[Rosiak's Blog] Details released on Blue assault case

[bilsu]

It leaves Buzz open to criticism, but I like the way Buzz never comments on things. Whether it is Maymom, Newbill, Reggie Smith, Patrick Hazel, Roseborro, etc. Imagine how hard it is to keep your month shut when you are being attacked.

[NersEllenson]

Irrelevant.  The premise I took issue with was that Buzz should be hailed as some paragon of transparency and openness.

As you illustrate, Buzz was no more forthcoming with information than any other coach in similar situations.

The comparison between Buzz and Crean was made before I got involved
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=26820.msg302288#msg302288

Awilhemlscream said that by comparing Buzz's actions to Crean's, one can conclude that Crean covered things up, and Buzz didn't.

I point out that Buzz's lack of public comment on the event is inconsistent with the conclusion that he is holier than any other coach.  

You're correct in that his lack of comment is a difference between a sin of omission rather than commission.  But it doesn't mean he's without sin, as Awilhelmiscrem concluded.

You now say the comparison is false--that's fine.  But that means that you would also have to agree with me that awilhelmiscream's conclusion--based only on that comparison--is also false.

The bottom line is that we don't know if Buzz is any more or less inclined to "cover things up" than any other coach--including our previous coach.

Who really cares about our former coach...and why would you take issue if Buzz "was hailed as some paragon and transparency of openness?"  I don't think anyone is putting Buzz on any kind of pedestal in this thread...but you are the only one who has suggested Buzz should have basically held a press conference and said:  "I want everyone to know that Vander Blue got into an altercation on campus.  Punches were thrown and Vander was issued a citation for municipal battery."  What coach goes to the media about a charge a player is NOT EVEN FOUND guilty with??  Talk about idiotic??

[GGGG]

You're correct in that his lack of comment is a difference between a sin of omission rather than commission.  But it doesn't mean he's without sin, as Awilhelmiscrem concluded.

It isn't a sin at all.  Buzz is under no obligation to address how he handled this.  We don't have to know what the extra, basketball-related punishment was.  We just need to know that MU addressed this through the student judicial process and that it wasn't biased.

Furthermore, it may actually be against FERPA for him to actually address it without his consent. 

[GGGG]

I would agree with Sultan here.  It's just that Vander takes "I am big time" to a new level. 

Then you don't really agree with me, because that view of Vander goes against most of what I have heard.

[Marquette84]

Who really cares about our former coach...

Apparently, awhilhelmscream does, given that he brought him into the discussion.

I just don't think Buzz represents any different thinking than Crean with respect to keeping players out of the glare of negative publicity.  

I believe both coaches would equally do everything within their power to protect their players--including minimizing news coverage.

Therefore, I don't take issue with anything Buzz did--I take issue with anyone who claims that he's better than any other coach--including our prior coach--with respect to "not covering up" bad news.

and why would you take issue if Buzz "was hailed as some paragon and transparency of openness?"  I don't think anyone is putting Buzz on any kind of pedestal in this thread...

I think both Crean and Buzz would take the same actions to protect their players.  I take issue with someone who would view Crean's actions as "covering up" the truth, then turn around and say that Buzz represents a change in policy when he was no more forthcoming with information.

but you are the only one who has suggested Buzz should have basically held a press conference and said:  "I want everyone to know that Vander Blue got into an altercation on campus.  Punches were thrown and Vander was issued a citation for municipal battery." 

I didn't suggest any such thing.

I merely pointed out that the lack of any such comment from Buzz flies in the face of awilhelmiscream's comment that Buzz represents a change in policy from Crean.

I think its wrong to look at Crean's efforts to keep his players out of the news and claim its because he "covered up" the news, then turn around and claim that Buzz gets credit for not covering up news when he didn't come clean with the story.

What coach goes to the media about a charge a player is NOT EVEN FOUND guilty with??  Talk about idiotic??

Are you defending Crean with this statement?  Awilhelmiscream said he "covered up" an incident in which a player didn't even receive a ticket or citation.  Needless to say, the player was "NOT EVEN FOUND guilty."  

Furthermore, it may actually be against FERPA for him to actually address it without his consent.  

I've got Paunki saying that the information was a matter of public record.
I've got you saying that it was against FERPA for the information to be discussed.

Not sure how both can be correct.  Maybe you guys can get together and sort it out.

Meanwhile, I'll stand by my belief that Buzz and Crean hold exactly the same desire to keep their players' names and actions out of the glare of the public spotlight.

[Hoopaloop]

Then you don't really agree with me, because that view of Vander goes against most of what I have heard.

Then you need to talk some more to the students who have to deal with him.  Maybe the best thing that happened to Vander this year is that he bombed.  He was an insufferable jerk when he stepped on campus and for many months after.  He needs to clean up his act.  Here's hoping a dismal freshman season allows for some humility into his life and a shrinking of his noggin. It would benefit him as a player, as a person and ultimately the team.

[nyg]

Then you need to talk some more to the students who have to deal with him.  Maybe the best thing that happened to Vander this year is that he bombed.  He was an insufferable jerk when he stepped on campus and for many months after.  He needs to clean up his act.  Here's hoping a dismal freshman season allows for some humility into his life and a shrinking of his noggin. It would benefit him as a player, as a person and ultimately the team.

Wow, alot of new posters who I presume are current students.  Did not realize that Vander has presented himself in such a manner. 

[GGGG]

Then you need to talk some more to the students who have to deal with him.  Maybe the best thing that happened to Vander this year is that he bombed.  He was an insufferable jerk when he stepped on campus and for many months after.  He needs to clean up his act.  Here's hoping a dismal freshman season allows for some humility into his life and a shrinking of his noggin. It would benefit him as a player, as a person and ultimately the team.

I know students that know him personally and they would disagree completely with your assessment of him.

[brewcity77]

I know students that know him personally and they would disagree completely with your assessment of him.

I'm not claiming to know either way, but reading your post, that could be the problem. I'm sure we all know jocks or other people who seem to have inflated senses of self. Once you get to know them, however, they turn out to be friendly, fair people that you grow to like.

But how many get that chance? Maybe people who know Vander personally (maybe 5% of campus?) think he's a nice, down-to-earth guy, but the other 95% that haven't had that chance think he's an arrogant blowhard. And maybe his actions with strangers justify those feelings. It's tough to tell which is true, and unlikely that much more than 10-15% of campus will ever truly know him well enough to make a true decision. Obviously, how he carries himself in front of the other 85-90% will have a great impact on his reputation to the layperson.

[cheebs09]

I completely agree with brewcity. I have only walked by Vander on campus so i don't know him at all, but i have heard a lot of what Hoopaloop said. It has never been from anyone that is friends with him or knows him that well. For all i know he could be a great kid, but i just wanted to say that Hoopaloop isn't the only person that shares that view, but at the same time that doesnt mean it is the right view.

[GGGG]

brew, I actually think you are correct.  But I find it rather pathetic then that people would view him a certain way based on a few interactions rather than actually knowing the guy.  And then post as such on a message board.

[Mike_Marquette]

This is stupid. The only reason it is even remotely "news" is because it is a Marquette basketball player. Stuff like this happens on Wells Street every Saturday night.

[Pakuni]

You're correct in that his lack of comment is a difference between a sin of omission rather than commission.  But it doesn't mean he's without sin, as Awilhelmiscrem concluded.

What?!?!?
A sin of ommission occurs when one fails to dislcose something that he or she is required (by law, duty, ethics, whatever) to disclose.
A homeseller failing to tell a potential buyer that the basement fills up with three feet of water every spring is a sin of ommission.
Explain for us the duty a college basketball coach has to publicly disclose when a player receives a citation. You can't, of course, because no such duty exists, and never has.
In the long and storied history of posters around here finding ways to bash or defend Tom Crean over the most minute of faults, this has got to be the weakest by far. Sinfully bad, I'd say.




You now say the comparison is false--that's fine.  But that means that you would also have to agree with me that awilhelmiscream's conclusion--based only on that comparison--is also false.

The bottom line is that we don't know if Buzz is any more or less inclined to "cover things up" than any other coach--including our previous coach.
[/quote]

[Marquette84]

What?!?!?
A sin of ommission occurs when one fails to dislcose something that he or she is required (by law, duty, ethics, whatever) to disclose.

The "whatever" in this case is awilhelmiscream's stated standard that Buzz does not "cover up" bad news.

I think knowing that a player was arrested but not saying anything is inconsistent with the claim that a coach doesn't "cover up" bad news like other coaches do.

You can dispense with all your inane straw men (Rahm Emmanuel, basements flooding).

Then again, since that seems to be the way you think about these issues, maybe this will help you understand:  do you think its fair to credit a man for being faithful to his wife if he has an affair that he never mentioned?  Obviously, he is not required (by law, duty, ethics, whatever) to disclose the affair.

I'm going to stick with my belief that Crean and Buzz hold EXACTLY the same view toward keeping their players bad news out of the press.  

You now say the comparison is false--that's fine.  But that means that you would also have to agree with me that awilhelmiscream's conclusion--based only on that comparison--is also false.

The bottom line is that we don't know if Buzz is any more or less inclined to "cover things up" than any other coach--including our previous coach.

Funny--you quoted my statement, but you didn't bother to reply.

[TheDOC816]

brew, I actually think you are correct.  But I find it rather pathetic then that people would view him a certain way based on a few interactions rather than actually knowing the guy.  And then post as such on a message board.

Well if he can be such a good guy then why does he play the part of being a complete jerk when he is out in public? If his true character is to be a good guy then I'm sure that would shine through.

[GGGG]

Well if he can be such a good guy then why does he play the part of being a complete jerk when he is out in public?

Jesus...how many times do I have tell you that...

1. Your interactions with him run counter to what has been told to me by a number of people that I trust, and.

2. It is pathetic that you would make such an anonymous post to a message board.

[TheDOC816]

Jesus...how many times do I have tell you that...

1. Your interactions with him run counter to what has been told to me by a number of people that I trust, and.

2. It is pathetic that you would make such an anonymous post to a message board.

1. Ok so it's my word against their word. I can understand where you are coming from on that.  I'll believe what I want to and you can do the same. No big deal.

2. All you have to do is look at my email in my profile to find out who I am, not that hard.