LOL @ Brendan Gibbons

[Sbee]

Part of this issue is about the possibility that this was swept under the rug because he was a football player. The fact that he wasn't a big contributor to the team does undermine that theory (only some). Whether or not he's on the football team at all shouldn't impact how he's treated, but if he wasn't a football player, then there'd be no accusation of a football-related cover-up.

yes that's why this story is appearing on multiple sports message boards. my issue is why would it matter if he were a freshman kicker who sucked? couldn't you just say that Michigan would have no problem kicking a football player off the team if he were involved in such an incident? why specify position, eligibility, and talent? it makes it seem like Michigan would have no problem kicking him off given those 3 factors.

 

[thewolverines24]

I just read the full police report and there is no way you can tell if this was an assault or not. Her statements show that she was absolutely wasted the night this happened. She didn't remember why semen was on her dress, doesn't remember intercourse at all, she puked from intoxication (she was chugging vodka), she states she did not know what she was doing at the time. Gibbons statements are much more coherent.

I'm not saying this wasn't an assault and I'm not saying it was. Gibbons shouldn't have been with someone that drunk. No doubt there, but that doesn't mean he forced it.

 

[redandguilty]

yes that's why this story is appearing on multiple sports message boards. my issue is why would it matter if he were a freshman kicker who sucked? couldn't you just say that Michigan would have no problem kicking a football player off the team if he were involved in such an incident? why specify position, eligibility, and talent? it makes it seem like Michigan would have no problem kicking him off given those 3 factors.

It shouldn't matter as a part of the decision making process, but it does impact how people view the decision.

In general terms, if a player is kicked off the team, it is viewed as an example of a coach being a consistent disciplinarian if the player is big contributor to the team. When non-contributors get booted, people don't see it as as much of an indicator of anything.

This is the reverse of that. If a big contributor had not been booted, it would have looked more like football player favoritism and it would be viewed with even more skepticism.

 

[TheVictors]

the sentence was that Michigan would have no problem kicking a freshman kicker who sucked off the team, would they have a problem kicking an all American off the team? how would it be different?

No, you're taking Hungry out of context. He was saying that ...had these charges been substantiated when they happened -- when Gibbons was a Freshman - that the team would have simply booted him off the team.

The only reason you have a hard on for this "story" is because the player involved plays at Michigan.

"All American" players are treated differently than "freshman anything who suck" at every program across the country, all the time. You don't think that Von Miller was given preferential treatment by coaches and cops while at A&M when he and other players were busted with weed???

Weird how Miller kept on playing and some "player who sucked" took the fall and was kicked off the team.


...sort of an "injustice" that happens all the time, but have at your windmill Senor Quixote!!

 

[douglas2k]

I just read the full police report and there is no way you can tell if this was an assault or not. Her statements show that she was absolutely wasted the night this happened. She didn't remember why semen was on her dress, doesn't remember intercourse at all, she puked from intoxication (she was chugging vodka), she states she did not know what she was doing at the time. Gibbons statements are much more coherent.

I'm not saying this wasn't an assault and I'm not saying it was. Gibbons shouldn't have been with someone that drunk. No doubt there, but that doesn't mean he forced it.

Your statement is typical of an old school of thought about what constitutes rape. If the person is too drunk to give consent, then that is also rape. The days of getting your date so drunk that you get "lucky" should be behind us.

I disagree that Gibbons story is more credible but even if you take the position that her memory was incomplete, she knows enough to still say that she did not consent.

 

[johnny2x2x]

Your statement is typical of an old school of thought about what constitutes rape. If the person is too drunk to give consent, then that is also rape. The days of getting your date so drunk that you get "lucky" should be behind us.

I disagree that Gibbons story is more credible but even if you take the position that her memory was incomplete, she knows enough to still say that she did not consent.

And she also had te rape kit showing vaginal tears and bruises on her arms where she was held down.

Is it your position Douglas that the primary reason she chose to not go forward with the rape charges is that she felt her safety was in danger due to the Lewan threats?

