AppFan.com
Don't Miss

Whoa! Montana cleans house

Gee .. wonder if anyone will draw parallels ... Out – “The University of Montana has fired athletic director Jim O’Day and head football coach Robin Pflugrad. “It is with great sadness that I inform you all that this morning our Athletic Director, Jim O’Day and Head Football Coach Robin Pflugrad were released of their duties as of 8:00 a.m. this morning.”” Coincidence? Could be. Or not.

119 Comments

  1. jambo

    March 29, 2012 at 10:06 am

    We should have done the same thing and brought in Satterfield as head coach with a clean house.

  2. Jamey

    March 29, 2012 at 10:19 am

    I cannot wait to see how quickly some of our folks jump to tear into these guys knowing we could have been forced to clean house recently. Let's make sure we keep those stones away from the glass houses.

    On another note…this bums me out because Montana will not be bringing their full force down to Boone this season. I was looking forward to seeing them, coach and all, at THE ROCK.

  3. GRIZZZLY

    March 29, 2012 at 10:28 am

    Believe me- there is a huge story coming.

  4. Dr. Gonzo

    March 29, 2012 at 10:37 am

    Bummer. The Bear will be limping into the Rock this year. Too bad. At least we will have an almost guaranteed W against a fellow powerhouse to start the FCS season.

  5. bigCtailgate

    March 29, 2012 at 10:38 am

    Seems we have tried to get to bottom of the problem, where rumors suggest that UM is covering it up.

  6. Dr. Gonzo

    March 29, 2012 at 10:40 am

    It seems that they were "helping hire attorneys" for certain players. Big no no. Idiots start drawing unfounded parallels to ASU in 5, 4, 3, 2,……

  7. appdreamin

    March 29, 2012 at 11:14 am

    Counting chickens are we, Gonzo?

    Given Montana's performance last year versus ours; given that we don't really know how good we will actually be, all our high expectations aside; and given that we don't know how Montana will fill the "gaps" but also given that it's a long time until September, so they have time to get things in order, it's quite premature to expect that MT will be limping into Boone or that we will have a near-guaranteed win even if they are. Assumptions are wonderful at times, but only when they prove to be correct.

  8. jland

    March 29, 2012 at 11:42 am

    Grizzly, Do you know of what that story entails?

    You have piqued my interest…

  9. randy

    March 29, 2012 at 11:46 am

    O'Day was one of the more active ADs in the FCS community. Wasn't he the head of the selection crew?

    Hate to see this for Montana.

  10. Murray

    March 29, 2012 at 11:54 am

    Dr Bozo is smoking his joints and jerking off in his grandmother's basement.

  11. MIDWEST

    March 29, 2012 at 11:59 am

    Aside from the story to come, their alumni was furious about their not moving to FBS. There was a revolt.

  12. bcoach

    March 29, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    Our story has yet to be told.

  13. Dr. Gonzo

    March 29, 2012 at 12:26 pm

    Great post Murray! Keep up the good work.

  14. asumike83

    March 29, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    All a child wants is attention and acknowledgement. Do not give it to him and he will go away. That's the easiest solution.

    I hate this for Montana. I want nothing more than to see two quality teams at full strength playing on September 8. Really a lose-lose all around. It is obviously a bad situation for UM but if they come in crippled, we have two possible outcomes: lose to a team that is not even at full strength or get a win over a weakened opponent that will be of questionable value. Neither is particularly good.

    Oh well, as long as the Griz bring their great fans to Boone, it will be a hell of a time anyways!

  15. GRIZZZLY

    March 29, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    I assume it has to do with the recent "sexual allegations" on campus and towards some players, including the recent allegations against our QB.Rumors are everywhere. You might want to go to egriz.com for the latest, or kpax.com for news. I'm sick to my stomach- grrrr

  16. ASU-LAW

    March 29, 2012 at 1:12 pm

    +1 randy

    If this ends up being the case you certainly hate to see a whole program effected by the actions of a few. Hope we bring our A game, because Montana is a top notch program and certainly will hire some capable staff that will bring it.

    Go Apps! Fight Apps! Kick A$$!

  17. Jamey

    March 29, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    GRIZZZ, I hate to hear your program is getting hit hard. I can say that your fans have always been some of the best that visit this site.

    And Gonzo, this does not sound too far from certain "rumors" and "allegations" against another football program we all know very well. I would not call this an unfounded parallel. What I would call it is a wake-up call that IF other universities are seeing trends in behavior then they should probably make it a priority to "nip it in the bud"

  18. appdreamin

    March 29, 2012 at 2:06 pm

    "Injured" bears are the most dangerous, I've read (with the possible exception of mother bears that feel their babies are threatened). No matter what happens in Missoula (or Boone)between now and September, we'd better not be overconfident (against any team, but especially Montana).

  19. Dr. Gonzo

    March 29, 2012 at 2:13 pm

    Touché about a likely win. We still have a lot of question marks to think we'll have a guaranteed dub against the Grizzlies. I was just saying that any weakness from either program will weaken the hype of this game.

    As far as the parallels go, I think the more information that surfaces about the UM fiasco, the less it will mirror what happened in Boone.

  20. Lewis

    March 29, 2012 at 2:22 pm

    It is disappointing about Montana. This never saw the court room because the university took control.

    I sense that Peacock is involved in helping with the cover up at Appalachian with the athletic department.

  21. Bruce

    March 29, 2012 at 2:35 pm

    Yep, I agree with the two posters that Montana's situation probably has as much to do with them not moving to FBS and their having a revolt.

    Will probably be a revolt at App State if we do not get into an FBS conference soon.

  22. Dr. Gonzo

    March 29, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    You honestly believe that the University taking the case had anything to do with the matter saying out of the courts? Lewis, please tell me you're not really an alumnus. I thought my diploma had some value.

  23. Murray

    March 29, 2012 at 4:13 pm

    Doc Bozo, Montana conducted its own investigation and formed its own conclusion based on protecting its students.

    Chancellor Peacock should have done the same for our students but he did not. Instead, Peacock asked Cindy Wallace to over turn the suspensions which they thought would just go away. It did not, has not and will not go away until we Clean House. End of story.

    It would be interesting to know if our Board of Trustees went into closed session during their visit last week or if they want to continue the cheerleader route.

  24. wer4asu

    March 29, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    Sorry for the Griz! "Sorrier" for us…I feel like I live in a glass house!

  25. Dr. Gonzo

    March 29, 2012 at 4:19 pm

    Source on Peacock ordering Wallace to let the players back? So you just make stuff up when you run out of quotes from Facebook to post? /facepalm Cindy dropped the ball in communicating what was happening. That is all. Every word you've ever typed in an Appfan comment box is asinine. FALL DOWN SOME STAIRS

  26. MIDWEST

    March 29, 2012 at 6:52 pm

    Move FBS or suffer the consequences. Trust me. People are getting impatient.

