Putting this in terms I relate to

[emmitt01]

Much has been said about our players needing to suck it up and run the system that Benford has put in place. Some have said that they look like they're pouting or not giving their all. Let me use a comparison that I've been thinking of for a few days.

Let's imagine that the Sandy Hook situation wasn't an active shooter. Let's say, hypothetically, that it was a hostage situation. No shots fired. Just a man with a gun barricaded inside.

Let's say that for ten years a SWAT sergeant has been in place. He's trained his troops on hostage rescue 101 and the first rule has always been "we don't force entry until there's an imminent loss of life." This has been his "system" the whole time. Every officer who has come under his command has lived by this "system". And it's led to massive success in recovering hostages.

Now, let's say that a new sergeant has been hired. Let's say he arrives at Sandy Hook and orders his officers to breach the doors and neutralize the threat. And let's say his officers look at him with a "pouting" look. His handling of every hostage situation, arrest warrant and search warrant thus far has led to "losses". And let's say that one of the members of this SWAT team had the chance to join the FBI's elite tactical team last year but he stayed around to work on parts of his "game". Now, he realizes that when he storms into this school and the bullets start flying his opportunity with the FBI is gonna be gone because of the inevitable collateral damage.

Do we tell them "follow the orders you're given and suck it up" or do we concede that maybe, just maybe, they're giving half-hearted compliance because they realize that this sergeant is way out of his depth? When lives are lost because of his "system", and there is no question they would be, do we just chalk that up to his troops not giving earnest effort?

Let me tell you, that sergeant would be fired. And sued. And so would the department who put him in place...especially if the lieutenant who assigned him had a history of failed promotees. (Draw whatever parallels you wish)

[MeanMag]

...

[UNT90]

Let me tell you, that sergeant would be fired. And sued. And so would the department who put him in place...especially if the lieutenant who assigned him had a history of failed promotees. (Draw whatever parallels you wish)

Or promoted.

Edited December 22, 2012 by UNT90

[UNTMike81]

Some how the new sargent was hired or told be hired and in his contract he's been given tenure by the union. A once up and coming police force and SWAT team is now destined to only be able to throw rocks at the drug lord king pins.

All I know is the best athletic program we've had at UNT in decades outside golf and women's soccer is being blown up right in front of our eye's and our AD seems to be impotent, unwilling, or forced by his superiors not to take any action(s) to resolve situation.

Our administration above our AD department must have no respect for UNT athletic programs, or any true tradition or asperations for the importance of UNT atheletics at all. We've been walking in the athletic wilderness for decades and had a great opportunity to at least compete on a national stage, if only for a year, but no, not no, but HELL no!!! Past that someone decides just to drop the A-Bomb on us all and end everything. At least that's what it looks like and feels like to me.

[KRAM1]

I just couldn't get through that....linking Sandy Hook in any way to Basketball is just a bit much for me.

[THOR]

Agree Kram...didn't read it after sandy hook...poor taste

[meangreener]

I can't believe you compared basketball to Sandy Hook. Disgusting.

[Army of Dad]

I'm sure most everyone here knows emmitt is a cop. He is drawing an analogy based on his line of work, much like others have and will do. I know it's a sensitive subject for people, especially teachers just keep in mind that people work through problems like that in the hopes they never have to use the solutions for real. Some are professionals and that isn't easy to turn off.

[THOR]

So if we were to compare this debacle to the holocaust it would be OK? How about the slavery?

We know who he is...that doesn't make it OK...

Edited December 22, 2012 by THOR

[emmitt01]

If you'll note, or if you'd simply read, you'd recognize that the analogy purposely avoids actual bloodshed and presents a scenario that is different. And, even if you still find that to be in "poor taste", you're a bit too hyper-sensitive. Reading what I wrote and honestly believing that I'm drawing a parallel between the gravity of the two subjects is beyond stupid. As someone who has actually trained to combat the real thing, and not just sat on my couch or behind my keyboard espousing just how shocked or mortified I am, I'd like to say I'm amused that this is what some of you took away from this...I'd like to say it if the conclusion you drew wasn't, again, so stupid. I've been the one to breach that door, pushed my way into the unknown, and I know even better than all of you "highly offended" peanut gallery members that death and carnage aren't the same as basketball. Again, how stupid.

Edited December 22, 2012 by emmitt01

[THOR]

No...its stupid to even bring up the two in comparison dude...u know this

[emmitt01]

No...its stupid to even bring up the two in comparison dude...u know this

Comparison implies the two are comparable.

Analogy implies that a similar lesson can be gleaned from two things...however divergent they may be.

When someone takes action prematurely we say they've "jumped the gun". Are we really saying that they're in the starting blocks of a track and field event? Ever heard the phrase "throwing the baby out with the bath water"? Are there really children being discarded out of tubs?

