NCAA plays favorites again!

[WildHorse]

The NCAA gave 33 Duke lacrosse players an extra year of eligibility to reimburse them for the year they lost after the scandal that ensued after the stripper party that resulted in eventually-dropped charges against three players. This is complete crap, because:

1) The school cancelled the 2006 season, not the NCAA. Had the NCAA cancelled the 2006 season, they might have had a case.

2) There's no need the entire team had to lose a year because three players were on the hot seat. Yes, it's distracting. So are injuries, arrests and academic failures that cost teams. Ask the Duquesne basketball team if they've been distracted.

3) Even if the three who were named in the charges were the only three (of course!) players whose behavior got inappropriate (but CERTAINLY not illegal) that night, that doesn't mean the other players should be exempt. Teams across the country in every sport suffer because a few players make stupid errors in judgement that affect the whole team. It's life. Deal with it. Take your lumps and move on.

4) The coaches at Duke's rivals have to be livid. They now will take on a team with Final Four-caliber talent, and some of these guys will be 24-year-old men. That's a physical advantage that other teams have no way to match, or to compensate for.

Of course, it's not complete crap because it's Duke. If this happened at Notre Dame or Texas or USC or Michigan or one of the other giant money-making schools, this same verdict would have been handed down (and look how fast the NCAA ruled! What was it .... two days since Duke asked for the extra year? Aw, those poor Dookies.) Imagine if it was a team that didn't make big money for the NCAA that asked for such an exemption....

This is not sour grapes, because SMU has not asked for any such exemption and gotten turned down. But because the Duke guys are getting another year, the NCAA should be absolutely ashamed of itself.

[jtstang]

This is not sour grapes,

Of course not.

[Water Pony]

I agree that the NCAA was too generous and should not have given the extra year, specifically because it was Duke University, who unilaterally canelled the season. The decision was a bit of a surprise.

However, the three on the "hot seat" occured after the season cancellation and they were "randomly picked", so any teammate member had a chance to be on the hot seat.

[quote="
2) There's no need the entire team had to lose a year because three players were on the hot seat. Yes, it's distracting. So are injuries, arrests and academic failures that cost teams. Ask the Duquesne basketball team if they've been distracted.

3) Even if the three who were named in the charges were the only three (of course!) players whose behavior got inappropriate (but CERTAINLY not illegal) that night, that doesn't mean the other players should be exempt. Teams across the country in every sport suffer because a few players make stupid errors in judgement that affect the whole team. It's life. Deal with it. Take your lumps and move on.

4) The coaches at Duke's rivals have to be livid. They now will take on a team with Final Four-caliber talent, and some of these guys will be 24-year-old men. That's a physical advantage that other teams have no way to match, or to compensate for. quote]

VERY TRUE. There are consequences for bad behavior and that is the price.

I believed in their innocence (in rape and kidnapping) from the beginning, but there should be no fifth year granted.

[PonyKai]

I would hope that you rethink your position on this subject and consider the fact that this was a group of barely adults who were:

1.) Abandoned by their school
2.) Demonized by the community
3.) The subject of a totally off-based racial witch hunt
4.) Lost their credibility, job offers, and will always carry this label
5.) Lost a year of the "4 greatest years of your life" dealing with media, the community, the school, and more hatred than many of us will ever know.

This decision was not for the school. This decision was made for the students and to grant them the chance to enjoy what they lost, when it was beyond their control. For once, I actually agree with what the NCAA has done. This isn't about making money, but it's about allowing a bunch of college kids continuing to do what they love when it was taken from them by a group of zealots. All of the ACC presidents were in unanimous support of the decision, and I believe that if we dealt with something similar, than the NCAA would act the same.

[George S. Patton]

I have no problem with this.

[ponyfan84]

Yea, I think its a good call. The second I found the out the accuser was black, I knew it was just some scheme to make money of rich white kids. Not to say I'm racist, but in most cases thats how they end up. And once that DA got in over his head with his little witch hunt, I knew it was just a matter of time before someone dropped the case. That in mind, I felt bad for that team. It sucks because of some moron (stripper), a bunch of kids lost a year of what they came to Duke for: Lacrosse. How would you feel if you were on the SMU football team and the season got cancelled because of some BS like this? You'd be pissed too, especially if in the end, it was all for naught.

These kids deserve a chance to play another year and make up for what they lost. I am sure they love it too. Another year of school, probably won't be taking any classes, so they get to enjoy life a little longer before entering the work force.

While I see the original posters point, put yourself in the Duke teams shoes. And if every ACC president agreed with this, I have no problems. Even though I am not a Lacrosse fan, I was hoping Duke would win it all last weekend, just to shut up the doubters and start building toward the future. It's a shame the 3 who were labeled rapists will always carry that with them.

[Water Pony]

BTW, the head coach for U. of Virginia lacrosse team did oppose this decision. And, only four ACC schools field Div. 1 Varsity Men's Lacrosse.

