FB: Presidents' Athletic Conference

[jknezek]

Come on Wally. The only excuse for that kind of violence is genuine fear for your safety. There is no excuse for it on the playing field. The opposing player said something crude about his mother 47 times during the game? Still can't excuse it. Say something back about what you did to his sister last night if you must, but you don't commit assault. You got cheap shotted below the knees on a few plays? Fine, next time you scrum jam an elbow into his gut. That's the little dirty stuff that happens in a game and it's not something to be proud of or accept, but it is excusable. This particular reaction, an obvious assault, is completely inexcusable.

[wally_wabash]

Come on Wally. The only excuse for that kind of violence is genuine fear for your safety. There is no excuse for it on the playing field. The opposing player said something crude about his mother 47 times during the game? Still can't excuse it. Say something back about what you did to his sister last night if you must, but you don't commit assault. You got cheap shotted below the knees on a few plays? Fine, next time you scrum jam an elbow into his gut. That's the little dirty stuff that happens in a game and it's not something to be proud of or accept, but it is excusable. This particular reaction, an obvious assault, is completely inexcusable.

Just to be clear, I think the player acted inappropriately and has earned a season-long suspension as well as the possibility of criminal action.  It was awful.  Full Stop. 

Now, I'd just like to know what else happened out there that led to the brutality.  I think that's a fair ask. 

[GillCJ1]

Wow!  There's just no excuse for that.

Not at all condoning the action...BUT.  But there's NO excuse for that?  You can't think of even one excuse- one thing said or done not captured by the 60 seconds of video we've seen that might have incited the Westminster player?  Again, I'm not condoning that action and that kid unfortunately can't play football anymore this season.  He gave that up when he started face punching.  But my first feeling on watching the video is that that tackle and those haymakers were provoked by something beyond standard issue on-field trash talk.  What happened there isn't the reaction of somebody who is just frustrated about losing and getting blocked on a kick return.  There's more investigating to be done on this I think.

No doubt.  I'm sure the kid was provoked in some way.  I'd like to know his reasons for doing it, too.  I still stand by my statement, though.

[ExTartanPlayer]

I definitely think that player has to sit out the rest of the year and perhaps even face some legal issues over this.  I'd just like to know more about what happened during the game and between those two players specifically before doling out white hats and black hats.

I have had a few interesting discussions with my father about this.  My father never played football, but has now spent the better part of his adult life attending my pee-wee, junior high, high school, collegiate games and subsequently remained devoted enough that he is attending some football game virtually every weekend, be it our hometown high school, one of the many D2 or D3 schools where we know someone playing, or the occasional D1 game (just last week we went to Hawaii @ Ohio State, just to take in the experience and support Hawaii!). 

We are both in agreement that this behavior is abhorrent and that there is no excuse - I agree with jknezek that even if the dude has called your mother dirty names all night and threatened to murder your sister, there is still no excuse for this on the field - but admit that in some other cases, it can be hard to draw the line between what constitutes regular on-field, boys-mixing-it-up behavior with a criminal assault.  It's even more muddled with hockey - fighting is an accepted part of the game, but if a guy swings a stick or gets slashed with a skate, now we're talking assault.  I would actually prefer to see harsher penalties enforced on any degree of extracurricular activity so this line is made more clear.

On a tangent here...a local high schiool coach was recently suspended (and may be fired, the school board is still reviewing the case, I think) for some degree of physical contact with his own player during a preseason scrimmage.  Much as wally wants to see the tape here, I kind of wanted to see the tape when I heard about it.  Why?  Because I don't know (from the newspaper's description of the incident) what transpired, and I'd like to see what happened before passing judgement.  Here's what the paper had to say:

"District officials have not publicly released any details about the incident. However a source told the (paper) that (coach) ran onto the field during a play and threw a hard block at a (team) lineman, knocking him to the ground.  The incident was captured on video by the (team) football staff, but that video has not been shared with the public. It has been viewed by district officials as part of their investigation."

While this sounds a little off-beat to me and might be a genuinely problematic thing, again...I want to see the video before deciding if this was an off-the-chain, he's-gotta-go incident or a coach getting a little overzealous trying to get his young lineman fired up.  I don't believe we should go back to the Woody Hayes and Bear Bryant style, but surely there has to be some allowance for a coach to teach technique and motivate his charges, right?

(Note: I know that the very end of this is far, far from the Westminster incident...the prior discussion just kind of led me on this tangent)

[SpartanMom_2016]

Wow!  There's just no excuse for that.

Not at all condoning the action...BUT.  But there's NO excuse for that?  You can't think of even one excuse- one thing said or done not captured by the 60 seconds of video we've seen that might have incited the Westminster player?  Again, I'm not condoning that action and that kid unfortunately can't play football anymore this season.  He gave that up when he started face punching.  But my first feeling on watching the video is that that tackle and those haymakers were provoked by something beyond standard issue on-field trash talk.  What happened there isn't the reaction of somebody who is just frustrated about losing and getting blocked on a kick return.  There's more investigating to be done on this I think.

