Maybe he doesn't respect him? Maybe he raised issues privately and felt like he was being ignored? We don't know. Either way, I think we'd do well to listen to the message on these things instead of dismissing it because we don't like how it was delivered. This is along the same vein as the Keanu Hill story a couple weeks ago. As Guerin Emig said about that situation "We didn't listen to TU football player Keanu Hill when he took a knee in protest four years ago. We damn sure need to hear him now."
What the H3ll is wrong with the Minneapolis Police?
- Thread starter TUMe
- Start date
Maybe he doesn't respect him? Maybe he raised issues privately and felt like he was being ignored? We don't know. Either way, I think we'd do well to listen to the message on these things instead of dismissing it because we don't like how it was delivered. This is along the same vein as the Keanu Hill story a couple weeks ago. As Guerin Emig said about that situation "We didn't listen to TU football player Keanu Hill when he took a knee in protest four years ago. We damn sure need to hear him now."
I don't see it as an "either or" situation. Chuba's message wasn't delivered in the right way, but I don't dismiss the message. He just made a lot of assumptions and took the cancel culture route. I completely understand what his concerns are. I'm all for equality.
I agree the players may not actually respect him, and said above that it’s possible that he’s not actually worthy of respect. Hard to know what goes on in locker rooms, but this event does make me wonder if there’s less of a feeling of family there than on most teams. If he felt like Gundy did care about him prior to anything going on with the shirt, this reaction would be hard to explain.
I think Chubba's message was delivered in exactly the right way in terms of effectiveness. If he had just walked in to Gundy's office to confront him one on one Gundy would have told him to pound sand. Doing it publicly insured that he was going to be taken seriously and there couldn't be significant repercussions against him.
I was actually very impressed that he admitted he went about it the wrong way. That's rare right now due to the cancel culture society we currently live in. Chuba definitely deserves respect for that, and hopefully both he and Gundy have learned something valuable from the experience.
You mean the one where their AD had a gun pointed at him from off camera? *wink*
Again... the way Hubbard went about things actually garnered results. I don't imagine any player walking into Gundy's office and telling him that his shirt and his attitude towards his players was offensive would have been taken seriously, and if it wasn't a star player they probably would have been punished.
You’ve clearly never played team sports.
Every coach has a group of players who are comfortable being intermediaries for the rest of the team that he relies upon for communication. And all of those players are absolutely comfortable going into his office and expecting reasonable results.
Which is what should have happened in this case and has happened at TU on these types of issues in the past.
Wait, are we still talking about a cheap T-shirt on a fishing trip? There are some murder investigations going, riots, etc. And this guy is throwing a fit over a T-shirt the coach wears on his own time. Granted Gundy is hard to like but there is a lot of stuff going on.
You keep using using the term “cancel culture”. Can you define what you think that means? Because in this case it seems mostly like holding a person in authority accountable for his actions.
Ctt, hope you don't mind me stealing this. It seems important to the discussion.
I wonder if any of these players knew of this alleged incident before and what kind of impact it will have on the locker room now if they didn't. It's something that seems too out of nowhere for the CU players to make it up, but even if it is this is a hard stain to remove.
I wonder if any of these players knew of this alleged incident before and what kind of impact it will have on the locker room now if they didn't. It's something that seems too out of nowhere for the CU players to make it up, but even if it is this is a hard stain to remove.
Last edited:
No problem, I'll tell you exactly what "cancel culture" is, as I've spent a lot of time looking into it and discussing it with my two teenage daughters. It's basically when a person makes a mistake or is even just assumed to have made a mistake -- or just does something that a group of people don't like or agree with, then a large group of people persecute them on social media in order to cause extreme shame and force a drastic measure to be taken against the person. It's a form of online bullying that causes people to often lose their jobs, lose friends or family, or even take their own lives.
It can also just be mob harassment from a large group of people who think differently than a particular person.
Chuba's intent was to publicly shame his coach, and it worked. Look at the article Pete Thamel wrote about it. He admitted that he had not talked to Gundy in person about it, so Chuba didn't even know what action he wanted Gundy to be held accountable for, because he didn't know how Gundy felt about any of it. If Chuba had talked to Gundy and got blown off, then maybe take it to social media. But that's not how our current society works. They want to attack first and cause problems, and then maybe apologize later after damage has already been done.
Thanks. I agree there are instances, especially with private citizens, where the vigilante Twitter mobs go way too far. The recent Bethesda biker story is a good example.
But I also think shame is often the only tool the public has to meaningfully affect change with power individuals or corporations that may otherwise be above the law. Thamel's article suggests that Gundy may have reached that point and a number of current and former players seem to agree. Either way, he brought much of this on himself and he's gonna have work to do in the locker room and the recruiting trail to make up for it.
But I also think shame is often the only tool the public has to meaningfully affect change with power individuals or corporations that may otherwise be above the law. Thamel's article suggests that Gundy may have reached that point and a number of current and former players seem to agree. Either way, he brought much of this on himself and he's gonna have work to do in the locker room and the recruiting trail to make up for it.
Possible, but Thamel also has a clear dislike for Gundy that has come out in numerous articles over the years.
I certainly agree that Gundy could've avoided all this by wearing an OSU shirt instead of an OAN shirt while fishing with his two boys, but I'm sure he didn't expect to be splashed all over social media and made out to be a racist due to the t-shirt without anyone talking to him about it.
You are definitely correct that they'll have work to do to repair the damage.
Was there ever any comment by Gundy or his players on this? Much bigger deal than a shirt
I don't expect to see him comment on a 31-year old alleged incident unless he's absolutely forced to.
It was picked up by the Washington Post shortly after his players accused him of racial insensitivity on a different matter. I'd be pretty shocked if there were no news outlets that asked him for comment. I think whether or not the players had heard of it is also relevant to understanding why several of them came out and embarrassed him publicly.
Last edited:
What happened in those 8 minutes is a disgrace. He deserves the maximum penalty.
But burning down your neighborhood, looting and rioting are not the answer. Neither are cop free sections of town. Punishing an offending officer is important in every case where there is evidence of intent is important. But disrupting a major city for weeks is not. Just like the police need to know what is not acceptable so does the mass population.
The media is not going to push the narrative, at least the beat and regional reporters, because they’ve personally known, or should have known about it, for years. He could have and should have been asked about it when he was hired.
I remember the incident but I also remember it quickly being downplayed by both sides and Gundy’s black teammates saying it never happened, they said Williams never said anything to them as he claimed and they wouldn’t play if it was true. So that kinda closed the book. It’s a 30 year old story you can’t report on except to say you can’t report on it.
The national media threw their bombs and moved on, but they may have had to comment and move on. It’s not a story you decline to run in the current climate, but it’s also not the type of story you want to pound on. Anyone who spends two minutes comparing what Williams told reporters then versus what he says now will find glaring factual conflicts that call into question whether Williams is now fully truthful or embellishing it. (He said then it happened in the 2nd Quarter repeatedly, he complained, it stopped, and he and Gundy handled it. Now he says it was one time at the end of the game and he was benched when he complained and he’s never had an apology or spoken to Gundy). Either way, there’s a credibility issue. It doesn’t help that he only went on paid appearance media to talk about it too.
He and Gundy clearly have issues because it’s been verified that he did steer recruits from Gundy for reasons nobody will comment on except Williams. So that tells me something happened. And Gundy likely said or did something, probably out of frustration when he was getting sacked 11 times and losing. But that doesn’t mean there’s enough to run a story that will get a multi-millionaire cancelled who will sue your paper that is on the verge of bankruptcy already. It’s a print what you can and hope someone else proves it and scoops you story.
