CU linebacker arrested, tossed

Posted by RickyLee on April 14, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hopefully he didn't harm any prairie dogs.

Posted by CaptainObvious on April 14, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Call the Broncos--this guy is perfect for them.

Posted by Earl on April 14, 2008 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

aaaahhh spring time in boulder. when will the hookers show up?

Posted by Scott on April 14, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

SHOCKING! It appears that Dan Hawkins is expecting his "men" to act like gentlemen. Coach Hawkins had better watch it though, if he starts holding the Neanderthals to a homo sapiens level life might get rough on him. The last football coach that did this, McCartney, felt the wrath of the "enlightened" ones at Coke U.

Keep it up Coach Hawkins. You have a long hard task ahead of you, cleaning out the Neanderthals.

Scott

Posted by UglyDuck on April 14, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, we shouldn't come down hard on these prima donnas. After all, they're simply giving in to their natural "athletic mindsets". You know - athletes will be athletes. Maybe we could come up with some sort of "jock condom" that doesn't restrict typical athletic behavior but provides protection for the rest of society. (Sorry, I couldn't help applying the same senseless logic many use to justify sexual promiscuity...)

Posted by UglyDuck on April 14, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Since January, five CU football players have been involved in incidents investigated by police." No way! Athletes in trouble with the law? In Boulder? Shocking! "...the player had failed to meet the 'high standards that must be met in order to be a part of our program (which) include representing the entire university community, faculty, staff, students and alumni in the most positive light possible.'" Hmmm...kinda looks like these players are fitting in quite well with what we've all come to expect from athletes, CU and Boulder's finest.

Posted by areader on April 14, 2008 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

He wasn't tough enough. That is why he was released. A real Linebacker would have been bloodied but still concious and would have continued running through the complex.

Posted by Buff4Life on April 14, 2008 at 11:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Breaking a window and getting arrested for underage drinking in Boulder is news? Spare me your attempt to create a story about a "tumultuous" off-season in Boulder. Apparently, the off-season has been so tumultuous that you had to bring up incidents that OCCURED LAST YEAR (Sipili & Perri) in order create this arua of tumultuousness.

With that said, assaults and breaking into vehicles are serious incidents. But if you must report on CU athletes getting into trouble while not reporting on the other likely 1,000+ similar incidents that occured in Boulder during the same period, tell it like it is - which sounds like 2 guys, Katoa and now Duren, who were idiots. A 3rd - Geer, may have been an idiot. If they all were, they should be punished. But from your story, how can we tell what happened to Geer? Suspicion of assault? What happened here? Maybe before you label an offseason as "tumultuous", a bit more jounalistic research and reporting actual news could take place.

Posted by PACE2008 on April 14, 2008 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Am I the only one who thinks that the Rocky Mountain News keeps running the same news stories every year? Spring time in Boulder always means racial attacks, football players beating folks, and the latest chaos at whole foods. ;) <as I padlock my coffee in the fridge> lol

I honestly love that city,,, but every spring I just sit back and shake my head.

Earl, Good response. lol

Posted by PACE2008 on April 14, 2008 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

...continuing with my jovial mood.

I mean, come on,,, at least Mox kept Tweeder and Billy Bob in line when they were at the str1p club watching Miss Davis undressing for money. ;)

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 11:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What does this have to do with Boulder exactly? This guy went to school in Littleton (a rather conservative area typically), apparently was a good enough player to get into college, promptly got drunk and got kicked off the team. How the heck is it Boulder's fault that he got drunk? Should the coach be forced to keep an eye on his players 24/7??

Typically conservatives like the principal of people taking personal responsibility--except when it comes to Boulder apparently in which case it's always Boulder's fault somehow. A bunch of hypocrites of you ask me.

Posted by Steph on April 14, 2008 at 11:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The guy's very possibly a piece of trash. I think it's disgusting how these guys get into a college based on their athletic prowess but not their intellect. Most college kids have to take "real classes" and have to work hard and spend a lot of money to graduate. These athletes get a free trip without having to reach the intellectual standards of the rest of the college but still get their diplomas. It's too bad that colleges need the $$$ brought in by the sports teams. There should be 2 different sorts of diplomas: One for athletes and one for actual students.

