Huggy Bear resigns | Page 20 | Syracusefan.com

Huggy Bear resigns

Status
Not open for further replies.
Technically he should be in jail for many years as repeat offender with a new felony. I do think the university should offer him help as a part of his severance package so he can get his health and life in order.
 
Orangezoo said:
It was paraphrasing but come on. The letter does him or her no benefit. I've seen what that level of intoxication can do. You wanna excuse someone or let them off some for a level that could kill others and himself? There is no semantics to argue around here. The university was right and she is wrong trying to find a way to say other things he has done offsets this. Also the 60 days in rehab offer is like offering to sit out the first two exhibition games of the season.

She's wrapping up an effort to show him as a victim with a lot of window dressing. It's bad.
Expand...
I in no way said she was correct in what she said. Something you don't know about me, when I was 16 I was driving my sister's Chevy Chevette. We had just left a church picnic on the way home when a drunk driver hit us, drove us off the road, and we rolled 5 times down the hill. There were 4 of us in the car. Needless to say I don't condone driving while intoxicated.

I also don't condone paraphrasing when you change the meaning and context of what was said. In this case I understand why she said it, and she doesn't even try to excuse what her dad. I understand as a daughter her need to stand up for her dad. Do I agree with what she said? No. This isn't his first rodeo and he could have, should have, gotten help many years ago. But she isn't the bad guy here and making her out to be is wrong.
 
I’m not condoning driving under the influence. In fact, just the opposite, as I’m one of I’m sure many who’s life has been affected by it.

With that being said, there’s plenty of statistics out there that show a large % of the American population has driven under the influence. North of 40% in their lifetime. There’s data that shows 2% of Americans have driven under the influence in the past 30 days.

It’s a problem. It’s a big problem.

But because Bob Huggins made a terrible decision, potentially many bad decisions in regards to driving in the state that he was, does not mean he’s a terrible human being. It means he has a problem. A problem that put others at risk.

He deserved to lose his job. He also deserves help & support in what is most likely a very dark hour for him. Anyone know what typically happens to addicts in dark hours?

We don’t need to hate people because they’ve made mistakes. We don’t need to eradicate all the good they’ve done. It doesn’t need to be a 0 sum game. Life is full of gray.

Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But in mine, I would choose to lend a hand or support to those struggling, because I too, have struggled.

I condemn Bob Huggins most recent transgression, but I don’t condemn Bob Huggins.
 
Sbucketball said:
Agreed. I'm a little surprised by all the takes indicating he's a horrible person because of this.
Expand...
Agree that being an addict does not make you a bad person.

But repeatedly driving while completely inebriated does.

When an addict decides getting high is more important putting the lives of many innocent people at risk, I would argue that they are not a good person.

As other have said, you can get drunk and not get behind the wheel. Bob had that option. I feel sorry for him and his family but he did something awful when he got in his car staggeringly drunk and now he needs to pay the price for it.
 
Finwad32 said:
I’m not condoning driving under the influence. In fact, just the opposite, as I’m one of I’m sure many who’s life has been affected by it.

With that being said, there’s plenty of statistics out there that show a large % of the American population has driven under the influence. North of 40% in their lifetime. There’s data that shows 2% of Americans have driven under the influence in the past 30 days.

It’s a problem. It’s a big problem.

But because Bob Huggins made a terrible decision, potentially many bad decisions in regards to driving in the state that he was, does not mean he’s a terrible human being. It means he has a problem. A problem that put others at risk.

He deserved to lose his job. He also deserves help & support in what is most likely a very dark hour for him. Anyone know what typically happens to addicts in dark hours?

We don’t need to hate people because they’ve made mistakes. We don’t need to eradicate all the good they’ve done. It doesn’t need to be a 0 sum game. Life is full of gray.

Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But in mine, I would choose to lend a hand or support to those struggling, because I too, have struggled.

I condemn Bob Huggins most recent transgression, but I don’t condemn Bob Huggins.
Expand...

How many times with him behind the wheel above the limit would make him a terrible person in your opinion?

Or, let’s say he’s driven drunk 1000 times in his lifetime, is he just a man with a disease or can we say that he’s crossed the rubicon into being a bad person?

I’m legitimately asking. I’m not saying people have to be perfect. I’m not saying he hasn’t done a ton of good. But what’s the line?

Genuinely asking. Because while I have deep empathy for what this and other similar diseases can do when they take hold, at what point are we ignoring the people that have enabled this to continue and allowed Huggy to exist in a profession that is insanely lucrative and make millions of dollars and have all the resources at his fingertips.

We’re not talking the guy that got popped one time after a bbq that was young and dumb.

So we can all choose to view this how we want, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that he’s likely been a chronic drunk driver and at some point, at least for me, there is a line that crosses from empathy to not.
 
MikeSU02 said:
How many times with him behind the wheel above the limit would make him a terrible person in your opinion?

