Social media a way of life for UConn football coaches (Fuller)

[huskymedic]

Social media a way of life for UConn football coaches

 

[whaler11]

@randyedsall Nobody knows you better than you, except maybe yourself - unknown

 

[Chief00]

Chief is a big liberal in the classical sense, who believes in freedom of speech. I don’t believe in blackballing someone because Randy doesn’t approve of what they tweet. Randy should support their freedom to tweet whatever they want (unless truely extremely hateful). Who cares if Randy agrees?

 

[Stainmaster]

Chief is a big liberal in the classical sense, who believes in freedom of speech. I don’t believe in blackballing someone because Randy doesn’t approve of what they tweet. Randy should support their freedom to tweet whatever they want (unless truely extremely hateful). Who cares if Randy agrees?

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense, approve of the free market reacting to someone's words/actions, increasing or lowering that someone's value in the process?

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense who believes in freedom, also support an individual coach's freedom to set his own criteria for which prospects he recruits, once again letting the market (whether or not that coach remains employed) determine whether or not those criteria are good?

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense who seems to be very concerned with rights, understand that the 1st Amendment text concerning "freedom of speech" refers to government suppression of speech? These recruits are still free to tweet whatever they want regardless of whether or not Randy recruits them; nobody (much less an agent of the state) is forcibly stifling their speech.

#CasualConstitutionalTheorist

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

Chief is a big liberal in the classical sense, who believes in freedom of speech. I don’t believe in blackballing someone because Randy doesn’t approve of what they tweet. Randy should support their freedom to tweet whatever they want (unless truely extremely hateful). Who cares if Randy agrees?

Nobody's being blackballed. They just won't go to UCONN.

Freedom of speech just says they can't be put in jail for their words....it doesn't say anything about their school, coaches, bosses, etc... liking it. It also doesn't protect them from repercussions from that boss/school/coach.

It's the kid's right to post whatever he wants and not be punished by the government (minus threats), and it's the coaches/program's right to think that it doesn't align with what the program/school stands for, and take whatever they think is the appropriate action....that's their right.

 

[uconnphil2016]

There are very few things a talented player could tweet that would make me think we shouldn’t take them. We don’t need RKGs

 

[Chief00]

Nobody's being blackballed. They just won't go to UCONN.

Freedom of speech just says they can't be put in jail for their words....it doesn't say anything about their school, coaches, bosses, etc... liking it. It also doesn't protect them from repercussions from that boss/school/coach.

It's the kid's right to post whatever he wants and not be punished by the government (minus threats), and it's the coaches/program's right to think that it doesn't align with what the program/school stands for, and take whatever they think is the appropriate action....that's their right.

A school should reflect the freedoms in the Constitution. For example, a fair admission process to all demographic groups, a tolerance for difference ideas and yes a respect for someone's constitutional freedom of speech.
I couldn’t disagree more with your post. UConn is a PUBLIC institution NOT a private association. A coach’s or a professor’s speech preference should not impact admission to the university or recruitment to a sports team.
Reading your post, you seem to yearn for a fascist state. How sad.

 

[huskymedic]

He’s not unique: Social media sleuthing just a part of today's recruiting for college coaches: 'You rely on the resources you have and your intuition'

>>“You’d love to be able to have a private investigator on staff and be able to do background checks on every player you have, (on) everything.” Alas, Fleck said, “you’re not allowed to do that.”

So coaches and their support staffs are left to become amateur detectives, especially during recruiting, which now includes the essential task of mining players’ social media accounts looking for bombshells.<<

>>College coaches frequently emphasize their efforts to educate players on social media etiquette. But before they get on campus, coaches must monitor recruits’ online lives closer than ever.