Posted by rockymnthigh on April 14, 2008 at 12:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Im not a huge CU buffs fan but I do pay attention to what and how they do every year. Who is in charge of recruiting besides Dan? Its ovbious that they are not screening their recruits for common sense / character.

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Steph: That's not even the worst part from a student point of view. The single highest student fee payed each semester is for the athletics program (on the order of $200-$400 per semester if I remember correctly)--which is ridiculous since the whole point of having these athletic programs are to bring more money and publicity to the school. Why do they need to be subsidized by the student population?

Posted by RickyLee on April 14, 2008 at 12:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Maybe he got a ride from Carmello Anthony.

Posted by PACE2008 on April 14, 2008 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Steph,

Good points, but I disagree a little. A few weeks ago a couple kids in boulder were harassing a man on the street. I do not remember hearing that they were athletes. I do not remember hearing what their major or extra curricular activities were either. I think sometimes athletes get unfairly pigeonholed because of a few bad eggs. If you always heard about student mayhem and the media mentioned that they were philosophy majors, people would eventually start saying “those damn philosophers, always causing trouble.” I am not saying that athletes don’t deserve a little ribbing, but I do think that they get negatively categorized on a regular basis.

Posted by chuckyg on April 14, 2008 at 12:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Steph and Joggle:
You sound a bit BITTER?? Society should appologize for you not getting a scolership? And penalize good athletes for their talents. They take classes just like you and have to pass them just like you. I am not saying this guy is not a idiot but how about the guy that through a mirror out the window?? He is just a football player and they all party just as much as you two do. Maybe we should get rid of all sports so you two can live happy in Liberal land......

Posted by Scott on April 14, 2008 at 1:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

chuckyg,

Getting rid of the sports, or at least making the Neanderthals act like responsible adults, is not just a "Liberal land" thing. I'm conservative and feel that this aspiring Neanderthal got exactly what it deserved. Eliminating the NFL minor league team at Coke U would be even better.

Oh, by the way chuckyg, I DID have a full ride tuition for both my Associates degree and my bachelors degree, both in engineering.

Scott

Posted by chuckyg on April 14, 2008 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Steph and Joggle:
Since you two are "actual students," that take "real classes" and athletes are not "actual students" and don't take "real classes", I was wondering how you have so much time on your hands to read about some football player that got into trouble and then spew your lib jealousy on the rest of us. I suppose you two are waiting tables to put yourself through college.., Right?

Posted by chuckyg on April 14, 2008 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nice Scott:
Sorry to hear about your problem with sports and athletes. They have a gift that you don't and shouldn't be classified as "Neanderthals" Lots of people play sports, are they all "Neanerthals"? or just Football players? maybe they should all right you a letter appologizing for their size and talents?.......Your a model citizen Scott.......You should run for President of Coke U.

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 2:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Actually I graduated a while ago. There's plenty of sports available at the intramural level that are not subsidized. Making students pay for a for-profit portion of the university just doesn't make sense though. To pay for professional-quality athletic areas accessible only to a very, very small portion of the university population doesn't make sense--especially since they're supposedly profitable. If they're profitable, why do they require subsidies?

It's also not a liberal-vs.-conservative thing. While I attended CU there was a student ballot for eliminating the athletic student fee (the great majority of which funded the men's football team). It passed by huge margins (and was promptly ignored by the CU Regents of course) and if you think CU's student population is full of only liberals you're wrong.

I also attended every home football game and several road games while I went to CU as a member of the marching band. That doesn't cloud my eyes to the fact that it's really unfair to make everyone fund the bloated football program with some of the highest salaries of any public officials in the state (with the head coach making more than any other public official in Colorado, including the governor for crying out loud).

Posted by Scott on April 14, 2008 at 2:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

joggle,

After reading chuchyg's last two retorts, your comment is wasted. This character only has one fall back, "You must be jealous ..."

