Chase Scanlan suspended indefinitely | Page 24 | Syracusefan.com

Chase Scanlan suspended indefinitely

you know for a fact that he has unilateral discretion to kick a kid off the team for any reason he wants?
Of course. Not take a scholarship, but no coach has to allow a player to be on the team
 
There is NO federal law that prohibits the coach of a college team from deciding who is on the team, and who is not. (Assuming someone is not prevented from being on the team due to race, religion, sexual orientation, religion, etc.) Being suspected of violence is not a protected class, and playing on a team is not a right.
 
think this falls under the old innocent until proven guilty category and right to due process, but I think the teams actions yesterday provided some writing on the wall as to validity the claims
That standard doesn’t apply to being on a sports team
 
Well said. The stuff DOE is currently reviewing and will almost certainly change are the enhanced protections for the accused put in by the prior administration, e.g. presence of third parties at a hearing.
Yeah. God forbid that accused persons have a right to counsel, especially when a property right (scholarship) is at stake.
I was one of the last lawyers to participate in one of those proceedings. It was such a kangaroo court that I got the conviction thrown out on the internal appeal. (Got a nice thank you from coach Edsall)
This complaint against him made because the girl was pissed the guy kicked her out of his apartment on a Saturday morning because his girlfriend was coming from out of town to visit. No one from the judicial board asked her any questions about the myriad inconsistent statements. Nothing. They believed her before she sat down to testify.
The board is generally made up of social justice anti-male, anti-athlete, milk toast followers looking to “get even” rather than effect justice under the rules.
 
Yeah. God forbid that accused persons have a right to counsel, especially when a property right (scholarship) is at stake.
I was one of the last lawyers to participate in one of those proceedings. It was such a kangaroo court that I got the conviction thrown out on the internal appeal. (Got a nice thank you from coach Edsall)
This complaint against him made because the girl was pissed the guy kicked her out of his apartment on a Saturday morning because his girlfriend was coming from out of town to visit. No one from the judicial board asked her any questions about the myriad inconsistent statements. Nothing. They believed her before she sat down to testify.
The board is generally made up of social justice anti-male, anti-athlete, milk toast followers looking to “get even” rather than effect justice under the rules.
I gave you a “like” for the “milk toast” reference. It’s an under-used term :)
 
There is NO federal law that prohibits the coach of a college team from deciding who is on the team, and who is not. (Assuming someone is not prevented from being on the team due to race, religion, s e xual orientation, religion, etc.) Being suspected of violence is not a protected class, and playing on a team is not a right.

You're most likely right. (Courts can be funny with what constitutes a property interest/right, and if the complainant withdraws, and Chase is run off, there's probably multiple cognizable claims there as well)

But the University stands to gain nothing by removing Chase from the team right now. He's a Native American from a reservation, playing on a team made up of mostly upper middle class white men, with all white captains, and all white coaches, and a white AD, and a white University President. He's essentially persona non grata from the Team, who are in South Bend as I type. From accounts, the alleged victim/complainant is also alway from campus. The semester is nearly over. Financial aid for the year is almost finished.

The last thing the University needs to do is screw up the process, or create a claim for a student that otherwise would not exist. This is especially true when the outcome is likely certain.

Also, you're kind of talking out both sides here. While the preserving the sanctity of the team and affording a student due process are not necessarily mutually exclusive, they do tend to go arm and arm.
 
Dudes! It's spelled milquetoast
Both versions are acceptable. But one version is more milk toast than the other :)

 
Yeah. God forbid that accused persons have a right to counsel, especially when a property right (scholarship) is at stake.
I was one of the last lawyers to participate in one of those proceedings. It was such a kangaroo court that I got the conviction thrown out on the internal appeal. (Got a nice thank you from coach Edsall)
This complaint against him made because the girl was pissed the guy kicked her out of his apartment on a Saturday morning because his girlfriend was coming from out of town to visit. No one from the judicial board asked her any questions about the myriad inconsistent statements. Nothing. They believed her before she sat down to testify.
The board is generally made up of social justice anti-male, anti-athlete, milk toast followers looking to “get even” rather than effect justice under the rules.
You're most likely right. (Courts can be funny with what constitutes a property interest/right, and if the complainant withdraws, and Chase is run off, there's probably multiple cognizable claims there as well)

But the University stands to gain nothing by removing Chase from the team right now. He's a Native American from a reservation, playing on a team made up of mostly upper middle class white men, with all white captains, and all white coaches, and a white AD, and a white University President. He's essentially persona non grata from the Team, who are in South Bend as I type. From accounts, the alleged victim/complainant is also alway from campus. The semester is nearly over. Financial aid for the year is almost finished.

The last thing the University needs to do is screw up the process, or create a claim for a student that otherwise would not exist. This is especially true when the outcome is likely certain.

Also, you're kind of talking out both sides here. While the preserving the sanctity of the team and affording a student due process are not necessarily mutually exclusive, they do tend to go arm and arm.
Interesting points all around, and as a (mostly) retired lawyer I appreciate the back and forth. As a practical matter I agree the University very much does not want to screw up a mostly positive relationship with Native American communities.
Separately I think the impending changes to the DOE guidelines/rules (back to the Obama standards) are misguided and will not fare well in court for those who can afford lawyers to challenge them. As they say though, elections have consequences.
 
You're most likely right. (Courts can be funny with what constitutes a property interest/right, and if the complainant withdraws, and Chase is run off, there's probably multiple cognizable claims there as well)

But the University stands to gain nothing by removing Chase from the team right now. He's a Native American from a reservation, playing on a team made up of mostly upper middle class white men, with all white captains, and all white coaches, and a white AD, and a white University President. He's essentially persona non grata from the Team, who are in South Bend as I type. From accounts, the alleged victim/complainant is also alway from campus. The semester is nearly over. Financial aid for the year is almost finished.

