Can we please refrain from villainizing the schwenkes

Lawboy wrote:
I just want to point at that come Feb. 3, I will be ready to move on from this, and move forward with the guys who send in the LOI's. I follow Cougar Football, not ND, UW or any other school. If BYU recruits go elsewhere, good luck to them, but I could care little about them, and will not comment about them anymore as they are not Cougars.



GO BYU!!!!!

there is a pattern of behavior in some of the poly recruits (and their families) though that leads us to believe that this a trend and not isolated instances. a trend like that affects byu recruiting in the future and shouldn't be completely glossed away.



just the same, Bronco and Co. have started their own trend, which is, "if you aren't 100% commited, good riddance; we'll win without you."



discussing the schwenke (and teo, and havili, and kaveinga, etc. etc. issues) trends has bearing on BYU football and certainly deserves discussion; particularly during the recruiting season.

jonnylingo wrote:

So there are now questions of whether or not Kona Schwenke and family ever bothered making trips to Provo when invited, yet jumped at the chance to visit other schools....



I went from confused, to bugged, to straight out angry now. The schwenke name is now right next to the teo name on my s**t list.



if you want to go somewhere else, go somewhere else, don't blame it on BYU, when you were never 100% honest with BYU...

jonnylingo wrote:

I personally don't believe that statement that the schwenkes still don't want to go to byu. while its true they were obviously not 100 percent committed, i still think that byu had the best shot at signing day if they didn't pull his offer. I understand on principle however why bronco pulled it. I dont blame him. i still think this whole thing became a way bigger deal than it had to when bronco compared his committment to play to his commitment or ability to keep the honor code. comparing the temptation of notre dame with the temptation to drink or something. that is just stupid.[/quote]



You still insist on villainizing Bronco. How do you know exactly what Bronco said, because Mr Schwenke told you???? How reliable is that???? Disgruntled people, or even just people who are looking for an excuse, often "quote" others in a manner that will shed the best light on themselves, and the worst light on the others. You have been giving Schwenkes the bebefit of the doubt for days, now please give Bronco the same benefit. Thank you.

So, Kona was "100% committed to BYU" and just wanted to visit friends.



Explain this comment made after he sent his LOI to Notre Dame



I thought it was going to be a hard decision between BYU and Notre Dame, but BYU pulled out and made it easier," Schwenke explained.



The more the Schwenke's open their mouths, the more they either (a) lie, or (b) reveal they were lying earlier. Sorry to villainize.

So does that make Ross Apo a liar, too, since he verballed to Texas first, before de-cmotting to go to BYU? It goes both ways. Win some, lose some.



To be honest, I'd rather gain a skilled WR with speed and size like Apo and lose a good DE recruit like Schwenke. BYU has no trouble getting big Dlineman. We struggle at the skill spots. So losing Jamora and Schwenke are smaller losses to me than the gain we got with Apo. All things considered, good trade for BYU. Espcially since the Schwenke issue free up a schollie for Kaveinga or someone else. I think this was for the best, and I do not care how it went down, because it was for the best. In the future, kids know what to expect, that Bronc sticks to his guns. nice lesson learned for all moving forward. Win-win in my book.

How many times do we have to go over the differences in Apo and Schwenke?

Lawboy wrote:
So does that make Ross Apo a liar, too, since he verballed to Texas first, before de-cmotting to go to BYU? It goes both ways. Win some, lose some.

LOL. There is no comparison. One is a kid telling a school, 'nevermind, I think I made the wrong decision' while the other is a kid lying to a school about his intentions. The two situations are not even comparable.



Kona is a liar. He said "I am 100% committed to BYU and just taking this trip to visit friends" up until the very minute BYU pulled his scholarship offer. He then told the media "It was going to be a tough decision between the two, but then BYU made it easy by pulling the scholarship." If either of those statements is true, the other has to be false. Had Kona said "Bronco, I may have made the wrong choice, so I am looking at other option," then he would not be a liar--he would have been honest and straightforward like Apo.

Man, some peoples kids...





With Apo commiting to the Y, we are overlooking what a "brave" decision that is. I understand that at the end of the day it is all about football, but with that being said I would have personally have reservations about going to a super religious private institution when I was in the minority...



So instead of holding up OC and Apo and others for making a hard decision and sacrifices (who DOESN'T want to have sex at age 19) to better themselves and the teams they play for, WE GO AND COMPARE THEM TO TWO-FACED b@stards like Kona.



What gives? Honestly...



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

snoscythe wrote:

So does that make Ross Apo a liar, too, since he verballed to Texas first, before de-cmotting to go to BYU? It goes both ways. Win some, lose some.

LOL. There is no comparison. One is a kid telling a school, 'nevermind, I think I made the wrong decision' while the other is a kid lying to a school about his intentions. The two situations are not even comparable.



Kona is a liar. He said "I am 100% committed to BYU and just taking this trip to visit friends" up until the very minute BYU pulled his scholarship offer. He then told the media "It was going to be a tough decision between the two, but then BYU made it easy by pulling the scholarship." If either of those statements is true, the other has to be false. Had Kona said "Bronco, I may have made the wrong choice, so I am looking at other option," then he would not be a liar--he would have been honest and straightforward like Apo.

So saying 'nevermind' is honoring his commitment to play at texas. Kona was clearly looking elsewhere but he still had byu as one of his top choices, if not the top choice. so yes he was lying in the fact that they were obviously still looking, but in a more general persecptive in terms of 'honor' that everybody keeps throwing around, Apo didn't honor his verbal commit to texas just the same as kona didn't. there really isn't much of a difference. both didn't honor their verbal commitments, they just 'dishonored' them in different ways. this is why all the talk about honor and verbal commitments is stupid. ITS RECRUITING not church. bronco applied a different standard to apo than he did to kona with good reason. i don't disagree with what he did. i only disagree with any type of implication that honoring a verbal commitment is even in any way remotely the same as honoring the honor code was you have signed on the dotted line.

snoscythe wrote:

So does that make Ross Apo a liar, too, since he verballed to Texas first, before de-cmotting to go to BYU? It goes both ways. Win some, lose some.

LOL. There is no comparison. One is a kid telling a school, 'nevermind, I think I made the wrong decision' while the other is a kid lying to a school about his intentions. The two situations are not even comparable.



Kona is a liar. He said "I am 100% committed to BYU and just taking this trip to visit friends" up until the very minute BYU pulled his scholarship offer. He then told the media "It was going to be a tough decision between the two, but then BYU made it easy by pulling the scholarship." If either of those statements is true, the other has to be false. Had Kona said "Bronco, I may have made the wrong choice, so I am looking at other option," then he would not be a liar--he would have been honest and straightforward like Apo.

so what you are saying then, is if kona would have just said i am looking at other schools and still thinking of where to go, then it would have been okay? then there would be no difference between him and apo?

I guess I look at things too much like a lawyer then. To me, the core issue is identical. Now, how they went about it was different, but that is it.



The core was both made verbal commitments to another school. Kona to BYU, Apo to Texas. Both then backed out and changed schools commitments. Apo was less messy, but a decommit all the same. Had he verballed early to BYU, then changed in the summer to Texas, many would still be mad because it happened. As to Kona, he verballed, then backed up and ended up at Notre Dame. He talked out of both sides of his mouth in the process, and changed really late. But at the end of the day, it was the same result as Apo. And the same as Jamora, who did hte same thing, but it being left alone as well. An early commit and a change to another school. Period.



How they went about it was way different though, and that is what people are picking up on. Apo did it in the summer, was more precise with it, less messy. Was like a sniper shooting. As to Kona, his was more like a messy knife butcher job. Messier scene, got uglier. But at the end of the day, if we were to try the so called "crimes", they get charged with the same thing. Just different elements to discuss in court. And that is the issue people are attaching to, and that I will not. For reasons listed above.

Lawboy wrote:
I guess I look at things too much like a lawyer then. To me, the core issue is identical. Now, how they went about it was different, but that is it.



The core was both made verbal commitments to another school. Kona to BYU, Apo to Texas. Both then backed out and changed schools commitments. Apo was less messy, but a decommit all the same. Had he verballed early to BYU, then changed in the summer to Texas, many would still be mad because it happened. As to Kona, he verballed, then backed up and ended up at Notre Dame. He talked out of both sides of his mouth in the process, and changed really late. But at the end of the day, it was the same result as Apo. And the same as Jamora, who did hte same thing, but it being left alone as well. An early commit and a change to another school. Period.



