Henderson Dismissed?

#26
#26
(VolunteerHillbilly @ May 4 said:
Until MM is also kicked off the team I will beleive that Henderson was a patsy.
Click to expand...

I'm all for putting the foot down. But Mitchell is a 5th yr Sr. who has never before been in the doghouse with his coaches. Sit him down. Set requirements. When he meets them, let him back on the team.

From what I've read this is not Henderson's first go round with improper behavior. As far as being a patsy, he certainly couldn't have picked a worse time to raise CPF's hackles, but then he's not a first offender either....
 
#27
#27
(orange+white=heaven @ May 4 said:
I'm all for putting the foot down. But Mitchell is a 5th yr Sr. who has never before been in the doghouse with his coaches. Sit him down. Set requirements. When he meets them, let him back on the team.

From what I've read this is not Henderson's first go round with improper behavior. As far as being a patsy, he certainly couldn't have picked a worse time to raise CPF's hackles, but then he's not a first offender either....
Click to expand...

Lots of emphasis on MM being a first time offender and to some extent I agree with you, but I am also thinking about how this is going to come accross to the rest of the team and potential recruits. I listened to Frank Wychek's show for a bit this morning and everyone seemed to agree that MM has to go. You can offend people without breaking the law, no question about it. But that touches on questions about freedom of expression and individual opinions regarding what is acceptable behavior. For example, I generally am offended by cursing but I accept the fact that to some people dropping the f-bomb is just part of their regular vocabulary and they do not consider it offensive. An arrest, on the other hand, is an arrest and represents at the least probable cause that the person involved committed a crime. I'm just not sure that in this day and age a university can punish someone more severly for a strictly moral infraction than for a criminal offense and be viewed as consistent. Particulary when it is obvious that the accused criminal is more important to the school than the moral offender.
 
#28
#28
Bottomline, Fulmer is the one that has to deal with it. He also has more facts in the case. You can complain about "fairness" but if you don't have all the facts AND don't have to make the decisions it's easy to say what should be done.

BTW, Frank Wychek doesn't have all the facts either :biggrin2:
 
#30
#30
So, FW has all the facts on:

all behaviors of Henderson and Mitchell since they joined the team

all the details of the two recent events

all the details of team discussions, rules and attitudes


Did he call Miss Cleo?
 
#31
#31
(VolunteerHillbilly @ May 4 said:
Lots of emphasis on MM being a first time offender and to some extent I agree with you, but I am also thinking about how this is going to come accross to the rest of the team and potential recruits. I listened to Frank Wychek's show for a bit this morning and everyone seemed to agree that MM has to go. You can offend people without breaking the law, no question about it. But that touches on questions about freedom of expression and individual opinions regarding what is acceptable behavior. For example, I generally am offended by cursing but I accept the fact that to some people dropping the f-bomb is just part of their regular vocabulary and they do not consider it offensive. An arrest, on the other hand, is an arrest and represents at the least probable cause that the person involved committed a crime. I'm just not sure that in this day and age a university can punish someone more severly for a strictly moral infraction than for a criminal offense and be viewed as consistent. Particulary when it is obvious that the accused criminal is more important to the school than the moral offender.
Click to expand...

Why can't CPF rule on moral fiber - that is what our exalted King George does , is it not???
 
#32
#32
(VolunteerHillbilly @ May 4 said:
I'm just not sure that in this day and age a university can punish someone more severly for a strictly moral infraction than for a criminal offense and be viewed as consistent.
Click to expand...

This sentence sets the problem well. It is this "consistency" that we naturally look for that always seems to run afoul of judging a problem on its individual merits. Judging each case for itself seems logical when dealing with individuals who come repleat with their own unique circumstances.

The argument, "what does doing that say to the rest of the team and the community?" puts Fulmer in a difficult position.

Personally, I tend to shy away from hard fast rules(i.e. 3strikes you're out)
because they give the disciplinarian zero room to act in a person's best interest.

It is a choice that has problems no matter which tack one takes.
I'm glad I don't have to make the call.
 
#33
#33
(orange+white=heaven @ May 4 said:
This sentence sets the problem well. It is this "consistency" that we naturally look for that always seems to run afoul of judging a problem on its individual merits. Judging each case for itself seems logical when dealing with individuals who come repleat with their own unique circumstances.

The argument, "what does doing that say to the rest of the team and the community?" puts Fulmer in a difficult position.

Personally, I tend to shy away from hard fast rules(i.e. 3strikes you're out)
because they give the disciplinarian zero room to act in a person's best interest.

It is a choice that has problems no matter which tack one takes.
I'm glad I don't have to make the call.
Click to expand...

well stated
 
#34
#34
Rumor on another board is, Starvin Marvin went in, ordered food and a drink, another customer picked up his food. He complained and then left. He then came back to try and get his money back, and the cop saw him and arrested him.

That supposedly is Marvin's side of the story.

The cop's side of the story is Marvin was told to leave, he came back walked away from the cop twice and told the cop to "f... off."

If its the first scenario I hope he gets reinstated thats ridiculous. The second scenario, telling the cop to "f.... off" he pretty much got what was to be expected.


 
#35
#35
I follow the Barry Switzer/Jimmy Johnson rule on this. If a guy helps you win on Saturday/Sunday, he gets more leeway than a guy who simply eats, rides, and sits.
 
