Jump to content

BYU Forgives Player


David Bokovoy

Recommended Posts

I'm not going to deny that when it comes to the Cougars, I'm a bit of a sports fanatic; especially football and basketball. Always have been, always will be. But speaking personally, despite my excitement over BYU's success in men's basketball this season, I was much more troubled by the fact that Brandon Davies' honor code violation had become such a public issue than I was disappointed by the Cougar's struggles without their starting center.

I couldn't care less about basketball when compared to this young man whose situation has been the focus of so much media attention. I've been really disturbed by it.

For those who have felt like I have, I think you may really enjoy this New York Times article on the subject. It's outstanding, and here is one of the highlights:

But B.Y.U. has a hole in its center. It has struggled to fill it, probably more than anyone imagined.

It cost the Cougars their momentum, and it may cost them their Final Four aspirations. But no one around B.Y.U. seems overly concerned about all of that.

What they want is to show broad support to Davies. And the way they are doing it is by bringing Davies along for the postseason ride, even if his missteps make it bumpier than anticipated.

BYU Forgives Player

Link to comment

I'm not going to deny that when it comes to the Cougars, I'm a bit of a sports fanatic; especially football and basketball. Always have been, always will be. But speaking personally, despite my excitement over BYU's success in men's basketball this season, I was much more troubled by the fact that Brandon Davies' honor code violation had become such a public issue than I was disappointed by the Cougar's struggles without their starting center.

I couldn't care less about basketball when compared to this young man whose situation has been the focus of so much media attention. I've been really disturbed by it.

For those who have felt like I have, I think you may really enjoy this New York Times article on the subject. It's outstanding, and here is one of the highlights:

BYU Forgives Player

I've been impressed with how the media in general have viewed this regrettable event. In general, they have been understanding, even insightful. One unfortuanate exception was right here Salt Lake City, where a local sports columnist characterized BYU's handling of the matter as "iron-fisted." One would think a local would have better comprehension than that.

Link to comment

Just to show a comparison......

Overton to play in NCAA tourneyEmail Print Comments12 Associated Press

SEATTLE -- Washington backup point guard Venoy Overton was reinstated Sunday and will play in the NCAA tournament Friday against Georgia, giving coach Lorenzo Romar's Huskies some needed backcourt depth.

Overton was suspended for the Pac-10 tournament after he was charged by the Seattle city attorney with providing alcohol to a minor. Overton was a spectator on the bench as Washington won the conference tournament title Saturday with a 77-75 overtime victory over Arizona.

With Overton unavailable, Isaiah Thomas played 123 of a possible 125 minutes in the conference tournament.

Overton spoke briefly Sunday for the first time since he was charged, while not directly addressing his case. Overton still has a court date scheduled for April 1. He said the last two months have been difficult and that the talk going on in public was almost more of a punishment than his suspension.

"It was hard. I feel like just all that being said was kind of a bigger punishment than sitting out, from the fact this is my hometown and just reputation," Overton said. "You don't want the reputation of being known for that."

The charge is a gross misdemeanor that carries up to a year in jail, though such a harsh punishment is extremely unlikely.

The case stemmed from an allegation by a 16-year-old girl that Overton sexually assaulted her at an apartment in Seattle on Jan. 8. King County prosecutors declined to file charges in that case because other witnesses reported that the contact appeared consensual. They referred the case to city prosecutors because of evidence Overton bought alcohol for the girl and her 16-year-old friend.Romar immediately suspended Overton after charges were filed and said there had been internal punishment already placed on the senior guard before suspending him for what turned out to be three games.

"After watching that tournament I'm blessed to be able to still play," Overton said.

Just which standard are we supposed to follow? Some have argued that it is merely BYU protecting its rep at the expense of Davies. But the real lesson is that if you go to another school, you can get away with borderline sexual assault and giving alcohol to minors, if and only if you are a good ball player. I think Overton is now considered very unimportant in the process, he is, after all, a piece of meat that is talented, not a man who must mature. Davies on the other hand is a man who is learning about what is important in life, and it isn't basketball.

Link to comment

Just to show a comparison......

Isn't that the point. BYU's removal of Davies for having consensual sex shows that BYU has higher standards than other schools. I sense that you must be swelling with pride at the comparison.

Davies on the other hand is a man who is learning about what is important in life, and it isn't basketball.

Had he worn a condom, he would still be on the team. So what is the important lesson?

Link to comment

I may be swelling with pride. Which I agree is wrong.

But I also see a stark difference between treating someone like a piece of talented meat and treating them like a person, a person who matures as he learns and lives up to responsibility.

Quote

Davies on the other hand is a man who is learning about what is important in life, and it isn't basketball.