How they went about it was way different though, and that is what people are picking up on. Apo did it in the summer, was more precise with it, less messy. Was like a sniper shooting. As to Kona, his was more like a messy knife butcher job. Messier scene, got uglier. But at the end of the day, if we were to try the so called "crimes", they get charged with the same thing. Just different elements to discuss in court. And that is the issue people are attaching to, and that I will not. For reasons listed above.

Maybe its our legal background that make us think similar? Enter the lawyers and sense of honor joke in 3.....2.....1.

snoscythe wrote:

So does that make Ross Apo a liar, too, since he verballed to Texas first, before de-cmotting to go to BYU? It goes both ways. Win some, lose some.

LOL. There is no comparison. One is a kid telling a school, 'nevermind, I think I made the wrong decision' while the other is a kid lying to a school about his intentions. The two situations are not even comparable.



Kona is a liar. He said "I am 100% committed to BYU and just taking this trip to visit friends" up until the very minute BYU pulled his scholarship offer. He then told the media "It was going to be a tough decision between the two, but then BYU made it easy by pulling the scholarship." If either of those statements is true, the other has to be false. Had Kona said "Bronco, I may have made the wrong choice, so I am looking at other option," then he would not be a liar--he would have been honest and straightforward like Apo.

Sno Dawg - Bingo!!!! +1 x 10.

During the recruiting process - up to & including LOI day - I refrained - and asked others from villifying Kona Schwenke & his Dad. Now that the LOI is all over & we have some distance & more facts have been revealed - it's time to tell it like it is. Both Kona & his Dad acted poorly - without integrity - without class - beneath both of them. I understand Kona is High School kid - facing a tough decision - inexperienced & caught up in the moment. That's where a Dad steps in & helps his son make good choices. If they wanted to look around - fine. Man up to it & be honest. Call, email, or txt Bronco & let him know. It's called honesty! That's life. But - to be at the airport - professing your loyalty & commitment to the Y - when IT IS NOT TRUE. That is what pissed me & every BYU fan's off. The deceit & disingenuous bull$*!t that the Schwenke clan was spewing was thinly veiled & not convincing. The Cougs are better off w/ out their ilk. Good luck & good-bye being associated with a mediocre program trying to regain the magic. It's a long & painful road. The Cougs will be just fine.

:crazy:

Is this going to be an issue with people until we have someone else decommit from BYU?



Kona may be good in high school, but we'll never know until the time passes AND by then we'll already have a stud who is just as good or better than him at that time.



I say we focus our attention one the loyal studs who kept their word with BYU and let bygones be bygones.

Lawboy wrote:
I guess I look at things too much like a lawyer then. To me, the core issue is identical. Now, how they went about it was different, but that is it.



The core was both made verbal commitments to another school. Kona to BYU, Apo to Texas. Both then backed out and changed schools commitments. Apo was less messy, but a decommit all the same. Had he verballed early to BYU, then changed in the summer to Texas, many would still be mad because it happened. As to Kona, he verballed, then backed up and ended up at Notre Dame. He talked out of both sides of his mouth in the process, and changed really late. But at the end of the day, it was the same result as Apo. And the same as Jamora, who did hte same thing, but it being left alone as well. An early commit and a change to another school. Period.



How they went about it was way different though, and that is what people are picking up on. Apo did it in the summer, was more precise with it, less messy. Was like a sniper shooting. As to Kona, his was more like a messy knife butcher job. Messier scene, got uglier. But at the end of the day, if we were to try the so called "crimes", they get charged with the same thing. Just different elements to discuss in court. And that is the issue people are attaching to, and that I will not. For reasons listed above.

False.



When did Kona "decommit" or back out????? Can you show me where he decommitted to BYU before his scholarship offer was withdrawn? He never did. He was insisting 100% commitment to the very end, even after Bronco pulled the scholarship. That's like saying you quit, but only after you've been fired. Apo read the writing on the wall and decommitted himself, showing honesty.



How can you say the core issue is the same when one person is acting (Apo decommitting) and the other is being acted upon (Schwenke having his scholarship pulled).



The lawyer in you needs to learn about distinctions.

snoscythe wrote:

I guess I look at things too much like a lawyer then. To me, the core issue is identical. Now, how they went about it was different, but that is it.



The core was both made verbal commitments to another school. Kona to BYU, Apo to Texas. Both then backed out and changed schools commitments. Apo was less messy, but a decommit all the same. Had he verballed early to BYU, then changed in the summer to Texas, many would still be mad because it happened. As to Kona, he verballed, then backed up and ended up at Notre Dame. He talked out of both sides of his mouth in the process, and changed really late. But at the end of the day, it was the same result as Apo. And the same as Jamora, who did hte same thing, but it being left alone as well. An early commit and a change to another school. Period.



How they went about it was way different though, and that is what people are picking up on. Apo did it in the summer, was more precise with it, less messy. Was like a sniper shooting. As to Kona, his was more like a messy knife butcher job. Messier scene, got uglier. But at the end of the day, if we were to try the so called "crimes", they get charged with the same thing. Just different elements to discuss in court. And that is the issue people are attaching to, and that I will not. For reasons listed above.

False.



When did Kona "decommit" or back out????? Can you show me where he decommitted to BYU before his scholarship offer was withdrawn? He never did. He was insisting 100% commitment to the very end, even after Bronco pulled the scholarship. That's like saying you quit, but only after you've been fired. Apo read the writing on the wall and decommitted himself, showing honesty.



How can you say the core issue is the same when one person is acting (Apo decommitting) and the other is being acted upon (Schwenke having his scholarship pulled).



The lawyer in you needs to learn about distinctions.

Good Post Sno.



If Bronco ever comes down hard on a kid for breaking a verbal to BYU, then you can compare that to Apo.



The only think you could possibly fault Bronco for in the Kona case is that he did not trust him. As things unfolded, we can see that this was wisdom in the end.

snoscythe wrote:

How can you say the core issue is the same when one person is acting (Apo decommitting) and the other is being acted upon (Schwenke having his scholarship pulled).



The lawyer in you needs to learn about distinctions.

Per Bronco policy, the second he took the ND trip he decommitted. Kona acted, and due to his actions, BYU then acted upon him. Not the other way around. Apo acted--decommitted--and then BYU acted by offering. I think I got he distinctions correct. In both cases, BYU acted after the recruit did.

snoscythe wrote:

I guess I look at things too much like a lawyer then. To me, the core issue is identical. Now, how they went about it was different, but that is it.



The core was both made verbal commitments to another school. Kona to BYU, Apo to Texas. Both then backed out and changed schools commitments. Apo was less messy, but a decommit all the same. Had he verballed early to BYU, then changed in the summer to Texas, many would still be mad because it happened. As to Kona, he verballed, then backed up and ended up at Notre Dame. He talked out of both sides of his mouth in the process, and changed really late. But at the end of the day, it was the same result as Apo. And the same as Jamora, who did hte same thing, but it being left alone as well. An early commit and a change to another school. Period.



How they went about it was way different though, and that is what people are picking up on. Apo did it in the summer, was more precise with it, less messy. Was like a sniper shooting. As to Kona, his was more like a messy knife butcher job. Messier scene, got uglier. But at the end of the day, if we were to try the so called "crimes", they get charged with the same thing. Just different elements to discuss in court. And that is the issue people are attaching to, and that I will not. For reasons listed above.

False.



When did Kona "decommit" or back out????? Can you show me where he decommitted to BYU before his scholarship offer was withdrawn? He never did. He was insisting 100% commitment to the very end, even after Bronco pulled the scholarship. That's like saying you quit, but only after you've been fired. Apo read the writing on the wall and decommitted himself, showing honesty.



How can you say the core issue is the same when one person is acting (Apo decommitting) and the other is being acted upon (Schwenke having his scholarship pulled).



The lawyer in you needs to learn about distinctions.

Maybe there is a distinction, but is it a distinction that matters, I don't think so for the reasons I stated above. You are the one pimping "honoring your verbal commitment" and the honor code is about "honor". What is the difference between these two actions. They both "lied" by your definitions. Both verbally committed to play at one school. One flat our broke that promise, the other may have even kept it but was shopping around at the same time. both "lied" and didn't honor their commitments. One of them you think is okay because it came out in byu's favor, the other you don't because it didn't. If the honor code is about honor and honring your verbal commitment relates to that, then both of these are no different. While kona's was more decietful, i dont' think anybody disagress with that, the distinction is irrelevant inthe overall argument you are all making about honor and commitment.



What is really going on is that you are saying is that being dishonest is okay unless you are being dishonest to byu. Otherwise its excusable and honorable. Your trying to have your cake and eat it to. All this emphasis on 'honor' in relation to verbal commitments to play football before lio day is stupid. I wish people would just say it like it is. Apo came to byu so we think he great. kona screwed us so we dont.



kona was wrong becuase he tripped after his commitment. apo was wrong because he actually took the step so far that he decommited from the school he promised to go somewhere else. Some would argue that distinction makes his dishonesty even worse becuase kona may have still chosen byu.



I personally don't think apo did anything wrong. until his name is on the dotted line its all fair play. I think Kona should have said nd is a great opportunity, i want to at least check it out coach, but please dont' pull my schollie. i just don't want to think what if my whole life. I want to be sure that byu is right for me and to konw that i have to take this trip. that is what he should have done. at that point bronco could have at least taken him at his word or not.

Mars wrote:




Jamora decommitted and committed elsewhere, pretty cut and dried. He never did a very good job explaining WHY, but it doesn't really matter in the end. He didn't go out and openly slander BYU or make up any stories.



Kona and his dad are both liars, and went about in the 11th hour in a very sneaky and dishonest way. No one can deny that anymore.



Those are 3 different situations, and anyone who says they are the same is either coming in with a strong anti-BYU slant or they just aren't paying attention.

Exactly. Kona (or at least his dad) knew to play the "answered prayer" card at BYU, the "Prestige" card at ND... Etc. I am wondering if he finds it so easy to de-commit from God and his supposed (hopefully made up) "answered prayer" - You don't want Him to pull His Offer...



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

jonnylingo wrote:

Lawboy wrote:
So does that make Ross Apo a liar, too, since he verballed to Texas first, before de-cmotting to go to BYU? It goes both ways. Win some, lose some.

LOL. There is no comparison. One is a kid telling a school, 'nevermind, I think I made the wrong decision' while the other is a kid lying to a school about his intentions. The two situations are not even comparable.



Kona is a liar. He said "I am 100% committed to BYU and just taking this trip to visit friends" up until the very minute BYU pulled his scholarship offer. He then told the media "It was going to be a tough decision between the two, but then BYU made it easy by pulling the scholarship." If either of those statements is true, the other has to be false. Had Kona said "Bronco, I may have made the wrong choice, so I am looking at other option," then he would not be a liar--he would have been honest and straightforward like Apo.

So saying 'nevermind' is honoring his commitment to play at texas. Kona was clearly looking elsewhere but he still had byu as one of his top choices, if not the top choice. so yes he was lying in the fact that they were obviously still looking, but in a more general persecptive in terms of 'honor' that everybody keeps throwing around, Apo didn't honor his verbal commit to texas just the same as kona didn't. there really isn't much of a difference. both didn't honor their verbal commitments, they just 'dishonored' them in different ways. this is why all the talk about honor and verbal commitments is stupid. ITS RECRUITING not church. bronco applied a different standard to apo than he did to kona with good reason. i don't disagree with what he did. i only disagree with any type of implication that honoring a verbal commitment is even in any way remotely the same as honoring the honor code was you have signed on the dotted line.

Apo absolutely honored his commitment. He only decommitted when Texas got verbals from two top-10 receivers and then told him they might not be able to hold up their end of the bargain. You tell me--when the school tells you, "Gee, we might not have a scholarship for you after all....you might have to walk-on" should the kid still be bound by his word to go to that school as a walk-on when his "verbal" was given in response to an offer of a scholarship? I don't think he is.



Kona lied to the media when he said he was 100% committed until BYU pulled his scholarship and then later told them he was having a tough time deciding between the two up until Bronco rescinded the offer. There was absolutely nothing honorable about how Schwenke dealt with things.