My point is the team is innocent of the felonies and were unjustly accused. Their own school, Duke, made it worse for them. Not a lot of positives in any direction.

That said, the team's consequence for stupidity should remain four, not five, years of eligibility. The lesson for the young men is there are appropriate consequences for this in-season behavior.

Duke shouldn't have cancelled the season in the first place. But the NCAA should not reward the players' decision to party with an extra year (equaling 4 and half seasons) makes sense to me.

As for the Championship game, I was pulling for the Blue Devils since I supported them throughout this ordeal. But, they needed to win the game Vs. Johns Hopkin. No entitlement. The Blue Jays played a smart game, especially in the first half. They were deserving champs. Plus, it was a great game to watch and the ending exciting.

Duke beating Cornell was an even better game in the semi's

[PonyKai]

"The NCAA said it considered several factors, including unanimous support from the presidents of the Atlantic Coast Conference universities, according to a news release."

"Virginia coach Dom Starsia, whose Cavaliers won the national championship in 2006, was unhappy with the decision, though he said it was about more than seeing some of Duke's top players possibly stick around a while longer."

[CA Mustang]

The second I found the out the accuser was black, I knew it was just some scheme to make money of rich white kids..

Glad to hear you have an open mind.

Not to say I'm racist, but in most cases thats how they end up..

Your words speak for themselves.

[Stallion]

CA Mustang took the words out of my mouth. Why not just judge the facts on the individual case and merits. You define the word prejudice which means to pre-judge.

[ponyfan84]

I stand by my words. Let's face us, the media has lead many of us to believe that in cases like this, there is a minority trying to scam her way into some money. I don't get consider myself racist, as one of my best friends is hispanic, but come on....poor black stripper gets invited to party hosted by rich white kids....would anybody else see money signs there? Do I think they're innocent? Yes. I think the 3 kids and maybe a few others went into the bathroom with her for some extra 'time', but I don't think any of them had intercourse with her.

[couch 'em]

I'm all for this, since it is a great way to shove this in the face of the local prosecutor who tried to further his career at the expense of the athletes, and the Jesse Jackson et al group who demonized the athletes without knowing the facts because they were white and the accuser was black. (to further their career/because they are bigots)

[CA Mustang]

Let's face us, the media has lead many of us to believe that in cases like this, there is a minority trying to scam her way into some money.

So what, the media made you a racist? Now that's a new one.

I don't get consider myself racist, as one of my best friends is hispanic,

You have got to be kidding me.

but come on....poor black stripper gets invited to party hosted by rich white kids....would anybody else see money signs there?

Your choice of words is nearly comical. She wasn't INVITED to the party, but rather HIRED. Since she was HIRED, she was there WORKING. The $ began when the players picked up the phone to order "entertainment" for the party.

Some of the other players made it quite clear that the only way someone like her would be at their party was if she was WORKING, not INVITED.

I think the 3 kids and maybe a few others went into the bathroom with her for some extra 'time', but I don't think any of them had intercourse with her.

So that makes it all okay?

[ponyfan84]

A) The media didn't make me a racist, as I am not racist. I am just saying, how many times have you seen a case in which someone, mostly minorities, try to scam their way into money. People will do anything for a buck these days. Ever heard of cases in which people get into a fender bender, but when the other driver asks if they're ok, they suddenly say their neck hurts? I have, and I am sure you have.

B) "You have got to be kidding me?". Great response to my statement.

C) You know I literally didn't mean 'invited'. Regardless of being hired or invited, she still tried to take advantage of these kids and their money.

D) No, that doesn't make it OK, and I never said it did. I am just saying that's probably what really happened. The kids invited her in, paid some extra money for a little 'happy ending', but some got carried away and tried to grope her, etc... She saw that as an opportunity to claim rape, and get some money.


The point of this story and thread topic, is that I believe they were justified in getting a second chance, seeing as three individuals were thought to be responsible for the rape, even if most of the team was at the party. Why should everyone be punished for the actions of three kids? They lost what was rightfully theirs and I am glad they get a chance to play again.

[CA Mustang]

A) Sure, insurance scams have been around since before either of us were born. But to attribute money scams mostly to minorities? Do you have any facts to support that claim, or is that just your opinion?

B) It was appropriate, considering the trite cliche that prompted it.

C) Hey, I was just going by what you typed. After all, you "stand by your words".

So the players hired her for the party, yet she went there with the intention of taking advantage of them financially (above and beyond her fee)? Exactly how do you know her intentions (or anyone else) that night? Do you know any of the involved parties? Were YOU there?

D) So once the party go out of control, crying "rape" was a moneymaking decision? At what point in the entire process did either of the dancers make a monetary claim (beyond their agreed upon fee for the evening)?

The school canceled the season, not the NCAA. Any gripes along those lines should be directed at the school. The NCAA giving the players an extra year was overly generous.