This week a bomb went off on the east bank of the University of Minnesota.
This week 4 University of Minnesota football players were charged with breaking a variety of laws in conjunction with an incendent that happened several months ago in the University Village on campus. The allegations state that they took advantage of a UofM coed when she was passed out after a drinking contest that included 8 shots of Vodka.
It seems like only yesterday that Clem Haskens was patrolling the sidelines at Williams Arena. We all know what that scandal did to our University. What will come of this most recent incident? Will the enthusiasm and hope that Tim Brewster has been selling be dampened because of this most recent case. A few months ago our snake oil salesman of a coach had us chanting “Rose Bowl”. Will we soon be hoping any kind of bowl?
While the players involved have not been formally convicted of any crime, they have been dismissed from the team. While I do not believe that this action was necessary, Tim Brewster did this as nothing more than a PR move. I think that he probably did what he thought was best for his team and the university. He talks about accountability and a code of conduct. He hopes that future players might think twice about acting in this manner. Brewster had the choice of suspending the players or dismissing them altogether. We saw what he chose.
I wonder whether this could possibly turn into a Duke Lacrosse situation…. What happens if the DNA evidence disappears or the alleged cell phone video doesn’t prove anything. Will these players sporting careers and more importantly their reputation be forever tarnished.
We have seen what has happened to the Duke Lacrosse players. The faculty, media (local and national) and sporting community condemned these players because they were the “rich” White kids who raped the black girl. Will this become a race issue like it did in Raleigh? Will the community rally behind the alleged victim and condemn the athletes because they are black?
I am not siding with any one side. I am merely playing the devils advocate and questioning the way the UofM handled the situation and raising questions as to what makes this case any different than that of Duke.
Your Thoughts?
6 responses so far ↓
1 Hoots // Jul 19, 2007 at 6:38 pm
The only thing good that can come of this is that it happened in July when everyone is outside working on their tan. I’m just glad it didn’t come out half way through the season. Makes you wonder what type character people Mason was recruiting in his last desperate hour.
2 Abbie // Jul 20, 2007 at 7:05 am
Duke University is in Durham, North Carolina not Raleigh. They are neighboring cities.
3 Drew // Jul 20, 2007 at 9:38 am
Thanks for the correction! My bad!
4 Ben The Professor // Jul 20, 2007 at 9:45 am
In this case they have a little more evidence than they did in the Duke case. For one thing, the police have the video recording of Dominic Jones, according to the police report, having sex with the woman’s incapacitated body, taking the condom off and ejaculating on the woman’s face.” If the video is that explicit, I’m pretty sure they will be able to recognize Jones’ face.
Further, I would guess that even being present at a party playing a drinking game that involved, according to the report, drinking 7 shots of vodka per person, would constitute a violation of the school’s and/or NCAA’s student athlete code of conduct policy. I think Brewster has every right to kick a player off of the team for even being there. We are not talking about professional athletes here, we are talking about underage college athletes.
5 Drew // Jul 20, 2007 at 10:27 am
The police report stated that none of the players on the team were drinking. The person who engaged in the drinking contest was a player who was kicked off of the team sometime earlier for his involvement in a robbery (or two) in St. Louis.
Also, the Duke case also stated that they had conclusive DNA evidence (which they ultimately did not). How can we be so sure that the police here are not in a similar situation. What is stated in a police report and what is reality is often not the same.
Regarding the video…. I’m not sure what kind of cell phone these accused have but if it’s anything like my video it might be a little hard to verify that it is actually in fact Jones.
My point is this: If Jones et al are kicked off the team for good and they are ultimately NOT convicted then the University screwed up and they will pay a price. Why not just suspend the players until a court of law states that they are guilty… Where is the harm in that? There is certainly less risk involved.
6 Adam // Jul 27, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Why does there always have to be a conviction for disciplinary measures to take place? Do high school prinicpals need a conviction before they can expel a student for assaulting another student? No, of course not.
All of these “student”- athletes were underage, drinking and (even if they are found not guilty of the charges) had group sex with an eighteen year old who they provided alcohol to. Pick your violation of the student conduct code:
Subd. 4. Refusal to Identify and Comply
(Daniels and EJ Jones)
Subd. 9. Illegal or Unauthorized Possession or Use of Drugs or Alcohol
(All of them)
Here are others which some or all of them may have violated:
Subd. 3. Falsification
Subd. 5. Attempts to Injure or Defraud
Subd. 6. Threatening, Harassing, or Assaultive Conduct
Subd. 7. Disorderly Conduct
Brewster did the right thing. Whether they’re convicted or not they don’t deserve to be Golden Gophers.
Leave a Comment