Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

81 - 83 of 83 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
I see your point, although I’m not sure it’s the exact same scenario. People should definitely correct me if I have any of this wrong (I hesitate to go too far down this rabbit hole since I’m not a legal expert). But my understanding of 2015 is that there was a formal rape charge filed, police investigation, etc. That to me is much closer in parallel to the formal Title IX option that has been discussed here. Based on what I’ve read about the current case, a formal complaint would have resulted in an automatic suspension. However, in this case, no formal complaint was filed. Again, this leaves the apparent mishandling of that whole situation by the department as a separate issue.

But as it relates to Becker, he would have been suspending someone without there even having been a formal complaint. I suppose he could have fallen back on the Code of Conduct, but at that point, you’d have the basketball coach coming off the top rope and basically overriding the Title IX process and his own employer’s process. With the benefit of hindsight, that might have been the best thing for everyone, but I think it would be pretty tough to expect a coach to unilaterally make that decision while the situation was still unfolding.

I guess my point ultimately is that when we start going down the “why didn’t Becker do something?” path, it implicitly speaks to his moral compass. Based on the fact pattern so far, coupled with his past actions, I just think we should be careful about that. If we find out differently later, I’ll be the first one to change my tune.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,868 Posts
Discussion Starter #82
I see your point, although I’m not sure it’s the exact same scenario. People should definitely correct me if I have any of this wrong (I hesitate to go too far down this rabbit hole since I’m not a legal expert). But my understanding of 2015 is that there was a formal rape charge filed, police investigation, etc. That to me is much closer in parallel to the formal Title IX option that has been discussed here. Based on what I’ve read about the current case, a formal complaint would have resulted in an automatic suspension. However, in this case, no formal complaint was filed. Again, this leaves the apparent mishandling of that whole situation by the department as a separate issue.

But as it relates to Becker, he would have been suspending someone without there even having been a formal complaint. I suppose he could have fallen back on the Code of Conduct, but at that point, you’d have the basketball coach coming off the top rope and basically overriding the Title IX process and his own employer’s process. With the benefit of hindsight, that might have been the best thing for everyone, but I think it would be pretty tough to expect a coach to unilaterally make that decision while the situation was still unfolding.

I guess my point ultimately is that when we start going down the “why didn’t Becker do something?” path, it implicitly speaks to his moral compass. Based on the fact pattern so far, coupled with his past actions, I just think we should be careful about that. If we find out differently later, I’ll be the first one to change my tune.
I think a lot of it speaks to what Ware and now the other women athletes are saying...if the athletic department was willing to overstep its bounds to get into a Title IX investigation to resolve it "informally" why then could they not use their own student-athlete code of conduct, itself "formal" only by the athletic department, but one that is used to discipline student-athletes for "informal" issues on campus?

The student-athlete code of conduct can suspend an athlete for missing class or practice, going out drinking be it underage or in defiance of coach's orders, and literally a bunch of other things that a normal student would not face consequences for, like team rules set by a head coach of one sport that don't blanket apply to other student-athletes, and wouldn't at all to any regular student.

A regular student misses class? Okay, their grade suffers in the class possibly. If they're doing poorly overall and get a GPA of under 2.0 (which is hard to do at UVM), they get placed on academic probaition, and can still attend, but have to meet with advisors and stuff, but get every chance to do better and the only difference is "we're watching you." A student-athlete? The NCAA says anyone under that is ineligible for competition the following semester. NCAA says 8 game suspension for textbook selling as UVM fans know...an on scholarship regular student who sells their textbooks when they're supposed to return them to the bookstore? "Hey don't do that" and "pay us back the costs out of your pocket." These are examples of NCAA rules specifically, but it is from the same cloth when it comes to NCAA rules and athletic department conduct codes.

A regular student gets caught drinking/drunk underage on campus? They have to meet with their resident director and attend a panel and write some essay about why what they did was bad and then maybe a letter goes home to their parents, but sometimes it doesn't. A lot of the times, the UVM PD officer just throws your citation out because they don't want to do the paperwork for insignificant cases. If you're off campus and underage, it's a $150 fine from Burlington PD, and a letter from the school saying "respect the community." If you're of age, generally nobody gives a crap (for the majority white, cisgendered student population, that is). For UVM student-athletes? Any scenario I laid out results in game suspension from the department. There was one hockey player during my time there who likely had a real alcohol problem, and occasionally he'd get scratched on the Saturday end of the home weekends because he'd go out to the bars when it's a team rule you don't on the Friday night, generally. He probably was never even formally "caught" for anything either by authorities, but he was suspended for games nonetheless.

All that being said, I think it's totally logical in response to Ware's story that other women student-athletes are making the demands they are for their own safety first, because the department sent the signal that we're just going to play the accused and he'll face no consequences, but secondly, since the athletic department can levy punishment against a student-athlete for things the university would say are "resolved" in the form of additional consequences, why can't they do it for cases of sexual violence?

The athletic department was all too willing to overstep and push for an informal solution, but then won't even apply their own departmental standards to it? Every right to question why they can cherry pick what they litigate and what they don't. The admins should be let go for the obvious mishandling/overstepping and putting the basketball program over another student-athletes wellbeing, but also because they are downright stupid and couldn't see how to logically apply their own informal policy to an informal solution and not be in the situation they are in. It would not in any way shape or form impacted the men's basketball team in a long term sense, especially since the timeline was in the non-conference part of the schedule. The only person who would have been mad about it is the same guy who is currently the department's only defender on here, and the same guy who whined all year about how UVM, a one-bid team in a one-bid league, blew its seeding chances every time it lost a game this season.
 

·
President of the Anti-Carbone Club
Joined
·
161 Posts
I don't think it reflects any better on Schulman that it was just his associate who made the comment about "the fans" and not him directly because either way, his own female athletes want him gone specifically as well. When you have nine teams (over half of UVM's student athletes, I'd assume) banding together and saying stuff like "We don't feel safe with you in charge" it sounds very much like they're making an ultimatum.
 
81 - 83 of 83 Posts
Top