MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: muguru on September 16, 2009, 06:50:29 PM
-
http://www.kxxv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11143180
-
Monterale Clark possibly is a rape suspect...yeah, that is very bad.
So what happens now? He didn't sign yet, did he? I think we end up dropping him and going after Derosiers and Walker.
I agree...everyone deserves forgiveness and redemption if they work towards it...but I also wish him luck elsewhere.
-
I wish him well at a University other than Marquette....Perhaps Minnesota?
However, he deserves a second chance somewhere else but not Marquette after he serves his penalty...Even if his excuse was that he was only present and does not get convicted of a crime.
-
To even be linked to a situation like this is very concerning.
-
I wish him well at a University other than Marquette....Perhaps Minnesota?
He deserves a second chance...Even if his excuse was that he was only present and does not get charged with a crime.
Should this be in teal? He was charged.
I doubt he ever wears a MU uniform unless somehow the charges against him are dropped. That means we now have three available next year.
-
I wish him well at a University other than Marquette....Perhaps Minnesota?
He deserves a second chance...Even if his excuse was that he was only present and does not get charged with a crime.
This is a very serious offense, anyone who is involved in a raping does not deserve a second chance. This is a very terrible crime to commit. If he observed it and didnt stop it or at the very least report it then he is just as guilty in my mind. Plus he is being charged with the actual raping, not the observing.
-
Are you kidding with wishing him luck? If he did this I hope he rots in prison. If he raped or assisted in raping that girl he is the lowest form of life and doesn't deserve a second chance. This isn't failing a class or stealing some money or even a car,it isn't anything like that , its rape. Go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not get paroled. Congratulations you've thrown your life away, but if you would do that, you were already a waste of organs that would be better used donated to anyone else.
I know this is all alleged right now that's why I said if, if the charges are dropped... I'll gladly retract this statement.
-
Guess we won't see the next great 6'10" small forward.
In seriousness, wow. The fact these kids can screw up their great hand in life is crazy. I feel bad for the girl if true and we don't need someone of that character coming to the MU community.
-
Which is worse, this recruiting mistake or Roseboro? Holy cripes what a disaster.
-
This is why many programs dont go after jucos.
-
I feel bad for the girl first and foremost, that's the real disaster.
We really didn't have a heck of a lot invested in Clark and I'd be more pissed at Buzz if the kid was in our "custody" and acting illegally/immorally. Nothing we can do when the man(boy) is in Texas 1200 miles away.
Roseboro is a misjudgement of talent. As long as Buzz produces good men and graduates his player and wins I have no problem if he essentially kicks untalented guys off the team.
-
He's done. In the affidavit he is the one that is accused of raping her with his penis. Clark denies this charge, but admits that he fingered her:
http://media.graytvinc.com/documents/20091659SexAssaultClarkWA.doc.
What an idiot. I hope he rots in jail for the rest of his life.
-
Okay, unnatural carnal knowledge what I said earlier...
I hope he gets castrated. I skimmed through the article VERY QUICKLY and was doing a couple other things at the same time and somehow didn't realize the gravity of the issue...
Monterale Clark is unnatural carnal knowledgeing scum.
This should most definitely open up the scholarship he would have taken...and basketball really is a small matter in this case...I'm praying for the poor girl...but I hope this opens up the possibility of picking up Derosiers, who would have been the better player anyways, and also Maurice Walker, the big body to bang down low (in the none-scumbag way).
-
Cut him loose. Good riddance.
-
This may not be a popular opinion, but I'm a little concerned about the recruiting trend... getting away from academics a bit. I'm all for athleticism and talent, but there were red flags big time with Clark from the get go.... transferring high schools and then not even being able to finish his senior year at Pius for disciplinary reasons. Eerily similar to the Mbakwe situation. I hope justice is served and our young coach can learn from this. Character is important too.
-
This may not be a popular opinion, but I'm a little concerned about the recruiting trend... getting away from academics a bit. I'm all for athleticism and talent, but there were red flags big time with Clark from the get go.... transferring high schools and then not even being able to finish his senior year at Pius for disciplinary reasons. Eerily similar to the Mbakwe situation. I hope justice is served and our young coach can learn from this. Character is important too.
Agreed.
-
Cut him loose. Good riddance.
Agreed. The first thing up on GoMarquette.com tomorrow morning better be a press release from Buzz Williams stating that his scholarship has been revoked.
-
Adios, MF'er and the golden goose you rode in on. Another in a long list of privileged who somehow find a way to F-up prosperity.
I'm all for scrutinizing a recruit's character in addition to his basketball skills. Don't want dudes like this wearing my alma mater's name on his jersey regardless if he supposed to be the second coming of Jordan, Jabbar, or Wade.
-
Damn. There went the moral high ground with the Badgers.
-
This may not be a popular opinion, but I'm a little concerned about the recruiting trend... getting away from academics a bit. I'm all for athleticism and talent, but there were red flags big time with Clark from the get go.... transferring high schools and then not even being able to finish his senior year at Pius for disciplinary reasons. Eerily similar to the Mbakwe situation. I hope justice is served and our young coach can learn from this. Character is important too.
If it's not a popular opinion, it should be. Anybody who wants to sell the university's integrity for a post presence is a no brain. Some of you lauded the distribution of recruiting classes via the JUCO route as some kind of genius manuever by Buzz. If it was that good of an idea, others would do it. We cannot have recruits accused of raping people. Marquette University is mentioned in that article.
It's simple, place a maximum on the number of JUCOS. Two would be a good start. I don't care how bare the cupboard was...bring in 5 freshman. Having 5, 6 or even 7 JUCOS is a recipe for disaster. You can pretend kids go to JUCOs because they were overlooked, but you'd be delusional. They go there because they're academic or behavioral risks.
This should be looked at as a blessing for Marquette basketball.
-
Damn. There went the moral high ground with the Badgers.
Really? That is what you care about right now?
You have a sad life.
-
If it's not a popular opinion, it should be. Anybody who wants to sell the university's integrity for a post presence is a no brain. Some of you lauded the distribution of recruiting classes via the JUCO route as some kind of genius manuever by Buzz. If it was that good of an idea, others would do it. We cannot have recruits accused of raping people. Marquette University is mentioned in that article.
It's simple, place a maximum on the number of JUCOS. Two would be a good start. I don't care how bare the cupboard was...bring in 5 freshman. Having 5, 6 or even 7 JUCOS is a recipe for disaster. You can pretend kids go to JUCOs because they were overlooked, but you'd be delusional. They go there because they're academic or behavioral risks.
There are differences between full qualifiers like DJO...and partial qualifiers whose troubles were academic like Butler and Buycks. Clark was an academic and behavioral risk.
This is the second high profile mistake that Buzz has made. And this one is going to hurt more than the Roseboro one. And if Buzz doesn't have this yanked within 24 hours, my respect for him starts going downhill.
-
Damn. There went the moral high ground with the Badgers.
this should be the last thing on anyone's mind. This is not a joking matter what so ever, some girl's whole world has been destroyed by this terrible act.
-
Damn. There went the moral high ground with the Badgers.
Then again, he was just a commit, whereas the other two were actually ON the team.
With that little asterisk in place, Glover and Taylor are a million times better than the Scumbag that is clark. So those two guys stole a few personal belongings...oh well.
Clark RAPED a girl...that is unacceptable. unnatural carnal knowledge the UW/MU moral high ground beef...the poor young woman is the victim, and monterale is the POS that needs to get Shawshank Redemption'ed in the showers
-
Since he is not on scholarship and has not signed a LOI Marquette cannot comment on him so there will be no mention of this on the MU website.
Its safe to assume he will never play for Marquette and Rosiak will confirm that in short order I would imagine.
-
There are differences between full qualifiers like DJO...and partial qualifiers whose troubles were academic like Butler and Buycks. Clark was an academic and behavioral risk.
This is the second high profile mistake that Buzz has made. And this one is going to hurt more than the Roseboro one. And if Buzz doesn't have this yanked within 24 hours, my respect for him starts going downhill.
On the final point I agree.
But beyond that I'm not sure how anyone could expect Buzz Williams, or any coach, to know - or have any inclination - that many months after recruiting a player he would commit this kind of act. Unless there's something criminal in Clark's past that the coaching staff was aware of and willfully ignored, I don't see how you hold them responsible for this one. Had they recruited this kid being aware of a criminal disposition, then hammer them for it. Barring that, however, it's unfair to expect them to be able to predict the future.
The true test is going to be how MU handles it from here.
-
Sixteen months in, the way I describe Buzz' tenure to present is scattered -- we are all over the fracking place.
I think I'm just going to start posting this weekly. It started with Roseboro. Then, the Acker reinstatement. Then the Bowen de-commit. Now, we learn we recruited a young man capable of rape. Awesome.
I've been hot and cold with this program for the last few months and yesterday I spent some time watching all the player videos over the last week or so. I really started to get excited for this year's squad. Then, this little cloud passes over and brings me back down.
The evidence is mounting that Buzz knows the pressure to stay near the top of the Big East is heavy and he may be swinging in areas we should never be near.
Get out of the unnatural carnal knowledgeing limo. Get out of the unnatural carnal knowledgeing private plane. Lock down the best player in the state. Get Clark or Pinkston to commit and put this program back into the unnatural carnal knowledgeing realm it has lived in over the majority of the last 10 years.
-
Clark RAPED a girl...that is unacceptable. frack the UW/MU moral high ground beef...the poor young woman is the victim, and monterale is the POS that needs to get Shawshank Redemption'ed in the showers
Somebody watched Entourage this weekend. :)
-
This is a first...
But I completely agree with PRN. Time to slow our roll with the JUCOs and stop heaping praise on Buzz for bringing in so many talented JUCOs.
-
I think I'm just going to start posting this weekly. It started with Roseboro. Then, the Acker reinstatement. Then the Bowen de-commit. Now, we learn we recruited a young man capable of rape. Awesome.
MU also recruited Pierre Pierce and Marcettus McGee.
-
Some JUCOs are fine, and for academic reasons or wheatever went the JUCO route. But I was concerned with sogning so many JUCOs, but have to trust the staff on balancing the classes etc.
This situation with Clark is an embarassment. But the poor woman raped is the real victim.
Clark will be gone - he's not coming here. He may spend time in jail if convicted. We will get over it. As said above, unless he had a criminal record, etc. it's hard to predict this type of thing. The woman raped may never get over this. Our prayers are with her, her family and friends.
-
Butler, Fulce and DJO where cleared by the NCAA that is why they could attend MU as Soph. The Only true Juco is Dwight
who just missed qualifying if I heard correctly. Clark was a bit of chararacter Risk and hopefully Buzz has learned his lesson.
-
This is why many programs dont go after jucos.
Careful, people will start screaming at you and starting threads in the members only section of the Scout board for saying things like that.
-
Careful, people will start screaming at you and starting threads in the members only section of the Scout board for saying things like that.
Better yet, why don't you guys list off some of the many programs not named North Carolina and Duke that don't go after JUCOs.
-
This may not be a popular opinion, but I'm a little concerned about the recruiting trend... getting away from academics a bit. I'm all for athleticism and talent, but there were red flags big time with Clark from the get go.... transferring high schools and then not even being able to finish his senior year at Pius for disciplinary reasons. Eerily similar to the Mbakwe situation. I hope justice is served and our young coach can learn from this. Character is important too.
You are clearly a hater and must think Buzz is an alcoholic based on those comments.
- Sincerely, Warriorfan4life
-
Better yet, why don't you guys list off some of the many programs not named North Carolina and Duke that don't go after JUCOs.
Wisconsin-madison
I can think of one JUCO they had in the last 7 years.
There are many others, I guess it depends on what your limit is on players from the JUCO ranks. Give me that criteria and I'll come up with many for you....and many of them top programs. I don't see an issue every 4 or 5 years going after one kid to fill a spot, but more than that causes many issues with the classes and continuity.
The issues I see going after JUCOs as a matter of repetition are as follows:
#1) They're only here 2 or 3 years max (usually 2). Constant turnover with the team. Players only are around a few years to buy into the "Marquette way".
#2) Typically come in with the absolute bare amount of credits and are constantly playing catchup academically to stay eligible
#3) For many (not all) there are reasons they went to a JUCO to begin with. Struggled with academics, struggled with maturity, had issues with discipline, etc. This doesn't apply to folks like Fulce and Butler and many others. But like it or not, there is a DAMN REASON why there is a stigma. That stigma didn't crop up out of the thin blue air, it came about over years and years and years of more issues happening with JUCO players than not. Is that unfair to make that statement? Maybe, but it's perception and I'll bet it's reality.
Buzz loves those JUCOs, that's where he cut his teeth. I hope that we're not on the constant JUCO influx every year but I have my serious doubts.
-
Butler, Fulce and DJO where cleared by the NCAA that is why they could attend MU as Soph. The Only true Juco is Dwight
who just missed qualifying if I heard correctly. Clark was a bit of chararacter Risk and hopefully Buzz has learned his lesson.
You know I was about to correct you, because I could have sworn that we only had Butler for one more year. No matter how many times I have looked at the scholarship table, I never realized I was wrong until now.
-
Better yet, why don't you guys list off some of the many programs not named North Carolina and Duke that don't go after JUCOs.
Marquette... before Buzz Williams.
Look save me the examples. I know we had JUCOs before Buzz but you need to limit the number you bring in and choose those few wisely. When taking a chance on kids, you need to be certain you are bringing them into an environment that will mold and shape them into a productive member of a first class program. Instead, when you bring in a half dozen JUCOs, you run the risk of having them shape and mold the program, IMO.
-
Wisconsin-madison
I can think of one JUCO they had in the last 7 years.
And yet Wisconsin-Madison has had just as many problems with their non-JUCO recruits(they just kicked 2 players off of their team) as we have with ours. Its not a JUCO problem. Each individual and situation is different.
-
Wisconsin-madison
I can think of one JUCO they had in the last 7 years.
So, you claim there are "many" programs that don't recruit JUCOs and then name ONE which does, in fact, recruit JUCOs?
Fact is, this isn't a JUCO issue. Unless you can show otherwise, I'm going to suggest that a JUCO is no more or less likely to commit a sex offense than a non JUCO (see: Pierre Pierce, Marcettus McGee, etc.)
-
Marquette... before Buzz Williams.
Another excellent example of a school that doesn't recruit JUCOs ... except when it does.
-
Somebody watched Entourage this weekend. :)
I've actually never seen a single episode... ?-(
-
Think this gets addressed at the Chicago luncheon?
-
So, you claim there are "many" programs that don't recruit JUCOs and then name ONE which does, in fact, recruit JUCOs?
Fact is, this isn't a JUCO issue. Unless you can show otherwise, I'm going to suggest that a JUCO is no more or less likely to commit a sex offense than a non JUCO (see: Pierre Pierce, Marcettus McGee, etc.)
Sigh. Give me the criteria Pakuni. Wisconsin-Madison has had ONE JUCO in 7 years. That's not recruiting JUCOs in my opinion. Perhaps to you it is, but not to me.
So define it for me and I'm happy to answer your question. If you think 1 in 7 years is recruiting JUCOs then you're right, Wisconsin-madison is recruiting JUCOs. We just have a distinctly different definition then.
-
I don't want these thugs around the dorms when my daughter goes to MU. Scum.
-
Another excellent example of a school that doesn't recruit JUCOs ... except when it does.
1. No one said we should NEVER recruit JUCOs
2. Nice job disregarding the rest of my post. Hmm... I think I'll try that.
"Better yet, why don't you guys list off some of the many programs... that don't go after JUCOs."
Duke and North Carolina don't recruit JUCOs
-
1. No one said we should NEVER recruit JUCOs
2. Nice job disregarding the rest of my post. Hmm... I think I'll try that.
"Better yet, why don't you guys list off some of the many programs... that don't go after JUCOs."
Duke and North Carolina don't recruit JUCOs
OK, that's fair. You just named two. Out of 343 programs.
Does that qualify as "many"?
As for the rest of your post, I disregarded it because it had nothing to do with what I was asking. A post stated that many programs do not recruit the JUCO ranks. A second agreed. I asked them to list some of those many programs. It seemed like a simple request at the time, but perhaps it was more complex than I thought.
That said, regarding what you said, I agree ... to an extent. But I think you're making a false assumption that JUCO players are more predisposed to commiting acts that would reflect poorly on the program/university. What's the basis for said assumption?
-
Sigh. Give me the criteria Pakuni. Wisconsin-Madison has had ONE JUCO in 7 years. That's not recruiting JUCOs in my opinion. Perhaps to you it is, but not to me.
Sigh ... the criteria was rather simple and stated in plain English. Name some of the many programs that do not recruit JUCOs. Not the ones that only get occasional commitments from JUCOs. Not the ones that recruit the JUCOs infrequently (whatever your definition of infrequently may be). The ones that do not recruit JUCOs. I'm sure there are a handful, particularly in the Ivy and Patriot leagues.
But I very much doubt there are many, particularly relative to the total number of D-I programs.
-
The guy whose room it was is (was) headed to Boise State.
http://twitter.com/Ckupets4
Seems like pretty much the whole team will be having scholarships revoked.
-
1. No one said we should NEVER recruit JUCOs
2. Nice job disregarding the rest of my post. Hmm... I think I'll try that.
"Better yet, why don't you guys list off some of the many programs... that don't go after JUCOs."
Duke and North Carolina don't recruit JUCOs
We're not Duke and NC.
Unfortunately, this happened. Fine. But it wasn't MARQUETTE's fault. It was Clark's fault.
Publicly state that he is no longer going to be welcome at Marquette and move on.
I don't see how this makes Marquette look bad in any way. It happened AFTER he was being actively recruited and offered. It didn't happen BEFORE.
This is unlike the UW situation - not comparing crimes, of course - in that the perps were actually enrolled at the school.
Just cut ties and move on. Sad to see...but that's life in NCAA D-I.
-
Just curious, if anyone out there would know. What percentage of Marquette students are JUCO transfers?
-
And yet Wisconsin-Madison has had just as many problems with their non-JUCO recruits(they just kicked 2 players off of their team) as we have with ours. Its not a JUCO problem. Each individual and situation is different.
Agree 10000%.
It know people are trying to apply broad rules or guidelines like "don't take jucos" or "only take 1" etc. etc.
It's not necessarily that a kid comes from a JUCO, it's if he's a good kid or not that should be a factor in his recruiting.
-
Bingo 77! This is not a JUCO issue, it is Montreale Clark, and that poor girl issue.
Doing poorly in a few classes in HS will not make you more likely to rape a girl, drive drunk or beat someone up.
If I was DJO, Jimmy Butler or any other decent kid that went JUCO, I would be appalled at what I was reading. To those painting JUCOs as more likely to committ should be of yourselves.
Thanks a-holes, hope that ivory tower y'all are sitting in has a nice view.
-
Based on Scout's database going back to 2002:
UCLA has not had a JUCO under Howland or Lavin.
Arizona has not had a JUCO under Olson, O'Neill, or Miller.
Georgetown has not had a JUCO under Esherick or JT3.
Vanderbilt has not had a JUCO.
Florida has not had a JUCO.
Villanova has not had a JUCO.
That's just off the top of my head, there's a bunch more out there, and that's not even factoring in the academically elite schools which don't allow the schools to get JUCO players.
-
Sigh ... the criteria was rather simple and stated in plain English. Name some of the many programs that do not recruit JUCOs. Not the ones that only get occasional commitments from JUCOs. Not the ones that recruit the JUCOs infrequently (whatever your definition of infrequently may be). The ones that do not recruit JUCOs. I'm sure there are a handful, particularly in the Ivy and Patriot leagues.
But I very much doubt there are many, particularly relative to the total number of D-I programs.
Well since it would be impossible for any of us to know who schools are actually recruiting since they aren't allowed to publicly comment, it's a moot point.
Let's do it this way, shall we. Let's look at rosters and see how many JUCOs are on those rosters vs what we have. In other words, where the rubber hits the road and schools actually have guys on the roster.
Marquette = 4 (with more on the way)
UCLA = 0 right now
Duke = 0
UW-Madison = 0
North Carolina = 0
Villanova = 0
Stanford = 0
Cal = 1
I got bored when after looking at the first 7 schools above I found a grand total of 1. My guess is if you go through Louisville, Cincinnati and their ilk, you find a lot. My guess is also if you go through most of the Big Ten you won't find many.
And MUSF is correct, no one ever said we shouldn't recruit or sign JUCOs. But there is a reason there is a stigma, it didn't materialize out of thin air.
-
There are quality people who are JUCOs and bad people who are JUCOs. The same goes for d-1 transfer students, prep schoolers, and high schoolers. Don't generalize this and throw the blame on all JUCOs.
This is one kid who committed an unspeakable act. One kid.
-
Clark was a bad kid in HS who had issues going back to problems at MPS and Pius. He wasn't just an academic JUCO, but was there because he got kicked out schools for multiple behavior problems. He should have never been offered a scholarship.
-
I think people need to look at Prep school products almost like JUCOs.
I mean...Prep school kids (since they can't even get a HS degree or similar) can't even get into a JUCO!
And if Prep schools weren't around, where would they be?!? Maybe in a JUCO or not.
But the key word is ALMOST.
I mean, if you can't pass HS in a 4 year situation, there are probably problems...possibly of the behavior-like.
-
There are quality people who are JUCOs and bad people who are JUCOs. The same goes for d-1 transfer students, prep schoolers, and high schoolers. Don't generalize this and throw the blame on all JUCOs.
This is one kid who committed an unspeakable act. One kid.
Of course that's the case and I don't think anyone is saying otherwise.
No one is saying it's MU's fault this clown did this either.
No one is saying don't recruit JUCOs.
What some people are saying is that whether we like to admit it or not, there seems (perception now) to be more problems with JUCO players as a percentage than 4 year guys. Maybe that's completely wrong, I'm only going on perception over the years. Perhaps that perception is also further entrenched because the top top programs don't sign JUCO's very often (if at all) and there are rarely problems with their kids with this type of issue.
Sure there are bad eggs everywhere....prep schools, 4 year high schools, JUCOs, etc....that's just a fact of life. I'd like to see us take FEWER JUCOs for the reasons stated earlier
1) they are in the program 4 years = continuity
2) they are ready out of high school academically to handle college (vs those JUCOs that don't qualify out of high school)
3) maturity
Again, I'm not talking about those that are fully qualified out of school but chose to improve their prospects by going a year to a JUCO. Hell, many kids in Wisconsin and California go to a JUCO because UW-Madison and UCLA literally guarantee you a spot transferring in as a normal student your sophomore or junior year. However, if we are going to load up on JUCO kids we better be ready to take the heat when they fail for things off the court, because the public opinion argument is against us. That is reality.
-
OK, that's fair. You just named two. Out of 343 programs.
Does that qualify as "many"?
As for the rest of your post, I disregarded it because it had nothing to do with what I was asking. A post stated that many programs do not recruit the JUCO ranks. A second agreed. I asked them to list some of those many programs. It seemed like a simple request at the time, but perhaps it was more complex than I thought.
That said, regarding what you said, I agree ... to an extent. But I think you're making a false assumption that JUCO players are more predisposed to commiting acts that would reflect poorly on the program/university. What's the basis for said assumption?
I am in not assuming that JUCO players are more pre-disposed to commiting acts that would reflect poorly on MU. I am using the fact that a player attended a junior college instead of a D1 program as an indicator of a potential problem. Not doing that would be irresponsible on Buzz's part and I am sure that he takes it into consideration. I am simply saying that I think he should take it a step further and put a limit on the number of JUCOs he brings in.
-
I am in not assuming that JUCO players are more pre-disposed to commiting acts that would reflect poorly on MU. I am using the fact that a player attended a junior college instead of a D1 program as an indicator of a potential problem. Not doing that would be irresponsible on Buzz's part and I am sure that he takes it into consideration. I am simply saying that I think he should take it a step further and put a limit on the number of JUCOs he brings in.
What about Prep schoolers?
-
Bingo 77! This is not a JUCO issue, it is Montreale Clark, and that poor girl issue.
Doing poorly in a few classes in HS will not make you more likely to rape a girl, drive drunk or beat someone up.
If I was DJO, Jimmy Butler or any other decent kid that went JUCO, I would be appalled at what I was reading. To those painting JUCOs as more likely to committ should be of yourselves.
Thanks a-holes, hope that ivory tower y'all are sitting in has a nice view.
STRAW MAN!
Does my MU degree hold the same prestige as a degree from Harvard? No.
Does that mean that I am not as intelligent or capable as someone with a degree from Harvard? No but our degrees are indicators of future performance and are considered by employers for good reason.
-
Chicos, do you have to hijack every freaking thread with your hidden agendas and your holier-than-thou lectures? I am a frequent observer on this website and greatly appreciate the MU discussions that take place on this board. You're obviously a frequent contributor and well-spoken individual, but your endless tangents and pompous attitude are really getting old. On top of that, they are extremely distracting. If you want to turn every single thread into a political and socioeconomical debate, I guess you won't be denied. But this is about ONE MU target that made a horrible decision and will be sentenced accordingly. I don't have any interest in your soap box lectures and I-told-you-so's about the risks and negative stigmas that come with recruiting JUCOs.
Buzz made a big mistake with this kid. It wasn't all his fault, but he screwed it up. To turn this into a condescending debate about how Marquette's image is being tarnished NOT because of the actions of a lousy individual, but because we continue to recruit junior college players, is just the typical trash I'm become so accustomed to from you. Give it a freaking rest.
-
Chicos, do you have to hijack every freaking thread with your hidden agendas and your holier-than-thou lectures? I am a frequent observer on this website and greatly appreciate the MU discussions that take place on this board. You're obviously a frequent contributor and well-spoken individual, but your endless tangents and pompous attitude are really getting old. On top of that, they are extremely distracting. If you want to turn every single thread into a political and socioeconomical debate, I guess you won't be denied. But this is about ONE MU target that made a horrible decision and will be sentenced accordingly. I don't have any interest in your soap box lectures and I-told-you-so's about the risks and negative stigmas that come with recruiting JUCOs.
Buzz made a big mistake with this kid. It wasn't all his fault, but he screwed it up. To turn this into a condescending debate about how Marquette's image is being tarnished NOT because of the actions of a lousy individual, but because we continue to recruit junior college players, is just the typical trash I'm become so accustomed to from you. Give it a freaking rest.
I'm sorry, was I the one that brought up JUCOs first?
Uhm, no. Knight Commission was
I'm sorry, was I the second one that brought JUCOs?
Uhm, no. Shaqilvaine was.
I'm sorry, was I the third person to bring up JUCOs?
Uhm, no.
I'm sorry, was I the 4th person to bring up JUCOs?
Uhm, no...PRN was.
I'm sorry, was I the 5th person to bring it up....no.
I'm sorry, was I the 6th person to bring it up....no (Daniel was)
Yes, by golly, I hijacked this thread by being the 7th person to bring it up...in the 35th reply to this thread ::)
Please, get a clue. Come down on me all you want, I don't particularly give a rip. But at least get your facts straight, I by no means hijacked this thread nor did I even come close to being the one to introduce the JUCO angle. Get some facts.
-
Here's a fact: you're obsessed with getting the last word and being the supposed voice of reason. Please, you don't have to be the first to the party to hijack the thread. If you want, go ahead and replace "hijack" with "spew sanctimonious crap." You made your position clear and clearly tried to provoke people with useless comments. I'm tired of so many threads ending up like that.
"Careful, people will start screaming at you and starting threads in the members only section of the Scout board for saying things like that."
"You are clearly a hater and must think Buzz is an alcoholic based on those comments.
- Sincerely, Warriorfan4life"
"Buzz loves those JUCOs, that's where he cut his teeth. I hope that we're not on the constant JUCO influx every year but I have my serious doubts."
'sigh,' insert rolling eyes smiley face...
I'm just really tired of listening to you but I won't bring it up again.
-
Use the ignore button, it's really simple.
-
Use the ignore button, it's really simple.
Why should he use the ignore button? Heres an idea don't post Sh*t like you usually do!
-
As terrible as this sort of thing is I can't say I was shocked when I heard. If you've ever seen one of this kids Facebook videos you could tell he was a low character individual: "F*** this", "N****** that". I understand Buzz wants to bring in the best talent possible, but you can't just overlook fairly obvious character flaws. And this isn't about JUCO's or High Schoolers. You can tell in watching a youtube video of Clark compared with a video of DJO and be able to discern which one is gonna be causing trouble. Buzz needs to take the blinders off a little bit and start adding character to his recruiting checklist.
-
As terrible as this sort of thing is I can't say I was shocked when I heard. If you've ever seen one of this kids Facebook videos you could tell he was a low character individual: "F*** this", "N****** that". I understand Buzz wants to bring in the best talent possible, but you can't just overlook fairly obvious character flaws. And this isn't about JUCO's or High Schoolers. You can tell in watching a youtube video of Clark compared with a video of DJO and be able to discern which one is gonna be causing trouble. Buzz needs to take the blinders off a little bit and start adding character to his recruiting checklist.
+1 .... though there are some other videos of some of the other guys on our squad that just make me shake my head as well. I cringe at the N word, I don't care who is saying it and whether it's culturally acceptable or not. When I hear it from some of our players it just saddens me. Call me an old prude, but I don't like it, even if it's "acceptable" to some.
-
Why should he use the ignore button? Heres an idea don't post Sh*t like you usually do!
If I usually post Sh*t, then you should know it's coming and there is no reason to read it. Or are you just one of those people that are attracted like the siren song or the bug to the electric light?
Look, I like Buzz, think he works his ass off. I hope like hell he succeeds because I don't want to go through another down era. If he does fail, then it benefits NO ONE.
But I love MU just as much and do not like seeing the school's name pulled through the mud. I don't know why people have a hard time understanding this. Recruit quality people and quality things will happen. Don't do that and you put the school, the program, the coach, etc into a potential bad light.
-
MUSF,
I see no straw man in my arguement. I honestly took your arguement as "limit the # of JUCOs, because they have raised red flags, and may cause problems". This is correct right?
Now, I have no issue with giving Buzz and his team some crap for not vetting someone, but I think you are you are painting all JUCOs as having a greater chance of effing up (even though you stated you didn't in another thread).
Just by saying, limit the # of JUCOs...you are, IMHO being harsh.
We all agree we want upstanding young men representing MU in a positive way, but bad apples appear in every demographic.
I just have an issue with grouping people based on piece of there background and making a sweeping generalization because of it.
Across the college ranks you see an ungodly amount of athletes that are full qualifiers get in a lot of trouble, but when you see kid that has to go to community college too many people automatically jump to the conclusion "well, he went JUCO, ya know, big surprise". And I personally think that is grossly unfair.
In full disclosure, I work with kids that go to community college because they for a variety of reasons couldn't get into a 4 year school. I believe in holding people personally responsible for their actions (as I am sure you are too), but I guess we just disagree in how Marquette makes sure we don't recruit jags like Clark. I apologize for my earlier accusatory remarks, I know we all agree that we want young men to represent our great university in a positive manner on and off the court.
Go Marquette!
-
If RichardShaw isn't that bizarre, unstable UncleJohn I'll eat my hat.
-
MUSF,
I see no straw man in my arguement. I honestly took your arguement as "limit the # of JUCOs, because they have raised red flags, and may cause problems". This is correct right?
Now, I have no issue with giving Buzz and his team some crap for not vetting someone, but I think you are you are painting all JUCOs as having a greater chance of effing up (even though you stated you didn't in another thread).
Just by saying, limit the # of JUCOs...you are, IMHO being harsh.
We all agree we want upstanding young men representing MU in a positive way, but bad apples appear in every demographic.
I just have an issue with grouping people based on piece of there background and making a sweeping generalization because of it.
Across the college ranks you see an ungodly amount of athletes that are full qualifiers get in a lot of trouble, but when you see kid that has to go to community college too many people automatically jump to the conclusion "well, he went JUCO, ya know, big surprise". And I personally think that is grossly unfair.
In full disclosure, I work with kids that go to community college because they for a variety of reasons couldn't get into a 4 year school. I believe in holding people personally responsible for their actions (as I am sure you are too), but I guess we just disagree in how Marquette makes sure we don't recruit jags like Clark. I apologize for my earlier accusatory remarks, I know we all agree that we want young men to represent our great university in a positive manner on and off the court.
Go Marquette!
Well said.
If you try to make a rule like "only 2 JUCOS because they have a higher chance on messing up", then why don't they make a rule like "Only 2 kids from public high schools because private school kids have a better chance of being successful and are less risky".
I realize that Universities have to limit risk, but making broad policies and/or rules isn't going to solve everything. We're dealing with people (particularly young people). Mistakes are going to happen.
Buzz and his staff have to do a good job creating a culture that breeds success (on and off the court), and recruit good people who are great at basketball.
Looks like Buzz has missed on this one. I'm certainly not going to give Buzz a free pass, but I'm not going to condemn all JUCO players because of this. Admit it, all of you guys were loving Jimmy Butler last year, but suddenly MU should limit JUCO's because of Clark?
Please.
-
This thread (the first page of it at least - maybe more info came out since then) was very disturbing. Did we learn nothing from the Duke Lacrosse case? Based on one article, people assuming Clark is guilty of a charge that has in no way been proven yet and going out of their way to call him a monster.
Someone's life was severely changed for the worse in this case. Likely it's the female and it's a horrible thing and we all feel terrible for her. But until it's known for sure, why is everyone so quick to ruin his life? He'll lose his scholarship, and he also has to deal with being vilified for the rest of his life, regardless of his innocence or guilt.
-
Just my 2 cents... I have no issue with having JUCOs in our program, as long as it contributes to winning. This is def an unfortunate incident, however it's more a reflection on the player than on the university. MU will cut its ties and move on, with most people forgetting and more likely being completely unaware of the situation. When a team makes it to the Final Four, you never hear Clark Kellogg say, "Yeah, they're good but they've really been recruiting some thugs lately." However you do see an increase in enrollment, donations, and all the good things that go along with success.
-
Sorry PRN, I'm not Unclejohn, although I appreciate the comparison to a bizarre and unstable individual. Do you even wear hats? I know you're some kind of legend around here, but don't you usuall do it in a bizarre and unstable way?
I'm a Milwaukee area native. I'm 27 and graduated from MU in 2007. I've had no other monikers on this blog. I want to see our program succeed as much as anyone. And I get tired of all the trivial, off-topic BS that seems to end up in a good number of these threads.
-
This thread (the first page of it at least - maybe more info came out since then) was very disturbing. Did we learn nothing from the Duke Lacrosse case? Based on one article, people assuming Clark is guilty of a charge that has in no way been proven yet and going out of their way to call him a monster.
He admitted to fingering her. Now unless she consented, but consent comes into question if they provide alcohol, he basically he admitted he raped her.
-
This thread (the first page of it at least - maybe more info came out since then) was very disturbing. Did we learn nothing from the Duke Lacrosse case? Based on one article, people assuming Clark is guilty of a charge that has in no way been proven yet and going out of their way to call him a monster.
Someone's life was severely changed for the worse in this case. Likely it's the female and it's a horrible thing and we all feel terrible for her. But until it's known for sure, why is everyone so quick to ruin his life? He'll lose his scholarship, and he also has to deal with being vilified for the rest of his life, regardless of his innocence or guilt.
Remind me again of the Duke lacrosse case? In particularly, remind me of the part when they disposed of the accuser's panties and also the part where the players admitted fingering the stripper.
-
But I love MU just as much and do not like seeing the school's name pulled through the mud. I don't know why people have a hard time understanding this. Recruit quality people and quality things will happen. Don't do that and you put the school, the program, the coach, etc into a potential bad light.
I don't think that everyone needs to get so bent out of shape here. Read through this entire thread...ALL OF IT...just about every person has said the same thing: That we can't stereotype all JUCO's, that maybe Buzz moved to quick on Clark, the red flags were there, etc...
As for this particular incident "dragging our school's name through the mud"... there's no doubt that Marquette means a great deal to all of us (hell, we take time out of our days to rant and rave about our pride), but nationally, MU really doesn't get much publicity at all. This kid is a 2010 VERBAL commit - there is virtually NO red tape involved for us to pull our offer - my guess is that his spot get's filled by another big recruit (hopefully a Walker or Derosier) and no one in the national media ever cares enough to question MU's ethics.
Had this kid been at MU when this happened or if Buzz would have been in the room coaching him on the proper fingering technique, it'd be a different story...but that didn't happen, so everyone calm down, back off the ledge, and focus on more pertinent issues like DJO's injury, O'Tule's bad hands and inability to finish around the basket, or who we're going to fill our last scholarships with...
-
Remind me again of the Duke lacrosse case? In particularly, remind me of the part when they disposed of the accuser's panties and also the part where the players admitted fingering the stripper.
Okay, and PS
PRN - I don't know if that was supposed to be funny...but I laughed out loud when I read it...well done! ;D
-
I've actually never seen a single episode... ?-(
Frank Darabont, the director of Shawshank Redemption, made a cameo appearance on Entourage this weekend and said something very similar about a stalker that he had.
-
This thread (the first page of it at least - maybe more info came out since then) was very disturbing. Did we learn nothing from the Duke Lacrosse case? Based on one article, people assuming Clark is guilty of a charge that has in no way been proven yet and going out of their way to call him a monster.
Someone's life was severely changed for the worse in this case. Likely it's the female and it's a horrible thing and we all feel terrible for her. But until it's known for sure, why is everyone so quick to ruin his life? He'll lose his scholarship, and he also has to deal with being vilified for the rest of his life, regardless of his innocence or guilt.
Did you read the affidavit? Unless the cop is lying, it is pretty clear that Clark is going to jail for a long, long, long time. In his first interview with the police he lied about where he was and in his second he admits that he "merely inserted his finger into her vagina."
As someone else posted, he basically admitted to rape right there. Even if all of this was consensual and turns out to be a case of a girl who had regrets the next day, Clark is a complete idiot for putting himself in that situation and he is even dumber for how he dealt with the police.
-
I don't think that everyone needs to get so bent out of shape here. Read through this entire thread...ALL OF IT...just about every person has said the same thing: That we can't stereotype all JUCO's, that maybe Buzz moved to quick on Clark, the red flags were there, etc...
As for this particular incident "dragging our school's name through the mud"... there's no doubt that Marquette means a great deal to all of us (hell, we take time out of our days to rant and rave about our pride), but nationally, MU really doesn't get much publicity at all. This kid is a 2010 VERBAL commit - there is virtually NO red tape involved for us to pull our offer - my guess is that his spot get's filled by another big recruit (hopefully a Walker or Derosier) and no one in the national media ever cares enough to question MU's ethics.
Had this kid been at MU when this happened or if Buzz would have been in the room coaching him on the proper fingering technique, it'd be a different story...but that didn't happen, so everyone calm down, back off the ledge, and focus on more pertinent issues like DJO's injury, O'Tule's bad hands and inability to finish around the basket, or who we're going to fill our last scholarships with...
I tried earlier by starting a new topic on this.
-
He admitted to fingering her. Now unless she consented, but consent comes into question if they provide alcohol, he basically he admitted he raped her.
That wasn't in the original article posted. Unless you're saying that the first 10 posters in the thread ran off to get all the facts before they posted, they ran to the conclusion of guilty.
-
Did you read the affidavit? Unless the cop is lying, it is pretty clear that Clark is going to jail for a long, long, long time. In his first interview with the police he lied about where he was and in his second he admits that he "merely inserted his finger into her vagina."
As someone else posted, he basically admitted to rape right there. Even if all of this was consensual and turns out to be a case of a girl who had regrets the next day, Clark is a complete idiot for putting himself in that situation and he is even dumber for how he dealt with the police.
The DA in the Duke case lied. It's not out of the realm of possibility that the cop lied in this case.
He may end up being guilty. Or it may end up that your last sentence is what truly happened. Either way it's 99.99% likely he's not going to play NCAA basketball, at least not here. Given that we don't know and there's a chance that your last sentence is what happened, I don't like the fact that when any woman makes an accusation of rape, the immediate response is to vilify the accused. The evidence of that is the first page of this thread. I guarantee that those posters did not read the affidavit before posting; some probably didn't even get past the headline of the article before making up their minds.
-
Remind me again of the Duke lacrosse case? In particularly, remind me of the part when they disposed of the accuser's panties and also the part where the players admitted fingering the stripper.
The disposing of panties is a new one, but the players admitted to all sorts of acts with the stripper. Their defense, which turned out to be true after they were vilified for over a year, was that she was lying and it wasn't rape because it was consensual.
-
MU also recruited Pierre Pierce and Marcettus McGee.
Good pull but neither was remotely close to being an MU player like Clark.
Like it or not, when a prospect verbally commits or signs an LOI it's a whole different level of outrage.
-
The disposing of panties is a new one, but the players admitted to all sorts of acts with the stripper. Their defense, which turned out to be true after they were vilified for over a year, was that she was lying and it wasn't rape because it was consensual.
Actually the Duke Lacrosse players never admitted to having sex with her. Big difference between that one and the Clark case.
-
That wasn't in the original article posted. Unless you're saying that the first 10 posters in the thread ran off to get all the facts before they posted, they ran to the conclusion of guilty.
But the original article posted mentioned that he was one of three arrested and accused of raping a girl that they got drunk. 99.9% of the time, that pretty much means guilty. Sorry but MUScoop isn't a court of law.
-
Good pull but neither was remotely close to being an MU player like Clark.
Like it or not, when a prospect verbally commits or signs an LOI it's a whole different level of outrage.
I think people are over reacting to the bad influence that this paints on Marquette. For one thing, I doubt this story is getting much publicity outside of Milwaukee and the area of Texas where it happened.
Also, Clark was simply a recruit of Marquette. I'm sure that there are a number of other recruits (even at schools like UNC, Duke, and KU) that get scholarship offers pulled from them after they get in trouble with the law and it is not necessarily an indictment of the program where it happens.
I honestly don't get the complex of some of the people on this board who freak out over every little thing (not that this is a little thing, its definitely a serious matter) and worry about how this reflects on the school. I garuantee you most people out there don't obsess over Marquette like we do. I'd be willing to bet that for most people, Marquette is respected enough and certainly isn't looked at as similar to a Cincinatti or a Memphis. It takes years of incidents like the Clark incident happening on your campus to get that type of reputation.
-
Good pull but neither was remotely close to being an MU player like Clark.
Like it or not, when a prospect verbally commits or signs an LOI it's a whole different level of outrage.
So, you're OK with Marquette recruiting players who months later commit sex crimes, but accepting a verbal commitment from one is crossing the line?
I see.
-
I think people are over reacting to the bad influence that this paints on Marquette. For one thing, I doubt this story is getting much publicity outside of Milwaukee and the area of Texas where it happened.
It's on NBE Basketball Report.
-
Here's the NBE Report story: UGH....
A troubling story out of Hillsboro (TX) that could impact the 2010 recruiting class at Marquette as Three Texas Basketball Players are Accused in a Woman’s Rape (Houston Chronicle). One of the accused is 20-year-old Monterale Clark, who is verbally commited to the Golden Eagles. Clark is charged with charged with second degree felony sexual assault and are being held in lieu of a $50,000 bond in the Hill County Jail.
The 6-foot-10, 222-pound Clark averaged 15.8 points, 10.2 rebounds and 2.1 blocked shots per game as a freshman last season at Hill College is Hillsboro (TX).
Todd Rosiak updates the comings and goings of the last several weeks within the MU program on his Golden Eagles Blog for the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. It began when freshman forward Brett Roseboro of Quakertown (PA) left the team on August 23 and transferred days later to St. Bonaventure. Senior point guard Maurice Acker, who’d quit the Golden Eagles in June to focus on his academics, rejoined the team on Aug. 29.
Also impacting the class of 2010 recruiting is the de-commitment on September 3 of guard Aaron Bowen. Bowen, of Jacksonville (FL), committed last November to the Golden Eagles. His decommitment and the uncertainty of Clark leaves us to believe that Jamail Jones is the only current 210 commitment for MU likely to sign in November.
Marquette is very much in the mix for local standout Vander Blue, a Wisconsin de-commitment, Carson Desrosiers and Cameron Clark, any of which could decide in the coming weeks.
Now, in addition to all the turnover, sophomore guard Darius Johnson-Odom is expected to be out for at least a month after suffering an injury to his left foot in a recent workout. He is in a protective boot and will be out at least until the beginning of official practices in October. However, we have seen how tricky a foot injury could be…
-
Based on Scout's database going back to 2002:
UCLA has not had a JUCO under Howland or Lavin.
Arizona has not had a JUCO under Olson, O'Neill, or Miller.
Georgetown has not had a JUCO under Esherick or JT3.
Vanderbilt has not had a JUCO.
Florida has not had a JUCO.
Villanova has not had a JUCO.
That's just off the top of my head, there's a bunch more out there, and that's not even factoring in the academically elite schools which don't allow the schools to get JUCO players.
Good list. But I'm wondering ... does the fact these schools have not had a JUCO on their roster mean they haven't recruited any?
For example, according to Rivals, Florida currently is recruiting 2010 prospects Paris Dean out of Paris JC in Texas and Jeremy McCray out of Cloud County CC in Kansas.
Georgetown, again according to Rivals, was recruiting Monterale Clark teammate Quincy Owens.
I'll try to find more examples if you wish.
I don't doubt there are some schools that simply will not recruit a JUCO under any circumstances, most notably the elite academic schools that don't really compete in basketball at a high level (i.e. Ivy and Patriot leagues). But, contrary to the statements here, I very much doubt there are "many" of them.
