MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: ToddRosiakSays on April 19, 2011, 11:15:06 AM
-
Details released on Blue assault case
Early one morning last October, Marquette University basketball player Vander Blue got into an argument with a man outside a campus restaurant, pushed the man twice, once into a window, and then punched him in the face, according to court documents.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/120207189.html
-
So the victim's story is Vander just walked in, threw water on him, and then punched him outside.
Something is missing.
-
So three separate incidents occuring last season/preseason one involving a fight, the others likely involving alcohol, and perhapd even underage drinkers - has anyone, in hindsight, been shocked that we didn't see any "violation of team rules" suspensions or at least temporary game restrictions???
-
I'm skeptical of this because the report says Vander hit his target and I don't think Vander hit his target all year.
-
So the victim's story is Vander just walked in, threw water on him, and then punched him outside.
Something is missing.
That isn't at all how I read the victim's story. I read 1) Vander walks in, 2) Vander starts hitting on 2 girls sitting at a table, 3) boyfriends or male friends getting pissed and make fun of Vander, 4) Vander gets upset, words are exchanged, altercation ensues.
I could see something playing out exaclty like that (not saying it did, but it makes sense).
-
I'm skeptical of this because the report says Vander hit his target and I don't think Vander hit his target all year.
Well said.
-
So three separate incidents occuring last season/preseason one involving a fight, the others likely involving alcohol, and perhapd even underage drinkers - has anyone, in hindsight, been shocked that we didn't see any "violation of team rules" suspensions or at least temporary game restrictions???
Well, all three went through the student judicial review right? So they received punishment that way. Who knows if Buzz did something else in practice.
-
Blue's statement's about the racial slur, that was not said according to other witnesses, and how he inadvertently hit the guy as he was trying to push him back? Both are pretty lame excuses. I'm putting the blame on blue for this one
-
So the victim's story is Vander just walked in, threw water on him, and then punched him outside.
Something is missing.
Actually, it's more like ..
- Vander walks in and approaches table
- guy feels "disrespected" and mocks Vander's last name
- Vander tosses water on him
- they agree to take it outside
- pushing ensues
- Vander pops him
- he runs off to Public Safety
I might be remotely troubled by this if the guy didn't, by his own account, mock Blue and then agree to take it outside. What exactly was he expecting to happen?
Really kind of surprised it was even charged. Milwaukee PD not familiar with the concept of mutual combatants?
-
Blue's statement's about the racial slur, that was not said according to other witnesses, and how he inadvertently hit the guy as he was trying to push him back? Both are pretty lame excuses. I'm putting the blame on blue for this one
Well obviously Vander is to blame. He seemed to escalate the incident by throwing water on the guy and pushing him around. Hopefully he will learn a lesson and stop doing this stuff now that he's an adult.
-
About five or six weeks ago I was walking outside of my apartment that is just a bit off of campus. I hear "excuse me" come from a SUV that pulled up alongside the curb. The car is a bit away from me, but I instinctively stop and look, assuming someone is looking for directions. The "excuse me" came from Vander Blue, who was in the back seat of the SUV. The "excuse me" wasn't for me, it was for two girls that passed by me going the opposite direction. When neither of them stopped to respond, the car sped away.
According to the victim's account (and reading between the lines), it sounds like Vander's assault charge stemmed from Vander hitting on some girls the victim was with and him not taking it lightly.
There are two outstanding sexual assault charges, both of which have been rumored to involve basketball players.
-
I might be remotely troubled by this if the guy didn't, by his own account, mock Blue and then agree to take it outside. What exactly was he expecting to happen?
Really kind of surprised it was even charged. Milwaukee PD not familiar with the concept of mutual combatants?
The victim gets hit with water, is with 2 girls, and gets asks to fight (allegedly). What is he suppose to do?
I get the whole "boys will be boys" stance, and agree that stuff like this happens with "normal" students all of the time. Having said that, I have a problem with 1) Vander acting like such a punk in a BRAND new place (he was at school for what? 3/4 months? and 2) Vander being STUPID enough to think it was ok to "take this outside" in the busiest late-night student intersection and think things were going to end smoothly.
-
Well obviously Vander is to blame. He seemed to escalate the incident by throwing water on the guy and pushing him around. Hopefully he will learn a lesson and stop doing this stuff now that he's an adult.
Really?
One could just as easily say the other guy is to blame for mocking Vander's name.
Or maybe Vander is to blame for have the temerity of approaching a table uninvited.
Does it matter.
Two guys agree to take their differences outside. Setting aside the idiotic machismo involved, how is one to blame more than the other?
-
About five or six weeks ago I was walking outside of my apartment that is just a bit off of campus. I hear "excuse me" come from a SUV that pulled up alongside the curb. The car is a bit away from me, but I instinctively stop and look, assuming someone is looking for directions. The "excuse me" came from Vander Blue, who was in the back seat of the SUV. The "excuse me" wasn't for me, it was for two girls that passed by me going the opposite direction. When neither of them stopped to respond, the car sped away.
According to the victim's account (and reading between the lines), it sounds like Vander's assault charge stemmed from Vander hitting on some girls the victim was with and him not taking it lightly.
There are two outstanding sexual assault charges, both of which have been rumored to involve basketball players.
Vander comes to campus as its latest star and uses it to try to chase some tail. That doesn't make him a rapist. Let's be a little careful with your projections.
-
Really?
One could just as easily say the other guy is to blame for mocking Vander's name.
I'm not going to get into a huge debate on this, but making fun of someone's name IMO isn't really accelerating anything very much. Obviously the police agreed.
-
The victim gets hit with water, is with 2 girls, and gets asks to fight (allegedly). What is he suppose to do?
Ummm ... I don't know. How about not making fun of a guy's name? Why's that more acceptable for you than a water toss?
Both guys acted like idiots. Why some see feel only one is to blame is inexplicable to me.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure two guys jawing and agreeing to settle their differences outside aren't thinking about whether it'll end smoothly.
-
I'm not going to get into a huge debate on this, but making fun of someone's name IMO isn't really accelerating anything very much. Obviously the police agreed.
Counselor .... police received a complaint and issued a ticket. That's standard practice, and that's likely the level of investigation involved. Do you think they put a couple of detectives and CSI on this before issuing a municipal citation?
-
About five or six weeks ago I was walking outside of my apartment that is just a bit off of campus. I hear "excuse me" come from a SUV that pulled up alongside the curb. The car is a bit away from me, but I instinctively stop and look, assuming someone is looking for directions. The "excuse me" came from Vander Blue, who was in the back seat of the SUV. The "excuse me" wasn't for me, it was for two girls that passed by me going the opposite direction. When neither of them stopped to respond, the car sped away.
According to the victim's account (and reading between the lines), it sounds like Vander's assault charge stemmed from Vander hitting on some girls the victim was with and him not taking it lightly.
There are two outstanding sexual assault charges, both of which have been rumored to involve basketball players.
"My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with a girl who saw Ferris pass-out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious. "
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_9fNvtMyW7cE/TN0uyUzOw_I/AAAAAAAAA7U/skA8MbqLpSA/s1600/SimoneFerrisBueller.jpg)
-
Really? Police issue citations by simply receiving a complaint? So they did no investigation? Didn't call anyone?
Look, they obviously talked to both Blue and the victim at least...and maybe some witnesses as well. Given what everyone told them, they obviously felt Blue was to blame since they didn't issue the other guy a ticket.
-
Ummm ... I don't know. How about not making fun of a guy's name? Why's that more acceptable for you than a water toss?
Both guys acted like idiots. Why some see feet to blame only one is inexplicable to me.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure two guys jawing and agreeing to settle their differences outside aren't thinking about whether it'll end smoothly.
I don't care what Johnny d-bad, the history major, is doing on Saturday night. I do care what Vander Blue, star recruit, is doing. Student-athletes are held to a higher standard because they 1) go here for free, and 2) are in the public light (hello journal sentinel).
-
Vander comes to campus as its latest star and uses it to try to chase some tail. That doesn't make him a rapist. Let's be a little careful with your projections.
Pause. Never did I say rapist. I am comfortable saying that documented instances of a guy unwantedly hitting on a girl make him more capable of being the accused in a sexual assault case.
-
Not to put some blame on DJO, but he needs to pull Blue away and walk away from the others.
-
Really? Police issue citations by simply receiving a complaint? So they did no investigation? Didn't call anyone?
Look, they obviously talked to both Blue and the victim at least...and maybe some witnesses as well. Given what everyone told them, they obviously felt Blue was to blame since they didn't issue the other guy a ticket.
No, they issued Blue a ticket because he hit a guy in an act that's not legally self-defense (being mocked over one's name is not legal justification, after all).
Blame is something decided by the courts, not the police.
-
Lots of late night bad judgement involved on both sides. Testosterone and (likely) alchohol can be a bad mix. Sounds like the "victim" was the first to say anything hostile and Blue finished things "outside". Given the conflicting statements I don't think it's fair to say it's "obvious" who's at fault here but there seems to be enough blame to go around.
-
If I get hit with water from a glass, can I claim assault?
-
Not to put some blame on DJO, but he needs to pull Blue away and walk away from the others.
Agree completely.
-
Really? Police issue citations by simply receiving a complaint? So they did no investigation? Didn't call anyone?
Look, they obviously talked to both Blue and the victim at least...and maybe some witnesses as well. Given what everyone told them, they obviously felt Blue was to blame since they didn't issue the other guy a ticket.
Used to be called a fight, which sometimes had a winner and a loser. Evidently nowadays a one punch KO is an assault with the loser now termed a "victim".
-
About five or six weeks ago I was walking outside of my apartment that is just a bit off of campus. I hear "excuse me" come from a SUV that pulled up alongside the curb. The car is a bit away from me, but I instinctively stop and look, assuming someone is looking for directions. The "excuse me" came from Vander Blue, who was in the back seat of the SUV. The "excuse me" wasn't for me, it was for two girls that passed by me going the opposite direction. When neither of them stopped to respond, the car sped away.
According to the victim's account (and reading between the lines), it sounds like Vander's assault charge stemmed from Vander hitting on some girls the victim was with and him not taking it lightly.
There are two outstanding sexual assault charges, both of which have been rumored to involve basketball players.
hmmm...I never said anything to a good looking fillie walking down the sidewalk either. give me a break.
Let me guess, you're a "I can't go to a sunday game b/c I have to study" guy. ::)
-
About five or six weeks ago I was walking outside of my apartment that is just a bit off of campus. I hear "excuse me" come from a SUV that pulled up alongside the curb. The car is a bit away from me, but I instinctively stop and look, assuming someone is looking for directions. The "excuse me" came from Vander Blue, who was in the back seat of the SUV. The "excuse me" wasn't for me, it was for two girls that passed by me going the opposite direction. When neither of them stopped to respond, the car sped away.
According to the victim's account (and reading between the lines), it sounds like Vander's assault charge stemmed from Vander hitting on some girls the victim was with and him not taking it lightly.
There are two outstanding sexual assault charges, both of which have been rumored to involve basketball players.
LOCK THEM UP!!!!Used to be called a fight, which sometimes had a winner and a loser. Evidently nowadays a one punch KO is an assault with the loser now termed a "victim".
No kidding.
-
About five or six weeks ago I was walking outside of my apartment that is just a bit off of campus. I hear "excuse me" come from a SUV that pulled up alongside the curb. The car is a bit away from me, but I instinctively stop and look, assuming someone is looking for directions. The "excuse me" came from Vander Blue, who was in the back seat of the SUV. The "excuse me" wasn't for me, it was for two girls that passed by me going the opposite direction. When neither of them stopped to respond, the car sped away.
According to the victim's account (and reading between the lines), it sounds like Vander's assault charge stemmed from Vander hitting on some girls the victim was with and him not taking it lightly.
There are two outstanding sexual assault charges, both of which have been rumored to involve basketball players.
Behavior like that gets some people elected to the US Senate in Massachusetts for 40+ years.
-
Not to put some blame on DJO, but he needs to pull Blue away and walk away from the others.
I agree as well. As an upperclassman I would expect DJO to drag Blue out of a situation like this that will ultimately hurt the team. As next years team captain and leader he better be ready to exercise more authority.
-
hmmm...I never said anything to a good looking fillie walking down the sidewalk either. give me a break.
Let me guess, you're a "I can't go to a sunday game b/c I have to study" guy. ::)
1) Please stay far away from guessing anything about me.
2) I was not passing judgement on what Vander did on the street (other than maybe questioning the approach -- "excuse me" out of a moving car has what? a 1% chance of success?). I'm just noting that there seems to be a pattern of him noticeably approaching women at inopportune times. All the while, there are 2 outstanding sexual assault charges on an unnamed player. You do the math.
-
If the fight had happened AFTER the season Vander would have been mocked for a lot more than his name.
-
Pause. Never did I say rapist. I am comfortable saying that documented instances of a guy unwantedly hitting on a girl make him more capable of being the accused in a sexual assault case.
What does this municipal citation have to do with the 2 pending sexual assault cases? Oh...thats right...NOTHING
-
Regardless what comes of this or the other incidents, I am uncomfortable with how often VB's name seems to be associated with these types of incidents. Even if he's in the right, he shouldn't be in the situation in the first place. I hope he learns and matures from these situations. As one of Marquette's most public figures, he represents ALL of us, and I can't say I appreciate it. I hope someone has explained to him that when he is in a situation like this, his actions reflect on all of Marquette. He's not just an average student, and should be responsible for carrying himself in a more responsible manner.
-
2) I was not passing judgement on what Vander did on the street (other than maybe questioning the approach -- "excuse me" out of a moving car has what? a 1% chance of success?). I'm just noting that there seems to be a pattern of him noticeably approaching women at inopportune times. All the while, there are 2 outstanding sexual assault charges on an unnamed player. You do the math.
Again, this is quite a leap. And frankly it is a false one. This shows the dangers of you jumping to conclusions based on ridiculous evidence.
-
1) Please stay far away from guessing anything about me.
2) I was not passing judgement on what Vander did on the street (other than maybe questioning the approach -- "excuse me" out of a moving car has what? a 1% chance of success?). I'm just noting that there seems to be a pattern of him noticeably approaching women at inopportune times. All the while, there are 2 outstanding sexual assault charges on an unnamed player. You do the math.
What's the point of this post? Is it to make people realize it's dumb of us to guess about you and just come right to the conclusion that you're a judgmental douche?
-
1) Please stay far away from guessing anything about me.
2) I was not passing judgement on what Vander did on the street (other than maybe questioning the approach -- "excuse me" out of a moving car has what? a 1% chance of success?). I'm just noting that there seems to be a pattern of him noticeably approaching women at inopportune times. All the while, there are 2 outstanding sexual assault charges on an unnamed player. You do the math.
On the other thread on assault, you had speculative postings, and we walked through the issue of libel. It is best to only speak from personal knowledge.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26754.msg300765#msg300765
Here, you have circled back to your tendency to speculate. Please avoid/supress the gossip in your nature.
Take your own advice/request in the above quote---and stay far away from guessing anything, about anyone---golden rule stuff, bud.
You are doing the math without full knowedge of the components of the equation.
-
1) Please stay far away from guessing anything about me.
2) I was not passing judgement on what Vander did on the street (other than maybe questioning the approach -- "excuse me" out of a moving car has what? a 1% chance of success?). I'm just noting that there seems to be a pattern of him noticeably approaching women at inopportune times. All the while, there are 2 outstanding sexual assault charges on an unnamed player. You do the math.
It's assumed Vander was hitting on those girls at Qdoba and it's assumed that he was going to try hitting on girls from the back of an SUV, assuming that story is even factual (I have my doubts). If you do that math, you'd find that your speculation is based completely on 3 assumptions. I understand the dots you're trying to connect but, in my opinion, it's out line. Basically, you're just rumor-starting. It's one thing for posters to do that in terms of recruits coming to MU. It's another to do that with something as serious as a potential sexual assault charge.
-
Regardless what comes of this or the other incidents, I am uncomfortable with how often VB's name seems to be associated with these types of incidents. Even if he's in the right, he shouldn't be in the situation in the first place. I hope he learns and matures from these situations. As one of Marquette's most public figures, he represents ALL of us, and I can't say I appreciate it. I hope someone has explained to him that when he is in a situation like this, his actions reflect on all of Marquette. He's not just an average student, and should be responsible for carrying himself in a more responsible manner.
I agree. Well said!
-
You are doing the math without full knowedge of the components of the equation.
The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.
Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.
One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.
-
The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.
Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.
One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.
No one is saying this is a good thing or acceptable - you are correct that it is embarassing and should be corrected.
However, you do realize you are compounding the problem by making accusations based upon assumptions right? I am all for discussing the issues as the facts are known, but I am not comfortable with speculation about this type of topic.
-
The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.
Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.
One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.
Chico's plays the victim card here, not someone that registered less than a week ago and only wants to deal in speculation and rumor-mongering.
-
Eagle, in the words of Princess Bride....I don't think you are using that word right (contrarian).
A contrarian is someone who's bringing an opposing viewpoint to the forefront. A contrarian is NOT someone who projects onto a kid that he's guilty of rape or sexual assault simply because he seemed to hit on two women that you happened to see. That's not contrarian. That's deuschbaggery.
-
One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.
no no...more like one person comes on here acting like a douche without any knowledge of anything that is going on - only pure speculation
-
Ground control to ding dong doufus posters: if they believed he assaulted the guy he would have been charged in criminal court and not a municpal citation.
-
Chico's plays the victim card here, not someone that registered less than a week ago and only wants to deal in speculation and rumor-mongering.
Gotcha -- the "you have less internet message board posts than me" card. I bow down to you and your 700+ posts. You sir, are a super fan. Probably smarter than me too.
-
The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.
Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.
One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.
How about this -
We actually wait for the FACTS to come out in the sexual assault cases and THEN we can have a discussion. IF the FACTS show that basketball players are guilty of some crime, I seriously doubt that anyone will post anything defending them. An actual crime is not a "boys will be boys" situation. Until we actually know the facts, don't you think Vander should be given the benefit of the doubt? There is still such a thing as due process, isn't there?
-
I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.
What a courageous stand you've taken (by anonymously, on the Internet, tossing about accusations while admitting you have no knowledge of the events).
-
Gotcha -- the "you have less internet message board posts than me" card. I bow down to you and your 700+ posts. You sir, are a super fan. Probably smarter than me too.
A. I most likely am smarter than you. Probably a better fan as well.
B. It's irrelevant.
C. See below:
What a courageous stand you've taken (by anonymously, on the Internet, tossing about accusations while admitting you have no knowledge of the events).
-
Eagle, in the words of Princess Bride....I don't think you are using that word right (contrarian).
A contrarian is someone who's bringing an opposing viewpoint to the forefront. A contrarian is NOT someone who projects onto a kid that he's guilty of rape or sexual assault simply because he seemed to hit on two women that you happened to see. That's not contrarian. That's deuschbaggery.
Hey Strawman, a couple thoughts.
1) Enough with the kid card. Vander Blue is a man. A man that gets paid a $250k education to play basketball.
2) I made assumptions (because I had to, due to 0 facts) that lead me to personally form an opinion that it is likely that player X was accused of sexual assault. Not guilting of sexual assault, and never once did I even use the word rape. I get that it is easier to tear down made-up stances, but please refrain.
