OU Decommit
- Thread starter TU_BLA
- Start date
No. I think its because he now has offers from basically all the major programs which he got after committing to OU.
I agree that the timing is suspicous but my line of thought is that if you are a recruit and you absolutely WANT to be at OU
that you should be able to look past an event that does not represent the true feelings of the campus and fan base.
But he could be using it as a reason to go back and look at his other options now that he has plenty of them.
I would buy that he may have been looking to go back and look at his options again...this gave him that opportunity.
I think there will be more though and they won't veil it as much.
ADDED: Couple reports out there now that the decision was based on the video
This post was edited on 3/9 1:56 PM by TU_BLA
This is a really important read.
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-football-eric-striker-cant-stay-silent-any-longer/article/5399890/?page=1
http://newsok.com/oklahoma-football-eric-striker-cant-stay-silent-any-longer/article/5399890/?page=1
+1000 for Eric Striker. It's something everyone needs to keep in mind regarding any athlete in any sport at any school. That is not the sole definer of who they are.
Delance also told the DMN that the video was the reason he decommitted. Good for him being convicted enough to make a decision like that. Stoops is said to have reached out to him. I sort of feel bad for Stoops because his job just got tougher. Jenni Carlson wrote a good article in the Oklahoman this AM regarding how this will impact not only athletic recruiting, but trying to get students in general, especially your NMS students to go to OU.
Reports are also leaking out from former SAE members at other institutions that this is a problem nationwide at SAE chapters. Many of them claim the national organization's actions on Sunday by stripping the OU chapter of their affiliation does not go along with the underground culture promoted by SAE.
Also saw a report on KJRH this AM about an African American OU SAE alum who was hoping his son would grow up and be a legacy. He is not that long removed from his time there and his picture must surely be on the wall along with the entire brotherhood. How is it that an organization can claim brotherhood and fraternity as a lifelong perk of membership and say the things they said KNOWING there have been African American brothers in the past????
I am not naive enough to think racism no longer exists, but I am flabbergasted that even if individuals harbor an innate or even a learned hatred or bias, that they would express such hate publicly and openly. I am saddened that no one in the chapter was convicted enough to stand up and tell everyone to STHU.
I don't think there's many in this generation period that will stand up and tell people to STHU.
OU's Rep is severely tarnished
They'll B Long term effects 4 Race "U"
On the level of Him St.
& the Blue Rape devils
Mega,Multi, Media, instant info generation made it so
@ Wal Mart in Derby, Ks. today
Lady wearing an "OhNoUDidn't " shirt
Gal get heckled & stared @ by many folk's
She left the store very quickly
I'm just asking the question,
R their places in America
U shouldn't wear an OU shirt right now?
Potential social ramifications?
When the kids turn their backs, ur done!
They'll B Long term effects 4 Race "U"
On the level of Him St.
& the Blue Rape devils
Mega,Multi, Media, instant info generation made it so
@ Wal Mart in Derby, Ks. today
Lady wearing an "OhNoUDidn't " shirt
Gal get heckled & stared @ by many folk's
She left the store very quickly
I'm just asking the question,
R their places in America
U shouldn't wear an OU shirt right now?
Potential social ramifications?
When the kids turn their backs, ur done!
I think the good news from an outsider's perspective is that Oklahoma still is viewed as having a LONG way to go to be as wacked as Missouri and Kansas...
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Chito, I can't see how that is even possible. OK has state legislators that are an absolute embarrassment not only as lawmakers but as people living in civilized society and citizens are appalled by their behavior yet somehow these individuals are able to continually get elected! Some of the insane stuff that happens here makes OK a joke (or the butt of jokes) nationally.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Shon, I remember some of the issues, not so much in the mid to late 90's as much as from say 2000-2005 or so...can't say much about after that period. On the surface relations seemed OK...but I know there were always instances of trouble when football players would show up at a party on the row.
Race issues are an *entirely* different situation than TU's shift in party policy around 2000.
When fraternities became responsible for enforcing the attendance limits at their parties based on presubmitted lists and numbers like two guests per member (which could be barely 100 people), who do think was on those lists? FEMALES. Not many football players.
It was different when it was a free for all my freshman and sophomore year. By the time we were older and parties became that regimented based on risk management directives from the university, we just partied at apartments more. And now that there's infintiely more apartments on campus, plenty more room to spread out.
Frankly it's not fair to put all the burden and risk on fraternities for campus social life either. But that wasn't about race in the least. At that time sororities were also being threatened by nationals that anything more than 2 of your members together constitutes an unregistered party and could be punished. It was all risk management.
When fraternities became responsible for enforcing the attendance limits at their parties based on presubmitted lists and numbers like two guests per member (which could be barely 100 people), who do think was on those lists? FEMALES. Not many football players.
It was different when it was a free for all my freshman and sophomore year. By the time we were older and parties became that regimented based on risk management directives from the university, we just partied at apartments more. And now that there's infintiely more apartments on campus, plenty more room to spread out.
Frankly it's not fair to put all the burden and risk on fraternities for campus social life either. But that wasn't about race in the least. At that time sororities were also being threatened by nationals that anything more than 2 of your members together constitutes an unregistered party and could be punished. It was all risk management.
I can actually speak to both sides... as a student I hated going to frat parties. I wasn't a member of one and I wasn't female...thus not terribly fun for me.
As an administrator in the early 2000's and one that usually had the task of dealing with party aftermath, i.e. drunk freshmen females who were more worried about their sororities finding out they had to be picked up off the floor by RAs and hall directors than the fact that their BAC's were close to .2-.3 was a problem for me. The 1st question was "Are you going to tell my house?" and the 2nd was "Are my parents going to find out?" Do you see an issue with the priority there? Risk management at universities is huge. About 8 years ago a pledge at OU died from alcohol poisoning and no one discovered it until the next day. The student had passed out on the couch in the front room of the house. A parent visiting before a football game discovered him. With Title IX implications seemingly attached to any type of interaction between a male and female and an unwillingness of the individual houses to really police that behavior or make anyone understand that an individual cannot legally consent to anything if they have had an alcoholic beverage. Law doesn't indicate if they are above the legal limit, merely under the influence which is having consumed 1 or more. I know this because I was subpoenaed in a case and listened to the judge and prosecutor explain the law to the students involved. Because of Title IX and the money tied to it institution have no choice but to be regimented and strict in these areas. Too often people only correlate Title IX with athletics because that was the first big application of the law. All of the federal research grants and scholarships that TU is awarded all carry the title IX provisions with them.
When I worked at Baylor, they had fraternities and sororities but no houses and the VP of Student Affairs took a hard line approach. If there were more than 3 members of the same org living at the same address it was deemed a "house" and was not appropriate. And they enforced it with the threat of removing chapters and charters from the university.
I understand students wanting to have fun and all...but there are limits. Be smart and almost ALL of my encounters are due to individuals simply not using sound judgement.
BTW, I know about the "lists" and they were easily bypassed. FR aren't the smartest or most savvy with regards to understanding how to beat the system and will talk with the right motivation.
This really isn't relevant to the race discussion at all. That's my point.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Sorry, went on a student affairs rant as a response to what was posted. But there was definitely some racial tension between frat row and football players and I can see Shon's frustration as the guest policy seemed to be randomly enforced by each particular house at times.
Other than minority athletes who are members of a fraternity, I don't see how there would be much interaction between these athletes and fraternities, except at fraternity parties. So what other instances would Shon be referring to? My assumption is that the instances of athlete(s) hanging out at a fraternity where he/she is not a member, when there wasn't a party, is generally amongst friends, and with vey few tensions arising. When alcohol, racists, and minority athletes come together it is often not a good recipe. Alcohol is a pretty good tonic for honesty. Call me naïve, and prove me wrong, but assuming a party was involved, seems like a pretty logical assumption. Sober racists today are a heck of a lot more concerned with being politically correct, for fear of persecution for their attitudes. (Stepping off soapbox.)
So if several black members of a football team shout white hatred and talk about killing them, would the entire sport be dropped? It's hard for me to believe that every member of that fraternity is a bad person. Just like there would be plenty of members of the football team that were good guys. Yet they are forever branded Just for association.
What Boren has done is ranked bad behavior. He has said that being a racist will get you eliminated from school and your fraternity booted, but being a football player and beating up your girlfriend will keep you on the team.
I'm not saying he is wrong on the former count, but he has set a high standard that he has not and cannot live up to.
What Boren has done is ranked bad behavior. He has said that being a racist will get you eliminated from school and your fraternity booted, but being a football player and beating up your girlfriend will keep you on the team.
I'm not saying he is wrong on the former count, but he has set a high standard that he has not and cannot live up to.
You aren't naive, you're just not talking about the same thing.
If you haven't been a student in about the last decade you wouldn't understand the "tensions" started by logistics at parties that have nothing to do with race. Athletes contributed to that problem by reacting poorly when they are not on the limited lists imposed by the university. It was especially unpleasant during the transition. In hindsight the univeristy did a really poor job explaining what they were doing to the non-Greeks and just let fraternities kind of deal with the fall out they didn't cause.
Prior to that time when the doors were wide open and the fraternities provided beer for EVERYONE, it was a different story. Those groups lived in relative party peace under that arrangement.
This is what started "party tensions". Personal altercations based on race, regardless of where they may have happened, is a different discussion.
And yes, people interact otherwise. I had football players as neighbors in both of my campus apartments and it was great. I was a Greek student when Shon was there.
And frankly, I think competition between athletes and fraternities is inevitable (especially on a small campus) because females. Booker's comments on that don't surprise me at all.