-
So, you're OK with Marquette recruiting players who months later commit sex crimes, but accepting a verbal commitment from one is crossing the line?
I see.
Good twist. You probably get away with that a lot.
The recruiting process is a chance to learn about people. Inevitably, due to the size and scope of our program we will have been "involved" at time or another with people who run afoul of the law (e.g. Pierce or McGee) but if you do your due diligence this kind of situation can be avoidable.
Anyone with half a brain in Milwaukee who was/is clued in either with MPS or Clark knew there were risks in this young man's life both inside the lines and outside the gym. Buzz took it upon himself to look at those risks and make a decision that they weren't enough of a warning to discontinue his recruitment of Clark. Once that choice was made to make Clark a member of the MU family, you open yourself up to the scorn of some fans or the nonchalance of other fans.
To wrap it up, if I'm not mistaken, both Pierce and McGee committed their acts while members of their particular University's team. Not sure either had red flags of such a degree that Clark did prior to his commitment but I'm sure you will know.
-
You might want to look at those again. Not a single one has actually been updated since those players were in high school. Georgetown has not been involved with Owens since he was in high school, Florida hasn't been involved with either Dean or McCrary in a few years.
Rivals is notorious for not updating a players list unless he commits somewhere. For example, Jeremy McCrary's hasn't been updated since 2006...when he was a sophomore in high school.
-
But the original article posted mentioned that he was one of three arrested and accused of raping a girl that they got drunk. 99.9% of the time, that pretty much means guilty. Sorry but MUScoop isn't a court of law.
+1
MUScoop isn't the court of law, so yeah we can allude to guilt.
MUScoop is one of many courts of public opinion for MU bball. And I think we all agree that this kid better not still be able to attend next year. Whether he is found guilty or not in the court of law, public opinion is not good. I mean, I wouldn't want my little sister at one of her first college parties (kinda like the guy who posted about his daughter) when there is a man, with friends, trolling for youngsters. It is sick. No place at all for something like that even if somehow he is exhonerated. And Best Wishes to the girl. It's going to take some time for her to get past this, but I hope she does and I hope her family and friends are supporting her unwaveringly.
However, I do think that this board is coming down a bit too harsh on the JUCO players and only accepting "ideal" recruits. Just because a high school kid looks clean don't make him so. Let's look at a guy like Jimmy Butler. I'd always take a character like him, going to JUCO and then making the jump to MU. He may be an exception, but why give up on a player like that just because he went to JUCO? Dumb and ignorant to think like that.
In the end, each individual scenario varies. Yeah, you could jump on Buzz for recruiting a bad character if you want, but I won't. It comes down to the individual and the choices they make once they have the opportunity. Clark made an awful decision and he should pay for it the rest of his life, you can't take something like that away from a person and be allowed to continue with everyday life. What if Clark wasn't a JUCO? Would the outrage be there? Yes, but not towards Buzz and the recruiting strategy.
Buzz better move on and not look back-if not, then let the head hunting beginning.
-
When Clark's name first came up as a recruit were any of these red flags ever mentioned on the board. I'm not a regular here, so I'm not sure, but reading now, it seems like his background was common knowledge. Was it that old thing of everyone being too PC to come out and say a Thug is a Thug. I mean it seems obvious now. Especially after seeing his videos on facebook and stuff. A Thug is a Thug, how Buzz missed this one I don't know.
-
When Clark's name first came up as a recruit were any of these red flags ever mentioned on the board. I'm not a regular here, so I'm not sure, but reading now, it seems like his background was common knowledge. Was it that old thing of everyone being too PC to come out and say a Thug is a Thug. I mean it seems obvious now. Especially after seeing his videos on facebook and stuff. A Thug is a Thug, how Buzz missed this one I don't know.
Briefly. Clark's commitment came out of the blue. He'd been seen at a few MU games, but no one made much of it. In fact he committed a few days before the story actually broke here. The only people that knew were those directly involved, and a Texas AAU site.
-
Briefly. Clark's commitment came out of the blue. He'd been seen at a few MU games, but no one made much of it. In fact he committed a few days before the story actually broke here. The only people that knew were those directly involved, and a Texas AAU site.
thanks
-
When Clark's name first came up as a recruit were any of these red flags ever mentioned on the board. I'm not a regular here, so I'm not sure, but reading now, it seems like his background was common knowledge. Was it that old thing of everyone being too PC to come out and say a Thug is a Thug. I mean it seems obvious now. Especially after seeing his videos on facebook and stuff. A Thug is a Thug, how Buzz missed this one I don't know.
There were a couple of posters that came out and said that Clark was bad news and they didn't like his commitment. Chili in particular, voice his displeasure with the Clark verbal from the outsight. In the end, they were 100% right.
-
Just my 2 cents... I have no issue with having JUCOs in our program, as long as it contributes to winning. This is def an unfortunate incident, however it's more a reflection on the player than on the university. MU will cut its ties and move on, with most people forgetting and more likely being completely unaware of the situation. When a team makes it to the Final Four, you never hear Clark Kellogg say, "Yeah, they're good but they've really been recruiting some thugs lately." However you do see an increase in enrollment, donations, and all the good things that go along with success.
Clark Kellogg isn't going to say it, but people can believe their eyes and ears fairly easily. When Miami was winning football championships, was Brent Musburger saying they were a thug program during the broadcast? No, but everyone knew they were based on the litany of stories that came out.
By no means am I saying we are a thug program as I'm sure some people will immediately accuse me of saying.
But programs can get into patterns and reputations if things become repetitive. I trust Buzz will be more diligent in the future after being burned. There are qualified chances coaches should take and then there are others that the risks greatly outweigh the potential benefits. This seems to be the case of the latter.
-
MUSF,
I see no straw man in my arguement. I honestly took your arguement as "limit the # of JUCOs, because they have raised red flags, and may cause problems". This is correct right?
Now, I have no issue with giving Buzz and his team some crap for not vetting someone, but I think you are you are painting all JUCOs as having a greater chance of effing up (even though you stated you didn't in another thread).
Just by saying, limit the # of JUCOs...you are, IMHO being harsh.
We all agree we want upstanding young men representing MU in a positive way, but bad apples appear in every demographic.
I just have an issue with grouping people based on piece of there background and making a sweeping generalization because of it.
Across the college ranks you see an ungodly amount of athletes that are full qualifiers get in a lot of trouble, but when you see kid that has to go to community college too many people automatically jump to the conclusion "well, he went JUCO, ya know, big surprise". And I personally think that is grossly unfair.
In full disclosure, I work with kids that go to community college because they for a variety of reasons couldn't get into a 4 year school. I believe in holding people personally responsible for their actions (as I am sure you are too), but I guess we just disagree in how Marquette makes sure we don't recruit jags like Clark. I apologize for my earlier accusatory remarks, I know we all agree that we want young men to represent our great university in a positive manner on and off the court.
Go Marquette!
Your background is important and appreciate you disclosing it. We all bring bias to our life perspective based on the life we live. Your perspective is important.
Equally, my bias on JUCOs comes from UNLV, Oklahoma under Tubbs, USC, etc. They were JUCO central growing up and issues followed them off the court all the time. Amazing athletes, they won a lot but many issues. Plus here in California we have a crapload of JUCOs with high profile athletic programs. Unfortunately a considerable amount of bad press has followed many of these local programs. My bias is unfair, but I readily admit it.
I think we can be smarter, but appreciate your perspective.
-
Should this be in teal? He was charged.
I doubt he ever wears a MU uniform unless somehow the charges against him are dropped. That means we now have three available next year.
If these were blind accusations, I'd say "innocent until proven guilty." But after reading the arrest warrant Clark either forcibly raped an unconscious girl or (by his own admission) physically and sexually assaulted an unconscious girl. Either way, not a guy I want representing MU in any way, shape or form.
By the way, the report lists him as 20 years old, this isn't a 15 year old who made a drunken "mistake." This is an adult commiting a criminal act of great sexual depravity.
Throw the book at him.
-
Your background is important and appreciate you disclosing it. We all bring bias to our life perspective based on the life we live. Your perspective is important.
Equally, my bias on JUCOs comes from UNLV, Oklahoma under Tubbs, USC, etc. They were JUCO central growing up and issues followed them off the court all the time. Amazing athletes, they won a lot but many issues. Plus here in California we have a crapload of JUCOs with high profile athletic programs. Unfortunately a considerable amount of bad press has followed many of these local programs. My bias is unfair, but I readily admit it.
I think we can be smarter, but appreciate your perspective.
I share Chicos' "bias" regarding the recruiting of JUCOs for the reasons he stated. There a are tons of great kids and great student athletes that go to JUCO for a wide variety of reasons. However, I'd like to think that MU is capable of recruiting the majority of our team from players who got good grades in High School, stayed clear of legal problems, and led decent lives. I don't think that is too much to ask.
I also strongly believe that players making a 4 year investment in a program yields greater results than JUCOs who only play a year or two at most.
-
If these were blind accusations, I'd say "innocent until proven guilty." But after reading the arrest warrant Clark either forcibly raped an unconscious girl or (by his own admission) physically and sexually assaulted an unconscious girl.
Yeah, that arrest warrant is very ugly. Several things are clear: 1) Clark lied in his first interview with the cop; 2) the victim believed that Clark had intercourse with her; 3) two of Clark's teammates said Clark had intercourse with the victim; 4) one of Clark's teammates recognized this situation for what it was quickly enough that he threw out the victim's underpants to avoid being implicated; 5) at the very least Clark admitted to digital penetration; and 6) the victim reported all of this within the hour.
This is not the Duke case. Not even close. None of the Duke LAX players ever admitted to any rape or accused any of his teammates of rape. Here you've got two of the players throwing Clark under the bus and even have Clark himself making a pretty damning admission (that is probably an admission of rape, but I don't know Texas's law). Aside from some guys trying to save their own skin, there is absolutely nothing exculpatory in that affidavit to suggest that this was not rape. It's perfectly clear from the affidavit that the girl was conscious and knows she was raped (once via intercourse and once digitally), and all the men that were present are basically confirming her story. There is absolutely no reference in the affidavit by any of the men that this was consensual sex.
I suspect this is going to end badly for Clark...as it should.
-
Link to Arrest Affidavits:
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/59372882.html (http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/59372882.html)
By the way, I forgot to mention that my thoughts and prayers, and I'm sure the thoughts and prayers of the entire Marquette family, go out to the victim of this crime. This is a beyond horrific scenario for anyone, let alone a young college student.
-
Agreed. The first thing up on GoMarquette.com tomorrow morning better be a press release from Buzz Williams stating that his scholarship has been revoked.
No press conference, nothing more than simple press release that all offers of a scholarship have been revoked, he never formally committed to MU, and that MU wishes the victim the best and offers her its support.
MU is only tangentially involved, and we don't need this piece of garbage harming MU's reputation. He's done enough damage already. What an absolute loser. I hope he rots in jail and spends eternity in hell.
-
Link to Arrest Affidavits:
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/59372882.html (http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/59372882.html)
By the way, I forgot to mention that my thoughts and prayers, and I'm sure the thoughts and prayers of the entire Marquette family, go out to the victim of this crime. This is a beyond horrific scenario for anyone, let alone a young college student.
At that same link there is video of an interview with the coach and some other school official. Obviously, the school isn't presuming innocence: "We have 250-300 athletes. Three of them did something very, very bad."
-
No press conference, nothing more than simple press release that all offers of a scholarship have been revoked, he never formally committed to MU, and that MU wishes the victim the best and offers her its support.