Yeah I'm definitely not arguing that anybody should go after him. I'm just genuinely curious if there are reasons his players acted the way they did beyond the weird climate we're in right now
The two knew each other from another second job. They were not friends. The incedent was person on person. It had nothing to do with police.
The real story will be if he loses ‘21 recruits. Anybody de-commit? I honestly haven’t followed that angle.
In case anyone was wondering why someone might feel the need to drive through one of these crowds. This driver was shot
Problem is, he was already attempting to drive through the crowd before he was shot. (Not saying that justifies his shooting) Ask yourself, what if someone had tripped and been trapped under his wheel and later died from injuries of being runover?
I think both parties are very much in the wrong here and should be prosecuted as such.
Last edited:
Attempting to enter an occupied vehicle for the purpose Or with the intention of committing a crime is punishable by up to life in prison in Florida. This includes knucklehead demonstrators leaning through the drivers window and touching the driver. Even without stand your ground deadly force can be used to defend yourself under the circumstances. It’s just a matter of time until exactly those facts happen, there’s no arrest, and Florida descends into nights of violence.
It was a peaceful (though unlawful do to being in a street) protest until the person tried to drive through the crowd. At what speed is it ok to drive through someone standing right in front of you?
If it wasn't a bunch of protesters and it was a domestic dispute for example. If it was a husband trying to push his wife out of the way using his vehicle and she was injured... would he be beyond prosecution?
It’s a Mormon joke. Mormons believed the Angel Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith in rural NY and revealed to him the location of solid gold plates which contained another testament of Jesus Christ.
Maybe. If he was reasonably in fear she would cause him grievous bodily harm, or in Florida, if she entered the vehicle for the purpose to commit a crime.
What if my wife stood in the middle of the street in front of a moving vehicle while a group of people pound on the vehicle as it inches up the road? Boy that's a toughie
If I reverse this hypothetical I can't think of a single scenario where my wife doesn't call me a dumbass. My wife, who is no conservative (remember she interned for Beto), has no sympathy for people who stand in the middle of roads and create dangerous situations. Haven't asked her yet, but I seriously doubt she'll be on the side of the guy who forced the confrontation and then shot a man.
If I reverse this hypothetical I can't think of a single scenario where my wife doesn't call me a dumbass. My wife, who is no conservative (remember she interned for Beto), has no sympathy for people who stand in the middle of roads and create dangerous situations. Haven't asked her yet, but I seriously doubt she'll be on the side of the guy who forced the confrontation and then shot a man.
The real question is when is the Justice Department going after BLM for RICO for sanctioning a series of misdemeanors that affects interstate commerce.
Last week you said it was reckless for a cop to shoot near a crowd and he should be tried for murder. You sticking to that now?
EDIT: enlarged video clearly shows the vehicle inching through the crowd when a man approaches the vehicle and points a pistol at him. At that point the driver accelerates enough to clear the crowd and as the final protestor steps away from the hood, the gun man shoots through the passenger side window, injuring the driver. Attempted murder should be filed, unless the victim expires.
Last edited:
I'm not on the side of the person that shot the man. One crime does not justify another. Both need to be punished.
Lol. A bit of a stretch... but, sure.... they did get Capone for tax evasion after all.
If a person feels comfortable having their car with their family inside surrounded by an armed mob then they’re a braver person than myself. I’m likely not stopping under the above circumstances and the mob shouldn’t expect cars with children inside to stop nor should they try to stop the same.
I'm not saying they should feel comfortable. I'm saying that feeling threatened does not automatically give you the right to commit a crime. It doesn't give you the right to drive over people who are inconveniencing you, and it doesn't give you the right to shoot at someone driving over people.
Or at least when I think about it logically, I don't believe that. Whether or not the courts actually agree with me is a different story.
Obviously, one party committed a worse criminal act, but the degree of how much worse I think is debatable.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
🏈 Recruiting Antai picks Tulsa over offers from OSU, TCU, K-State and Cal
- Latest: Chris Harmon
-
-
