i heard it was codeine cough syurp
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Falo and Gordon SUSPENDED sentences (reinstated for fall camp)
- Thread starter buff4bcs1985
- Start date
Yeah. That's what the Tylenol/Codeine is. They sell it OTC in Canada and I think they give it out pretty loosely at the CU med clinic.
Y is a helluva chromosome
I think what LB is trying to say is that the "boys will be boys" excuse doesn't fly in this instance. I don't think anybody was making that argument in the first place, but whatever.
They messed up. As Nik says, if they make amends, pay their debt, and the system provides them a pathway back to the playing field, then that would be great. Hopefully they learned from this.
They messed up. As Nik says, if they make amends, pay their debt, and the system provides them a pathway back to the playing field, then that would be great. Hopefully they learned from this.
I would be pleased to illuminate. Another way to phrase it would be just as TSchekler put it. There needs to be no further excuses along the lines of "boys are dumb when they are between (insert age range)." There were some statements on the thread that suggest that thought process.
Again, they are not dumb. They are willful and selfish. Not dumb.
That is exactly what I was saying. I think it may have been DBT who shared that opinion. There was an absence of countering that point.
OK. But decision-making is worse (more rash) at that age and people that age do some dumb ****. Stuff we'd never do when we're older. That doesn't discriminate by gender. Certainly not an excuse. But it is something that, I think, allows us to be a bit more understanding than if a couple 40 year olds had gone into the dorms and stolen things from a dorm room... a bit more open with leaning toward the rehabilitation side of the consequences equation instead of straight punishment.
I always wondered why you had a fake student id.
Big Jim
WTF?
Agreed. I do not know why a path back to the field at CU is important if they are are guilty. Let them move on down the line to CSU Pueblo or some other place that takes former Buffs after they serve their time. If they are not guilty, then let them back.
I stand by what I said. So you're saying they don't deserve a second chance if they are truly sorry? Their "crime", IMO, pales in comparison to many others that are forgiven.
What I did say is that this (meaning breaking and entering) is not something that we should allow everyone to learn by trial and error. Why? Because that encourages a LOT of it to happen. How many times would you find it acceptable for someone to break into your property and take your things as a part of a learning curve? I could do with zero times, personally. Would you find a "sorry" enough in the situation if it happened to you? Particularly if that sorry was all that was required for the perp to get the clearance to play some more ball? Because an act would make you feel better about it all? Really and honestly?
It does not matter if this "pales in comparison" to other things. They were rather comfortable in setting up the grab to minimize getting caught (lookout), and had no issue taking from others. That to me makes me question whether or not this was their first rodeo. Whether it was or wasn't, one thing is for certain: this was not like stealing a pack of gum impulsively. This is not an insignificant event.
That being said, I am generally content to let the legal system and school have their go at them first. That being said, the safety of students is something the school should be vested in FIRST. How safe is CU intending to be if football becomes a mitigating factor, if everyone passes the buck and becomes okay with the gravity of this because in the end they just want a couple of players back on some timeline?
And don't tell me this happened because "boys are boys". Ever.
It does not matter if this "pales in comparison" to other things. They were rather comfortable in setting up the grab to minimize getting caught (lookout), and had no issue taking from others. That to me makes me question whether or not this was their first rodeo. Whether it was or wasn't, one thing is for certain: this was not like stealing a pack of gum impulsively. This is not an insignificant event.
That being said, I am generally content to let the legal system and school have their go at them first. That being said, the safety of students is something the school should be vested in FIRST. How safe is CU intending to be if football becomes a mitigating factor, if everyone passes the buck and becomes okay with the gravity of this because in the end they just want a couple of players back on some timeline?
And don't tell me this happened because "boys are boys". Ever.
Last edited:
Big Jim
WTF?
I try to look at it in terms of whether something would cause someone to lose any other scholarship on campus or be suspended from activities for a period of time... as a punishment the school administrator in charge would mete out over and above whatever punishment the school hands down. There shouldn't be lighter or harsher consequences for a football player than for any other student at CU on a merit scholarship. I think that's fair. And I think that it works because the arguments for football being treated differently balance out (money arguing leniency while media noise arguing hardline stances).
