Missouri Football Players to Strike

[GoIrish41]

Agreed. It's hard to believe that there wasn't a perceived widespread problem if a group of people is willing to stick their neck out like that. Nobody goes to lengths like that unless they believe in what they're doing, and moreover they took a larger risk than many realize. They could've jeopardized both their educational and athletic futures with their decision.

Exactly! People do not take these sort of risks casually. I am amazed how dismissive some are being about this. It appears that is the very attitude that made this boil up to the level of national attention.

 

[gkIrish]

Exactly! People do not take these sort of risks casually. I am amazed how dismissive some are being about this. It appears that is the very attitude that made this boil up to the level of national attention.

Well let's be real. There is 0% chance the football team would suffer significant negative consequences considering the entire team acted in solidarity. What was the school going to do? Shut down the football program?

Second, while there is no way of knowing what he would actually do, the list of people who actually follow through on a hunger strike is pretty small. I seriously doubt this kid was going to kill himself over this, no matter what he said.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Well let's be real. There is 0% chance the football team would suffer significant negative consequences considering the entire team acted in solidarity. What was the school going to do? Shut down the football program?

Second, while there is no way of knowing what he would actually do, the list of people who actually follow through on a hunger strike is pretty small. I seriously doubt this kid was going to kill himself over this, no matter what he said.

You don't think there's a good chance that these guys get downgraded in the draft over this?

 

[tussin]

If boycotting a football game is all it takes to get a president impeached then I'm protesting my family's annual Turkey Bowl.

 

[kmoose]

Then don't try to grab an officers firearm away from him while you are wrestling with him through the open window of his car....

OK. Since this is now deemed an infraction-worthy post, let me put it in "nicer" terms: The forensic evidence in the Michael Brown case CLEARLY showed that Officer Darren Wilson's story of a physical struggle for control of his gun while he was seated in his car was supported by the evidence. But people are STILL trying to push the narrative that Mike Brown was just an innocent dude, gunned down by a racist cop while he was just walking down the street minding his own business. I don't think we ought to be catering to people who "feel threatened" by false narratives. Instead, maybe they should be responsible for accepting that, while they may have experienced some mild persecution(racial slurs, "looks" on the street, etc), the Ferguson case is not a reason for them to be hyper-sensitive about their physical safety. And that it's unreasonable to go around demanding that University Presidents resign because of their irrational fears.

 

[dublinirish]

You don't think there's a good chance that these guys get downgraded in the draft over this?

seriously????

 

[gkIrish]

You don't think there's a good chance that these guys get downgraded in the draft over this?

I certainly don't think there's a "good" chance. I don't think it will have any effect whatsoever. If anything, some GM might take it as a positive for "leadership."

 

[woolybug25]

Agreed. It's hard to believe that there wasn't a perceived widespread problem if a group of people is willing to stick their neck out like that. Nobody goes to lengths like that unless they believe in what they're doing, and moreover they took a larger risk than many realize. They could've jeopardized both their educational and athletic futures with their decision.

Exactly! People do not take these sort of risks casually. I am amazed how dismissive some are being about this. It appears that is the very attitude that made this boil up to the level of national attention.

I don't buy this. It's surprising to me that so many people are willing to just give a small group of angry students (because that's what it is, less than a third of a college campus at best) the benefit of the doubt simply because "why would they stick their neck out?"...

Let's revisit the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, shall we? There too, the public and social media immediately made the situation blow out of proportion. In this case, much like Mizzou, it led to innocent faculty to resign. The President of the University warned in a school-wide e-mail of threats of gang violence against Duke students. Other Duke students claimed they had been threatened ("I swear... somebody called me a slur and I saw a swastica made of shit... "). Mobs protested outside the house that had been the site of the party, banging pots and pans at early hours of the morning. It turned into complete chaos with the same level of demand on the President of the university.

Photographs of lacrosse team members had been posted prominently around Durham and on the Duke University campus with accompanying captions requesting that they come forward with information about the incident. They cancelled the entire season for the team.

Seemed like a lot of people were willing to stick their neck out, hell.. the prosecutor straight up lied in efforts to falsely convict a bunch of kids for a crime they didn't commit. He was disbarred and forced to resign. He was willing to "stick his neck out" and was completely wrong. Why is it so hard to believe that this is the case here?

 

[IrishinSyria]

I certainly don't think there's a "good" chance. I don't think it will have any effect whatsoever. If anything, some GM might take it as a positive for "leadership."

Yeah, I don't know about that. Don't rock the boat is generally the prime directive for guys with pro aspirations, especially if they realistically grade out as mid-late round bubble candidates.

It's at least a risk these guys would have thought about before they went through with this.

 

[GoIrish41]

Well let's be real. There is 0% chance the football team would suffer significant negative consequences considering the entire team acted in solidarity. What was the school going to do? Shut down the football program?

Second, while there is no way of knowing what he would actually do, the list of people who actually follow through on a hunger strike is pretty small. I seriously doubt this kid was going to kill himself over this, no matter what he said.

Do you think these students didn't see what they were doing as a risk? Scholarship football players refusing to practice or play football represents no risk at all to them personally. Initially, the team did not act in solidarity. There were 30 players who initially joined the protest and their teammates joined them after the fact.

Hunger strikes often fail to the extent that the striker does not starve him or herself to death ... that's true. But, say it drug on for 20 days. How much damage does that do the the protestor's body. In other words, even if he didn't die, he was pretty obviously willing to put himself through some misery and risk long term health problems over this cause.

The larger point is that the issues that brought about these protests were clearly important to those protesting. There are many in this thread who have dismissed their cause out of hand because they don't feel in was a worthy endeavor, or they are just a bunch of dumb, entitled kids. My post had to do with how important these issues on the Missouri campus seemed to be to the protestors -- not really about whether there would actually ever be any negative consequences as a result of their actions. I doubt the football players calculated that the would protest and nothing would happen to them as a result of their actions. They probably thought it was entirely possible that they would lose their scholarships, and yet they joined the protest. They certainly thought what they were doing was more important than their place on the football team, or at the university, for that matter.

Instead of dumping on these kids, we should be aplauding their convinction.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Exactly! People do not take these sort of risks casually. I am amazed how dismissive some are being about this. It appears that is the very attitude that made this boil up to the level of national attention.

Good grief dude. If you want to apologize for your "white privilege" then do so. But keep me and my "attitude" out of it.

I will wait for you to defend the majority white students at a university when they start protesting that the milk in the dining hall should all be white and not chocolate. They feel marginalized and threatened because of it and demand the resignation of the President of the university for it.

Furthermore... what really is the risk today when the word racism is thrown out there? I can answer that one. There is really no risk. It's all a reward proposition due to the very climate we live in called political correctness. If you are white and you oppose what is being protested, you are branded a racist. Plain and simple.

 

[dublinirish]

so you guys think its ok on a campus in 2015 for a group of students to be subjected to racial slurs by fellow students and this isn't a big deal? is that really what you are saying?

 

[tussin]

The larger point is that the issues that brought about these protests were clearly important to those protesting. There are many in this thread who have dismissed their cause out of hand because they don't feel in was a worthy endeavor, or they are just a bunch of dumb, entitled kids. My post had to do with how important these issues on the Missouri campus seemed to be to the protestors -- not really about whether there would actually ever be any negative consequences as a result of their actions. I doubt the football players calculated that the would protest and nothing would happen to them as a result of their actions. They probably thought it was entirely possible that they would lose their scholarships, and yet they joined the protest. They certainly thought what they were doing was more important than their place on the football team, or at the university, for that matter.

Instead of dumping on these kids, we should be aplauding their convinction.

Conviction shouldn't be applauded if it is misplaced. As wooly mentioned, everyone in the Duke lacrosse case had conviction it what they were doing.

There are racist people everywhere, and there will always be racist people everywhere... all these protesters managed to do was get a white guy fired who had NOTHING to do with the incident in question. Demanding the president resign and denounce his "white privilege" is utterly ridiculous.

