Unsportsmanlike Conduct?

[mountainman]

Here's a follow-up to the Miami-FIU incident:

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/6176924

[donovan]

There is no doubt labeling is a technique that deflects the attention of a serious problems to areas where resolvement is seldom addressed.

I am still of the considered opinion, when teams have player conduct issues either on or off the field that escalate in proportion, it is because coaches and administration have failed to nip unacceptable behavior in the bud.

A prime example of that was the University of Washington. Their program is still feeling the affects of their looking the wrong way. When the UW was in their prime with Don James and the school was winning, even some part of a National Championship, nobody cared what the athletes were doing. Then the roof blew off. James retired and the new coaches are under all kinds of scrutiny because of things going on. The booster club ran the program and did so with money. Recruiting was like unto NFL. At practice players are driving off in new cars and when asked of the coaches their reply was. "Oh we never notice what the kids are driving. Well the list went on and the Athletic Department tried to defend and ultimately they knew what was happening and tired to cover it up.

Finally a new college President....absolutely it goes that high in these programs....comes in and says..."cleaning it up....New athletic director....somehow the Tyee...booster Club gets reigned in...New coaches.....Willingham...and the program is struggling....but as of this point' no nonsense it tolerated...Makes recruiting tough..but it will come.

I mentioned once before when BYU had their problems, multiple players involved in a scandal involving behavior not allowed at that university....Everyone was fired...Athletic Directors...Coaches.....The University Vice President took over all athletic departments until they could sort it out. They seem to be doing much better.

Smaller schools that have problems may not make the news, but they have the same issues. Some address them in the right way and some do not.

The Duke Lacrosse situation is a good example....without discussion of what happened....someone at the school said....there is principle here for the integrity of our school and we are here for education...no Lacrosse right now....were innocents hurt...sure...no all players were accused or involved....but action was taken.

Well the point is...not every player on the teams are problems...but there are a few apples in the barrel and they school has to be willing to set aside some statistics for principles....Ultimately the program will be better...e.g. Ohio State...and issues become isolated and not representative.

As with all behavior problems...it has almost nothing to do with football or whatever sport....it as to do with standards being disregard for the sake of expediency or greed (winning)

[billybud]

You can be assurred that the FIU coach resigned because of having the second worst record in IA football....not because of a scuffle.

If FIU was 9-1, the coach would be getting a bonus.

[mountainman]

There is no doubt labeling is a technique that deflects the attention of a serious problems to areas where resolvement is seldom addressed.

Well, donovan, I believe there is little doubt that we, us, the system, they, them, or whatever noun or pronoun is attached, has shown tolerance or as some would say, "a double standard" for talent or position.

I'm not ready to pass judgement on whether or not that's a good or a bad thing, but I think it's important to know that it is a reality.

[donovan]

There is no doubt labeling is a technique that deflects the attention of a serious problems to areas where resolvement is seldom addressed.

Well, donovan, I believe there is little doubt that we, us, the system, they, them, or whatever noun or pronoun is attached, has shown tolerance or as some would say, "a double standard" for talent or position.

I'm not ready to pass judgement on whether or not that's a good or a bad thing, but I think it's important to know that it is a reality.

I would be interested in what cases you think "labeling" large groups for the actions of a few is all right.

The problem describe in this thread only uses football as an example...this is in every aspect of our lives and it is not good. I will refrain from the listing all the examples where the consequences of using such a technique has caused problems from families being shunned to genocide. It is my opinion that sports do reflect our attitudes in society.

Amen.

[mountainman]

There is no doubt labeling is a technique that deflects the attention of a serious problems to areas where resolvement is seldom addressed.

Well, donovan, I believe there is little doubt that we, us, the system, they, them, or whatever noun or pronoun is attached, has shown tolerance or as some would say, "a double standard" for talent or position.

I'm not ready to pass judgement on whether or not that's a good or a bad thing, but I think it's important to know that it is a reality.

I would be interested in what cases you think "labeling" large groups for the actions of a few is all right.

The problem describe in this thread only uses football as an example...this is in every aspect of our lives and it is not good. I will refrain from the listing all the examples where the consequences of using such a technique has caused problems from families being shunned to genocide. It is my opinion that sports do reflect our attitudes in society.

