Started By
Message
re: Mizzou in danger of losing AAU status?
Posted on 3/22/16 at 3:55 pm to Mizz-SEC
Posted on 3/22/16 at 3:55 pm to Mizz-SEC
Sorry Mizz-SEC but Pinkel was in a no win situation a true catch-22. If he did not support the kids then Mizzou Football could forget about recruiting black athletes to the playing field. Fact that escapes everyone is that players have real power when they band together. There are no games without them and they used it. The only ones I really blame are that frickhead hunger strike sob and the radicals on his side. Also the admin really fricked up and did not deescalate the situation. If so called "supporters" of the University pull the support then they were never really fully supporting it before. It is the same as our fair weather fans and all the bullshite excuses from them over the years (dear hunting/its too hot etc).
This post was edited on 3/22/16 at 3:57 pm
1
Posted on 3/22/16 at 4:46 pm to Tackle74
quote:
Sorry Mizz-SEC but Pinkel was in a no win situation a true catch-22. If he did not support the kids then Mizzou Football could forget about recruiting black athletes to the playing field
Bingo. I'm over the political bullshite. Won't have any effect on whether I choose to attend any games or not.
Posted on 3/22/16 at 5:43 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
No one is throwing them in jail for protesting, which is all rights entitle you to.
This isn't true. Once the scope of rights were widened through incorporation the trial of US v. Cruikshank ruled that the government had a duty to protect one's ability to perform all clauses of the amendment (I.e. Protection, space, etc.)
Posted on 3/23/16 at 8:31 am to SEC. 593
quote:
This isn't true. Once the scope of rights were widened through incorporation the trial of US v. Cruikshank ruled that the government had a duty to protect one's ability to perform all clauses of the amendment (I.e. Protection, space, etc.)
Team rules are arbitrary. Coaches decisions are arbitrary. Your rights as a citizen do not protect your status on the team.
As I mentioned before, free speech is a right, but your speech is not free from criticism. If you call your coach a retarded monkey to his face, your rights do not protect you from team punishment. Also, they would be more than free to call the coach a retarded monkey.
Just a reminder that football teams and scholarships are privileges, and not rights.
Posted on 3/23/16 at 6:51 pm to 5thTiger
I agree with the sentiment. However, depending on the wording of the scholarship a public entity is going to take a very conservative approach to dealing with a individual to avoid any semblance of infringing on a civil right.
I think that the administration and GP were out into a lose-lose situation. They chose the pill that doesn't kill the football program for the next decade.
I think that the administration and GP were out into a lose-lose situation. They chose the pill that doesn't kill the football program for the next decade.
Posted on 3/23/16 at 6:57 pm to 5thTiger
quote:
Team rules are arbitrary. Coaches decisions are arbitrary. Your rights as a citizen do not protect your status on the team.
Wanted to address this separately.
I would suspect that being a public institution there are situations where they actually do intersect and an argument could be easily made that they are protected.
This post was edited on 3/23/16 at 6:59 pm
Posted on 3/23/16 at 8:33 pm to SEC. 593
quote:
I would suspect that being a public institution there are situations where they actually do intersect and an argument could be easily made that they are protected.
No.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:15 am to kilo
I am not saying I believe they are protected, but that an argument (ie. Lawsuit) could be made. Even more so because the school is a government entity.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 8:25 am to SEC. 593
quote:
Wanted to address this separately.
I would suspect that being a public institution there are situations where they actually do intersect and an argument could be easily made that they are protected.
Would have to be very specifically stated by the coach/administrator that it was because they are a protected class. (race, sex, etc.). Otherwise, it is impossible. Simple "difference in philosophy" is enough in sports.
People get kicked out of school just for being ACCUSED of things, not even proven guilty or convicted.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 10:22 am to SEC. 593
I doubt the staff would say they were suspended for exercising their right to free speech. They would be suspended for not fulfilling their obligations that come with being on the team and on scholarship. They could have protested or whatever they want on their own time. For $130 anyone can file a lawsuit but that lawsuit would have been tossed out.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:11 pm to 5thTiger
The fact that they are students at a public university definitely complicates the situation. The number of supreme court rulings shows that it is a special situation.
One of the problems with message board discussions is complex issues seem to be broken down into basic examples that are often not even relative.
We have differing views on the importance of rights and how easy they should be limited. That is fine.
One of the problems with message board discussions is complex issues seem to be broken down into basic examples that are often not even relative.
We have differing views on the importance of rights and how easy they should be limited. That is fine.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:27 pm to Tigersessed
If I'm on an academic scholarship at the University, I do not have the first amendment right to remain on academic scholarship even though I'm boycotting attending classes.
There's no first amendment right to a scholarship.
There's no first amendment right to a scholarship.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:35 pm to the808bass
How many classes did you miss? One? I'm sure nobody has lost a scholarship for missing one class. If you take that scholarship because they protested one class then you will be found in the wrong.
If you missed enough classes to fail the course, then you could lose your scholarship. You see the difference?
If you missed enough classes to fail the course, then you could lose your scholarship. You see the difference?
This post was edited on 3/24/16 at 12:42 pm
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:41 pm to Tigersessed
quote:
miss? One? I'm sure nobody has lost a scholarship for missing one class. If you take that scholarship because they protested one class then you will be found in the wrong.
Right. But I'm sure people have lost a scholarship over missing a test. Just one.
It's not a complex issue. You're trying to make it one.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:42 pm to Tigersessed
We are talking hypotheticals here. And I have been more tolerant of 1950 than many. Whether I agree with them or disagree I support their right to be heard. Having said that, being a public school has no bearing on it.
I'd be happy to be corrected but I don't think there is a single Supreme Court case protecting ones right to play football or be on scholarship. Again, it could be different if they were suppressing all thought or all speech. But they wouldn't be doing that. Any discipline would be for not living up to their obligations, not for supporting a cause. That's a huge difference.
I'd be happy to be corrected but I don't think there is a single Supreme Court case protecting ones right to play football or be on scholarship. Again, it could be different if they were suppressing all thought or all speech. But they wouldn't be doing that. Any discipline would be for not living up to their obligations, not for supporting a cause. That's a huge difference.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:45 pm to the808bass
Punishing people for missing a test that has already been stated must be taken is different than punishing people for exercising their rights. Do you have any examples that are relative?
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:48 pm to reedus23
Would we be punishing football players if they felt the field at Faurot was not safe and they had said we are not playing a game on that field until it is better?
If we take scholarships from student athletes for peacefully protesting, it will end up at the Supreme Court for the first ruling ever.
If we take scholarships from student athletes for peacefully protesting, it will end up at the Supreme Court for the first ruling ever.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:49 pm to Tigersessed
You're focused on "for exercising their rights." That's not really relevant.
If I miss a test because I'm protesting South Africa investment on the Quad, getting an F on the test isn't restricting my abilities to exercise my rights.
If I miss a football game because I'm protesting the University's stance on abortion funding, my scholarship being revoked isn't a restriction on me exercising my rights.
If I miss a test because I'm protesting South Africa investment on the Quad, getting an F on the test isn't restricting my abilities to exercise my rights.
If I miss a football game because I'm protesting the University's stance on abortion funding, my scholarship being revoked isn't a restriction on me exercising my rights.
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:50 pm to Tigersessed
quote:
s from student athletes for peacefully protesting, it will end up at the Supreme Court for the first ruling ever.
Lolno
Posted on 3/24/16 at 12:55 pm to the808bass
You are confusing the outcome to the cause. The football team missed one practice, what should be the appropriate result? If you are disciplining because they said something on twitter, what should be the discipline?
You keep mentioning tangible effects that have outcomes that are easily measured. It is not that simple.
You keep mentioning tangible effects that have outcomes that are easily measured. It is not that simple.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News