It’s common to hear coaches talk about attempting to avoid recruits with poor character, but they also don’t want a public-relations disaster damaging the university’s reputation.<<

 

[Stainmaster]

A school should reflect the freedoms in the Constitution. For example, a fair admission process to all demographic groups, a tolerance for difference ideas and yes a respect for someone's constitutional freedom of speech.
I couldn’t disagree more with your post. UConn is a PUBLIC institution NOT a private association. A coach’s or a professor’s speech preference should not impact admission to the university or recruitment to a sports team.
Reading your post, you seem to yearn for a fascist state. How sad.

Once again: nobody's constitutional right to free speech is being abridged here. There is absolutely nothing fascist about a college coach using subjective criteria to determine which players he recruits.

It seems like your proposed solution is to restrict the coach's individual freedom through top-down institutional control. That's not a smart position to take when you're trying to tar those who disagree with you as fascist. Speaking of which, it is apparent to everyone here that you yourself are wholly incapable of the "tolerance for different ideas" you claim to support. Anyone who disagrees with you here is immediately branded a "casual fan" who doesn't understand the game, a "lightweight," a product of indoctrination by "Marxist professors," or a "fascist." This is called an ad hominem logical phallacy, and it makes your already shaky argument look even worse. Your logical fallacy is ad hominem

I recognize that your massive ego prevents you from ever admitting that you are wrong or don't know something, but I will say this anyway; your posts in this thread show that you do not know the meaning of the terms "freedom of speech," "classical liberal" or "fascist." I would strongly suggest doing some reading, or perhaps auditing a class at your local college or law school if you are able to do so.

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

A school should reflect the freedoms in the Constitution. For example, a fair admission process to all demographic groups, a tolerance for difference ideas and yes a respect for someone's constitutional freedom of speech.
I couldn’t disagree more with your post. UConn is a PUBLIC institution NOT a private association. A coach’s or a professor’s speech preference should not impact admission to the university or recruitment to a sports team.
Reading your post, you seem to yearn for a fascist state. How sad.

Public yes, but that doesn't mean anyone can just walk in there and be a student. You have to meet certain criteria of the school's choosing. In your scenario, a C- student could just sign up for UCONN med school whenever they wanted. Who cares if they're not smart enough....FREEDOM ! How about a prospective student with multiple violent felonies on his record ? FREEDOM ? How about someone who just doesn't feel like paying tuition ? Still Freedom ??? Now we have a school full of violent idiot doctors running around killing patients, either with bad diagnoses, or just beating them to death (because, again, violent felons are accepted now), and if that wasn't bad enough....they're not even paying for the education they're apparently 'entitled' to (you know....because of the freedom). Doesn't seem like a successful institution.

The world has rules. It's not fascism (you should google that word by the way), it's reality. Otherwise we would have chaos.

 

[Buffett10]

A school should reflect the freedoms in the Constitution. For example, a fair admission process to all demographic groups, a tolerance for difference ideas and yes a respect for someone's constitutional freedom of speech.
I couldn’t disagree more with your post. UConn is a PUBLIC institution NOT a private association. A coach’s or a professor’s speech preference should not impact admission to the university or recruitment to a sports team.
Reading your post, you seem to yearn for a fascist state. How sad.

Coaches want players/ prospective players to represent their organizations a certain way and if they don't then they won't be apart of the organization. It's not that hard of a subject to understand lol.

 

[uconndogs]

Social media is just an extension of how you represent yourself, much like an interview. It will reflect on folks positively or negatively with the corresponding consequences.

How this thread got to first amendment rights stretches the imagination.

 

[CL82]

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense, approve of the free market reacting to someone's words/actions, increasing or lowering that someone's value in the process?

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense who believes in freedom, also support an individual coach's freedom to set his own criteria for which prospects he recruits, once again letting the market (whether or not that coach remains employed) determine whether or not those criteria are good?

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense who seems to be very concerned with rights, understand that the 1st Amendment text concerning "freedom of speech" refers to government suppression of speech? These recruits are still free to tweet whatever they want regardless of whether or not Randy recruits them; nobody (much less an agent of the state) is forcibly stifling their speech.

