Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Here was an article in the ST with some bowl notes:

http://www.sent-trib.com/stnew/index.ph ... &Itemid=40" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

he should be out of the program.

The white uniforms will blend with the snow. The Vandals won't even see Freddie

MACMAN wrote:he should be out of the program.

Check out the 14th ammendment to that little piece of paper in your avatar, then I would suggest you ammend your statement to "If found guilty of xyz he should be out of the program."

You have to be extremely careful in he/said she/said cases.

Unlike the word "gun" the words "due" and "process" actually appear in the United States constitution.

Dayons_Den wrote:

MACMAN wrote:he should be out of the program.

Check out the 14th ammendment to that little piece of paper in your avatar, then I would suggest you ammend your statement to "If found guilty of xyz he should be out of the program."

You have to be extremely careful in he/said she/said cases.

Unlike the word "gun" the words "due" and "process" actually appear in the United States constitution.

Dayons_Den wrote:

MACMAN wrote:he should be out of the program.

Check out the 14th ammendment to that little piece of paper in your avatar, then I would suggest you ammend your statement to "If found guilty of xyz he should be out of the program."

You have to be extremely careful in he/said she/said cases.

Unlike the word "gun" the words "due" and "process" actually appear in the United States constitution.

Yeah, just like they do in AZZ posts that include the word "Scooter"!

I thought I was going to read that because Alvarado is out, BG will wear the white uniforms.

Last time I checked there isn't a constitutional right to play college football. Rather it's a privilege and one that can be revoked for conduct detrimental to ones self, team, and/or the university. Kudos to Clawson for making the tough decision rather than trying to justify why he should be playing with a "legal" argument.

Dayons_Den wrote:

MACMAN wrote:he should be out of the program.

Check out the 14th ammendment to that little piece of paper in your avatar, then I would suggest you ammend your statement to "If found guilty of xyz he should be out of the program."

You have to be extremely careful in he/said she/said cases.

Unlike the word "gun" the words "due" and "process" actually appear in the United States constitution.

Grateful Falcon wrote:Last time I checked there isn't a constitutional right to play college football. Rather it's a privilege and one that can be revoked for conduct detrimental to ones self, team, and/or the university. Kudos to Clawson for making the tough decision rather than trying to justify why he should be playing with a "legal" argument.

Dayons_Den wrote:

MACMAN wrote:he should be out of the program.

Check out the 14th ammendment to that little piece of paper in your avatar, then I would suggest you ammend your statement to "If found guilty of xyz he should be out of the program."

You have to be extremely careful in he/said she/said cases.

Unlike the word "gun" the words "due" and "process" actually appear in the United States constitution.

C'mon Grateful, you're just reading what you want to in to what I posted and putting words in my mouth/post. I agree he should be suspended until his legal issues are worked out for the reasons you outlined in your post. What I disagreed with was MACMAN's completely un-American guilty until proven innocent statement of removing him from the program entirely. Removal from the program or any additional punishment should be levied only after the entire due process is played out.

We had two former players arrested on possession charges a year or so ago. Once that situation played out it was determined there in fact was an innocent party.

Now, with the Alvarado case a myriad of things could play out such as he struck someone and therefore I agree should then be removed from the program. But don't forget that until that is proven there is always a chance something less malicious occurred or even something non-malicious occured.

Speaking from experience, I have been on both sides of this, so before we kick him out of the program I just thought we should let the situation play out in its entirety. I never said it was his right to play in the bowl game, or to practice with the team or be a part of the program, I just said it was his right to be innocent until proven guilty and asked for everything to come to light before we rush to judge and decide his future on a message board.

Dayons_Den wrote:

MACMAN wrote:he should be out of the program.

Check out the 14th ammendment to that little piece of paper in your avatar, then I would suggest you ammend your statement to "If found guilty of xyz he should be out of the program."

You have to be extremely careful in he/said she/said cases.

Unlike the word "gun" the words "due" and "process" actually appear in the United States constitution.

ALVARADO: Bowling Green defensive tackle Kevin Alvarado will not play in the bowl game.
He has been on indefinite suspension since being arrested for assault by the Bowling Green Police Department earlier this month.
He had the assault charge amended to disorderly conduct with persistence. He was to pay fines and court costs and will be placed on probation.
A redshirt sophomore, Alvarado started all 12 games for the Falcons this season and had 28 tackles.

Innocent men don't take plea bargains.

Innocence and guilt are tough terms to define when a group of college kids are out on the town and charges like disorderly conduct are being proffered.

I'm not a big fan of zero tolerance type policies. I think there are lines you simply cannot cross (home invasions with bb guns are one) but for the most part, I think you need to look at the kid and the situation. I think part of the University's mission to educate should include working with kids to overcome their mistakes and become better people for it.

got to agree with Flip. It seems a bit like we are manipulating these kids sometimes. You come in here and play football for us, if you mess up we won't help. That is not always the case and should very rarely be the case. If a kid doesnt learn time and time again that is one thing. If it is a one shot thing thats another.

If every institution was as rigid and insane as MACMAN would like the football program to be, I never would have made it out of elementary school.

Bleeding Orange wrote:If every institution was as rigid and insane as MACMAN would like the football program to be, I never would have made it out of elementary school.

You couldn't keep your pants on in elementary school either?!?!?

Cool.