Or, let’s say he’s driven drunk 1000 times in his lifetime, is he just a man with a disease or can we say that he’s crossed the rubicon into being a bad person?

I’m legitimately asking. I’m not saying people have to be perfect. I’m not saying he hasn’t done a ton of good. But what’s the line?

Genuinely asking. Because while I have deep empathy for what this and other similar diseases can do when they take hold, at what point are we ignoring the people that have enabled this to continue and allowed Huggy to exist in a profession that is insanely lucrative and make millions of dollars and have all the resources at his fingertips.

We’re not talking the guy that got popped one time after a bbq that was young and dumb.

So we can all choose to view this how we want, but I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that he’s likely been a chronic drunk driver and at some point, at least for me, there is a line that crosses from empathy to not.
Expand...
It’s a good question. And I think there are degrees to it… but certainly won’t pretend to have an answer.

Someone who chronically does it without incident may not view it as problematic at all even though we all know it is. Someone who does it once and kills someone would probably be labeled terrible and would carry that burden forever. Who’s worse?

I don’t know how many times he has, nobody does but him. Could certainly assume but won’t.
 
Finwad32 said:
I’m not condoning driving under the influence. In fact, just the opposite, as I’m one of I’m sure many who’s life has been affected by it.

With that being said, there’s plenty of statistics out there that show a large % of the American population has driven under the influence. North of 40% in their lifetime. There’s data that shows 2% of Americans have driven under the influence in the past 30 days.

It’s a problem. It’s a big problem.

But because Bob Huggins made a terrible decision, potentially many bad decisions in regards to driving in the state that he was, does not mean he’s a terrible human being. It means he has a problem. A problem that put others at risk.

He deserved to lose his job. He also deserves help & support in what is most likely a very dark hour for him. Anyone know what typically happens to addicts in dark hours?

We don’t need to hate people because they’ve made mistakes. We don’t need to eradicate all the good they’ve done. It doesn’t need to be a 0 sum game. Life is full of gray.

Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But in mine, I would choose to lend a hand or support to those struggling, because I too, have struggled.

I condemn Bob Huggins most recent transgression, but I don’t condemn Bob Huggins.
Expand...
One of the best posts on this board, ever. Thank you for your thoughtful and rational insight.
 
Finwad32 said:
I’m not condoning driving under the influence. In fact, just the opposite, as I’m one of I’m sure many who’s life has been affected by it.

With that being said, there’s plenty of statistics out there that show a large % of the American population has driven under the influence. North of 40% in their lifetime. There’s data that shows 2% of Americans have driven under the influence in the past 30 days.

It’s a problem. It’s a big problem.

But because Bob Huggins made a terrible decision, potentially many bad decisions in regards to driving in the state that he was, does not mean he’s a terrible human being. It means he has a problem. A problem that put others at risk.

He deserved to lose his job. He also deserves help & support in what is most likely a very dark hour for him. Anyone know what typically happens to addicts in dark hours?

We don’t need to hate people because they’ve made mistakes. We don’t need to eradicate all the good they’ve done. It doesn’t need to be a 0 sum game. Life is full of gray.

Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But in mine, I would choose to lend a hand or support to those struggling, because I too, have struggled.

I condemn Bob Huggins most recent transgression, but I don’t condemn Bob Huggins.
Expand...
I hear you, but “under the influence” is a big range.

.21 is insane. Far worse than someone who is slightly over the limit, IMO.
 
Finwad32 said:
I’m not condoning driving under the influence. In fact, just the opposite, as I’m one of I’m sure many who’s life has been affected by it.

With that being said, there’s plenty of statistics out there that show a large % of the American population has driven under the influence. North of 40% in their lifetime. There’s data that shows 2% of Americans have driven under the influence in the past 30 days.

It’s a problem. It’s a big problem.

But because Bob Huggins made a terrible decision, potentially many bad decisions in regards to driving in the state that he was, does not mean he’s a terrible human being. It means he has a problem. A problem that put others at risk.

He deserved to lose his job. He also deserves help & support in what is most likely a very dark hour for him. Anyone know what typically happens to addicts in dark hours?

We don’t need to hate people because they’ve made mistakes. We don’t need to eradicate all the good they’ve done. It doesn’t need to be a 0 sum game. Life is full of gray.

Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion. But in mine, I would choose to lend a hand or support to those struggling, because I too, have struggled.

I condemn Bob Huggins most recent transgression, but I don’t condemn Bob Huggins.
Expand...
Well said!
 
2 more transfers out of WVU in addition to Tre Mitchell. Would assume Kerr to Illinois because their previous transfer PG commit just decommited

 
Let it burn.
thumb-234111903550.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Monday for Basketball
Replies
1
Views
505
Ozone!
Ozone!

Forum statistics

Threads
170,297
Messages
4,882,979
Members
5,991
Latest member
Fowler

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
256
Guests online
1,088
Total visitors
1,344
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom