Bobby Hauck Story

[tampa_griz]

Based on his response to me in the previous post...

crazycat wrote:
What makes you think he'd ever do that? He's as pleased as punch to have Russum on the team. Couldn't be prouder according to his posts.

Tampa Griz replied:
You better believe it.

And based on your response to this creepy story I can surmise that it's safe to call you a hypocrite.

And here's a little legal advice for ya crazy; grabbing another man's junk, taking off his pants, and sticking your fingers in his poopchute when he doesn't want you to is most certainly a crime. What you consider fun at the bath house others might not enjoy. Don't do it.

[AlphaGriz1]

Based on his response to me in the previous post...

crazycat wrote:
What makes you think he'd ever do that? He's as pleased as punch to have Russum on the team. Couldn't be prouder according to his posts.

Tampa Griz replied:
You better believe it.

And based on your response to this creepy story I can surmise that it's safe to call you a hypocrite.

And here's a little legal advice for ya crazy; grabbing another man's junk, taking off his pants, and sticking your fingers in his poopchute when he doesn't want you to is most certainly a crime. What you consider fun at the bath house others might not enjoy. Don't do it.

I have never agreed with a poster more than this post.

Anyone that does that kind fo stuff has 2 choices in life, prison or a very high position working for the Clinton's.

[crazycat]

Based on his response to me in the previous post...

crazycat wrote:
What makes you think he'd ever do that? He's as pleased as punch to have Russum on the team. Couldn't be prouder according to his posts.

Tampa Griz replied:
You better believe it.

And based on your response to this creepy story I can surmise that it's safe to call you a hypocrite.

And here's a little legal advice for ya crazy; grabbing another man's junk, taking off his pants, and sticking your fingers in his poopchute when he doesn't want you to is most certainly a crime. What you consider fun at the bath house others might not enjoy. Don't do it.

That's true when it's men and in the scenario you suspiciously described so well (you've been there?), but in this particular case the case was dismissed, which I can only take to mean that no crime was committed.

Like I said comparing a high school sophomore grabbing someone's jewels in a dog pile to a guy getting his girlfriend drunk and having his buddy...well, we all know Russum's story...are drastically different. When juveniles pull these kinds of pranks it isn't something that we need to tie up the courts over. However Russum's act being that it was premeditated and that he also conspired with a college roommate takes on a whole different flavor compared the spontaneous act that occured with this high school sophomore.

However had this kid had a history of doing this kind of thing and continued the act after being reprimanded, that's different, too. I just don't think high school sophomores who ill-advisedly and inappropriately grab each others Jimmies in a dog pile are criminals. I'm sure this kid has more than paid the price via public embarrassment and whatever reprimands the school doled out. Russum on the other hand is still getting a full ride scholarship to another school.

This other kid should, and probably will, get a scholarship somewhere. My contention is that he should still be able to come here and I see the poll agrees with me. I don't think our past problems should limit our ability to take THIS particular kid. We should, however, continue to scrutinize who we take lest we end up taking players with track records like Russum, Quinn, Coleman et al.

[tampa_griz]

Like I said comparing a high school sophomore grabbing someone's jewels in a dog pile to a guy getting his girlfriend drunk and having his buddy...well, we all know Russum's story...are drastically different. When juveniles pull these kinds of pranks it isn't something that we need to tie up the courts over. However Russum's act being that it was premeditated and that he also conspired with a college roommate takes on a whole different flavor compared the spontaneous act that occured with this high school sophomore.

However had this kid had a history of doing this kind of thing and continued the act after being reprimanded, that's different, too. I just don't think high school sophomores who ill-advisedly and inappropriately grab each others Jimmies in a dog pile are criminals. I'm sure this kid has more than paid the price via public embarrassment and whatever reprimands the school doled out. Russum on the other hand is still getting a full ride scholarship to another school.

This other kid should, and probably will, get a scholarship somewhere. My contention is that he should still be able to come here and I see the poll agrees with me. I don't think our past problems should limit our ability to take THIS particular kid. We should, however, continue to scrutinize who we take lest we end up taking players with track records like Russum, Quinn, Coleman et al.

Your ability to insert new rules about what program takes whom knows no limits crazy. Whatever it takes to justify your "Bobby takes bad people and we take good people" argument works I guess.