You ARE condoning the action by insisting that there might be something that could justify it.  When my kids were growing up I always told them that you cannot control what someone else says or does but you CAN control how you react to it.  Reacting by committing a crime is never ever justified.

[Pat Coleman]

The player has left the team. Story in the Post-Gazette.

[sigma one]

Provoked is a relative term.  Many of you Wabash guys know my background.  I've studied the short video, which does not provide what may have led to the punches.  Perhaps the game tape will provide some context.  In my opinion no matter what happened to "provoke" the incident, it is inexcusable, and perhaps criminal.  Most of us have had our parentage questioned, our mothers and sisters maligned, etc--I know i don't have to go on.  Taking into account all of this, including some off-camera bad behavior by the W & J player prior to what the video segment shows (and I can't speculate on what may or may not have happened), there is no excuse for the deliberate attack.  We all know that high emotion, competitiveness, even personal animosity can play a role when violence occurs.  I more than once had talks with students (you Wabash guys know what I mean) about their violent reactions to events.  The rationalizations and excuses varied from "I was drunk," to he "dissed" me, to he hit on my girlfriend--and even some more elaborate and clever defenses.  None of those excuses excused the violence that ensued, although some of it led me to question the other student(s) involved about their behavior. 
     And in an athletic contest, these kinds of violent incidents, with big, strong people (bigger and stronger than most young men themselves realize) must be punished in a way that sends a message to the player and to all who are trying to find the best way to play games.  As some  have noted, there may be "extenuating circumstances," but those really should not much matter when determining the consequences of such a vicious attack against a player on his back and apparentlly defenseless.
     For the attacking player, the incident may have been out of character, or not. But he did what he did.  Some extenuating circumstances may affect the punishment. (I more than once had a student say to me something like "I've never been in trouble--I've never done anything like this before and don't know why, even now, I did what I did;  OR that might mean I've never been caught before.)  Regardless, the incident has to speak for itself  Only the severity of the punishment might be influenced by other factors.
     For the record, I was writing this when Pat posted about the player leaving the team.  I'll leave it up anyway.
 

[DagarmanSpartan]

Gang,

I think that this next game should give we CWRU fans some idea as to whether or not we've made any improvement from last season.

Our last game was a heartbreaker, so if we can turn things around and beat a team that felled us in our last meeting, then I'll feel better about our chances of going .500 or better.

I hope that Cuda continues to play as well as he did last game.

[SpartanMom_2016]

Who is going to be in Cleveland this weekend?  We will be up on the  top of the parking garage pre game.  Come say hello.

[DagarmanSpartan]

Would love to be there and say Hello, but alas, I'm stationed in Hawaii.

It's a bit far away!

Last year's Geneva game was the first CWRU football game that I attended in person in over 20 years.

I had the privilege of meeting ADL70 at that game.

[SaintsFAN]

The player has left the team. Story in the Post-Gazette.

To echo what was said in the article, I hope this kid grows from this.

[DagarmanSpartan]

Convincing win by CWRU today over a team that we lost to last season.

I now think that we'll be OK.  Cuda was great at QB.

Let's hope that the progress continues against Thiel next week.

[SaintsFAN]

Let's hope that the progress continues against Thiel next week.

Gonna go out on a limb here and say that if they don't beat Thiel next week, it shall be a long season up at CWRU.

We saw TMC get almost 10 yards a play today against the Tomcats. 

Trap game against a very good team in Westminster for the Saints.  Hope Scafe has their attention and not looking ahead to October 3rd because Westminster can beat Thomas More.

[ExTartanPlayer]

Observations from W & J 38, CMU 14 yesterday:

- W & J offense moved the ball just about at will.  Think this is partly a function of a very strong Presidents offense (Coughlin, Ruffing, the WR who wears #2, and the OL were all very impressive) and partly a function of a struggling, undersized CMU defense.  Tartans have moved one of last year's starting ILB's to the nose guard position, and it's not because he's exceptionally big - it's because they have no other good options on the DL at the moment.  Really spells trouble against any teams that can run effectively.

- On the flip side, CMU running back Sam Benger had a field day with 21 carries for 303 yards.  The Presidents did almost entirely shut down the CMU passing game, meaning that the Tartans still only got 14 points from two big Benger rushes and any third-and-long situation was a troublesome one.

Going forward, I expect that CMU will be able to compete evenly against the mid-level PAC teams on the strength of the OL and Benger, as long as the defense can do a little better against the Thiel and Grove City type teams as opposed to the mighty Prez.

W & J, on the other hand, is quite good but given what we have seen from the TMC offense so far...I wonder if the Prez defense will be a problem against the Saints.  Benger is a fabulous player but he is the only thing CMU has and W & J still could not stop him or even slow him down.  TMC has much more all-around offensive talent, and if they play a good game against W & J, I expect that they can score an awful lot on the Prez.

[SaintsFAN]

TMC has much more all-around offensive talent, and if they play a good game against W & J, I expect that they can score an awful lot on the Prez.

Man, I hope you're right!