dat dude;757088 wrote:Didn't Bell have an offer from ND?

Yes he did.

Bell should have been dismissed form the University.

dat dude;757088 wrote:Didn't Bell have an offer from ND?

This stuff happens all the time at ND, but since its a private University we never hear about it. I'm surprised we even heard about the negligent death of a 20 year old.

jordo212000;755893 wrote:I'd be interested to hear what team rule he broke. Kind of funny how differently this situation is being handled this time around. The whole season for some weed? (if that is the case). Hey Tress, could have used this sort of heavy handed punishment when TP and the gang was selling memorabilia for some tats

But in typical Tressell fashion...a non-star gets the hammer while the stars get protection.

ksig489;757981 wrote:But in typical Tressell fashion...a non-star gets the hammer while the stars get protection.

Pretty sure he was going to be a starter this year. And he was a 5 star recruit coming in.

wkfan;757167 wrote:Bell should have been dismissed form the University.

Pretty sure the university disciplne board has that say

LJ;758010 wrote:Pretty sure the university disciplne board has that say

Serious question boss man. I won't try to argue either way with you, just want to know how you feel. If one of your employees failed 3 drug tests, would you fire them?

karen lotz;758140 wrote:Serious question boss man. I won't try to argue either way with you, just want to know how you feel. If one of your employees failed 3 drug tests, would you fire them?

its not directed to me, but only if it was affecting their performance at work. I might be in the minority, though.

drug testing is a waste of money anyways.

ksig489;757981 wrote:But in typical Tressell fashion...a non-star gets the hammer while the stars get protection.

suspended 5 games for selling some gifts..id say thats pretty harsh. Federal law > NCAA rules.

karen lotz;758140 wrote:Serious question boss man. I won't try to argue either way with you, just want to know how you feel. If one of your employees failed 3 drug tests, would you fire them?

We only drug test those employees where coming in impaired would put safety at risk. They are fired after 1 fail and refusing treatment, 2 fails and accepting treatment. It would never get to 3.

Isn't there some adage about the fish rotting from the head down?

LJ;758010 wrote:Pretty sure the university disciplne board has that say

No shit.

This is my opinion.

Why do people keep comparing throwing someone out of school with firing them from a job? They are totally different and completely unrelated things.

I kind of agree with 5knots here. KIND OF.

Of the players we've recently seen have disciplinary issues:

TP, Adams, Bell, Posey, Herron, Thomas

TP and Adams had issues either before coming to c-bus or shortly thereafter (Pryor and the fighting rumors), Adams (first year troubles). that's 1/3 (and I don't know enough about the other 4's pasts to know they hadn't had issues before this). So it stands to reason that you could make a judgement call pretty soon.

Here is an example: Kid from Texas who (I think) we have offered. Linebacker prospect Derek David. Kids gets arrested for sexual assault of a 16 year old girl about a month ago. From the articles I could muster up this was not that big of a surprise? What kind of homework are we doing???? And we don't give Joe Bolden the time of day? Here is a kid who hauls his whole family to Ann Arbor just to look Hoke in the eyes and tell him he is on board! We blew that one imo. Alos seems like higher percentage of kids from PA or east lately are winding up trouble for us? Who recruits this area? is this a common thread or just coincidence? I don't know enough about it to assume a correlation, I am only asking you gurus.

5knots;759628 wrote:Here is an example: Kid from Texas who (I think) we have offered. Linebacker prospect Derek David. Kids gets arrested for sexual assault of a 16 year old girl about a month ago. From the articles I could muster up this was not that big of a surprise? What kind of homework are we doing???? And we don't give Joe Bolden the time of day? Here is a kid who hauls his whole family to Ann Arbor just to look Hoke in the eyes and tell him he is on board! We blew that one imo. Alos seems like higher percentage of kids from PA or east lately are winding up trouble for us? Who recruits this area? is this a common thread or just coincidence? I don't know enough about it to assume a correlation, I am only asking you gurus.

to be fair if the coaches sniffed bolden, then the coaches would be the sexual deviants.

LJ;758010 wrote:Pretty sure the university disciplne board has that say

From what I read on another site, the procedure is established for this kind of offense (failed drug test). There's progressive steps of discipline for each successive failed test, with the third resulting in losing an entire season. It varies some from Big Ten school to Big Ten School, but MOST of them have a very similar process.

If I can find the comparison, I'll post it, but it probably is no longer available.

Found it. This was posted by Gerd on the O-Zone. I'll provide the link at the bottom of the page to show where he got it.

Illinois: (1) none; (2) 1/12th of regular-season games; (3) 1/4th of regular season games; (4) one year.

Indiana: (1) none; (2) one game; (3) dismissal.

Iowa: (1) none; (2) 10 percent of games; (3) dismissal.

Michigan: (1) none; (2) 10 percent of games; (3) one year.

Michigan State: (1) none; (2) 30 days; (3) one year.

Minnesota: (1) none; (2) 20 percent of games; (3) one year.

Nebraska: (1) none; (2) suspension determined by head coach; (3) dismissal.

Ohio State: (1) none; (2) two weeks; (3) one year.

Penn State: (1) none; (2) seven days; (3) one year; (4) dismissal.

Purdue: (1) none; (2) none; (3) 10 percent of games; (4) "may be dismissed" with athletic director making decision.

Wisconsin: (1) none; (2) 30 days; (3) dismissal.

It's interesting to see the slight differences between the policies, especially which schools have a definitive dismissal penalty and which don't. Six schools from AQ conferences suspend players for their first positive drug test, but none come from the Big Ten.

Purdue is one of four teams from AQ conferences that doesn't hand down a playing-time penalty for the second positive drug test.

A few Big Ten-related nuggets from the FanHouse story:

At Purdue and UCLA, a student-athlete does not miss any games after two positive tests and only misses one game for a third positive test. By comparison, a student-athlete at 31 of the 60 schools is dismissed from the football program for a third positive test. Purdue also offers this caveat: If a student-athlete goes 18 months since his last positive test, he may revert back to his previous number of positive tests -- in essence earning up to five chances before dismissal.
At Florida, Illinois, Purdue and UCLA, student-athletes at those respective schools may have up to five positive drug tests before being dismissed. Those are easily the nation's most lenient policies, at least as far as allowing a student-athlete the most chances.
Iowa, which recently admitted some flaws in its drug testing procedures in that a number of student-athletes likely had "gotten around the tests," actually has one of the nation's most common substance abuse policies: no games are missed for a first positive, 10 percent of games suspended for a second positive and dismissal for a third positive.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/21275/bt-teams-differ-on-drug-policies-penalties