I'm sure this kid has more than paid the price via public embarrassment and whatever reprimands the school doled out. Russum on the other hand is still getting a full ride scholarship to another school. This other kid should, and probably will, get a scholarship somewhere.

For Christ's sake crazy.......which is it? Pick one please. Russum has a scholarship at UM after making an ill-advised decision. And you scream bloody murder about it. And in the same post you say that someone who puts their fingers in people's butts (on more than one occassion I might add) is deserving of a scholarship. You even have the audacity to say that that action is not a crime which is extremely bizarre. What the hell man?

[crazycat]

Like I said comparing a high school sophomore grabbing someone's jewels in a dog pile to a guy getting his girlfriend drunk and having his buddy...well, we all know Russum's story...are drastically different. When juveniles pull these kinds of pranks it isn't something that we need to tie up the courts over. However Russum's act being that it was premeditated and that he also conspired with a college roommate takes on a whole different flavor compared the spontaneous act that occured with this high school sophomore.

However had this kid had a history of doing this kind of thing and continued the act after being reprimanded, that's different, too. I just don't think high school sophomores who ill-advisedly and inappropriately grab each others Jimmies in a dog pile are criminals. I'm sure this kid has more than paid the price via public embarrassment and whatever reprimands the school doled out. Russum on the other hand is still getting a full ride scholarship to another school.

This other kid should, and probably will, get a scholarship somewhere. My contention is that he should still be able to come here and I see the poll agrees with me. I don't think our past problems should limit our ability to take THIS particular kid. We should, however, continue to scrutinize who we take lest we end up taking players with track records like Russum, Quinn, Coleman et al.

Your ability to insert new rules about what program takes whom knows no limits crazy. Whatever it takes to justify your "Bobby takes bad people and we take good people" argument works I guess.

I'm sure this kid has more than paid the price via public embarrassment and whatever reprimands the school doled out. Russum on the other hand is still getting a full ride scholarship to another school. This other kid should, and probably will, get a scholarship somewhere.

For Christ's sake crazy.......which is it? Pick one please. Russum has a scholarship at UM after making an ill-advised decision. And you scream bloody murder about it. And in the same post you say that someone who puts their fingers in people's butts (on more than one occassion I might add) is deserving of a scholarship. You even have the audacity to say that that action is not a crime which is extremely bizarre. What the hell man?

All I've said is Bobby takes bad people and he does take bad people. It's well documented. WTF is so wrong with that statement. I'm not screaming bloody murder over just Russum. If it was just Russum, Hauck wouldn't be in the pickle he's in.

You continue to describe the people we're talking about in a misleading fashion. You make this high school sophomore sound like a grown adult. He's not and that case was dismissed. Those are the facts. You need to live with them and then go forward. You can't disregard the facts and continue trying to make a point. It doesn't work that way. I'm not saying it's not a crime, a judge in that jurisdiction did. He probably ruled that way due to the ages of those involved and the setting that this occured.

[GrizinWashington]

... he doesn't care if Hauck is ethical or not as long as he brings in talented players.

That sums up everything. I'm sure GiW and ECG are in the same camp when it comes to this. You'll notice he didn't respond to my 12:09 post.

Although this thread has gone waaaaayyyy off the deep end (which seems to happen regularly when 2506 and cc are involved), I'll close with this: If you believe the above statement, you obviously have no clue about me or my postings on this and other boards. I am on the record all OVER this board saying BH has made poor decisions. If you question that, review my posts on Quinn. In addition, I vehemently disagreed with his decision to stay silent on many issues, including shortly after the arrests. FWIW, however, Russum WAS not and IS not a poor decision, and any coach in America would be happy to have him. He's been a model student and citizen at UM.

So yes, I believe BH has made poor decisions, and I will be the first in line to state when I think he's wrong. But being wrong and being unethical are so completely different that they are not only not in the same ballpark, they're not even in the same neighborhood. NO ONE has provided ONE SHRED of evidence to show that BH has EVER done anything remotely unethical. Figure out the distinction between errors and ethics, and then we can discuss this further.

[tampa_griz]

Like I said comparing a high school sophomore grabbing someone's jewels in a dog pile to a guy getting his girlfriend drunk and having his buddy...well, we all know Russum's story...are drastically different. When juveniles pull these kinds of pranks it isn't something that we need to tie up the courts over. However Russum's act being that it was premeditated and that he also conspired with a college roommate takes on a whole different flavor compared the spontaneous act that occured with this high school sophomore.