Had he worn a condom, he would still be on the team. So what is the important lesson?

Two points to the falseness of the observation.

1-As far as I know, no one was pregnant from the result, indeed he may have worn a condom. But the point is irrelevant to the rule that Davies said he would live by.

2-As stated, the issue of protection for sex is irrelevant to the fact he had sex. So that lesson could not, in any sense of the word be drawn from the experience, beyond your own disdain for the church. You stretch for false facts which in the end prove you cannot comprehend what is best for Davies as an individual.

Link to comment

I've admired BYU's stance on this issue and it's great he can at least sit on the bench and support his teammates. :P

The only way this story goes away and doesn't gain any more traction is if reasonably ranked BYU doesn't have an earlier exit out of the tournament and at least makes it to the Sweet 16. With the likely Saturday opponent being St. John, picking that upset isn't too difficult though. Playing with good intentions only gets you so far and I hope I'm wrong about the an early exit for BYU.

My 2 cents

Link to comment

Two points to the falseness of the observation.

1-As far as I know, no one was pregnant from the result, indeed he may have worn a condom.

You are right, I am assuming that there was pregnancy, based on what I have heard. But, unlike you, I don't pretend to be naive. You are welcome to do so, if its important to your faith.

But the point is irrelevant to the rule that Davies said he would live by.

2-As stated, the issue of protection for sex is irrelevant to the fact he had sex. So that lesson could not, in any sense of the word be drawn from the experience, beyond your own disdain for the church. You stretch for false facts which in the end prove you cannot comprehend what is best for Davies as an individual.

I never claimed to know what is best for Davies. Though that is exactly what you are doing when you say things like "Davies on the other hand is a man who is learning about what is important in life, and it isn't basketball."

Just out of curiosity, why is it so hard for you to accept that I actually and sincerely believe that the punishment imposed on Davies was far too harsh in relation to his crime. You feel compelled to attribute that opinion to what you see as a "disdain for the [LDS] Church."

Its not only critics that believe the punsishment was excessive. In fact, Gordon Monson, BYU grad, describes the two schools of thought among BYU fans:

A lot of BYU fans and other observers of the Davies saga, in specific, and the honor-code issue, in general, fall into one of two camps: 1) The Rules-Are-Rules-and-Consequences-Are-Consequences faction, and 2) The Application-of-the-Honor-Code-Is-Too-Extreme group.

...

The latter acknowledges that students, including student-athletes, at BYU agree to live by the honor code, that many of them want to follow the code, but that they remain, in fact, human, and are therefore subject to the frailties and failures of the human condition. Short of the most egregious cases, such as instances where a perpetrator is a predator among other students, the imperfect should be worked with and helped toward abiding by the code. They should not be expelled, or banished, or kicked off the basketball team for even a series of moral transgressions.

Its curious that none of the apologists here fall into the second camp. It appears that to do so would run contrary to the prime directive which is defend the Brethren agaisnt all criticism.

Link to comment

You are right, I am assuming that there was pregnancy, based on what I have heard. But, unlike you, I don't pretend to be naive. You are welcome to do so, if its important to your faith.

I never claimed to know what is best for Davies. Though that is exactly what you are doing when you say things like "Davies on the other hand is a man who is learning about what is important in life, and it isn't basketball."

Just out of curiosity, why is it so hard for you to accept that I actually and sincerely believe that the punishment imposed on Davies was far too harsh in relation to his crime. You feel compelled to attribute that opinion to what you see as a "disdain for the [LDS] Church."

Its not only critics that believe the punsishment was excessive. In fact, Gordon Monson, BYU grad, describes the two schools of thought among BYU fans:

Its curious that none of the apologists here fall into the second camp. It appears that to do so would run contrary to the prime directive which is defend the Brethren agaisnt all criticism.

Actually everyone here agrees that the issue should be worked out. Davies for example still attends school, has not been expelled. He simply cannot play basketball which is harldy devestating, if you are at school for educational purposes and not simply to play basketball. I believe Davies is a sophmore so he may be able to play again, after going through the process all students go through. A minority of 4% per year even appear at the office (for all offenses not simply the harsh ones) and varying degrees of penalties exist for the infractions.

The idea of two schools of though implies an equality in amount of opinion held by students. I haven't seen anything that resembles such, indeed three people in agreement could be the entire "school of thought". So I would be careful before you tie a wagon to a horse that isn't there.

Link to comment
Just out of curiosity, why is it so hard for you to accept that I actually and sincerely believe that the punishment imposed on Davies was far too harsh in relation to his crime. You feel compelled to attribute that opinion to what you see as a "disdain for the [LDS] Church."

