "whatever they can prove is all they can charge and that's all that happened." That's BS when it comes to being a leader.

No it isn't. As a leader you have an obligation to investigate the facts then act on the facts as they present themselves. You can only hold someone accountable for things you can prove... or you are headed for a lawsuit.

You must be a heck of an easy mark as a parent. If you didn't see the kid do it....... they didn't do it. That's how you lead kids or young men?

My kids wouldn't see me that way... but this isn't parenthood. And no, I wouldn't punish my kids for things I simply assumed they had done. There needs to be a good bit more than that.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

No it isn't. As a leader you have an obligation to investigate the facts then act on the facts as they present themselves. You can only hold someone accountable for things you can prove... or you are headed for a lawsuit.


My kids wouldn't see me that way... but this isn't parenthood. And no, I wouldn't punish my kids for things I simply assumed they had done. There needs to be a good bit more than that.

Let's try to find some agreement and honesty here.

Coach Heupel and admin, like the police, are going to have hell finding out what really happened. Call it what you will but the people involved are going to shut up...... and hard facts about what happened before the police arrived are not going to be there beyond video, if any is helpful.

So, someone (not the police, but in the UTAD) is going to have to try to reconstruct events that the participants won't share OR, at least in my view, what is being taught is: don't talk, make them prove it, don't share anything.

I, personally, don't want to foster the latter. Do you?

 

[sjt18]

Let's try to find some agreement and honesty here.

Coach Heupel and admin, like the police, are going to have hell finding out what really happened. Call it what you will but the people involved are going to shut up...... and hard facts about what happened before the police arrived are not going to be there beyond video, if any is helpful.

Not much we can do about it other than oppose that kind of thinking. It isn't that I have not seen it... or done it. It is just that aged wisdom has taught me that there are costs with that kind of thinking and behavior that young people often do not account for.

So, someone (not the police, but in the UTAD) is going to have to try to reconstruct events that the participants won't share OR, at least in my view, what is being taught is: don't talk, make them prove it, don't share anything.

I, personally, don't want to foster the latter. Do you?

I have a way of dealing with that both with my kids and with employees. I take them at face value but make sure they know that the punishment for whatever misdeed is involved is FAR less than if I catch them in a lie. Most people are driven by their conscience if you let them be and don't use punishment beyond the crime. Others can be moved if you change the "economics" of their decision to hide things.

 

[butchna]

Let's try to find some agreement and honesty here.

Coach Heupel and admin, like the police, are going to have hell finding out what really happened. Call it what you will but the people involved are going to shut up...... and hard facts about what happened before the police arrived are not going to be there beyond video, if any is helpful.

So, someone (not the police, but in the UTAD) is going to have to try to reconstruct events that the participants won't share OR, at least in my view, what is being taught is: don't talk, make them prove it, don't share anything.

I, personally, don't want to foster the latter. Do you?

Why do they “have to” assume facts not in evidence. Kinda desperate big brotheresque stuff. Deal with what you know and give them a short leash seems more than appropriate.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

ESPN will love this

No one "loves" it. Geez

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Why do they “have to” assume facts not in evidence. Kinda desperate big brotheresque stuff. Deal with what you know and give them a short leash seems more than appropriate.

I'm assuming the leash is already pretty dang short at UT. If the staff hasn't emphasized to the team that UT CANNOT tolerate any dumba$$ behavior right now (surely we can agree that this is the last kind of thing the program needed)....... then the new admin is helplessly inept.

This is EXACTLY that situation where you tell the guys: Whatever you do, don't jump offside..... or don't false start....... then not one, but a couple of them jump. Discipline. Establish it or face the consequences of not establishing it.

By the end of this, the team needs to KNOW that UT Football WILL NOT be in the news for this kind of crap. We simply can't afford to self-inflict anymore damage.

 

[sjt18]

No one "loves" it. Geez

Are you kidding? Reporters relish this kind of stuff.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Not much we can do about it other than oppose that kind of thinking. It isn't that I have not seen it... or done it. It is just that aged wisdom has taught me that there are costs with that kind of thinking and behavior that young people often do not account for.


I have a way of dealing with that both with my kids and with employees. I take them at face value but make sure they know that the punishment for whatever misdeed is involved is FAR less than if I catch them in a lie. Most people are driven by their conscience if you let them be and don't use punishment beyond the crime. Others can be moved if you change the "economics" of their decision to hide things.

They'll be no "catching them in a lie" here. I'd be really surprised if someone breaks ranks and talks unless a non-player involved is already on probation or something and faces more than simple possession.

Most people of college age are dumb as a bag of hammers in groups of 4 or more. Someone in the group says: "Let's......" and nobody wants to be the p**sy and offer a sane reason why that's the second most stupid thing they could possibly do...... and things happen. YMMV, but expecting conscience to be a major driver for a group of college age young men on any given evening isn't a good idea. They tend to run on hormones and "Hell yeah.... Let's..." in my experience.

More than anything else, UT doesn't need this crap. Hate it for these guys but the punishment needs to be ugly and painful (not dismissal, at this point unless Assault/Robbery charges appear) and "set the tone" that Coach and Co aren't going to look favorably AT ALL on these kinds of distractions.