#36
#36
(VolunteerHillbilly @ May 4 said:
Lots of emphasis on MM being a first time offender and to some extent I agree with you, but I am also thinking about how this is going to come accross to the rest of the team and potential recruits. I listened to Frank Wychek's show for a bit this morning and everyone seemed to agree that MM has to go. You can offend people without breaking the law, no question about it. But that touches on questions about freedom of expression and individual opinions regarding what is acceptable behavior. For example, I generally am offended by cursing but I accept the fact that to some people dropping the f-bomb is just part of their regular vocabulary and they do not consider it offensive. An arrest, on the other hand, is an arrest and represents at the least probable cause that the person involved committed a crime. I'm just not sure that in this day and age a university can punish someone more severly for a strictly moral infraction than for a criminal offense and be viewed as consistent. Particulary when it is obvious that the accused criminal is more important to the school than the moral offender.
Click to expand...

I think that you're making a huge deal out of nothing. Should MM have talked back to the cop? Probably not. But that's all he did. He didn't swing at him or try to harm him. I know that the NegaVols are all excited that UT is having problems, but give me a break.
 
#37
#37
(Orangewhiteblood @ May 4 said:
I think that you're making a huge deal out of nothing. Should MM have talked back to the cop? Probably not. But that's all he did. He didn't swing at him or try to harm him. I know that the NegaVols are all excited that UT is having problems, but give me a break.
Click to expand...


I like that "NegaVols. That's funny right there I don't care who you are.
 
#38
#38
(VolBeef88 @ May 4 said:
I like that "NegaVols. That's funny right there I don't care who you are.
Click to expand...

I can't remember who actually came up with that, but it wasn't me. Orangepappy or OldVol maybe? I don't know. :dunno:
 
#39
#39
read the article in the tennessean. if that article is true they should boot mitchell off the team right now. not only is he stupid, it almost sounds like he wanted to get arrested.
 
#40
#40
(Orangewhiteblood @ May 4 said:
I think that you're making a huge deal out of nothing. Should MM have talked back to the cop? Probably not. But that's all he did. He didn't swing at him or try to harm him. I know that the NegaVols are all excited that UT is having problems, but give me a break.
Click to expand...

If we're just making judgements based on perceived level of offense alone then Joh(nnie Walker) Parker Wilson at Bama should have been kicked of the team and possibly castrated for his DUI - much more serious than talking back to a cop :biggrin2:
 
#41
#41
(smokedog#3 @ May 4 said:
read the article in the tennessean. if that article is true they should boot mitchell off the team right now. not only is he stupid, it almost sounds like he wanted to get arrested.
Click to expand...

I just found what you are referring:

Police said when they arrived to disperse a disruptive crowd early Monday morning at the market, they heard Mitchell shouting and swearing at another customer near the front door.

According to the UT police report, Mitchell threatened to "knock the customer out."

Sensing that an altercation was about to occur, police told Mitchell to leave and noticed a strong odor of alcohol on his breath.

Mitchell initially left, according to police, but came back into the store and began swearing at someone else.

When police again told Mitchell to leave the area, he told one of the officers to "chill the (bleep) out," according to the police report.

While police were escorting Mitchell out of the store, the report stated that he became verbally abusive and continued to swear.

Police said while trying to establish control of Mitchell that he pulled away from them three times and was uncooperative during the completion of the arrest report.

Mitchell was booked into the Knox County Detention Center and released on $500 bond. His arraignment has been scheduled for May 8.
Click to expand...

http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articl...417/1345/SPORTS

MM side of the story is, he paid and ordered food, and another customer took his food that he paid for. Thats why he was upset.

He later returned to talk to the owner to see if he could get his money back and thats when the cop arrested him.
 
#42
#42
Is it possible to debate the issue without saying that the side you don't agree with are Fulmer apologists? If not, then saying anything else would be useless.
 
#44
#44
Since when is saying "chill the f--- out" threatening and abusive?

Now, if he said "I'll knock you the f--- out" to the cops, then he's dumb.
 
#45
#45
I think Marvelous Marvin was drinking kryptonite or something. This is completely out of character for him. My godson played football with Marvin in high school and hangs out with him on occasion. He seems to be a nice enough kid.
 
#46
#46

I think that if I had paid for a service and did not get it, I would be pretty P.O.ed. And if a police officer didnt help me get my money back I would probably told him to f off. I have told them alot worse things than that before and not got arrested, maybe I was lucky, but I dont think it was that big a deal. And how can we as fans expect a football player to not get service, but expect him to give the service of being a role model. It did not say that he was drunk, just said he had alcohol on his breath, I can drink 1 beer and have beer on my breath. However I do think that CPF has to lay the law down this year, I would hate it to be MM, and maybe Henderson getting dismissed saved CPF from having to make that call.
 
#47
#47
I dont know what all the debate is about. It's about time somebody had an example made out of them for an offense that wasn't THAT severe. Good for CPF. Now, watch the decline in bad behavior...

Look at Bill Parcells and Bobby Knight. How often do you see their players acting a menace off the field?? Sure, once in a blue moon, but then the player is immediately terminated. Then you don't hear about it again. Believe me, when you punish a certain behavior, you get less of it.
 
#49
#49
Does anyone remember a very promising tight end named Dustin Moore? No matter how "talented" a player is,they have a responsibility to the university, the program and the community to conduct themselves in a respectful manner. let's remember the university is giving these kids a free ride to play a game, most of us as parents make our kids "earn" the things we give them and the university, and the program should be no different.
 
#50
#50
(Orangewhiteblood @ May 4 said:
I can't remember who actually came up with that, but it wasn't me. Orangepappy or OldVol maybe? I don't know. :dunno:
Click to expand...



Thanks OWB I did coin that phrase and unfortunately we have to use it to often. I have got to agree that there is a difference between someone that has been in trouble several times and a first time offender especially when it sounds like MM's situation has been way overblown even if you believe the Police story.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top