Because the only reason you post is to complain about the church, which makes me question one of two things. Your sanity (since there is no balance in your posts at all regarding actions, even something as almost universally agreed upon as this), or your sincerity (ie you judged the situation on its merits versus because its a church school).

Link to comment

Just to show a comparison......

Just which standard are we supposed to follow? Some have argued that it is merely BYU protecting its rep at the expense of Davies. But the real lesson is that if you go to another school, you can get away with borderline sexual assault and giving alcohol to minors, if and only if you are a good ball player. I think Overton is now considered very unimportant in the process, he is, after all, a piece of meat that is talented, not a man who must mature. Davies on the other hand is a man who is learning about what is important in life, and it isn't basketball.

I don't think it's fair to compare the two.

I like how BYU handled and is still handling the Davies matter. I think that should be applauded. And that's not to say that I would have disapproved if it had been handled differently.

But I don't understand the need to tear down who other schools handle things when their student athletes get into trouble. And given the little facts I know about the Overton matter, I can't criticize how Washington is handling it. I certainly don't see enough evidence to justify your spin on it.

Link to comment

If one can ...

Link to comment

I think that this is an interesting and worthwhile contribution to the debate. If nothing else, it puts the lie to Jaybear's implied assertion that the naivete with which he thinks we regard this situation is a uniquely Mormon "affliction". People far beyond this single, isolated, perhaps somewhat provincial message boar are in desperate need of the sort of enlightenment he can provide.

Link to comment

I don't think it's fair to compare the two.

I like how BYU handled and is still handling the Davies matter. I think that should be applauded. And that's not to say that I would have disapproved if it had been handled differently.

But I don't understand the need to tear down who other schools handle things when their student athletes get into trouble. And given the little facts I know about the Overton matter, I can't criticize how Washington is handling it. I certainly don't see enough evidence to justify your spin on it.

It's not a tear down if the facts are as they stand. The circumstances would be horrible for the parents of the 16 year old girl. Where an athlete receives nothing in the way of a penalty for outrageous behavior with a minor.

It may be that their code allows for such things, or their code may state that student athletes may not be held to the standards of non athlestes (after all strong testosterone drive boys will be boys you know). I have not yet heard of a reason beyond the importance of the game series itself. I would gladly stand corrected if it were not so. But it appears that the sports writer and myself are both of the same mind in this one. It wasn't about the man they were educating, but about the talent he happened to have. The man himself was of little importance.

Link to comment

It's not a tear down if the facts are as they stand. The circumstances would be horrible for the parents of the 16 year old girl. Where an athlete receives nothing in the way of a penalty for outrageous behavior with a minor.

.

First, it's not true that he received nothing -- he was suspended from the Pac-10 tournament. I don't think you can say that's insignificant for both the team and the player.

Second, they are allegations, yet you are treating them as if they had been established. The allegations of sexual assault were dropped, apparently because the conduct was consensual. (Age of consent in Washington is 16.) He has now been charged with providing alcohol to a minor. but he has yet to be convicted. While I doubt Washington has an honor code that prohibits intimate sexual relations, I suspect the team at least has a code of conduct that they must follow. I have no reason to believe that Romar did not take all this as well as other relevant facts that he may be aware of into consideration when considering what to do.

Overton was reinstated after a suspension. If Davies is reinstated next year (after what would then be a slightly longer suspension), will you complain?

Link to comment

Its curious that none of the apologists here fall into the second camp. It appears that to do so would run contrary to the prime directive which is defend the Brethren agaisnt all criticism.

You might want to consider medical assistance with that jaundice of yours.

Link to comment

Its curious that none of the apologists here fall into the second camp. It appears that to do so would run contrary to the prime directive which is defend the Brethren agaisnt all criticism.

I just find it interesting that the antis fall into the camp of "the Church and anything or anybody associated with the Church can never do good and if there is even a chance that they might do something good, all efforts must be afforded to destroy that vile, evil image and Jaybear, you fall squarely into the camp from the post of yours that I remember.

I have read posts from good members of the Church here on the board who have criticized "the Brethren", but I don't ever remember reading a post of yours where you ever complimented "the Brethren" or anything related to the Church.

Link to comment

First, it's not true that he received nothing -- he was suspended from the Pac-10 tournament. I don't think you can say that's insignificant for both the team and the player.

Second, they are allegations, yet you are treating them as if they had been established. The allegations of sexual assault were dropped, apparently because the conduct was consensual. (Age of consent in Washington is 16.) He has now been charged with providing alcohol to a minor. but he has yet to be convicted. While I doubt Washington has an honor code that prohibits intimate sexual relations, I suspect the team at least has a code of conduct that they must follow. I have no reason to believe that Romar did not take all this as well as other relevant facts that he may be aware of into consideration when considering what to do.