Seriously. We don't need this. Set an example.

 

[sjt18]

They'll be no "catching them in a lie" here. I'd be really surprised if someone breaks ranks and talks unless a non-player involved is already on probation or something and faces more than simple possession.

So be it. People seldom get away with things without trying them again. If so... they'll have their day. It is still unwise and unjust to punish people because of what we assume happened.

Most people of college age are dumb as a bag of hammers in groups of 4 or more. Someone in the group says: "Let's......" and nobody wants to be the p**sy and offer a sane reason why that's the second most stupid thing they could possibly do...... and things happen. YMMV, but expecting conscience to be a major driver for a group of college age young men on any given evening isn't a good idea. They tend to run on hormones and "Hell yeah.... Let's..." in my experience.

If that were true... it would be MUCH worse than it is. And that's not saying a lot of crap doesn't happen. We both know it does. But if no one avoided trouble or said no... you'd need the National Guard to police campus.

More than anything else, UT doesn't need this crap. Hate it for these guys but the punishment needs to be ugly and painful (not dismissal, at this point unless Assault/Robbery charges appear) and "set the tone" that Coach and Co aren't going to look favorably AT ALL on these kinds of distractions.

Seriously. We don't need this. Set an example.

Setting examples isn't discipline. Discipline isn't discipline if it isn't consistent. These guys should receive punishment appropriate to what they are known to have done so that their price will be consistent with those who do it in the future.

Generally an escalating scale of punishment works best.

If you want to watch the AD and HC lose control... let them punish guys based on what they "assume" happened.

 

[cobbwebb0710]

It would better for the program in the long run to get KPD and campus police to be more like their brothers in blue down in Tuscaloosa, Gainesville and Athens.

Exactly! One call from Saban and the Alabama campus police would’ve raided that kids room for the players.
GBO!!

 

[cobbwebb0710]

I find it fascinating that a LEO can appreciate the beauty in high end buds. I don’t partake either, haven’t in over 20 years because of my job. But I appreciate the craft it takes to make the sticky ones.

GBO!!

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

So be it. People seldom get away with things without trying them again. If so... they'll have their day. It is still unwise and unjust to punish people because of what we assume happened.

If that were true... it would be MUCH worse than it is. And that's not saying a lot of crap doesn't happen. We both know it does. But if no one avoided trouble or said no... you'd need the National Guard to police campus.

Setting examples isn't discipline. Discipline isn't discipline if it isn't consistent. These guys should receive punishment appropriate to what they are known to have done so that their price will be consistent with those who do it in the future.

Generally an escalating scale of punishment works best.

If you want to watch the AD and HC lose control... let them punish guys based on what they "assume" happened.

I'm not a hard ass punitive guy by nature but these guys damaged the team at EXACTLY the time when UT Football needs to show it's not a dumpster fire.

The punishment needs to be severe not because of the weed but because, as I said elsewhere, Coach Heupel should've already told the team that distractions, clowning, dumbass behavior CANNOT be tolerated right now.

These guys let down their team at one of the worst possible times. It's not punitive to swing the hammer a little harder on them because of the timing of their infraction.

 

[N.ohio vol]

I'm not a hard ass punitive guy by nature but these guys damaged the team at EXACTLY the time when UT Football needs to show it's not a dumpster fire.

The punishment needs to be severe not because of the weed but because, as I said elsewhere, Coach Heupel should've already told the team that distractions, clowning, dumbass behavior CANNOT be tolerated right now.

These guys let down their team at one of the worst possible times. It's not punitive to swing the hammer a little harder on them because of the timing of their infraction.

I agree 100% it comes down to a few players arnt bigger than the program. At this time it seems the players know Tennessee is in a weak time period. They also know that if I don't get what I want or they can just transfer. Tennessee as of now is between a rock and a hard place.

 

[butchna]

I'm assuming the leash is already pretty dang short at UT. If the staff hasn't emphasized to the team that UT CANNOT tolerate any dumba$$ behavior right now (surely we can agree that this is the last kind of thing the program needed)....... then the new admin is helplessly inept.

This is EXACTLY that situation where you tell the guys: Whatever you do, don't jump offside..... or don't false start....... then not one, but a couple of them jump. Discipline. Establish it or face the consequences of not establishing it.

By the end of this, the team needs to KNOW that UT Football WILL NOT be in the news for this kind of crap. We simply can't afford to self-inflict anymore damage.

THESE players didn’t come in with a preemptive leash. This one strike and you’re out philosophy you’re espousing would make it impossible to rebuild the program...so drop football. It’s not a realistic option.

 

[butchna]

I'm not a hard ass punitive guy by nature but these guys damaged the team at EXACTLY the time when UT Football needs to show it's not a dumpster fire.

The punishment needs to be severe not because of the weed but because, as I said elsewhere, Coach Heupel should've already told the team that distractions, clowning, dumbass behavior CANNOT be tolerated right now.

These guys let down their team at one of the worst possible times. It's not punitive to swing the hammer a little harder on them because of the timing of their infraction.

“You can mess up...when it’s convenient.” K.

