(01-20-2015 09:24 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote: Way to go Memphis, way to bring down the hammah!
Missouri St. and Kansas?
Boy, they sure learned their lesson!
Hell, half of them graduated. We didn't start this crap. BYU said things all week, including their coach.
Not sure about Connecticut, but in Tennessee you don't start fights, but you damn sure finish them.
I thought then, and still do today, that if the player who was seen swinging his helmet around (with obvious intent to injure and/or maim) is still on the team, then Memphis was never serious about disciplining the offending players. At all.
Ok. He shouldn't have done it but he never hit anyone. He's punished.
Suuuuuuuuure he is. Lemme guess, he's punished for an entire half against Missouri St.?
Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
(01-20-2015 09:45 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote: There were lots of players out there with "serious intent" to injure. I'm sure the various players with get 'rewarded' based on the evidence. The only question might be the degree --- but as long as it's proportional I'm fine with it (ie the BYU players, especially the one who started the whole thing, get similar punishments) -
So a player swinging his helmet, intending to injure and/or maim, is to be applauded? Good to know.
So you're saying everyone should receive the death penalty? Good to know.
I'm amused that you came up with that conclusion, when I never said and/or even alluded to such a thing. But, since you asked.......his punishment should be removal from the football team.
(01-20-2015 09:45 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote: There were lots of players out there with "serious intent" to injure. I'm sure the various players with get 'rewarded' based on the evidence. The only question might be the degree --- but as long as it's proportional I'm fine with it (ie the BYU players, especially the one who started the whole thing, get similar punishments) -
So a player swinging his helmet, intending to injure and/or maim, is to be applauded? Good to know.
No one said that.
I guess you would applaud the guy who sucker punched our kid while with a coach. How about the guy who started it? How about them talking trash all week? How about their coach lying? How about all the cheap shots during the game and the season for that matter?
It was a fight, people were punished, we didn't start it, but we did finish it. We suspended 12 players because of this BS.
Seriously, how many people have been in fight they didn't start? It happens.
Screw BYU.
I call BS on the bolded. I've said, and will continue to say, that those "suspensions" were nothing more than Memphis making it look like they're coming down with the hammah on those 12 players.
(01-20-2015 11:00 PM)cbhstiger Wrote: Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
(01-20-2015 11:00 PM)cbhstiger Wrote: Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
Like I said, if our two toughest opponents were the first two games we played, they would be suspended for those. It just so happens that the teams aren't as high profile, but that doesn't mean they aren't being punished or the administration isn't serious about it. I think it is the correct thing to do by not playing at the start of the season, instead of picking random dates against better competition.
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2015 11:14 PM by cbhstiger.)
(01-20-2015 09:45 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote: There were lots of players out there with "serious intent" to injure. I'm sure the various players with get 'rewarded' based on the evidence. The only question might be the degree --- but as long as it's proportional I'm fine with it (ie the BYU players, especially the one who started the whole thing, get similar punishments) -
So a player swinging his helmet, intending to injure and/or maim, is to be applauded? Good to know.
No one said that.
I guess you would applaud the guy who sucker punched our kid while with a coach. How about the guy who started it? How about them talking trash all week? How about their coach lying? How about all the cheap shots during the game and the season for that matter?
It was a fight, people were punished, we didn't start it, but we did finish it. We suspended 12 players because of this BS.
Seriously, how many people have been in fight they didn't start? It happens.
Screw BYU.
I call BS on the bolded. I've said, and will continue to say, that those "suspensions" were nothing more than Memphis making it look like they're coming down with the hammah on those 12 players.
All for show, as the kids used to say!!
You don't know that until you see the game suspensions, which won't be announced until just before the season starting, b/c some suspension lengths will depend on the other work they have to do between now and then.
And so far, BYU has announced nothing. If ours is all for show, what is theirs? You don't seem so indignant about them. The ones who started this.
(This post was last modified: 01-20-2015 11:17 PM by TripleA.)
(01-20-2015 11:00 PM)cbhstiger Wrote: Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
Like I said, if our two toughest opponents were the first two games we played, they would be suspended for those. It just so happens that the teams aren't as high profile, but that doesn't mean they aren't being punished or the administration isn't serious about it. I think it is the correct thing to do by not playing at the start of the season instead of picking random dates against better competition.
Hi cbhstiger.
Why bother responding to this guy?
Everyone knows who he is and his only reason for posting is get responses from good folks like he has in this thread.
