Answer Monday!

Re: Sanchez question

I can't speak for the person who originally asked the question, but what I've heard is that Sanchez was allowed to take finals even though he was suspended, and that people from USC may have had a meeting at the alleged victim's home, perhaps even providing information about her to his attorney. Also something about the use of a fake ID and the name on it, including not ever being punished by the university for underage drinking.

I've heard that through the grapevine, so not sure if that's the case or not, or that's what the person was asking. There's more but this is a good start.

Yeah, I have heard those same things about him too. Go on campus and the dorms and you hear a LOT more things about what he is up to....

Can't help but think there's a little extra animus towards Mark Sanchez on account of his race. It's almost like he does not fit the superficial image of the USC All-American QB so lets make him into a monster for his youthful mistakes. It's not hard to detect this general line of thinking on this forum and others.

"Scott" Wolf on the town with Matt Leinart?!

So does that mean you're really a b-list starlet?

Troyjan&Tonic, the issue I have with what you said is not so much that someone should not have a second chance, but that he should be held accountable for his actions. If you have paid the price for your mistakes, then yes, you should get a second chance. The problem I have with Sanchez is that he was never punished for any of his mistakes or held accountable in any way, other than his reputation being damaged. I do not care what Sanchez's race is, but I care that he has been given a free ride for many of his actions that have not represented USC in a positive light. In that regard, I do not believe he fits the image of a USC QB.

My guess would be that Sanchez is not the only underage drinker on the USC football team, and probably not the only player to be caught doing it by the authorities or the football program. I would say that Sanchez deserves whatever punishment those actions warrant. Unfortuneately, the he said/she said aspect of the case gave more publicity to a minor Fogel getting a Hawaiian driver's license with "McLovin" printed on it storyline.

The vast number of Sanchez antagonists on this Board
seem to think a serial sexual predator is the frontrunner for the starting QB position. The school gave him a free pass because he's a star athlete. Anyone who actually believes the administration, athletic department, or the football program is protecting a sexually violent felon is a hypocrite if they continue to support USC football in any way. (If they do believe this, I will take their 50 yard line seats as I don't believe it.)

I think everyone should pay for their mistakes, but when it comes to Mark Sanchez what are we really talking about here?

The alleged sexual assault? If I thought he was guilty of this, I would be beating the drum louder than anyone. It made me sick to my stomach reading about Jeramy Stevens and how he got away with what was clearly rape at the University of Washington. But I have to trust that both USC and the LA DA did their due diligence and thought the case was without merit. Until I find out otherwise, I'm giving Mark the benefit of the doubt.

As far as the underage drinking? If everyone who drank illegally (read: before they turned 21) was forced to get offline, I dare say there would be absolutely no one on this site to post anything. I challenge anyone here to say they never drank before they were of legal age. (like Mark, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but I'll still be a little suspicious) Was it right of him to have a fake ID? No. Was it smart of him to have a fake ID, since he's a prominent player on the most prominent team in America? No. Do hundreds of thousands of teenagers across the country drink illegally every day? Absolutely! When I was 18, 19 20, I never had an illegal ID, but that's because I was like Stephen Curry (only white). I looked 12, and nobody would have believed me.

I find it really hard to believe that there is truly righteous indignation from the masses regarding Mark's drinking. I think people are just using it as an excuse to skewer a guy they don't like. I mean seriously, underage drinking? Is that all you got?

Let's see - how about the fact that Sanchez lied on the record to the LA Times about videotaped evidence against him? He was confronted about it and was caught lying? How about how he was detained by DPS for vandalizing a fraternity house? How about when he got in a brawl and the sheriff came in?

Better yet, why did the DA's office never say that he was innocent on his rape accusations but only that they could not guarantee a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, so that was the reason they would not proceed with the charges? They never said the accusations were without merit.

But if you want to go based on the "Pete Carroll knows best" argument - how do you justify that Pete offered a scholarship to Frostee Rucker after had Colorado State expelled him for raping a student? How about how he was arrested as a 13 year old for raping an 11 year old girl? There was clearly history there when he transferred to USC, so did it come as a surprise when Rucker was arrested for assaulting a woman at USC?

Is it a coincidence that Rucker and Sanchez had the same UCLA grad as their attorney?

Makes you think, doesn't it?

Just to clear one thing up. Although Mark Sanchez was suspended from the football team, he was allowed to attend class and take finals. Student affairs did not suspend him from classes. I believe he took at least one final at a different time than the rest of the class.

My friend's cousin's best friend said that he heard Mark Sanchez is mean to kids and hates pets.

Photographic evidence of Matt Leinart and Scott Wolf in Arizona this past weekend:

http://www.thedirty.com/?p=19356

Trojan RAB said:

"My friend's cousin's best friend said that he heard Mark Sanchez is mean to kids and hates pets."

As long as we're talking *cats*, that's alright with me.

In all seriousness, obviously, each Trojan has to find his or her own way in the Sanchez matter. I will reiterate that the righteous indignation expressed by some on this board is literally unparalleled elsewhere. Presumably, the mood took hold here during the time of the incident, and has never waned.

I have every bit of sympathy for the young woman in question. At a bare minimum, the situation was deeply unfair to her.

