Hauck's list of two

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:37 pm

crazycat wrote:I definitely don't think Hauck should be praising Russum. I think being a model citizen is the very least Russum can do. Mentioning him along with Ochs was IMO a bad choice. Let Russum get into his senior year and then, if all has gone well, throw his name out there as someone you think has come in, handled a lot of adversity, excelled and point out the things he's done around campus and the community.

That was stupid. Just so I have this straight......you should bring in kids like Russum and the poker but once they're there and performing well to ignore them? There's a recipe for on and off the field success if I ever saw one.

crazycat wrote:WHAT? What? Yeah, that's what it sounds like. Bizarre I know and I don't understand how that could be, hence all the disclaimers about mslacat's report on the matter. I'll say it again: "It appears some details are missing." It sure sounds weird that judge would send someone to a boot camp and make he perform community service, while at the same time saying it was merely 'a hazing gone bad.' Had he been convicted of something, what would the penalty have been? Strange.

You don't get sentenced to anything (prison, boot camp, community service, a fine, etc.) without a conviction. This is still America last I checked. Sounds like he had the sexual battery charge dropped but was convicted of something(s) else....sexual assault, assault, etc.

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:07 pm

This thread has gotten out of hand.

But crazy, if you think that kid got sentenced but didn't get convicted (or plead guilty or no contest) to a crime, you seriously need to go back and take a civics course.

BWahlberg · Post by **BWahlberg** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:16 pm

crazycat wrote:
Re/Max Griz wrote:I read the first few posts and wanted to respond, apologies if it's already been mentioned.

There's actually a bunch of transfers here at the UM that have been just fine in addition to Russum and Ochs:

- Eric Allen
- Reggie Bradshaw
- Van Cooper Jr
- Paul LaMantia
- Erik Stoll
- Justin Green
- Levi Horn
- Josh Swogger
- Craig Chambers
- Joe Smith
- Mike Vandenburg
- Ciarre Campbell
That's a nice list, but I'm talking about players known to have had prior legal trouble. Seriously, kudos to those guys and Hauck for being just fine.

Then why mention Ochs? He had no legal issues. Technically neither did Shelton (had grade and class attendance issues).

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:19 pm

tampa_griz wrote:
crazycat wrote:I definitely don't think Hauck should be praising Russum. I think being a model citizen is the very least Russum can do. Mentioning him along with Ochs was IMO a bad choice. Let Russum get into his senior year and then, if all has gone well, throw his name out there as someone you think has come in, handled a lot of adversity, excelled and point out the things he's done around campus and the community.
That was stupid. Just so I have this straight......you should bring in kids like Russum and the poker but once they're there and performing well to ignore them? There's a recipe for on and off the field success if I ever saw one.

crazycat wrote:WHAT? What? Yeah, that's what it sounds like. Bizarre I know and I don't understand how that could be, hence all the disclaimers about mslacat's report on the matter. I'll say it again: "It appears some details are missing." It sure sounds weird that judge would send someone to a boot camp and make he perform community service, while at the same time saying it was merely 'a hazing gone bad.' Had he been convicted of something, what would the penalty have been? Strange.
You don't get sentenced to anything (prison, boot camp, community service, a fine, etc.) without a conviction. This is still America last I checked. Sounds like he had the sexual battery charge dropped but was convicted of something(s) else....sexual assault, assault, etc.

Ignore them? No. But don't go bragging them up in the media. Good grief, are you his PR advisor or what? He could talk about them in a football sense.

Maybe. Mslacat's post on the matter didn't make it sound like that. Why would a judge say it's 'a hazing gone bad' or whatever and then send him to boot camp. Again (and again and again) it would appear mslacat left some details out or didn't know them all.

Please try to keep up with the conversation, so I don't have to go back over these things for you. It's just making you look bad.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm

crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
crazycat wrote:I definitely don't think Hauck should be praising Russum. I think being a model citizen is the very least Russum can do. Mentioning him along with Ochs was IMO a bad choice. Let Russum get into his senior year and then, if all has gone well, throw his name out there as someone you think has come in, handled a lot of adversity, excelled and point out the things he's done around campus and the community.
That was stupid. Just so I have this straight......you should bring in kids like Russum and the poker but once they're there and performing well to ignore them? There's a recipe for on and off the field success if I ever saw one.

crazycat wrote:WHAT? What? Yeah, that's what it sounds like. Bizarre I know and I don't understand how that could be, hence all the disclaimers about mslacat's report on the matter. I'll say it again: "It appears some details are missing." It sure sounds weird that judge would send someone to a boot camp and make he perform community service, while at the same time saying it was merely 'a hazing gone bad.' Had he been convicted of something, what would the penalty have been? Strange.
You don't get sentenced to anything (prison, boot camp, community service, a fine, etc.) without a conviction. This is still America last I checked. Sounds like he had the sexual battery charge dropped but was convicted of something(s) else....sexual assault, assault, etc.
Ignore them? No. But don't go bragging them up in the media. Good grief, are you his PR advisor or what? He could talk about them in a football sense.