-
How does anyone come to the conclusion that Vander was hitting on the girls at the table? There is no indication of that whatsoever.
-
The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.
Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.
One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.
The problem with your "viewpoint" is this: You are angered that anyone would make any assumption about you even if that assumption is based on what you actually wrote, yet you are perfectly okay with making assumptions about others even as you admit to having no facts about them. If you don't see this as a problem you're not paying attention in Theology and Philosophy class.
-
immaeagle is either:
A. Pissed that VB hit on his own lady while ordering some cheese nachos at Qdoba last Fall, then got jacked in the face.
B. You are outraged student Derrick Wendler
-
Ground control to ding dong doufus posters: if they believed he assaulted the guy he would have been charged in criminal court and not a municpal citation.
Hold down the insult. A district attorney, on receipt of a complaint, proffers criminal charges, or presents the facts to a grand jury for a felony indictment. What officers believe, or dont believe on the scene, does not equate to the nature of the charges proffered, nor even constitute evidence of any crime..
-
What a courageous stand you've taken (by anonymously, on the Internet, tossing about accusations while admitting you have no knowledge of the events).
Courageous? I said that where? I passively hinted at that where? What is the point in even bothering to write "anonymously, on the Internet" while we are on a message board. I hold the same viewpoints in the company of my friends as I do online and would have the same stance in any other forum. Message me if you are interested in my name, address, background, or any other pertinent information.
-
immaeagle is either:
A. Pissed that VB hit on his own lady while ordering some cheese nachos at Qdoba last Fall, then got jacked in the face.
B. You are outraged student Derrick Wendler
I have to call a spade a spade here and concede that this was well done.
-
The fact that this basketball team is being represented by players who are getting accused of sexual assualt and punching students is a huge problem, and I am making due with what information I have (which is essentialy none, becuase it is the end of the world if anyone talk about this). I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program. This is embarassing, plain and simple.
Considering that I do not have personal knowledge of the alleged assault, and I should only speak from personal knowledge, should we just ignore this? Everybody? Forget that "vander blue punch" and "Marquette basketball sexual assault" are actual working google searches, let's talk about how many minutes Davante Gardner will get next year.
One person comes on here with a contrarian viewpoint and points the finger of blame at this players and he immediately becomes a speculative, judgemental douche. Sorry I forgot to drink the Kool-aid.
Speaking only for myself, the problem that I have with what you're posting here is that you're making a lot of assumptions and, based upon those assumptions, are conflating several events.
It's perfectly acceptable to be disappointed (or choose another appropriate word that describes how you feel) that Vander got into a fight with some kid. It sounds like bad judgment and putting himself in a situation that he needs to avoid. However minor the event actually is, it's regrettable.
It's perfectly acceptable to be troubled (or choose another appropriate word) that it appears that one or more members of the basketball team have been charged with sexual harassment (or assault or whatever).
What I (and apparently some others) have a problem with is your assumption that these things are related. You are assuming that Vander was hitting on a couple of girls on the night in question. Even if that assumption is true (and it might be - it's a possible scenario) many think it's unfair to Vander for you to move from that assumption to a suggestion that because he hit on those girls (and apparently spoke to a couple of girls on the street) that he also committed a sexual assault on a different occasion.
-
If LennysTap's post above doesn't shut this immaeagle tool up, nothing will. Couldn't have said it better myself.
-
So your stance is that you *have* to make assumptions because you have 0 facts? There is another option - don't make assumptions and let the facts come out.
-
The problem with your "viewpoint" is this: You are angered that anyone would make any assumption about you even if that assumption is based on what you actually wrote, yet you are perfectly okay with making assumptions about others even as you admit to having no facts about them. If you don't see this as a problem you're not paying attention in Theology and Philosophy class.
I admittedly paid no attention in Theology or Philosophy. If some reads what I said and responds with, "I think you are wrong because of xyz" that is fine. When some responds with "I think you are wrong because you disagree with me, also you are a douche" then I have a slight issue. I have received very few (though some) respectful responses.
-
I don't know if this has been posted (sorry if it has)
This is a great read for all of us "experts" out there on the issue
http://www.anonymouseagle.com/2011/4/19/2120124/setting-the-record-straight-about-vander-blues-court-date
-
I get that it is easier to tear down made-up stances, but please refrain.
I get that it is easier to make up accusations, but please refrain
-
What I (and apparently some others) have a problem with is your assumption that these things are related. You are assuming that Vander was hitting on a couple of girls on the night in question. Even if that assumption is true (and it might be - it's a possible scenario) many think it's unfair to Vander for you to move from that assumption to a suggestion that because he hit on those girls (and apparently spoke to a couple of girls on the street) that he also committed a sexual assault on a different occasion.
This could easily have been lost in the posts, but never did I intend to accuss Vander of being guilty of sexual assault. If he is found guilty by the courts, so be it. The only jumps I am comfortable making is that the events described above make it more likely (in my mind) that he would be accused of sexual assault. I respect that you are not willing to make those jumps, and don't expect everyone too. I'm not sold on much, just that it raises more red flags for me.
-
2) I made assumptions (because I had to, due to 0 facts) that lead me to personally form an opinion that it is likely that player X was accused of sexual assault. Not guilting of sexual assault, and never once did I even use the word rape. I get that it is easier to tear down made-up stances, but please refrain.
Because you have (admittedly) ZERO facts, you don't "have to" form an opinion. As a matter of fact, having ZERO facts should cause you to refrain from having an opinion. Again, you don't like it when people jump to conclusions about you but feel it's okay (you even say you HAD to) to do so about others. Sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever.
-
I admittedly paid no attention in Theology or Philosophy. If some reads what I said and responds with, "I think you are wrong because of xyz" that is fine. When some responds with "I think you are wrong because you disagree with me, also you are a douche" then I have a slight issue. I have received very few (though some) respectful responses.
Probably because the tone of your posts (as well as the date you registered and your low number of posts all having to do with allegations and your "interpretations" of said allegations) will not elicit a whole lot of respect from the people that frequent this board.
And that, is why I called you a douche.
-
Courageous? I said that where? I passively hinted at that where? What is the point in even bothering to write "anonymously, on the Internet" while we are on a message board. I hold the same viewpoints in the company of my friends as I do online and would have the same stance in any other forum. Message me if you are interested in my name, address, background, or any other pertinent information.
"I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program"
If you're so certain of your stance, publicly state your name and address alongside your implication that Vander Blue is suspected of a sex crime, then forward that to his attorney(s) and Marquette's corporate counsel.
I'm sure they would interested in knowing who's making such claims.
-
If you're so certain of your stance, publicly state your name and address alongside your implication that Vander Blue is suspected of a sex crime, then forward that to his attorney(s) and Marquette's corporate counsel.
I'm sure they would interested in knowing who's making such claims.
+1
(http://[url=http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.bestoftheblogs.com/ClientFiles/960b84cf-95e6-4f4f-bfc1-faa534513ac7/woodshed2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bestoftheblogs.com/Home/31843&h=480&w=640&sz=65&tbnid=LLbFur8-tk3hfM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=137&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwoodshed%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=woodshed&usg=__o1Uuzr66DQnZ0LjTdcRVFwgKfE8=&sa=X&ei=0uKtTYfzPJCw0QH_w-3CCw&ved=0CEMQ9QEwBg]http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.bestoftheblogs.com/ClientFiles/960b84cf-95e6-4f4f-bfc1-faa534513ac7/woodshed2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bestoftheblogs.com/Home/31843&h=480&w=640&sz=65&tbnid=LLbFur8-tk3hfM:&tbnh=103&tbnw=137&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dwoodshed%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=woodshed&usg=__o1Uuzr66DQnZ0LjTdcRVFwgKfE8=&sa=X&ei=0uKtTYfzPJCw0QH_w-3CCw&ved=0CEMQ9QEwBg[/url])
-
So your stance is that you *have* to make assumptions because you have 0 facts? There is another option - don't make assumptions and let the facts come out.
This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?
-
This could easily have been lost in the posts, but never did I intend to accuss Vander of being guilty of sexual assault. If he is found guilty by the courts, so be it. The only jumps I am comfortable making is that the events described above make it more likely (in my mind) that he would be accused of sexual assault. I respect that you are not willing to make those jumps, and don't expect everyone too. I'm not sold on much, just that it raises more red flags for me.
I understand that. And I suppose it could be true that guys who hit on girls more often are more likely to be accused of sexual assault. But you're not just saying that he's more likely to be accused of sexual assault. Putting aside whether or not that's true, you're also suggesting that he is one of the players who actually has been accused of sexual assault. This is the leap that makes me uncomfortable.
-
This sort of provocation happens all of the time to pro athletes. Give the kid some community service time and hopes he finds a way to avoid these type of creeps in the future.
-
Speculating on recruiting and wins next year are a little different than speculating whether or not VB is guilty of a sex related crime.
-
This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?
haha...they are so similar your right.
-
This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?
is this a serious question?
-
How does anyone come to the conclusion that Vander was hitting on the girls at the table? There is no indication of that whatsoever.
Seriously? Yeah, I'm sure he just stopped by to say hi to the two gentlemen, which forced them into a verbal altercation. I've been to many bars/after bar spots and 90% of the fights that occur stem from women....I think it's more than reasonable to assume.
-
"I'm not just going to sit down and talk about the next recruiting class with this black cloud hanging over the program"
If you're so certain of your stance, publicly state your name and address alongside your implication that Vander Blue is suspected of a sex crime, then forward that to his attorney(s) and Marquette's corporate counsel.
I'm sure they would interested in knowing who's making such claims.
Agree.
I went to seminar last week to bone up on internet discovery, and learned he is already liable, on possible libel (the admission of making assumptions with 0 facts is priceless-lol), and they'll be no defense of anonymity. If posters cant warn off this conduct, I'd enjoy seeing a suit drive home the lesson.