MU is only tangentially involved, and we don't need this piece of garbage harming MU's reputation. He's done enough damage already. What an absolute loser. I hope he rots in jail and spends eternity in hell.
Since he is only verbally committed to the school, I believe NCAA regulations prohibit Marquette from commenting on the situation. Rosiak said something to the effect in his blog this morning
-
Now, I'll throw my $.02 for the least favorite opinion...
<rant>
The way many of you are responding to this is repulsive. Who the hell gave so many of you the right to cast judgment? Everybody seems to feel compelled to blame someone, and point fingers.
In no way do I think Clark should end up at Marquette after this, but I would expect 2 things to happen, all of which involves a couple little words namely: compassion and mercy.
1) Marquette should reach out to the girl and her family to help them with anything they need to help the healing process. No, Marquette is not responsible for this in any way, but it would the be compassionate, and I think *right* thing to do.
2) Buzz (and perhaps Marquette) should stay in contact with Clark over the next couple years. Not to recruit, or woo him, but rather because it's clear he needs some positive figures in his life, and there will be plenty of people out there (like many of you) who immediately assume he can never be a better person than he is currently. A little mercy may help turn this kid around, but shunning him will surely lead to more bad deeds. Casting blame is easy, but try to imagine if he was one of your relatives, and not just a kid you feel you can easily throw away.
I'm sure some will still say he doesn't deserve any mercy, and I'm not going to continue re-iterating my point of view. If you don't agree, and can't see how there should be any mercy in this case, then so be it. We disagree.
</end rant>
-
Now, I'll throw my $.02 for the least favorite opinion...
I appreciate your point Rocky, but forcible rape falls into my category of "point of no return." We can show compassion and still condemn his acts. This is a henious crime.
-
Now, I'll throw my $.02 for the least favorite opinion...
<rant>
The way many of you are responding to this is repulsive. Who the hell gave so many of you the right to cast judgment? Everybody seems to feel compelled to blame someone, and point fingers.
In no way do I think Clark should end up at Marquette after this, but I would expect 2 things to happen, all of which involves a couple little words namely: compassion and mercy.
1) Marquette should reach out to the girl and her family to help them with anything they need to help the healing process. No, Marquette is not responsible for this in any way, but it would the be compassionate, and I think *right* thing to do.
2) Buzz (and perhaps Marquette) should stay in contact with Clark over the next couple years. Not to recruit, or woo him, but rather because it's clear he needs some positive figures in his life, and there will be plenty of people out there (like many of you) who immediately assume he can never be a better person than he is currently. A little mercy may help turn this kid around, but shunning him will surely lead to more bad deeds. Casting blame is easy, but try to imagine if he was one of your relatives, and not just a kid you feel you can easily throw away.
I'm sure some will still say he doesn't deserve any mercy, and I'm not going to continue re-iterating my point of view. If you don't agree, and can't see how there should be any mercy in this case, then so be it. We disagree.
</end rant>
I also see and respect your 2 cents, and I think it would be an excellent idea for Buzz or someone to keep in contact with clark because he obviously needs a positive figure in his life.
I try and be a good person and I try to forgive, and obviously that is in the poor girl's hands, but I still think rapists should be castrated. If a man tries to take away someone's womanhood, then how would he like it if someone took away his manhood?
I know I know...we shouldn't be thinking in terms of an eye for an eye, but I've had friends go through a similar horror and I needed a lot of prayer and self-restraint to keep myself from seeking vengeance.
On the other hand...I followed the link posted by Avenue Commons, and it sickens me to see what some people are leaving in the comments section. It was HER fault?!?!
Disgusting.
A guy straight out of Africa that knows nothing about American culture goes down into the deep south and runs into white supremacists and they lynch him...is that his fault?! It may not be the best use of judgment, and how was he supposed to know?! It's the individuals that commit the crime that are at fault.
Whoever thinks she deserved it or had it coming needs some serious help.
-
MU should give scum Clark's scholarship to the girl he victimized.
-
Now, I'll throw my $.02 for the least favorite opinion...
<rant>
The way many of you are responding to this is repulsive. Who the hell gave so many of you the right to cast judgment? Everybody seems to feel compelled to blame someone, and point fingers.
In no way do I think Clark should end up at Marquette after this, but I would expect 2 things to happen, all of which involves a couple little words namely: compassion and mercy.
1) Marquette should reach out to the girl and her family to help them with anything they need to help the healing process. No, Marquette is not responsible for this in any way, but it would the be compassionate, and I think *right* thing to do.
2) Buzz (and perhaps Marquette) should stay in contact with Clark over the next couple years. Not to recruit, or woo him, but rather because it's clear he needs some positive figures in his life, and there will be plenty of people out there (like many of you) who immediately assume he can never be a better person than he is currently. A little mercy may help turn this kid around, but shunning him will surely lead to more bad deeds. Casting blame is easy, but try to imagine if he was one of your relatives, and not just a kid you feel you can easily throw away.
I'm sure some will still say he doesn't deserve any mercy, and I'm not going to continue re-iterating my point of view. If you don't agree, and can't see how there should be any mercy in this case, then so be it. We disagree.
</end rant>Appreciate your thoughts here. As for #1, that sounds noble; but, I'm not sure how that would be accomplished without casting MU into a position of being party to the crime.
-
Now, I'll throw my $.02 for the least favorite opinion...
<rant>
The way many of you are responding to this is repulsive. Who the hell gave so many of you the right to cast judgment? Everybody seems to feel compelled to blame someone, and point fingers.
In no way do I think Clark should end up at Marquette after this, but I would expect 2 things to happen, all of which involves a couple little words namely: compassion and mercy.
1) Marquette should reach out to the girl and her family to help them with anything they need to help the healing process. No, Marquette is not responsible for this in any way, but it would the be compassionate, and I think *right* thing to do.
2) Buzz (and perhaps Marquette) should stay in contact with Clark over the next couple years. Not to recruit, or woo him, but rather because it's clear he needs some positive figures in his life, and there will be plenty of people out there (like many of you) who immediately assume he can never be a better person than he is currently. A little mercy may help turn this kid around, but shunning him will surely lead to more bad deeds. Casting blame is easy, but try to imagine if he was one of your relatives, and not just a kid you feel you can easily throw away.
I'm sure some will still say he doesn't deserve any mercy, and I'm not going to continue re-iterating my point of view. If you don't agree, and can't see how there should be any mercy in this case, then so be it. We disagree.
</end rant>
Rocky...
Nice post but,
1) There is no way MU will reach out to the victim and get involved with this matter. Compassion is one thing, but in view of the fact Clark was not an MU student-athlete, not going to happen.
2) If Buzz or his staff or whoever wants to stay in touch with Clark over the next few years, they may want to look at where the state prisons are located in west Texas. This is not a simple burglary case, if convicted Clark could spend the majority of his adult life in prison.
-
Now, I'll throw my $.02 for the least favorite opinion...
<rant>
The way many of you are responding to this is repulsive. Who the hell gave so many of you the right to cast judgment? Everybody seems to feel compelled to blame someone, and point fingers.
In no way do I think Clark should end up at Marquette after this, but I would expect 2 things to happen, all of which involves a couple little words namely: compassion and mercy.
1) Marquette should reach out to the girl and her family to help them with anything they need to help the healing process. No, Marquette is not responsible for this in any way, but it would the be compassionate, and I think *right* thing to do.
2) Buzz (and perhaps Marquette) should stay in contact with Clark over the next couple years. Not to recruit, or woo him, but rather because it's clear he needs some positive figures in his life, and there will be plenty of people out there (like many of you) who immediately assume he can never be a better person than he is currently. A little mercy may help turn this kid around, but shunning him will surely lead to more bad deeds. Casting blame is easy, but try to imagine if he was one of your relatives, and not just a kid you feel you can easily throw away.
I'm sure some will still say he doesn't deserve any mercy, and I'm not going to continue re-iterating my point of view. If you don't agree, and can't see how there should be any mercy in this case, then so be it. We disagree.
</end rant>
A couple of things. I hope MU reaches out to the victim, but in a way that is behind the scenes and quietly.
As for reaching out to Clark, if Buzz wants to do that, go ahead...on his own time. MU should not be involved in any way. I cannot imagine what kind of PR disaster that would cause.
-
Rocky...
Nice post but,
1) There is no way MU will reach out to the victim and get involved with this matter. Compassion is one thing, but in view of the fact Clark was not an MU student-athlete, not going to happen.
Agreed. While it may seem like a compassionate gesture on MU's behalf and I doubt the university would do this insincerely, too many people - justifiably cynical, I suppose - would see this as Steve Alford, pat II. MU needs to leave this one alone.
2) If Buzz or his staff or whoever wants to stay in touch with Clark over the next few years, they may want to look at where the state prisons are located in west Texas. This is not a simple burglary case, if convicted Clark could spend the majority of his adult life in prison.
Unfortunately, probably not. For a guy who appears to be a first-time offender - at least in the adult system - it would not be surprising if he got a minimal sentence, certainly not anything approaching a life sentence. Pierre Pierce did less than a year, and he was a multiple offender. Mike Tyson spent three years in prison. I know it's Texas and all, but don't expect a long sentence ... if he's convicted.
-
Since he is only verbally committed to the school, I believe NCAA regulations prohibit Marquette from commenting on the situation. Rosiak said something to the effect in his blog this morning
There should be an exception to this rule if a recruit is accused of committing a crime, becomes severely ill (develops cancer, or some other severe/life threatening disease), or dies.
Its ridiculous that Marquette's name is all over these stories yet they can't comment.
A committed, but not yet signed recruit could go on a killing rampage wearing a Marquette Jersey and Marquette still wouldn't be able to respond.
-
There should be an exception to this rule if a recruit is accused of committing a crime, becomes severely ill (develops cancer, or some other severe/life threatening disease), or dies.
Its ridiculous that Marquette's name is all over these stories yet they can't comment.
A committed, but not yet signed recruit could go on a killing rampage wearing a Marquette Jersey and Marquette still wouldn't be able to respond.
I'd venture to guess that whatever minor punishment the NCAA would hand down for what would have to be an obvious secondary infraction (see: Kiffin, Lane) would easily be overcome by the positive response such a gesture would receive publicly.
-
I appreciate your point Rocky, but forcible rape falls into my category of "point of no return." We can show compassion and still condemn his acts. This is a henious crime.
Rocky....do you have any daughters? +1000000000 for Avenue Commons. As a father of a daughter, as a graduate of MU, and as a person who simply believes in common sense ....I feel no remorse in passing judgment on this guy if he is expected to represent the school. If it wasn't an open and shut case, I wouldn't and you would have a point. But in this case, Officer Hammer and the authorities seem to have this one nailed. If I'm wrong, I'll send an apology to the Clark family.
-
I'd venture to guess that whatever minor punishment the NCAA would hand down for what would have to be an obvious secondary infraction (see: Kiffin, Lane) would easily be overcome by the positive response such a gesture would receive publicly.
Agreed. I say F the NCAA and issue a statement.
-
Agreed. While it may seem like a compassionate gesture on MU's behalf and I doubt the university would do this insincerely, too many people - justifiably cynical, I suppose - would see this as Steve Alford, pat II. MU needs to leave this one alone.
Unfortunately, probably not. For a guy who appears to be a first-time offender - at least in the adult system - it would not be surprising if he got a minimal sentence, certainly not anything approaching a life sentence. Pierre Pierce did less than a year, and he was a multiple offender. Mike Tyson spent three years in prison. I know it's Texas and all, but don't expect a long sentence ... if he's convicted.