However had this kid had a history of doing this kind of thing and continued the act after being reprimanded, that's different, too. I just don't think high school sophomores who ill-advisedly and inappropriately grab each others Jimmies in a dog pile are criminals. I'm sure this kid has more than paid the price via public embarrassment and whatever reprimands the school doled out. Russum on the other hand is still getting a full ride scholarship to another school.

This other kid should, and probably will, get a scholarship somewhere. My contention is that he should still be able to come here and I see the poll agrees with me. I don't think our past problems should limit our ability to take THIS particular kid. We should, however, continue to scrutinize who we take lest we end up taking players with track records like Russum, Quinn, Coleman et al.

Your ability to insert new rules about what program takes whom knows no limits crazy. Whatever it takes to justify your "Bobby takes bad people and we take good people" argument works I guess.

I'm sure this kid has more than paid the price via public embarrassment and whatever reprimands the school doled out. Russum on the other hand is still getting a full ride scholarship to another school. This other kid should, and probably will, get a scholarship somewhere.

For Christ's sake crazy.......which is it? Pick one please. Russum has a scholarship at UM after making an ill-advised decision. And you scream bloody murder about it. And in the same post you say that someone who puts their fingers in people's butts (on more than one occassion I might add) is deserving of a scholarship. You even have the audacity to say that that action is not a crime which is extremely bizarre. What the hell man?

All I've said is Bobby takes bad people and he does take bad people. It's well documented. WTF is so wrong with that statement. I'm not screaming bloody murder over just Russum. If it was just Russum, Hauck wouldn't be in the pickle he's in.

You continue to describe the people we're talking about in a misleading fashion. You make this high school sophomore sound like a grown adult. He's not and that case was dismissed. Those are the facts. You need to live with them and then go forward. You can't disregard the facts and continue trying to make a point. It doesn't work that way. I'm not saying it's not a crime, a judge in that jurisdiction did. He probably ruled that way due to the ages of those involved and the setting that this occured.

A judge said that holding someone down while putting your fingers in their butt is not a crime? I'm sure you'll be pulling up stake there soon.

Hauck's not in a pickle after this year's 11-1 season and winning BSC Coach of the Year. He's keeping his job as long as he wants it while his name is tossed around at CSU. Sorry. You need to face facts and get over it.

And, as noted earlier, you constantly keep having to inject new rules into the argument. That newest one being "16-17 year-olds don't know that putting your fingers in people's butts is wrong (it's not even a crime)....18-19 year-olds know that it's wrong". What's next crazy? Does it matter if the guy wore a watch while he penetrated someone's ass and diddled his junk? Or would it make it OK if it happened in a county beginning with the letter "R"? What if the local congressman was a woman? How much weight would that have on your judgement?

Or....let's just get to the brass tracks shall we?....would it matter if Bobby Hauck was recruiting him? That's the real difference isn't it? I mean, you're best friends with the guy because you're a big booster and all so you're definitely in a position to know right?

Sorry crazy.....every one of your little "Bobby is bad because....." rants are over. You've been exposed as the hypocrite.....lying hypocrite that you are.

[crazycat]

... he doesn't care if Hauck is ethical or not as long as he brings in talented players.

That sums up everything. I'm sure GiW and ECG are in the same camp when it comes to this. You'll notice he didn't respond to my 12:09 post.

Although this thread has gone waaaaayyyy off the deep end (which seems to happen regularly when 2506 and cc are involved), I'll close with this: If you believe the above statement, you obviously have no clue about me or my postings on this and other boards. I am on the record all OVER this board saying BH has made poor decisions. If you question that, review my posts on Quinn. In addition, I vehemently disagreed with his decision to stay silent on many issues, including shortly after the arrests. FWIW, however, Russum WAS not and IS not a poor decision, and any coach in America would be happy to have him. He's been a model student and citizen at UM.

So yes, I believe BH has made poor decisions, and I will be the first in line to state when I think he's wrong. But being wrong and being unethical are so completely different that they are not only not in the same ballpark, they're not even in the same neighborhood. NO ONE has provided ONE SHRED of evidence to show that BH has EVER done anything remotely unethical. Figure out the distinction between errors and ethics, and then we can discuss this further.

Good. Then we agree. It may not be unethical, but it shows poor decision-making ability to knowingly bring in players of poor character.

[crazycat]

A judge said that holding someone down while putting your fingers in their butt is not a crime? I'm sure you'll be pulling up stake there soon.

Hauck's not in a pickle after this year's 11-1 season and winning BSC Coach of the Year. He's keeping his job as long as he wants it while his name is tossed around at CSU. Sorry. You need to face facts and get over it.

And, as noted earlier, you constantly keep having to inject new rules into the argument. That newest one being "16-17 year-olds don't know that putting your fingers in people's butts is wrong (it's not even a crime)....18-19 year-olds know that it's wrong". What's next crazy? Does it matter if the guy wore a watch while he penetrated someone's ass and diddled his junk? Or would it make it OK if it happened in a county beginning with the letter "R"? What if the local congressman was a woman? How much weight would that have on your judgement?

Or....let's just get to the brass tracks shall we?....would it matter if Bobby Hauck was recruiting him? That's the real difference isn't it? I mean, you're best friends with the guy because you're a big booster and all so you're definitely in a position to know right?

Sorry crazy.....every one of your little "Bobby is bad because....." rants are over. You've been exposed as the hypocrite.....lying hypocrite that you are.

According to what I've read the judge threw the case out. However you want to take that, is up to you. I take it as meaning he saw no crime.
I never once said Hauck's job is in jeopardy. He is, however, under scrutiny even by the Governor, so that being said, he's in a pickle.

I'm not following you. Are you saying this kid had a watch on while he stuck his hand up some kids ass. If so, then that's a tad extreme. Are you saying that?

It's brass tacks, not tracks.

I never said I was best friends, just that I've met him and have talked to him. If Hauck was recruiting this kid and the kid wanted to attend UM, I'd have no problem with it. He was a young pup and screwed up, paid his price and should be given a break. I didn't say Russum didn't deserve a break, I'm saying the compilation of all these guys and their problems makes Hauck look pretty lame in his recruiting. He was in no position to take chances on players of poor character.

Your little name calling jaunts are telling. If you can't hold it together and conduct yourself in a civil manner, then just bow out. It's basically admitting you don't have a leg to stand on. Which you don't since the conversation is about Hauck making poor decisions about the type of player he brings. He's made poor decisions, face it. It's all been documented. These guys were bad guys and Hauck brought them in. It's not like he was trying to build a team from scratch. Poor choice. No question. No argument.

[tampa_griz]

Good. Then we agree. It may not be unethical, but it shows poor decision-making ability to knowingly bring in players of poor character.

You're a hypocrite.

[crazycat]

Good. Then we agree. It may not be unethical, but it shows poor decision-making ability to knowingly bring in players of poor character.

You're a hypocrite.

Sorry thinking that kid should be able to come to MSU, while thinking Hauck makes bad decision and brings in bad guys makes no one a hypocrite. Another fact you can't face.

You're just not a man. And you're the hypocrite, not me. Bow out and quit embarrassing yourself.

[tampa_griz]

Good. Then we agree. It may not be unethical, but it shows poor decision-making ability to knowingly bring in players of poor character.

You're a hypocrite.

Sorry thinking that kid should be able to come to MSU, while thinking Hauck makes bad decision and brings in bad guys makes no one a hypocrite. Another fact you can't face.

Making hay about a guy who recruits someone that took naughty pics of his girlfriend while apologizing for an ass-raper makes you a very large hypocrite.

[tampa_griz]

Good. Then we agree. It may not be unethical, but it shows poor decision-making ability to knowingly bring in players of poor character.

You're a hypocrite.

Sorry thinking that kid should be able to come to MSU, while thinking Hauck makes bad decision and brings in bad guys makes no one a hypocrite. Another fact you can't face.

You're just not a man. And you're the hypocrite, not me. Bow out and quit embarrassing yourself.

If I wanted to embarrass myself I'd apologize for ass-rapers and maybe even say it's not a crime. But that wouldn't make me embarrassed...it'd make me you. Throw in a few good tales telling everyone how much of an important booster I am while I rub elbows with all the coaches and I'd really be you.

[Eastcoastgriz]

what I know of his character I believe he would and has done unethical things.