Overton was reinstated after a suspension. If Davies is reinstated next year (after what would then be a slightly longer suspension), will you complain?

Dropped because it appeared to be "consensual". I suppose a 16 year with an athlete receiving alcohol is consensual for some. It isn't for me. Perhaps I know too much that goes on in the booking process and how the system if fairly clear as to how strong the evidence has to be for the police of a favorite home town team to hold someone.

Do you think such a thing horrific? And suspension from the PAC 10 is minor if you are already sure you will be in the playoffs.

Davies missed a crucial season, overton did not miss anything in the PAC 10 tourney, anyone who knows the PAC will tell you that. It is March Madness that counts. For Davies to miss the game and have his suspension possibly made permanent is substantially more real and telling than letting someone get away with getting a 16 year old drunk and having sex with her. Or don't you think that is terrible?

Link to comment
You are right, I am assuming that there was pregnancy, based on what I have heard. But, unlike you, I don't pretend to be naive. You are welcome to do so, if its important to your faith.

Do you have a source for your gossip?

And on what basis do you accuse Jeff of pretending to be naive? Is it naive to attribute principled decision-making to others? Or only to Mormons? Or only to Mormons in leadership positions, such as BYU administrators?

And is it so very naive to attribute principled decision-making to them that such naivete simply must be feigned? Is that it?

I never claimed to know what is best for Davies. Though that is exactly what you are doing when you say things like "Davies on the other hand is a man who is learning about what is important in life, and it isn't basketball."

Just out of curiosity, why is it so hard for you to accept that I actually and sincerely believe that the punishment imposed on Davies was far too harsh in relation to his crime. You feel compelled to attribute that opinion to what you see as a "disdain for the [LDS] Church."

I, for one, accept that you actually and sincerely believe that any punishment for any failure to keep a promise to the Church of Jesus Christ -- especially a sexual transgression -- would be "far too harsh in relation to his crime."

Regards,

Pahoran

Link to comment

Perhaps I know too much that goes on in the booking process and how the system if fairly clear as to how strong the evidence has to be for the police of a favorite home town team to hold someone.

Why wait for the facts when you can judge based on what you know about what really goes on. Isn't that what righteous judgment is all about?

And suspension from the PAC 10 is minor if you are already sure you will be in the playoffs.

What would WA's NCAA seeding be if they had been knocked out in the first round of the Pac-10 tourney? Do you believe there's a difference between a 7 and a 9 or 10 seed? For a weak conference, and yes, the 2010-11 Pac 10 is a weak conference, the conference tournament can make all the difference. And it's not like WA has a UCLA, or even a Stanford or Arizona pedigree where winning the conference tournament has little meaning.

Link to comment

The seeding is basically a minor thing for the most part. Teams don't often risk injury and play light, it isn't that important, especially for teams that generally do well in the tourney.

Washington Huskies have won now two years in a row, and they have always finished near the top. They hold more depth in talent than most other schools. Overton removal from the tourney while being put in place for March reflects how easy it is to move the goal posts.

Maybe the rules allow the giving of alcohol to minors, and maybe charges and arrest records mean nothing. Maybe that is the standard.

I can understand if you endorse such a standard but I would not want one set of standards for athletes and another set of standards for non athletes. I do not endorse such a view though perhaps it may be acceptable to others.

UNLV waited year after year while "proof" was put together as they won championship after championship. Then Tarkanian retired, the offenders went on to the NBA and the new crop of players had to bear the burden. I am sure that was a lesson well learned. :P

Link to comment

I can understand if you endorse such a standard but I would not want one set of standards for athletes and another set of standards for non athletes. I do not endorse such a view though perhaps it may be acceptable to others.

Do you ever get a bloody nose from such heights.

Here's the standard I endorse -- making a decision based upon the unique circumstances of each case. This includes taking into consideration the nature and seriousness of the allegations, the underlying facts and circumstances leading to those allegations, the athlets's past conduct (both positive and negative), the athlete's current attitude, and any other circumstances and facts which may either mitigate or exacerbate the situation.

You seem quick to condemn Overton and Washington's handling of the matter based solely on the nature and seriousness of the allegations alone. You have no knowledge of any of the other factors and apparently don't consider them relevant.

However, I suspect BYU follows a similar process when dealing with Honor Code violations. During my time there years ago, I knew of a few cases of fellow students who got in trouble for extramarital intercourse. I know of one where the student did not suffer any serious consequence (she wasn't an athlete that could be suspended from a team). I know of another where the student was suspended from the school for at least a year. But based on the admittedly incomplete knowledge I had of those cases, I have no problem with how they were handled and see no inconsistencies.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...