 

[Rocket's Rocket Fan]

As a millennial who tries to see both sides of this story, I find this both interesting and a little scary. While looking deeper into this story I found this article from a college professor very interesting. I think unfortunately I think that that has happened at Mizzou could set up a dangerous precedent. Where is the end game? Does it stop when everyone mind numbingly agrees?

I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me - Vox

 

[RDU Irish]

College kids do stupid stuff and let their emotions run their life. The only way I can imagine the people on here are giving so much credit to a bunch of 18-22 year olds is that they are probably not that far removed from being 18-22. Grow up and pull up your pants. Stop acting like insolent children. And, my favorite - being right is rarely enough.

Respect is commanded, not demanded. These stupid articles whining about not being respected only highlight that fact of life.

 

[T Town Tommy]

so you guys think its ok on a campus in 2015 for a group of students to be subjected to racial slurs by fellow students and this isn't a big deal? is that really what you are saying?

Not saying that at all. But the demands made for remedy of the situation was ridiculous. There is no evidence of systematic racism on the campus so why should the president of the school resign? He should not have. Whether he acted appropriately when concerns were raised is open for debate.

 

[connor_in]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Mizzou?src=hash">#Mizzou</a> needs a new Chancellor? I hear this guy's available. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/YouPCBro?src=hash">#YouPCBro</a> <a href="https://t.co/Hs2aPGoha1">pic.twitter.com/Hs2aPGoha1</a></p>— Amy Lutz (@amylutz4) <a href="https://twitter.com/amylutz4/status/663850946988916736">November 9, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[gkIrish]

Yeah, I don't know about that. Don't rock the boat is generally the prime directive for guys with pro aspirations, especially if they realistically grade out as mid-late round bubble candidates.

It's at least a risk these guys would have thought about before they went through with this.

Michael Sam "rocked the boat" and it got him drafted when basically every expert said he wasn't worthy of being drafted in terms of talent.

so you guys think its ok on a campus in 2015 for a group of students to be subjected to racial slurs by fellow students and this isn't a big deal? is that really what you are saying?

No one is saying it's okay for students to be subjected to racial slurs. It's obviously not. The debate is about whether what's going on at Missouri is somehow different than most other college campuses and whether someone deserved to get fired because of it.

 

[tussin]

so you guys think its ok on a campus in 2015 for a group of students to be subjected to racial slurs by fellow students and this isn't a big deal? is that really what you are saying?

No, it's NOT okay to be racist. But instead of demanding that innocent people get fired, why don't they focus their anger on actual racists?

 

[RDU Irish]

WTF ever happened to "Sticks and stones"? Wasn't that a staple of growing up? Or have we sissified the country to the point that name calling is worse than assault?

 

[woolybug25]

so you guys think its ok on a campus in 2015 for a group of students to be subjected to racial slurs by fellow students and this isn't a big deal? is that really what you are saying?

What are you talking about? There was no "group of student subjected to slurs", there was an off campus incident (supposedly) where a black student was yelled at from a moving vehicle and another supposed incident where a student claimed to have seen a swastika made of crap.

People keep acting like a verifiable, public action of racism took place that has caused all of this. These cases are isolated and unverified. It's a bunch of rioting over a couple random acts. Not large scale, institutional racism.

Again... there are 35k students at this school. There were 7 rapes and a myriad of assaults actually reported to the Mizzou PD that apparently are less important than someone getting called a mean name off campus. Apparently the faculty of the school should be busy making widespread change because of unverified stories about human crap being made into a hate symbol. That's what they should be focused on. That is what needs to be rioted against.

 

[irishff1014]

WTF ever happened to "Sticks and stones"? Wasn't that a staple of growing up? Or have we sissified the country to the point that name calling is worse than assault?

Yes

 

[GoIrish41]

I don't buy this. It's surprising to me that so many people are willing to just give a small group of angry students (because that's what it is, less than a third of a college campus at best) the benefit of the doubt simply because "why would they stick their neck out?"...

