The comment isn't overly charitable and I waited until season's end to make it (although I've held this view since the beginning), but it's honest and not meant maliciously. I do respect your point. This is an ethical issue that I've thought about, and I'm surprised it doesn't come up more.Globetrotter wrote:I think it is irresponsible and mean spirited to post on a message board that someone who very well might read the message board is not worthy of a scholarship or a D1 athlete. I thought it when it was said about Marc Larson and I think it again now that it is being said about Dee Brown.
There is a variety of commentary out here, some of which is clearly out of bounds. IMO, there is a fat line between between discussing what one sees on the court versus what might be going on off the court. On the court, a kid plays basketball, a sport. My opinion on whether someone is a DI athlete refers only to their ability play that sport. On the other hand, we've seen posts accusing and reveling in players' illicit behavior off the court, and THAT can be permanently detrimental to kid's reputation and career/life prospects. This is just basketball - if a negative opinion is measured and not abusive, I think it is fair game here. The difference btw on-court v. off-court posts is like night and day. Players occupy scholarships to the exclusion of others. If someone should not be in DI (but rather in DII), why is that sooo bad? (And, as an aside, if he is NOT actually a DI athlete, maybe it's unethical to NOT point that out?)
Certainly, Brown has his own opinion of his abilities that will, in his mind, override mine. Maybe the negativity would discourage him. More likely, he would ignore it or it would piss him off. I'll admit that the comment didn't need to be said, but the same is true for 99% of all posts. If we only posted mindless, rah-rah stuff, the forums would become dull and meaningless.
$.02