-
Because you have (admittedly) ZERO facts, you don't "have to" form an opinion. As a matter of fact, having ZERO facts should cause you to refrain from having an opinion. Again, you don't like it when people jump to conclusions about you but feel it's okay (you even say you HAD to) to do so about others. Sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever.
Personally, when an issue this big comes out about my favorite basketball team, I feel I have to have an opinion. I have an opinion on every issue related to Marquette basketball, the Green Bay Packers, and the Milwaukee Brewers. In other words, I am a sports fan.
-
This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?
Thanks for removing all doubt about your intelligence.
-
This could easily have been lost in the posts, but never did I intend to accuss Vander of being guilty of sexual assault. If he is found guilty by the courts, so be it. The only jumps I am comfortable making is that the events described above make it more likely (in my mind) that he would be accused of sexual assault. I respect that you are not willing to make those jumps, and don't expect everyone too. I'm not sold on much, just that it raises more red flags for me.
This is inane beyond words.
Even if we're to believe you once saw Vander Blue hit on a girl (or girls) on the street, that in no way makes him more likely to be accused of sexual assault. Is there some proven correlation of which you are aware linking forward behavior with criminality?
-
Probably because the tone of your posts (as well as the date you registered and your low number of posts all having to do with allegations and your "interpretations" of said allegations) will not elicit a whole lot of respect from the people that frequent this board.
And that, is why I called you a douche.
You can conclude whatever you want based on my post number and tone. I'm comfortable formulating an opinion on you judging by "I am probably smarter than you" and "I am a better fan than you". Has there been a more obvious case of douche-baggary?
-
1) Please stay far away from guessing anything about me.
I am still wondering when someone is going to guess more about who immaeagle is as a person and what immaeagle is going to do, given his earlier and somewhat intimidating line quoted above.
I have five dollars that he throws a virtual glass of water on whoever engages in this type of activity.
-
You can conclude whatever you want based on my post number and tone. I'm comfortable formulating an opinion on you judging by "I am probably smarter than you" and "I am a better fan than you". Has there been a more obvious case of douche-baggary?
I'm sorry, did my hyperbole get your panties twisted?
I never claimed I wasn't being a douche to you, because, in your case, you reap what you sew.
-
This is a message board full of people hypothesizing how many games we will win next year, where we will be ranked, whether or not Jimmy will get drafted, and where our next recruit will come from. Those are all MU-related issues that are talked about before they happen. How is this different?
You have speculated/assumed over a past event---do you see the future as different than the past?
This may have been one of those points you missed in Phil class.
-
Has there been a more obvious case of douche-baggary?
Have you read your own posts today?
-
I love it. Another story comes out about MU players, a new fresh poster with 0 history of posts starts commenting and making up stories... and people here lap it up like it could actually be a Marquette fan and not a Badger troll. Where have I seen this story before?
-
Personally, when an issue this big comes out about my favorite basketball team, I feel I have to have an opinion.
You can have an opinion all you want. I think people are simply suggesting that, as your opinion is based on no facts whatsoever, you might do well to keep it to yourself.
-
I love it. Another story comes out about MU players, a new fresh poster with 0 history of posts starts commenting and making up stories... and people here lap it up like it could actually be a Marquette fan and not a Badger troll. Where have I seen this story before?
This made me throw up in my mouth.
-
Personally, when an issue this big comes out about my favorite basketball team
Liar. See I can form opinions without facts as easy as you can.
-
This made me throw up in my mouth.
A lot of that going around in this thread.
-
I'm sorry, did my hyperbole get your panties twisted?
I never claimed I wasn't being a douche to you, because, in your case, you reap what you sew.
I respect that fact you can admit you were being a conditional douche. I may have gotten defensive when my controversial viewpoint was met with vitrol. ~cyberhug, a$$es out~
-
About five or six weeks ago I was walking outside of my apartment that is just a bit off of campus. I hear "excuse me" come from a SUV that pulled up alongside the curb. The car is a bit away from me, but I instinctively stop and look, assuming someone is looking for directions. The "excuse me" came from Vander Blue, who was in the back seat of the SUV. The "excuse me" wasn't for me, it was for two girls that passed by me going the opposite direction. When neither of them stopped to respond, the car sped away.
According to the victim's account (and reading between the lines), it sounds like Vander's assault charge stemmed from Vander hitting on some girls the victim was with and him not taking it lightly.
There are two outstanding sexual assault charges, both of which have been rumored to involve basketball players.
Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm a little f-ed up. But it seems to me you're speculating a wee bit much without more facts wouldn't you say?
-
Free Vander Blue.
-
Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm a little f-ed up. But it seems to me you're speculating a wee bit much without more facts wouldn't you say?
I'd prefer if this entire thread just got deleted. I admit that I was 100% speculating based on very little facts (on a situation that has no facts), but was just hoping that some people would see the soft connections and say "I see your point" or "I don't think you make those jumps just yet". Instead I got "AAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGHHH MARQUETTE RULES< YOU'RE AN IDIOT! RAWR!!!!!"
-
Hey, now, I don't think anyone said anything about Marquette Ruling.
-
I'd prefer if this entire thread just got deleted. I admit that I was 100% speculating based on very little facts (on a situation that has no facts), but was just hoping that some people would see the soft connections and say "I see your point" or "I don't think you make those jumps just yet". Instead I got "AAAAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGHHH MARQUETTE RULES< YOU'RE AN IDIOT! RAWR!!!!!"
Speculating 100% on very little facts and hoping for a response is not a good thing, especially for an 18 year kid facing possible charges. The Assistant District Attorney will review the case and present if necessary. They will not speculate about the facts.
If you wish to discuss and make positive contributions to a basketball message board, then speculate on recruiting, lineups, schedule, etc. Those items are always a subject of contention, without hindering the prosecutorial status of a young man.
-
If you wish to discuss and make positive contributions to a basketball message board, then speculate on recruiting, lineups, schedule, etc. Those items are always a subject of contention, without hindering the prosecutorial status of a young man.
I feel like talking about recruiting, lineups, schedules, etc. while this stuff is out there is ignoring the real issue. I would assume/hop there is not debate that this is the single biggest story regarding Marquette basketball right now. How can you say that I can't talk about the most important topic?
-
Really? Police issue citations by simply receiving a complaint? So they did no investigation? Didn't call anyone?
Look, they obviously talked to both Blue and the victim at least...and maybe some witnesses as well. Given what everyone told them, they obviously felt Blue was to blame since they didn't issue the other guy a ticket.
Maybe the cops were Bucky fans.
-
I feel like talking about recruiting, lineups, schedules, etc. while this stuff is out there is ignoring the real issue. I would assume/hop there is not debate that this is the single biggest story regarding Marquette basketball right now. How can you say that I can't talk about the most important topic?
Vander Blue got a ticket? That's the "most important topic"? That's a fact, but not a very significant fact.
The rest is all conjecture. Wait for the facts.
Vander Blue punched someone and he may or may not have yelled "excuse me" from the back of a vehicle. He is a college student. He may actually "like" women. In your book, somehow that means he is a sexual predator.
Come back when we have the facts. You can be first to yell "I told you so!" if there are facts to back up your conjecture. If not, you can respectfully say you're sorry to Vander at the restaurant.
-
I think you all are being a little harsh on immaeagle. Basketball players being in the news in a negative light, innocent or not, is bad PR for the school and the program. They should know that they are hyper-scrutinized, act accordingly, and watch out for each other. If basketball players don't get into fights then we don't have to decide if they are guilty of assault and battery or not. They are all adults. It is fair to expect all student athletes to behave as representatives of the university at all times. I am sure they are told that frequently by the staff, and hopefully Blue (and others) see these accusations as very serious reminder. Is it fair to hold them to a higher standard than the general student body? Maybe not. Is it fair that universities make all kinds of money off student athletes? Maybe not. Is it what they signed up for. Absolutely.
-
You obviously have not read all of his posts/accusations.
-
2 thoughts:
1. How does a Marquette student not know who Vander is? Does he not follow the basketball team at all? Sorry for the assumption, but I feel like you absolutely know who is on the basketball team if you go to school at Marquette
2. Most importantly, anyone know what they ordered? Maybe Vander was just pointing out how much of a nancy the guy was for ordering the burrito bowl... man up, get the regular burrito with the tortilla and burn off the extra calories at the gym!
-
At what point does IamEagle not realize that he's outnumbered about 30-2 in this thread?? You sir, need to retire your argument on this debate/thread...
-
At what point does IamEagle not realize that he's outnumbered about 30-2 in this thread?? You sir, need to retire your argument on this debate/thread...
(http://areasonablelife.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/woodshed_mountain_museum-2.jpg)
-
At what point does IamEagle not realize that he's outnumbered about 30-2 in this thread?? You sir, need to retire your argument on this debate/thread...
The black knight never gives up, even after losing both arms and legs--its just a flesh wound--Monty Python
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4&feature=related
-
concept of mutual combatants
Is that a legal term? Because I'm pretty sure that in this situation it's assault or battery one way or another.
-
Is that a legal term? Because I'm pretty sure that in this situation it's assault or battery one way or another.
Yes, it's a legal concept that essentially says that if two people agree to engage in a fight one should not be held criminally or civilly liable ... at least so long as the fight continues voluntarily. If one guys cries "uncle" and the other continues to fight, then it's an assault/battery.
-
Yes, it's a legal concept that essentially says that if two people agree to engage in a fight one should not be held criminally or civilly liable ... at least so long as the fight continues voluntarily. If one guys cries "uncle" and the other continues to fight, then it's an assault/battery.
Pakuni's right. One of the elements of a battery is that the victim didn't consent to the contact. If you agree to fight, you've consented to the contact.
-
Yes, it's a legal concept that essentially says that if two people agree to engage in a fight one should not be held criminally or civilly liable ... at least so long as the fight continues voluntarily. If one guys cries "uncle" and the other continues to fight, then it's an assault/battery.
sounds like hockey, like when the ref skates in once a player hits the ground
-
They are the linesman and for the most part are huge, the tiny refs very rarely get involved. You are right though....they do wait till they hit the ground. Must be in their contract or something.
-
The "mutual combatants defense" probably explains why the DA offered to lower the charge to disorderly conduct. You still can't fight whoever and wherever you want just because you both agree to it.
Since this is the thread of speculation, I'll speculate on Boyle's strategy here. In some ways, regardless of the outcome of the trial, wouldn't it have just been better to accept the disorderly conduct offer and get this thing out of the media? To me, the real damage here isn't the charge (a citation, which seems harmless enough), but the constant juxtaposition of a Marquette basketball player with some sort of misconduct. As was mentioned earlier, it's hard to "just talk about basketball" with this sort of cloud hanging over Blue and the program, a cloud that will hang there at least until June.
-
One thing is for sure, the chants of
VANDER ORANGE
are going to echo at the Kohl Center next year and a number of other venues.
-
You can conclude whatever you want based on my post number and tone. I'm comfortable formulating an opinion on you judging by "I am probably smarter than you" and "I am a better fan than you". Has there been a more obvious case of douche-baggary?
Gotta agree with eagle here. I've never seen a bigger loser post that "lancesOtherNut" claiming he's smarter than eagle. What a total boob
-
One thing is for sure, the chants of
VANDER ORANGE
are going to echo at the Kohl Center next year and a number of other venues.
The kid should have been punched just for coming up with such a lame insult. What did Vander say back?....."It's Vander Blue, and you are going to be Black and Blue"
-
Vander is just a tool. Every time I've interacted with him on campus he think's he is God's gift to earth, can do whatever he wants and if you don't like it then he's gonna let you know. The lie about the racial slur just make things look like him trying to worm out of something he did by saying he was provoked.
-
* Yesterday WISN did a live Stand-up in front of the Quoba where Vander's incident took place.
* Roisak's blog has three separate threads about Vander's incident just yesterday.
* We have hundreds of posts about this here in the last few days.
It seems like most people learned about Vander's charges yesterday.
My take is the only reason this is such a big deal is because it is coming in the wake of the sexual harassment and assault allegations as Humphrey. Without these allegation the Vander story is a non-story.
I first knew about this before Christmas. Vander's Milwaukee Court post has been online since November. Many others here knew about it. No one said anything or posted anything (including me).
I think we were all trying to protect Vander which is why their was zero discussion of this until a few weeks ago. No one wanted to post it, ask Rosiak, Buzz or Gerry Boyle about it. He was the star recruit and we wanted to just go away.
In hindsight was this a big mistake? Should we have had our three hundred posts and hand-wringing about this last November, before the season started, instead of now? It would have been better for Vander as now his charges always seen to be mentioned in the same breath as what happened at Humphrey, as if he was involved in all these incidents.
Would have it been better for Buzz as no one can see any punishment that was handed out. If you want to say that Buzz was afraid to punish the star, right now it is hard to say that is an incorrect perception. If it was a story last fall, Buzz would have been asked that question and forced to give a response.
Maybe the best thing we can do in the future is not sit on stories like this for months. If its public record, it is going to become known to everyone. So get it out ASAP and let the post fly, the hyperbole be said and misunderstands get made. Then it quietly goes away. Then, months later, we he goes to court, we don't act like act like it is the "third incident in a month."
Hopefully I'm getting my point across.
Thoughts?
-
Since the other participant apparently never threw a punch, did he really agree to fight. Assuming he wants to carry this through, why would he not testify that he thought it was a joke and he did not really think there would be a fight. It would be his word against Vander's and right now Vander's word is not worth much. The thing that turned me off on this is Vander saying he did not throw a punch his arm just came out when he was pushing him. (Sounds like the stuff they say to refs, when an altercation occurs on the basketball court)Come on' Pushing him into a window is just as bad or not worse. He attacked him plain and simple. He should of taken the plea bargain and it would of been over with and soon forgotten. Not taking the plea bargain smells of arrogance and stupidity. I doubt that Boyle advised him to turn the plea bargain down, but Boyle will defend him no matter what and certainly will not publically state that Blue should of taken the plea bargain.
-
Since the other participant apparently never threw a punch, did he really agree to fight. Assuming he wants to carry this through, why would he not testify that he thought it was a joke and he did not really think there would be a fight. It would be his word against Vander's and right now Vander's word is not worth much. The thing that turned me off on this is Vander saying he did not throw a punch his arm just came out when he was pushing him. (Sounds like the stuff they say to refs, when an altercation occurs on the basketball court)Come on' Pushing him into a window is just as bad or not worse. He attacked him plain and simple. He should of taken the plea bargain and it would of been over with and soon forgotten. Not taking the plea bargain smells of arrogance and stupidity. I doubt that Boyle advised him to turn the plea bargain down, but Boyle will defend him no matter what and certainly will not publically state that Blue should of taken the plea bargain.
He would have to be a total fool to take a plea bargain on something as frivolous as this.
-
He would have to be a total fool to take a plea bargain on something as frivolous as this.
Why's that? I always take the plea so that I don't have to spend any more time in court.
Having a disturbing the peace on your record is no biggie.
-
Why's that? I always take the plea so that I don't have to spend any more time in court.
Having a disturbing the peace on your record is no biggie.
Maybe not, but if you didn't do what you are being charged with, you would just take the plea?
Clearly the kid wanted to step outside, and then got his ass popped.
and now he is crying like a pansy to the cops.
boo hoo... cry me a god damn river.
Once he agreed to step outside, and then STEPPED OUTSIDE he became a mutual combatant.
He lost the little scuffle and now he is all butt hurt about it.
-
Maybe not, but if you didn't do what you are being charged with, you would just take the plea?
I usually do. The less I have to deal with the court system the better. Especially over a couple hundred dollars and some he-said-he-said.
Clearly the kid wanted to step outside, and then got his ass popped.
and now he is crying like a pansy to the cops.
boo hoo... cry me a god damn river.
Once he agreed to step outside, and then STEPPED OUTSIDE he became a mutual combatant.
He lost the little scuffle and now he is all butt hurt about it.
+1
-
Vander is just a tool. Every time I've interacted with him on campus he think's he is God's gift to earth, can do whatever he wants and if you don't like it then he's gonna let you know. The lie about the racial slur just make things look like him trying to worm out of something he did by saying he was provoked.
I take it you've never met another athlete before, much less one who was told he was the greatest thing ever in HS. Not saying its right, but Vander is hardly alone and when people complain about this (happened all the time with football players I went to college with), they just come off as bitter and jealous.
-
Since the other participant apparently never threw a punch, did he really agree to fight. Assuming he wants to carry this through, why would he not testify that he thought it was a joke and he did not really think there would be a fight. It would be his word against Vander's and right now Vander's word is not worth much. The thing that turned me off on this is Vander saying he did not throw a punch his arm just came out when he was pushing him. (Sounds like the stuff they say to refs, when an altercation occurs on the basketball court)Come on' Pushing him into a window is just as bad or not worse. He attacked him plain and simple. He should of taken the plea bargain and it would of been over with and soon forgotten. Not taking the plea bargain smells of arrogance and stupidity. I doubt that Boyle advised him to turn the plea bargain down, but Boyle will defend him no matter what and certainly will not publically state that Blue should of taken the plea bargain.
So it is bad for Vander to "distort" the intent but you think it is only appropriate for the other guy? ::)
-
* Yesterday WISN did a live Stand-up in front of the Quoba where Vander's incident took place.
* Roisak's blog has three separate threads about Vander's incident just yesterday.
* We have hundreds of posts about this here in the last few days.
This is why I think it's a mistake to go to trial and not take the disorderly plea. Now we'll have another round of TV reports outside the courthouse, Qdoba, Humphrey Hall, and the AL talking about Vander being on trial for Assault and Battery. They won't mention it's a municipal citation and not criminal charges and the general public won't care, and all the reports will mention the onging sexual assault investigations. There will be multiple newspaper articles, and hundreds more message board posts and blog entries beyond just the MU boards. I think paying the $175 fine for disorderly conduct would be money well spent to avoid bringing all this continued negative attention to Marquette.
-
I take it you've never met another athlete before, much less one who was told he was the greatest thing ever in HS. Not saying its right, but Vander is hardly alone and when people complain about this (happened all the time with football players I went to college with), they just come off as bitter and jealous.
If today's bball players are like the ones when I was MU, they generally have a bit of a "I am big time" attitude, but are by and large good guys trying to live life under a microscope.
This group is undoubtedly better at basketball than the group I went to school with though.
-
This is why I think it's a mistake to go to trial and not take the disorderly plea. Now we'll have another round of TV reports outside the courthouse, Qdoba, Humphrey Hall, and the AL talking about Vander being on trial for Assault and Battery. They won't mention it's a municipal citation and not criminal charges and the general public won't care, and all the reports will mention the onging sexual assault investigations. There will be multiple newspaper articles, and hundreds more message board posts and blog entries beyond just the MU boards. I think paying the $175 fine for disorderly conduct would be money well spent to avoid bringing all this continued negative attention to Marquette.
Eh. It's a horse a piece, I think: the people who are looking to trash Vander and/or Marquette would continue to bring this up (and fail to mention it was just a municipal citation) even if he took the plea for the DC ticket. Hell, I think that will be the case even if the complaining witness doesn't show up for the trial and the City has to dismiss it.
