No more honor code comments

Holmoe announced today that BYU will no longer comment on Honor Code violations unless it's part of the public record or the student athlete initiates it. The Honor Code office has been directed to respond "no comment" to any inquiries.

I applaud the University's decision (and that of the Honor Code Office).



Other than that, I have no coment.

What kind of comments has the Honor Code Office made in the past?

SpoCoug wrote:
What kind of comments has the Honor Code Office made in the past?

They would confirm violations of the honor code. In the past the university would also say what the violation was not.



So, if I remember correctly, during the Davies saga, the university/Sports SID said that Davies was still in good standing academically and that he had done nothing illegal. What was left was basically violation of the moral parameters.



Simply stating they will not comment on any violations - hopefully this includes even confirming a violation - could hopefully cause these stories to lose steam more quickly since they won't have any details to go off of.

Somebody reads Cougarcorner. ;)

About time!



Good call, Holmoe. No need to air these people's dirty laundry out for the world to see.

Gunk wrote:
About time!



Good call, Holmoe. No need to air these people's dirty laundry out for the world to see.

Agree

Sometimes rumors and speculation will be worse than the truth. The old policy did not bother me. The new policy does not bother me -unless it plays out poorly.



But I can assure you that the rumors about fathering more than 1 baby and speculation about which gf was the baby mama were not caused by HC or AD office comments. I never read or heard any confirmation of the HC violation being sexual in nature or that any pregnancy occurred.



Luckily, since we were told that no crime was committed, we were spared false rumors of rape.



I will assume that this policy change was prayerfully considered and hope that it results as anticipated by those in charge.



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

Did you know that it wasn't just student athletes that the HC office was giving out information about? I'm glad this policy is across the board. No one (athlete or not) should be subjected to this.



It kind of sounded like they tried to do this last year with. When the Hadley situation broke, it was initially labeled a violation of team rules. It wasn't until the GRAMA request done by the Trib to the Univ of Utah became public that it was labeled as a honor code violation.

The thing that really bothers me about this is the "journalists" are saying this is great news, and they'll keep saying it, right up to when something happens. Then it will be another, "BYU doesn't give out any information," rant.

stuckinbig10country wrote:
The thing that really bothers me about this is the "journalists" are saying this is great news, and they'll keep saying it, right up to when something happens. Then it will be another, "BYU doesn't give out any information," rant.

Exactly. It will be another "BYU is a private school, so it doesn't post it's coaches salaries, like everyone else..." commentary in every article.



I'm glad for this.

stuckinbig10country wrote:
Did you know that it wasn't just student athletes that the HC office was giving out information about? I'm glad this policy is across the board. No one (athlete or not) should be subjected to this.



It kind of sounded like they tried to do this last year with. When the Hadley situation broke, it was initially labeled a violation of team rules. It wasn't until the GRAMA request done by the Trib to the Univ of Utah became public that it was labeled as a honor code violation.

Yes. And thusly,



The Spencer Hadley situation would get handled exactly the same way moving forward. Public info because of gramma. request.



The KVN situation. Public Record - Reno Nevada. Also not enrolled yet. So clearly not academics or skipping practice. Holmoe did say the if it was public record in a far away place like Juneau, Alaska, and local / national news did not get wind of it, HC comments would not be made. Probably this would be handled the same way going forward - I believe national news picked this up.



Manti Teo's cousin - DUI. Provo news. This would be handled the same way.



Manti Teo - No crime. No news report of what happened that I recall. Not actually enrolled. The new rule is not clear re recruits prior to enrollment. But - this one would probably go down without HC statement just like it did originally.



Manti Teo's Girlfriend. Ok. TIC. But had he been at BYU, and national news broke, even though no HC violation occurred, BYU would have been drawn into the discussion the same way ND was.



Rape Gate - made the news. In the criminal docket. That would get the same treatment.



So this raises this question for me -



In reality, has anything actually changed.



Back in my day, someone - not an athlete - from my hometown got in trouble for reaching in the open window of the unlocked car parked next to him on the way to class and grabbing one 8 track tape off the dashboard. A fellow student saw this and reported it. After he got out of class, he was arrested as he walked back to his car. I witnessed the arrest as I was walking with him on the way to my car and thus heard the details. The owner of the tape told police he did not even know he had that particular tape and did not care. Technically - it was auto burglary - a felony. Made the Provo Paper - just the list of police calls for that day. BYU HC did not make a statement because there was no news article - just a one line entry in the DH police log. Later it was reduced to a misdemeanor and a hand slap. He probably wished HC or someone would have said something as it looked like he had broken into a locked car in the police blog which gave no details.



Someone in my hometown, read the DH, and it was all over town in a flash. This would probably go the same way today.



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

Re: the Hadley situation. A GRAMA request could and only was filed because the information was sent to the University of Utah. Had the information initially been sent to BYU, BYU would have been under no legal obligation to release the information.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Re: the Hadley situation. A GRAMA request could and only was filed because the information was sent to the University of Utah. Had the information initially been sent to BYU, BYU would have been under no legal obligation to release the information.

I believe that's what I was trying to point out. It sounded like BYU was trying to take this approach last year with Hadley (ie saying suspended indefinitely for violation of team rules), but they ended saying it was honor code because the info came from somewhere else.

stuckinbig10country wrote:

Re: the Hadley situation. A GRAMA request could and only was filed because the information was sent to the University of Utah. Had the information initially been sent to BYU, BYU would have been under no legal obligation to release the information.

I believe that's what I was trying to point out. It sounded like BYU was trying to take this approach last year with Hadley (ie saying suspended indefinitely for violation of team rules), but they ended saying it was honor code because the info came from somewhere else.

It's exactly like what happened with Hoffman last year, but BYU never had to reveal the real reason he was suspended, because no other institutions were involved.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Re: the Hadley situation. A GRAMA request could and only was filed because the information was sent to the University of Utah. Had the information initially been sent to BYU, BYU would have been under no legal obligation to release the information.

Exactly. That is what I said. If the exact same circumstances happen next week - U fan sends compromising stuff to U and rumor gets out and Trib files GRAMA request, BYU HC Office will comment - same as last time.



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

hawkwing wrote:

SpiffCoug wrote:
Re: the Hadley situation. A GRAMA request could and only was filed because the information was sent to the University of Utah. Had the information initially been sent to BYU, BYU would have been under no legal obligation to release the information.

I believe that's what I was trying to point out. It sounded like BYU was trying to take this approach last year with Hadley (ie saying suspended indefinitely for violation of team rules), but they ended saying it was honor code because the info came from somewhere else.

It's exactly like what happened with Hoffman last year, but BYU never had to reveal the real reason he was suspended, because no other institutions were involved.

IDK if it was the same as with Hoffman because I do not know if there was an HC violation. I may have missed something, but I do not even recall any unconfirmed reports of an HC Violation.



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

Cougarbib wrote:

stuckinbig10country wrote:

Re: the Hadley situation. A GRAMA request could and only was filed because the information was sent to the University of Utah. Had the information initially been sent to BYU, BYU would have been under no legal obligation to release the information.

I believe that's what I was trying to point out. It sounded like BYU was trying to take this approach last year with Hadley (ie saying suspended indefinitely for violation of team rules), but they ended saying it was honor code because the info came from somewhere else.

It's exactly like what happened with Hoffman last year, but BYU never had to reveal the real reason he was suspended, because no other institutions were involved.

IDK if it was the same as with Hoffman because I do not know if there was an HC violation. I may have missed something, but I do not even recall any unconfirmed reports of an HC Violation.



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

Exactly my point.

Here is exactly my point.



If Hoff had an honor code violation - he is probably glad HC did not comment.



Conversely, if a player gets suspended for cleaning out a teammates locker and everyone starts speculating about HC violations because they do not know the real reason, he may wish HC would publicly confirm that he did not violate HC. He might even speak up and comment that it was not. Pretty soon any player suspended that does not proclaim innocence will be rumored to be guilty.



Maybe not. But with any new or revised rule there is risk of unintended consequences.



Hopefully it works as intended. Perhaps it will.



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