DGB didn't bring in any money, but he also didn't cause any problems. Mixon hasn't brought in any money, either, but then again...he hasn't played a down yet, so that's a silly question. Plenty of athletes with criminal records have brought in money to OU, though. You think every student should be treated the exact same at OU? Should every department get the same amount of money? Should every student have the exact same class schedule? Should every student get the exact same financial aid? I doubt you'd be this "idealistic" if you were actually in a position of power. Saying our football players should be treated differently than regular students doesn't mean they always get it easier. A lot of times they get punished for things that would be complete non-issues if a regular student did it. It's just a different set of rules for a different group of people.
This was a lead story on national news programs on Monday and Tuesday. By Wednesday it was relegated to a footnote and is gone on Thursday. Did Boren handle this appropriately? Go ask Roger Goodell or the Ferguson, MO (ex-) police chief. Boren protected his brand. As for Mixon, nobody outside of a few message board posters and a few CFB columnists writing articles in the off-season that absolutely nobody is reading gives a rat's ***. It's called damage control and this is the world we live in. As for those guys that were expelled, I'm guessing they would have never set foot on campus again anyways. It certainly wouldn't have been a comfortable existence.
Yeah, lucky for us DBG didn't throw any women down stairs or get caught with drugs while he was here. And yes, I think all students should be treated equally when it comes to fromal university policy concerning conduct and grades. If you think some students should be shown preference then you are just asking for morale and legal problems.
Wrong. The OU student body noticed. I have a daughter enrolled at OU and the students have noticed the discrepancy in how the episodes were handled. It may not be a visible thing but it is undercutting the respect for Boren and his administration.
So fan, how long are you going to allow CNN and NBC to rip to shreds your organization while you adjudicate in the name of "fairness"? Any money you may pay out in lawsuits to these guys would be pennies on the dollar compared to what weeks of negative publicity would cost you.
I'm sure there are undergrad courses in jurisprudence that might help your daughter understand, Fanin. One distinction that is sufficient is that the frat boys were acting under the umbrella of an officially recognized organization. To be comparable, DGB or Mixon would need to leap into the stands during a game and assault someone at Bob's direction.
I understand and my daughter understands why the frat idiots and their frat were disciplined. That's not the problem. The problem is how Boren has handled the various student conduct issues differently. You are either naive or not being honest if you maintain there isn't a difference in the way students are treated.. BTW, my daughter is not in the minority in her opinion and she is on a varsity OU athletic team and the athletes on her team feel they would not get the same consideration that the football players get. I wondered why Frank Shannon got hammered byt the Title IX committee but I understand why now....because their is a lot of resentment building up toward Boren among the student body and faculty about how he has meted out punishment when it comes to conduct violations and this was a chance for the committee to give Boren the middle finger.
Didn't even bother to address that. It's enough, to me, that Mixon got away with a slur and an assault, and was suspended for a six month "year." As I've stated before, you have to remember where we are these days: only white males are capable of racism...and sexism...and....
The problem is, Boren and - by throwing himself into the middle of it - Bob Stoops are hypocrites. We can only assume Joe Castiglione as well because he's Bob's boss and allowed Stoops to cancel practices and make a show of it. Not only should the SAE kids have been thrown of campus, but Mixon as well. The SAE students don't play football; Mixon does. Neither situation lifted OU's "brand." That Boren and Stoops defend their decision on Mixon putting on the show of sanctimony at the SAE situation is ridiculous. Both situations called for expelling students.
Down here in Dallas a dozen or so blacks were out in front of the expelled kids' parents houses. Where were these people in August of last year? Did they fly to Mixon's parents' home in California to protest the black football player breaking a white girl's face? Or, to protest the black football player using a homosexual slur against a white male? Of course not. Just remember these two things: (1) Only white males can be racist, sexist, etc. (2) Football players have protected status on college football campuses, even after they commit crimes.
That's a complete non sequitur. I'm not familiar the example you gave and I'll take it what you said at face value but I would say that the point of emphasis for their protest is institutionalized racism. That is the case with a national fraternity not the case with the Mixon incident. Additionally you could also note that the Black Community at large had no problem with the Mixon arrest/trial.
Then tell your daughter and all those other disgruntled students to go enroll up in Stillwater. This was crisis management 101. First rule of crisis management is get the story off the nightly news program as quickly as possible. As an alumnus of the University of Oklahoma I applaud Boren's response as he did just that. As for fairness, what the **** is that? You guys that are lamenting the fate of these poor overindulged frat boys probably bristled when Patricia Arquette used her Oscar speech to campaign for "equal pay" for women. Here in the real world fairness is an abstract idea at best.
You obviously don't read the real truth as posted on this board. Boren directed his puppets on the title IX committee to go after Shannon with a vengeance when Shannon did nothing wrong. It's part of his grand scheme to water down or even destroy the football program (for completely unknown reasons). So forget this title IX/committee inconvenient fact - Boren personally banned Shannon from the University and will no doubt prohibit him from returning. It's in the SF.com FAQ.
Really? Did the national fraternity tell them to say racist things? Maybe I read the news to quickly, but wasn't it the national fraternity that revoked the OU group's charter before Boren acted? And, if you are correct, then, are college football organizations "institutionalized" to the point where breaking girl's faces is okay? And, the face of a girl who also happens to not be of the attackers own race. As another poster pointed out earlier, imagine if it had been the other way around - a white football player, off-campus, calls a black girl's friend a fag, then breaks her face. We'd be hearing on and on and on about racism, white privilege, homophobia, and all sorts of other academic drivel that slimes its way into politics. The bottom line is, Boren/Stoops/Castiglione do operate with a double standard...which is par for the course in college athletics, and particularly when it comes to football and men's basketball.
Fanin, the cases are different. There's a legal distinction that would support different treatment for the frat vs Mixon. I explained it above. If you or others don't understand there's nothing further I can do to help you. I suppose that's why we have courts rather than relying on citizens to work things out.
I don't know, maybe http://totalfratmove.com/new-eviden...ou-thing-other-chapters-called-into-question/ but that is beside the point. You're shifting the argument to accommodate your rant. You said: "Where were these people in August of last year? Did they fly to Mixon's parents' home in California to protest the black football player breaking a white girl's face? Or, to protest the black football player using a homosexual slur against a white male? What you are describing is not a tit for tat situation. In the one case of the SAE fraternity, blacks would be considered the aggrieved party. In the other case the wronged party was a drunken white woman who attacked Mixon for making supposed homosexual slurs. Why would blacks be protesting this? What would this have to do with any transgression against the black community in general? Given your example wouldn't it be incumbent on the "gay community" to protest at Mixon's parents' home in California?
I think TDTW is trying to turn this white guy victimization routine into a regular cable news gig. Hey, it worked for Al Sharpton.
Kanto, does the University of Oklahoma have a student conduct policy? Is that OFFICIAL policy applied equally and fairly among the student body regardless of affiliation with certain organizations? I would say no. BTW, how much investigation into this latest situation did Boren do before he lopped everybody's head off? How many non-racist SAE's found themselves out on the street the week of midterm exams? How many employees of the SAE fraternity are now looking for jobs? I am the last person to step up and defend fraternities and sororities. I think they are juvenile, elitist and generally a waste of time. I never pledged a fraternity and both my daughters who attended OU look down on them with disdain. But I do believe in fair administration of policies and procedures and understand that Boren is arbitrary and heavy-handed with how he uses his enforcement powers. BTW, both of my daughters were on OU varsity teams and I know for a fact that members of their teams were kicked off of the teams and suspended from school for far less than what Mixon did. I guess all athletes at OU aren't viewed equally in the eyes of DBo, either.
Not to defend Mixon, but let us not forget there was also reported a racial slur in that altercation.
