Did They Really Have to Suspend

Brandon Davies? Really? I am really bothered by this whole thing. Sincerely. I've been a BYU fan my whole life, I am alumni, Cougar Club, season ticket holder, the whole thing and I don't think I've ever been so bothered by a BYU sports related incident. Here's why: I know a former BYU athlete (within the last 5 years) who knocked up his girlfriend. He went to his Bishop and worked with him, worked with his coach, was able to retain his ecclesiastical endorsement, stayed in school, stayed on his team, married his girlfriend and eventually completed his eligibility and graduated. He is now a solid member of the church and community and a total BYU guy. There was no publicity, no suspensions, nothing like what has happened here. So, why the difference? Why couldn't Brandon's situation be handled the same way? I realize I don't know all the facts, nor should I or anyone else not connected to the situation. But, what's out there in the public forum sounds strikingly similar to this other case I know about. If there is some kind of double standard or unfair inconsistency with the way the honor code is enforced, that really needs to be fixed. I believe in the honor code and what it stands for and I love BYU, largely because of what BYU stands for. But, something here really bothers me and maybe it's just because I don't know all that happened and I need to find a way to completely trust the people involved in administering the consequences. But, it's really, really difficult right now. Anyone have any helpful input?



I think I'm most troubled by this because for the first (and probably only) time in my life, BYU had a legitimate shot at a No. 1 seed and for the first time in 30 years a legitimate shot at a deep run in the tournament. Now, that is all gone. So, that's my selfish fan motives coming out. But, the whole situation still troubles me greatly. I can't help but think that BYU could have handled this better and diminished the public scrutiny on Brandon and kept the season from disintegrating. But, maybe I'm wrong. Anyone else's helpful counsel would be much appreciated.

I agree.. not much else I can add. I can't help but feel horrible for a 19 or so yr old kid who has his transgressions posted on the front page of every major news outlet. It bad for all involved. It's a tough situation either way though.. Bottom line for me is that I'd like to see issues handled privately between student and ecclesiastical leaders.. and if repentance isn't met, then send it to the HC office.. but until then keep it PRIVATE because most of the time (not all the time I'm sure) it'd work out better for those involved IMO.

Hopefully the church does not start purging like the HC violations office so that the church becomes a rest home for the perfect. If so, I'm in a lot of trouble.....

Edited. Too emotional in my words methinks.

My guess is that someone else outside that circle of trust found out about it and went and told the Honor Code office. At that point, people know publically, and if the HC office doesn't react, they will make a stink out of it (i.e. "But he slept with his girlfriend, and I told the Honor Code office, and they aren't doing anything about it"). So the HC office had to react to avoid that situation. In my opinion, the person who told the HC office needs to mind their own business!

runbyu1 wrote:
My guess is that someone else outside that circle of trust found out about it and went and told the Honor Code office. At that point, people know publically, and if the HC office doesn't react, they will make a stink out of it (i.e. "But he slept with his girlfriend, and I told the Honor Code office, and they aren't doing anything about it"). So the HC office had to react to avoid that situation. In my opinion, the person who told the HC office needs to mind their own business!

This version is not accurate. But if they are gonna do this to him, every single kid that goes and confesses should get the same treatment....every sport, every honor student, everyone! We wouldn't want anyone to receive special treatment and we don't want to risk anyone's eternal salvation!

Still doesn't make sense to me why a regular student can make the same mistake and escape with little or few consequences when it comes to their standing with BYU; yet, an athlete gets their dirty laundry aired out for all to see and made an "example" of.



If you're worthy enough to attend basketball, you should be worthy enough to play on the team. Plan and simple.

Gunk wrote:
If you're worthy enough to attend basketball, you should be worthy enough to play on the team. Plan and simple.

I think you're overstating the case. Lucifer himself is worthy enough to attend basketball.

snoscythe wrote:

If you're worthy enough to attend basketball, you should be worthy enough to play on the team. Plan and simple.

