Delaware suspensions v Berryman

[Bub]

Someone please explain to me: why on the one hand everyone on this board applauds(rightly IMHO) Delaware for putting the boot to the players who are accused of burglarizing & robbing their teammate; yet on another thread fans are hoping CONVICTED FELON Jason Berryman will pick their I-AA team to transfer to. This after he spent a year in jail and was booted out of Iowa State for violating team rules?: smh :

This is the stumbling block I have at times with I-AA, the acceptance of proven bad apples, all in the hopes that this is the player that will allow us to win.

Does this mean if the suspended Delaware players are good enough some other I-AA team will accept them on their team, when the judicial system in Delaware is done with them, if convicted?(I agree if not convicted no issue exists).

Not smacking any specific team. I really don't get it. As an example, UNI took proven multiple loser Hill in, despite their knowledge of of his major problems. I agree, they did the right thing and booted him when he screwed up yet again, but the question remains, why were they willing to take him in the first place? How bad does a guy have to be before no team will touch him? How does this mesh with our view of I-AA football?

[*****]

Good points. I look forward to the discourse!

[Tod]

Someone please explain to me: why on the one hand everyone on this board applauds(rightly IMHO) Delaware for putting the boot to the players who are accused of burglarizing & robbing their teammate; yet on another thread fans are hoping CONVICTED FELON Jason Berryman will pick their I-AA team to transfer to. This after he spent a year in jail and was booted out of Iowa State for violating team rules?: smh :

This is the stumbling block I have at times with I-AA, the acceptance of proven bad apples, all in the hopes that this is the player that will allow us to win.

Does this mean if the suspended Delaware players are good enough some other I-AA team will accept them on their team, when the judicial system in Delaware is done with them, if convicted?(I agree if not convicted no issue exists).

Not smacking any specific team. I really don't get it. As an example, UNI took proven multiple loser Hill in, despite their knowledge of of his major problems. I agree, they did the right thing and booted him when he screwed up yet again, but the question remains, why were they willing to take him in the first place? How bad does a guy have to be before no team will touch him? How does this mesh with our view of I-AA football?

The three Delaware players have yet to pay their debt to society. Berryman has served his time and should, to an extent, be given a second chance. Not all will agree with that, but many people, including ADs, HCs, will.

Forgive an forget (but watch).

As far as the Delaware players, I don't know the rules that well. I'm sure there's a reason that Berryman is going I-AA. Perhaps the same rule will (if applicable) force the Del players to go to D-II schools (at least in a timely manner).

[lucchesicourt]

Yeah, he has payed his debt to society. But, does he still have the right to share in all the same advantages of honorable individuals? How I see it, is it is fine to give him a second chance, but there needs to be a penalty for a school should this individual cause future problems. For instance, if I hired a felon at my work, and he produced good work, I would be commended. But, if he ended up breaking the law and costing the company money, I am sure I would be terminated for making such a bad choice (or surely demoted at the very least). Shouln't a program, coach, school, or someone be held accountable for such bad decisions too? Maybe, a loss of scollies, financial penalties to the league or NCAA, etc. A person with a bad track record is not necessarily a good choice, especially if his only real asset is he can play football. I also believe that a person right out of prison should not be elgible to play until he has been at the institution for a full year, stayed out of trouble, and is academically qualified. Is this too much to ask of an individual?

[Tribe4SF]

Our schools seem to run the gamut with regard to acceptance of players with troubled pasts. The Berryman and Hill cases only highlight our diversity of approaches. I don't think you can say this is a I-AA issue, or creates any image for I-AA.

That being said, many on here could very quickly give a list of schools that would be likely candidates for Berryman's services.

[Kill'em]

This brings up several arguments:
1) Convicted felons are risks. I wonder what percentage find decent jobs after "paying their debt."
2) By not educating or hiring these guys, the chances of their committing another crime probably goes way up.
3) What does it say for a I-AA school, or I-AA, in general if they are admitted?

Personally, I don't want to see them at Georgia Southern. I would wish them well, but I think it hurts the reputation of the school.

[lucchesicourt]

I wouldn't want to see them at my alma mater either. However, the point that they have paid their debt to society is true. I think one of the best ways to keep riff raff out of your program is by making admission standards that are difficult to meet (academically). And, there is nothing wrong with saying anyone with past criminal history is exempt from participating in extracurricular activities. This would include joining fraternities, sororities, athletic teams, on campus clubs, etc.
They are then allowed to continue their education, but are not allowed the privilege of other students. Afterall, participating in such activities is a prililege and not a right. Same applies to driving. You can lose this privilege too.

[HensRock]

Bub, When I first read your post, I thought you were saying that DELAWARE fans were hoping that Berryman joins their I-AA team. I can assure you, this is not that case. We've had enough negative publicity already. I had to re-read your initial post to understand what you were saying - and I agree it just shows the diversity of approaches and philosophies out there in I-AA.

If convicted, the 3 former UD players won't be going to another I-AA, they'll be going to Gander Hill Correctional Facility. If not convicted, they may end up on another I-AA. They probably will not be back at UD judging from past experience, even if they are cleared of all charges.

[Bub]

Additional facts on Berryman, after completing a year in jail, he was let out on probation and the coach accepted him back with some publically unknown rules governing his staying with the team. After the season was over he was caught under age in a bar, where some scuffled had taken place involving other underaged football players and was kicked off the team for good for violation of these rules. The other players were put on some level of team suspension.

[colgate13]

Personally I think this should come down along the lines of what a school would normally do. Some schools have very open admission policies because their mission is stated as such. Others have very strict admission policies because their mission is stated as such.

If a school would normally admit a convict who has served their time, then fine. Let him play ball too.

If a school would not normally do so, but will do so because they can play football, then that is something I like to think of as 'athletic prostitution'; and the offending school should be ashamed and ridiculed appropriately.

[Bub]

Of course we're not talking simply about admission, but recruitment and a providing of a scholarship to play football.

The question isn't whether a school would normally admit a felon, rather would they provide a scholarship to a felon, who was kicked off his last football team?

Berryman wasn't kicked out of school just off the football team. He could continue at ISU as a student on his own dime, after this semester. Till then he remains on scholarship.

[colgate13]

Of course we're not talking simply about admission, but recruitment and a providing of a scholarship to play football.

The question isn't whether a school would normally admit a felon, rather would they provide a scholarship to a felon, who was kicked off his last football team?

For me, it is. Drake isn't letting this kind of player in because they aren't letting this kind of student in. If they did, then I'd cry foul.

If (fill in the blank public school) normally has these types of kids in, AND they want to actually pay the student to play football, fine with me. It's their gamble, and their reputation.