 

[Sbee]

No, you're taking Hungry out of context. He was saying that ...had these charges been substantiated when they happened -- when Gibbons was a Freshman - that the team would have simply booted him off the team.

The only reason you have a hard on for this "story" is because the player involved plays at Michigan.

"All American" players are treated differently than "freshman anything who suck" at every program across the country, all the time. You don't think that Von Miller was given preferential treatment by coaches and cops while at A&M when he and other players were busted with weed???

Weird how Miller kept on playing and some "player who sucked" took the fall and was kicked off the team.


...sort of an "injustice" that happens all the time, but have at your windmill Senor Quixote!!

hungry can speak for himself but why mention that he sucked? what does that have to do with anything? is there a sliding scale for talent and tolerance for rape allegations?

 

[thewolverines24]

Your statement is typical of an old school of thought about what constitutes rape. If the person is too drunk to give consent, then that is also rape. The days of getting your date so drunk that you get "lucky" should be behind us.

I disagree that Gibbons story is more credible but even if you take the position that her memory was incomplete, she knows enough to still say that she did not consent.

You don't know if she drunkenly consented or not because of the fact that she may or may not even remember herself.

I said she was undoubtedly too drunk for him to have sex with and it should not have happened. I've been in a very similar situation with a friend before. We were making out at the bar and we went back to her house. She climbed on top of me and tried to have sex with me in her living room. I said no let's go to your room in case anyone comes home. I laid her on the bed and we started making out and undressing. We started making out again, but she ended up passing out because she was too drunk. I tucked her in to bed, went and got her dog and put her dog on the bed with her because they always sleep together, and I then walked away. Called her friends to make sure they came and checked on her.

How easily could I have been blamed for doing something wrong here even though I didn't? I was lucky in the fact that my friend remembered what happened, apologized to me for what happened and we remain friends to this day.

If the situation was altered and she never passed out, we had sex, but she blacked out and didn't remember what really happened then what? I'm a rapist because of drunken memory loss? No. If that's the case, then I've been raped by a woman before.

 

[redandguilty]

hungry can speak for himself but why mention that he sucked? what does that have to do with anything? is there a sliding scale for talent and tolerance for rape allegations?

There's a sliding scale for talent in how the public perceives disciplinary matters.

 

[Sbee]

There's a sliding scale for talent in how the public perceives disciplinary matters.

that's true but the quote was that Michigan would have no problem disciplining a freshman kicker who sucked, that has nothing to do with public perception. that has to do with discipline and it implies that given different variables they might have had a problem with kicking a player off the team

 

[douglas2k]

And she also had te rape kit showing vaginal tears and bruises on her arms where she was held down.

Is it your position Douglas that the primary reason she chose to not go forward with the rape charges is that she felt her safety was in danger due to the Lewan threats?

She said that she was receiving "threats", plural, so I assume she was receiving threats from others as well. She was also dependent on an athletic scholarship and so she may have worried that she would lose her scholarship. I think you can also tell from the many comments on this blog and others that she feared she would be subjected to all kinds of verbal attacks on her character by Michigan football fans.

Lewan's threats (there were two of them) were probably particularly credible to her since he was Gibbons best friend.

I think her decision, then and now, not to go ahead with a criminal trial was complicated but the threats from Lewan were a factor.

 

[redandguilty]

that's true but the quote was that Michigan would have no problem disciplining a freshman kicker who sucked, that has nothing to do with public perception. that has to do with discipline and it implies that given different variables they might have had a problem with kicking a player off the team

You're looking for something that isn't there. Nobody's saying what you want us to be saying.

 

[TheVictors]

No, dipshit -- I'm just helping you to understand what Hungry meant because I didn't find it so hard to get. You are insinuating that Gibbons was given "special treatment" because AT THIS POINT, he's still on the team.

What Hungry was saying is that ...Gibbons COULD'VE BEEN KICKED OFF the team but wasn't and what is it to a football program to boot a Freshman guilty of such an aggregious act.

You're fixated on the fact that Gibbons goes to Michigan.

