Back at the start of the football season, another blogger received an anonymous email from someone who claimed to be inside Purdue University who wanted to out members of the football team for failed drug tests. The source named several players including one high profile one and said they had failed multiple drug tests and yet had no been punished, nor had the failed tests been made public.
The writer did what a lot of bloggers would do and he posted the rumor but with the caveat that it was just that -- a rumor, and one that was probably not able to be confirmed. He did not report it as fact -- only that someone claimed it was true. This is, of course, the sticking point between bloggers and "reporters" and it's one that many cannot get past. There is this assumption out there that anyone who runs a blog actually wants to be a reporter and thus should be held to the same requirements, while in fact few of us want to be reporters and are, in essence, running opinion columns all the time (when you think about it, that's what most blog posts are). Opinion columns are just that -- opinions. And whether my opinion is that LeBron is a douche or drugs are running rampant somewhere, it's something I'm entitled to say. Especially if I say something like, "This is not a confirmed fact, it's just something we believe is going on." Like, you know, players getting paid in the SEC to come play football there or shady things happening at Ohio State. (Oh, wait, those are now coming to light as facts. Whatever.)
Getting back to the Purdue football drug rumor, the posting of the rumor was met with anger and threats from Purdue University. The blogger was essentially told he would never have access again to cover games if he didn't retract it immediately. So he did, which was probably in his best interest given that he wants to be able to cover his alma mater. But this kind of gestapo tactic by our favorite school is kind of disgusting. It makes you wonder how many of the traditional media guys covering Purdue understand the same kind of blackballing would befall them if they dared to question the University's practices. That is to say, I wonder if the local media who does cover Purdue is in the university's pocket.
Fast forward to now, and this article by AOL Fanhouse came to light this week, which details how Purdue is among only four universities from the automatic-qualifying BCS conferences that do not suspend a football player after two positive drug tests. In fact, at Purdue, you only get suspended one game after your third positive drug test (at more than half the other schools, you get dismissed from the team at this point). And that's only if you fail three drug tests in 18 months; if you go 18 months without a positive test, your slate goes back to zero. Yes, that's right... you can fail a couple of drug tests every year and a half and never serve time for it. It makes you begin to wonder how bad a drug user you'd have to be to be suspended even a game at Purdue. Are these guys tested all the time? Once a year? Randomly? If it's the last one, then there's almost no way a guy would ever get in real trouble for regularly using drugs, recreational or otherwise. This is disappointing.
What further disappoints me is that this lax policy probably played into the way that the aforementioned blogger was treated by Purdue when he posted the rumor. The rumor probably had some -- or a lot -- of truth to it and the PR folks in West Lafayette knew it and reacted poorly. If that's the case and Purdue is strongarming bloggers, well, that just sucks. They should be handling drug abuse issues with as much fervor.
From the Fanhouse article and other rumblings we've heard, it appears that truly nothing happens to players, even with repeated failed tests. How seriously can we expect players to take rules and discipline when repeated illegal activities aren't even punished?
And on the separate issue of the actions of the athletic department, well, that's totally out of line and disappointing as well. We want nothing more than for our school and its athletic programs to succeed, but we also want it to be done "the right way." We're often quick to rip on other programs, athletes and situations that we think deserve to be ripped. It's only fair that we publicly announce it when our university disappoints us, too.
On this subject, they've done so in multiple ways and we fear there is more to come.
18 comments:
Totally joking here....but our policy could be a "heck of a recruiting tool" ....... quality Purdue, quality.
Quite frankly, this disgusts me.
Very very disappointed to see this Morgan Burke. What's next to look forward to, 3 wins on the grid iron next year? Enough is enough. When can we expect our athletic department to have their act together again? 30 more years? Does it take a Bob Griese or a Drew Brees every half a millennium for our program to have something relevant and successful to hang their hat on? I'm thoroughly disgusted. The anemic results on the field are embarrassing enough....but to do so with the most lax drug policy in all the land...there's nothing Purdue about that at all. That's nothing but an executive eyesore...and I ask of you whom is to blame? Hell, let's get Cecil Newton in here to start recruiting, maybe we can scrounge up some UMICH boosters or some talented ink artist from Columbus to join the fun.
Personally, I don't care what people do with drugs.
With that being said.
I do think entities, like Purdue, should care what drugs people are doing.
If, a player is recruited and fails drug tests, I feel that this speaks volumes to their character and dedication to their team (not my team, theirs). iu proved this under Sampson, they could not maintain concentration and finish the season under Dakich, this, among other distractions , called for a premeditated end to the season (by the way, has anyone else heard Dakich claim that there is no one who was more in line with NCAA rules than him, no one? Even when you were an assistant Dak? (I am sure if Dak reads this he will split hairs on the wording, but this is quintessencly what he stated))
I feel Purdue and Burke are hurting themselves and the programs by allowing this. This WILL bite them in the ass in the future, bad press, horrible handling, questionable accountability, etc.
In the end, if you run a clean program you will be rewarded with wins and respect. It will build a fan base. It was asked on this blog recently in light of the EsPN show on SMU, would you sell your soul? My answer is ABSOLUTELY NOT.
Again, in light of the article from AOL, I would be concerned that this will come back to hurt/haunt the school and athletics.
Mr. Burke, please look at this. Correct this. You are in control of more than the athletic department. Purdue's reputation is what’s valued the most, this would have far reaching affects into the academic and other realms.
Do what's right AD Burke.
Let's take a look at penalties for third (and fourth) strikes:
Purdue: (3) 10 percent of games; (4) "may be dismissed" with athletic director making decision.
Alabama: (3) one year; (4) dismissal.
Arkansas: (3) 50 percent of games; (4) dismissal.
Auburn: (3) dismissal.
Florida: (3) 20 percent of games; (4) 50 percent of games; (5) dismissal.
Georgia: (3) dismissal.
Kentucky: (3) dismissal.
LSU: (3) one year.
Ole Miss: (3) three games.
Mississippi State: (3) one year; (4) dismissal.
South Carolina: (3) dismissal.
Tennessee: (3) dismissal.
Purdue's policy for recreation drug test failure is more lax than 11 of 12 SEC schools (Vanderbilt's private and doesn't have to disclose) ... and let's be honest, do you think Purdue's policy is tougher than Vanderbilt's? Me either.
very, very disappointing.
Im not trying to rat or start rumors, but after that first post on Plue(didn't actually know about a suspension) I can attest to seeing him buy "blunt wraps" at the local Speedway. I forget his last name too but Arsenio something was dismissed from the team a few years ago after I think 3 or 4 violations in the dorm of drug use too.
Thank you Zlion for this. For the record I emialed Mr. Burke to get his opinion on this matter and these are his exact words in several correspondence....
"Merry Christmas to you as well.
I would suggest you read the policy a bit more closely. It has a number of features designed to alter behavior with progressive consequences. It has been recently reviewed by the National Drug Free Sport organization as well as our legal counsel and Sports Medicine personnel and we feel it is a sound policy. So before you allow a blogger to categorize it perhaps a closer reading is in order.
As always if you would like to speak in person feel free to call me."
Some more harsh toned words from me in response to this bunk...and he writes:
Conclusions reached without reading the policy and without understanding it are suspect. Mr. McMurphy never made contact with me and to the best of my knowledge anyone within the department or University. So to take his article's assessment and adopt it is unwise .
I love your pride for Purdue and despite the harsh tone of your message I know your heart is in the right place.
Enjoy Christmas."
Mr. McMurphy didn't contact you because we know how you treat press that airs Purdue in bad light. He doesn't need your permission to write this article MJB.
So there you have it, straight from the horses mouth. We have a progressive and effective drug policy that has been reviewed by council and sports medicine personnel as well National Drug Free Sport Organization.
Comical bullshit.
Condescension and being talked down to by the purdue athletic dept?? Shocking!
Yes, Ben, you just don't understand....blech.
The policy is black and white. Burke is deflecting.
What I believe he is referring to is toothless counseling and things of that nature that offenders are hit with.
Big deal.
As I said, disappointing.
I agree J Money. Shocking response huh. What WAS shocking that his tort didn't include something about high academic progress among student athletes and the success of the capital improvement projects at Ross Ade and Mackey. I have found that is his typical deflection from any issue at hand. This time he just took the bull head on and said the policy is sound.
Unbelievable.
And for the record...as I indicated in my previous post, my tone was nothing short of harsh. There was no attempt with honey. This was a cupful of vinegar right to the face.
I think maybe when I asked him what else we had to look forward to from our AD, 3 wins on the grid iron next year?...the conversation went south, and quickly.
The underlying problem is Purdue's refusal to treat bloggers like Boiled Sports as potential allies instead of potential enemies. Having an open discussion about this makes the most sense, especially since there are only a handful of Purdue blogs, as opposed to scores of traditional media outlets in the state of Indiana alone. Developing good relationships with Boiled Sports, Hammer and Rails, Jumbo Heroes, etc., is just plain common sense. Sad to say, this is a common mistake made by AD's across the country, and I really hoped Purdue would be more savvy (savvier?) than that. Instead of embracing Bloggers, SID's and AD's act as if they're radioactive.
I was disappointed to hear that Purdue's policy was so weak. It should be changed immediately. It should be more stiff....that's what she said.
So who are the people that are accused of testing positive? Anyone have a cached link to the blog?
This policy is shameful. I for one will be placing at least one letter in The Exponent challenging Burke to explain this. Also, the apparent treatment of the blogger in question, if true, is even worse. Threatening a blogger/reporter/fan just because they said/posted/wrote something you dislike, that makes you look bad is beyond the pale even in the college football world. Purdue is better than this. Is our AD?
I seem to be in the minority here, but if the drugs are not of the "performance-enhancing" (I hate that term so much) variety, then who cares? Do we give athletes breathalyzers too? I'm not a drug user, but I do believe that drug laws (especially regarding marijuana) are too severe. If a guy wants to light up a joint, I don't see how it's any of my business.
Sheesh, really, it looks like you guys are fishing for something. This is such a nonissue. The school has a policy, you don't like it, so what? If the school is consistent with it, so what? I don't care what other schools do. This is a university, not a nanny.
And really, T-Mill, I lost all respect for you when you went all bipolar and called the b-ball team a bunch of cowards when they lost to Minny lat year. You fly off the handle at the smallest thing. You need some self control.
If the school wants to protect itself from the posting of some windbag blogger, so be it. It has every right to. Every person and institution has the right to defend itself from rumor and slander. What T-Mill did was his right, but it was unethical. Especially considering that he put a players name up there. He posted rumor. FROM AN ANONYMOUS EMAIL NO LESS!!
Wow, ad hominem much MrA?
Mr A -- You think we're fishing??
No, just disappointed. As I said.
Post a Comment