Maybe. Mslacat's post on the matter didn't make it sound like that. Why would a judge say it's 'a hazing gone bad' or whatever and then send him to boot camp. Again (and again and again) it would appear mslacat left some details out or didn't know them all.

Please try to keep up with the conversation, so I don't have to go back over these things for you. It's just making you look bad.

You claim a judge sentenced someone to boot camp who wasn't convicted of anything. Yeah.....I'm the one that looks bad. I'm the hypocrite.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:23 pm

GrizinWashington wrote:This thread has gotten out of hand.

But crazy, if you think that kid got sentenced but didn't get convicted (or plead guilty or no contest) to a crime, you seriously need to go back and take a civics course.

Again good greif. Please just read what I say and quit putting words in my mouth and insinuating that I believe something that I obviously don't. I haven't been doing that to any of you.

I definitely said that I find it odd that this kid was sent to boot camp, but had his case thrown out. I'm not saying that's even what happened. I basing everything I say about this on mslacat's post. You'd have to get mslacat over here to explain just how that occured as he seems to be the only one with knowledge of this. I've found nothing by searcing the web.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:25 pm

tampa_griz wrote: You claim a judge sentenced someone to boot camp who wasn't convicted of anything. Yeah.....I'm the one that looks bad. I'm the hypocrite.

I didn't claim that. That's what it mslacat's post appears to say. I don't know the details, so don't ask me. Just read his post and give me your interpretation. As I've been saying it's seems odd, but that may be due to a lack of details. Not that details appear to be your strong suit.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:26 pm

crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote: You claim a judge sentenced someone to boot camp who wasn't convicted of anything. Yeah.....I'm the one that looks bad. I'm the hypocrite.
I didn't claim that. That's what it mslacat's post appears to say. I don't know the details, so don't ask me. Just read his post and give me your interpretation. As I've been saying it's seems odd, but that may be due to a lack of details. Not that details appear to be your strong suit.

No...you claimed that. Don't run away from it.

crazycat wrote:Whatever that means, but then he was still sent to boot camp. So sounds like he was sentenced, yet not convicted of anything.

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:28 pm

crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
crazycat wrote:I definitely don't think Hauck should be praising Russum. I think being a model citizen is the very least Russum can do. Mentioning him along with Ochs was IMO a bad choice. Let Russum get into his senior year and then, if all has gone well, throw his name out there as someone you think has come in, handled a lot of adversity, excelled and point out the things he's done around campus and the community.
That was stupid. Just so I have this straight......you should bring in kids like Russum and the poker but once they're there and performing well to ignore them? There's a recipe for on and off the field success if I ever saw one.

crazycat wrote:WHAT? What? Yeah, that's what it sounds like. Bizarre I know and I don't understand how that could be, hence all the disclaimers about mslacat's report on the matter. I'll say it again: "It appears some details are missing." It sure sounds weird that judge would send someone to a boot camp and make he perform community service, while at the same time saying it was merely 'a hazing gone bad.' Had he been convicted of something, what would the penalty have been? Strange.
You don't get sentenced to anything (prison, boot camp, community service, a fine, etc.) without a conviction. This is still America last I checked. Sounds like he had the sexual battery charge dropped but was convicted of something(s) else....sexual assault, assault, etc.
Ignore them? No. But don't go bragging them up in the media. Good grief, are you his PR advisor or what? He could talk about them in a football sense.

Maybe. Mslacat's post on the matter didn't make it sound like that. Why would a judge say it's 'a hazing gone bad' or whatever and then send him to boot camp. Again (and again and again) it would appear mslacat left some details out or didn't know them all.

Please try to keep up with the conversation, so I don't have to go back over these things for you. It's just making you look bad.

Wait. I want to be certain I'm clear on this.

The Jr. Adams story is pure Hollywood material. What a great story he is

You think Jr Adams story should be made into a movie, but you don't think BH should say good things about Brent in public????? Okay. Now I AM convinced. You, cc, need to take a trip to Oz. You have no brain.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:30 pm

GrizinWashington wrote:Wait. I want to be certain I'm clear on this.