I'm honestly not giving you a hard time for responding because a lot of good folks do, but it's a complete waste of time. It's all just personal entertainment to that knucklehead. He can't possibly believe all the junk he spouts here and other places.
(01-20-2015 11:00 PM)cbhstiger Wrote: Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
Like I said, if our two toughest opponents were the first two games we played, they would be suspended for those. It just so happens that the teams aren't as high profile, but that doesn't mean they aren't being punished or the administration isn't serious about it. I think it is the correct thing to do by not playing at the start of the season instead of picking random dates against better competition.
Hi cbhstiger.
Why bother responding to this guy?
Everyone knows who he is and his only reason for posting is get responses from good folks like he has in this thread.
I'm honestly not giving you a hard time for responding because a lot of good folks do, but it's a complete waste of time. It's all just personal entertainment to that knucklehead. He can't possibly believe all the junk he spouts here and other places.
(01-20-2015 11:00 PM)cbhstiger Wrote: Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
Like I said, if our two toughest opponents were the first two games we played, they would be suspended for those. It just so happens that the teams aren't as high profile, but that doesn't mean they aren't being punished or the administration isn't serious about it. I think it is the correct thing to do by not playing at the start of the season instead of picking random dates against better competition.
Hi cbhstiger.
Why bother responding to this guy?
Everyone knows who he is and his only reason for posting is get responses from good folks like he has in this thread.
I'm honestly not giving you a hard time for responding because a lot of good folks do, but it's a complete waste of time. It's all just personal entertainment to that knucklehead. He can't possibly believe all the junk he spouts here and other places.
Well said
Honestly, he's just being a complete jerk in this thread for some reason. He does that on occasion and it's best just to walk away and let him rant all alone with no one paying attention until he gets tired, bored, and goes away for awhile.
(01-20-2015 11:00 PM)cbhstiger Wrote: Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
we would suspend them for the higher profile toughest games but they all look about the same to us, might as well get it outa the way early.
(01-20-2015 11:00 PM)cbhstiger Wrote: Why would we wait to suspend players for the better teams on our schedule? Im sure if we played Ole Miss and Cincy in the first two games they would be suspended for them. People acting like there is no punishment because the opponents may be inferior are a bit baffling, but to each his own.
Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
Like I said, if our two toughest opponents were the first two games we played, they would be suspended for those. It just so happens that the teams aren't as high profile, but that doesn't mean they aren't being punished or the administration isn't serious about it. I think it is the correct thing to do by not playing at the start of the season instead of picking random dates against better competition.
Hi cbhstiger.
Why bother responding to this guy?
Everyone knows who he is and his only reason for posting is get responses from good folks like he has in this thread.
I'm honestly not giving you a hard time for responding because a lot of good folks do, but it's a complete waste of time. It's all just personal entertainment to that knucklehead. He can't possibly believe all the junk he spouts here and other places.
Hello, OT. I understand what you're saying and completely agree. Im done responding to him or anyone else that thinks this isn't a "proper" punishment as I've made my point and there is no reason to keep rehashing it.
(01-20-2015 11:07 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote: Because if Memphis was truly serious in bringing down the hammah on these 12 players, they wouldn't do it for Missouri St. and/or Kansas. They'd do it for somebody more high profile. You and I both know they were never serious about disciplining those 12 players.
Like I said, if our two toughest opponents were the first two games we played, they would be suspended for those. It just so happens that the teams aren't as high profile, but that doesn't mean they aren't being punished or the administration isn't serious about it. I think it is the correct thing to do by not playing at the start of the season instead of picking random dates against better competition.
Hi cbhstiger.
Why bother responding to this guy?
Everyone knows who he is and his only reason for posting is get responses from good folks like he has in this thread.
I'm honestly not giving you a hard time for responding because a lot of good folks do, but it's a complete waste of time. It's all just personal entertainment to that knucklehead. He can't possibly believe all the junk he spouts here and other places.
Well said
Honestly, he's just being a complete jerk in this thread for some reason. He does that on occasion and it's best just to walk away and let him rant all alone with no one paying attention until he gets tired, bored, and goes away for awhile.
I agree. I don't know what else he wants the AD and coaches to do.
Remember, this is BYU, that suspended a starting basketball player on the then #3 team in the nation for 8 games (including all of the conf tourn AND all 3 games in the NCAA) because he had premarital sex (against BYU Honor Code).
No clue what BYU will do in this situation...but I'd hate to be a BYU player in any sport that does something against their honor code.
