Posted on 12/14/2013 6:33:19 PM PST by parksstp
Florida State quarterback Jameis Winston has won the 2013 Heisman Trophy.
Winston is only the second redshirt freshman to win the award after Texas A&M QB Johnny Manziel was handed the trophy as a redshirt freshman last year. Winston is the third player in school history to earn the distinction, following former Seminole QBs Charlie Ward ('93) and Chris Weinke ('€™00).
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.foxsports.com ...
Cutcliffe’s miracle at Duke is astonishing. It’s been building for five years, and this year they really hit a critical mass of improvement. They’re actually fast at some positions, scored on kick returns and pick sixes and the like, are extremely well conditioned, and led the nation in plus/minus in fourth quarters, and November was their best month. The irony is, their passing offense wasn’t quite as good this year as it normally is under Cut, their starting QB out half the season and slow to return to form, etc, and yet they still went 10-2, and would appear to be in line to have an even better team next year.
All of this is just upside down. Duke fast and well conditioned? A Duke running back pulling away from Miami defensive backs in the fourth quarter? Beam me up Scotty.
Now, the way he has recruited at Duke would not have worked at UT….IMO. He’s taken the “misfit toys” and rebuilt their bodies and moved them around positionally - and it’s worked for Duke.
"BUT - What if there is absolutely no truth to the accusations? Ruh Roh, you hadn’t even let that thought cross your mind, had you."
I know you had your ties to the Newt campaign, so I wouldn't expect you to be familiar with the concept, but out here in the real world there are people in business, the clergy, the military and pretty much every other walk of life that deal with a little concept called the "appearance of impropriety." Since you're obviously unfamiliar with it and how it applies, I'll take a bit of my Sunday morning to explain it to you.
Sometimes it is not enough for people of conscience to be morally correct, but when people are put in certain positions of trust and/or honor, they need to ensure that their behavior is not only beyond reproach, but that they make an extra, concerted effort to avoid tainting the position with perfectly legitimate behavior that might otherwise reflect poorly upon the position or the confidence they hold. Sometimes, things are bigger than one's self, and to service them properly one must go above and beyond one's own personal standards and live up to an even higher expectation. Part of this country's problem right now is people equating that which is legal with that which is ethical or moral. "It's perfectly legal" is a great excuse for much that is entirely unethical or unseemly, or gives off that appearance. In this case I would aver that the Heisman voters dropped the ball (pun intended), but Winston could have preserved much of the award's mystique and prestige simply by voluntarily withdrawing his name.
"Meanwhile, if in a civil suit or whatever more evidence comes to light, which might happen by the way, then the award will be taken from him post facto. Thus him getting the award now is the appropriate result, based on what is known."
So go ahead and give him the award without knowing all the facts...that's essentially what you're saying. Maybe next weekend I can teach you about the concept of "due diligence."
Joe, I’m sorry you don’t understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty. The facts in this case, as they are known, indicate that a young lady who brags on social media about chasing cleats….chased and caught her cleat….Jamies Winston. She apparenlty caught at least one other dude for sex that same night.
She then lied about being drunk to the cops, made a lot of inconsistent claims and charges, and then had a crazy relative bring the case back to life once that cleat became nationally famous.
So apparently you think it’s the onus of the Heisman committee to do more due diligence than that, simply so you won’t be offended by their award. That’s just absurd and stupid. And yet, you hide your absurdity behind your pharisee robe of phony self righteousness.
It is YOU sir who are guilty of the impropriety of prejudgment in a situation you know nothing about, and apparently have spent little time to research, since doing so would rip your high horse right out from under you. So climb down off your high horse …..slowly podner……you are way up there…..and a quick fall would hurt.
Meanwhile, if in the course of due diligence, the known facts indicate that this predatory vixen was somehow not in character on this particular night, and was for some reason not chasing cleats this particular night….and was only re- energized in her cleat chasing pursuits with the help of a date rape drug…or something similar….then that would change everything. And at that time, The Heisman committee…who are not required to be attorneys, let alone sayers and seers and prophets….can easily and appropriately reverse their decision.
But to assume enough guilt to make this appropriate now puts you in the un American camp of prejudgement.
Apparently I understand it better than you. It applies to the legal system, and not to private organizations or administrative proceedings.
And I'm going to stay right here on my high horse, knowing that if I was offered an award by a civic or professional organization, or appointed to an office of special trust and responsibility, and my name came under a cloud of suspicion that would reflect discredit upon said honor or office, I would voluntarily ask to be withdrawn from consideration until such time as any ambiguity or doubt had been removed, even if I knew all along, I was innocent of said impropriety.
An award or an office bestowed by an organization are bigger than, and do not belong exclusively to, the person to whom they are entrusted.
I have the utmost respect for the principles of American jurisprudence to include standards of proof, the admissibility of evidence, and innocence until proven guilty; I work within the system every day and firmly believe those principles should be applied within that system. They do not apply to judgments and decisions made by private organizations.
Personally, our nation suffers from an aversion to "judgmentalism," with people who would never otherwise touch a Bible, incorrectly citing Matthew 7:1. The standard put forth therein simply advises that on judge only by the same standards one would expect to be judged by. There's no high horse involved there. I've already stated (repeatedly) on this thread what I believed Winston should have done, and if I were in his shoes, I would have done just that. Namely, ask for my name to be withdrawn from consideration for this year.