Let's revisit the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, shall we? There too, the public and social media immediately made the situation blow out of proportion. In this case, much like Mizzou, it led to innocent faculty to resign. The President of the University warned in a school-wide e-mail of threats of gang violence against Duke students. Other Duke students claimed they had been threatened ("I swear... somebody called me a slur and I saw a swastica made of shit... "). Mobs protested outside the house that had been the site of the party, banging pots and pans at early hours of the morning. It turned into complete chaos with the same level of demand on the President of the university.

Photographs of lacrosse team members had been posted prominently around Durham and on the Duke University campus with accompanying captions requesting that they come forward with information about the incident. They cancelled the entire season for the team.

Seemed like a lot of people were willing to stick their neck out, hell.. the prosecutor straight up lied in efforts to falsely convict a bunch of kids for a crime they didn't commit. He was disbarred and forced to resign. He was willing to "stick his neck out" and was completely wrong. Why is it so hard to believe that this is the case here?

I'm generally open to your opinions and insights. And, while I do not always agree with you on issues, you always make me think about my own positions. As you know, I have sent you PMs in the past that complimented you on your intellect and fairness. But, in this situation, I'm trying to understand where you are coming from. I'm honestly trying to understand your objections to their "cause." Your positions seem to be uncharacteristically dismissive of these students, and I'm trying to see it as you do. Are you suggesting that "one third of the campus" spontaneously decided to cause chaos for no good reason whatever? Do you not think there is anything to their perception that black students were being treated poorly on campus? It seems to me their objections are about more than just the shit swastika and a truck load of rednecks barking racial slurs. I would guess that those incidents -- ignored by the administration -- were simply the tipping point of something that had a steady undercurrent over a long period of time. You seem to be locked onto a couple of incidents (which you said you do not believe happened) and how they, and they alone, led to the resignation of an "innocent" person. I suspect that the protesting students don't see it that way. I suspect they see this as a problem that is baked into the culture of the campus, and these couple incidents are just the latest examples of a larger widespread injustice.

 

[dublinirish]

What are you talking about? There was no "group of student subjected to slurs", there was an off campus incident (supposedly) where a black student was yelled at from a moving vehicle and another supposed incident where a student claimed to have seen a swastika made of crap.

People keep acting like a verifiable, public action of racism took place that has caused all of this. These cases are isolated and unverified. It's a bunch of rioting over a couple random acts. Not large scale, institutional racism.

Again... there are 35k students at this school. There were 7 rapes and a myriad of assaults actually reported to the Mizzou PD that apparently are less important than someone getting called a mean name off campus. Apparently the faculty of the school should be busy making widespread change because of unverified stories about human crap being made into a hate symbol. That's what they should be focused on. That is what needs to be rioted against.

A timeline of the University of Missouri protests - CNN.com

October 4 -- A drunken white student disrupts an African American student group, the Legion of Black Collegians, preparing for homecoming activities and uses a racial slur when they asked him to leave. "Not only did this individual disrupt our rehearsal, but we were also made victims of blatant racism in a space that we should be made to feel safe," the group said. Loftin issues a statement the next day, saying "racism is clearly alive at Mizzou." "What we have done is not enough. Every member of our community must help us change our culture," he said.

 

[gkIrish]

The larger point is that the issues that brought about these protests were clearly important to those protesting. There are many in this thread who have dismissed their cause out of hand because they don't feel in was a worthy endeavor, or they are just a bunch of dumb, entitled kids. My post had to do with how important these issues on the Missouri campus seemed to be to the protestors -- not really about whether there would actually ever be any negative consequences as a result of their actions. I doubt the football players calculated that the would protest and nothing would happen to them as a result of their actions. They probably thought it was entirely possible that they would lose their scholarships, and yet they joined the protest. They certainly thought what they were doing was more important than their place on the football team, or at the university, for that matter.

Instead of dumping on these kids, we should be aplauding their convinction.

Personally I don't doubt that these people found this issue to be important. I'm not saying they aren't being genuine. I'm saying let's not paint them as martyrs. I think there is a strong argument to be made that a 4-5 Missouri team comes out of this with overall positive results for themselves and the team as a whole. And that was their goal so I guess good for them. I just don't see what these "negative consequences" are. Although I asked the question earlier in this thread, I am highly skeptical that the players would do this if it meant losing scholarships. I just don't buy that.

 

[gkIrish]

I'm generally open to your opinions and insightes. And, while I do not always agree with you on issues, you always make me think about my own positions. As you know, I have sent you PMs in the past that complimented you on your intellect and fairness. But, in this situation, I'm trying to understand where you are coming from. I'm honestly trying to understand your objections to their "cause." Are you suggesting that "one third of the campus" spontaneously decided to cause chaos for no good reason whatever? Do you not think there is anything to their perception that black students were being treated poorly on campus? It seems to me their objections are about more than just the shit swastika and a truck load of rednecks barking racial slurs. I would guess that those incidents -- ignored by the administration -- were simply the tipping point of something that had a steady undercurrent over a long period of time. You seem to be locked onto a couple of incidents (which you said you do not believe happened) and how they, and they alone, led to the resignation of an "innocent" person. I suspect that the protesting students don't see it that way. I suspect they see this as a problem that is baked into the culture of the campus, and these couple incidents are just the latest examples of a larger widespread injustice.

This wasn't a movement that originated with 1/3 of the campus taking action. It originated with just a small group of people and grew from there. So it's not like 1/3 of campus felt the need to protest and make demands. A handful of students did and then a bunch of other people jumped on for the ride. Happens all the time. Hell there are "professional protesters" who literally get paid to picket.

 

[IrishinSyria]

September 12 -- Student Government President Payton Head uses Facebook to broadcast his frustration with bigotry, anti-homosexual and anti-transgender attitudes at the school after people riding in the back of a pickup truck screamed racial slurs at him. "For those of you who wonder why I'm always talking about the importance of inclusion and respect, it's because I've experienced moments like this multiple times at THIS university, making me not feel included here," he wrote in the widely shared post.

Again, the problem was not one or two isolated incidents. It was that black students did not feel safe, and that they did not feel like the administration took their concerns seriously.

Crisis management is an executive function. The president failed to manage a crisis- even if- the underlying cause was entirely fabricated, which seems highly unlikely. I mean, is anyone seriously surprised that there are racist students at Mizzou?

 

[kmoose]

I'm generally open to your opinions and insightes. And, while I do not always agree with you on issues, you always make me think about my own positions. As you know, I have sent you PMs in the past that complimented you on your intellect and fairness. But, in this situation, I'm trying to understand where you are coming from. I'm honestly trying to understand your objections to their "cause." Are you suggesting that "one third of the campus" spontaneously decided to cause chaos for no good reason whatever? Do you not think there is anything to their perception that black students were being treated poorly on campus? It seems to me their objections are about more than just the shit swastika and a truck load of rednecks barking racial slurs. I would guess that those incidents -- ignored by the administration -- were simply the tipping point of something that had a steady undercurrent over a long period of time. You seem to be locked onto a couple of incidents (which you said you do not believe happened) and how they, and they alone, led to the resignation of an "innocent" person. I suspect that the protesting students don't see it that way. I suspect they see this as a problem that is baked into the culture of the campus, and these couple incidents are just the latest examples of a larger widespread injustice.

Except that they weren't ignored by the administration. 4 days after the racial slur incident, the President announced mandatory inclusion training for all students and staff. And 2 days after the swastika incident, the President had a meeting with the CS1950 students. He did not give in to the unreasonable demands that they published, just 6 days prior. If you are going to build your case on a false narrative, then you shouldn't be surprised when people don't buy into it.

 

[RDU Irish]

What are the odds the new university president is black?

And did anyone see the pic of the outgoing Chancellor? Holy creepshow, Batman!

 

[gkIrish]

Again, the problem was not one or two isolated incidents. It was that black students did not feel safe, and that they did not feel like the administration took their concerns seriously.

Crisis management is an executive function. The president failed to manage a crisis- even if- the underlying cause was entirely fabricated, which seems highly unlikely. I mean, is anyone seriously surprised that there are racist students at Mizzou?

Serious question....have there been recent incidents of violence that support the notion that black students were not safe? If not, perhaps that's why Wolfe did not take any specific immediate actions.