Safe to say this Professor won't be honored at halftime.
- Thread starter ruready4somefootball
- Start date
Considering the complexity of dealing with professors and athletes for coaches, they should ban all teaching personnel from the fields, athletic buildings etc.. This is not to be punitive, but precautionary since it is almost impossible not to slip up if a conversation somehow begins.
I wish they would so we could all see who this ahat is and give them the appropriate level of support for their commitment to Rutgers.
Based on what I have read on this and the other board (not saying it is true)... if the prof felt he/she was improperly contacted by Flood, the prof was REQUIRED under university policy to report it to Compliance.
So if that is true, the problem is not that the prof properly adhered to policy. The problem is that Flood did not.
So if that is true, the problem is not that the prof properly adhered to policy. The problem is that Flood did not.
You are free to move along if you wish. But before you do, consider this:
If it is proven that Flood violated University policy, he MUST be suspended for at least a game. Otherwise, what message is being sent to the players? That they need to follow the rules, but the boss doesn't?
If it is proven that Flood violated University policy, he MUST be suspended for at least a game. Otherwise, what message is being sent to the players? That they need to follow the rules, but the boss doesn't?
OK but why don't we find out if rules were broken first. If anything we can expect any potential disciplinary action to be an over reaction, no? Given the history?
That' Bullcrap ! Where does the policy say if a coach contacts a professor about a player on their team, a 1 game suspension is Warranted ?? Show me the clause please?
In our large , multi national company , with a significant Compliance division, most compliance violations are dealt with by educating the offender by having them take mandatory on line courses specific to the violation. We do NOT get taken away from our work duties (in Flood's case that would be Coaching). He did not break a law, OR NCAA guideline, he MIGHT have broken a University compliance guideline, and unless It Specifically say a game Suspension is Mandatory (which I highly doubt), then I call your statement........BULLCRAP !
In our large , multi national company , with a significant Compliance division, most compliance violations are dealt with by educating the offender by having them take mandatory on line courses specific to the violation. We do NOT get taken away from our work duties (in Flood's case that would be Coaching). He did not break a law, OR NCAA guideline, he MIGHT have broken a University compliance guideline, and unless It Specifically say a game Suspension is Mandatory (which I highly doubt), then I call your statement........BULLCRAP !
But if Rutgers already allows the Head Football Coach to teach classes where some of his students are also his players, it sets a strange situation that blurs the division line that they are supposedly intended to be creating.
That is ridiculous. If he he a broke a policy that is really no big deal why can't he just be warned?
Sounds like a good plan. Shouldn't be necessary, but this is Rutgers. Pull Politi's, Sargeant's, and Hacksaw's credentials while you are at it.
Kevin Manahan: "Its Rutgers, I hate them, I love purposely sensationalizing news to put Rutgers in the worst light possible. Nothing is more fun for me!"
shame..cause there are already plenty of ASSESS already spouting their agenda driven crap on campus these day..
Seargent is now saying it was possibly a part-time professor, with comments from the head of the faculty union.
I'm actually getting nervous about this nonsense. Will RU go overboard in its punishment????
That indeed . I think the prof is the least likely and the mole the most likely.
Are the THE Dr. Ronald Levao? I find it hard to believe that a professor spends his time on a Rutgers Football message board.
Why not?
The good professor is a Rutgers undergrad who got a PhD at Berkeley and now teaches at RU in the same English Dept as Dowling. Besides an interest in the Renaissance , he also has some expertise on professional boxing. Explains everything.
I think I created a mini-firestorm with my prior note. Please allow me this lengthy clarification:
1) There may be some who are taking joy in all this. I truly am not. If Flood is exonerated, I will be very happy to eat crow on this board.
2) I said that if Flood is found to have violated university policy, then he must be suspended. My use of the term "must" was intended to be figurative, not literal. As in "Flood must start Player X" or "Recruit Y is a must get". I did not mean to imply that there is a university mandated policy for suspension. I am sure there is not.
