Pelini Blocks DN, Reverses Decision

Appropriate response for Bo would have been to call the DN, tell them you're disappointed in their story because it misrepresented the facts and called out individual players, and insist they write a more thorough piece about team discipline that actually takes into account the views of the person in charge of team discipline. If they refuse, maybe you hold out the threat of barring them from practice.

All that said, I can see why Bo would go a little overboard initially, especially when they call out a player who's been on the straight and narrow for a while now and another who's only been accused of wrongdoing, not convicted. Presumption of innocence is right up there with freedom of the press, IMHO.

 
The article is nothing more than a kid trying to create controversy to get his name out there as a writer.

In reality, the kid could really careless how Pelini runs his program. All the writer cares about is creating more hits and more of a response to his article, which in turns makes he/she look better.

It's bad journalism, but more times than not, these type of articles create more attention than the sunshine pumping articles.

 
BigWillie said:
The article is nothing more than a kid trying to create controversy to get his name out there as a writer.

In reality, the kid could really careless how Pelini runs his program. All the writer cares about is creating more hits and more of a response to his article, which in turns makes he/she look better.

It's bad journalism, but more times than not, these type of articles create more attention than the sunshine pumping articles.
Click to expand...
:yeah

When it comes to internal disciplinary action by Pelini, it is his discretion to make it public or not. It is none of the DN businiess. Calling them to do a more in depth article is the opposite of what Pelini should do, it is nobody's business if it is an internal matter. Now if law enforcement is involved, then it is up to them to make the call according to their policies.

The DN has over stepped it's bounds. :nutz They should be apologizing to the players named. It was NONE of their business to begin with. And as I stated before, the DN is funded by the university, they are at the mercy of the university and should project it in a better light than the regular press.

This was nothing more than some snot nosed kid trying to make a name for himself who has absolutely no pride in the university that probably will give him his degree. The university won't do anything with them, under the guise of having "freedom of the press", but if I were an acquaintance of this kid, or a fellow student, I would be calling him a traitor. That is my opinion, and only my opinion. :box

 
Pretty much everyone at the DN is a bunch of snobby wanna-a-be reporters who are still young enough to think they can do, say or write whatever they want because "Freedom of Speech". Is the DN not funded by the University, do they not know not to "bite the hand that feeds them"

 
Big Willie hit the nail on the head.

I will support Bo Pelini long before I worry about what an individual wrote at a children's newspaper.

 
kstatehater said:
Is the DN not funded by the University, do they not know not to "bite the hand that feeds them"
Click to expand...
they won't be defunded. the thing is tho, it will be odd that the campus news paper will have an easier time getting quotes from the opposition's coaches than their own.

 
Personally I think the whole incident says a lot more about the paper than it does the athletic department or Pelini.

Besides and editorial on how to run an organization by some one too young to have ever ran an organization as large as the football program may not make a lot of sense. Not that it can't happen and be a good editorial but while many 18-24 year old college students may think they have all the answers how many really do?

It's been said that wisdom comes with age and sometimes age comes all by itself. It does imply that there may not be quite as much wisdom with youth now doesn't it.

 
coyeote said:
Personally I think the whole incident says a lot more about the paper than it does the athletic department or Pelini.

Besides and editorial on how to run an organization by some one too young to have ever ran an organization as large as the football program may not make a lot of sense. Not that it can't happen and be a good editorial but while many 18-24 year old college students may think they have all the answers how many really do?

It's been said that wisdom comes with age and sometimes age comes all by itself. It does imply that there may not be quite as much wisdom with youth now doesn't it.
Click to expand...
What ever happened to the notion of "Respect"? When I was young, my dad once told me I could learn a lot more and gain more of my own respect if I listened and asked questions before stating a view or telling someone what they should or shouldn't do. You also were to respect those in authority or even older than yourself.

I think if they would have followed my fathers advice, they would have asked to speak to Bo and got their facts straight, along with the outlook of how the University or the athletic department believed such matters should be handled and why.

You have to remember, which they obviously did not, that Tom Osborne is responsible for overseeing all of the disciplinary decisions, and above him, the Chancellor of the University. I don't think Osborne is going to sit by and let Bo or any other coach do nothing, or do something that is not in the best interest of the program. Obviously these snot nosed kids that put articles like this together are too young to know that Tom Osborne is viewed upon as the pillar of integrity. If they don't believe that, then they need to get their butts out to the west coast to one of those liberal schools where they believe the ROTC is baby killers and that it is okay to have two moms or two fathers rather than a mother and a father.

 
The DN is a joke. My wife was a journalism major at UNL and she quit the DN because of their 'journalistic itegrity'. They're a bunch of sanctimonius pricks. While I'm sure there are different writers there now, the culture appears to remain the same.

The DN's motives are very transparent in this case. This has been a pretty quiet offseason for discipline. Of the three examples in their previous editorial, only one involved both a current player and Pelini. And in that case, the player was dismissed from the team. So WTH does anyone have to complain about? And yet the DN finds it necessary to expose the 'discipline problem' in the athletic department?

I say good for Pelini. He maybe shouldn't have yelled into the phone (Although i doubt he did. Honestly, how effective is it to yell into a phone? Can anyone really envision him doing that?), but I agree with banning the reporters from practice. If nothing else, it lets the players know he'll support them when its warranted.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There was just a huge disconnect between the evidence and the conclusions...

One example of a serious crime that was dealt with harshly and publicly (Christensen),

one example of a decision BC made a year ago and has nothing to do with Bo (Culbert),

one example of a minor transgression dealt with internally (Witt),

and one example of an incident that hasn't been dealt with yet because the facts aren't known (Josh)...

somehow these examples add up to a "boys will be boys' mentality" where illicit activity goes unpunished and hidden within the football program???

:wacko:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top