#CasualConstitutionalTheorist

"Um, I don't think those two concepts go together..."
"Don't stop him, he's on a roll."​

 

[BlueandOG]

Social media is just an extension of how you represent yourself, much like an interview. It will reflect on folks positively or negatively with the corresponding consequences.

How this thread got to first amendment rights stretches the imagination.

Agreed! Walter, this is not a first amendment thing, man.

 

[storrsroars]

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense, approve of the free market reacting to someone's words/actions, increasing or lowering that someone's value in the process?

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense who believes in freedom, also support an individual coach's freedom to set his own criteria for which prospects he recruits, once again letting the market (whether or not that coach remains employed) determine whether or not those criteria are good?

Shouldn't Chief, the big liberal in the classical sense who seems to be very concerned with rights, understand that the 1st Amendment text concerning "freedom of speech" refers to government suppression of speech? These recruits are still free to tweet whatever they want regardless of whether or not Randy recruits them; nobody (much less an agent of the state) is forcibly stifling their speech.

#CasualConstitutionalTheorist

Spoken like a true Spackler Classical Liberal!

 

[HuskyHawk]

The first amendment and freedom of speech are not really relevant here. However, I would point out that UConn is the government, and the 1st amendment applies to it via the 14th. It's ability to limit speech of students or coaches is limited by the Constitution.

The larger point is that while I think it is ok for Randy to stay away from kids who may be problems for him or the program (criminal activity, drug use, other questionable behavior), he shouldn't be turning down recruits lightly, or based on some political litmus test.

 

[Stainmaster]

The first amendment and freedom of speech are not really relevant here. However, I would point out that UConn is the government, and the 1st amendment applies to it via the 14th. It's ability to limit speech of students or coaches is limited by the Constitution.

The larger point is that while I think it is ok for Randy to stay away from kids who may be problems for him or the program (criminal activity, drug use, other questionable behavior), he shouldn't be turning down recruits lightly, or based on some political litmus test.

I can almost guarantee you that social media activity Randy is referring to has nothing to do with a prospect’s political views.

Randy’s coaching staff consists of people whose political views are both very similar to and very different from his, as is the case with the actual roster. Anyone who saw “politics” in what he said is applying their own way of looking at the world to a completely separate person.

 

[Exit 4]

Yeah, I pretty much guarantee Edsall is not giving one iota to political views expressed by prospects. Its about the usual stuff which pretty much boils down to character and/or your passion for football and the effort FBS football requires. The staff also cannot ignore when kids seem to expression much more interest in another program.

 

[Scrutiner]

Don't let them get you down, Chief. Those questioning your grasp of phallism just isn't fair.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I can almost guarantee you that social media activity Randy is referring to has nothing to do with a prospect’s political views.

Randy’s coaching staff consists of people whose political views are both very similar to and very different from his, as is the case with the actual roster. Anyone who saw “politics” in what he said is applying their own way of looking at the world to a completely separate person.

Yeah, I pretty much guarantee Edsall is not giving one iota to political views expressed by prospects. Its about the usual stuff which pretty much boils down to character and/or your passion for football and the effort FBS football requires. The staff also cannot ignore when kids seem to expression much more interest in another program.

Good. Corey's comment could certainly be read differently, which is where my comment came from, not "my own way of looking at the world".

 

[storrsroars]

Good. Corey's comment could certainly be read differently, which is where my comment came from, not "my own way of looking at the world".

I didn't see anything remotely touching on "political" in Corey's comments. In the other link, Scott Frost mentions "guns" without any modifiers, so not sure what that's about.

 

[TRest]

Agreed! Walter, this is not a first amendment thing, man.

chief is Walter?

 

[Fishy]

I’m against anything that makes an already small pool of potential recruits even smaller.

Recruit prisons if you must, just stop giving up eight touchdowns a game.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Spoken like a true Spackler Classical Liberal!

Blasphemy.

 

[Stainmaster]

Nice to see Carl has taken a brief break from training exercises to come discuss football with us.