Takitaki charged w/ misdemeanor theft

I'm not linking to the story. But it's on the SLTrib site and the news broken by Jay Drew.

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

Looks like a one game suspension. And hopefully he'll learn that taking things that aren't his are frowned upon

Am I the only one that thinks punishing all infractions from the end of the last play of the prior season to the beginning game of the next season by suspending players in the first game of the season is ...

(take your pick)

stupid, dumb, foolish, futile, ill-advised, laughable, ludicrous, naïve, senseless, dense, dim, dopey, idiotic, imbecilic, insane, mindless, moronic, nonsensical, pointless, simpleminded, thick-headed, unthinking, crazy, dippy, illogical, loony irrational, nutty, screwy, silly, unreasonable or whacky?



Seriously, why, other than it's the next game, but how illogical that all punishment be focused on a game that you are hired to attempt to win?



I'm all for consequences, but give me a break. All punishment should be meted out at the exact same time? That accomplishes what exactly?



This isn't like where you ground all your kids from going outside to play with their friends because they had a food fight at the dinner table. Whats the consequence to the neighborhood as a whole in that scenario? Mainly your kids are going to feel the consequences of their choices. My experience with those situations is the parents end up more punished than the children.



But it doesn't impact so many of those that didn't do anything like what Bronco is apparently going to do every year.



As I stated, I understand there should be a punishment, but Bronco, why not take a stroll outside the box and devise a punishment that doesn't also punish the school, community and fans too? We didn't do anything but put our hearts, time and money on the line. Is Johnny going to feel less punished if he misses the 2nd game as opposed to the 1st? If you're talking 1-2 players, okay, but not several.



I want individuals to learn from mistakes, but being as short-sighted to believe that you accomplish that in mass suspensions from the first game of the season is all the words above. Schedule a cupcake for the 1st game of the season--not one that will be on national TV.



It appears (and this isn't Bronco's fault) that every year there probably be players suspended during that HUGE span of time and always making those suspensions in that first game destroys it for the fans. If there were no fans, they would not be playing this game.



Oh bother! :sulk:

Oh, and by this way, this isn't only about Takiaki being suspended for a game. This is about what's becoming a trend and I just don't agree with it as a fan.

Instead give him 40 lashes and a beheading.

Sounds to me like you've been taken in by the Urban Meyer philosophy of suspending a guy from a play in practice, so that they can still win all their games.

I kind of agree here with the way punishments are handed down as well. Why not come up with something else? For the guys involved in the bowl brawl, I thought they should have gotten back to Provo and started their punishment right away . . . Something line running the stadium stairs up and down every aisle, maybe a hundred times, or a hundred runs up to the Y. not sure how many sessions it would take to complete. Or how about community service - any punishment like that seems a lot more beneficial for all parties involved than missing a game.

It's not about punishing them. We live in an age of diminishment--we have to demean them publicly and elicit a public apology. If BYU handles matters internally (say, by having them do X hours of community service, write a 10-page essay on what it means to be a banner-bearer, etc.) there is no public diminishment, and therefore the media/public determine that there has been no "true" punishment.



It's not about right and wrong, these days it's about me being right, and you admitting via public statement and actions that you were wrong all along.

I would like to see the punishments not all be in the same games, but the only really forceful punishment for college football players is missing games.



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

scott715 wrote:
Instead give him 40 lashes and a beheading.

See, you're starting to get it.

;)

hawkwing wrote:
Sounds to me like you've been taken in by the Urban Meyer philosophy of suspending a guy from a play in practice, so that they can still win all their games.

Did I say or imply that? No. I said I think it's stupid to take the span of time from some point in December after the last play of the season and up to the 1st snap of the next season (that's a period of 8 fricken months!) as being a period where all punishment related to where a player is suspended to HAVE to be in that first game.



I'm not talking whatsoever about not having punishment for players violation of team rules, but there is no rule written that says it has to be the first game. If you broke a family rule when you were growing up, would it have been any less of a deterrent if your parental unit told you as a consequence of your transgression, you will be grounded on the following weekend as opposed to being grounded that specific night (say it was a Tuesday of a school night where you didn't having anything going on buy homework and watching some TV)?



I don't think there is a more powerful punishment for a football player than telling him he cannot suit up for a game or travel with the team. I'm just saying let's be reasonable in how it's metered out.



I know you're probably just pullin at me with that Oscar Meyer analogy because you know I'm a Buckeye fan. Please, it's hard enough to shallow having him coaching my OSU team that I have to be reminded of that. Honestly I don't agree with a lot that he does and I wouldn't trust him with babysitting my dog.

EM_Puma wrote:

Sounds to me like you've been taken in by the Urban Meyer philosophy of suspending a guy from a play in practice, so that they can still win all their games.

Did I say or imply that? No. I said I think it's stupid to take the span of time from some point in December after the last play of the season and up to the 1st snap of the next season (that's a period of 8 fricken months!) as being a period where all punishment related to where a player is suspended to HAVE to be in that first game.



I'm not talking whatsoever about not having punishment for players violation of team rules, but there is no rule written that says it has to be the first game. If you broke a family rule when you were growing up, would it have been an less deterrent if your parental unit told you as a consequence of your transgression, you will be grounded on the following weekend as opposed to being grounded that specific night (say it was a Tuesday of a school night where you didn't having anything going on buy homework and watching some TV)?



I know you're probably just pullin at me with that Oscar Meyer analogy because you know I'm a Buckeye fan. Please, it's hard enough to shallow having him coaching my OSU team that I have to be reminded of that. Honestly I don't agree with a lot that he does and I wouldn't trust him with babysitting my dog.

I don't disagree with this. As long as the punishments are severe enough to meet the crime, it doesn't necessarily have to punish the whole team, and it should be timely. The goal is to get reformation, not to show the public you have done something. That allows room for creativity.



My aunt once had to figure out how to creatively punish my cousin...I don't remember for what infraction. Her solution...remove his bedroom door. He got the message. I never in a million years would have thought of that. But it is in my arsenal now. Bronco can likewise get creative.

EM_Puma wrote:

Sounds to me like you've been taken in by the Urban Meyer philosophy of suspending a guy from a play in practice, so that they can still win all their games.

Did I say or imply that? No. I said I think it's stupid to take the span of time from some point in December after the last play of the season and up to the 1st snap of the next season (that's a period of 8 fricken months!) as being a period where all punishment related to where a player is suspended to HAVE to be in that first game.



I'm not talking whatsoever about not having punishment for players violation of team rules, but there is no rule written that says it has to be the first game. If you broke a family rule when you were growing up, would it have been any less of a deterrent if your parental unit told you as a consequence of your transgression, you will be grounded on the following weekend as opposed to being grounded that specific night (say it was a Tuesday of a school night where you didn't having anything going on buy homework and watching some TV)?



I don't think there is a more powerful punishment for a football player than telling him he cannot suit up for a game or travel with the team. I'm just saying let's be reasonable in how it's metered out.



I know you're probably just pullin at me with that Oscar Meyer analogy because you know I'm a Buckeye fan. Please, it's hard enough to shallow having him coaching my OSU team that I have to be reminded of that. Honestly I don't agree with a lot that he does and I wouldn't trust him with babysitting my dog.

I couldn't pass up the opportunity to put a little Buckeye fun in the mix, my apologies!



But in terms of punishing the whole team, I think there is some validity to that approach because it forces the team to be aware of and help each other member of the team. They have to be their brother's keepers.

stuckinbig10country wrote:
I would like to see the punishments not all be in the same games, but the only really forceful punishment for college football players is missing games.



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

In my playing days, running seemed to be a pretty good deterrent. We had one game with 120 yrds penalties. We ran a minute for every yard. The next game we had 5 yards in penalties. Two hours of running 40 yard sprints in full pads after practice got our attention and nipped the undisciplined play in the bud.

The problem is, who could be an impartial party that could decide who misses what game? There's the obvious problem that the coach, AD, or anyone else associated with the school in any way would sit the star player vs. direction direction state and the backup vs good competition. It quickly becomes a slippery slope where integrity and the spirit of the rule take a back seat.

imuakahuku wrote:

I would like to see the punishments not all be in the same games, but the only really forceful punishment for college football players is missing games.



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

In my playing days, running seemed to be a pretty good deterrent. We had one game with 120 yrds penalties. We ran a minute for every yard. The next game we had 5 yards in penalties. Two hours of running 40 yard sprints in full pads after practice got our attention and nipped the undisciplined play in the bud.

Wow! That is quite a disciplinary action. The question is, did you win either game. I don't know what the best action is in these cases but that sure should be considered. It would be done right away and would impact his play leaving the door open for someone else to take his place. That would be true discipline.

This was my proposed punishment:

http://cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17938&p=205979&hilit=fight#p205979" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SpiffCoug wrote:

The Brawl was ugly. BYU should be better than that. But so should Memphis. It is unacceptable - albeit understandable - behavior by both teams.



I was initially disgusted by Kai Nacua's cheap shot from behind. But as the camera stayed with him and he turned and you could see his bloody cheek, it became more understandable.



Here is what I would do. There would be no dismissals from the program or suspensions for games next season. If I were Bronco and Tom Holmoe, I would announce today or tomorrow that we have requested ESPN to send the video from all cameras that have any footage of the fight.



Then I would announce that any player seen on tape as moving towards the melee would face discipline in the form of running all the aisles of Lavell Edwards Stadium. The number of stadiums those players would have to run will be determined by their involvement. Every 10 seconds moving towards the scrum and not towards the lockerroom (and moving unrestrained) would be one stadium. Any and each push or shove would be an additional five stadiums (stadia?). Any and each punch, kick or stomp will be an extra ten. And any and each swing of a helmet will result in an additional 15.



A poster will then created and posted outside the lockerroom, Coach Mendenhall's and Tom Holmoe's office. The poster will have the players listed and the amount of stadiums required. Players will have to check them off.



Each player involved will also write a hand-written letter to the Miami Beach Bowl Committee, ESPN, the Memphis athletic director, the Tigers' head coach and any player the verbally or physically engaged. In the letter they will apologize for their role in the brawl, for any embarassament they caused the organization (the bowl committee, ESPN, etc) and how their actions do not reflect what they are taught at BYU or how they are expected to act.



The letters must be sent prior to school starting in January. And the running of Lavell Edwards Stadium to be completed by the end of the winter semester.



Whether Memphis takes any action is irrelevant. I would make these punishments known publically.

I think something similar could have been employed for Takitaki and other players who will screw up, make bad decisions, but still not hurt the fans, teammates and program.

The handling of athletes breaking the law is an embarrassment across the nation. Get in a brawl or fight, face assaul/battery charges like any normal citizen. If that means jail time, so be it. Instead, excuses are made and players have to miss a game or two, big deal.



Takitaki should have to pay all fines, write a note of apology to the store, and be made to stand on the curb holding a sign that says, "I am a BYU football player and a thief. Despite being on a full ride scholarship and having just about everything paid for me, I still felt compelled to steal. I am sorry. Don't be like me."



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

Gunk wrote:
The handling of athletes breaking the law is an embarrassment across the nation. Get in a brawl or fight, face assaul/battery charges like any normal citizen. If that means jail time, so be it. Instead, excuses are made and players have to miss a game or two, big deal.



Takitaki should have to pay all fines, write a note of apology to the store, and be made to stand on the curb holding a sign that says, "I am a BYU football player and a thief. Despite being on a full ride scholarship and having just about everything paid for me, I still felt compelled to steal. I am sorry. Don't be like me."



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

I am not a fan of public humiliation like that. Yes, he should have to pay restitution, yes he should have to pay civilly for the crime but holding a sign in public saying "I am a thief" is a horrible form of punishment and IMO doesn't fit the crime.