I think you're overstating the case. Lucifer himself is worthy enough to attend basketball.

Then let him play ;). We could sure use him getting nasty on "D" about now. :evil: He could sure make it hell for the other team. I'll bet he's "deceptively athletic" like Emery (at least deceptive, I don't know how athletic a spirit can be). Probably not good for team unity, though. On second thought, let's do our best to keep him out of the Marriott Center all together, we don't need anyone else getting any ideas that may blossom into honor code violations. :whistle:

In my limited readings, I got the impression that Rose suspended Davies and not the HCA. I suspect that Rose and Davies had a long talk about what was best for Davies and for the team and it wasn't a rash action on Rose's part.



The timing couldn't have been worse for the team, but there was probably no better way for Rose and Davies to handle the situation.

snoscythe wrote:

If you're worthy enough to attend basketball, you should be worthy enough to play on the team. Plan and simple.

I think you're overstating the case. Lucifer himself is worthy enough to attend basketball.

I hear the Utes are recruiting Lucifer pretty heavily. Is there a rule against boosters playing?

CannonCougar85 wrote:

Gunk wrote:
If you're worthy enough to attend basketball, you should be worthy enough to play on the team. Plan and simple.

I think you're overstating the case. Lucifer himself is worthy enough to attend basketball.

I hear the Utes are recruiting Lucifer pretty heavily. Is there a rule against boosters playing?

Not even Lucifer would play for Boylen.

Lucifer plays baseball anyway. Dude is a fireballer.

snoscythe wrote:

If you're worthy enough to attend basketball, you should be worthy enough to play on the team. Plan and simple.

I think you're overstating the case. Lucifer himself is worthy enough to attend basketball.

Sno - I'm a fan of your posts - but your logic here makes no sense to me. Just sayin' my man.

Ddawg wrote:

Gunk wrote:
If you're worthy enough to attend basketball, you should be worthy enough to play on the team. Plan and simple.

I think you're overstating the case. Lucifer himself is worthy enough to attend basketball.

Sno - I'm a fan of your posts - but your logic here makes no sense to me. Just sayin' my man.

I meant to say BYU. If one is worthy enough to attend BYU, they should be considered worthy enough to play on the basketball team.

I started the thread about the HC office maintaining Double standards and this very supportive as well.



This type of banishing behavior for all the world to see is Puritanistic and reflects the remains of an LDS culture that accentuates consequences and severity for the highly public figure.



Byu athelets should be held to the code but not administered consequences on a similar level as visable ecclesiastical leaders. If a Bishop commits adultery or embezzles money, he would be excommunicated for minimum five years! The normal for even a Melch priesthood holder would be a minimum of 1 year. A Bishop should receive extra punishment. A 19 year old should not.

This is beyond the simplistic polyanna-like platitudes of "he signed the code" and he should be punished. Many can afford to live within the simple, clear moral reasoning and live peacefully even in pseudo-idyllic fashion. But for Brandon Davies, his sins have now been exposed to the entire country, transcending even national sports as it gets out into the national general media.

And at some level Brandon Davies is almost being exploited and touted to support BYU's increasing commitment to the almighty "Exposure". "See look how good we are unlike the Ohio State's and Auburn's of the world."

Jimmer has become Famous. Brandon has become Infamous. Who would have thought that Jimmer's stardom could be eclipsed. Not that Jimmer ever wanted to be famous or eclipsed, but what has happened is approaching antiquation. Again, don't confuse, I think the principles and code need to be in place. But this Scarlet Lettering is what it is--Puritanistic. There has to be some other way for Brandon to "learn his lesson", " be rehabilitated", etc, etc.

If the Senior Apostle Elder Packer was compelled to soften and change recent "old school" wording in his conference talk that was otherwise harsh and condemning, could we not reasonably consider a more effective way to discipline a kid who will now become the "sole" and scapegoated reason for the most colossal collapse in BYU sports history?



