Percentage chance we play in the bowl game?

Donate To GopherHole
Hollinsanity

Hollinsanity

Active member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
1,108
Reaction score
11
Points
38
I don't see the U backing down and I don't see the players backing down either, so that being said I'll go with 25%.

What say you?
 












West Fargo Gopher Fan said:
Cooler heads will prevail they always do.

How many teams have threaten a boycott? Many.

How many actually have?
Click to expand...

So you're saying the players, who have the full support of their coaches, are going to back down?

Because I don't see Kaler backing down given the current environment surrounding sexual assault.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Both sides want the bowl game to happen more than not. It will end up happening.
 

Hollinsanity said:
So you're saying the players, who have the full support of their coaches, are going to back down?

Because I don't see Kaler backing down given the current environment surrounding sexual assault.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No I didn't say that. I'm just saying one way or another we are playing in the game.
 

The U will be out 2.8 million and will probably be sued by the Holiday Bowl for breach of contract. Neither Kaler or Coyle will survive this. There will also be repercussions from the B1G,
sponsors, etc.
 



ruppertflywheel said:
The U will be out 2.8 million and will probably be sued by the Holiday Bowl for breach of contract. Neither Kaler or Coyle will survive this. There will also be repercussions from the B1G,
sponsors, etc.
Click to expand...

The conference would be out 2.8 million.
 

It'll get done. Frankly, I was looking forward to seeing the game anyways....possibly somebody
will emerge that nobody was expecting, even without the ten.
 

Given what has happened at Baylor, Stanford, etc. I just don't see how Kaler can back his way out of this situation. Appease the players by cancelling the suspensions and he faces the wrath of the nation, or uphold the suspensions and half the team transfers. Lose-lose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

ruppertflywheel said:
The U will be out 2.8 million and will probably be sued by the Holiday Bowl for breach of contract. Neither Kaler or Coyle will survive this. There will also be repercussions from the B1G,
sponsors, etc.
Click to expand...

bingo.

all the hub-bub thus far has been grown children talking about "university values" the tone will change dramatically when the adults start talking about money
 

Some one claiming the $2.8mm will expedite the resolution please enlighten me how you see the situation being resolved. I just don't see it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

75%. The players are going to see that the public reaction is not on their side at all and backdown, just like with the Yale case.
 

Hollinsanity said:
Some one claiming the $2.8mm will expedite the resolution please enlighten me how you see the situation being resolved. I just don't see it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

if i had to guess right now, they'll probably throw coyle under the bus.

fire claeys right now and the program is dead
 

Question: are the players boycotting the game because the players were suspended?

or are they boycotting the game because the EOAA recommended expulsion or suspension in most (9 of 10) cases?

If it is the former, than I imagine the U could suspend the players for the bowl game, but not hand out any expulsions... I would think that would appease the players.

Obviously, the U does not, in anyway, want to look like they lightened the sentence because they caved to the football team...

This is an ugly precedent we are setting up here. If Minnesota gives in, every sports team in the country would now have a new card to play (boycott) if they have any perceived grievances
 

The problem that you have is that it has to be resolved quickly. They would need to have some kind of practice and then fly out to San Diego on prior to Christmas. Somebody is going to have to blink and I'm not sure who will be the ones to do it. I'm not sure how you go about mending fences here to make both sides happy.

The problem with this coming out when it did, and it was intentionally done at this time to cause as much pain to the players and program as possible, is that it gave very little time to come to a resolution.
 


minny01 said:
The problem that you have is that it has to be resolved quickly. They would need to have some kind of practice and then fly out to San Diego on prior to Christmas. Somebody is going to have to blink and I'm not sure who will be the ones to do it. I'm not sure how you go about mending fences here to make both sides happy.

The problem with this coming out when it did, and it was intentionally done at this time to cause as much pain to the players and program as possible, is that it gave very little time to come to a resolution.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the Title IX inquiry must be completed within 60 days. So, that would align with the timing aspect. I'm not defending the process as it it is a complete farce, but it would have been ballsy to hold the report until after the ball game, and we know these two don't have a courageous bone in their bodies.
 

Gopher04 said:
Another brilliant take.
Click to expand...

It all depends how the media frames it. Do you side with the black defendants wrongly convicted, or do you side with the feminist activists? I suspect many in the media will be torn on this. If they simply focus on the fiasco that is the Title IX mandates handed down by a political appointee in 2011 everyone wins. Except the activists.
 

It's not going to be whether you side with the "feminists", it's whether you are siding with the rape victim. This country just elected a President who put out a full page ad in the New York Times calling for the dearth penalty of four young black men after they had been exonerated by DNA evidence. This is not going to end the way the players are thinking it will.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
It all depends how the media frames it. Do you side with the black defendants wrongly convicted, or do you side with the feminist activists? I suspect many in the media will be torn on this. If they simply focus on the fiasco that is the Title IX mandates handed down by a political appointee in 2011 everyone wins. Except the activists.
Click to expand...

the more i think about this the more i feel like coyle has to be the fall guy, he's the link between the team and the administration
 

GG Allen said:
It's not going to be whether you side with the "feminists", it's whether you are siding with the rape victim. This country just elected a President who put out a full page ad in the New York Times calling for the dearth penalty of four young black men after they had been exonerated by DNA evidence. This is not going to end the way the players are thinking it will.
Click to expand...

You're really something. What rape victim? You don't know what happened that night any more than I do. Simply because you believe it to be so doesn't make it so. Wake up.
 

GG Allen said:
75%. The players are going to see that the public reaction is not on their side at all and backdown, just like with the Yale case.
Click to expand...

Yes, public opinion from those who only see headlines in the PP and Strib and know none of the details will be against the players. Those that "sure aren't going to believe a group of football players" will be against them too. PE is right - it all depends how the media chooses to frame it. To this point they have chosen to lead the sheep against the players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Coyle is not going to be fired for following the recommendation of a investigation required by federal law. He's probably the person least likely to get fired because of this incident.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom