'11 FL DE Aaron Lynch (USF Transfer)

[Rack Em]

A DUI and alcohol related legal issues are actually worse than anything you listed above. And by no means am I stating Lynch is a better person than Floyd.

I don't think Lax meant that they compare, it was their respective responses to adversity/stupid decisions.

They both let their teammates down.
1) Lynch was a serious cancer in the locker room and on campus. Then he quit.
2) Floyd was a great teammate and accepted his punishment. He came back from it to do well on the field and graduate.

 

[IrishLax]

A DUI and alcohol related legal issues are actually worse than anything you listed above. And by no means am I stating Lynch is a better person than Floyd.

It's absolutely comical that you think a DUI is a bigger character flaw and more serious than assaulting women.

 

[greyhammer90]

How is a DUI or anything Mike did comparable to anything I listed above? I'll wait.

If Aaron's "alleged" conduct gets brought up I feel like Michaels "alleged" conduct should be fair game too. I have no idea if either is true, but I remember when there were several nasty rumors that got quickly scrubbed out by mods on ND boards regarding one of Michaels first alcohol related citations.

Second, are you kidding? A DUI is a lot worse than being a "general asshole". Last time I checked one of those things could kill San innocent person, and the other one couldn't. And he blew a .19. That guy knew he wasn't ok but decided to play the odds (I'm totally sure it was his first time drunk driving too.)

You go to ND = mixture between Ghandi and Jesus.
You don't go to ND = Stupid kid who will regret his decision forever.
You transfer/decommit from ND = Literally Hitler.

 

[Irish Insanity]

I don't think Lax meant that they compare, it was their respective responses to adversity/stupid decisions.

They both let their teammates down.
1) Lynch was a serious cancer in the locker room and on campus. Then he quit.
2) Floyd was a great teammate and accepted his punishment. He came back from it to do well on the field and graduate.

Floyd suffered a punishment for his that resulted in a change in him. Lynch didn't do anything that led to a punishment therefore his reaction couldn't be compared. Both let their teammates down. Both of their actions affected their teammates. However only one of them broke the law, and also put others at risk of loss of life while doing so.





And to clear, I'm a huge Floyd fan and supporter. But I'd also like to see Lynch showcase the talent he has and that his time at ND wasn't a fluke.

 

[irishog77]

If Aaron's "alleged" conduct gets brought up I feel like Michaels "alleged" conduct should be fair game too. I have no idea if either is true, but I remember when there were several nasty rumors that got quickly scrubbed out by mods on ND boards regarding one of Michaels first alcohol related citations.

Second, are you kidding? A DUI is a lot worse than being a "general asshole". Last time I checked one of those things could kill San innocent person, and the other one couldn't. And he blew a .19. That guy knew he wasn't ok but decided to play the odds (I'm totally sure it was his first time drunk driving too.)

You go to ND = mixture between Ghandi and Jesus.
You don't go to ND = Stupid kid who will regret his decision forever.
You transfer/decommit from ND = Literally Hitler.

So Floyd's bad conduct was done under the influence of alcohol. What was the mitigating factor in Lynch's bad conduct? A flawed character?

 

[woolybug25]

I slapped Hog's momma once...

but she was asking for it.

 

[greyhammer90]

So Floyd's bad conduct was done under the influence of alcohol. What was the mitigating factor in Lynch's bad conduct? A flawed character?

I'm confused by your argument. So if Aaron had been drinking the whole time his conduct would be more forgivable?

 

[ResLife Hero]

I'm confused by your argument. So if Aaron had been drinking the whole time his conduct would be more forgivable?

Also alcohol doesn't really mitigate anything in terms of what was "alleged". Any chance we can just quit the Floyd talk though?

 

[T Town Tommy]

Don't know as much about Lynch's background at ND - other than he looked great his first year. Floyd's issues are more well documented. But I wish nothing but the best for both of them.

 

[greyhammer90]

Don't know as much about Lynch's background at ND - other than he looked great his first year. Floyd's issues are more well documented. But I wish nothing but the best for both of them.

Agreed.

 

[Irish Insanity]

It's absolutely comical that you think a DUI is a bigger character flaw and more serious than assaulting women.

I know people that have been assaulted by their significant other. I also know people who have been convicted of DUI, including one who took a life, and one who lost their life to a person under the influence. Everyone I know who was assaulted is still breathing, unfortunately I can't say the same for the others.

 

[IrishLax]

If Aaron's "alleged" conduct gets brought up I feel like Michaels "alleged" conduct should be fair game too. I have no idea if either is true, but I remember when there were several nasty rumors that got quickly scrubbed out by mods on ND boards regarding one of Michaels first alcohol related citations.

Second, are you kidding? A DUI is a lot worse than being a "general asshole". Last time I checked one of those things could kill San innocent person, and the other one couldn't. And he blew a .19. That guy knew he wasn't ok but decided to play the odds (I'm totally sure it was his first time drunk driving too.)

You go to ND = mixture between Ghandi and Jesus.
You don't go to ND = Stupid kid who will regret his decision forever.
You transfer/decommit from ND = Literally Hitler.

I'd really like to hear the specifics of this "alleged" first incident that was really nasty. Maybe I missed something, but I think I've got a pretty clear grasp of everything Floyd did.

On one hand you have a person who was loathed by everyone on the team, went around starting fights virtually at random and assaulting women, was a complete jerk, and quit on his teammates.

On the other hand you have a person who was generally a hard working and great teammate, got a DUI, was generally well liked, and opted to come back for an extra year AND suffer through his separation from the University.

Those are literally polar opposites. So your entire "do you root for Floyd but against Lynch?" thin doesn't even hold water as the situations have zero similarities to even liken between the two players.

On top of that, a DUI is the epitome of a "mistake" crime. I, personally, hope for redemption with people that make mistakes. You'll meet tons of people who got DUIs that are otherwise upstanding citizens and good people. Starting dozens of fights and assaulting women is not a "mistake"... it's a pattern of behavior. And people with a serious character flaws like that I don't respect. Unlike the above, you're not going to find tons of woman beaters that are otherwise great guys you'd like to be family friends with.

 

[irishog77]

I'm confused by your argument. So if Aaron had been drinking the whole time his conduct would be more forgivable?

Perhaps. You're the lawyer-- you deal with mitigating factors in legal cases.

My point is Floyd made bad decisions when he was drinking (which we all have done), yet he seemed to have corrected a major mechanism that caused him to make bad decisions (he quit drinking. I'm not sure if he has maintained that corrective measure or not, but he seems to have at least positively evolved).

Lynch made bad decisions when he was sober. Could they have been corrected too? Possible. But people who take action and make decisions in the manner that Lynch has done (allegedly), usually have more going on, internally, than drankin' and boozin'.

 

[Rack Em]

Perhaps. You're the lawyer-- you deal with mitigating factors in legal cases.

My point is Floyd made bad decisions when he was drinking (which we all have done), yet he seemed to have corrected a major mechanism that caused him to make bad decisions (he quit drinking. I'm not sure if he has maintained that corrective measure or not, but he seems to have at least positively evolved).

Lynch made bad decisions when he was sober. Could they have been corrected too? Possible. But people who take action and make decisions in the manner that Lynch has done (allegedly), usually have more going on, internally, than drankin' and boozin'.

Voluntary intoxication is a defense to all Specific Intent crimes. I know this because I study.

 

[IrishLax]

I know people that have been assaulted by their significant other. I also know people who have been convicted of DUI, including one who took a life, and one who lost their life to a person under the influence. Everyone I know who was assaulted is still breathing, unfortunately I can't say the same for the others.

This is the classic anecdotal fallacy. There are also lots of people who have assaulted people and killed them. Just because you don't know one of them doesn't mean anything to me, sorry.

The truth is, there is mountains of evidence to suggest that driving under the influence in the grand scheme of things tends to typically result in no harm done. Only a small percentage of the time that someone drives impaired do they get into an accident, and only a small percentage of the time that they get into an accident does someone get seriously injured or killed.

Drunk driving is irresponsible and dangerous. It's a crime, as it should be, and is punished as such. And it's a tragedy that you know someone who was impacted by someone acting irresponsibly. But it's a crime of negligence, stupidity, and ignorance. Nobody gets behind the wheel of a car with the intention of harming another person. They get behind the wheel with the intent of getting to their destination, and if they harm themselves or someone else it's a mistake.

Whereas 100% of the time you choose to assault a woman as an uber athletic 250 pound man you are actively making a decision to harm another human being.

 

[IrishLion]

So, Lynch did, in fact, assault a woman?

 

[greyhammer90]

This is the classic anecdotal fallacy. There are also lots of people who have assaulted people and killed them. Just because you don't know one of them doesn't mean anything to me, sorry.

The truth is, there is mountains of evidence to suggest that driving under the influence in the grand scheme of things tends to typically result in no harm done. Only a small percentage of the time that someone drives impaired do they get into an accident, and only a small percentage of the time that they get into an accident does someone get seriously injured or killed.

Drunk driving is irresponsible and dangerous. It's a crime, as it should be, and is punished as such. And it's a tragedy that you know someone who was impacted by someone acting irresponsibly. But it's a crime of negligence, stupidity, and ignorance. Nobody gets behind the wheel of a car with the intention of harming another person. They get behind the wheel with the intent of getting to their destination, and if they harm themselves or someone else it's a mistake.

Whereas 100% of the time you choose to assault a woman as an uber athletic 250 pound man you are actively making a decision to harm another human being.

PM'd you.

 

[IrishLax]

PM'd you.

Thanks. Appreciate it dude.

 

[Irish Insanity]

This is the classic anecdotal fallacy. There are also lots of people who have assaulted people and killed them. Just because you don't know one of them doesn't mean anything to me, sorry.

The truth is, there is mountains of evidence to suggest that driving under the influence in the grand scheme of things tends to typically result in no harm done. Only a small percentage of the time that someone drives impaired do they get into an accident, and only a small percentage of the time that they get into an accident does someone get seriously injured or killed.

Drunk driving is irresponsible and dangerous. It's a crime, as it should be, and is punished as such. And it's a tragedy that you know someone who was impacted by someone acting irresponsibly. But it's a crime of negligence, stupidity, and ignorance. Nobody gets behind the wheel of a car with the intention of harming another person. They get behind the wheel with the intent of getting to their destination, and if they harm themselves or someone else it's a mistake.

Whereas 100% of the time you choose to assault a woman as an uber athletic 250 pound man you are actively making a decision to harm another human being.

Show me the legal papetwork/conviction of Lynch assaulting a woman. We both agree Floyd broke the law and drove drunk. I'll wait.

I guess those of us that still would like to see Lynch do well are using bad judgement being all the hearsay and alleged incidence. But those supporting Floyd (including myself) aren't even tho he's actually been convicted of a crime.

So if you had a daughter. Would you rather her boyfriend assault her (what's alleged of Lynch) or get in the car or be in the vicinity of a drunk driver?

 

[IrishLax]

Show me the legal papetwork/conviction of Lynch assaulting a woman. We both agree Floyd broke the law and drove drunk. I'll wait.

This is just so dumb. Why the hell do you think I said "alleged" from the very beginning?

DGB was never convicted of pushing a girl down some stairs, but everyone knows it happened and it's why he got kicked out of Missouri. But she didn't press charges... doesn't mean it didn't happen. There are hundreds of examples of things like this. And this thread isn't a court of law.

 

[Irish Insanity]

This is just so dumb. Why the hell do you think I said "alleged" from the very beginning?

DGB was never convicted of pushing a girl down some stairs, but everyone knows it happened and it's why he got kicked out of Missouri. But she didn't press charges... doesn't mean it didn't happen. There are hundreds of examples of things like this. And this thread isn't a court of law.

I guess, to me, comparing an allegation to a conviction is pretty stupid from the get go.

 

[irishog77]

Show me the legal papetwork/conviction of Lynch assaulting a woman. We both agree Floyd broke the law and drove drunk. I'll wait.

Right. And Dorial Green Beckham didn't beat that girl up because no charges were filed and OJ Simpson didn't kill his wife and another person because he wasn't convicted.

 

[Rack Em]

I guess, to me, comparing an allegation to a conviction is pretty stupid from the get go.

Why? Because one is issued from someone with zero firsthand knowledge of the situation and the other is? Because we both know that isn't true.

Lack of a conviction doesn't mean it didn't happen. Especially when all the circumstantial evidence points to it happening.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Right. And Dorial Green Beckham didn't beat that girl up because no charges were filed and OJ Simpson didn't kill his wife and another person because he wasn't convicted.

I didn't say what's being alleged never happened.

 

[Rack Em]

I didn't say what's being alleged never happened.

Then why is it stupid to compare allegations to convictions?

 

[Irish Insanity]

Then why is it stupid to compare allegations to convictions?

Allegations are side of a situation or what is believed to have happened without necessarily all the truth being known and what we know of the allegations are hearsay. A conviction is an admittance to breaking the law and to what's been alleged.

 

[gkIrish]

Show me the legal papetwork/conviction of Lynch assaulting a woman. We both agree Floyd broke the law and drove drunk. I'll wait.

I guess those of us that still would like to see Lynch do well are using bad judgement being all the hearsay and alleged incidence. But those supporting Floyd (including myself) aren't even tho he's actually been convicted of a crime.

So if you had a daughter. Would you rather her boyfriend assault her (what's alleged of Lynch) or get in the car or be in the vicinity of a drunk driver?

Your analogy doesn't make sense. The question you need to ask yourself is whether beating a woman to death is more or less "evil" than killing someone with your vehicle because you drove drunk.

 

[woolybug25]

 

[Rack Em]

Allegations are side of a situation or what is believed to have happened without necessarily all the truth being known and what we know of the allegations are hearsay. A conviction is an admittance to breaking the law and to what's been alleged.

But allegations are usually (almost always) based on circumstantial evidence, the same evidence that is used to bolster a conviction.

Not as strong as a conviction? Not debatable. You're right.
Often a fair proxy for a conviction? Looks like we disagree here.

*Obviously the above is in the court of public opinion.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Allegations are side of a situation or what is believed to have happened without necessarily all the truth being known and what we know of the allegations are hearsay. A conviction is an admittance to breaking the law and to what's been alleged.

Floyd's DUI was a victimless crime. Many of Lynch's alleged transgressions were not. Difficult to draw any kind of moral equivalency here.