 |
|
Some things jump out, and should be thoughtfully considered.
Posted on: July 31, 2016 at 17:54:52 CT
MizzouTigerz MU
Posts:
37095
Member For:
21.52 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
1. Knowing someone has no bearing on how they perform their job.
2. Someone performing their job well in the past, is no guarantee they will always be, and have always been, flawless in the execution of their duties. One of these nice ladies may have made an error or two in 15 years. That doesn't mean they are incompetent nor above being held responsible if they did make a mistake. This stuff is hardly an immoral act which was designed to harm others. They are not angels nor demons. Unless it was intentional, just take it in stride.
3. Mizzou would be wise to avoid all entanglement with the NCAA. In the past it has seemed like, as least to me, the NCAA has punished Mizzou far more severely than other programs, and drug it out forever, exacerbating the harm to the program. Flip flops? A burger? Unpaid for movies at the hotel? Some used clothes? A ride to the airport? Heinous crimes all.
4. Which is worse, finding out that you can add someone a little late, or, allowing someone in who is later declared to be ineligible, which leads to sanctions? Again, I would err on the side of caution.
5. I don't consider those who want to cheat to get wins fans of the program. They are fans of their own selfish egos, and couldn't care less about the harm done to the image of the school and the program that comes from cheating. Which of you respects the beakers for the cheating they did which resulted in titles? And you want us to follow their example?! No, no, a thousand times no.
6. Running a cheater out of town is a good thing. Anyone who is unwilling to agree on this point is in the false fan category of those in #5.
7. Unless you have first hand information, it's all hearsay, and making definitive statements based on hearsay isn't a good practice or policy.
Edited by MizzouTigerz at 17:59:16 on 07/31/16
2. Someone performing their job well in the past, is no guarantee they will always be, and have always been, flawless in the execution of their duties. One of these nice ladies may have made an error or two in 15 years. That doesn't mean they are incompetent nor above being held responsible if they did make a mistake. This stuff is hardly an immoral act which was designed to harm others. They are not angels nor demons. Unless it was intentional, just take it in stride.
3. Mizzou would be wise to avoid all entanglement with the NCAA. In the past it has seemed like, as least to me, the NCAA has punished Mizzou far more severely than other programs, and drug it out forever, exacerbating the harm to the program. Flip flops? A burger? Unpaid for movies at the hotel? Some used clothes? A ride to the airport? Heinous crimes all.
4. Which is worse, finding out that you can add someone a little late, or, allowing someone in who is later declared to be ineligible, which leads to sanctions? Again, I would err on the side of caution.
5. I don't consider those who want to cheat to get wins fans of the program. They are fans of their own selfish egos, and couldn't care less about the harm done to the image of the school and the program that comes from cheating. Which of you respects the beakers for the cheating they did which resulted in titles? And you want us to follow their example?! No, no, a thousand times no.
6. Running a cheater out of town is a good thing. Anyone who is unwilling to agree on this point is in the false fan category of those in #5.
7. Unless you have first hand information, it's all hearsay, and making definitive statements based on hearsay isn't a good practice or policy.
Edited by MizzouTigerz at 17:59:16 on 07/31/16
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
Some things jump out, and should be thoughtfully considered. - MizzouTigerz MU - 7/31 17:54:52