The coaches get paid alot more than I do, so I think I'll let them handle it. I think they probably have a few more facts than we do, or we can just base our opinions on hearsay.

The coaches get paid alot more than I do, so I think I'll let them handle it. I think they probably have a few more facts than we do, or we can just base our opinions on hearsay.

 

:thumb:

Brooksy should have sat him...disappointed he didn't.

Resisting arrest is nothing to blow off. Could be an emotional behavior issue that needed to be adjusted. If the case is as it may seem, he should have to take some counseling as well. Should have sat a game, at the very least.

 

Smoking weed and driving under the influence is not a good gig either, and Kragthorpe should have sat Spillman and had him set up for drug testing.

I respect you consistancy and your standerds on this issue. I'm of the opinion that we don't know the disciplinary process of the coaches, especially that which is behind closed doors, so we really don't need to be to judgemental when we don't know everything, but I can respect where you are coming from..

Johnson and Spillman should've sat a game. Regardless of the time it occurred. A member of a team has rules to live by. You're a UofL/UK football player 24/7. Whether you get in trouble in February or October, you're representing the program in a negative fashion and deserve to sit a game. Counseling is not a punishment. It's something to help the football player as a human being. Sitting a game is to help the football player understand his role...

 

Also, I know they didn't sit a game. And NOTHING affects a competitive division I athlete more than sitting a game he's prepared for for the last 6,8,10 months...

I think an important difference here is that Spillman was arrested in January. For all we know, he may have been in drug/alcohol counseling for the last 6 months. In fact, I have a strong suspicion that he has been at least for some of that time, as it's usually a condition of whatever resolution to such charges occurs. And, as far as we know, he gets drug tested every day...or not. I have no idea what Kragthorpe may have done to discipline Spillman.

 

I'm not excusing his crime, I'm just saying that the Spillman incident has had months to work toward resolution, and that it's possible the reasons he wasn't out for a game was because other steps were taken.

Counseling is standard for Louisville athletes and RSO members (and at any university really) when drugs or Alcohol related charges are brought by DPS (department of public saftey officers which are University of Louisville police with real police training and powers). I used to work for U of L and believe me the sessions they have to go through are not easy, fun, or easy to get out of. I would bet a lot of clams that he has been through that program.

 

I still think he should sit though if found guilty. (Wish they already sat him if it helps teach a lesson)

The coaches get paid alot more than I do, so I think I'll let them handle it. I think they probably have a few more facts than we do, or we can just base our opinions on hearsay.

:thumb:

Most people do not know all the facts. Some do. It seems from the information I have gathered, it wouldnt have been right for Johnson to sit at all. Maybe a quarter or a half at most. Myself and a few others know that he didnt exactly get a fair shake.

I agree with RM on this one, Coaches know the facts. we as fans know nothing, if you know what I mean. So, this is nothing but a bedtime story,good nite everyone.:sleep:

So the LEX police made the charge up???

 

I must've typed that in my invisible text. I'm not writing this off as nothing, I know getting arrested for anything can't be referred to as nothing. However, going to visit a teammate in the hospital, other circumstances, in my humble opinion, I don't think it's as huge of a deal as it could be.

Resisting arrest is stupid, not all UK fans defend UK players to the death.

Most people do not know all the facts. Some do. It seems from the information I have gathered, it wouldnt have been right for Johnson to sit at all. Maybe a quarter or a half at most. Myself and a few others know that he didnt exactly get a fair shake.

Talk about a bold statement. Are you also walking circles around a racial profiling claim without saying it???

Talk about a bold statement. Are you also walking circles around a racial profiling claim without saying it???

Yeah, it wasn't terribly profound or anything, but its the truth. I cant really share all the details here, all I can really say is that Rich Brooks basically saw the whole resisting thing as bull. Hence the reason Johnson played.

It was the dreaded no seat belt law that got him in trouble.:mad:

all I can really say is that Rich Brooks basically saw the whole resisting thing as bull.

Of all the issues involved with this situation this aspect is most concerning in my opinion. Why is Brooks making this judgement, did he see the incident, or is he just going by the players word.

 

It is concerning to me that Brooks would blow off the incedent completely. I acknowledge that he has more information than I do, but to publicly support his player above the law is a bad precendent to set.

Let me be the first UL fan to say it's not a big deal. The kid might have been set out because he was arrested. Just so the public is at ease Brooks was doing his job.

 

College kids are KIDS. So let them make a mistake. If kid majoring in Education and plays no sports gets arrested, then no one cares. So why care if a player gets arrested. Other than its a good news story. More than likely it will be dismissed or the case will get Diversion. Which is another word for " Everyone makes a mistake"