Monson, Gordon, not the Prophet, talks about dancing monkies

Apparently, Monson has BYU envy a lot worse than Drew. Apparently, BYU HC people have to dance to Monson's perception of love and concern else they are just a bunch of monkeys dancing.

School spokesperson Carri Jenkins announced the five-game suspension last week and that Hadley had, in fact, broken the honor code. Question: Why would a school that claims to have the best interests of its students in mind make such an announcement? Why wouldn’t it simply say the student-athlete broke team rules and leave it at that? Issuing a statement that Hadley had run afoul of the honor code makes his personal transgression public in too specific a manner.

All the way through this article, I could hear the commercial for the lawyer from Arrested Development - Bob LoBlaw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwWAsNZTnug



Edit: Here's link http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/sports/56933093-77/hadley-byu-code-honor.html.csp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What a trash piece. How does this guy even find work in this town?

CAFB_04-12 wrote:
What a trash piece. How does this guy even find work in this town?

Rhetorical question much? He writes for the trib.

I won't bother linking Franchuk's (I think) piece for the Herald where he concludes the less than 100% attendance was because BYU is self-righteous and suspended Hadley and Hoffman and the fan base is tired of BYU's self-righteousness.



Because it couldn't have anything to do with a Friday night game played at the same time as every high school football game in the state during deer/elk season days before waterfowl season in cold, wet weather against a no-name opponent coming off of a heart-breaking loss to your rival during a rebuilding season. It was all about BYU's self-righteousness and the suspensions, even though one of them wasn't even publicly confirmed until about an hour before kickoff.

Fanchucks piece was to Drew's piece as Drew's piece was to Bennet's. sort of anyway. Bennet's piece was, of course, so much higher, more relevant, national, etc, etc.

Drew's piece bottom of the barrel. Fanchucks was below that. Nothing like total inaccuracy and irrelevancy. Only other diff is that I expect garbage, Ute-bents out of Trib writers. But Chuckie-boy, tsk, tsk. How does it feel to have Drew scoop garbage and you to follow suit?

So, if I'm following this correctly ...

You can "prove" you aren' biased by slamming BYU

And

If your tirade is irrelevant blather it passes for journalism so long as it slams BYU.



Aren't there any journalism schools in Utah? Sheesh, I suspect Timpview's school paper is full of budding journalists better than Monson and Franchuck apparently are.

The problem was the weather, the opponent, and BYU being 1-2, and it being late Friday night. The weather was so bad, Jacksonman took his wife, her cold feet, his season tickets, to an out of town bubblebath wednesday - took his unborn child as well. Jackson - just funnin with ya.



Develop a little thick skin folks. Refs, media, PAC 12, Utes, Kiffin, Meyers, .......



Unpopular BYU players and coaches..........





How many people can you hate and blame?



But despite all the issues, attendance was higher than a RES sellout.



Attendance will be even lower in Logan - space constrained.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

CAFB_04-12 wrote:
What a trash piece. How does this guy even find work in this town?

I've often wondered how Monson has managed such a long career in sports journalism. If there's one thing that BYU and Ute fans have in common, it's their loathing of him. Nobody, outside of the Tribune and 1280 the Zone, takes Monson seriously.

It's a good thing that it wasn't Preston Hadley getting suspended, because the "making the monkey dance" line would have been even more out of line. I think I missed the part in the article that BYU "made" him do anything...



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I understand the negative reaction to the piece here, but apart from his ultimate conclusion and the rhetoric, I have to say that for my part, I do agree with two points he makes.



1. The university should merely state that a player has broken team rules and is suspended for X amount of games. When NCAA infractions or serious legal issues that will become public record are involved, it's one thing to get ahead of them to help protect the individual or the university. But when its a private honor code infraction, there is no need to protect anybody but the individual. Announcing it's an honor code issue brings a level of negative attention to the individual that is not deserved.



2. There is something problematic about him not being able to represent the university on the field, but the university is happy to parade him out for a national sports writer that will use his case to glorify the university and its institutional standards.



Just my two cents.

DarthMagnus wrote:
I understand the negative reaction to the piece here, but apart from his ultimate conclusion and the rhetoric, I have to say that for my part, I do agree with two points he makes.



2. There is something problematic about him not being able to represent the university on the field, but the university is happy to parade him out for a national sports writer that will use his case to glorify the university and its institutional standards.



Just my two cents.

I'm not sure how "happy" the University is to "parade him around." Are you suggesting that someone who cannot play for the team should be cut off from all contact with the team? He was on the sidelines of the game, just like he was on the sidelines with the prison visit, so if the prisoner isn't allowed to make a statement about him, does the school also prohibit cameras from showing him on the sideline? Do they obtain a restraining order to keep the media from showing him of the TV or talking about him as well?