3) I am very sympathetic to the argument that we should refrain from judgement until this is adjudicated by the university, and that there is no purpose to prejudging. My only rebuttal is that there is no real purpose to most of what we do on this board. And a lot of what we do is exactly this: we formulate opinions based on incomplete information.
4) And based on the incomplete information with which we have been provided, I conclude the following:
1) There may be some who are taking joy in all this. I truly am not. If Flood is exonerated, I will be very happy to eat crow on this board.
2) I said that if Flood is found to have violated university policy, then he must be suspended. My use of the term "must" was intended to be figurative, not literal. As in "Flood must start Player X" or "Recruit Y is a must get". I did not mean to imply that there is a university mandated policy for suspension. I am sure there is not.
3) I am very sympathetic to the argument that we should refrain from judgement until this is adjudicated by the university, and that there is no purpose to prejudging. My only rebuttal is that there is no real purpose to most of what we do on this board. And a lot of what we do is exactly this: we formulate opinions based on incomplete information.
4) And based on the incomplete information with which we have been provided, I conclude the following:
- It is highly unlikely that Flood violated NCAA regulations. (GOOD!)
- However, it is highly likely that he violated University policy (not so good).
- The press will have a field day if Flood is found guilty and left unpunished. You may not care. I do. As the adage goes, you don't pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel.
- Conversely, if the school does suspend Flood for a game, this could actually be spun into a positive. As in "There is no NCAA violation and no reportable wrongdoing. However, we at Rutgers hold ourselves to our own standards..."
- If under the above scenario Flood is not suspended, how does he face his team? He imposes discipline, and properly so, when players break his rules. What will they think if their coach breaks the rules with impunity? Do as I say, not as I do? I know of no better way to lose the respect of one's underlings.
- You may think this was a meaningless technical violation. I do not. My guess is that the rule was enacted by RU in response to the acknowledged ambiguity in the NCAA rule. RU said let's get rid of the gray, let's make it black and white -- just don't do it! And Flood just did it (assuming that he in fact did). That tends to piss people off.
- Lastly, the inescapable conclusion is that by his actions, Flood did damage to the RU athletic brand. I want to be very clear on this. FLOOD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS. The whistleblower is not responsible. The press is not responsible. Flood is responsible. He preaches accountability, and must be held accountable.
You are still VERY WRONG. Even if Flood is discovered to have innocently violated with good intention, a compliance Guideline, which is still doubtful, nobody outside of NJcom will give a rats behind if he agrees to be more careful and review the policy.
What is wrong with you? Really?
What is wrong with you? Really?
The Prof is a total ass. I want the Prof to be investigated. What are his motivations? Snitch!
I applaud Coach Flood for doing everything he could to support his player.
I applaud Coach Flood for doing everything he could to support his player.
If Flood is guilty, I think it would be fair and appropriate for him to be suspended for half a game, just like he suspended his players for. In neither case do the infractions seem particularly egregious, so this might be a good punishment in the sense of proportionality. In other words, it would show what's good for the players is good for Flood and vice versa.
Excellent post. No matter how you slice it or dice it, Flood created this mess by doing what he was explicitly told NOT to do. It is nobody's fault but his own.
Let's stop blaming the press or the faculty for Flood's poor judgment.
Choices have consequences.
Let's stop blaming the press or the faculty for Flood's poor judgment.
Choices have consequences.
The "prof" is a low paid adjunct with no job security, no health insurance, and no prospects for ever getting on the tenure track.
An after this episode, you can most certainly rule the SEC out of his job prospects. lol.
I will say this. My PhD program was pretty large by CAS standards. I'd guess from first years thru people lecturing and finishing their writing there were 75 in all. Back of the envelope math, I could EASILY see 50 of them making a stink over this. EASILY. Not because it's wrong per se. But rather, because they hate football, hate what they perceive to be misspent money on athletics, hate what they perceive to be coddled football and basketball players skating by. I could absolutely see a PTL (part time lecturer) in my old department running to someone over this. EASILY.
Similar threads