  27. The Boogieman

    March 30, 2012 at 1:33 am

    UM will not limp into Boone…Yes ASU now has a SS, and maybe a better running scheme. But UM still has alot of guys waiting in the wings…Dont ever forget 3 yards rushing last year…This one goes to the wire regardless of what is happening im Montana. ASU still has the 800 pound gorilla staring at them…Alot a questions left unanswered especially after Maine and thier midgets had thier way last year in Boone, NC. 3 YARDS RUSHING…

  28. Lewis

    March 30, 2012 at 4:09 am

    they are probably not finished cleaning house.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1125296-montan

  29. Dr. Gonzo

    March 30, 2012 at 4:59 am

    I'm a lot more worried about our passing ability than rushing.

    A. There is a huge drop off in our receiver depth after Peacock and Washington. If you've seen them practice, you know that the receivers coach is about to pull all his hair out teaching them fundamentals. On top of that, the guys can't even catch the ball. It's going to be a long year if these guys can't step up.

    B. Our rushing attack should improve with more depth at RB (miller, Chisholm and transfers) and our O-line will continue to develop. O-line still has a long way to go though.

  30. Boonedocks

    March 30, 2012 at 5:25 am

    I agree Boogieman…anybody who thinks because of this that we will just roll Montana is kidding themselves.

    I am optimistic that the new coaching staff will help, but it will take time. If we beat UM at home, it will be a good win.

  31. SpeedkingATL

    March 30, 2012 at 6:20 am

    Hate to see this for any program, especially one like Montana. To assume that the Giz will limp into The Rock is to forget how App limped into The Rock against Maine. At least for them it is happening in the spring and not during the fall.

  32. asumike83

    March 30, 2012 at 6:29 am

    I am not expecting an easy game from the Griz no matter who they bring to Boone but I just don't think the Maine game will have much bearing on the 2012 season other than serving as motivation. Different stable of RB, two OL coming back from injury/suspension, a dedicated OC and entirely new offensive coaching staff. For better or worse, this will be a different team.

    We shook things up and the Maine game served it's purpose, in my opinion. Just not sure I see the connection between that game and what's happening at Montana that some folks seem to be making.

  33. Abbie

    March 30, 2012 at 7:58 am

    So sad for Montana but it's not any better for App. We just need for everyone to behave like they know they should.

  34. Jamey

    March 30, 2012 at 1:20 pm

    I cannot wait until the posts about football actually have some relation to the act of hiking a pigskin and running an offense and a defense. Not alleged impropieties, not coaching changes, not university scandals & cover-ups. I want to actually see someone run the f'ing spread offense or watch a linebacker destroy a receiver coming across the middle.

  35. Lewis

    March 30, 2012 at 1:37 pm

    I think that this the best statement I have seen on AppFan.

  36. Lewis

    March 30, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    Meaning Abbie's post.

  37. Dr. Gonzo

    March 30, 2012 at 2:44 pm

    Jamey's is better

  38. GIMEDIC

    March 30, 2012 at 8:31 pm

    APP Fans –

    Compliments first – you all are a great fan base, have a great team, and certainly have a game day atmosphere that rivals any saturday football experience (from what I have been told ). With that said:

    I have my room booked; flight confirmation to follow hoping costs will drop within the area. I would not miss the opportunity to visit The Rock and enjoy FCS football at a premier venue. When the opportunity exits, I try not to miss the Griz play at places that embody the love for the game. Was at Neyland last year, Iowa in 2008, 3 NC games in chatty, etc. Bottom line – Boone, NC ranks right up there in my opinion and worth shelling out some dollars for the visit. The Griz will bring game – they are a tough group. Look forward to the tailgating and drinking some beer with fans that love their team. Go Griz and see you in September.

  39. GIMEDIC

    March 30, 2012 at 8:33 pm

    Sorry – 2 games in chatty; 2 games in huntington. drinking too much cold smoke tonight. and randy moss ate us up 🙁

  40. jland

    March 30, 2012 at 10:09 pm

    Gotta love some Griz fans… Classy AND Loyal…

  41. appdreamin

    March 31, 2012 at 2:12 pm

    Yes. And GIMEDIC, Moss ate up most everyone back in the day, App definitely included.

  42. Big Dave

    April 2, 2012 at 6:22 am

    Come to space 320 in the stadium lot and we will take care of you. We were very hospitable to some Maine fans last year although if we'd know they were going to expose us we might not have been so nice… now that I think of it they did us a favor and we were able to clean house……

  43. Appnaysayer

    April 2, 2012 at 3:47 pm

    Teams get good and scandals of this sort inevitably follow. The reason is simple: grossly misplaced university priorities. Coaches, ADs, fans, are more concerned about getting players than getting students. Not all students behave properly; not all athletes end up in court. But students are more likely to behave if they are on campus to be students first and athletes second. Those who are students first are also less likely to have had high school rules bent to protect them and less likely to see themselves as privileged or above the rules. When you set up any system of privilege for athletes (tutoring, certain athlete-friendly classes, registration perks), the message is clear: Your athletic prowess is more important to us than your academic ability. All you have to do is play well and we'll take care of you. And, while no two situations are exactly alike, anyone who doesn't see parallels here between Montana and ASU is just not paying attention. Endings for both stories have yet to be written.

  44. asu7

    April 2, 2012 at 5:40 pm

    Naysayer if everything is so bad why do you even want to be apart of something like this? If you hate athletes as much as you do and schools that take care of them why don't go pull for Davidson or something. If you dislike this place so much why don't you go find MarsHillFan.com. I just can't understand why someone that hates athletics as much as you even comes around or hates App State for that matter.

  45. Lewis

    April 3, 2012 at 2:52 am

    asu7, it is not about pulling for our team or another team. We are a university before athletics. Each university has a code of conduct that students are expected to adhere to instead of losing their minds and doing something crazy.

  46. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 3:45 am

    That doesn't matter to people like asu7 and others who have the aforementioned misplaced priorities. Why do we "take care" of athletes and not ALL students. Are athletes somehow more important to the overall well-being of the university? I doubt it. As I've said before, if you shut down football tomorrow, ASU would still be open, go about its business, and the purpose of the university would still be served. The reverse is not true. With regard to rooting for Davidson…at least their basketball team makes the NCAAs with some regularity.

    To paraphrase the good book, you cannot serve two masters. Either academics is first or the whole enterprise fails.

  47. ASU-LAW

    April 3, 2012 at 4:33 am

    I see your reasoning naysayer but respectfully disagree. Just like students go to college to get an education, athletes (in certain sports like football) go to college to become a pro football player. Now obviously this is less prevalent in the FCS level, but nonetheless it still exists. Sure 80-100 years ago it was about being a "student athlete"… i think that is long gone from FBS, but still exists to some extent in FCS. Anyhow, i digress, morals and codes of conduct apply to all, regardless of the reason a student is attending a university. A school can prioritize sports higher than education and maintain a high level of morals and comply with codes of conduct.