The Jr. Adams story is pure Hollywood material. What a great story he is
You think Jr Adams story should be made into a movie, but you don't think BH should say good things about Brent in public????? Okay. Now I AM convinced. You, cc, need to take a trip to Oz. You have no brain.

Ya think cc might be a hypocrite?

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:30 pm

tampa_griz wrote:
crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote: You claim a judge sentenced someone to boot camp who wasn't convicted of anything. Yeah.....I'm the one that looks bad. I'm the hypocrite.
I didn't claim that. That's what it mslacat's post appears to say. I don't know the details, so don't ask me. Just read his post and give me your interpretation. As I've been saying it's seems odd, but that may be due to a lack of details. Not that details appear to be your strong suit.
No...you claimed that. Don't run away from it.

crazycat wrote:Whatever that means, but then he was still sent to boot camp. So sounds like he was sentenced, yet not convicted of anything.

"Sounds like" is claiming? No. Sounds like is sounds like. If I was claiming that I'd say, "The judge sentenced him, but didn't convict him." I said it the way I did to show the absurdity of it.

I think you know this, but again with the harrassment.

You not only look foolish, but you're also are coming off as an A-Hole.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:37 pm

crazycat wrote:"Sounds like" is claiming? No. Sounds like is sounds like. If I was claiming that I'd say, "The judge sentenced him, but didn't convict him." I said it the way I did to show the absurdity of it.

I think you know this, but again with the harrassment.

You not only look foolish, but you're also are coming off as an A-Hole.

Don't like having your own words read back to you crazycat? Don't be mad at me. You're the one who wrote them. Not me. Be mad at yourself.

I'm sorry you've embarrassed yourself. But I had nothing to do with it.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:37 pm

tampa_griz wrote:
GrizinWashington wrote:Wait. I want to be certain I'm clear on this.

The Jr. Adams story is pure Hollywood material. What a great story he is
You think Jr Adams story should be made into a movie, but you don't think BH should say good things about Brent in public????? Okay. Now I AM convinced. You, cc, need to take a trip to Oz. You have no brain.
Ya think cc might be a hypocrite?

You're convinced. I bet. Not bright enough to detect sarcasm, eh? But, yeah, The Junior Adams Story, starring Denzel Washington.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:38 pm

tampa_griz wrote:
crazycat wrote:"Sounds like" is claiming? No. Sounds like is sounds like. If I was claiming that I'd say, "The judge sentenced him, but didn't convict him." I said it the way I did to show the absurdity of it.

I think you know this, but again with the harrassment.

You not only look foolish, but you're also are coming off as an A-Hole.
Don't like having your own words read back to you crazycat? Don't be mad at me. You're the one who wrote them. Not me. Be mad at yourself.

I'm sorry you've embarrassed yourself. But I had nothing to do with it.

I'm sorry you keep embarrassing yourself with each key stroke. You make this too easy.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:39 pm

crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
GrizinWashington wrote:Wait. I want to be certain I'm clear on this.

The Jr. Adams story is pure Hollywood material. What a great story he is
You think Jr Adams story should be made into a movie, but you don't think BH should say good things about Brent in public????? Okay. Now I AM convinced. You, cc, need to take a trip to Oz. You have no brain.
Ya think cc might be a hypocrite?
You're convinced. I bet. Not bright enough to detect sarcasm, eh? But, yeah, The Junior Adams Story, starring Denzel Washington.

The Brent Russum story starring John Holmes.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:40 pm

crazycat wrote:
crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
GrizinWashington wrote:Wait. I want to be certain I'm clear on this.

The Jr. Adams story is pure Hollywood material. What a great story he is
You think Jr Adams story should be made into a movie, but you don't think BH should say good things about Brent in public????? Okay. Now I AM convinced. You, cc, need to take a trip to Oz. You have no brain.
Ya think cc might be a hypocrite?
You're convinced. I bet. Not bright enough to detect sarcasm, eh? But, yeah, The Junior Adams Story, starring Denzel Washington.
The Brent Russum story starring John Holmes.

The Tampa Griz story starring George W. Bush w/ a cameo by Bill Clinton.

GrizinWashington · Post by **GrizinWashington** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:40 pm

GrizinWashington wrote:
crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
crazycat wrote:I definitely don't think Hauck should be praising Russum. I think being a model citizen is the very least Russum can do. Mentioning him along with Ochs was IMO a bad choice. Let Russum get into his senior year and then, if all has gone well, throw his name out there as someone you think has come in, handled a lot of adversity, excelled and point out the things he's done around campus and the community.
That was stupid. Just so I have this straight......you should bring in kids like Russum and the poker but once they're there and performing well to ignore them? There's a recipe for on and off the field success if I ever saw one.

crazycat wrote:WHAT? What? Yeah, that's what it sounds like. Bizarre I know and I don't understand how that could be, hence all the disclaimers about mslacat's report on the matter. I'll say it again: "It appears some details are missing." It sure sounds weird that judge would send someone to a boot camp and make he perform community service, while at the same time saying it was merely 'a hazing gone bad.' Had he been convicted of something, what would the penalty have been? Strange.
You don't get sentenced to anything (prison, boot camp, community service, a fine, etc.) without a conviction. This is still America last I checked. Sounds like he had the sexual battery charge dropped but was convicted of something(s) else....sexual assault, assault, etc.
Ignore them? No. But don't go bragging them up in the media. Good grief, are you his PR advisor or what? He could talk about them in a football sense.

Maybe. Mslacat's post on the matter didn't make it sound like that. Why would a judge say it's 'a hazing gone bad' or whatever and then send him to boot camp. Again (and again and again) it would appear mslacat left some details out or didn't know them all.

Please try to keep up with the conversation, so I don't have to go back over these things for you. It's just making you look bad.
Wait. I want to be certain I'm clear on this.

The Jr. Adams story is pure Hollywood material. What a great story he is
You think Jr Adams story should be made into a movie, but you don't think BH should say good things about Brent in public????? Okay. Now I AM convinced. You, cc, need to take a trip to Oz. You have no brain.

cc, no rebuttal? Well, I guess I can understand that.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:40 pm

crazycat wrote:I'm sorry you keep embarrassing yourself with each key stroke. You make this too easy.

I'm sorry you're upset cc. But you brought this on yourself. You started this ridiculous thread. You're the one that made those posts. Not me.

I'd be mad if I was you too. But don't blame me. I didn't do it.

tampa_griz · Post by **tampa_griz** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:41 pm

crazycat wrote:
crazycat wrote:The Brent Russum story starring John Holmes.
The Tampa Griz story starring George W. Bush w/ a cameo by Bill Clinton.

Quoting yourself now cc? My work is done.

crazycat · Post by **crazycat** » Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:43 pm

GrizinWashington wrote:
GrizinWashington wrote:
crazycat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
crazycat wrote:I definitely don't think Hauck should be praising Russum. I think being a model citizen is the very least Russum can do. Mentioning him along with Ochs was IMO a bad choice. Let Russum get into his senior year and then, if all has gone well, throw his name out there as someone you think has come in, handled a lot of adversity, excelled and point out the things he's done around campus and the community.
That was stupid. Just so I have this straight......you should bring in kids like Russum and the poker but once they're there and performing well to ignore them? There's a recipe for on and off the field success if I ever saw one.

crazycat wrote:WHAT? What? Yeah, that's what it sounds like. Bizarre I know and I don't understand how that could be, hence all the disclaimers about mslacat's report on the matter. I'll say it again: "It appears some details are missing." It sure sounds weird that judge would send someone to a boot camp and make he perform community service, while at the same time saying it was merely 'a hazing gone bad.' Had he been convicted of something, what would the penalty have been? Strange.
You don't get sentenced to anything (prison, boot camp, community service, a fine, etc.) without a conviction. This is still America last I checked. Sounds like he had the sexual battery charge dropped but was convicted of something(s) else....sexual assault, assault, etc.
Ignore them? No. But don't go bragging them up in the media. Good grief, are you his PR advisor or what? He could talk about them in a football sense.

Maybe. Mslacat's post on the matter didn't make it sound like that. Why would a judge say it's 'a hazing gone bad' or whatever and then send him to boot camp. Again (and again and again) it would appear mslacat left some details out or didn't know them all.

Please try to keep up with the conversation, so I don't have to go back over these things for you. It's just making you look bad.
Wait. I want to be certain I'm clear on this.

The Jr. Adams story is pure Hollywood material. What a great story he is
You think Jr Adams story should be made into a movie, but you don't think BH should say good things about Brent in public????? Okay. Now I AM convinced. You, cc, need to take a trip to Oz. You have no brain.
cc, no rebuttal? Well, I guess I can understand that.

You're too slow to keep up with my rebuttals. Scroll up Dopey.