If you haven't been a student in about the last decade you wouldn't understand the "tensions" started by logistics at parties that have nothing to do with race. Athletes contributed to that problem by reacting poorly when they are not on the limited lists imposed by the university. It was especially unpleasant during the transition. In hindsight the univeristy did a really poor job explaining what they were doing to the non-Greeks and just let fraternities kind of deal with the fall out they didn't cause.
Prior to that time when the doors were wide open and the fraternities provided beer for EVERYONE, it was a different story. Those groups lived in relative party peace under that arrangement.
This is what started "party tensions". Personal altercations based on race, regardless of where they may have happened, is a different discussion.
And yes, people interact otherwise. I had football players as neighbors in both of my campus apartments and it was great. I was a Greek student when Shon was there.
And frankly, I think competition between athletes and fraternities is inevitable (especially on a small campus) because females. Booker's comments on that don't surprise me at all.
My last year at TU was 1997. A party was open or closed by the decision of the house at that time. There were no enforcement of lists demanded in school regulations at this time. I don't understand completely the regulation or enforcement of these lists, but I get the general idea. But I THINK(for emphasis of uncertainty, not screaming) my point still stands, and maybe all the more. If these lists were not addressed and explained by the university, then there were already legitimate concerns and confusion with athletes and non athletes related to the list. Add to that house members who were drunk from the party, throw in a drunk racist or three, add athletes and students(peanut gallery) who like many other party goers, started drinking before the party(in preparation of said party). The lists could have been used legitimately and illegitimately(as an excuse because of racist tendencies). Then everybody gets confused because they don't realize motivations, actions, and/or intent of other said parties, etc, etc, and.... everybody is drunk. I'm not meaning to get my arguments entangled with your points about separateness of the two types of incidents(racial or list oriented) but I don't see how they can be kept separate. I'm sorry for the debate, that I started semi-accidentally.(I saw it coming and wanted to avoid it.)
This post was edited on 3/12 10:47 AM by Gmoney4WW
This post was edited on 3/12 10:47 AM by Gmoney4WW
I realize TUBla Bla Bla,(a joke meant to laugh hopefully with u Bla, not at u) sometimes goes on and on, and gets a little lost in words and points. But either accidentally or intentionally I think TUBla had a point about pulling parties into the debate.
This post was edited on 3/12 10:57 AM by Gmoney4WW
This post was edited on 3/12 10:57 AM by Gmoney4WW
The point was that while the university required registered parties to submit a guest list, it was generally known that those lists typically included every current student at the time. The guest lists were then somewhat enforced by said party monitors from other houses knowing that the next event their house threw, they would hope for the same favor. Security was also required, but mostly did nothing and made sure no one got killed. I know for a fact that several football players in the early 2000's were pretty pissed because they were not allowed to attend a party at a certain house on the row. They were all African American and they felt they were singled out because of race. I know this because I talked with them about it.
There seemed to be more racial tension on campus during the time Keith Burns was HC than at other times...just saying.
There seemed to be more racial tension on campus during the time Keith Burns was HC than at other times...just saying.
OU football players are now refusing to practice and demanding action against the SAE officers who weren't apparently on the bus. Interesting since they support a fellow player who hurled gay slurs at fellow students then broke the jaw, orbital along with other facial bones of a 130lb girl when she objected to the homophobic slurs.
This post was edited on 3/12 11:52 AM by lawpoke87
double standard
This post was edited on 3/12 11:52 AM by lawpoke87
double standard
I don't think they are refusing to practice. They'll practice after spring break.
But my sympathy is starting to wane drastically.
It was pretty bad on campus at that time but the one and only good thing that I give Burns credit for was disbanding AWOL. Under Rader, the offensive line coach was very open about his racial preferences and lovingly named his position group AWOL (all white offensive lineman). Needless to say that was very divisive. I don't remember many days when we didn't fight in practice. One of the few outlets for many minorities used to be the frat parties until they started discriminating as well. There were many days where things were very tense and depressing on campus. My class came in with 28 and I graduated with 6 from the original group. The racial environment that existed on campus and on the team played a significant part in so many guys leaving. It took many many years for me to forgive and forget. There are still many guys I know or played with that haven't been back since the day they left for the negative experiences they had. I would like to think things have improved greatly since that time on campus but I'm sure there is still plenty of work that needs to be done!
You're right...this attitude starts at home. That doesn't mean SAE and/or OU aren't tacitly or unknowingly providing a place for this to grow. Too often society is reactive to stuff like this instead of proactive. Universities love to talk about diversity and tolerance yet do nothing to promote acceptance and understanding. Almost every university dedicates a portion of their new student orientation to diversity and they have someone come in and talk about it for 30-45 minutes. You can't appreciate diversity if you really don't know what it means, or how to confront racism, or how to speak to someone who is different from you (and I'm not just talking skin color).
My guess is the student who videotaped the incident and released it, didn't know how to speak up in front of a group of his or her peers for fear of being ostracized from the group. Releasing the video was a very passive-aggressive way of getting the groups' attention and letting them know how wrong. Betting they didn't know how much of a huge deal it would become.