 

[butchna]

They'll be no "catching them in a lie" here. I'd be really surprised if someone breaks ranks and talks unless a non-player involved is already on probation or something and faces more than simple possession.

Most people of college age are dumb as a bag of hammers in groups of 4 or more. Someone in the group says: "Let's......" and nobody wants to be the p**sy and offer a sane reason why that's the second most stupid thing they could possibly do...... and things happen. YMMV, but expecting conscience to be a major driver for a group of college age young men on any given evening isn't a good idea. They tend to run on hormones and "Hell yeah.... Let's..." in my experience.

More than anything else, UT doesn't need this crap. Hate it for these guys but the punishment needs to be ugly and painful (not dismissal, at this point unless Assault/Robbery charges appear) and "set the tone" that Coach and Co aren't going to look favorably AT ALL on these kinds of distractions.

Seriously. We don't need this. Set an example.

What’s “ugly and painful” but also legal.

 

[sjt18]

I'm not a hard ass punitive guy by nature but these guys damaged the team at EXACTLY the time when UT Football needs to show it's not a dumpster fire.

And UT can still show that if they handle it well. You used kids as an example. Did you make a habit of making your kids' punishment worse if you happened to have a bad day at work or when you needed to create a perception that your family had it all together?

Handling this in a way that is harsh enough to be effective but not so harsh that you cannot apply the same standard later has to be the goal. Dealing only with what is known and not what is presumed will be more impressive to any fair minded person than making examples based on assumptions... which again could get them sued.

The punishment needs to be severe not because of the weed but because, as I said elsewhere, Coach Heupel should've already told the team that distractions, clowning, dumbass behavior CANNOT be tolerated right now.

The punishment should be the same as he would use if there were no attention on the program and the same as what he will be able to use 5 years from now and be just. The weed was stupid. I'm not taking a position on what constitutes severe enough punishment for what they're known to have done.... only that it needs to be consistent and just.

These guys let down their team at one of the worst possible times. It's not punitive to swing the hammer a little harder on them because of the timing of their infraction.

It should be punitive. But it should not be unjust because of the timing.

To put it a different way, someone later should not get off easier for the same thing just because it happens not to occur right after a coach was fired for paying players.

I don't know about you but one of the traits of the good bosses and leaders I've known is their consistency in discipline. Those who are inconsistent are considered untrustworthy. If Heupel is serious about building trust.... then these guys get what anyone else will get later for the same infraction.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

And UT can still show that if they handle it well. You used kids as an example. Did you make a habit of making your kids' punishment worse if you happened to have a bad day at work or when you needed to create a perception that your family had it all together?

Handling this in a way that is harsh enough to be effective but not so harsh that you cannot apply the same standard later has to be the goal. Dealing only with what is known and not what is presumed will be more impressive to any fair minded person than making examples based on assumptions... which again could get them sued.

The punishment should be the same as he would use if there were no attention on the program and the same as what he will be able to use 5 years from now and be just. The weed was stupid. I'm not taking a position on what constitutes severe enough punishment for what they're known to have done.... only that it needs to be consistent and just.


It should be punitive. But it should not be unjust because of the timing.

To put it a different way, someone later should not get off easier for the same thing just because it happens not to occur right after a coach was fired for paying players.

I don't know about you but one of the traits of the good bosses and leaders I've known is their consistency in discipline. Those who are inconsistent are considered untrustworthy. If Heupel is serious about building trust.... then these guys get what anyone else will get later for the same infraction.

First, did I deal with kids differently when I'd had a bad day. I certainly hope not.

Did I deal with them differently when they'd been told "Now's not the time. We're at the Pastor's daughter's wedding, I expect your best behavior" then yes, yes I did.

Coach Heupel and Co should've made it clear by now to the team that it's going to be a hard road for the next couple of years and that the program is rebuilding, is facing possible sanctions, etc, and that the program cannot tolerate more damage.

This is damaging to the focus of the team, to the image of the team, to the primary mission of restoring the winning tradition of the team. It's not like the infraction occurs in a vacuum. The team REALLY REALLY doesn't need this crap right now. If that's not been made clear by the coaching staff, you might want to just go ahead and pick up a case of Jack Daniels handles AND some Brown-Forman stock......... you're going to need it.

 

[butchna]

Can’t win without players. Not the TIME to dismiss players based on speculation.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

THESE players didn’t come in with a preemptive leash. This one strike and you’re out philosophy you’re espousing would make it impossible to rebuild the program...so drop football. It’s not a realistic option.

Never said I'd give them the axe (unless Assault/Robbery is actually the charge) but I'd also not make it as easy as touching every Neyland step (honestly, strength and conditioning might have issues with that) or just gutbusters and bear crawls until they puke..... twice.

They need to see the damage. They need to read the ESPN and other media stories out loud at team meetings after practice when everyone's dragging ass then apologize to the team for keeping them there for such BS. They need to feel the disappointment AND they need to know that the team EXPECTS better judgement in the future.

 

[Ratvol]

I wonder if they got caught with some good shat or just some Alabama dirt weed? Asking for a friend...

Go VOLS