Talent has EVERYTHING to do with it. There IS a sliding scale relative to punishment.... sorry if that flies in the face of your idyllic world of college football where justice reigns supreme.


How many times was Honeybadger in trouble before LSU was FORCED to boot him?? Three ...four times?! How many years were there insinuations about Tressel before something finally broke .... about a decade?!?! How was it all those starters in Gainesville never happened to miss any big SEC games or the game against FSU...??

Why is that?? Oh, it's because of talent.


So it's up to you to PROVE that Gibbons was allowed to remain on the team DESPITE clear evidence proving him guilty and that he was allowed to stay BECAUSE OF TALENT and bias for TALENT alone.

Hungry is simply saying that he'd be gone, back then, were he actually guilty of the charges or deemed to be by the program.

 

[TheVictors]

You're looking for something that isn't there. Nobody's saying what you want us to be saying.

exactly. this is stupid message board garbage. conversation going nowhere with illogical tangents and posts taken out of context.

I'm out of here.

 

[redandguilty]

If Douglas2k feels like answering questions: How did the Regents react the times you spoke? If this isn't the forum for it, I could see that.

 

[Sbee]

No, dipshit -- I'm just helping you to understand what Hungry meant because I didn't find it so hard to get. You are insinuating that Gibbons was given "special treatment" because AT THIS POINT, he's still on the team.

What Hungry was saying is that ...Gibbons COULD'VE BEEN KICKED OFF the team but wasn't and what is it to a football program to boot a Freshman guilty of such an aggregious act.

You're fixated on the fact that Gibbons goes to Michigan.

Talent has EVERYTHING to do with it. There IS a sliding scale relative to punishment.... sorry if that flies in the face of your idyllic world of college football where justice reigns supreme.


How many times was Honeybadger in trouble before LSU was FORCED to boot him?? Three ...four times?! How many years were there insinuations about Tressel before something finally broke .... about a decade?!?! How was it all those starters in Gainesville never happened to miss any big SEC games or the game against FSU...??

Why is that?? Oh, it's because of talent.


So it's up to you to PROVE that Gibbons was allowed to remain on the team DESPITE clear evidence proving him guilty and that he was allowed to stay BECAUSE OF TALENT and bias for TALENT alone.

Hungry is simply saying that he'd be gone, back then, were he actually guilty of the charges or deemed to be by the program.

I know hungry is saying he'd be gone if he was found guilty or if the administration thought it was warranted. what I am also saying is that it seems like he might not have been gone if it was Denard or a more prominent player at the time, kind of strange.

also, Vic, just understand that everyone posting in this thread is doing so because Gibbons goes to Michigan. I know that your infatuation with me blinds you from reality but would any of you post on this topic on this board if it were a soccer player from Ferris state? don't call me out for doing the same thing everyone else does, just because I went to MSU. grow up Vic, come on, you're embarrassing yourself with this bullshit.

 

[redandguilty]

I know hungry is saying he'd be gone if he was found guilty or if the administration thought it was warranted. what I am also saying is that it seems like he might not have been gone if it was Denard or a more prominent player at the time, kind of strange.

Why does it seem that way to you?

 

[douglas2k]

If Douglas2k feels like answering questions: How did the Regents react the times you spoke? If this isn't the forum for it, I could see that.

I took a picture of the young woman with me to give to President Coleman and said that she should apologize to her for failing to protect her. When I walked to the President's end of the table to put it in front of her, I got catcalls from several of the Regents. Other than that there was no response.

 

[Sbee]

Why does it seem that way to you?

because he had to specify class, position, and talent level.

you could just say that Michigan would have no problem kicking a football player off the team if the charges were pursued or if there was more evidence.

 

[redandguilty]

because he had to specify class, position, and talent level.

you could just say that Michigan would have no problem kicking a football player off the team if the charges were pursued or if there was more evidence.

That's been explained plenty and that's not what you said anyway. You said, in the context of someone having been found guilty or the admin feeling it was warranted, that it seems like the player wouldn't be gone if it was a prominent player. What makes it seem that way to you?