This is exactly the point we are trying to make. You have determined that he will and has do unethical things based on Internet garbage.

[crazycat]

Good. Then we agree. It may not be unethical, but it shows poor decision-making ability to knowingly bring in players of poor character.

You're a hypocrite.

Sorry thinking that kid should be able to come to MSU, while thinking Hauck makes bad decision and brings in bad guys makes no one a hypocrite. Another fact you can't face.

You're just not a man. And you're the hypocrite, not me. Bow out and quit embarrassing yourself.

If I wanted to embarrass myself I'd apologize for ass-rapers and maybe even say it's not a crime. But that wouldn't make me embarrassed...it'd make me you. Throw in a few good tales telling everyone how much of an important booster I am while I rub elbows with all the coaches and I'd really be you.

A 15 year old that jumps on a dog pile with a bunch of his teammates then does what, we don't know for sure. I'm assuming the kid did this stuff through the clothing. Whatever the case the JUDGE threw the case out of court. You're trying to make it sound like he pulled the guys pants down and stuck his hand in his ass. I don't think that's how it went. If so, then to call him an ass raper is a misrepresentation of the truth. I'm not a Griz booster and never claimed to be an important booster of anyone. There you go again distorting facts. All I said was I've talked to Hauck and he knows me by name. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but thats the way it is. It's not anything I;'m either proud or ashamed of. I made some statements about Hauck's personality, you asked how I would know and I told you. Deal with it.

[tampa_griz]

A 15 year old that jumps on a dog pile with a bunch of his teammates then does what, we don't know for sure. I'm assuming the kid did this stuff through the clothing. Whatever the case the JUDGE threw the case out of court. You're trying to make it sound like he pulled the guys pants down and stuck his hand in his ass. I don't think that's how it went. If so, then to call him an ass raper is a misrepresentation of the truth. I'm not a Griz booster and never claimed to be an important booster of anyone. There you go again distorting facts. All I said was I've talked to Hauck and he knows me by name. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but thats the way it is. It's not anything I;'m either proud or ashamed of. I made some statements about Hauck's personality, you asked how I would know and I told you. Deal with it.

crazycat's ass-raping excuse #142:

If your finger is covered by clothing as it penetrates a man's bunghole it's cool and recruiting a person that does that a number of times doesn't mean you recruit bad guys. Unless of course your name is Bobby Hauck. Then penetrating someone's ass without their permission while wearing gloves is bad and you shouldn't recruit them.

Keep telling this board how important you are to coaches and that they know what you're ass-raping apologizing name is. Maybe even you'll believe it some day. Till then take my advice on the NAMBLA lobbyist job. Everyone needs an advocate.

[Eastcoastgriz]

Meeting Hauck isn't hard to do, you should try it yourself, you might learn something.

Although I go to lots of booster functions, I don’t need to go there to see him. I can go to his parents (Eleanor and Bob) or his little Katie’s. If YOU would spend a little time with him, you would know how ridicules you sound

[cats2506]

what I know of his character I believe he would and has done unethical things.

This is exactly the point we are trying to make. You have determined that he will and has do unethical things based on Internet garbage.

Based on news reports (Internet, print and tv), conversations with boosters of both schools and conversations with students and alumn of both schools.

Sorry, I dont base my opinion on information just from message boards. In fact I usually assume that the message board info is unreliable but give it some credence when it is backed up by other sources.

[tampa_griz]

Meeting Hauck isn't hard to do, you should try it yourself, you might learn something.

Although I go to lots of booster functions, I don’t need to go there to see him. I can go to his parents (Eleanor and Bob) or his little Katie’s. If YOU would spend a little time with him, you would know how ridicules you sound

Exactly. The first clue to his ****** was his "tense and nervous" accusation. That ain't Hauck the two times I shook hands with him. I thought he was cocky and arrogant.....the polar opposites of tense and nervous. Cocky and arrogant is all right with me anyway....I know I am.

[Eastcoastgriz]

Good. Then we agree. It may not be unethical, but it shows poor decision-making ability to knowingly bring in players of poor character.

Unfortunately Bobby, unlike you is human. Guess what, humans make mistakes. You make the best decision you can at the time and more forward. One of the things I have liked about both msu and UM that we have been willing to give a student a second chance.