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

Lawboy wrote:
Lucifer plays baseball anyway. Dude is a fireballer.

He may be a two-sport star. I'm pretty sure I saw him "on fire" on NBA Jam for Sega Genesis back in the day.

dm, I have a few questions for you...what if BYU tried to deal with it privately? What if it was maybe swept under the rug and dealt with internally? Then someone finds out and exposes BYU for being hypocritical...and that goes national? Yes, it is unfortunate that everyone knows about Davies and his indiscretions...but remember, BYU is not out there rubbing Davies nose in it. BYU is not the one running to every news outlet and shouting it out. The news outlets want to know why Davies would no longer be playing. BYU is not placing a Scarlet letter on Davies (Have you read that book because the comparison is very unfair and comletely different). BYU is not shunning Davies, nothing can be farther from the truth.

dmcougar wrote:
I started the thread about the HC office maintaining Double standards and this very supportive as well.



This type of banishing behavior for all the world to see is Puritanistic and reflects the remains of an LDS culture that accentuates consequences and severity for the highly public figure.



Byu athelets should be held to the code but not administered consequences on a similar level as visable ecclesiastical leaders. If a Bishop commits adultery or embezzles money, he would be excommunicated for minimum five years! The normal for even a Melch priesthood holder would be a minimum of 1 year. A Bishop should receive extra punishment. A 19 year old should not.

This is beyond the simplistic polyanna-like platitudes of "he signed the code" and he should be punished. Many can afford to live within the simple, clear moral reasoning and live peacefully even in pseudo-idyllic fashion. But for Brandon Davies, his sins have now been exposed to the entire country, transcending even national sports as it gets out into the national general media.

And at some level Brandon Davies is almost being exploited and touted to support BYU's increasing commitment to the almighty "Exposure". "See look how good we are unlike the Ohio State's and Auburn's of the world."

Jimmer has become Famous. Brandon has become Infamous. Who would have thought that Jimmer's stardom could be eclipsed. Not that Jimmer ever wanted to be famous or eclipsed, but what has happened is approaching antiquation. Again, don't confuse, I think the principles and code need to be in place. But this Scarlet Lettering is what it is--Puritanistic. There has to be some other way for Brandon to "learn his lesson", " be rehabilitated", etc, etc.

If the Senior Apostle Elder Packer was compelled to soften and change recent "old school" wording in his conference talk that was otherwise harsh and condemning, could we not reasonably consider a more effective way to discipline a kid who will now become the "sole" and scapegoated reason for the most colossal collapse in BYU sports history?



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

Completely agree. It's sickening.



There's plenty of examples in church history or the "rules" and their consequences being altered at a later time.



Problem is you have a generation that is motivated and motivates others by fear. "How can you instill obedience if there is no fear of the consequences," they shout! There has to be consequences! There has to be Hell to pay! No there doesn't. People can be motivated to do things in other ways.

kiwibacon wrote:
dm, I have a few questions for you...what if BYU tried to deal with it privately? What if it was maybe swept under the rug and dealt with internally? Then someone finds out and exposes BYU for being hypocritical...and that goes national? Yes, it is unfortunate that everyone knows about Davies and his indiscretions...but remember, BYU is not out there rubbing Davies nose in it. BYU is not the one running to every news outlet and shouting it out. The news outlets want to know why Davies would no longer be playing. BYU is not placing a Scarlet letter on Davies (Have you read that book because the comparison is very unfair and comletely different). BYU is not shunning Davies, nothing can be farther from the truth.

Kiwi, I'll wager thousands of students at BYU each year are guilty of gravely breaking the HC, many on the same level of Davies and his girlfriend. No one is crying hypocrisy because we don't know about those incidents.



Let's suppose it was handled privately and for some reason at a later date it came out. BYU simply says, "We handled it privately and given the circumstances felt it didn't warrant a public announcement. We thought it better for the parties involved that it not be made public. If something transpired that warranted a public announcement, etc. then we would have made it."