  48. ASU-LAW

    April 3, 2012 at 4:34 am

    In other words, the failure isn't placing priority on athletics over education, rather it is placing morals and values in inferiority to athletics.

  49. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 4:36 am

    Any university that would "prioritize sports higher than education" is not worthy of the name. Universities, by definition, do not exist for sports. Universities exist for one purpose and one purpose only: the advancement of knowledge. It's an argument that you just cannot make.

  50. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 4:51 am

    Interestingly, "student-athlete" was a term coined by NCAA in the 1950s/60s to avoid lawsuits over injuries. At the time, there was a strong legal argument that athletes were in fact employees of an institution and therefore subject to funds and rehabilitation of injuries through workman's comp. The NCAA and big universities like Alabama (who figured in one of the early injury lawsuits) made up the term to avoid having to pay for debilitating athletic injuries, most of which were associated with football. "Student athletes" NEVER existed outside of the NCAA's terminology.

  51. Dr. Gonzo

    April 3, 2012 at 5:40 am

    Alright Naynay, I'm gonna have to attack your poor logic one disingenuous statement at a time.

    "But students are more likely to behave if they are on campus to be students first and athletes second."

    Do you have some sort of research on this? I'd be interested to see if the per-capita rate of misbehaving is higher among student-athletes than normal students. My guess is absolutely not. Like you said, there's a bad apple in every bunch. Of all the debauchery I saw/heard about in college, very little involved athletes. Anyway, the quote above is an unfounded and unprovable statement.

    "When you set up any system of privilege for athletes (tutoring, certain athlete-friendly classes, registration perks), the message is clear: Your athletic prowess is more important to us than your academic ability."

    Tutoring and registration advantages are given because athletes have to balance a similar practice schedule as a professional athlete, while still taking a full course load. Are you serious? Perhaps it's been a while since you've had to register for classes, but the optimum times fill up rather quickly, especially for an underclassman. So you suggest that we let them fall into the hourly hierarchy of registration, miss practice, get kicked off the team and lose their scholarship? Asinine. It's not a "clear message that athletic prowess is more important than academic ability." It's helping them to succeed in all aspects of being a student-athlete.

    "Universities exist for one purpose and one purpose only: the advancement of knowledge."

    Wrong. Universities exist for a multitude of purposes. Indeed, academia is THE highest priority, but the university is an organism that depends on multiple parts to succeed. Example: After the 2007 football season (3-peat and Michigan win) admission standards skyrocketed. This brought in a smarter group of students, helping the overall academic prestige of ASU. Everything is linked in a University setting. The Appalachian Family.

  52. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 6:12 am

    Gonzo, do you read appfan at all. They blew up that myth about admissions standards, applications and football at ASU years ago.

    "Professional athletes" do not belong at a university, they belong in a professional league.

    "Student-athlete" is an absolute pure myth created by the NCAA. See Taylor Branch's recent article, "The Shame of College Sports" in last October's issue of the Atlantic Monthly.

    You should check out the classic definition of a university that dates to the Middle Ages. Universities have been turned into "organisms" and "families" by administrators caught up in the allure of the bright lights and money (at the highest levels, certainly not ours) associated with big-time sports.

    As for statistics about football misbehavior, I would direct you to the Sports Illustrated Article published a year or so ago about the correlation between successful programs and the number of player arrests. It was not an absolute correlation, but generally speaking, the article pointed out that the better a program and the faster it's rise, the more arrests. Boise State, for example, had more arrests (and these were felonies, not traffic stops) than any other team in SI's top five.

    When you're inclined to do some reading instead of just spouting unsubstantiated opinion, here are the links to the articles, though I don't expect you or any of the other blissfully ignorant on this site to read them:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/the

  53. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 6:25 am

    faster its rise. Sorry.

  54. Dr. Gonzo

    April 3, 2012 at 6:44 am

    We weren't talking about athlete misbehavior in successful vs unsuccessful programs, we were discussing bad behavior rates in students vs student athletes at Appalachian. Your deflection skills are unparalleled. Your assertion that athletes act up more than normal students was the only spouting of unsubstantiated opinion injected in this mornings dialogue.

    I don't really follow your campaign against the term "student-athlete" as related to the unfair advantages you claim student-athletes receive. Like it or not, these kids put in a lot of work on top of the normal responsibilities of students. They register early so they can adhere to a practice schedule. The University dynamic has changed a little bit since the middle ages. Sadly, your perceptions have not.

  55. bcoach

    April 3, 2012 at 7:17 am

    So why is it that the trainers who put in many more hours than the players, don't get the same benifits?

  56. asumike83

    April 3, 2012 at 7:21 am

    I'd really like to know if there is any statistical data that shows whether athletes are more commonly in trouble than regular students. I tend to think not but I'd love to see some data. I know a lot of people that were in legal trouble of their own during my time in Boone and very few were athletes.

    Sadly, bad things like this happen all the time. It just doesn't always make the paper and generate conversation unless the accused happens to play a sport.

  57. Dr. Gonzo

    April 3, 2012 at 7:48 am

    bcoach: Trainers, video staff, equipment staff ect all get preferred registration and other benefits to ensure they can be present at games and/or practices to fulfill their roles. It's a functional purpose. Not some system of rewards only for the players of the football team. The conspiracy theories on here get more and more ridiculous every day.

  58. Dr. Gonzo

    April 3, 2012 at 7:49 am

    And I assure you the trailers do not put in more hours than the players.

  59. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 7:51 am

    Gonzo, did you read the articles? I didn't think so. Both address the question. My original post was about programs getting good quickly and the consequences thereof.

    However, since I know neither you nor Jamey nor any of the other shameless boosters on this site will bother to look anything up, here is an excerpt from an article published by Johns Hopkins University. (You've heard of it, right?)

    High-profile sexual abuse cases involving athletes such as Kobe Bryant and Mike Tyson, as well as cases involving high school athletic teams, contribute to the continuing debate over the sports dynamic and its association with relational abuse. One thesis posits that athletes in general exhibit more aggression than nonathletes in interpersonal relationships. Yet, sports fans have long advocated the idea that athletes do not participate in higher rates of abusive behavior, but rather that their celebrity status attracts more attention to their actions.1 What does the research have to say? If evidence suggests that atheletes are more violent, what are the possible causes of this phenomenon?

    General studies seem to support the hypothesis that college athletes are more often involved in aggressive behavior than are nonathletes. Findings indicate that athletes play a significant role in campus violence. For example, one report linked athletes (consisting of 2% of the campus population) with 20% reported cases of sexual assaults or attempted sexual assaults.1,2 This finding is consistent with the results from another study, which recorded the statistics of aggressive behavior occurrences at ten Division I colleges in an effort to determine the ratio of athletes to nonathletes engaging in criminal activity.3 Benedict and colleagues found that athletes were responsible for 19.9% of campus criminal acts, although they represented a mere 3.3% of the entire student population.