The last thing the University needs to do is screw up the process, or create a claim for a student that otherwise would not exist. This is especially true when the outcome is likely certain.

Also, you're kind of talking out both sides here. While the preserving the sanctity of the team and affording a student due process are not necessarily mutually exclusive, they do tend to go arm and arm.
Well said.

This will be resolved properly.

Rushing to terminal outcomes is never a good idea, even if the conclusion seems to be inevitable.

just let it play out
 
Both versions are acceptable. But one version is more milk toast than the other :)

have to disagree with m-w here. and i'd have to wonder when this secondary entry was posted. i get it the language is an evolving thing, but this smells like a cop out.

i'm passing judgment.
 
You're most likely right. (Courts can be funny with what constitutes a property interest/right, and if the complainant withdraws, and Chase is run off, there's probably multiple cognizable claims there as well)

But the University stands to gain nothing by removing Chase from the team right now. He's a Native American from a reservation, playing on a team made up of mostly upper middle class white men, with all white captains, and all white coaches, and a white AD, and a white University President. He's essentially persona non grata from the Team, who are in South Bend as I type. From accounts, the alleged victim/complainant is also alway from campus. The semester is nearly over. Financial aid for the year is almost finished.

The last thing the University needs to do is screw up the process, or create a claim for a student that otherwise would not exist. This is especially true when the outcome is likely certain.

Also, you're kind of talking out both sides here. While the preserving the sanctity of the team and affording a student due process are not necessarily mutually exclusive, they do tend to go arm and arm.
this looks like the deal. and anyone that thinks they "know" that desko ran this on his own to reinstate, without being given either directions, ultimatums, or a list of risks and consequences... please... fill us in on those meetings' minutes.
 
Could be very relevant in a civil suit, however...
Ummm, no. As long as he has his scholarship, he has no case.
1. No right to be on a team. None. Coaches suspend players all of the time. If the coach doesn’t like his socks, he can kick him off.
2. No damages. He didn’t get to play in some games. Boo Fing Hoo. Guess what, he can play all of next year.
3. Even if someone says he was “damaged” by not being on the team, how does he get compensated? More games? He gets a whole other year already.

Now, if he did nothing, and this is a false allegation, he can sue the girl.
 
Last edited:
Ummm, no. As long as he has his scholarship, he has no case.
1. No right to be on a team. None. Coaches suspend players all of the time. If the coach doesn’t like his socks, he can kick him off.
2. No damages. He didn’t get to play in some games. Boo Fing Hoo. Guess what, he can play all of next year.
3. Even if someone says he was “damaged” by not being on the team, how does he get compensated? More games? He gets a whole other year already.

Now, if he did nothing, and this is a false allegation, he can sue the girl.
I hear from a source that it wasn't nothing to report it was a third party that was even there seen a hole in wall told frilly pants she thought chase must have thrown her in to the wall. And and boom wild fire arms legs add.why do u think no charges. 2 weeks tomorrow it dont take that long 4 a Investigation
 
I hear from a source that it wasn't nothing to report it was a third party that was even there seen a hole in wall told frilly pants she thought chase must have thrown her in to the wall. And and boom wild fire arms legs add.why do u think no charges. 2 weeks tomorrow it dont take that long 4 a Investigation
Is your source Chase Scanlan and are you or are you not his second cousin twice removed?
 
I'm the long lost voice of reason. I'm the middle of a modern day lynching. Performed by clowns that dont know what there talking about.
Oh my god. It’s not a lynching to say “These are serious charges. We aren’t arresting anyone. But we are going to temporarily remove you from team activities while we investigate.”

lynchings involved people being killed by being hung from trees, not being asked to hang up a lax stick for a couple weeks. Let’s get some perspective.
 
Oh my god. It’s not a lynching to say “These are serious charges. We aren’t arresting anyone. But we are going to temporarily remove you from team activities while we investigate.”

lynchings involved people being killed by being hung from trees, not being asked to hang up a lax stick for a couple weeks. Let’s get some perspective.
Oh my god. It’s not a lynching to say “These are serious charges. We aren’t arresting anyone. But we are going to temporarily remove you from team activities while we investigate.”

lynchings involved people being killed by being hung from trees, not being asked to hang up a lax stick for a couple weeks. Let’s get some perspective.
Modern day lynching and his ces
Oh my god. It’s not a lynching to say “These are serious charges. We aren’t arresting anyone. But we are going to temporarily remove you from team activities while we investigate.”

lynchings involved people being killed by being hung from trees, not being asked to hang up a lax stick for a couple weeks. Let’s get some perspective.
I said modern day. And I was referring to his career. So there my prospective
 
Scott?
10654082.jpg
 
Ummm, no. As long as he has his scholarship, he has no case.
1. No right to be on a team. None. Coaches suspend players all of the time. If the coach doesn’t like his socks, he can kick him off.
2. No damages. He didn’t get to play in some games. Boo Fing Hoo. Guess what, he can play all of next year.
3. Even if someone says he was “damaged” by not being on the team, how does he get compensated? More games? He gets a whole other year already.

Now, if he did nothing, and this is a false allegation, he can sue the girl.
If it's a false allegation, then he can absolutely make a case that Desko kicking him off the team further damaged him and his reputation, which is absolutely fair game in a civil suit. When you're as high-level of a player as Scanlan, you can argue all kinds of financial damage resulting from this move (i.e., endorsements, impending professional contracts, etc.).

Would he win? I'm not so sure. But this is the sort of exposure that athletic departments and their legal consultants try to minimize.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,128
Messages
4,681,666
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
274
Guests online
2,062
Total visitors
2,336


Top Bottom