I was not aware of the student ballot, but you need to remember that the Regents respond to the big money donors, not the students or faculty or the taxpayers.

Scott

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Scott,

Yeah, I know. But I like giving a response for the sake of anyone that happens to be following the discussion.

The ballot issue happened back in spring of 2000 or 2001 I think. Most of us knew it was a purely symbolic vote but we really wanted to vent.

Personally, I wouldn't mind having an athletic fee so long as it didn't cost too much and didn't pay for the football program which should be able to pay for itself. If that happened, I'd even be up for them increasing it a tad to bring back college baseball to CU (which was canceled back in the early or mid 90s I think). I think eliminating the huge football subsidies would go a long way toward cleaning up the program by getting rid of the excess fat that's easy to squander and corrupt.

Posted by Scott on April 14, 2008 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

joggle,

I concur with your views regarding the athletic fees. However, if the football program were to be cleaned up, then what would the NFL do? ;-)

Scott

Posted by BO on April 14, 2008 at 3:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

A whole mess of you folks are knuckleheads. Most Div. I FB teams have around 100 members (not all on scholarship). Of course there is going to be 5-10 that are idiots. You could probably test 100 members of the band or drama dept., and I bet at least that many, if not more, would test positive for drugs. I realize its not the same as fighting, but its still wrong just the same. I must have forgotten that non-athlete students don't ever fight, partake in underage drinking, have sex parties, etc. Only the athletes do that, right? The people with the worst reputation at the college I went to were members of a specific frat (known for drinking and fighting); none of whom were on the football team. Unlike a non-athlete, Duren will probably be out of school, unless his parents ante up for the tuition. Most non-athletes don't lose their schooling because of underage drinking (or suspicion of criminal tresspass). As far as recruiting, maybe the kid didn't get into trouble in HS- maybe he just got a big head while being one of the BMOC.

I'm not saying kids shouldn't be punished. It just seems to me that many on here think athletes should be punished more than a regular student. I was a college athlete. The idiots are the exception, not the rule.

Posted by Squatch on April 14, 2008 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Sure are alot of athelete haters on these boards. THis kid screwed up just like that moron who thru a mirror out of his room oh but wait that kid didnt play Football, BAsketball or any other sport at CU. Once again everybody who goes to college is trying to improve thier income factor weather its the next doctor or football player. To call it Coke U is ridiculus. I know plenty of smart coke heads that went to the school of mines.

Posted by chuckyg on April 14, 2008 at 3:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I didn’t have the big University problems that are being talked about. I don’t think it’s a fair assumption that sports and athletes are a burden to Universities. I never said the system wasn’t flawed and never said it was even good. I just get sick of hearing people say we shouldn’t have sports in college and all athletes skate by on their talents. Most athletes are just as good of a student as they are in sports. I was an athlete and I took "real college classes." If you’re going to convince me that there is a real problem with “all” of the football players at CU, it would take a lot more. Try stating your rant with every major University in America.

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 3:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with a lot of what you're saying BO but I think even a non-athlete would be facing pretty serious consequences if arrested for stealing after being caught drunk with a bloody hand. I'd expect a full semester suspension would probably happen regardless of whether he was an athlete or not. Being an athlete he probably won't be coming back though since he probably was only able to go thanks to an athletic scholarship.

Posted by BO on April 14, 2008 at 3:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Squatch and chuckyg-
Great points. I honestly think many hate sports because sports aren't politically correct- they involve winners and losers.

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 4:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

chuckyg: I understand that and there's certainly a role for athletics at any university. I just have a problem with a single program, football, taking such a ridiculous priority at the university. I bet if you do a news search for 'CU' half the results will be related to football. Even other athletes at CU don't have access to the excellent football weight rooms and amenities and have to either live with the same equipment that all the other students use or use their own older hand-me-downs from the football program.

What the heck makes the football players so superior to all the other students (and athletes) at CU? Why must the baseball program be cut while the football program gets a budget increase? I love college sports but hate the policies at CU for funding the football team and I really hate the corruption that has surrounded the football team for years (not that this news story had anything to do with past corruption). I hope the new coach can straighten things out over there.