OK, I see your comparison with Pierce, and even the hotel room case of Tyson, but this case is basically a "gang rape" in which a victim was violated by multiple subjects. Not even close to a "date rape" situation. Juries and Judges do not like men taking turns with a defenseless woman. If the evidence proves she was forced to drink the substance in order to render her useless, then the premeditation aspect will also be reviewed by the states attorney's office. Either way, the guy in a heap of crap with the law.
-
I really hate to say this because I love MU basketball, but I fear Buzz is going to turn us into another mid-to-late 1990s Cincinnati.
-
Another Cincy?! Good gravy. Stop the insanity.
-
I really hate to say this because I love MU basketball, but I fear Buzz is going to turn us into another mid-to-late 1990s Cincinnati.
No he would be chased out of town way before that. I would think one more incident like this and there would be pressure on MU to take some type of action.
-
No he would be chased out of town way before that. I would think one more incident like this and there would be pressure on MU to take some type of action.
I doubt we're going anywhere near that route.
Buzz likes the underdogs, the guys that go the unconventional route to DI basketball. There are the academic and attitude cases, for sure, and that can be worked on...but who would know we'd have to deal with sexual assault?!
I'm sure that if Buzz thought Clark was at all capable of this atrocity, he would have dropped him in a heartbeat.
-
I really hate to say this because I love MU basketball, but I fear Buzz is going to turn us into another mid-to-late 1990s Cincinnati.
Oh for f*cks sake man... Overreact much?!
Why, because he brings in some JUCO's? Let's look at them-
Fulce- Only needed one year. Followed Buzz, solid citizen.
Butler- Only needed one year. Developed a ton, solid citizen.
DJO- Caught in the clearinghouse, only needed one year. Seems a solid guy so far.
Buycks- Had what he needed to qualify but got bad core class advice at Bay View. Already discussed as a growing team leader.
Clark was likely the last piece in balancing out the classes. Buzz took a gamble, and got burnt. This did not happen on MU's watch. There have been no disciplinary issues with any of Buzz's players while they've been here. How this puts MU even on a path to being Cincy under Huggins is beyond me. Starting to sound like the UW fans....
-
Oh for f*cks sake man... Overreact much?!
(http://image.spreadshirt.com/image-server/image/composition/1458194/view/1/producttypecolor/1/type/png/width/280/height/280)
-
maybe it was an overreaction, but one of the reasons Cincy was ripped everywhere was Huggins always took the JUCO route. I don't want us to follow that lead.
-
maybe it was an overreaction, but one of the reasons Cincy was ripped everywhere was Huggins always took the JUCO route. I don't want us to follow that lead.
Huggins was ripped because he took thug players who didn't graduate.
The fact that they were JUCOS has nothing to do with it.
-
Huggins was ripped because he took thug players who didn't graduate.
The fact that they were JUCOS has nothing to do with it.
Clark was and is and always has been a thug. Buzz wanted him.
Kind of like Crean with James Matthews.
-
But the original article posted mentioned that he was one of three arrested and accused of raping a girl that they got drunk. 99.9% of the time, that pretty much means guilty. Sorry but MUScoop isn't a court of law.
There's no way that only .1% of rape claims turn out to be false rape claims. Being arrested and accused of something doesn't by itself make you guilty. That's what bothers me. This kids life is ruined now because he'll never live down the assumed guilt, regardless of what happened.
Here's an article that says 18% of rape claims are false. I am not an expert, it's only 1 article, but it leads me to think that it's certainly not .1%.
http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2009/01/06/another-study-debunks-the-two-percent-false-rape-canard/ (http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2009/01/06/another-study-debunks-the-two-percent-false-rape-canard/)
-
Where were the majority of you when we were recruiting him in the first place naysaying about his past. When something comes out about rape all of a sudden everyone is quick to say I told you so. Its unfortunate that this has happened but lets not finger point either saying its Buzz fault that this happened.
The jury is out about this already I see but I give the benefit of the doubt.....aka Ben Roethlisberger
-
Sorry, but the fact that we have more JUCOs on the roster now than at any time in school history bothers me a little bit. I don't think Cincy's low graduation rates and the fact that half their roster were JUCOs was just a coincidence. I totally agree that Huggins went out of his way to recruit JUCOs who were also thugs. I am just pissed off that the Clark case is dragging MU through the mud.
-
I am just pissed off that the Clark case is dragging MU through the mud.
I don't disagree, but I think we should keep this in perspective. I suspect that outside Milwaukee, Hill Texas and maybe Madison, about 0.000001% of college basketball fans will ever even hear about this.
-
Clark was and is and always has been a thug. Buzz wanted him.
Kind of like Crean with James Matthews.
I'm agree with you.
I'm just saying let's not start using "juco" and "thug" interchangeably.
Huggins was criticized for recruiting players without character who didn't graduate. "juco" has nothing to do with it.
-
I'm agree with you.
I'm just saying let's not start using "juco" and "thug" interchangeably.
Huggins was criticized for recruiting players without character who didn't graduate. "juco" has nothing to do with it.
I never did that. I have not said a bad thing about any of the other JUCO's. Just Clark. From day one. When his verbal was announced.
-
Sorry, but the fact that we have more JUCOs on the roster now than at any time in school history bothers me a little bit. I don't think Cincy's low graduation rates and the fact that half their roster were JUCOs was just a coincidence. I totally agree that Huggins went out of his way to recruit JUCOs who were also thugs. I am just pissed off that the Clark case is dragging MU through the mud.
You need to separate your preconceived notions about JUCO players.
They are not all thug Cincy players.
Hell, Mike Kinsella went to a year to JUCO. Does that mean he was a high risk player?
JUCO can mean higher risk, but not always.
Just like recruiting kids from inner city schools can be riskier, but not always.
-
Where were the majority of you when we were recruiting him in the first place naysaying about his past. When something comes out about rape all of a sudden everyone is quick to say I told you so. Its unfortunate that this has happened but lets not finger point either saying its Buzz fault that this happened.
The jury is out about this already I see but I give the benefit of the doubt.....aka Ben Roethlisberger
The dude admitted sexually assaulting the woman! He is a freaking thug.
-
I never did that. I have not said a bad thing about any of the other JUCO's. Just Clark. From day one. When his verbal was announced.
Understood. Not speaking to you specifically, just the thread in general.
JUCO doesn't = Thug or high risk player
I'm not giving Buzz a free pass, I'm just saying let's not go overboard on the "MU should limit JUCO players" thing. A more accurate statement is "All MU players should have strong character, regardless of their background."
-
There's no way that only .1% of rape claims turn out to be false rape claims. Being arrested and accused of something doesn't by itself make you guilty. That's what bothers me. This kids life is ruined now because he'll never live down the assumed guilt, regardless of what happened.
Here's an article that says 18% of rape claims are false. I am not an expert, it's only 1 article, but it leads me to think that it's certainly not .1%.
http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2009/01/06/another-study-debunks-the-two-percent-false-rape-canard/ (http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2009/01/06/another-study-debunks-the-two-percent-false-rape-canard/)
The guilt on the part of Clark is not assumed by anyone. It is fact. He admitted that he digitally penetrated a girl without her consent. That's at the very least.
At the worst, he raped an unconscious girl according to the other perpetrators and witnesses in the room. This isn't a situation of "he said, she said". Clark is a criminal and there is nothing about these accusations that should trouble anyone. He is most likely going to jail, as he should.
-
You need to separate your preconceived notions about JUCO players.
They are not all thug Cincy players.
Hell, Mike Kinsella went to a year to JUCO. Does that mean he was a high risk player?
JUCO can mean higher risk, but not always.
Just like recruiting kids from inner city schools can be riskier, but not always.
Not sure Mike Kinsella is a good example. The guy played at Rice his first year, the Harvard of the South.
I don't want to put words in ecompt's mouth, but my guess is that he is referencing JUCO's that were not fully qualified out of high school (i.e. Mike Kinsella, Fulce and Butler would not be in that list)
-
Not sure Mike Kinsella is a good example. The guy played at Rice his first year, the Harvard of the South.
I don't want to put words in ecompt's mouth, but my guess is that he is referencing JUCO's that were not fully qualified out of high school (i.e. Mike Kinsella, Fulce and Butler would not be in that list)
This is exactly my point.
I know he went to Rice, but still, "he's a JUCO", and MU should limit the amount of JUCO's in order to limit their risk, right?
Wrong.
MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball. No need to make it more complicated than that.
Private school, public school, prep school, JUCO, transfer, etc. etc. None of it really matters if they are good kids who are great at basketball and can handle the academics.
-
The guilt on the part of Clark is not assumed by anyone. It is fact. He admitted that he digitally penetrated a girl without her consent. That's at the very least.
At the worst, he raped an unconscious girl according to the other perpetrators and witnesses in the room. This isn't a situation of "he said, she said". Clark is a criminal and there is nothing about these accusations that should trouble anyone. He is most likely going to jail, as he should.
I agree with you, but one minor clarification -- not sure there is any allegation anywhere that the girl was unconscious. She remembers and reported what happened, and none of the other witnesses say she was unconscious. The only reference to "unconscious" in the arrest affidavit is where it refers the statute which refers to assaulting someone who is unconscious or physically unable to resist.
Incidentally, the charged offense - Sexual Assault (Texas Penal Code Section 22.011) is a second degree felony. If convicted, the penalty is at least two years and no more than 20 years (Texas Penal Code Section 12.33).
-
Not sure Mike Kinsella is a good example. The guy played at Rice his first year, the Harvard of the South.
I don't want to put words in ecompt's mouth, but my guess is that he is referencing JUCO's that were not fully qualified out of high school (i.e. Mike Kinsella, Fulce and Butler would not be in that list)
OK, if Kinsella is not a good example, why are Butler and Fulce and DJO good examples? Each of these players could have played D-1 ball out of high school. (Fulce had to go to prep school for a year, but I do not see anyone complaining about too many prep school players.)
Throwing out some arbitrary rule like limiting the number of jucos is stupid. To what number? Which jucos? Ones who did not qualify out of high school, or transfers like Kinsella, or what, exactly?
This recruit was a mistake. That's all. Buzz is not going to get called onto Wild's carpet and told never to do that again, and he shouldn't. He is in charge of the program, and the higher-ups are mostly going to leave him alone unless there is a good reason not to, and one recruit who gets arrested is not a good reason not to.
-
I would think Fr. Wild WILL have a talk with Buzz about this. True, he is in charge of the program, but that program still has to answer to the university president. When something like this happens, it's the university that looks bad.
-
I would think Fr. Wild WILL have a talk with Buzz about this. True, he is in charge of the program, but that program still has to answer to the university president. When something like this happens, it's the university that looks bad.
OK, if he had stolen a car or committed some other mid level felony, I would agree there were red flags with him based on the stories I am hearing(admittedly just now that all this has gone down)......however I haven't a single story that would make me believe Buzz could have predicted he was capable of rape. And really that's what we are all reacting to, that he made the jump from juvenile issues to being a rapist. Really he went from a 3 to a 9 on the criminal scale....who could predict that?
Plus it didn't happen at MU, perhaps with a better support system Clarke could have improved as a person and this doesn't happen.
-
I would think Fr. Wild WILL have a talk with Buzz about this. True, he is in charge of the program, but that program still has to answer to the university president. When something like this happens, it's the university that looks bad.
