What's Happening at LA Tech [merged thread]

[Bigpetunia]

The moderators have the power and the right to end this discussion, but I hope they do not do so...Because we are fans of WCBB, and because we have a ringside seat to so many peripheral issues that affect both the coaches and the players, and, most of all, because the issues being discussed are so important to our mutual understanding of these issues (way beyond the TS and girlfriend matter), the discussion, by its very nature, is really quite healthy.

The central issue being discussed concerns the nature of victimhood, what constitutes consensual relationships, who "earns" the lion's share of the blame in matters such as this one. I submit that this is not simply a semantic matter. One of our fellow posters, sarals24, very articulately makes the underappreciated point that no matter how voracious the appetites of either party in a relationship, that relationship cannot be considered consensual in any traditional sense so long as the power structure going in is hugely tilted one way or the other. She's not talking about legality here, just basic ethics. It does not matter, for example, how much a secretary is googoo-eyed over her boss... any relationship between the two that might ensue is tainted by the non-level nature of the playing field and cannot, therefore, be deemed truly consensual.

I can hear folks rushing to articulate their disagreement, but allow me to illustrate the point by offering another example: I am a retired doctor. Over the long course of my career, I have been witness to many cases of doctor/patient relationships that have crossed the line unethically. By far the most egregious of those involved so-called mental health professionals, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, etc., who violated the most sacred position of trust imaginable by dallying with their vulnerable patients. In such relationships, the fundamental issue of "transference" is always in play (look it up). But transference, and hero worship, is in play in an extremely wide variety of other relationships with uneven power levels...sure, some students may wish to "bang" the professor for a better grade, but these things aren't always about trying to achieve some kind of illusory quid pro quo. Sometimes the professor allows his or her ego to be flattered in ways that, ultimately, cannot be condoned. Between coach and player, c'mon...no semblance of power equity there!

 

[FairView]

Carnac, I agree with you except when it comes to schools and kids, and rapists, serial killers, cop killers, Bernie Madoff, John Wilkes Booth etc etc etc. Let the punishment fit the crime.

John Wilkes Booth and Tyler Summitt were shooting completely different weapons.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

John Wilkes Booth and Tyler Summitt were shooting completely different weapons.

Tisk, tissk, tisssk....

 

[intlzncster]

I want to understand the hypothetical before answering. Who is the mother and is he married to her and does he live in the Bible Belt?

hahaha good point there. Still married to his current wife with a son. Bible belt? dunno about that. Say no, elsewhere.

 

[A10 fan]

The fact that she followed him from Marquette, changes the entire dynamic of the situation. Had all of this happened in one place, I could buy the argument that she may have been coerced. Her following him to LT throws that out the window. He had no power to make her follow him, but she indeed could have forced him to allow her to come.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

hahaha good point there. Still married to his current wife with a son. Bible belt? dunno about that. Say no, elsewhere.

Okay. Just one more question: Is he working in a hardware store, a bank teller or the preacher in his own little church called The Summit of God?

 

[intlzncster]

I can hear folks rushing to articulate their disagreement, but allow me to illustrate the point by offering another example: I am a retired doctor. Over the long course of my career, I have been witness to many cases of doctor/patient relationships that have crossed the line unethically. By far the most egregious of those involved so-called mental health professionals, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, etc., who violated the most sacred position of trust imaginable by dallying with their vulnerable patients. In such relationships, the fundamental issue of "transference" is always in play (look it up). But transference, and hero worship, is in play in an extremely wide variety of other relationships with uneven power levels...sure, some students may wish to "bang" the professor for a better grade, but these things aren't always about trying to achieve some kind of illusory quid pro quo. Sometimes the professor allows his or her ego to be flattered in ways that, ultimately, cannot be condoned. Between coach and player, c'mon...no semblance of power equity there!

Good post.

In reply, I'll offer the same question I did before. What if (and we have no idea either way) the player in question is entrapping Summit into keeping--or even starting--the relationship either by threat or by having a child? She is now the power broker. This could truly be what happened here. We just don't know.

My point is that there is more potential dynamics here that require further information before making a definitive judgement.

 

[CL82]

You don't think, in 7 years time, he could coach his (hypothetical) 7 year old son's team?

So your rehabilitation plan is to wait 7 years and then have him coach rec? That's his way back?

 

[intlzncster]

So your rehabilitation plan is to wait 7 years and then have him coach rec? That's his way back?

I don't have a 'rehabilitation plan'. I'm simply saying it is one way to get back into the game. I bet he could become a men's assistant in a shorter time frame. Only question is, who owes Pat Summitt a favor?

