PonyFans.com

ReedFrawg wrote:

Big Hoss wrote:Saw Patterson's comments on the news last night, and he was saying all sorts of great stuff about watching out for his players and teaching kids about being responsible for their actions. I'll believe that when he suspends Pachall for at least 1 game.

Why? He was disciplined 6 months ago in accordance with TCU and NCAA policy? Kids fail drug tests all the time...it's just typically not public knowledge.

And what was that? Did he wag his finger in the face and just say "that's not how we do things around here"? If he's truly concerned about a kid's well being, he'd take away something that's meaningful so that he understands consequences.

Big Hoss wrote:

ReedFrawg wrote:

Big Hoss wrote:Saw Patterson's comments on the news last night, and he was saying all sorts of great stuff about watching out for his players and teaching kids about being responsible for their actions. I'll believe that when he suspends Pachall for at least 1 game.

Why? He was disciplined 6 months ago in accordance with TCU and NCAA policy? Kids fail drug tests all the time...it's just typically not public knowledge.

And what was that? Did he wag his finger in the face and just say "that's not how we do things around here"? If he's truly concerned about a kid's well being, he'd take away something that's meaningful so that he understands consequences.

I believe a 1st violation would result in the parents being contacted and informed, a $150 fine, a substance abuse assessment, followed by mandatory drug and alcohol education.

I can't speculate as to whether GP added any off the books punishments.

Big Hoss wrote:

ReedFrawg wrote:

Big Hoss wrote:Saw Patterson's comments on the news last night, and he was saying all sorts of great stuff about watching out for his players and teaching kids about being responsible for their actions. I'll believe that when he suspends Pachall for at least 1 game.

Why? He was disciplined 6 months ago in accordance with TCU and NCAA policy? Kids fail drug tests all the time...it's just typically not public knowledge.

And what was that? Did he wag his finger in the face and just say "that's not how we do things around here"? If he's truly concerned about a kid's well being, he'd take away something that's meaningful so that he understands consequences.

so, they should do more than what their official policy says they will do?

Junior wrote:so, they should do more than what their official policy says they will do?

Yes, because it is not us and it is them. It's much easier to be sanctimonious, when we are the ones not in the news. In fact, TCU should get the DP!

ericdickerson4life wrote:

Junior wrote:so, they should do more than what their official policy says they will do?

Yes, because it is not us and it is them. It's much easier to be sanctimonious, when we are the ones not in the news. In fact, TCU should get the DP!

Well, there's that....

But in all seriousness, to me the issue is making sure you are doing what is in the best interest of the kid long term. If it's a slap on the wrist, is he really going to correct his behavior? Or is he just going to do enough not to get caught again?

I'm not saying to string the kid up, but a 1 game suspension seems an appropriate way to really get his attention. If he's a team player, sitting on the sidelines, even if it's just a warm-up style game, might be just what it takes to make him realize that his actions have impacts not just on himself, but on others as well.

Just my two cents.

They could also sit him down and make him watch a bunch of "Say No to Drugs" videos starring Nancy Reagan? But then again, that may be too harsh.

Big Hoss wrote:

ericdickerson4life wrote:

Junior wrote:so, they should do more than what their official policy says they will do?

Yes, because it is not us and it is them. It's much easier to be sanctimonious, when we are the ones not in the news. In fact, TCU should get the DP!

Well, there's that....

But in all seriousness, to me the issue is making sure you are doing what is in the best interest of the kid long term. If it's a slap on the wrist, is he really going to correct his behavior? Or is he just going to do enough not to get caught again?

I'm not saying to string the kid up, but a 1 game suspension seems an appropriate way to really get his attention. If he's a team player, sitting on the sidelines, even if it's just a warm-up style game, might be just what it takes to make him realize that his actions have impacts not just on himself, but on others as well.

Just my two cents.

They could also sit him down and make him watch a bunch of "Say No to Drugs" videos starring Nancy Reagan? But then again, that may be too harsh.

but that's not what the policy is. theit policy, which I'm assuming went through some sort of review and approval process, was judged by people within the university to be fair and just. it doesn't seem that there are many schools that have a mandatory 1 game suspension for the first offense. so it would appear that most schools would find your policy to be too harsh.

CalallenStang wrote:[Gary Patterson] has covered all of this up from the public in an effort to protect his football record. He should be punished.

It was public record since shortly after the police report was submitted on 2/15. How could he cover that up exactly? What a [Craig James]tastic post. LOL.

It was a team administered drug test versus NCAA and yet he was punished as if the NCAA had performed it. I would say that is pretty dramatic as it is an official 1st strike. There was no obligation to provide the results to the NCAA let alone impose discipline. Not too many coaches would have done the same.

Big Hoss?

froglicious wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:[Gary Patterson] has covered all of this up from the public in an effort to protect his football record. He should be punished.

It was public record since shortly after the police report was submitted on 2/15. How could he cover that up exactly? What a [Craig James]tastic post. LOL.

It was a team administered drug test versus NCAA and yet he was punished as if the NCAA had performed it. I would say that is pretty dramatic as it is an official 1st strike. There was no obligation to provide the results to the NCAA let alone impose discipline. Not too many coaches would have done the same.

Big Hoss?

froglicious?

froglicious wrote:

CalallenStang wrote:[Gary Patterson] has covered all of this up from the public in an effort to protect his football record. He should be punished.

It was public record since shortly after the police report was submitted on 2/15. How could he cover that up exactly? What a [Craig James]tastic post. LOL.

It was a team administered drug test versus NCAA and yet he was punished as if the NCAA had performed it. I would say that is pretty dramatic as it is an official 1st strike. There was no obligation to provide the results to the NCAA let alone impose discipline. Not too many coaches would have done the same.

Big Hoss?

"Maybe it's 5, and maybe it's 82."

My expectations are different than yours froglicious and I guess that of Gary Patterson as well. I don't think it's an outrageous expectation, but you are entitled to think I'm being too strict. That would be why it is called "my opinion".