    83% of those polled believe that pro and college athletes are committing more criminal acts now compared to 25 years ago.

    Source: ESPN SportsZone Poll

    In an attempt to assess the validity of statistics that correlate teen athletes and the tendency to engage in higher rates of abusive behavior, Chandler et al. recently conducted a study that compared the rates of abusive behavior between athletes and nonathletes using a self-report approach. 1 One hundred and twenty six athletes (87 men and 39 women) and 216 nonathletes (114 men and 102 women) attending a traditionally African-American university located in the southeast responded anonymously to the surveys. The study recorded the different types of abuse, either physical or verbal, exhibited by men and women, as well as by athletes and nonathletes. Also noted was the gender of the individual involved. 1

    The results of the study show that athletes were significantly more likely to be abusive than nonathletes. However, regardless of whether the participant was an athlete or nonathlete, there was a gender difference in how young women and men engaged in interrelational aggression. Women more frequently employed verbal abuse while men more often employed physical abuse. Men also admitted significantly more often to having engaged in some form of sexual abuse. However, there was also a dichotomy in abusive behavior in athletes and nonathletes, though only in regards to physical abuse: although athletes reported displaying significantly more physical abuse than nonathletes, the rates of verbal abuse in both groups were concordant. Furthermore, athletes were more likely to have forced sex on someone of the opposite sex than nonathletes, and athletes also reported higher incidences of sexual activity. 1

    Did You Know?

    A 3-year study shows that while male student-athletes comprise 3.3% of the population, they represent 19% of sexual assault perpetrators and 35% of domestic violence perpetrators.1

    One in three college sexual assaults are committed by athletes. 1

    In the three years before 1998, an average of 1000 charges were brought against athletes each year. 1

    In 1995, while only 8.5% of the general population was charged with assault, 36.8% of athletes were charged with assault. 1

    A new incident of athletic crime emerges once every two days. This statistic does not include crimes that were unreported in the media. 1

    84% of the public believes colleges should revoke the scholarship of a player convicted of a crime. 2

    References

    1. No Author. Game Stats [online]. Littleton, National Coalition Against Violent Athletes, 2003 [cited 30 March 2004]. Available on the World Wide Web: (http://www.ncava.org/ ncavamain.html).

    2. ESPN SportsZone Poll.

    Thus, Chandler et al. concluded from their results that a relationship between college athletes and higher rates of abusive behavior exists. 1 Their findings appear to refute claims that the image of athletes as more aggressive is a by-product of media exploitation rather than a reflection of reality. In addition to interpersonal aggression, data gathered by Chandler et al. also strongly suggest that college athletes reported higher rates of participation than nonathletes in multiple types of abusive behavior, even if it is harmful to their own well-being, such as alcohol abuse, high-risk recreational activities, or unsafe operation of motor vehicles. Alcohol and tobacco abuse are strongly correlated with the probability that a male will engage in sexual abuse.3 An athlete's higher tendency for substance abuse may be linked with recorded data that suggest athletes engage more often in sexual abuse than nonathlete students.

    Despite mounting evidence indicating that athletes are more inclined to exhibit abusive behavior than nonathletes, other studies contest this claim. One finding reported that between 70 and 100 athletes and coaches have been accused each year over the past five years for some form of sexual assault against women. Yet, if one considers the 1998 estimates that about three million women were battered and almost one million raped, the proportion of incidences that involve athletes in comparison to the regular population is relatively small. Another variable that may contribute to the perception that athletes are more violent than nonathletes is race. In a poll conducted by the National Opinion Research Center Survey, 56% of whites stereotyped African-Americans as physically violent. This statistic may correlate with the fact that there are higher participation rates of African-Americans in football and basketball, sports generally perceived as being more physically aggressive. Moreover, the theory that holds that the aggressive nature of sports desensitizes athletes in general to violence may be subject to question. If this argument holds to be true, individuals who engage in violence as a result of the types of activity in which they participate such as adolescents who participate in ROTC or in the military should also tend to be more aggressive.3 However, further research is needed in order to determine if the tendency to engage in abusive behavior exists not only for student athletes but for other groups in general exposed to higher amounts of violent activity than the normal population.

    In studying the relationship between athletes and the tendency to engage in abusive behavior, an important issue of gender differences has not been properly addressed. Most of the studies discussed have results that for the most part, concern abusive behavior in the form of sexual assault. These studies more often implicate examples of abusive behavior demonstrated by men but do not direct attention to forms of abusive behavior specific to women, which may be less physical but more verbally aggressive. Furthermore, the study conducted by Chandler et al. lacked a full exploration on the possible gender differences in abusive behavior between female athletes and male athletes, only dividing groups into athletes against nonathletes and adolescent girls versus boys. Would the same gender difference between the types of abuse young women and men tend to employ also be found between female and male athletes?

    In an attempt to address growing concern towards whether athletes are more abusive than the regular population, programs have been designed to remediate the high frequency of sexual abuse committed by teen athletes. Locklear (2003) cites general suggestions that target restructuring an athlete's overall attitude towards women and sexual abuse.4 The tendency to engage in sexual behavior is treated as a socially learned behavior. The use of role models and important authority figures such as athletic coaches as proper models for promoting healthy relations towards women can serve as examples for male student athletes to observe correct ways in treating other female students. Silva and Bredemeier and Shields reported that athletes were more likely to condone rule-breaking behavior than those not involved in contact sports, and that the degree to which they accepted this behavior corresponded to the amount of contact involved in the sport they played.5-7 Lastly, Locklear also stressed that open communication and dialogue for discussing gender violence were necessary for promoting awareness in college athletes about the severity of the problem.4 Perhaps, if further research continues to indicate that teen athletes have a higher likelihood of engaging in abusive behavior than those who do not participate in sports, programs like those suggested by Locklear should be more heavily emphasized to remediate a significant problem perpetrated not just by student athletes, but athletes in general.

  60. ASU-LAW

    April 3, 2012 at 7:56 am

    Appnay,

    I don't have the time today to break down each of your statements like Gonzo. But I will address your most egregious statement… your opinion regarding "professional athletes". I mean seriously, are to create some argument just for the pleasure of arguing?

    So i begin… Some sports provide opportunities for individuals to bypass college to make it into the pro's (i.e. baseball and basketball) but when was the last time a football player went straight into the Pro's without attending college? What percentage of pro football players come from college? I don't have the statistics, but i watch a sh*t ton of football and don't recall any that didn't attend college. That being said it may be your opinion that they shouldn't go to college with the priority of pro football, but your opinion is not in line with reality.

    And as for the comments about successful sports programs increasing academic standards… its a logical fact to conclude that…smart kids want to be associated with schools that are national known for success… even if that success is related to sports achievements.

  61. ASU-LAW

    April 3, 2012 at 7:58 am

    Appnaysayer,

    HOLY SH*T… that was a long post…..

    GET A FREAKING JOB!

  62. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 8:00 am

    Too long for you to read? Get an education.

    This speaks to all the issues. And it's a excerpt since, as noted, no one will look up anything.

  63. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 8:10 am

    And with reference to winning teams boosting academics and enrollments, the fine editors at Appfan demonstrated years ago that WCU, with a 1-win season had a higher percentage increase in applications than did ASU during a championship year. I'm sure the editors would be happy to point you to the info.

    But the bigger question is, what university worthy of the name wants to claim that its popularity is due to the football team? Put another way, does ASU want the sort of student who would pick a school based on its athletic success or its academic programs?

  64. asu7

    April 3, 2012 at 8:32 am

    Nay while I might agree with some of your points what I still don't understand is if you think APP is so horrible then why go to the games? Why put money into something that you think is not worthy of its name? Oh and by the way I never said that any school that makes athletes more important is a good thing or that athletes should be taken care of. I am just wondering why you support APP if you feel the way you do?

    I just don't get why we should ever expect to see you on here or at the games. If I were upset like yourself then I wouldn't waste my time with it.

    Lewis … you sir are well … where in my post did I say that athletes should not be held to the same standard. If you and Nay are so unhappy why do you even come to this site?

    I just can't understand why people support a place that they feel is so ethically challenged.

  65. bcoach

    April 3, 2012 at 9:01 am

    Dr Gonzo

    1 I would like to know what those other benefits are. Scholarships sure aren’t one. Tutor sure isn't one. What are these other benefits?

    2 If you think the trainers don't put in more hours you are so far off base you are not in the stadium. They are there to open up and get things ready in the morning and they are still there to clean up afterward. I am not guessing, I know this for a fact. You missed this one big. Trainers are the most overlooked asset the athletic department has. Without the trainers the program could not exist. They get little thanks in the program and none outside the program.

    Not trying to argue. I just happen to know these things for a fact.

  66. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 9:03 am

    I think of myself as a missionary.

  67. Zen

    April 3, 2012 at 9:18 am

    Nay Nay,

    The Benedict/Corsett study referenced multiple times in your cut & paste job probably isn't the best study to prove your case. Here is the abstract from that study.

    http://jss.sagepub.com/content/19/2/126.abstract
    This article examines the relationship between collegiate athletic participation and reported sexual assaults at Division I institutions. The research is based on the police records at 20 institutions during the 1992-1993 school year and the records of 10 judicial affairs offices over a 3-year period from 1991 through 1993. Although the findings indicate that male student-athletes are overrepresented in reports of sexual assault in both locations, the differences between student-athletes and other male students are statistically significant only when it comes to the number of incidents reported to judicial affairs.

    (emphasis mine)

    This study does appear to indicate that athletes are more often accused, but also appears to indicate that they are far more often found not guilty.

    (If you or anyone else wants to pony up $25.00 to purchase the paper to refute or confirm my take on the abstract, please do.)

    When the final dispensation of the cases are known, the difference between "athletes" and "students" is statistically insignificant.

    This is supported by a statistic on the ncava.org list that is absent from your post.

    http://www.ncava.org/Statistics.html
    –The general population has a conviction rate of 80%. The conviction rate of an athlete is 38%. (Benedict/Crosset Study)

    To you, the true outcomes aren't important. If the accusations support your position, then that's all you need…right?

  68. Dr. Gonzo

    April 3, 2012 at 9:30 am

    Ok coach. I've refrained from revealing this for a long time, but for the sake of credibility, I'll tell you: I was on the video staff when I went to App. While I worked there I got preferred registration, access to the entire athletics complex including weight room, TONS of free gear and tickets to most games I wanted. I was not an athlete, nor was I a criminal. We made next to nothing there, but made the daily commitment to be at practice and even to sacrifice a few days of tailgating and joining the student section in order to sit on Owen's field house ect and film. I'm not saying I was a martyr by any means. I absolutely loved every second, just making a point.

    The theory that a few of us are challenging here is that there is some sort of reward system, set up exclusively for football players, that is giving them the impression that they are above the law and are only at ASU to win games. This is not the case. Advantages for the players are in place to help the individual as well as the university. Non athletes can enroll in tutoring programs as well. As far as scholarships go, how do you feel about academic scholarships? Recipients worked harder in school to receive money to finance their education. Are they getting preferential treatment as well?

    I'll admit that I don't know exactly what kind of hours the trainers put in, so I'll concede to your testimony on that. They are an invaluable part of the program and certainly an unsung hero. I was just reiterating that its more than just practices and games that the players have to balance with their course load. They have conditioning, team meetings and film to watch.

  69. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 9:31 am

    How does the study "appear" to indicate that more are found "not guilty." I read the whole article and did not see this anywhere in it.

    And are you talking about the general population or the general student population at a university? University courts or civil courts?

    I'd say you're the one working off "appearances."

  70. Zen

    April 3, 2012 at 9:34 am

    Did you read the abstract from the study that I included in my post?

  71. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 9:36 am

    Yes, and I READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE ON JSTOR. Did not see that in it.

  72. Zen

    April 3, 2012 at 9:38 am

    That may be the problem. You read an article about the study. I went to the source (or as near as possible for free) the STUDY ITSELF.

    http://jss.sagepub.com/content/19/2/126.abstract

  73. ASU-LAW

    April 3, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Appnay,

    It is very obvious to all that you don't address others arguments, and completely detract from the issue at hand. Making bold statements of fact do not substantiate your arguments or provide any level of credibility.

    "And with reference to winning teams boosting academics and enrollments, the fine editors at Appfan demonstrated years ago that WCU, with a 1-win season had a higher percentage increase in applications than did ASU during a championship year. I’m sure the editors would be happy to point you to the info."

    Obviously the fine editors and yourself need an education in statistics. A one year sample duration and of a population of two is completely inadequate to create even a shred of statistical evidence. There are too many variables to be able to effectively create statistical evidence substantiating this point. With a sample size of 2 I could create statistical relationships between anything!

  74. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 10:08 am

    Zen, I not only read the abstract you posted, but the article itself. It's short and done by a couple of M.A.s (I get a research service at work; rest assured I switch computers before I write on appfan.) The article deals with reports to university judiciary bodies–about the only true numbers available for such a study. I know I'll get zinged for this, but I'm not comfortable posting something that my employer pays for so I'm not going to paste it here. Like you said,someone can pony up the money if they don't want to take my word for it.

