Walking Boot of Doom

They might not be liars, but they clearly have the ability to be absolutely and completely wrong.

How many times do you think the Langfords have accompanied Romeo to Indiana? It's all good. We won't know anything till spring anyway.

Recruits families go on visits to schools. That is normal.

There’s a whole lot of confirmation bias up in here. Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando BtownBanners

Look, you’re trying to use the forum as a sounding board for the beginnings of your sports journalism career, and as someone consuming your work, I’ve provided you feedback. Do with it what you will. Good luck! Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

We need a mix of medication and straight-jackets on this board. Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

This is oddly realistic for this board... BAN HIM

I'm off the leash coonhounds

You state things as fact. There's a reason people like hoosierpap are well respected on this board. My opinion is that his approach is probably one worth emulating. There have been some really cool things that you've done, like establishing a relationship with players and providing cool interviews - keep up the good work there! Ignorance is claiming to know facts when you don't.

So what are the benefits? You haven’t named a single one. Also, how many Zion Williamson articles have you seen since he committed? Probably none. Romeo Langford articles have greatly increased. Why? He’s the highest rated uncommitted recruit in 2018. Meaning, Romeo Langford = clicks. You’re a smart guy, think about it some more. Sentimental value of having a “victory lap” or relieving yourself of pressure is a purely subjective argument. Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Dude you claimed facts plenty of times previously and they oddly have not become facts. I feel like claiming to know anything for fact is something you should avoid. Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Name one reason I’m committing to Indiana now? Us, Kansas, and Vandy will all have a scholarship for him whenever he wants it. He will continue to have national coverage UNTIL he commits. He is the highest ranked uncommitted high school recruit in the country, and has a few more months to remain the national focus. ZERO reason to commit to any school right now. ZERO benefits. Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

So, that is the point, like I said earlier. There is no reason or benefit to committing now, even if he knows it’s Indiana. There’s a story to build. Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Completely disagree. There is ZERO reason to commit before you are required if you treat this as a business decision. Gather all of the information available to you, because there is nothing threatening your ability to make the same decision at a later date. Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

What the hell is a Piston Honda Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando BtownBanners

You’re certain of something that has some logic to support it, and yet ignore and refute all other logical explanations. Let’s assume Romeo is someone who is going to let someone else pick his school for him. If his father is telling him to go to Indiana, who do you think wins between Tim Langford and Darius Garland? Seriously, your narrative is so full of holes, it’s astonishing that I need to point them out to you.

That'd be great. I proposed an extreme solution. Maybe there are better options. Although, I think it will take something drastic and powerful to shake the current system and the current way we handle sexual assault. If my solution is the solution that causes the most damage, and that damage is 10x less harmful that the current system, is it that bad of a solution though? Couldn't a shift in the burden of proof lead to the development of different and potentially improved means for investigating sexual assault, thus helping to improve our ability to identify criminals and protect innocent people?

Definitely agree with you that university should be removed entirely. That's also a major change to our judicial system. It would be best to remove the individuals that have reason to influence certain outcomes from the process, but our legal system has allowed colleges and educational institutions to operate in their own unique legal environment for some time. There are a few Supreme Court decisions that have supported an idea that schools need the ability to maintain order, and thus receive unique consideration under the law. http://www.nytimes.com/learning/teachers/featured_articles/20080915monday.html

This also increases the chances that rapists go to prison, and the rate of unreported and unpunished sexual assault decreases, thus increasing the effectiveness of the justice system. It doesn't need to be a pure "guilty until proven innocent" policy. The argument is clear to me that giving benefit of the doubt to the accuser in sexual assault cases is statistically and morally the correct course of action. I am advocating for a major change to the way we handle sexual assault, specifically withing college athletics where the balance of power is overwhelmingly in favor of the athletic institutions. I'm frightened that normal, well-adjusted people can't see that the current system is broken and causing far greater harm than you are afraid a change may cause.

Here is the article which was the basis of that comment : http://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/22214566/pattern-denial-inaction-information-suppression-michigan-state-goes-larry-nassar-case-espn If you scroll about halfway through, the article discusses the incident with Keith Appling and Adrian Payne. I went back and edited my original post to reflect that they did not formally admit, and included the above article.

What are those 321,500 women? Are they not innocent? Basic logic is directing my argument - there are far more victims of sexual assault, reported and unreported, than victims of false accusations. Even if you assume the highest false accusation rate of 10%, that means there are 10x innocent victims of sexual assault for every one victim of false accusations.

Yes. As opposed to, in the current system, allowing the sexual assault of 321,500, on average , innocent women each year? https://www.rainn.org/statistics/victims-sexual-violence If these individuals are innocent, let there be evidence that corroborates them. It's not a solution without cost, but our current system is completely broken when dealing withe sexual assault. Why continue to operate within a broken paradigm?

That is the current structure we live in, and that is why two men accused of rape, Keith Appling and Adrian Payne, played four years of college basketball while on scholarship, receiving praise and glory for their athletic accomplishments. The list those impacted by false accusations pales in comparison to the list of individuals who suffered no punishment for one of the most heinous crimes someone can commit.

Research suggests that false reporting of sexual assault ranges between only 2-10% of cases, on par with most other criminal accusations. Research also suggests that 40-63% of sexual assaults are NEVER reported for various reasons - embarrassment, fear of the public reaction, fear that the victim won't be believed, fear of the individual who committed the assault, etc. https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/Publications_NSVRC_Overview_False-Reporting.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/group/maan/cgi-bin/?page_id=297 Prosecution rates for sexual assault cases are ABYSMALLY low, so the number of "false" reports of sexual assault are also inflated by decisions of "no crime" where there was not enough evidence or the prosecution chose not to prosecute - that does not necessarily mean that the victim lied or falsely reported sexual assault. https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system What I listed above is disturbing. Now, out of context, I understand why "guilty till proven innocent" will bother any American raised on the principles of our judicial system. The American justice system is the institutional power, therefore, the burden of proof is placed on them in order to give the accused, who posses far fewer resources and lesser influence, a fair chance. When we add to this discussion the context of college athletics, the vested interest of men who hold more power than the individuals in place to prevent sexual assault and protect victims in the innocence of the accused , and the economic power behind a thriving athletics institution, which party do you believe needs the support and the benefit of the doubt in order to have a fair chance at obtaining justice?

Izzo’s players practically admitting to raping a woman (http://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/22214566/pattern-denial-inaction-information-suppression-michigan-state-goes-larry-nassar-case-espn), and he administered zero punishment (don’t tell me he handled it internal and made them *shudder* run laps) and let them play without recourse for their actions. He is a directly enabler of the growth in sexual assault on college campuses, athletics, and specifically MSU athletics. Furthermore, an abundance of caution should be throw in the favor of the victims, not the accused. In our current situation, the perpetrators and enablers are reaping all of the support while victims’ stories of assault are reduced to hearsay. This is not our normal justice system; this is an institution that operates in its own quasi-jurisdiction. The leverage of those in power over those without creates an overwhelmingly unfair situation for victims. In these cases, I really believe it is far more important and valuable to side with the victims till the accused are proven innocent. The cost of possibly allowing rape culture and sexual assault to continue to be swept under the rug is too great, versus the cost of one individual’s reputation being questioned or tarnished. Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app