But, at the end of the day, I'm with those who say that I have to trust that USC made what they thought to be the best decision in keeping Mark a part of the Trojan family. In *most* cases of date rape on college campuses, of which I'm aware, if there's any doubt, the *benefit of the doubt* is given to the young woman.

It would have been truly heartless -- and unthinkable, in my mind -- for the University to have suspected the worst of Mark, and to have kept him on.

thegoodfight:

Based on your own comments, how do you justify Pete Carroll giving a scholarship to Frostee Rucker AFTER he had been expelled by Colorado State for raping a student? He was then arrested for assaulting a young woman while he was at SC. Yet he was allowed to enroll at USC and remain at USC, so this whole "giving the benefit of the doubt" routine can only go so far. As the person above quite correctly pointed out the "Pete Carroll knows best" argument is very flawed.

On a side note, I do find it interesting that Rucker and Sanchez had the same attorney in their sexual assault cases.

EVK Room 323,

Here's my answer to your question, which I made in response to you on the ad nauseum thread, from the weekend.

Regards.

thegoodfight said:
EVK Room 323 said:

"As someone mentioned before, Carroll offered a scholarship to Frostee Rucker AFTER he was expelled from Colorado State for raping a student, and then he was arrested for an assault against a woman at SC, too. So I doubt the fact that he has allowed Sanchez to remain at SC means that he is innocent of anything. Also, as was pointed out, Rucker and Sanchez had the same attorney. There is history here to suggest Carroll turns a blind eye to legal troubles."

If this is truly how you feel, then I would ask again, how can you, in good conscience, remain a fan of the program?

I guess, of course, I should first ask: are you an SC fan/alum?

But if what you say about Pete Carroll is true -- that, in matters of football, he is essentially amoral -- then it means he is a pretty bad guy, himself. Right?

Unless, of course, at the end of the day, Pete knows more about *either* the Rucker matter *or* the Sanchez matter, than you or me. Which, I'm thinking, is a pretty d*mn safe bet.

It is because I am a Trojan that I speak out against Sanchez and his behavior. Yes, I support my alma mater, but does not mean that I will support anyone who plays football or represents the university if I believe they do not represent the ideals of the institution. Pete Carroll is a good football coach, but he is notorious for being very lenient on his players' off the field actions. The Frostee Rucker transfer was unforgivable. He had no business ever being at SC in the first place, so who is to blame when he was subsequently arrested again? The signs were all there.

For those of you who are also ready, apparently, to think the worst of Frostee Rucker, what do you think about the following story?

http://www.bengals.com/news/news.asp?story_id=6611

Please cut and paste this into your browsers, read it, and see if this story comports with your image of Rucker.

Great link, thegoodfight. It puts into perspective that we are talking about young adults who deserve a second chance to make good. I read a lot of negative innuendo and presumption regarding these off-field "incidents", but I trust Pete and staff's judgement to give a second chance to certain kids while still maintaining a high standard of representation for the university. Given our high profile status and La-La-land location, I believe that Pete is running the program about as clean as you possibly can while still competing for national championships every year. The "Book-em" Horns of U Texas are a good example of what a loose program would look like with 8-10 arrests every off-season. My kudos to the football and athletic dept staff, and of course, PC. Viva la Sanchez!

Or you can read this non-PR link about Rucker:

https://rebuildingyear.wordpress.com/2006/07/11/frostee-the-rape-man/

Petersen said:
Or you can read this non-PR link about Rucker:

https://rebuildingyear.wordpress.com/2006/07/11/frostee-the-rape-man/

Absolutely. Now *that's* surely a worthy enterprise.

Some random blogger who chooses to give Frostee Rucker the worthy sobriquet "Frostee the Rapeman"!! Do you suppose its possible such a person is revealing a bias? If so, is he a pro-USC guy, or an anti-USC guy?

For that matter, are *you* a pro-USC guy?

As the Bengal piece notes, at this point in his NFL tenure, Frostee Rucker is more or less an also-ran. I myself can't imagine what substantial PR rewards came for Rucker -- or, for that matter, the Bengals organization -- through the piece I posted.

I guess my point was -- which thankfully, at least one poster got -- human beings are complex. Beyond questions of whether or not Frostee Rucker is the monster you apparently believe him to be, we witness in the Bengals story a first-hand account of the selflessness, kindness, and potential for growth of which Rucker is capable.

Once again opening myself up to personal attacks through a personal revelation here, I'll go ahead and mention that I happen to make my living as a screenwriter. Interestingly, on the monster-thread from the weekend, one of the more self-righteous posters suggested how important it was to know something about "the human psyche" in order to empathize with the young woman Mark Sanchez was alleged to have assaulted.

Every day of my life, I sit down and work on -- and through -- my notions of "the human psyche." One of the first -- and I still think most important -- observations one can make has to do with the complexity -- and frequent paradoxical nature -- of human behavior.

*Everyone* does a thing or two in this life for which they would like to have a do-over. Did you ever bounce a check? Did you ever cheat on your taxes? Cheat on your girlfriend or your wife?

It's called being human.

Consider it for a moment and you'll probably agree that human redemption is one of the most common themes in literature and film. Guess why.

At the end of the day, we *all* falter. We *all* fail. We *all* sometimes come up short when we'd rather have persevered.

Good link and good stuff, Good Fight.

Fight On!