    After reading the article, the premise is that if you look at the data, then yes there is a significant disproportionate number of athletes who face charges. Unreported cases (however many there are and who knows; sexual assaults are chronically underreported) might change the significance. But using the number of reports–about the only numbers available– then athletes are more likely to face charges given their low percentages in the student body as a whole (and that's the point my original excerpt noted). Didn't see anything about guilty v. not guilty. I did read it quickly (again the work thing), but it's short and I don't think I missed it. I'm not trying to fudge any numbers here. I think they're clearly on my side. Sports Illustrated, Atlantic Monthly, and a host of other sources agree.

  75. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 10:11 am

    The problem as I see it is that lots of fans are in denial about this whole issue. They simply don't want to confront it. As Jamey said, hike the football and the other stuff be darned. In point of fact, it is a serious problem, one that has prompted serious investigative reporting by major magazines and news networks. That it surfaces at programs like ours and Montana's, intent on getting better fast, should come as no surprise.

  76. ASU-LAW

    April 3, 2012 at 11:29 am

    Appnay,

    Man you really have to lay off these bold statements.

    "one that has prompted serious investigative reporting by major magazines and news networks"…

    seriously…you know what has also garnered national attention… Beyonce losing 10 lbs.

    I think we have all learned that studies are often conducted for pointless statistical analysis and anything that will see a newspaper or commercial space is worthy of publishing.

    I think it goes without saying that athletics attracts individuals with a greater propensity to commit crime… id rather not go into detail about how this is true, so use your imagination.

  77. ASU-LAW

    April 3, 2012 at 11:29 am

    sell*

  78. asu7

    April 3, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    Thanks Nay for at least answering my question.

  79. bcoach

    April 3, 2012 at 1:02 pm

    I understand your point and appreciate the work you did. I will say though that a trainer does not make next to nothing, they make nothing. In addition to the time I spoke of, they are there for every bit of rehab which sometimes is early on a Sunday morning or late on a Saturday night.

    I am not making a judgment on the conduct of the athletes only that they are the darlings of the athletic department. They do get more benefit from the program than any other student in the program does. The trainers are also there because they love it. They do get shirts, hats and all that "stuff". They also get some tickets. Here is the difference. Most of the players get paid to be there, the trainers pay to be there. My statements are in no way anti athlete they are just pro all the little guys who make things work. The athletes ARE the privileged. I don't know that we need to complain about it but we sure don't need to try and hide it.

    Remember Matt Stevens? Remember when he blew out a knee? You know who worked on his rehab night and day so that he could be ready for a shot at the pros? Two trainers did that, one the head trainer, and the other a student trainer. You know what Matt got? A big fat contract. You know what the student trainer got? Dirty towels. Matt should have gotten the big contract, but the student trainer should have gotten more than dirty towels.

    To answer your question I feel great about academic scholarships. Are you suggesting that we should make athletes qualify for academic scholarships? I never really thought of that but I think you may have come up with a great idea.

  80. Appnaysayer

    April 3, 2012 at 1:13 pm

    I think that like TCU and several other schools, we should do a criminal background check on every athlete we intend to sign to a scholarship. Not to say that one misstep should eliminate a recruit, but if there is a pattern, that tells the institution that problems lie ahead. Lots of businesses do this. I see no reason universities can't do it, other than the fear that it may seriously limit the pool of potential recruits.

    Law, I'm not sure what you mean, but I'm praying it's not what I think. Whatever the reason, if athletes have proportionately higher arrest records, aren't we, in fact, inviting a criminal element onto campus with big-time sports? And doesn't it stand to reason that the better our teams get, the more the police blotter will fill up?

    And Zen, I'm serious. If you've got numbers that disprove the Hopkins article I posted, I'll stand corrected. Everything I've seen points the other way. I was unsure whether the article you referenced was peer reviewed. It was in a fairly obscure professional journal. That doesn't mean it's not legit. I just couldn't tell if it had been reviewed.

  81. Lewis

    April 3, 2012 at 4:46 pm

    Hey Appnay,

    I have no issues with anything you have said today. I appauld you insights to want thing to be better for all schools including App.

    All students are submitted to a background check prior to admission to acceptance to the North Carolina University System. We we need is a continuous background check once they are in school along with a cross reference on the national handgun registry for all students.

  82. Appthunder90

    April 3, 2012 at 6:10 pm

    Hey there Big Brother! It sure is swell to see you. I wondered when you would show up here. Come on in and have a seat. Wha?… Hey stop eating all my chips! Why are you rubbing your feet in my carpet and couch?

  83. Jamey

    April 4, 2012 at 4:17 am

    Can someone explain how I became uneducated by simply stating that I wanted the best for our school and for the truth to be investigated and revealed? I express my sincere apologies for not doing more research to respond to a blog thread than I did for a thesis paper in college, but I guess some of us are just too busy with life.

  84. appthunder90

    April 4, 2012 at 4:36 am

    i dont give the article posted any validity anyway, Jamey. The most recent data is 14 years old.

  85. bcoach

    April 4, 2012 at 7:01 am

    Man do we need a game.

    We are on here pretending that studies are something more than the opinion of the authors. At least the discussion Dr Gonzo and I have had is based on something we lived. Something we can verify as fact. We don’t have to agree but at least we are not going from what we were told, but what we know to be fact.

    We don't need studies to tell us what we need to do or what is going on around us. We don't need to know what someone said happened at 10 div 1 schools. We need to worry about how things are done at ASU. This latest incident has been so mishandled that it cannot be corrected. It can come to a conclusion one way or the other, but not corrected. We need a clear sensible policy for the future and it needs to be understood and followed. The eventual fallout from this is not going to be a good thing for the school or the people connected to the entire fiasco. This has been mishandled by every person involved from day one. We often say that students make stupid decisions because many times they do. This case is chocked full of them. What make this case so mystifying are the stupid decisions by all the so called adult authorities. These stupid decisions were made by people with more experience under their belt. People who should have the life learned practical knowledge to do better. Studies are not going to change that. Sound policy and the understanding of that policy, along with sound decision making will.

    My soap box has now been put back in the closet. I know, it never should have come out. HA HA beat you to it.

  86. appdreamin

    April 4, 2012 at 7:09 am

    "Are you suggesting that we should make athletes qualify for academic scholarships? I never really thought of that but I think you may have come up with a great idea."

    Coach, that is the standard all athletes on scholarship at DIII schools must meet–i. e., qualify for an academic scholarship or finance their education otherwise. To me, that's why the only true "student-athletes" (at least in the context of how I would define the term) are at DIII schools.

    A logical question is whether many, or any, DIII universities systematically "weight" academic scholarships toward qualifying students who also happen to be athletes. Depending on criteria associated with specific scholarships, doing so might be completely legitimate, or it might not.

    Either way, for most schools, including App, DIII is not a viable option. But it is the closest thing NCAA offers to truly amateur, student first-athlete second, competition.

  87. bcoach

    April 4, 2012 at 7:52 am

    I am a great admirer of Div 3 football. I have mentioned a few time on here that I went to the Nat champ last year. Went by myself and just picked a side to sit and watched the game but also the fans. They had a great time and it was a good game. They really didn't seem to care that they were not on the minds of America that night. They were having a great time. They were thankful for what they had. Fact of the matter is that it was a MUCH better game than our game at VT.

    You are correct in that we can't go back at this point. It is just a shame that college football left the Div 3 way of doing things. It is a shame that the NFL and NBA are smarter than the NCAA. They now have FREE minor leagues. We pay all the expenses. Actually I must correct myself. The NCAA executives are doing very well for themselves. It is the college presidents who were not so smart.

    BUT! I love where we are and can't wait for the first game.

  88. appdreamin

    April 4, 2012 at 9:02 am

    I largely agree. And I wholeheartedly agree about NFL and, even worse from the perspective of the student-athlete concept (or myth?), NBA having free developmental leagues.

    The one-year NBA rule may be worst of all. How does anyone reasonably expect a kid to even pretend to be a serious student, at least for more than one semester, when he is enrolled in college simply because NBA won't hire him until he's at one year removed from high school graduation and has "completed" one year of college? The requirement should either be at least two years, or none. Realistically, it probably should be none—if the player is good enough, why shouldn't he be allowed to play professionally even if he's never set foot on a university campus, much less enrolled as a so-called student athlete?

    Of course, we App fans are a long way removed from being directly affected by the NBA’s one-and-done rule.

  89. ASU-LAW

    April 4, 2012 at 9:15 am

    bcoach,

    I don't think there are many ASU fans who wouldn't agree with you that the good old days of playing for the sake of intercollegiate competition as opposed to the oh might dollar are preferable but long gone.

    As a side note I think our leadership is doing an excellent job to try to stay true to this as much as possible while balancing the schools interests of growth. A move to an "appropriate" D-I FBS conference or staying put will be the only choice, not a more to any conference. Staying true to intercollegiate rivalries will help keep the focus on competition and not the dollar.

  90. Jamey

    April 4, 2012 at 9:31 am

    I just received a call regarding alleged animal cruelty on this website. It seems that there is a dead horse that is being beaten repeatedly for no apparent reason.

  91. asu7

    April 4, 2012 at 10:01 am

    That's what we need Lewis … more people spying on us.

  92. bcoach

    April 4, 2012 at 10:52 am

    ASU-LAW

    For the most part I agree that they are doing a pretty good job so far. The only problem is that as you grow the dollar takes a bigger bite out of your soul. We will not be able to avoid that in the long run whatever the long run will be.

  93. coloradoneer

    April 4, 2012 at 11:37 am

    "The only problem is that as you grow the dollar takes a bigger bite out of your soul."

    Man, bcoach, what that a statement about our school or life? I think both.

  94. Appnaysayer

    April 4, 2012 at 1:48 pm

    bcoach is far too intelligent and makes way too much sense to be on this blog. And he can get a subject and verb to agree. Fancy that. I'm a fan.

    Jamey, you're an unabashed apologist for anything App football does or might do at some time in the future. Son, you don't bleed black and gold, you hemorrhage.

    As for the article being outdated, just as soon as someone else on here reads (or if that's too much to hope for Jamey, at least posts) something more current, I'll be taking notes. The problem is that "sports researchers" such as they are don't do much research on this subject that I can find. They don't want to bite the hand that feeds them. So it's left to the journalists at SI, CBS, and elsewhere. And who on this blog doesn't think the situation has gotten worse, not better, since the publication of this article?

    Doing a background check and using it in recruiting are two different things. If a single felony ruled out an athlete's participation in FBS, most schools couldn't field a punt-return team. Heck, Florida would have to declare bankruptcy, morally and otherwise.

  95. GRIZZZLY

    April 4, 2012 at 1:53 pm

    Well at least we're not Howard University…

  96. Appnaysayer

    April 4, 2012 at 2:10 pm

    Or UNC, or Southern Cal, or Ohio State, or Boise State, or Pitt, or Penn State, or Miami (with a chancellor who takes 50K checks from rappers in bowling alleys), or Syracuse…or John Callipari..but to that, we aspire!

  97. ASU-LAW

    April 4, 2012 at 2:11 pm

    Jamey,

    If that is a reference to my member, thanks to Viagra its not dead, people just call it horse because if its size, and I impose no limit on beating it.

  98. Appthunder90

    April 4, 2012 at 6:57 pm

    In reference to my comment about this article being outdated, I will say that it is Possible (note that I did not say probable) that this problem has improved some. Why might I perpetuate such a claim? Generations tend to revert back to its grandfather generation's values because they rebel against the parent generation. The baby boomers rebelled against the greatest generation and now my generation is rebelling against the babyboomers. Ipso facto, there is a push to get back to the values of the greatest generation. This is somethig I strive for because I have great admiration for my grandparents but especially my grandfathers. It is the little piece of hope that I cling to, perhaps out of ignorance or more appropriately, disdain for some of the things that happen in this world. So yes, if my generation follows the trend and does seek to emulate the greatest generation, this problem could have improved some since 20 years ago (1992) when Most of the study(ies) focus in the article you posted. Hopefully, I came across the way I intended and not as a bumbling idiot.

  99. Jamey

    April 4, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    "Jamey, you’re an unabashed apologist for anything App football does or might do at some time in the future. Son, you don’t bleed black and gold, you hemorrhage."

    Apparently you fail to read 99% of the posts that I make on this site. I have actually gotten ripped for condemning the administration and athletic department's handling of this situation and for admitting that there are different rules for student athletes at ASU. I have personally emailed Peacock and Cobb regarding these issues and encouraged others to do so as well. I have advocated removing players that were suspended/reinstated/suspended from all sports events until the entire situation was resolved. Your incorrect assessment of myself and other frequent posters on this site only furthers reason to question your "research" on this topic. You present what you want people to believe, regardless of relevance or truth. Here is a suggestion for you that I sincerely hope you consider; use the time that you take up making ridiculous posts and take actual ACTION to correct the problems you see at ASU. Email administrators, speak to those in charge, voice your concerns to those that can make change. Sitting on a website spouting nonsense does nothing but make you look like a jerk with too much free time on your hands.

  100. Jamey

    April 4, 2012 at 11:14 pm

    I am more than willing to debate sports, media, sociology, criminal justice…etc. with anyone who cares to bring talking points to the table. Hell, I will even take time research the topic if I deem the topic to be of enough interest to me. However, I do not see the point in spending hours on end posting personal attacks and insults towards who simply visit a website with the intent of staying informed about their alma mater. As I have said before, I cannot wait to get to September so we can actually talk about Offense, Defense, Special Teams, and that terrible lettering in the end zones.