Knowing that others who operate outside of the control of the school and player have the right to (and always exercise that right) to run with the story how they will, what is the school to do? Let someone else dictate the direction of a matter between them and the player?



Monson piece is sour grapes...

DarthMagnus wrote:
I understand the negative reaction to the piece here, but apart from his ultimate conclusion and the rhetoric, I have to say that for my part, I do agree with two points he makes.



1. The university should merely state that a player has broken team rules and is suspended for X amount of games. When NCAA infractions or serious legal issues that will become public record are involved, it's one thing to get ahead of them to help protect the individual or the university. But when its a private honor code infraction, there is no need to protect anybody but the individual. Announcing it's an honor code issue brings a level of negative attention to the individual that is not deserved.



2. There is something problematic about him not being able to represent the university on the field, but the university is happy to parade him out for a national sports writer that will use his case to glorify the university and its institutional standards.



Just my two cents.

I agree w/ point one. Point two is NOT how it went down. He was not a planned for speaker at the prison fireside. It was a spontaneous reaction upon the prisoners chanting for Hadley to be put in. Bronco asked Hadley if he would like to say something. Hadley said ok.



I guess that could be considered acting as a representative of the university, but I think in this instance, he wasn't being paraded to glorify the institution. He was essentially speaking in defense of the actions being taken against him.



He also was not brought out for the benefit of a national sports writer.



That is the way the local media is presenting it. But if they had decided to attend the fireside, they could have written about it as well.



BYU holds firesides before every game. Media can attend each one of them. They are not closed to the media and are not restricted from a local media presence.

I definitely understand your objections to my point number 2. In my haste, I probably threw in some hyperbole ("parade him out for the national media") that is the more cynical part of me coming out.



I'm just thinking, if they are going to say he can't play football because he can't represent the university, it seems a little inconsistent that he is then allowed to represent the university in a public forum. Regardless of who asked him to speak, it seems a little too opportunistic to sit well with me. If he's not allowed to represent the university, why is he being allowed to speak at public team events?



In the end, it isn't that big of a deal to me. Just something that bothers me a little bit. And not nearly as much as point number one bothers me.

I agree with point 1, we've talked about it in the podcast. The honor code office should make no comments about anything. The only 2 words they should ever say to the media are "no comment."



That being said, if that's what the honor code office was really doing, we'd have a scathing article by Gordon Monson claiming that BYU is covering things up, hard to work with, not responding to important and necessary journalistic requests, and anything else he could say to get people upset. Half the fans would agree with him.

hawkwing wrote:

That being said, if that's what the honor code office was really doing, we'd have a scathing article by Gordon Monson claiming that BYU is covering things up, hard to work with, not responding to important and necessary journalistic requests, and anything else he could say to get people upset. Half the fans would agree with him.

This was my initial reaction to Darth's point #1. I'd love it if the team said "team rules" and the Honor Code Office said "no comment". However, once the HCO says no comment, and then it comes out (through tremendous investigative journalism - or trolling the fan boards :roll: ) that it's an HC violation, the first thing that will come down is that BYU is trying to cover up what's really going on in Provo. It may be that having standards is a no-win situation in the short (temporal) term.

What happened was a good experience for the inmates. I have no problem Hadley speaking. I work with a local Prison branch. We will be sharing the article with our members and hopefully they share it with other inmates and they come to our meetings or at least become BYU football fans.

I have no problem with HC being confirmed when it is a public figure and photos are known to be floating around and in possession or purported possession of the media.



You fool yourselves when thinking a 5 week suspension for team rules and a no comment from HC Office spares anyone anything even when photos are not flying around.



The way this went down was the least embarrassing way possible for Hadlsy. Rhe rumors about pregnant girlfriends and NCAA violations and involvement of other players have all been nipped in the bud.



Hoffman's situation seems to be going a bit more quietly. Maybe becauae it is 1 game and no photos.



The Lord works in mysterious ways. He seems to have done OK on this one. Hadley seems happy with the outcome. Too bad if Gordo, some Utes, and a few BYU fans are not.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib wrote:
The way this went down was the least embarrassing way possible for Hadlsy. Rhe rumors about pregnant girlfriends and NCAA violations and involvement of other players have all been nipped in the bud.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

They may have been nipped, but not because of anything the Honor Code Office did. The HCO's confirmation did not dispel those rumors. The HCO does not confirm the nature of violations, just that there is an investigation.