[KRAM1]

The fact that so much work is going into trying to justify this thread pretty much proves that it is more than just a little bit out of line.

[THOR]

Much has been said about our players needing to suck it up and run the system that Benford has put in place. Some have said that they look like they're pouting or not giving their all. Let me use a comparison that I've been thinking of for a few days.

Let's imagine that the Sandy Hook situation wasn't an active shooter. Let's say, hypothetically, that it was a hostage situation. No shots fired. Just a man with a gun barricaded inside.

Let's say that for ten years a SWAT sergeant has been in place. He's trained his troops on hostage rescue 101 and the first rule has always been "we don't force entry until there's an imminent loss of life." This has been his "system" the whole time. Every officer who has come under his command has lived by this "system". And it's led to massive success in recovering hostages.

Now, let's say that a new sergeant has been hired. Let's say he arrives at Sandy Hook and orders his officers to breach the doors and neutralize the threat. And let's say his officers look at him with a "pouting" look. His handling of every hostage situation, arrest warrant and search warrant thus far has led to "losses". And let's say that one of the members of this SWAT team had the chance to join the FBI's elite tactical team last year but he stayed around to work on parts of his "game". Now, he realizes that when he storms into this school and the bullets start flying his opportunity with the FBI is gonna be gone because of the inevitable collateral damage.

Do we tell them "follow the orders you're given and suck it up" or do we concede that maybe, just maybe, they're giving half-hearted compliance because they realize that this sergeant is way out of his depth? When lives are lost because of his "system", and there is no question they would be, do we just chalk that up to his troops not giving earnest effort?

Let me tell you, that sergeant would be fired. And sued. And so would the department who put him in place...especially if the lieutenant who assigned him had a history of failed promotees. (Draw whatever parallels you wish)

You used the word "comparison"....so u are comparing the two events...

[emmitt01]

The fact that so much work is going into trying to justify this thread pretty much proves that it is more than just a little bit out of line.

Or, it could be that time has to be needlessly spent explaining the spirit behind an argument to an audience that would rather attack the medium than the message. I really shouldn't expect better.

[emmitt01]

You used the word "comparison"....so u are comparing the two events...

So I'm guilty of poor word choice.

Next.

[THOR]

You said it...not me....you can't build a defense on something that wasn't said....you compared the two events

You believe in your words and comparison...cool...I just think it was a poor choice...no biggie...Ill still let u borrow a koozie or give you a beer at the games. Just think this was a poor choice...that's all.

[Green Dog]

I'm sure most everyone here knows emmitt is a cop. He is drawing an analogy based on his line of work, much like others have and will do. I know it's a sensitive subject for people, especially teachers just keep in mind that people work through problems like that in the hopes they never have to use the solutions for real. Some are professionals and that isn't easy to turn off.

Look I know you want to be sure not to lose your chance to tailgate with Emmitt, so you overlook the words "Sandy Hook". Emmitt could have a picked a hostage situation at say a fictional department store. His post is way off base and is insensitive.

Edited December 22, 2012 by Green Dog

[Green P1]

I like manufacturing outrage as much as the next guy.... I don't see it.

Edited December 22, 2012 by Green P1

[Army of Dad]

Look I know you want to be sure not to lose your chance to tailgate with Emmitt, so you overlook the words "Sandy Hook". Emmitt could have a picked a hostage situation at say a fictional department store. His post is way off base and is insensitive.

And I know you are a dick and like to stalk people on GMG. I understand that part of his worldview. You should stop, but you aren't smart enough to realize how you are embarrassing yourself.

[UNT90]

Wow.

I guess we should never use the words "Sandy Hook" or "Newtown" again.

Feigned Internet outrage is the best kind of feigned outrage, if you ask me.

[MeanMag]

It's not outrageous if you know what emmitt does for a living. It's just a poor analogy. Isn't the first on this board, won't be the last.

Edited December 22, 2012 by MeanMag

[emmitt01]

It's not outrageous if you know what emmitt does for a living. It's just a poor analogy. Isn't the first on this board, won't be the last.

I agree with this in retrospect (the poor analogy part)

[GreenMachine]

Or, it could be that time has to be needlessly spent explaining the spirit behind an argument to an audience that would rather attack the medium than the message. I really shouldn't expect better.

This has happened here for as long as I have been reading this board. Instead of addressing the real problem of poor coaching, bad attitude's, etc. People would rather nit pick someones opinion, wording, or spelling. Might be why our athletic dept has never made major steps forward.

[foutsrouts]

Wow.

I guess we should never use the words "Sandy Hook" or "Newtown" again.

Feigned Internet outrage is the best kind of feigned outrage, if you ask me.

Or Aurora, or Blacksburg, or Killeen, or Dallas on a typical Saturday night, or....