The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(04-13-2018 01:20 PM)The Flagship Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 12:42 PM)84Monarch Wrote:  So I guess there is one set of standards for coaches kids and another for everyone else. I would hate to have to explain that one. Kids from other programs have been let go without felony convictions next to their name.

Not that I am defending the decision, but THIS felony was a victimless crime.

Understood, but it still has overtones of a double standard that I would not want to be responsible explaining.

(04-13-2018 07:40 PM)odufansam Wrote:  Pinkard’s situation was different in that there were multiple infractions over time. DW just made one terrible decision.

You are correct, but Pinkard was not convicted of anything that we know of

I am thinking that if we had all the facts laid out in front of us in all the cases, the reinstatement of DW would not be much of an outlier.
But the court of public opinion is not privy of all that information. Nor should they be. The optics are bad, but I don't think it is as bad as it appears.
So the real debate is whether or not this is worth the bad optics. I can understand if someone said that one person, especially a non-QB, is not critical to a football team.

It will be interesting to see if he ever sees the field again. That knee injury seems to dragging on for quite some time, especially considering there was no surgery reported.

(04-14-2018 09:44 AM)GotLabradors Wrote:  It will be interesting to see if he ever sees the field again. That knee injury seems to dragging on for quite some time, especially considering there was no surgery reported.

I felt the same way. He's a Jr.r. Hasn't ever really played much or made an impact. If that knee isn't healed by now, it may never be up to the strain of college ball.

(04-14-2018 09:17 AM)The Flagship Wrote:  I am thinking that if we had all the facts laid out in front of us in all the cases, the reinstatement of DW would not be much of an outlier.
But the court of public opinion is not privy of all that information. Nor should they be. The optics are bad, but I don't think it is as bad as it appears.
So the real debate is whether or not this is worth the bad optics. I can understand if someone said that one person, especially a non-QB, is not critical to a football team.

That is my point, it just doesn’t look good. Besides the kid has really been an asset to the team

How has he been an asset to the team?

(04-14-2018 07:58 PM)ODUBB12BB Wrote:  How has he been an asset to the team?

He used to pick up the kicking tee for the first 4 years of the program!

(04-14-2018 08:55 PM)AimHigh Wrote:  

(04-14-2018 07:58 PM)ODUBB12BB Wrote:  How has he been an asset to the team?

He used to pick up the kicking tee for the first 4 years of the program!

Wow

(04-14-2018 08:55 PM)AimHigh Wrote:  

(04-14-2018 07:58 PM)ODUBB12BB Wrote:  How has he been an asset to the team?

He used to pick up the kicking tee for the first 4 years of the program!

HAHAHA! That's more than I could think of!

(04-15-2018 01:37 PM)ODUBB12BB Wrote:  

(04-14-2018 08:55 PM)AimHigh Wrote:  

(04-14-2018 07:58 PM)ODUBB12BB Wrote:  How has he been an asset to the team?

He used to pick up the kicking tee for the first 4 years of the program!

HAHAHA! That's more than I could think of!

He's the coaches son. There's not a single coach out there that doesn't dream of coaching his own son. I'll not be the one to hold this against Bobby Wilder. I understand completely.

I have waited and waited for someone else to provide this information but no-one is putting it out there so here you go. I was told a couple of months ago Coach Wilder put the issue of his son before his Team Committee (forgot their formal name) and they were unanimous for letting him return to the team. I was also told that it was then passed to the AD and President Broderick who both gave a thumbs up and so he is back. I do not know anything about the reasoning behind these decisions but I am guessing it may be due to: 1)it was not at the university or having anything to do with a football practice, trip or game. 2)There was no victim, no robbery etc. 3)The only injury inflicted was to the guilty party-Derek Wilder. 4)As far as I know he had been a good student and team member up to that point - no prior bad behavior. Emphasis here that these 4 points are my conjecture about why he was allowed to remain. FWIW - I was also told by someone I trust that they (ODU Powers) did consider the "bad optics" issue but decided they should not let that be the main bases for their decision.

HA! I suggested the team meeting explanation several months ago and some on here ridiculed the idea.

(04-17-2018 10:26 AM)Old Dominion Wrote:  HA! I suggested the team meeting explanation several months ago and some on here ridiculed the idea.

Yeah I laughed and said what a joke. If I wanted to break the rules I'd have taken notes with Dereks situation. Make friends with the committee, commit nothing more than a victimless crime, and last but not least make sure its all done off campus.

Kid is smart. Very elaborate plan to break the rules.

Derek, is a much smarter kid than I thought. To think about all that while driving a motorcycle at high speeds. Brilliant.

(04-17-2018 01:32 PM)DaBigBlue Wrote:  Derek, is a much smarter kid than I thought. To think about all that while driving a motorcycle at high speeds. Brilliant.

Ya know he did film it!!! Film study!!!