Rossow: Gophers’ boycott is the culmination of administration’s apparent hypocrisy

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,716
Reaction score
15,963
Points
113
per Rossow:

Kaler and Coyle continue to play the privacy card, which began with the university President’s letter to boosters early Wednesday in which he stated “our students have privacy laws that we value and respect.”

His letter came hours after the names of the 10 suspended players were released. It would seem that privacy laws would apply to all university students involved with the investigation, even those on a stage as public as the football team.

If that’s not realistic in this day and age, then some form of general explanation and/or reasoning behind the suspensions, without compromising the process, is necessary. When you consider five additional players never implicated in the criminal investigation were punished, it’s mandatory.

“All these kids’ reputations are destroyed,” Leidner said. “Their names are destroyed and it’s extremely difficult to get back and it’s very unfair for them and that’s why we’re sticking together through this thing.”

Also contained in Kaler’s letter was an assertion that coach Tracy Claeys made the final decision to suspend the players after consulting with Coyle. Coyle continued to push that narrative in his statement to the media on Wednesday, but the players rejected that Thursday night.

“That’s not true,” Wolitarsky said. “He [Claeys] doesn’t have the power to do that. Mark Coyle has the power to do that and Mark Coyle did it.”

Somebody’s lying, folks.

http://www.1500espn.com/gophers-2/2016/12/gophers-boycott-culmination-administrations-hypocrisy/

Go Gophers!!
 

Excellent article. I am so disgusted with the U, with the EEOC, with the Obama admin which put all this in motion, with pretty much everything. Very hard to see how on earth I am renewing my seats, even though I'd like to support the team and players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Gophers’ boycott is the culmination of administration’s apparent hypocrisy -1500ESPN

By Adam Rossow

With those eight words from senior Drew Wolitarsky’s mouth, Minnesota football players took a stand on Thursday night. For anyone who’s been following the developments in Dinkytown the past 48 hours, this comes as only a minor surprise.

Something was bound to happen, because the bureaucratic hypocrisy executed by university President Eric Kaler and Athletics Director Mark Coyle has been on full display since the announcement that 10 Gophers football players were suspended indefinitely late Tuesday afternoon.

Wolitarsky stood with quarterback Mitch Leidner and tight end Duke Anyanwu in front of the entire team at the Gophers’ indoor practice facility and read a statement that laid out the team’s issues with what they called an “unjust” investigation that was “without due process”.

The players said the boycott would continue until due process was followed and the suspensions of all 10 players were lifted, putting into question the Dec. 27 Holiday Bowl against Washington State.

The players said they were motivated by Wednesday’s meeting with Coyle where they said no answers were given about why the players were suspended after law enforcement officials did not prosecute. Instead of answers, Wolitarsky said, the team got “misleading statements.” That’s not a good look for a guy that’s been on the job for only seven months.

“As a player, it became more than a game for me and I know it did, as you can see, for this whole team about the livelihood of these kids afterwards, after football, because that’s why we came here,” Wolitarsky said. “We came here to get a degree. We come here to make a life for ourselves, and these kids’ reputations have been ruined.”

Kaler and Coyle continue to play the privacy card, which began with the university President’s letter to boosters early Wednesday in which he stated “our students have privacy laws that we value and respect.”

His letter came hours after the names of the 10 suspended players were released. It would seem that privacy laws should apply to all university students involved with the investigation, even those on a stage as public as the football team...

“All these kids’ reputations are destroyed,” Leidner said. “Their names are destroyed and it’s extremely difficult to get back and it’s very unfair for them and that’s why we’re sticking together through this thing.”

Also contained in Kaler’s letter was an assertion that coach Tracy Claeys made the final decision to suspend the players after consulting with Coyle. Coyle continued to push that narrative in his statement to the media on Wednesday, but the players rejected that Thursday night.

“That’s not true,” Wolitarsky said. “He [Claeys] doesn’t have the power to do that. Mark Coyle has the power to do that and Mark Coyle did it.”

Somebody’s lying, folks.

http://www.1500espn.com/gophers-2/2016/12/gophers-boycott-culmination-administrations-hypocrisy/
 

If privacy is such an issue, why can the University release the names of the players but not the female? That's the first question Kaler and Coyle need to answer.
 



Unregistered User said:
WTF?
Click to expand...
You and S2 can go back to the OT now. Go back to the non-stop bickering that forum lends you two.
Section2 said:
Excellent article. I am so disgusted with the U, with the EEOC, with the Obama admin which put all this in motion, with pretty much everything. Very hard to see how on earth I am renewing my seats, even though I'd like to support the team and players.


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

Jack jones said:
If privacy is such an issue, why can the University release the names of the players but not the female? That's the first question Kaler and Coyle need to answer.
Click to expand...

How do you suspend 10 players and have no one find out?
 







The single reference in question:

... “Dear Colleague” letter issued a year ago by the U.S. Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights. While that document was less a mandate to develop new procedures than it was a reminder (albeit a pointed one) of colleges’ responsibilities in handling allegations of sexual assault under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, most colleges have begun to revisit their policies in its wake. The letter, issued shortly after the department <UNC> made waves with multiple settlements stemming from sexual harassment cases, was part of a crackdown of sorts by the Obama administration on Title IX violations."


So it seems like Maximus is blaming Obama administration for sending a letter (and "crackdown of sorts") that Universities are responsible for handling allegations of sexual assault under Title IX.

I'm not sure if Maximus' stance is that Obama administration should have a different message or whether he is saying that Universities should not be responsible for handling allegations of sexual assault. Perhaps he could elaborate.



Section2 said:
How about the notoriously biased "inside higher ed?"
https://www.insidehighered.com/news...rompts-big-change-sexual-assault-hearings-unc

It's ok.


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

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom