LeQuint Allen is Back

[Toga]

I'm not a lawyer but i'd argue that the egregious suspension and damage done to his imagine has limited his ability to gain NIL deals

Gone. Gone. The damage done.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

According to Axe (and I’m surprised that it has not been discussed more), LA was offered suspension for this past Spring and this Summer and he declined.

That doesn't make sense.

 

[two3zone]

That doesn't make sense.

If I was defending myself and they offered a suspension in general I’d decline it.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

That doesn't make sense.

Axe: LeQuint Allen made a mistake and got an extreme penalty. Is there no better way to handle this?

Brent Axe writes about Syracuse University's suspension of running back LeQuint Allen and wonders if the right lesson is being taught.

www.syracuse.com

6th and 5th paragraphs from the bottom.

I’m sure that one could justify his response but throughout this, a number of posters have said “why couldn’t SU have suspended him for the Spring so that he could play this Fall?

Seems like they offered that.

 

[OburgCuse]

According to Axe (and I’m surprised that it has not been discussed more), LA was offered suspension for this past Spring and this Summer and he declined.

Ok, if that’s the case I hadn’t seen. I still wonder if true or Axe misspoke. He was very inaccurate with lots of details on the podcast with Emily (she corrected him on a few) so would be interesting if reported elsewhere.

*Edit- I now see it in the article Dick linked so interesting considering he would have already been through most of spring practices

 

[HastingsCuse]

According to Axe (and I’m surprised that it has not been discussed more), LA was offered suspension for this past Spring and this Summer and he declined.

In the supporting petition filed by LA's attorney at paragraphs 34-43 it says that that he was offered a Spring and Summer suspension but it would have meant he would lose his scholarship so he declined.
the offer was made in February/March before his hearing.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

In the supporting petition filed by LA's attorney at paragraphs 34-43 it says that that he was offered a Spring and Summer suspension but it would have meant he would lose his scholarship so he declined.
the offer was made in February/March before his hearing.

Yeah that's a load of crap.

 

[MSOrange]

Axe: LeQuint Allen made a mistake and got an extreme penalty. Is there no better way to handle this?

Brent Axe writes about Syracuse University's suspension of running back LeQuint Allen and wonders if the right lesson is being taught.

www.syracuse.com

6th and 5th paragraphs from the bottom.

I’m sure that one could justify his response but throughout this, a number of posters have said “why couldn’t SU have suspended him for the Spring so that he could play this Fall?

Seems like they offered that.

But then he wouldn't have been academically eligible anyway, so not sure if it would have made a huge difference.

 

[ThundrTroll]

It may have been mentioned but I’m surprised there hasn’t been more comparison with the Delone Carter punishment. Yes Delone was suspended for 2 semesters like LA but how they treated the suspension was quite different and I’d think that would be basis to help LA.

LA’s actions occurred in December…DC’s happened in February (I believe) and still ended up more favorable for him with the punishment timing. They allowed DC to start his suspension (spring semester) retroactively even though it was prob close to half over and then serve 2nd semester suspension during summer session. This allowed him to be eligible for fall as long as he got his academic requirements in order. On the surface it looks like LA wasn’t allowed these same opportunities which shows inconsistencies within the school judicial system.

*Disclaimer- this is assuming LA wasn’t given the option of starting suspension in spring

He was. He had two informal meetings with Ms. Carroll (he had to push back the first due to father's death and brought a football advisor with him; he retained counsel by the second that took place March 23). He was offered an informal resolution from Ms. Carroll in March that would have suspended him for the current Spring and Summer.

This is when he began to offer alternatives and also question the process. Part of his rationale was if he accepted the Spring and Summer suspensions he would not have enough credits to be eligible to play football in the Fall despite being allowed to be back as a student in the Fall. Part of one of his proposals was to be allowed to take 6 credits remotely that would allow him to retain football eligibility for the Fall, but that was denied since you cannot take any SU classes if suspended of course.

None of his alternatives and counters were not accepted, and LeQuint subsequently did not accept the informal resolution instead opting for a formal hearing in front of a board (comprised of both admins and students). It was after the hearing, which took place on April 21, where he was found responsible for violating student code and given a suspension beginning May 15 through the Fall semester (i.e., summer sessions and Fall semester). He appealed to no avail, and ended up filing the lawsuit.

Maybe in hindsight he should have accepted the informal resolution and be suspended Spring and Summer from SU while enrolling and taking enough credits at a community college to be eligible to play football in Fall and be back on campus. However, he felt he was wronged with punishment not fitting of his defense.

 

[Toga]

So before there was a hearing it was determined that a two semester suspension would be the punishment. Not allowed to take six credits remotely is -ing bullshit.

 

[GoSU96]

That doesn't make sense.

He has no way to pay for the credits, and living expenses, somewhere else to keep progressing in order to be eligible for his grant.

 

[GoSU96]

So before there was a hearing it was determined that a two semester suspension would be the punishment. Not allowed to take six credits remotely is -ing bullshit.