Posted by farsidefan on April 14, 2008 at 4:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why is college football held in such a prominent position ? Money. It can attract big time "boosters". It brings in TV revenue. Alumni give more to the school when the football program is successful.
Why is it so popular in America ? Money..betting. If we took one week ends worth of bets made legally and illegally and used it for nutrition for kids we would all be better off. Not sure of the numbers but I thought I heard it ranged in the billions.
Now the football revenue is important to the school because it does help fund the other sports.
I don't see many fans at BB games, volleyball games,softball games, track meets, skiing,
Without football these programs would not exist IMHO.
I played football at a small college in this state. My financial reward ? I got a job washing pots and pans in the kitchen of the cafeteria. Every day at 5am even in cold ass snow filled mornings. I was up before the snow plow drivers :)

Posted by MontanaBuff on April 14, 2008 at 4:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

First, I applaude Hawkins for taking quick (and I'll assume informed) action.

That being said, all this wouldn't be so bad if the punishments were passed out on an even scale. Do you think the band member arrested for a fight is banned from playing in the orchestra with his peers? Do you think that similar incidents at other schools (you know which ones) would merit semester suspensions or dismissals? It's hard enough for CU to compete with schools who rake in millions more in revenue each season, but the team shouldn't have to fight it's own university and city to be competitive.

www.cuatthegame.com

Posted by Squatch on April 14, 2008 at 4:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why must the baseball program be cut while the football program gets a budget increase? Blame Title 9 for that one.

Posted by chuckyg on April 14, 2008 at 4:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I will agree that football players that are good get special treatment, starting with middle schools and ending with NFL. But it's not the athletes falt, they work hard at their sport. Not every football player is a moron like this guy though. I will also agree to the fact that many football players enjoy special bonuses and funding. Isn't that what every football player dreams of after all. This is nothing new, it happens all over the US, but the focus seams to be on CU's football team, and not the individual.

Posted by Squatch on April 14, 2008 at 4:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Air Force Academy has the strictest rules in this state as far as colleges go yet when one of thier kids does something wrong these same people have something sarcastic to say.

The kid screwed up and now he is off the team and lost his scholarship but the same free loader kids whos parents pay for them to party are still there. KIDS WILL BE KIDS.

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 4:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Squatch: I blame both. Obviously Title 9 made it tougher, but with a bit more money they could have funded softball or have some other sport just for girls. Title 9 is something else that I think needs a serious review since, by and large, girls simply aren't as interested in college-level sports as guys and universities shouldn't be forced to have equal representation for something that's inherently unequal.

Posted by Squatch on April 14, 2008 at 4:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I would love to have a baseball team & softball teams at CU. You will be able to recruit more football/Baseball players. The Women would be in the tourney every year.

Posted by joggle on April 14, 2008 at 4:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

MontanaBuff: I wouldn't think a band member arrested for one fight would be suspended (unless it was a particularly vicious fight). If he was caught stealing, drunk with a bloody hand like this guy then he probably would be suspended I think.

I don't recall anybody in the band being particularly violent or prone to fighting though. It would be much more likely that someone in the band would be busted for underage drinking than anything else (which has happened at least once since I graduated). While there were kids like me who didn't drink, I'd estimate at least 70% of them drank at the various parties that were thrown and nowhere near 70% of them were 21.

Posted by Brain on April 14, 2008 at 9:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

joggle;
Are you saying that CU would be better off without football's revenue?

I think all sports at CU should fund themselves, no subsidies to any.

Posted by joggle on April 15, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Brain: I'm saying if CU's football is actually bringing in money then why the heck do they need even more money from the student population? I also don't see why they can't spread the wealth more with other athletics at CU; all of whom must work on a shoe-string budget in comparison.

Subsidies are necessary if, for no other reason, Title 9 (girl's sports are almost never profitable, at least at CU--even the girl's basketball team doesn't break even and they usually attract a pretty good crowd). If you got rid of all subsidies then you would have to get rid of all varsity sports at CU which I'm certainly not in favor of.