More accountable than the coach? I agree - at least in the regard that the coach should be accountable to the CoC. But to say that the Company Officer should have reported his FB players up the chain is laudable but also laughable. Especially given the known focus on FB (real or perceived makes no difference.) It would be a interesting exchange..."Sir, I believe Mister Jones attended a party at an unauthorized location." "Is that Mr. Jones the QB that scored two touchdowns today?" "Yes Sir." "The party has now been authorized. Thank you, LT. One more thing, all parties in the future are also authorized. Dismissed"
Senior Quarterback Dismissed from USNA
- Thread starter Luigi59
- Start date
More accountable than the coach? I agree - at least in the regard that the coach should be accountable to the CoC. But to say that the Company Officer should have reported his FB players up the chain is laudable but also laughable. Especially given the known focus on FB (real or perceived makes no difference.) It would be a interesting exchange..."Sir, I believe Mister Jones attended a party at an unauthorized location." "Is that Mr. Jones the QB that scored two touchdowns today?" "Yes Sir." "The party has now been authorized. Thank you, LT. One more thing, all parties in the future are also authorized. Dismissed"
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,412
osdad,
The CONDUCT of MIDN, regardless of where or when it occurs, falls under the purview of the military chain of command -- whether or not it is the fault of anyone in the chain of command for letting it happen, preventing it from happening, or mitigating it from happening. Disagree? That is the definition of being accountable for one's people in the military, which I would presume you know.
Say the next DI USNA Football incident (hypothetically) involves a DUI and makes the news...I guess this would be Coach N's doing too, right? No...it should be their Company Officer, they are the ones accountable for their MIDN actions. It is just like LITS said earlier...if the CO is asleep in his cabin and the ship runs aground, it is his/her fault 99.9% of the time -- fair or unfair.
I have a very hard time believing that someone in the chain of command would sweep this under the rug. An officer who chooses this path risks a lot of their career -- administrative to punitive action, all it takes is either someone going up in the chain of command, an IG complaint, or an article in the newspaper before an investigation is started. I think (at least in today's military) for many, it isn't worth the risk. And if that person is investigated for being the senior man with a secret, then the chain of command IS being held accountable.
I think Coach N SHOULD be accountable IF he is preaching unethical or illegal actions or he is intentionally sweeping something under the rug. I haven't seen ANY FACTS to support this. Who cares that he gets paid more $$$ (I personally would love to have a salary that large), but just because of that and any pressure from Alumni doesn't mean that he would purposefully disgrace USNA. He HAS benched and punished football players before for infractions. If any poster has FACTS that support that he has been sweeping things under the rug or turning a blind eye, I would love to see that and then I would agree with you --- but I haven't seen it.
The CONDUCT of MIDN, regardless of where or when it occurs, falls under the purview of the military chain of command -- whether or not it is the fault of anyone in the chain of command for letting it happen, preventing it from happening, or mitigating it from happening. Disagree? That is the definition of being accountable for one's people in the military, which I would presume you know.
Say the next DI USNA Football incident (hypothetically) involves a DUI and makes the news...I guess this would be Coach N's doing too, right? No...it should be their Company Officer, they are the ones accountable for their MIDN actions. It is just like LITS said earlier...if the CO is asleep in his cabin and the ship runs aground, it is his/her fault 99.9% of the time -- fair or unfair.
I have a very hard time believing that someone in the chain of command would sweep this under the rug. An officer who chooses this path risks a lot of their career -- administrative to punitive action, all it takes is either someone going up in the chain of command, an IG complaint, or an article in the newspaper before an investigation is started. I think (at least in today's military) for many, it isn't worth the risk. And if that person is investigated for being the senior man with a secret, then the chain of command IS being held accountable.
I think Coach N SHOULD be accountable IF he is preaching unethical or illegal actions or he is intentionally sweeping something under the rug. I haven't seen ANY FACTS to support this. Who cares that he gets paid more $$$ (I personally would love to have a salary that large), but just because of that and any pressure from Alumni doesn't mean that he would purposefully disgrace USNA. He HAS benched and punished football players before for infractions. If any poster has FACTS that support that he has been sweeping things under the rug or turning a blind eye, I would love to see that and then I would agree with you --- but I haven't seen it.
Whatever it says in his contract.
Generally, that will also include appearing at certain functions, television, radio, etc. etc; not running afoul of NCAA regulations; and whatever I'm not thinking of at the moment. He isn't their academic adviser; he's not in their chain of command.
By the way, and before the evidential facts are in, some of you are hammering on a coach who suspended his star fullback for leaving the field without singing Air Force's Alma Mater after a brutal and controversial loss. That doesn't seem like a "winning above all" move to me. And they indeed did lose the next game against Southern Miss.
If all the D1 FBS service academies cared about was winning for the sake of winning, they would drop down to D3 and dominate. Check out the records of Army's and Navy's Sprint Football teams. I think that is the closest look you'll get as to what might happen.
Some of you are assuming facts not in evidence. Academically, Navy Football does fine (source NCAA):
6. Stanford 90% graduation rate
7. Army 88%
8. Navy 87%
9. Air Force, Wake Forest 86%
10. Vanderbilt 85%
The latest data I saw had Navy's overall graduation rate at 87% (all midshipmen), so I really don't see some huge problem here.
I think it is awesome that Air Force, Army, and Navy hold their own playing big boy football (well, not so much lately for Army) and we can watch them against the likes of Ohio State (Navy almost won), Oklahoma (Air Force almost won), and Stanford (good luck Army, you'll need it). When Navy beat Notre Dame in 3OT for the first time since Roger Staubach did in in 1962 or whatever; that was a major deal. Yes, it is a whole lot of ego. So what? Ego is a big part of the military. They are saying they aren't afraid to step out on a field of battle with the odds stacked against them.
It's great that D3 works out for USCGA and USMMA. But that ain't the case for the others. Football traditions there go back to national titles (Army), near misses of titles (Navy), Heisman Trophy winners (Army, Navy), and sustained excellence in a competitive conference over many years (Air Force, plus they have the most CIC Trophies).
And what is this magic D3 scandal protection spray you are alluding to?
Lots to Google if you want:
Start with: http://www.militarycorruption.com/miller.htm and go from there.
All that said, this is a sad situation at USNA. Hopefully justice will prevail and I trust due process will rise above the media frenzy.
No secret with the media writing this...
http://www.capitalgazette.com/news/...0-696c-5332-bd0c-bc500fe8a707.html?TNNoMobile
Coach should resign or get the kick out the door.
http://www.capitalgazette.com/news/...0-696c-5332-bd0c-bc500fe8a707.html?TNNoMobile
Coach should resign or get the kick out the door.
One of the Navy football team’s former leading tacklers and a promising linebacker entering his junior year...
...he was described on the Naval Academy athletics’ website as “one of the team leaders.”
In 2006, Lamar Owens Jr., the team’s starting quarterback, was acquitted of rape but found guilty of lesser charges. He was later expelled from the school, despite opposition from some alumni.
Another one-time member of the team, Kenny Ray Morrison, was convicted in 2007 of sexually assaulting a female classmate at a Washington hotel. He was sentenced to two years in the Navy brig.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,412
I think the reason there was opposition from the Alumni (wasn't just because they REALLY liked Navy football) was because the court-martial only convicted him of violating a military protective order (I think he walked in the same wing of Bancroft as the alleged victim) and a general lawful order (viewing pornography on the computer) but returned "no punishment" as the sentence -- meaning the Superintendent could not impose any punitive punishment. The Alumni felt that since he had his day in court and was found not guilty of rape but guilty of "minor" offenses (which could have been handled within USNA's Administrative Conduct system), he should have been allowed to graduate (VADM Rempt administratively separated Owens). Some thought VADM Rempt was out to hang Owen's regardless of the outcome. Owens and his defense team had some more than usual wiggle room in selecting the jury panel because the military judge found (and admonished) VADM Rempt had acted very close to undue command influence.
I don't recall much opposition in the Morrison trial.
Also, let's not forget these football players are alleged suspects. They haven't been convicted of anything at this time.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
Only matters in U.S. courts.... we're talking about the Court of Public Opinion.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
Don't use USAFA and "traditions" going well back in the same sentence, especially when discussing football. This isn't a discussion of long held traditions.
USCGA at one time had a great football program, coached by Otto Graham.
falconfamily
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 670
If my memory serves me, the Coast Guard was originally the Light House Service and was administered by the department of Treasury, which was later tasked with enforcing customs via the department of Revenue. Yes this is a mighty and fine branch of service that all of the other service academies must continually be reminded of...
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
If my memory serves me, the Coast Guard was originally the Light House Service and was administered by the department of Treasury, which was later tasked with enforcing customs via the department of Revenue. Yes this is a mighty and fine branch of service that all of the other service academies must continually be reminded of...
Your memory is as lite as Air Force history and tradition.
The Coast Guard most readily traces it's founding as a "system of cutters" aka the Revenue Marine, aka the Revenue Cutter Service in 1790. The U.S. Lighthouse Service, found in 1789 (before the Department of War) was later added to the U.S. Revenue Cutter Service (much like the AOL Chatroom Wing was added to the Air Force).
The Coast Guard (as both USRCS and USCG) remained in the Department of the Treasury (remember, the Department of Defense would come much later) until 1967, when it moved to the Department of Transportation, and then in 2003 to the Department of Homeland Security.
And it might be helpful for the Zoomie memories that the lighthouse system was a precurser to GPS...
The gates of Arlington National Cemetery have the crests of four service. The Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Coast Guard.
