Jim Minick reinstated
where are you getting that?
should have had Minnick's lawyer. . .
says the blood isn't back yet. turn around time for the MSP should be less than 2 weeks for a blood draw and his arrest was 4 weeks ago.
I imagine Gary Moeller would have a legit gripe in 2015.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I don't blame Moeller for being mad, but it was a different time and embarrassing the University like he did just wasn't going to be tolerated by that AD. It was an unfair punishment, but I also don't see why the school shouldn't evolve a bit in its handling of this type of situation. That said, DUI vs. disorderly conduct in a restaurant is a little hard to square.
Wouldn't it be great if every time there was a thread about someone getting in trouble for something alcohol-related, there wasn't an instant post about Moeller?
Well, at least in this case it is somewhat related. But yeah, his name does pop up quite a bit. Like RR when certain people want to argue about offenses in the Big 10.
Mo was an excellent coach and it's regrettable that, like many of us, he got ridiculously drunk at one point and acted the fool. Worse, I suppose, because he was head football coach at Michigan under an AD who wasn't having any of that.
I commented about Moeller because, plainly, Minnick's issue in 2015 is at least as egregious (moreso if you consider that Moeller was not about to drive) but in the modern era he gets the pass.
Times change.
Did the times change generally, or just at Michigan?
My general impression was that things were moving in the opposite direction. 20 years ago three-martini lunches were quite common in my workplace and the CEO often spent the afternoon locked in his office because he'd come back from lunch falling-down drunk. You might have thought the parent company would take a dim view of that, but in fact his ability to drink the other party under the table while negotiating a contract was seen as one of his main strengths.
But it wouldn't fly, now, not there, or anywhere else I've worked. He was one of the last holdovers of a dying world...or have I worked in atypical environments and this is still common elsewhere?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
...an easy mistake not to make. I'd prefer that our athletic leadership not be showing lapses in judgement when it comes to alcohol and cars.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
...I lost a much loved family member due to the selfish decision of a drunk driver. The driver never said so but I'm sure she also thought her previous DUI was also no big deal.
This board seems awfully willing to let the first one pass when there is no reason why anyone should ever get a first DUI. I'm much more willing to forgive "mistakes" when they don't obviously and predictably put other people in danger.
They weren't referring to the drunk driver bit. They were referring to the huge tangent about the word retard...
It's not tangential. Respect for people who have disability is not a tangent and, bottom line, Magnus and his defenders can plainly do better here. This isn't about language policing or political correctness, it's plainly about respect.
For the people who have a child, a son or daughter, a loved one with a developmental disability use of the term "retard" is hurtful, offensive, stigmatizing and cruel. And for the many posters I have read on here defending Magnus' use of the term "retard" they ignore the decades of accrued social meaning for those families and their children who are not, in fact, "retarded" but are through no choice of their own (unlike Minnick) developmentally disabled secondary to neurological differences which occur in fetal development.
The use, or in Magnus' case, misapplication of the term "retard" speaks, regrettably, to his insensitivity and dare I say, ignorance, in this matter. He can cheaply parse it with precise dictionary definitions all he wants but the societal application of the term "retard" since it's introduction just after 1961 into the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual has related to stigmatizing a population group due to their illness then termed "mental retardation" (which itself, sadly, was an alleged improvement on feeblemindedness, idiocy and mental subnormality). To call someone a "retard" then and now contained stigma and a contextually negative social meaning. To ignore this just further stigmatizes that group.
Over the past two decades medical, psychiatric and other professionals have abandoned this term due to it's negative implications toward a population group who are developmentally disabled. The term has been removed from the DSM (as of DSM V) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).
I often enjoy Magnus' comments and insight on recruiting. He has some talent in those areas but in this one he can do better. Regrettably, his use of the term "retard" is plainly offensive and ignores the social and historica context surrounding that term. Magnus can do better and respect those families impacted by this issue.
Ever hear of the phenomena called a euphemism treadmill?
I suggest you look it up. Retard is just the latest word to hop on it after words like idiot, moron and imbecile were replaced by... retard... after they became derogatory and warped from original medical terminology.
I wouldn't be surprised if "disabled" became the next one people try to omit from negative slang usage in the future once it also gets a negative connotation.
Can Magnus just agree that he meant to say "Jim Minick made a developmentally disabled decision" when he chose to drive drunk?
Problem solved for everyone.
Faggot wasn't a bad word either, neither was bitch. I bet you'd never use either word to describe your mother or sibling. History is full of words being taken from the original meaning and being used to demean because of the words original stigmatization. That is a sad rational for using those words when you are still well aware of what they mean and who they would offend.
Faggot was mainly a negative word from its inception in describing elderly women to homosexuals.The "bundle of sticks" go to origin is simplistic. It was used to describe women who gathered firewood in negative fashion if I recall correctly.
Imbecile, idiot, moron and retard are different in that they weren't re-defined/created as slang. They were re-defined/created with the purposes to describe illness in a neutral manner.
Faggot would be more in line with words like cunt aka having negative connations since its origin for most of its lifespan. Bitch falls into this too b/c its literal Nordic dog meaning dropped off a few centuries in since inception and translation to English.
A word like gay is interesting b/c it began as a word meaning care free and then turned into describing scantily females to homosexuals in negative manner. But since then it became more prominent as an adjective to describe a segment of the population in a neutral tone.(while keeping some of its negativity in different contexts).
In some circles, faggot is reclaimed just like "nigga." Thus, gay, faggot and nigga would be examples of a dysphemism treadmill. Words that were/are offensive that are getting reclaimed by the groups that were marginalized throughout history with them.
I'm not arguing for one side or the other. I'm just noting that this debate will continue forever with new words like it has been for the past 200 years with mentally handicapped adjectives.
Retard will be used in a couple generations in the same manner as idiot, imbecile, and moron are used now as people then begin to argue over "disabled" and its usage. The people arguing to not use retard have won. It has been disjointed from its original definition and thus will be associated with the former 3 in future vernacular.
People on both sides should recognize that especially medical personnel who should be the first to usher in the use of new terminology.
"The people arguing not to use retard have won"
Yeah, medical and psychiatric professionals who diagnose, work with families and children with these conditions and try to be respectful and not stigmatizing to those individuals. Wow, respecting people at a principle level has been successful. Damn.
It's easy to thoughtfully argue at a philosophical level, as you have about word meanings. It's a lot different to look across the table at a family whose child is developmentally delayed and discuss with them the implications of that diagnosis and how their young person will be treated.
I hope if this ever happens to your family (or Magnus who began this debate) that people will have the kindness not to label your child or relation with such language but, rather, to treat your family with respect choosing person first language. Perhaps ypu should look up that term and/or the impacts of stigma on child development.
This is a transition period. A generation from now retard will not be associated with mentally handicapped people just like idiot moron and imbecile aren't anymore.
The fact that you are associating it with mentally handicapped individuals is not helping your own cause b/c you're keeping that association alive by getting offended.
I'm not personally going out of my way to say retard. I'll respect other people's opinions on the matter. That also means I won't go out of my way to stop people from using it unless they are specifically making fun of handicapped people. Like I said before, transition period.
Just smh.
You can talk philosophically all day about this but at no point do you acknowledge the disrespect that use of that term has for people with developmental challenges or their families.
Again, I hope once you have kids you never run into this type of issue. Then again, maybe you can engage those offending you in a philosophical discussion on linguistics. Good luck with that.
yea the firing of moeller started the the slow descension. who knows what he would done @ um. but to say his firing was unfair is pushing it a little. a head coach should be above reproach especially since he has to discipline players for their transgressions.
yea the firing of moeller started the the slow descension. who knows what he would done @ um. but to say his firing was unfair is pushing it a little. a head coach should be above reproach especially since he has to discipline players for their transgressions.
yea the firing of moeller started the the slow descension. who knows what he would done @ um. but to say his firing was unfair is pushing it a little. a head coach should be above reproach especially since he has to discipline players for their transgressions.
yea the firing of moeller started the the slow descension. who knows what he would done @ um. but to say his firing was unfair is pushing it a little. a head coach should be above reproach especially since he has to discipline players for their transgressions.
As long as that is the way you feel about all dangerous behavior that could lead to death or injury of innocent people than thats cool. And you better have that belief about anyone who has ever been arrested for drugs.
Its mind numbing how easily people blow off drunk driving because its something they know they could do. Not drunk driving really isn't that, its called not being an idiot and millions of people manage to pull it off. Drunk driving is also incredibly dangerous for others and the fact that nobody happened to be hurt this time doesn't change that. If he had hit and killed someone his actions and decisions would have been no different. Both he and society were lucky that didn't happen this time, but this isn't an "Everybody just makes mistakes" sort of decision like me accidentally hitting reply all on an email.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Double posts, double stupid!
It's Blueday gum!
Let the facts speak.
You don't have the facts.
You'd cut him loose.
Kewl.
Nice tackle Timmmaay
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I love, love, love getting jacked in a movie theater!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
To your comment, that ball was his for the taking. It pays to teach and stress causing turnovers.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
So no DUI because the blood test was thrown out?
Yeesh, people.
You act like this is the first time anyone has had a couple beers and gotten behind the wheel. It was a single-car accident, no one was hurt. He made a big mistake. He admitted to it. Apparently, the legal process is now taken care of, whatever the end result may be (which, really, isn't any of our business).
Long story short, he's reinstated. Harbaugh and Michigan are apparently convinced this isn't an issue, and that Minick has done what he needed to do. Enough with the conjecture and moralizing.
We're not all leaders of young men and held to an even higher standard. It's not right no matter WHO does it, but yes, in this role that he's in, there are higher conseqences than many others.
Stop comparing him to the common person. He took the fucking job, he also took the responsibility that comes with it. Period.