I understand that the ‘innocent until’ applies to the legal system only, and I fully anticipated you would say this…..but this doesn’t change the fact that you have convicted him and you are too obtuse, stupid, ignorant, or have such poor reading comprehension that you have never ever ever ever answered my last scenario…because YOU CANNOT. YOU HAVE CONVICTED him of something in your tiny mind……
And again, the Heisman is NOT a civic award. And it CAN be redacted. But I fully am calling total bullsh-t on the fact that you would, in the same situation, turn down this award. BS BS BS BS BS BS.
You are just like a liberal….giving away other people’s award like they give away other peoples money…..all because you have a better understanding of who should get the award than the very committee themselves.
but again….answer the cleat chaser scenario, or you have zero standing here .
Thank you for the compliment, darling. I am not the only lady who cares deeply about you. We are fortunate women, privileged to know and to love a gentleman of superior intellect, profound wisdom, and inner security, whose sophistication, kindness and wealth of corporeal and spiritual gifts — fueled by passion, but, also, a genuine humility — make him undeniably wonderful.
I’m sorry if my public frankness embarrasses you. I know that you always fight capably and win your own battles. But I will not sit back and ignore untruths written, even in the meanest jest, about those whom I love and cherish.
Today is Gaudete Sunday, dear Joe! Please look in your email!
I have no authority whatsoever to convict anybody of anything. The notion that you think I do, really demonstrates who the obtuse one is (hint: it isn't me).
I've formed judgments and opinions, certainly, and they are formulated strictly on the standards I would fully expect to apply to myself, and to have others apply to me were I in Winston's cleats. Apparently I hold (or more correctly, "held") the Heisman in higher esteem and regard than its own voting body and its most recent recipient. Holding high standards can be a bitch sometimes, especially when you have to defend them to people who are either incapable of, or merely too lazy to understand them.
The Heisman standards include the words, "integrity and excellence." Clearly Winston is your gold standard for what passes for integrity and excellence; hope you can live up to it. Personally, I'm going to aim a little bit higher.
"And FTR Joe, your ignorance of the subject indicates you indeed have never been pursued by the fairer sex, unless perhaps a vice cop," making the clear insinuation that you were a lady of low character.
Of course, I would not expect an apology from him as he's made it abundantly clear on this thread what kind of men he deems worthy of being presented awards for integrity.
Nodoby believes you would turn down the Heisman in this situation….nodoby…..undercuts your entire cred on this.
And you have convicted him in your mind, because short of that, you wouldn’t even think about the notion of him recusing himself. You need to learn to connect some logical dots dude…..
And as for reading into the Heisman some civic things that just are not there anymore…yes, you do - but the Heisman committee does not..and its THEIR award, not yours.
And you are misinterpreting the “intregity” part of the engraving on the award….that relates to the integrity of the game…ie…no doping, no cheating on the fielld….it’s not a Church award and never has been.
I'm not sure who "nodoby" is, but yes, I would ask my name to be withdrawn from consideration in the first place so I wouldn't have to turn it down.
You are context illiterate…..very cute here……who’s next, mama?
"And FTR Joe, your ignorance of the subject indicates you indeed have never been pursued by the fairer sex, unless perhaps a vice cop,"
Clearly that insinuates that any member of the fairer sex who has pursued me is a prostitute. You're the one that made the insinuation. I'd tell you to man up and apologize to the lady and fellow FReeper, but I honestly don't think you have it in you, and I doubt floralamiss is going to hold her breath waiting for it.
I’m sorry if my public frankness embarrasses you. I know that you always fight capably and win your own battles. But I will not sit back and ignore untruths written, even in the meanest jest, about those whom I love and cherish.
Yes, he is undeniably wonderful, especially in post 82, where he claimed my moma chased him sexually…..yes, those spiritual gifts, that inner security, that sophisitication, fueld by passion…yes yes yes…..all of those things when he drug my mother into this. Makes you proud now. Yes, you are fortunate indeed. I guess my mama missed out on being so fortunate, since his clear indication, with all of his inner security, is that he turned my mama down. Too bad. Again, see post 82…..enjoy!
bazinga…..
Usually it's considered common courtesy to include a FReeper in the "to:" line when you comment on him or her in a post to another freeper, but your level of civility has already been noted. And as we discussed already, my retort to your comment was just that...me meeting you on the ground you chose.
No, once again the english language vexes you.
This would only applies to her if she chased you in that particular manner….an insinuation I would NEVER make….and yet, one you just did.
But that’s really an infantile response…….taking things out of context, which a triple digit IQ would have demonstrated….
Please stop.
Again, you be vexed by english….
I was very clearly in context talking about any women who chased you sexually in the general sense of one night stands….fully assuming that your bride would not be part of that universe. So I was really excluding her, while you were very specifically including my mom as one who did.
You sir have no standing here atall…..
per your request, I will……but I was just accused of what he actually did…..
but per your rquest….done.
Offered like a True Lady. Well and truly stated, m’Lady.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.