Every service figured out how to fly before the Air Force existed.
falconfamily
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 670
Truth be known I was in the Army for two decades before my DS entered USAFA. But I was a member of the youngest branch of the Army (Special Forces), we do not have the history and traditions of the 1st ID, 82nd, 101st, or the 10th MD. All of these units have a great history and are rightly proud of it, many people did not know much about us when I served, but we are not ashamed of our newness, and seldom if ever, found a need to remind people who we are.
I have great respect for everyone who serves, I have worked quite a bit with the CG, I think they are good at what they do, I found that some of the rescue swimmers and boat crews I have worked with are as good in the water as any unit I had trained with. I really don't think less of the CG, and neither should you.
Cheers!
I have great respect for everyone who serves, I have worked quite a bit with the CG, I think they are good at what they do, I found that some of the rescue swimmers and boat crews I have worked with are as good in the water as any unit I had trained with. I really don't think less of the CG, and neither should you.
Cheers!
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
Ah, I see! You were just rehashing... incorrectly, the Coast Guard's history because of your profound respect for it. I see. I was mistaken.
I kind of expected you to counter my comments with something defending the Air Force, but instead you retreated to "Oh no no, I was Army!" There's plenty of good counter-arguments in favor of a tradition-heavy Air Force out there.
I'm always a huge fan of service members, who receive push back from current or past Coast Guardsmen, immediately falling back on "I've worked often with the Coast Guard, and they always impressed me by..."
Usually it sounds like, in this case, an old soldier, is attempting to validate the Coast Guard. I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again, if you ever find yourself overly concerned with the amount of energy Coasties exert thinking about what you think of them.... don't. They don't care. They don't need a soldier commenting on their small boat handling skills, they already know they're good at it. They don't need airmen commenting on their rescue swimmers, they already know they're good. They don't need sailors or Marines commenting on their ship driving or piloting... they already know they're good.
Imagine, for a second, a Coastie telling a soldier, "oh I've worked with the army, and they're good at firing artillery." First, I don't think the soldier needed that validation, and second, what the hell does the Coastie know about lobbing artillery rounds?
Finally, it never ceases to amaze me when other services comment on the Coast Guard history or its mission. I've had relatives in the Army and Navy, and friends in the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard... I only really know the history and mission of the Coast Guard. Frankly, while the history interests me in general, I'm not overly concerned with the histories of the other services. So before you attempt to comment on the Coast Guard's history, at least google it. I'm OK with you even pulling from Wikipedia. But don't, off-handedly, try to make a joke with incorrect information.
At least make fun of the service using its actually history!
falconfamily
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 670
Sigh....whatever.....
falconfamily
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 670
I really shouldn't respond, but I think I would be remiss in not doing so. There are SCUBA teams in Special Forces, we spend a lot of time in the water. We go to small boat schools, we go to scout swimmer schools, we train with navy assets, we spend time on big boats and little boats, some go fast, some even go underwater. We are Army units with our own boats, some are soft hulled, others are not. We even work with people from other countries. Some of them are good, some of them are not. We actually will assemble small boats on the open sea after getting inserted by aircraft. That is no small feat at night and in rough water. So I think there is some validity to my observations that I respected the ability of CG members I worked with. That said, I think it is best to move on and get back to the subject of the original thread.
Cheers!
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
Agreed. It's probably best to move on. But I agree. There are no better boat handlers in the U.S. military than a Coast Guard surfman.
usna1985
15-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2006
- Messages
- 7,847
Folks,
This site respects and celebrates ALL of the SAs and services. No one does his/her service proud by disparaging the other services or SAs.
Support your alma mater and/or your "alma service." Relay facts -- including "bad" facts -- as you think appropriate. Remember, however, that we all remain comrades in arms and denigrating one's comrades does not reflect well on anyone. Please keep this in mind.
Your friendly Mod
This site respects and celebrates ALL of the SAs and services. No one does his/her service proud by disparaging the other services or SAs.
Support your alma mater and/or your "alma service." Relay facts -- including "bad" facts -- as you think appropriate. Remember, however, that we all remain comrades in arms and denigrating one's comrades does not reflect well on anyone. Please keep this in mind.
Your friendly Mod
USCGA13STN
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2010
- Messages
- 337
Sigh....whatever.....
My Two favorite parts of SAF: when someone gets exasperated by LITS and when the mods enter the convos to chastise LITS.
Just Kidding LITS
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
But true!
scoutpilot
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2010
- Messages
- 4,479
SWCCs would laugh at that.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
I've seen SWCCs.... they can drive fast, but I'll take a surfman in 25 ft. seas. Sorry. We'll call SWCCs JV Surfman.... they can always cross over!
LineInTheSand is correct. Entirely correct. Period. There is a breakdown in character demands when it comes to athletes at all high-level institutions of learning. I have seen it happen too many times. Too many really great candidates get bumped by high school athletic prima donnas.