 

[CL82]

I don't have a 'rehabilitation plan'. I'm simply saying it is one way to get back into the game. I bet he could become a men's assistant in a shorter time frame. Only question is, who owes Pat Summitt a favor?

Who knew? I have a ton of rec and travel experience. Coaching woman's basketball will be a cool retirement gig.

 

[intlzncster]

Who knew? I have a ton of rec and travel experience. Coaching woman's basketball will be a cool retirement gig.

Does Pat Summitt owe you a favor?

 

[Sonny44]

If he is removed as spokesperson over this--WoW --what does that say for those who carried on long term affairs and still are govenors, ex presidents, mayors, etc who show their faces over and over on TV??? Or does this only work for Tyler??

Don't you know politicians are above the law.

 

[CL82]

Does Pat Summitt owe you a favor?

Well I've stuck up for her kid in these threads, so yeah, I guess.

 

[UcMiami]

The moderators have the power and the right to end this discussion, but I hope they do not do so...Because we are fans of WCBB, and because we have a ringside seat to so many peripheral issues that affect both the coaches and the players, and, most of all, because the issues being discussed are so important to our mutual understanding of these issues (way beyond the TS and girlfriend matter), the discussion, by its very nature, is really quite healthy.

The central issue being discussed concerns the nature of victimhood, what constitutes consensual relationships, who "earns" the lion's share of the blame in matters such as this one. I submit that this is not simply a semantic matter. One of our fellow posters, sarals24, very articulately makes the underappreciated point that no matter how voracious the appetites of either party in a relationship, that relationship cannot be considered consensual in any traditional sense so long as the power structure going in is hugely tilted one way or the other. She's not talking about legality here, just basic ethics. It does not matter, for example, how much a secretary is googoo-eyed over her boss... any relationship between the two that might ensue is tainted by the non-level nature of the playing field and cannot, therefore, be deemed truly consensual.

I can hear folks rushing to articulate their disagreement, but allow me to illustrate the point by offering another example: I am a retired doctor. Over the long course of my career, I have been witness to many cases of doctor/patient relationships that have crossed the line unethically. By far the most egregious of those involved so-called mental health professionals, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, etc., who violated the most sacred position of trust imaginable by dallying with their vulnerable patients. In such relationships, the fundamental issue of "transference" is always in play (look it up). But transference, and hero worship, is in play in an extremely wide variety of other relationships with uneven power levels...sure, some students may wish to "bang" the professor for a better grade, but these things aren't always about trying to achieve some kind of illusory quid pro quo. Sometimes the professor allows his or her ego to be flattered in ways that, ultimately, cannot be condoned. Between coach and player, c'mon...no semblance of power equity there!

Really good and clearly stated, and I agree that if we keep this on an even keel I would hope we can keep the discussion flowing. I do not sense hostility though we have strong disagreements, and except for a few attempts at humor that may be a little off, it isn't descending to bathroom graffiti levels.
I agree with you and Sarals24 in the rigid line to be drawn, but do see two areas where personal experience can gray the perceptions of most of us:
1. Most of us probably know of relationships that started in obvious power imbalance situations have over long periods of time been very successful and joyous - it is hard to condemn the origin of the relationship given the end result.
2. The reality is that no couple exists in a perfect balance of power and no relationships start in perfect balance, or ever truly achieve a perfect balance. Most of us probably know successful and happy relationships where the power is very imbalanced, but it works for both parties, and who are we to judge.
That is not to excuse the abuse of position (power) in any way, just to state that nothing in other peoples lives is ever completely cut and dried.

What if (and we have no idea either way) the player in question is entrapping Summit into keeping--or even starting--the relationship either by threat or by having a child? She is now the power broker.

I'll just say that it requires an abuse of his position by Tyler initially before she might be able to turn the tables and achieve theoretical power. That first step is huge, and he would have to compound his offenses to become trapped as deeply as he has been if he has in fact been 'trapped'.

The fact that she followed him from Marquette, changes the entire dynamic of the situation. Had all of this happened in one place, I could buy the argument that she may have been coerced. Her following him to LT throws that out the window. He had no power to make her follow him, but she indeed could have forced him to allow her to come.

Two things - we do not know yet if it started at Marquette. And even if it started at Marquette she would not be the first person to possible be coerced to do something wrong including following someone from town to town by a possibly manipulative person - and she didn't just follow him, he provided the inducement of a scholarship for her and her friend, an approximately $100,000 per year sweetener paid for by the tax payers of Louisiana. (I am using possibly in awkward fashion because this is all speculation)