• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

granger or brown??

F

flipper

New member
penalties fit the crime?

ray brown who keeps his schloarship, gets to practice with the team but can't play for a year for testing positive for drugs..or

danny granger, who had to pay his own way and couldn't play for a year for talking to duane broussard.

which punishment was harsher for their rule violation?
 
Re: granger or brown??

flipper said:
penalties fit the crime?

ray brown who keeps his schloarship, gets to practice with the team but can't play for a year for testing positive for drugs..or

danny granger, who had to pay his own way and couldn't play for a year for talking to duane broussard.

which punishment was harsher for their rule violation?
Click to expand...

Something eating at me on this comparison is.... Bradley held Granger back from playing for talking with DB.

IMO, if the NCAA made the final decision on DG's eligibilty (and NOT Bradley), I would expect they would have granted his release and he would have played right away.
 
the bottom line is granger got a harsher penalty because bu didn't want him to transfer than ray brown did for testing positive for drugs,

granger not only had to sit out a year of basketball,but had to pay for a year of schooling.ray gets his schooling paid for and gets to practice with his team. seems weird that granger got a harsher penalty than brown.
 
Maybe it's just me, but they both broke rules that they did or at least should have known about, both of which had set penalties. Whether or not the punishments for each seperate offense are comparable doesn't matter. It's a rule. It has a set punishment. You know about. Don't break it or else pay the consequences.
 
Re: granger or brown??

flipper said:
danny granger, who had to pay his own way and couldn't play for a year for talking to duane broussard.
Click to expand...

Wait just a minute...this isn't a true statement at all!

Danny Granger was NOT penalized in any way for talking to the New Mexico staff, but the New Mexico coaches were.
Danny Granger sat out one year exactly as proscribed by the NCAA for all players transferring to a D-I program from another four year school.
The reason he had to pay his own way is because Danny had already accepted and received a scholarship to Bradley, and so he cannot get a second one from UNM.
 
Flipper- Please, stop it. Your rants here and on the PJ Star board about Danny Granger's punishment being more severe than Ray Brown's is ridiculous. You are not fooling anyone with your hyperbolic posts, and your obvious anti-Bradley and anti-Jim Les bias continually shows through.

Danny Granger chose to leave Bradley in the middle of a season, after illegal contact with the coach of another school. He chose to transfer to that school, without even asking Bradley for his release. The NCAA rules are quite clear- he has to obtain a release from Bradley, before he can receive a scholarship at New Mexico. He chose to do it the way he did, knowing he would lose a year of eligibility and have to pay his own way. Bradley would have given him the release if he would have just sought it properly, but he chose to try to screw Bradley. Remember, Danny Granger, in a completely unprecedented move, and with the help of Ritchie McKay and the people at New Mexico, called a press conference just for the purpose of ripping Bradley, Jim Les, Ken Kavanagh, and his entire Bradley experience. He referred to his treatment by Bradley as being "treated like a slave", and accused Les of threatening him and being abusive.
http://www.dailylobo.com/media/stor...te200607231047&sourcedomain=www.dailylobo.com

Note (bottom line of article) that this outrageous Bradley-bashing press conference was held 1 week before he appealed for his release from his scholarship!

You will not find another example of a college player transferring with proven tampering, and then holding a press conference just to rip his former school and coaches, but if it ever did happen, I'll bet you would find that the former school would not be enthusiastic about giving the kid his release. Granger is 100% responsible for his plight of having to pay for his first year at UNM. He was not "penalized", but rather simply had to abide by long-standing NCAA regulations.

I simply don't grasp the attempt to compare these 2 events. Ray is being severely punished for what most people would consider a minor transgression. He has remained loyal to Bradley. Danny Granger was a priviledged scholarship athlete at Bradley, but chose to leave knowing he had not yet been released from his scholarship. He tried to screw Bradley and then expected mercy from them. His fate of having to pay for his own way his first year at UNM is entirely his own doing.
 
Da Coach said:
Flipper- Please, stop it. Your rants here and on the PJ Star board about Danny Granger's punishment being more severe than Ray Brown's is ridiculous. You are not fooling anyone with your hyperbolic posts, and your obvious anti-Bradley and anti-Jim Les bias continually shows through.
Click to expand...


what and the heck are you posting about? :roll: because i have opinion that is different than yours i am anti-bradley and anti jim les. you are ridiculous. i have went to bradley for three years and have been a bradley fan my entire life as i grew up in the area. i am entering my senior year at bradley. who are you to question my loyalty to bradley university? i don't know you and you don't me. but you sound like one of the grey hairs who have little tolerance for anyone with a differnt opinion or outlook than theirs.kinda of know-it-all with little tolerance.


my take is different than yours on ray brown and danny granger. is this what this board about, controling opinons.

the facts are facts. granger had to sit out a year and pay for his own schooling.

brown has to sit out a year and gets to practice with the team with his schooling getting paid for.

you can't see the difference? if not, so be it. i have a choice. i will continue to post what i want and where i want. you have a choice. believe what you want to believe and read want you want.

it is good to live is country with the first ammendment and choices.don't you agree,da coach?
 
BradleyBrave said:
Flipper, were you high when you tried to compare these two incidents? They have absolutely nothing in common.
Click to expand...


i am not comparing the two incidents but comparing the punishment(consequences) on two players actions. one choose to do drugs while the other choose to transfer. the incidents are not related. i understand that. i just thought it was interesting from a players standpoint what the consequences were for two differemt players for actions that they chose. it is that simple. i am not trying to make a federal case out it. gosh this is a message board, not a court of law with a judge and
jury.

one question, is having a few beers called getting high or does that mean just smoking pot? :lol:
 
flipper said:
i am not comparing the two incidents but comparing the punishment(consequences) on two players actions. one choose to do drugs while the other choose to transfer. the incidents are not related. i understand that. i just thought it was interesting from a players standpoint what the consequences were for two differemt players for actions that they chose. it is that simple. i am not trying to make a federal case out it. gosh this is a message board, not a court of law with a judge and
jury.

one question, is having a few beers called getting high or does that mean just smoking pot? :lol:
Click to expand...

flip, the thing is, you cant compare the punishments due to the fact that what they are being forced to sit out for are so different. ray's was a dumb mistake where as granger just comes off as a p.o.s. a-hole
 
ok. i understand. no big deal. frankly my main issue with the granger situation had nothing to do him personally. it has to do with the ncaa. same with ray.

when a coach leaves that recruited a player, that player should be able to transfer without sitting out. if a coach can move so should a player. 1 year for smoking pot is too harsh.

with granger though, if a player doesn't want to be at bradley, doesn't want to play for coach les and doesn't want to be on the team. let hm go and move on.bu wasted too much time and energy dealing with the granger issue and the ncca that could have been used in a productive manner.

that's it. i am done. didn't mean to upset the applecart. 8)
 
One thing almost everyone agrees on....Flipper, even bb Fan on the other board, and most knowledgable basketball people, that the whole year of suspension/ineligibility is an excessive and unfair penalty.

None the less, that's what penalty is due, so BU can only bite the bullet.

In the end I think people will look back in a few years and note how well and how admirably Bradley did considering all the adverse NCAA rulings.

Bradley was treated unfairly when other schools tampered with our players and got off almost scot-free.

Bradley was treated unfairly when DRuff got a passing score on his ACT and was still disallowed to play his freshman year.

Bradley was treated unfairly when they came digging at the beckoning of a disgruntled complainer, and still hit POB and WF with stiff penalties even though BU self reported and it was all re-paid.

Bradlley (and RB) is again getting a very unfairly stiff penalty,
but I believe the Braves will be better than the 7th place they are being picked.
I predicted Bradley would contend for the title last year and I think they'll be above the break even point this year.
 
hope your right t. you certainly got the last laugh with many bu fans who wanted to fire coach les in feburary of this year. :wink:
 
flipper said:
one question, is having a few beers called getting high or does that mean just smoking pot? :lol:
Click to expand...

In a Doris Day flick (Pillow Talk), there is a reference to 'getting high' by an elevator operator to a cleaning lady (for D Day) that drank all the time.

I'd say 'getting high' refers in this day and age as smoking pot - not getting pickled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top