Sure, but there are talks and there are talks. Someone suggested earlier here that he be called into Wild's office and told never to do that again. That is not going to happen. I can see Wild asking Buzz about it the next time they have lunch, and suggesting that we would not want to see anything happen that might damage the university. And there may be some discussion about what kind of kids you give a second chance to. But no "Come to Jesus" meeting. If this kid had as many red flags as some suggest, it was likely discussed with Cottingham at least, and he would have known Buzz was taking a chance on a risky kid. Of course, no one would have anticipated what happened.
-
I would think Fr. Wild WILL have a talk with Buzz about this. True, he is in charge of the program, but that program still has to answer to the university president. When something like this happens, it's the university that looks bad.
What's Fr. Wild going to say?
"Shame on you, Buzz, for not using your crystal ball to see that this young man would commit a terrible sex crime five months after you accepted his verbal commitment."
Unless Clark had serious criminal issues in his past of which the coaching staff was aware, I don't see how anyone can pin this on Buzz. How the heck is he supposed to know this was possible?
This, I suspect, is where someone inserts something about JUCO players being "risky."
The problem with that, though, is I'm not aware of any objective data supporting that kind of inference. This just as easily could have happened with a player recruited out of high school. As it did at Wisconsin. And Iowa. And Boston College. And Colorado. And ...
-
No, probably along the lines of, "This kid went to a bunch of high schools in one of the worst educational systems in the country. Can we please be a little more careful?"
-
No, probably along the lines of, "This kid went to a bunch of high schools in one of the worst educational systems in the country. Can we please be a little more careful?"
and reportedly ripped off money and food and was rumored to be involved in a car stealing incident. hmmm, might want to check deeper into his background. The thug had no business being considered for MU and the idea of him sitting next to my daughter in a class makes me puke.
-
This is exactly my point.
I know he went to Rice, but still, "he's a JUCO", and MU should limit the amount of JUCO's in order to limit their risk, right?
Wrong.
MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball. No need to make it more complicated than that.
Private school, public school, prep school, JUCO, transfer, etc. etc. None of it really matters if they are good kids who are great at basketball and can handle the academics.
When people said they should limit their risk of Jucos, my assumption (at least how I think) is that you limit the number of non qualifiers, thus the Kinsella, Fulce, Butler type JUCO would be excluded.
-
OK, if Kinsella is not a good example, why are Butler and Fulce and DJO good examples? Each of these players could have played D-1 ball out of high school. (Fulce had to go to prep school for a year, but I do not see anyone complaining about too many prep school players.)
Uhm, they're not good examples as I stated yesterday and again today. If they're full qualifiers out of high school and attend a JUCO, then I have no worries from an academic perspective. If they aren't full qualifiers out of high school and go to a JUCO, we need to be more diligent.
But more importantly, when we have a kid that is basically a criminal (whether he went to a JUCO or not), it would be nice if our due diligence in the recruiting process would capture this. It would have taken one phone call to the right person. I would be absolutely FLOORED if Buzz didn't know about Clark's past...FLOORED. He chose to ignore it which is his right. If he felt the kid turned the corner, fine....but it's clear that he hadn't. Yes, to say it was a mistake, is an understatement.
-
OK, if he had stolen a car or committed some other mid level felony, I would agree there were red flags with him based on the stories I am hearing(admittedly just now that all this has gone down)......however I haven't a single story that would make me believe Buzz could have predicted he was capable of rape. And really that's what we are all reacting to, that he made the jump from juvenile issues to being a rapist. Really he went from a 3 to a 9 on the criminal scale....who could predict that?
Plus it didn't happen at MU, perhaps with a better support system Clarke could have improved as a person and this doesn't happen.
Stealing a car only gets you a 3 on the criminal scale nowadays?
-
The point is that based on his record there was no way to predict he would go off the rails this badly. Wouldn't you agree going from potentially being involved in a car stealing incident to rape is at least a three fold escalation in severity?? If Buzz thought his early mistakes were youthful indiscretion and he had turned a corner...I don't have a problem with that because nothing I see here makes me think you could foresee what happened.
-
Stealing a car only gets you a 3 on the criminal scale nowadays?
Depends on the car... :D
-
I agree with you, but one minor clarification -- not sure there is any allegation anywhere that the girl was unconscious. She remembers and reported what happened, and none of the other witnesses say she was unconscious. The only reference to "unconscious" in the arrest affidavit is where it refers the statute which refers to assaulting someone who is unconscious or physically unable to resist.
Incidentally, the charged offense - Sexual Assault (Texas Penal Code Section 22.011) is a second degree felony. If convicted, the penalty is at least two years and no more than 20 years (Texas Penal Code Section 12.33).
So if he gets near the minimum, we'll have time to show him the "Jesuit Way" and he'll still have eligibility???
-
When people said they should limit their risk of Jucos, my assumption (at least how I think) is that you limit the number of non qualifiers, thus the Kinsella, Fulce, Butler type JUCO would be excluded.
What exactly makes a partial qualifier "riskier" than a full qualifier?
I realize that they may have some academic issues in the past, but clearly that is not what we are talking about with Clark.
Again, MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball and can pass their classes.
Let's not start applying more rules than that.
ooooo he's a JUCO, he's so scary... oooooo....
They are kids who went to Junior College. They aren't mutants.
C'mon Chicos.
-
Uhm, they're not good examples as I stated yesterday and again today. If they're full qualifiers out of high school and attend a JUCO, then I have no worries from an academic perspective. If they aren't full qualifiers out of high school and go to a JUCO, we need to be more diligent.
But more importantly, when we have a kid that is basically a criminal (whether he went to a JUCO or not), it would be nice if our due diligence in the recruiting process would capture this. It would have taken one phone call to the right person. I would be absolutely FLOORED if Buzz didn't know about Clark's past...FLOORED. He chose to ignore it which is his right. If he felt the kid turned the corner, fine....but it's clear that he hadn't. Yes, to say it was a mistake, is an understatement.
But yesterday you were calling for a limit on the number of jucos, not a limit on the number of jucos who did not qualify out of high school, and you pointed out that the fact that we had four jucos on our roster with another committed for next year was terrible and made the program look bad. But of those four, three qualified out of high school. The fourth seemingly was a good enough student who was poorly advised in high school. No one has had anything bad to say about him. Quite the contrary. He is emerging as a team leader.
Clark was a recruiting mistake in my view, but I do not know what information Buzz had on him which might have affected his decision. I find it unbelievable that he did not make the ONE phone call you refer to in order to check up on the guy. He most probably made several.
So by the standards you are applying today, as opposed to yesterday, we have had two juco recruits who were not eligible out of high school and who should have been closely scrutinized. One seemingly was. So we have one juco recruit who seems to be a mistake. And your solution is to limit the number of jucos?
-
What exactly makes a partial qualifier "riskier" than a full qualifier?
I realize that they may have some academic issues in the past, but clearly that is not what we are talking about with Clark.
Again, MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball and can pass their classes.
Let's not start applying more rules than that.
ooooo he's a JUCO, he's so scary... oooooo....
They are kids who went to Junior College. They aren't mutants.
C'mon Chicos.
No one said that. In my opinion based on my experiences, kids that are fully qualified out of high school usually take school more seriously, are usually more mature, more disciplined, make better life decisions. Those are general terms, but I believe the are applicable. As I've said in this thread at least 5 times, that doesn't mean you don't take JUCO players or you don't take partial qualifiers. But yes, I do think it means you have to be more diligent.
I'm sticking to it....they're not mutants, but I'd prefer 4 year players every day of the week....and if we do go the JUCO route, I'd prefer we go through our best efforts to make sure they will succeed at MU and don't have major red flags (Clark) on their resume which could bite MU in the ass.
-
But yesterday you were calling for a limit on the number of jucos, not a limit on the number of jucos who did not qualify out of high school, and you pointed out that the fact that we had four jucos on our roster with another committed for next year was terrible and made the program look bad.
Go back and read what I said because I did not say what you just stated. My standards haven't changed at all. I said fewer JUCOs (I did not put a limited number) and I also said I'm not against JUCOs. What I DID say is that going after so many JUCOS means kids coming in every 2 years rather than 4 years. That means constant turnover in the classes. I also said kids that aren't ready academically puts additional strain on the program because they are always battling to stay eligible (but clearly stated that Fulce and Butler and others that were full qualifiers are not whom I was referencing)...post at 7:57pm and 9:15pm So I disagree with your characterization
But of those four, three qualified out of high school. The fourth seemingly was a good enough student who was poorly advised in high school. No one has had anything bad to say about him. Quite the contrary. He is emerging as a team leader. (again, look at what I actually said in the posts referenced above...I'm not talking about the full qualifiers...never have been)
Clark was a recruiting mistake in my view, but I do not know what information Buzz had on him which might have affected his decision. I find it unbelievable that he did not make the ONE phone call you refer to in order to check up on the guy. He most probably made several. (I would be floored if Buzz didn't know about Clark's problems in the past. He obviously felt Clark had matured on and wasn't going to be a problem...unfortunately he was wrong...a recruiting mistake....second one in the last 2 weeks...recruiting is a tough business and difficult to predict...funny, I kept reading on here from so many people how easy it was and recruiting mistakes should not be happening or so the comments went the last 3 or 4 years)
So by the standards you are applying today, as opposed to yesterday, (wrong, same standards yesterday and today) we have had two juco recruits who were not eligible out of high school and who should have been closely scrutinized. One seemingly was. So we have one juco recruit who seems to be a mistake. And your solution is to limit the number of jucos? (my solution is to recruit 4 year kids as much as possible, the add consistency to the program, are ready academically and tend to be more mature generally speaking. I'm not against JUCOs, as I stated again and again, especially full qualifiers. If we go the JUCO route, dig deeper in the evaluation process. My additional solution is to not recruit kids that have a resume that includes theft, multiple high schools, etc, etc. unless you're absolutely sure they've got their crap together. If you're not sure, then it isn't worth the risk)
-
What exactly makes a partial qualifier "riskier" than a full qualifier?
I realize that they may have some academic issues in the past, but clearly that is not what we are talking about with Clark.
Again, MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball and can pass their classes.
Let's not start applying more rules than that.
ooooo he's a JUCO, he's so scary... oooooo....
They are kids who went to Junior College. They aren't mutants.
C'mon Chicos.
Everyone knows that partial qualifiers commit rape at a significantly higher rate than full qualifiers. Maybe they should be required to wear sweaters with bright red R's on them
-
Everyone knows that partial qualifiers commit rape at a significantly higher rate than full qualifiers. Maybe they should be required to wear sweaters with bright red R's on them
(http://bnp.org.uk/files/2009/01/strawman-motivational.jpg)
-
Everyone knows that partial qualifiers commit rape at a significantly higher rate than full qualifiers. Maybe they should be required to wear sweaters with bright red R's on them
Everyone knows that if a kid says he's turned a corner, he's no longer going to steal, is finally going to take school seriously, will no longer hang out with the wrong crowd you can take it to the bank. No need to dig further.
-
Everyone knows that if a kid says he's turned a corner, he's no longer going to steal, is finally going to take school seriously, will no longer hang out with the wrong crowd you can take it to the bank. No need to dig further.
The quotes I read on this board were not from the kid but from his coach. But why let a simple thing like accuracy interfere with a really good opinion?
-
I am making some assumptions here. I assume that Buzz knows Clark's JC coach and that the JC coach told him that Clark was not any trouble for him. There are no guarantees in life. Things sometimes go wrong. One bad Juco does not mean all juco's are bad. The difference between Huggins at Cincy and Buzz at MU is that Clark would probably still be on Cincy's team.