FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

wally_wabash · January 09, 2006, 04:25:38 PM

Whoa whoa whoa. Off-the-field problems are mandatory to be a respected member of the SEC. They're exempt. We hold the rest of the major college football programs to a higher standard.

lancer98 · January 10, 2006, 10:48:02 AM

Thanks for the jab Wooscot!! I would be willing to bet Oldguy was not referring to me as I was standing on the sidelines during those years which were early in my career. So he was not able to feel the thuggery of myself.

I too was interested to hear that comment from him. Just what I saw we did not have a lot of "thugs" on those teams. Now, WooScot you would have to comment of the championship team from '97. I don't know those guys very well but what little I do know I could se some of them not being too kind on the field.

wooscot · January 10, 2006, 02:56:00 PM

Well, I'll give oldguy the benefit of the doubt in making is point, but it was still an interesting comment. Maybe he witnessed a couple late hits during a game or two, or some chipping off the pile, but nothing that in my opinion would amount to thuggery. I always associate that label to what players do off the field, like the situation at Va Tech or the Clarett example. I can't remember any Woo players from that era being suspended for failing drug test, DUIs, for brandishing firearms, for robbing people, or anything like that, nor do I have first hand knowledge of those types of behavior occuring at other NCAC schools, with the exception of one somewhat high profile incident at Witt. Then again, those Wooster teams did have some players did get into "trouble" now and then with the school, but nothing that would amount to thuggery.

Lancer, maybe you should change your screen name to "WooThug".

Thugs Out!

oldguy · January 10, 2006, 03:33:18 PM

I wasn't trying to make the point that those Wooster teams were a bunch of thugs. My point was that Witt's teams were no different than the Wooster teams, and that its silly to make a joke about one team, when your own team is the same way.

Personally, I don't think either school has had many problems. Yes, Witt had one of its stars get in trouble, but thats one, and he wasn't a thug. He just didn't have the best judgement. Perhaps the word "thug" should have been replaced with a different word, but I typed quickly and didn't have a thesaurus with me.

wally_wabash · January 10, 2006, 03:48:55 PM

Should we even keep talking about Maurice Clarrett in terms of him being a football player? When was the last time he actually played meaningful football? Scrambling into an SUV without fumbling the assailed's cell phone doesn't count. This guy isn't a football player anymore...he's just a common criminal.

Li'l Giant · January 10, 2006, 06:02:16 PM

Does anyone else see a subtle racial component to the use of the word "thug"?

While he certainly was one, no one referred to Bill Romanowski as a "thug". But Clarett, Vick, et al, they're "thugs".

I'm not saying anyone on this board is racist by any means. I just think that when most football fans or pundits spout off about "thugs" they're pointing in one direction.

formerd3db · January 10, 2006, 06:48:36 PM

Lil'Giant:

With all due respect, I think you are slightly mistaken on that. I agree with you that "a thug is a thug", but I believe that most people (and I include myself in that) do not conotate the word thug with being a racist term nor imply it to. It applies to anyone who engages and/or shows that associated type of behavior/actions.

smedindy · January 10, 2006, 07:06:02 PM

Hey, I always referred to Romanowski as a thug.

formerd3db · January 10, 2006, 07:24:06 PM

Wally:
That may soon apply to Vick as well. Man, what a misguided young man he is (I have stronger terms that would fit, however, I'm trying to do the right thing and avoid such remarks). At any rate, I hope he gets the help he needs. Yet, he also needs to admit that he needs to face the consequences for his recent misdeeds. And BTW, we all read in the newspapers that he apologied to the Virginia Tech community, however, I did not see where he ever apologized to the player he stepped on (even after he said he did and was "called out" on that for that statement not being true. Of course, always the possibility he did it in private at the time of this VT apology (before this gun possession thing) and it just wasn't made public. A sad and unfortunate situation, but like Clarett, he has himself to blame (but , I won't hold my breath waiting to hear him eventually admit that publically

).

Man, aren't you guys glad we don't have this kind of stuff (usually

) in DIII?

oldguy · January 11, 2006, 09:55:11 AM

Lil' Giant,

I agree that some people attribute the term "thug" to a particular race. However, I also agree with formerD3B. In most cases with sports analysts, I don't think it has any racial connotation.

In my case, it had nothing to do with race (I know you weren't implying that, but I want to explain it anyway). Considering Wooster's and Witt's teams were predominately white, the term thug was general for every player that acted innappropriately or got in trouble. In fact, the people I remember were all white (don't ask for names, because I don't remember).

I remember hearing sports analysts call Romanowski a thug repeatedly, especially after he came out with his book.

seinfeld · January 11, 2006, 09:56:17 AM

I see on Wittenberg's site they have an off-season program roster, and on it is Tristan Murray, so I think that pretty much says he is coming back next year. Looks like Will Block, a defensive back, is also using his 5th year.

http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/football/roster06.html

Since 2005 ended up being kind of a lost season for Wooster, I almost wish Schafer had gotten injured earlier so that maybe he could get that season back in 2007. But I guess he will have to make 2006 count big time.

BashBacker#16 · January 11, 2006, 10:23:26 AM

I was never under the impression that Murray was not coming back. Why would Witt post an "off season" roster? For dudes like us to track who is there and who is not?

Will Stokes be the Witt QB next season?

Why is it that Witt always seems to have the most 5th year guys - Goldsbury, Thomas, Holmes, etc.? Many of the other schools very rarely have 5th year players. I cannot remember a Wabash 5th year guy going back to the 90's - unless I am missing one. Hall of Famer WR Mike Funk '89 played as a 5th year guy after pursuing a semester at USC (baseball) - other then that? Current Jr. QB Dustin Huff would be one with 2 years of eligibility left.

wally_wabash · January 11, 2006, 10:35:01 AM

Wasn't Goldsbury on the 3-2 program with Clark Country Corrections?

I think Jaime Bowers used a fifth year, BB16. That guy was a train.

BashBacker#16 · January 11, 2006, 10:43:48 AM

I didn't realize he used a 5th year. He was a beast. The coaches called Bowers the best player in D3. Made it to the final cut for the New England Patriots as a TE. Great guy too.

wooscot · January 11, 2006, 11:04:52 AM

Wally, that was funny!

Lil Giant, this point has been made, but given the context of the discussion concerning NCAC football players, most of whom are "white," the application of the word "thug" does not resonate as racist. I can see how in some contexts it could be viewed as derogatory or a stereotype, but I don't think thats the case here.

The perception that Witt players always seem to have a fifth year is interesting in light of our recent discussions...