-
I never knew there were so many lawyers on this board
-
So it is bad for Vander to "distort" the intent but you think it is only appropriate for the other guy? ::)
We all assuming the other guy intended to fight. However, we were not there and we really do not know what his intent was. I am not defending the other party. I am saying that Vander should of taken the plea and put the ordeal behind him. This will not go away now until the trial is done. If it were me, I rather not have to worry about going to trial.
-
This is why I think it's a mistake to go to trial and not take the disorderly plea. Now we'll have another round of TV reports outside the courthouse, Qdoba, Humphrey Hall, and the AL talking about Vander being on trial for Assault and Battery. They won't mention it's a municipal citation and not criminal charges and the general public won't care, and all the reports will mention the onging sexual assault investigations. There will be multiple newspaper articles, and hundreds more message board posts and blog entries beyond just the MU boards. I think paying the $175 fine for disorderly conduct would be money well spent to avoid bringing all this continued negative attention to Marquette.
Maybe, maybe not.
If the case ends in a dismissal or acquittal, then all that news is going to be that a MU player was cleared/exonerated of the allegations. That's not necessarily a bad thing, nor it is really negative attention. And it's certainly much better than news of a Marquette player pleading guilty.
-
Keep it up everyone! At this rate - barring Mod locks - this thread will surpass Devonte Newbill's!
-
Keep it up everyone! At this rate - barring Mod locks - this thread will surpass Devonte Newbill's!
I heard Brad Forester is going to have an expose on the situation.
-
From his parent's basement?
-
Maybe, maybe not.
If the case ends in a dismissal or acquittal, then all that news is going to be that a MU player was cleared/exonerated of the allegations. That's not necessarily a bad thing, nor it is really negative attention. And it's certainly much better than news of a Marquette player pleading guilty.
Here's my prediction, all the local news stations will do stories the day before the trial about how a Marquette player is going to court for assault & battery. If he's acquitted, the only station to follow up will be WISN, and their story will be how a Marquette player used the most prominent criminal defense attorney in the state to get out of paying a $175 disorderly conduct ticket.
-
Here's my prediction, all the local news stations will do stories the day before the trial about how a Marquette player is going to court for assault & battery. If he's acquitted, the only station to follow up will be WISN, and their story will be how a Marquette player used the most prominent criminal defense attorney in the state to get out of paying a $175 disorderly conduct ticket.
Haters gonna hate...
(http://www.gifbin.com/bin/052009/1242032359_haters-gonna-hate.gif) (http://www.gifbin.com/982918)
-
Here's my prediction, all the local news stations will do stories the day before the trial about how a Marquette player is going to court for assault & battery. If he's acquitted, the only station to follow up will be WISN, and their story will be how a Marquette player used the most prominent criminal defense attorney in the state to get out of paying a $175 disorderly conduct ticket.
sounds about right
-
I take it you've never met another athlete before, much less one who was told he was the greatest thing ever in HS. Not saying its right, but Vander is hardly alone and when people complain about this (happened all the time with football players I went to college with), they just come off as bitter and jealous.
I have met other athletes and I never made the generalization that all athletes are like Vander.
If today's bball players are like the ones when I was MU, they generally have a bit of a "I am big time" attitude, but are by and large good guys trying to live life under a microscope.
I would agree with Sultan here. It's just that Vander takes "I am big time" to a new level.
-
I went back and read the initial account again. It is incomplete and because of that, one cannot draw any conclusions from it. So I'm amazed at the length of the thread. But then again, it is a slow MU news period, so it give us something to speculate about......
-
I have met other athletes and I never made the generalization that all athletes are like Vander.
I would agree with Sultan here. It's just that Vander takes "I am big time" to a new level.
I was there from 04-08 and this is nothing different from crap the bball players pulled while I was there. Buzz just doesn't cover this stuff up like some of the old regime. For example, I watched an unnamed player drop a guy at a house party after some words were exchanged (no racial slurs though). The police showed up and started to write citations and all of a sudden TC's Jaguar pulls up behind the cop car. He exchanged some words with the cop and told the unnamed player to get in the back of his car. This isn't a TC vs Buzz thing and I don't want it to turn into that but it just seems that things are different now in the way the players are treated in these situations. That being said, for every d-bag there is on the team that thinks he's God's gift to campus there is another one that is a truly nice guy.
-
Here's my prediction, all the local news stations will do stories the day before the trial about how a Marquette player is going to court for assault & battery. If he's acquitted, the only station to follow up will be WISN, and their story will be how a Marquette player used the most prominent criminal defense attorney in the state to get out of paying a $175 disorderly conduct ticket.
modified +1
If Gerry Boyle gets Vander off, the we will get live shots from the Court House, Qdoba, Humphrey and the AL all saying that MU and Vander used one of the state's best criminal attorneys to beat a $175 municipal violation. The will guess how many thousands of dollars Boyle's fee would have been for the mere mortal to have him represent them in a municipal violation case. The implication is MU used its money and clout to get its star off. The implication will be that MU bullied the process.
Then they will mention the ongoing criminal investigation into sexual assault charges and leave the viewer with the idea that MU basketball players are guilty. And, if they are cleared, or have been cleared by Vander's June 3 court date, the impression is MU again bullied the process to get the guilty off.
No matter what the outcome, nothing good is coming from this court date/trial for MU.
Pay the fine and make it go away.
-
I was there from 04-08 and this is nothing different from crap the bball players pulled while I was there. Buzz just doesn't cover this stuff up like some of the old regime. For example, I watched an unnamed player drop a guy at a house party after some words were exchanged (no racial slurs though). The police showed up and started to write citations and all of a sudden TC's Jaguar pulls up behind the cop car. He exchanged some words with the cop and told the unnamed player to get in the back of his car. This isn't a TC vs Buzz thing and I don't want it to turn into that but it just seems that things are different now in the way the players are treated in these situations. That being said, for every d-bag there is on the team that thinks he's God's gift to campus there is another one that is a truly nice guy.
1. If there was no citation issued to the unnamed player, what was "covered up"?
2. Aren't you "covering it up" as well given that you aren't naming the player?
3. Do you think that if Buzz had known about Vander's altercation, that he wouldn't have done the same thing for Vander by pulling his Escalade up behind the cop car, having some words with the cop, and telling Vander to to get in the back seat?
4. And how do you reconcile your comment that "Buzz just doesn't cover this stuff up," with the fact that this event occurred on October 24 2010 and only became public on April 19, 2011--nearly six months later?
It seems far more likely to me that the reason why Buzz didn't get to the scene on 10/24 was that he didn't find out about the incident in time or was out of town on a recruiting trip. Buzz strikes me as the kind of guy that would have his players back, and I have to think he would have done the exact same thing for Blue that you say that Crean did for his player if it meant avoiding this whole distraction.
-
I was there from 04-08 and this is nothing different from crap the bball players pulled while I was there. Buzz just doesn't cover this stuff up like some of the old regime. For example, I watched an unnamed player drop a guy at a house party after some words were exchanged (no racial slurs though). The police showed up and started to write citations and all of a sudden TC's Jaguar pulls up behind the cop car. He exchanged some words with the cop and told the unnamed player to get in the back of his car. This isn't a TC vs Buzz thing and I don't want it to turn into that but it just seems that things are different now in the way the players are treated in these situations. That being said, for every d-bag there is on the team that thinks he's God's gift to campus there is another one that is a truly nice guy.
I miss DJ. He was really fun to watch.
As for the last statement, that can probably extend to the entire male population on campus. Plenty of douchebags who thought they originated from the seventh rib of God during my time in Milwaukee.
-
1. If there was no citation issued to the unnamed player, what was "covered up"?
2. Aren't you "covering it up" as well given that you aren't naming the player?
3. Do you think that if Buzz had known about Vander's altercation, that he wouldn't have done the same thing for Vander by pulling his Escalade up behind the cop car, having some words with the cop, and telling Vander to to get in the back seat?
4. And how do you reconcile your comment that "Buzz just doesn't cover this stuff up," with the fact that this event occurred on October 24 2010 and only became public on April 19, 2011--nearly six months later?
It seems far more likely to me that the reason why Buzz didn't get to the scene on 10/24 was that he didn't find out about the incident in time or was out of town on a recruiting trip. Buzz strikes me as the kind of guy that would have his players back, and I have to think he would have done the exact same thing for Blue that you say that Crean did for his player if it meant avoiding this whole distraction.
1) What didn't you understand about the cop was in the process of writing citations when TC pulled up and then for some reason stopped? That was covering up an incident and making sure that there were no legal consequences or paper trail to prove this ever happened. Again, nothing against Crean either. He dropped off donuts and coffee for students outside of the BC at 6am numerous times when I was freezing my ass off waiting in line for lower bowl seats.
2) Not covering it up, just didn't want to get into the "I know that guy was a great ambassador for the University" discussion. Hint: He was a guard that played for the team from 2005-2009.
3) I actually don't think Buzz would have done that, he tends to talk a lot about accountability and having a player deal with the consequences of his actions is otherwise known as holding someone accountable.
4) That lag time is just the difference between when the citation was issued and some reporter cruising the arrest / trial site to find a story. Yes, the court date was probably set to not interfere with basketball season but I would venture a guess that the info was out there the whole time and some reporter just came across it April 19th as the court date got closer.
Again, having your player's back is one thing but not holding them accountable for their actions is another and what you're suggesting is definitely the latter. I don't know Buzz personally but from what I can tell I don't think he'd stand for that.
-
I miss DJ. He was really fun to watch.
As for the last statement, that can probably extend to the entire male population on campus. Plenty of douchebags who thought they originated from the seventh rib of God during my time in Milwaukee.
That's what I was getting at, they're just like every other male on campus in that regard. I'm trying to kick a cold right now and the meds are clouding my ability to convey my thoughts as I'd like. Also, nice job on picking up on the identity of the unnamed athlete.
-
1) What didn't you understand about the cop was in the process of writing citations when TC pulled up and then for some reason stopped? That was covering up an incident and making sure that there were no legal consequences or paper trail to prove this ever happened. Again, nothing against Crean either. He dropped off donuts and coffee for students outside of the BC at 6am numerous times when I was freezing my ass off waiting in line for lower bowl seats.
Was there a citation issued? No. Therefore, there was nothing to cover up.
Its no different that talking a cop into letting you go with a warning instead of issuing a ticket. Appealing to an officer to use his discretion and not issue a ticket is NOT covering it up.
3) I actually don't think Buzz would have done that, he tends to talk a lot about accountability and having a player deal with the consequences of his actions is otherwise known as holding someone accountable.
I disagree on two fronts.
First, I strongly suspect that Crean DID hold his player accountable.
Second, it is unimaginable to me that Buzz would wash his hands of a situation if he found out a player of his was in some sort of trouble.
Imagine what might have happened that night:
DJO: "Coach--Vander got in a fight, the police are here, I think he's in trouble--what do we do?"
Do you actually think Buzz would hang up on DJO? Tell him that he's washing his hands of the whole matter? "You and Vander made your bed, now you lie in it. I'm not coming."
I still maintain that if Buzz had known of the situation and could get there, he would have done exactly what Crean did. And if Buzz could have appealed to the cops to use some discretion to not issue a ticket or arrest the player (knowing that an arrest could follow a player forever, hurt future employment chances, etc), I strongly believe that Buzz would have done just that.
He'd then issue his own punishment in practice. And perhaps Vander would wish he was just arrested at that point.
4) That lag time is just the difference between when the citation was issued and some reporter cruising the arrest / trial site to find a story. Yes, the court date was probably set to not interfere with basketball season but I would venture a guess that the info was out there the whole time and some reporter just came across it April 19th as the court date got closer.
Imagine if one of Huggins' players was arrested two weeks before the season began, and he said nothing about it. Then imagine if some reporter discovered the arrest after the end of the season.
Would you be defending Huggins for holding his players accountable and not covering up the arrest?
Again, having your player's back is one thing but not holding them accountable for their actions is another and what you're suggesting is definitely the latter. I don't know Buzz personally but from what I can tell I don't think he'd stand for that.
And what you're suggesting is that Buzz would turn his back on his player before he knows the facts.
Sorry--I don't think he'd stand for that.
If nothing else, I think Buzz would do everything possible to get to the scene and learn the truth--if for no other reason than to make sure that his player doesn't get railroaded by an overeager cop trying to make a name for himself with a marquee arrest, or getting played by some "victim" who makes up false charges because Vander is famous.
And if its a judgement call, he's going to do his best to support his player and try and prevent a situation that could haunt a player the rest of his life.
-
4. And how do you reconcile your comment that "Buzz just doesn't cover this stuff up," with the fact that this event occurred on October 24 2010 and only became public on April 19, 2011--nearly six months later?
His player was cited, said citation was entered into the public record, said public records are readily available to anyone who has a computer and Internet connection, and the player was brought through university disciplinary channels and punished.
That may be the worst cover up of all time.
Was there a citation issued? No. Therefore, there was nothing to cover up.
Its no different that talking a cop into letting you go with a warning instead of issuing a ticket. Appealing to an officer to use his discretion and not issue a ticket is NOT covering it up.
Awful, awful analogy.
You're comparing what one does on his own behalf (asking for a warning rather than a ticket) to having an high profile community figure advocate for a break on your behalf. A better comparison would be having Rahm Emanuel ask an Arlington Heights traffic cop to cut you a break.
And I'm not saying Crean did anything wrong. If that DJ story is true, he did what I suspect what most coaches would do.
-
His player was cited, said citation was entered into the public record, said public records are readily available to anyone who has a computer and Internet connection, and the player was brought through university disciplinary channels and punished.
That may be the worst cover up of all time.
It was good enough to keep it out of the news from 10/24/2010 to 4/19/2011.
Look, I'm not saying that Buzz failed because he didn't hold a press conference on 10/25 to announce what happened to his player--but neither should he be hailed for "not covering up" such incidents.
Buzz's choice not to announce what happened with Blue and Crean's choice to intervene on behalf of his player both reflect an underlying desire to keep the incident out of the news.
Awful, awful analogy.
You're comparing what one does on his own behalf (asking for a warning rather than a ticket) to having an high profile community figure advocate for a break on your behalf. A better comparison would be having Rahm Emanuel ask an Arlington Heights traffic cop to cut you a break.
You compare the basketball coach of a private college to a former US Congressman, Presidential Chief of Staff and Mayor-Elect of the 3rd largest city in the nation? And you say my analogy is "Awful, awful?"
If you want to be fair, given the similarities between the coach/player and father/son relationships, I would say Crean intervening on behalf of a player is not much different than a father intervening on behalf of his own son.
Second, your implication that the cop only used his discretion and didn't issue a citation because of Crean's celebrity is a pretty strong indictment of the character of the cop.
Most cops I know would not let Crean's celebrity influence their thinking one iota--if the nature of the offense warrants a citation, nobody will talk them out of it just because a request comes from a "high profile public figure." If someone asks for a break and gets it, its because the cop feels giving a break is a reasonable action given the situation.
And I'm not saying Crean did anything wrong. If that DJ story is true, he did what I suspect what most coaches would do.
And thats my point as well.
I dispute the notion that these two events highlight some shift in policy from Crean "covering up" citations that don't exist to Buzz being a beacon of transparency.
-
It was good enough to keep it out of the news from 10/24/2010 to 4/19/2011.
Look, I'm not saying that Buzz failed because he didn't hold a press conference on 10/25 to announce what happened to his player--but neither should he be hailed for "not covering up" such incidents.
Buzz's choice not to announce what happened with Blue and Crean's choice to intervene on behalf of his player both reflect an underlying desire to keep the incident out of the news.
Could you please cite one example of a coach announcing to the press (before it had been previously disclosed) that a player had been given a ticket.
Thanks.
You're somehow trying to equate Crean's active intervention on behalf of a player with Buzz's passive decision not to hold a press conference announcing a citation (something, to the best of my knowledge, which never happens).
It's not in the least bit comparable.
-
His player was cited, said citation was entered into the public record, said public records are readily available to anyone who has a computer and Internet connection, and the player was brought through university disciplinary channels and punished.
I asked this earlier.
Yes it was public record for months. As I noted before, I knew about this before Christmas. I even started a thread about it several weeks ago and the mods took it down. Rosiak has a blog and he surely knew and said nothing. All the reporters doing stand-ups about this on April 19 knew about it for weeks and said nothing. Many of those close to the program (including many here) knew about this for months and nothing from anyone about this story.
So, EVERYONE went out of their way to make this a non-story from 10/24/2010 to 4/18/2011. Then on 4/19/2011 this story seem to blow up as if Vander was arrested on April 19 for Felony Assault.
So why was this such a non-story until April 18 and such a big story on April 19? Is it because of the Humphrey allegations? Without them this would have slid all the way through without getting noticed?
-
I honestly think it was the Humphrey allegations and the fact that they had something to report about it (that Vander had his court date the other day). I doubt it was covered right away because honestly it really isn't that big of a deal and to my knowledge they don't cover this kind of stuff much. I'm asking because I have no idea, but was Diamond Taylor stealing at UW covered this in-depth? UWM had some problems earlier last year, was that given such a large amount of attention? JSonline reporting it isn't a huge deal, but were the news stations on campus issuing nightly reports?
-
I asked this earlier.
Yes it was public record for months. As I noted before, I knew about this before Christmas. I even started a thread about it several weeks ago and the mods took it down. Rosiak has a blog and he surely knew and said nothing. All the reporters doing stand-ups about this on April 19 knew about it for weeks and said nothing. Many of those close to the program (including many here) knew about this for months and nothing from anyone about this story.
So, EVERYONE went out of their way to make this a non-story from 10/24/2010 to 4/18/2011. Then on 4/19/2011 this story seem to blow up as if Vander was arrested on April 19 for Felony Assault.
So why was this such a non-story until April 18 and such a big story on April 19? Is it because of the Humphrey allegations? Without them this would have slid all the way through without getting noticed?
What's to report? It was a Muni Citation. Nothing more. VB was not talking - would have been advised not to - if interviewed and the reporter would not have known the circumstance or who else was involved. As it is a Muni Citation, I doubt they wanted to do much investigation anyway.
As for why it has blown up (or better yet, out of proportion) now, I suspect the other allegations have played signifcantly into that.
-
Could you please cite one example of a coach announcing to the press (before it had been previously disclosed) that a player had been given a ticket.
Thanks.
Irrelevant. The premise I took issue with was that Buzz should be hailed as some paragon of transparency and openness.
As you illustrate, Buzz was no more forthcoming with information than any other coach in similar situations.
You're somehow trying to equate Crean's active intervention on behalf of a player with Buzz's passive decision not to hold a press conference announcing a citation (something, to the best of my knowledge, which never happens).
The comparison between Buzz and Crean was made before I got involved
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26820.msg302288#msg302288 (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26820.msg302288#msg302288)
Awilhemlscream said that by comparing Buzz's actions to Crean's, one can conclude that Crean covered things up, and Buzz didn't.
I point out that Buzz's lack of public comment on the event is inconsistent with the conclusion that he is holier than any other coach.
You're correct in that his lack of comment is a difference between a sin of omission rather than commission. But it doesn't mean he's without sin, as Awilhelmiscrem concluded.
You now say the comparison is false--that's fine. But that means that you would also have to agree with me that awilhelmiscream's conclusion--based only on that comparison--is also false.
The bottom line is that we don't know if Buzz is any more or less inclined to "cover things up" than any other coach--including our previous coach.
-
It leaves Buzz open to criticism, but I like the way Buzz never comments on things. Whether it is Maymom, Newbill, Reggie Smith, Patrick Hazel, Roseborro, etc. Imagine how hard it is to keep your month shut when you are being attacked.
-
Irrelevant. The premise I took issue with was that Buzz should be hailed as some paragon of transparency and openness.
As you illustrate, Buzz was no more forthcoming with information than any other coach in similar situations.
The comparison between Buzz and Crean was made before I got involved
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26820.msg302288#msg302288 (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26820.msg302288#msg302288)
Awilhemlscream said that by comparing Buzz's actions to Crean's, one can conclude that Crean covered things up, and Buzz didn't.
I point out that Buzz's lack of public comment on the event is inconsistent with the conclusion that he is holier than any other coach.
You're correct in that his lack of comment is a difference between a sin of omission rather than commission. But it doesn't mean he's without sin, as Awilhelmiscrem concluded.
You now say the comparison is false--that's fine. But that means that you would also have to agree with me that awilhelmiscream's conclusion--based only on that comparison--is also false.
The bottom line is that we don't know if Buzz is any more or less inclined to "cover things up" than any other coach--including our previous coach.
Who really cares about our former coach...and why would you take issue if Buzz "was hailed as some paragon and transparency of openness?" I don't think anyone is putting Buzz on any kind of pedestal in this thread...but you are the only one who has suggested Buzz should have basically held a press conference and said: "I want everyone to know that Vander Blue got into an altercation on campus. Punches were thrown and Vander was issued a citation for municipal battery." What coach goes to the media about a charge a player is NOT EVEN FOUND guilty with?? Talk about idiotic??
-
You're correct in that his lack of comment is a difference between a sin of omission rather than commission. But it doesn't mean he's without sin, as Awilhelmiscrem concluded.
It isn't a sin at all. Buzz is under no obligation to address how he handled this. We don't have to know what the extra, basketball-related punishment was. We just need to know that MU addressed this through the student judicial process and that it wasn't biased.
Furthermore, it may actually be against FERPA for him to actually address it without his consent.
-
I would agree with Sultan here. It's just that Vander takes "I am big time" to a new level.
Then you don't really agree with me, because that view of Vander goes against most of what I have heard.
-
Who really cares about our former coach...
Apparently, awhilhelmscream does, given that he brought him into the discussion.
I just don't think Buzz represents any different thinking than Crean with respect to keeping players out of the glare of negative publicity.
I believe both coaches would equally do everything within their power to protect their players--including minimizing news coverage.
Therefore, I don't take issue with anything Buzz did--I take issue with anyone who claims that he's better than any other coach--including our prior coach--with respect to "not covering up" bad news.
and why would you take issue if Buzz "was hailed as some paragon and transparency of openness?" I don't think anyone is putting Buzz on any kind of pedestal in this thread...
I think both Crean and Buzz would take the same actions to protect their players. I take issue with someone who would view Crean's actions as "covering up" the truth, then turn around and say that Buzz represents a change in policy when he was no more forthcoming with information.
but you are the only one who has suggested Buzz should have basically held a press conference and said: "I want everyone to know that Vander Blue got into an altercation on campus. Punches were thrown and Vander was issued a citation for municipal battery."
I didn't suggest any such thing.
I merely pointed out that the lack of any such comment from Buzz flies in the face of awilhelmiscream's comment that Buzz represents a change in policy from Crean.
I think its wrong to look at Crean's efforts to keep his players out of the news and claim its because he "covered up" the news, then turn around and claim that Buzz gets credit for not covering up news when he didn't come clean with the story.
What coach goes to the media about a charge a player is NOT EVEN FOUND guilty with?? Talk about idiotic??
Are you defending Crean with this statement? Awilhelmiscream said he "covered up" an incident in which a player didn't even receive a ticket or citation. Needless to say, the player was "NOT EVEN FOUND guilty."
Furthermore, it may actually be against FERPA for him to actually address it without his consent.
I've got Paunki saying that the information was a matter of public record.
I've got you saying that it was against FERPA for the information to be discussed.
Not sure how both can be correct. Maybe you guys can get together and sort it out.
Meanwhile, I'll stand by my belief that Buzz and Crean hold exactly the same desire to keep their players' names and actions out of the glare of the public spotlight.
-
Then you don't really agree with me, because that view of Vander goes against most of what I have heard.
Then you need to talk some more to the students who have to deal with him. Maybe the best thing that happened to Vander this year is that he bombed. He was an insufferable jerk when he stepped on campus and for many months after. He needs to clean up his act. Here's hoping a dismal freshman season allows for some humility into his life and a shrinking of his noggin. It would benefit him as a player, as a person and ultimately the team.
-
Then you need to talk some more to the students who have to deal with him. Maybe the best thing that happened to Vander this year is that he bombed. He was an insufferable jerk when he stepped on campus and for many months after. He needs to clean up his act. Here's hoping a dismal freshman season allows for some humility into his life and a shrinking of his noggin. It would benefit him as a player, as a person and ultimately the team.
Wow, alot of new posters who I presume are current students. Did not realize that Vander has presented himself in such a manner.
-
Then you need to talk some more to the students who have to deal with him. Maybe the best thing that happened to Vander this year is that he bombed. He was an insufferable jerk when he stepped on campus and for many months after. He needs to clean up his act. Here's hoping a dismal freshman season allows for some humility into his life and a shrinking of his noggin. It would benefit him as a player, as a person and ultimately the team.
I know students that know him personally and they would disagree completely with your assessment of him.
-
I know students that know him personally and they would disagree completely with your assessment of him.
I'm not claiming to know either way, but reading your post, that could be the problem. I'm sure we all know jocks or other people who seem to have inflated senses of self. Once you get to know them, however, they turn out to be friendly, fair people that you grow to like.
But how many get that chance? Maybe people who know Vander personally (maybe 5% of campus?) think he's a nice, down-to-earth guy, but the other 95% that haven't had that chance think he's an arrogant blowhard. And maybe his actions with strangers justify those feelings. It's tough to tell which is true, and unlikely that much more than 10-15% of campus will ever truly know him well enough to make a true decision. Obviously, how he carries himself in front of the other 85-90% will have a great impact on his reputation to the layperson.
-
I completely agree with brewcity. I have only walked by Vander on campus so i don't know him at all, but i have heard a lot of what Hoopaloop said. It has never been from anyone that is friends with him or knows him that well. For all i know he could be a great kid, but i just wanted to say that Hoopaloop isn't the only person that shares that view, but at the same time that doesnt mean it is the right view.
-
brew, I actually think you are correct. But I find it rather pathetic then that people would view him a certain way based on a few interactions rather than actually knowing the guy. And then post as such on a message board.
-
This is stupid. The only reason it is even remotely "news" is because it is a Marquette basketball player. Stuff like this happens on Wells Street every Saturday night.
-
You're correct in that his lack of comment is a difference between a sin of omission rather than commission. But it doesn't mean he's without sin, as Awilhelmiscrem concluded.
What?!?!?
A sin of ommission occurs when one fails to dislcose something that he or she is required (by law, duty, ethics, whatever) to disclose.
A homeseller failing to tell a potential buyer that the basement fills up with three feet of water every spring is a sin of ommission.
Explain for us the duty a college basketball coach has to publicly disclose when a player receives a citation. You can't, of course, because no such duty exists, and never has.
In the long and storied history of posters around here finding ways to bash or defend Tom Crean over the most minute of faults, this has got to be the weakest by far. Sinfully bad, I'd say.
You now say the comparison is false--that's fine. But that means that you would also have to agree with me that awilhelmiscream's conclusion--based only on that comparison--is also false.
The bottom line is that we don't know if Buzz is any more or less inclined to "cover things up" than any other coach--including our previous coach.
[/quote]
-
What?!?!?
A sin of ommission occurs when one fails to dislcose something that he or she is required (by law, duty, ethics, whatever) to disclose.
The "whatever" in this case is awilhelmiscream's stated standard that Buzz does not "cover up" bad news.
I think knowing that a player was arrested but not saying anything is inconsistent with the claim that a coach doesn't "cover up" bad news like other coaches do.
You can dispense with all your inane straw men (Rahm Emmanuel, basements flooding).
Then again, since that seems to be the way you think about these issues, maybe this will help you understand: do you think its fair to credit a man for being faithful to his wife if he has an affair that he never mentioned? Obviously, he is not required (by law, duty, ethics, whatever) to disclose the affair.
I'm going to stick with my belief that Crean and Buzz hold EXACTLY the same view toward keeping their players bad news out of the press.
You now say the comparison is false--that's fine. But that means that you would also have to agree with me that awilhelmiscream's conclusion--based only on that comparison--is also false.
The bottom line is that we don't know if Buzz is any more or less inclined to "cover things up" than any other coach--including our previous coach.
Funny--you quoted my statement, but you didn't bother to reply.
-
brew, I actually think you are correct. But I find it rather pathetic then that people would view him a certain way based on a few interactions rather than actually knowing the guy. And then post as such on a message board.
Well if he can be such a good guy then why does he play the part of being a complete jerk when he is out in public? If his true character is to be a good guy then I'm sure that would shine through.
-
Well if he can be such a good guy then why does he play the part of being a complete jerk when he is out in public?
Jesus...how many times do I have tell you that...
1. Your interactions with him run counter to what has been told to me by a number of people that I trust, and.
2. It is pathetic that you would make such an anonymous post to a message board.
-
Jesus...how many times do I have tell you that...
1. Your interactions with him run counter to what has been told to me by a number of people that I trust, and.
2. It is pathetic that you would make such an anonymous post to a message board.
1. Ok so it's my word against their word. I can understand where you are coming from on that. I'll believe what I want to and you can do the same. No big deal.
2. All you have to do is look at my email in my profile to find out who I am, not that hard.