It was determined before his first informal meeting

 

[OrangeXtreme]

So before there was a hearing it was determined that a two semester suspension would be the punishment. Not allowed to take six credits remotely is -ing bullshit.

Spring Semester, no football.
Summer Semester, no S & C.

We'll let you back in school for the Fall, but you'll be ineligible to play football.

That's like a three semester suspension.

Why would he agree to that?

 

[JRHEETER]

Axe is wrong

He missed the spring/summer semester suspension because he missed the first disciplinary hearing because his father passed away

 

[baggerbob]

It was determined before his first informal meeting

That's why the entire process needs to be thrown out.
Either the BOT needs to get the Chancelor on board to eliminate this travesty, or the University might as well give up athletics.
There is no point in coaches trying to recruit, with their hands tied behind their backs.

 

[Dcuse]

Axe is wrong

He missed the spring/summer semester suspension because he missed the first disciplinary hearing because his father passed away

“Axe is wrong.” If I had a penny for every time that were the case.

 

[Chris02M]

“Axe is wrong.” If I had a penny for every time that were the case.

you would be like one of those magic fountains everyone throws pennies into

 

[BigNastyJon]

you would be like one of those magic fountains everyone throws pennies into

Childhood flashbacks to Shoppingtown Mall

 

[BillSU]

Oh no, I'm going to rant. As someone who teaches in higher ed., this is one of my biggest bugaboos. An advanced degree is not customer service. It's a service to society. Well-educated people worldwide help buoy their national infrastructure and create technologically advanced societies that help raise the well-being of everyone.

A college degree SHOULD be about a life of the mind. It should be about gaining new perspectives and ideas to create a well-rounded individual who can think critically and act accordingly regarding the world around them. Unfortunately, the American education system is so fundamentally broken at both the elementary and high school levels and the university levels that so few students consider education a way to be productive citizens of an intelligent society.

I blame low-cost student loans. LBJ introduced the government-backed low-interest college loan system, which was a GREAT idea then. Universities and colleges shouldn't be free of charge, but high-achieving students who could make a difference in the world should have the opportunity to continue their education. Unintended consequences are unintended for a reason, and the consequences of this noble idea have helped to tear down the very structure of higher education.

Now that students could access higher education, enrollments started to climb. As competition between universities to grab the best students increased, these institutions decided they needed a better infrastructure to lure students. So they start building gyms, campus centers with myriad dining options, etc.. With all that new infrastructure, they need more employees and administrators to oversee these areas. Tuition started to rise, but for baby boomers and Gen X'ers who never thought they'd have a path to college, the increases were minuscule. The education and the jobs they would get from college overshadowed any slight tuition increase. With interest rates for student loans at 2 or 3%, the cost-benefit was a no-brainer.

People started looking at higher education as job training. As universities went nuts trying to lure students with everything except for better, more highly trained faculty, the arms race began in earnest. This is essentially the early to mid-'90s if you're looking for a time frame. Universities needed to give students all the creature comforts they could want as that would draw in more students. It also increased the cost of going there. It didn't matter, though, because higher education became a birthright for the middle class. Vocations and the military were dirty words for most households. That meant you were "stupid." College was the ONLY way to get ahead.

With this corroding of what a higher education experience meant historically (literally for 600 years, university education was about a "life of the mind"), people began viewing it as transactional. Prices became too high, and student loan interest rates increased mainly based on a formula from the original 1965 act. Many students in the mid-2000s dealt with interest rates as high as 8% on federal student loans. At a place like Syracuse, they were paying more than a quarter-million for a degree they would have to pay off for as long as a mortgage.

These high-interest rates and heightened tuition creep come to a head at the worst possible time - the 2009 recession. All of a sudden, these students can't get jobs, and the ones they are getting aren't cutting them to pay off these loans. Gen X parents and Millenial children become disenfranchised with the entire system (and rightly so) and look at college as a fully transactional customer service. No longer was it "I pay for an education." It was "I pay, and you give me a degree," and by the way, the customer is always right.

It all happened gradually and then all at once. I can tell you that the university I work at 100% looks at the student as the customer, and the customer IS always right. Their college experience is so different from the one you and I went through that it's completely foreign. The food options, the gyms, and the perks (water slides, lazy rivers, free ice cream trucks) are absurd. The quality of life is something they won't experience when they leave college. Paying for a gym membership that could even remotely compete with on-campus facilities would be astronomical. Administrative bloat is at an all-time high. I personally know of nearly a dozen campus administrators who get paid for doing nearly nothing. And they get paid VERY well. I'm not talking about senior admin here. I'm talking middle management types.

Faculty salaries, by and large, are stagnant. Universities decided a long time ago that to entice students, they needed to become country clubs. The education was ancillary. That callous attitude toward education by administrators has created the perfect storm of "I pay, you give me a degree." Education is only a tiny part of why the majority of kids go to college in the first place.

The higher ed. system in this country is built on a house of cards, and it will start tumbling in the next few years (it already has in some cases). Excellent private universities will start to fold within the next three to four years. The number of college-aged students has been rising for decades. For the first time in generations, that college-aged group is falling? Fewer students mean even more competition. Prominent state universities will continue to increase in size, gobbling up small privates in their sphere.

There are ways to fix this, but it will take a herculean effort. For now, though, my job has become akin to a Home Depot return specialist. I know they broke the tool themselves, but I have to give them what they want because that's our store policy. It blows, and it's terrible for everyone.

I told you I was going to rant. If you're interested in how we fix this mess - let me know. I can write another War and Peace on that subject.

Yes, please write about how we fix it!

 

[AZOrange]

get US Savings Bonds (I-bonds). We put like 125k in and will have 750-850k when kids are in school.

What’s your return on savings bonds?

 

[BKCuse]

Even further back to Melvin Eggers, who preceded Buzz. Fact is, incidents occurred back then but the reactions were vastly different. If you got into a fight and no one was seriously injured, win or lose, everyone just moved on.
It rarely if ever made it to the student board in the first place, but yes- they've always had a reputation of being arse holes.

Melvin Eggers was great (at least from my point of view as a not overly aware student)

 

[buffalorange]

He was. He had two informal meetings with Ms. Carroll (he had to push back the first due to father's death and brought a football advisor with him; he retained counsel by the second that took place March 23). He was offered an informal resolution from Ms. Carroll in March that would have suspended him for the current Spring and Summer.

This is when he began to offer alternatives and also question the process. Part of his rationale was if he accepted the Spring and Summer suspensions he would not have enough credits to be eligible to play football in the Fall despite being allowed to be back as a student in the Fall. Part of one of his proposals was to be allowed to take 6 credits remotely that would allow him to retain football eligibility for the Fall, but that was denied since you cannot take any SU classes if suspended of course.

None of his alternatives and counters were not accepted, and LeQuint subsequently did not accept the informal resolution instead opting for a formal hearing in front of a board (comprised of both admins and students). It was after the hearing, which took place on April 21, where he was found responsible for violating student code and given a suspension beginning May 15 through the Fall semester (i.e., summer sessions and Fall semester). He appealed to no avail, and ended up filing the lawsuit.

Maybe in hindsight he should have accepted the informal resolution and be suspended Spring and Summer from SU while enrolling and taking enough credits at a community college to be eligible to play football in Fall and be back on campus. However, he felt he was wronged with punishment not fitting of his defense.

I think this description illustrates why so many have issues with the penalty. It was one punch in self defense and the penalty imposed was huge, even if it began in the spring. LA would have had to try to take classes at another school to retain eligibility to play football. And another poster laid out the onerous process of regaining admission to SU - proof of classes taken elsewhere and/or records of employment, plus reference letters, and more. A student can't just serve a suspension and return.

I think that is what folks find so unfair. A judicial process that is capricious, a penalty far in excess of the offense, and then a gauntlet to return to school.

 

[BKCuse]

He probably filed the action because L.A. is an athlete on scholarship & wanted to ruin L.A.'s life. Despicable.

So he filed an action, didn’t bother to show to the hearing yet the stabile geniuses on the judiciary board decide to destroy the kid who is cooperating with the “process”

What a joke.

 

[FrancoPizza]

Childhood flashbacks to Shoppingtown Mall

Or Camillus… or for you old timers… Fairmount Fair.

 

[orangenauburn]

At this point we won't hear more or anything substantial in this until the 19th, and even then I don't foresee is getting any good news.

I've resigned myself to the fact that our future star RB will never play here, and that it will impact the season, and it will impact recruiting, and it will impact whether or not certain staff members stick around, which will effect future recruiting and stability.

We are primed with the investments and renovations, with some stability and success, to take the next step up in consistency in recruiting - to get those top 35 classes and occasional top 30 classes needed for depth and talent.

To get more and more kids into the league. To keep improving recruiting, and thus, better and more successful seasons.

But the university leaders in general are so ucking short sighted and weak that they are going to throw away potentially tens of millions of dollars in windfall cash from an improved football program - increased attendance, booster engagement, program valuation, advertising revenue, merchandise, interest from future potential students - over one punch on a snowy December in 2022.

Because that's what this school has done since 1994. They have undervalued under appreciated the AD and in particular football, which drove significant revenue, and kept other non AD programs a float. When they pilfered the AD to pay for non AD expenses back in the 90s, instead of reinvestment in their cash cow.

It's been over multiple admins and an issue by many out of touch career administrators that doesn't change. It's cultural on The Hill. The culture is not promoting a strong AD to co-exist with a strong academic and research university. The culture has been stuck in an old school mentality of "nerds" and "jocks" - it's insanity.

LeQuint Allen is just another example of this. This is such an unforced black eye and error by the school. 85% of other schools and probably close to 95% of any P5 would have never let this get to this point.

SU won't respond of course because of ongoing litigation and are so GD by the book and they have a horrific PR team that is advised by overpaid lawyers that they can miss the obvious call.

So long story short, nothing will happen, nothing will change, and I expect Allen will transfer shortly after things go sideways in late July, and have a wonderful career elsewhere - probably Rutgers.