I hate the CYA nature of this. It seems like the administration is looking for reasons to keep players off the field instead of looking at reasons to make sure they play.
I hate the CYA nature of this. It seems like the administration is looking for reasons to keep players off the field instead of looking at reasons to make sure they play.
My opinion is that the DA declined to press charges, the woman declined to press charges, and both of them later stated they didn't have sex from what I read. The only thing Shannon brought on himself was trying to get laid like any typical college kid.Originally Posted by cherokeebrewer
You could be right, but unfortunately the inquiry board disagrees with your conclusion...
"Image is what people think we are. Integrity is what we really are"
Court appearance today
The University of Oklahoma’s fight to keep starting linebacker Frank Shannon off the field this season will go before the Oklahoma state Supreme Court at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday, according to court documents.
So if your Shannon, what are the benefits of staying at a university that wants you to sit for a year? Would you feel unwelcome after what's happened?
As long as the team and coaches are behind him, I think he'd be fine. And it sounds that way if Stoops is still giving him 1st (and now even 2nd) team reps.
The most likely scenario to me is, Boren/JC/Stoops sat down and plotted the necessary actions, and this is all part of the plan to satisfy Title IX. At that point, I suspect Stoops then sat down with Shannon and made sure he understood what had to happen. I really don't believe there's a legitimate undercurrent of being unwelcome. The wheels just have to grind through the process.
Posting Permissions