  101. appdreamin

    April 5, 2012 at 7:51 am

    Thunder, you almost sound more idealistic than many boomers did when they were your age (and that's not a criticism). Eventually, many boomers grew out of their idealism and into a certain cynicism—or maybe just frustration or merely responsibility—that colors their present-day views. Your generation’s views are likely to change with age, as well. It would be interesting if one could look into the future and see how you will think 20 or 30 years hence.

    As to the list of schools that App and Montana are not, maybe we should add FAMU.

  102. Appthunder90

    April 5, 2012 at 8:48 am

    I can't speak to the future and how I might or might not think. I can posit that I have recently taken up the classic art of the wet shave, with a double sided safety razor. What a ritual. Much better than with the greenish blue goop they market as "shaving gel" that smells horrible and leaves you with a bad shave anyway.

    Anyway,

    I for one am tired of all the manchilds and get back to a time when your honor, loyalty, and respect actually meant something.

  103. appdreamin

    April 5, 2012 at 12:55 pm

    Maybe so, but to hear you tell it you and your generation have never actually experienced such a time–and you may well be right about that. As one who has lived longer and experienced/observed more, I can say that you're correct about there being generational differences in attitudes and values. I'm just not so certain that those differences are the exact ones you think. Time will tell, for you at least.

    As for shaving, I've found that it's more about the blade than the lather source. One of life's irritations is that blades don't last nearly as long as it seems they should, given their cost. I'm speaking of the various "cartridges," though, not safety razor blades.

  104. appthunder90

    April 5, 2012 at 1:43 pm

    i would love to hear you expand your thoughts about your experience with generational values and their differences and/or similarities.

    as for the razor blades, you are absolutely right. however, my new blades cost me 50cents each for a pack of 10 versus a cartridge price of an arm a leg. i was just never a fan of the shaving "gel", thought it stunk, and left my face feeling gunky.

    i am so ready for football season to get here.

  105. appdreamin

    April 6, 2012 at 5:27 am

    Given that cost difference, I may have to switch to the safety razor! My father (almost certainly of the same generation as your grandfathers) used a safety razor, after all.

  106. appdreamin

    April 6, 2012 at 5:29 am

    Oh, and though there are probably a few who would disagree for one reason or another, I'd bet almost everyone posting on Appfan agrees with your last comment.

  107. appthunder90

    April 6, 2012 at 6:10 am

    this particular safety razor was my great, great uncle's. I found it amidst his World War II "souveneirs" and medals/ribbons. it was very very cool. I sterilized it of course before using. although, my grandfather also used a safety razor. I don't have his because he still uses it! If you have never tried a wet shave with a double edged safety razor i HIGHLY recommend it. It is one of the most relaxing things that a man can do. An equivalent of a trip to the spa for our lady friends. Although, it does require attention to the task at hand. I would recommend some light reading on the techniques and proper way to go about it to avoid any "mishaps". Thankfully, i have not encountered any as of yet. since this seems to have piqued your interest (at least slightly curious) here is an article to get you started. very easy fun read and informative.

    "how to shave like your grandpa" for the safety razor

    http://artofmanliness.com/2008/01/04/how-to-shave

    for a real old school experience: "how to shave like your great grandpa" for the straight razor shave

    http://artofmanliness.com/2009/10/06/how-to-strai

    happy manliness.

  108. appdreamin

    April 6, 2012 at 10:18 am

    Thanks – I will read these, as it has been a long time since I used a safety razor (basically way back when I was pretending to actually need to shave, in my very early teen years). I'm mostly interested in the cost savings, honestly; as I said, the cost of multi-blade cartridges really aggravates me, more so even than gas prices rising for no reason other than we're nearing family vacation season.

  109. Appnaysayer

    April 6, 2012 at 3:00 pm

    Since we probably can't count on Appfan to post this, here's the latest on the "scandal." According to the Watauga Democrat, he April case has been heard again, same result.

    http://www2.wataugademocrat.com/News/story/ASU-su

  110. emerson string quart

    April 6, 2012 at 8:27 pm

    Attractive element of content. I just stumbled upon your weblog and in accession capital to assert that I get actually loved account your weblog posts. Anyway I'll be subscribing to your augment and even I fulfillment you access constantly quickly.

  111. Zen

    April 7, 2012 at 6:43 am

    Were these "appeals hearings", as the Democrat article states, or were they re-trials? If they were appeals hearings, wouldn't the original conclusions either be simply upheld (process finished) or vacated (possibly warranting a new trial)? How, on appeal, did the conclusions change?

    It's very troubling to me that the University Conduct Board hears and decides on cases of this weight. The lives and reputations of ALL the students involved in such cases are too important to be subject to judgement by such an ill-prepared group. The lack of subpoena power, an investigative arm, and evidentiary expertise reduce these hearings to little more than "he said, she said".

    It also troubles me greatly that the University is willing to pass judgement before the legal process has run it's course. A "verdict" from the University has the potential to greatly prejudice the legal process.

    The ramifications of these cases are just too great to be put in the hands of people who want to play lawyers and judges.

    Nay Nay,

    How is it the "same result" when the conclusion changed in three of the five cases?

  112. Jamey

    April 7, 2012 at 7:08 am

    Naysayer,

    All previous comments aside, thanks for posting the link to the Watauga Democrat article. I am happy to see that the local media is going to hold the administration to task on not allowing this to fall by the wayside. We do not want to be known as a University who simply allows these activities take place without a LEGITIMATE and TRANSPARENT process to determine the allegations' merits. At the end of the day, I believe we all want what is best for this university and its long-term benefit. If that means exposing that we have a problem within our student ranks, then let it be brought to light and dealt with to prevent future incidents.

  113. Appnaysayer

    April 9, 2012 at 4:39 am

    You step on campus you agree to abide by university rules. All students even athletes get a copy of the code of conduct. These cases have now been decided, appealed, reviewed by a special committee, heard again on a technicality, and decided. I still find it interesting that the worst offenders got only the minimum 8 semesters suspension. Let's see what happens with the more serious allegations in the September incident. App fan your silence is deafening.

  114. Dr. Gonzo

    April 9, 2012 at 6:04 am

    Whoa! Are people still commenting on this thread?!

  115. appthunder90

    April 9, 2012 at 7:38 am

    yes, I hijacked the thread and kept it on the sidebar. Then appnaysayer put it back on track.

  116. Appnaysayer

    April 9, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    The case is still generating lots of "interest" in the Boone/campus community. I don't think we've heard the last of it Gonzo, not by a long shot. The more serious allegations have yet to be reheard. And charges in the September incident are still pending.

  117. appthunder90

    April 9, 2012 at 7:47 pm

    appnaysayer,

    Is there an allegation more serious than sexual assault/rape floating around that I have missed? I also find it interesting that charges in the September incident were pending the outcome of the university hearing at all. I don't understand that. If the university found them innocent then the case will proceed? If guilty, abandoned? that doesn't make any sense to me. Perhaps you know something that I have not heard as of yet.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login