Amen.

Whenever the a firemen enters a burning building in an attempt to save a life, whenever a soldier defends his country, whenever the Congress of the United States passes a law, by a 51-49 margin, that protects and preserves the rights of citizens, whenever 12 people set in a jury box, whenever a group of medical researchers develop a cure for a disease that impact all of mankind, whenever a teacher enlightens a classroom full of kids, whenever the farmers feed hungry people ......

My point being is that labeling is a reality, that can be both good and bad.

I do consider labeling a suspect practice since just because an individual has one trait of a 'labelled group" that does not necessarily mean the individual or the group has all the traits attributed to the individual or the group.

[billybud]

Stereotypes are part of the human condition...programmed by evolution...shortcuts in thinking often spawned by kernels of truth.

One only has to see a partial flash of tawny yellow through the tall african grass for the mind to fill in "lion". Experiments with humans find that we recognize a broad caricature before we do the actual portrait photo. Bononos react more strongly to a caricature of a predator than to an actual picture. The mind is survival programmed to shortcut a few strokes into a full picture . Likewise, since we can not know every individual, it has been useful to broadly classify groups.

Me? I regard every Pit Bull as dangerous...some owners will expound on the sweetness of their lovely pet and accuse me of stereotyping at the same time that I am looking around for a weapon. Yep..I have been mauled by one of those beasts from hell while walking my lab (the beast is buried in the woods by my house). I shudder to think if it had been my 94 pound wife fighting the monster instead of 240 pound me...I had a tooth embedded in my eye ridge, came close to losing an eye, had stitches in my hand, arm, and a calf muscle torn loose. I now stereotype the hell out of this breed and carry a gun when I walk my dog in the woods. Stereotyping be darned, a good Pit Bull is a dead Pit Bull.

[donovan]

Whenever the a firemen enters a burning building in an attempt to save a life, whenever a soldier defends his country, whenever the Congress of the United States passes a law, by a 51-49 margin, that protects and preserves the rights of citizens, whenever 12 people set in a jury box, whenever a group of medical researchers develop a cure for a disease that impact all of mankind, whenever a teacher enlightens a classroom full of kids, whenever the farmers feed hungry people ......

.

I read this and wanted to stand up and sing God Bless America....which is a good thing. And I do not disagree with you.

[donovan]

Stereotypes are part of the human condition...programmed by evolution...shortcuts in thinking often spawned by kernels of truth.

One only has to see a partial flash of tawny yellow through the tall african grass for the mind to fill in "lion". Experiments with humans find that we recognize a broad caricature before we do the actual portrait photo. Bononos react more strongly to a caricature of a predator than to an actual picture. The mind is survival programmed to shortcut a few strokes into a full picture . Likewise, since we can not know every individual, it has been useful to broadly classify groups.

Me? I regard every Pit Bull as dangerous...some owners will expound on the sweetness of their lovely pet and accuse me of stereotyping at the same time that I am looking around for a weapon. Yep..I have been mauled by one of those beasts from hell while walking my lab (the beast is buried in the woods by my house). I shudder to think if it had been my 94 pound wife fighting the monster instead of 240 pound me...I had a tooth embedded in my eye ridge, came close to losing an eye, had stitches in my hand, arm, and a calf muscle torn loose. I now stereotype the hell out of this breed and carry a gun when I walk my dog in the woods. Stereotyping be darned, a good Pit Bull is a dead Pit Bull.

My 9th wife weighed 94 pounds once...I think that was in the fourth grade for a about 6 minutes.....

Lewis Carroll had it right in Alice in Wonderland..."First the verdict...then the trial."

I wonder whatever happened to her.

[mountainman]

...shortcuts in thinking often spawned by kernels of truth.

..."First the verdict...then the trial."

You guys are good.

Hopefully neither of you will mind if I use your thoughts and quotes somewhere, sometime, someplace, in the future. You have my word I shall attribute them to you guys ...... folks I really don't even know.

[billybud]

Lewis Carroll had it right in Alice in Wonderland..."First the verdict...then the trial."