Big Jim
WTF?
I am all in favor of striping away a merit scholarship of any student found guilty of crimes committed on campus of the nature that these two students have been accused of if they are guilty. Even equality of this nature is often not equal as the merit scholarship student is more likely to be in college because of academics than the scholarship athlete.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure it's a three digit number.
I guess where I'm at is that I don't think there should be an automatic punishment as a policy for these types of things. Given that, I guess that leaves me trusting and supporting the coach in charge to make good decisions.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
Given that Briles would suspend Gordon for the first defensive series of the first game, and Falo for the first offensive series of the first game. Or for the coin toss. Whichever comes first.
And that's why you need to clearly communicate university expectations to a coach and hold/him her accountable for meeting them.
In the case of Briles, it seems that he did meet university expectations and then they wanted to make him the lone fall guy for what went on.
Good point, it takes more than one to **** things up that badly. It's a failure of Baylor as a University, top to bottom. They sold their souls pretty much to have a winning program.
Because leaving it to the coach has historically ensured an appropriate outcome? The coach is there to win. It seems a conflict of interest with that pathway.
It doesn't have to be a system where abuse and carte balance on the part of athletes happen. It just does tend to be that way though.
Definitely an imperfect setup. But if you don't give coaches a certain amount of discretion as CEOs of their programs, you're not going to be able to hire any coach who has another option. That's the market. And, frankly, I think a certain amount of discretion is important for them to have. With that, there have to be strong people in the president, chancellor and regent positions who refuse to allow a coach to run his/her program in a way that runs counter to the standards of the university.
That's in place all over.
I think that exactly because of their status as football players the consequences of their actions has been considerably worse than if they had only been students. This has been the case for several CU football players. Just the fact that their names and pictures have been bounced around by the media is harsh.
To me, punishment for crimes serves three purposes; Retribution for the victims, a deterrent to others and rehabilitation of the perpetrators. I believe, in this case, the first two have been met. How do you rehabilitate by tossing them out on their ears and not giving them a chance to make amends?
To me, punishment for crimes serves three purposes; Retribution for the victims, a deterrent to others and rehabilitation of the perpetrators. I believe, in this case, the first two have been met. How do you rehabilitate by tossing them out on their ears and not giving them a chance to make amends?
I think that is rather selective DBT. I would not say, by far, that football players tend to have the strictest consequences.
There was a kid here who spent a year and a half in a TYC facility for throwing a chair that happened to hit a teacher. Meanwhile, football players have gotten away with a long list of items, and often have minimized or no consequences to allow them to still play.
Just because an athlete or two has a consequence more grave than another person, does not really mean that is the standard practice.
There was a kid here who spent a year and a half in a TYC facility for throwing a chair that happened to hit a teacher. Meanwhile, football players have gotten away with a long list of items, and often have minimized or no consequences to allow them to still play.
Just because an athlete or two has a consequence more grave than another person, does not really mean that is the standard practice.
CitizenKane
Well-Known Member
Interesting discussion. Clearly leaving the punishment up just to those in charge has had major failings all across the country, but then, we all should have learned the hard way by now that mandatory sentencing has only created problems in the court system. Do we really need to pass those problems down to colleges? Perhaps punishment guidelines is a better start. That being said, judging whether someone is a bad person or just a person who made a mistake (Clearly everyone on this board other than me has made many) isn't something a system can do nor is it something that a person does very well...even groups of people together often fail. People will be people, they will do bad things, we suck (Except me since I embody perfection) and every answer put forth by society to handle these types of issues has been flawed as well. Therefore all decisions should be mine only mine. Feel free to name me potentate at any time.
Very good question. They would if I were in charge. I guess another question is "do CU football players get special treatment in these cases or are they punished the same or even more harshly than the general student population?" I guess you could argue that just by the fact that they have a free ride they are privleged and, therefore, should be held to a higher standard.