I think trials are a product of civilization. We have the leisure to adjudicate guilt and punishment. In more primitive circumstances, we revert to what keeps us safest. In the woods, when approached by a Pit Bull, my verdict is in...I'm drawing my weapon and getting a sight alignment. In the Corps, when we observed movement where we expected NVA to be, we called in strikes....the times that innocent farmers were hit, oh well, they were in the wrong place. I guess that they were posthumously declared innocent.

There once was a trial in Pensacola. A man and his wife were coming back down a desolate road, as it got dark, from the Fort Pickens State Park. A group of partying black men who had been on the beach blocked the road and stopped the guys car. The guy killed a man and blew through the human barrier. He was put on trial for manslaughter...the black community claimed the man's stereotyping led to murder. The jury found that the man was in reasonable fear for himself and his wife and acted in self defense. It was a mini OJ trial in that the community was split along racial boundries.

I thought that the man made a quick judgement, maybe influenced by stereotypes, but a judgement that was defensible based on circumstances.
However, whether you thought that the jury made the right call or not surely differed based on whether you were white or whether you were black.

[Spence]

You see, in that situation I wouldn't care about the color. The fact that someone was blocking my path in a dark place, at night, and away from immediate help would make me kick into survival mode. I would do whatever I thought I needed to do to protect myself and my family. But it would be the situation, not who the men were.

As for the Pit Bulls, or just dogs in general, they rely on instincts. Humans are capable of rational thought, big difference. Still the breed of dog doesn't matter as much as the personality. I had German Shepard dogs growing up. Never once did one so much as nip at me and I provoked them plenty of times as a young child. I got a black lab for my kids because my wife was scared of Shepards. The dog snapped at my daughter, although caused no damage, and I thought she must have done something to it. Later it bit my mother when she tried to pet him. That was his last day on earth. So much for the friendly breeds.

[..fanatic]

You can be assurred that the FIU coach resigned because of having the second worst record in IA football....not because of a scuffle.

If FIU was 9-1, the coach would be getting a bonus.

Having closely followed the career of Don Strock, I sincerely doubt that record has anything to do with it. Besides, their record is totally defendable - young team, hard early-season schedule which they played well against - then the troubling incident at Maimi and resulting suspensions.

I suspect there are circumstances, far removed from the record, that led to his decision.

[billybud]

Don't be ridiculous. Breed of dog matters most of all.

How many times do you read of a man being mauled almost to death by a Labrador or a Golden Retriever? You don't. What you read in the news is Pit Bull attacks...maybe a Rotweiler now and again....The dog lovers are full of the "blame the dog, not the breed" propaganda....but together, the Pit Bull and Rottweiler breeds account for a hugely disproportionate share of the human deaths caused by dog bite. Just these two breeds accounted for one half of human deaths by dog bite according to the Center of Disease Control and Prevention.

But labs and retreivers are two of the most common dogs...why is that it is Pit Bulls and Rottweilers are killing children and not labs? It is genetics. There is certainly differences of temperment among dog breeds. It would be foolish to ignore the reality of Mendelson's peas.

According to someone who is in the place to know...

"Carl Friedman, director of San Francisco's Animal Care and Control, said that although he does not want to condemn an entire breed, local and national statistics support taking steps to regulate pit bulls, such as mandatory neutering.

"When you have a mauling where a 12-year-old child is killed and when 50 to 60 percent of our hearings for vicious and dangerous animals are for pit bulls, you don't have to be a brain surgeon to see we have a problem with pit bulls," Friedman said. "

It is no stereotyping to call a Pit Bull an aggressive and inherently dangerous breed. And the "blame the dog, not the breed" nonsense ignores reality and the effect of genetics on disposition.

The only good Pit Bull is a dead one and any that close within 15 feet of me will become a good dog.

(and Spence...German Shepards are listed as a breed with aggressive tendencies...that's why yopu see them take down police fugitives while the labrador just sniffs car trunks).

[Spence]

I'm not defending Pit bulls or saying that they aren't genetically bred to be attack dogs. I'm saying that animals, all animals can attack in any situation. The comparison to humans isn't valid because humans have the ability to think rationally. They have the ability to make choices. The dogs rely on instint. That was my point.