Did They Really Have to Suspend

Gunk wrote:

dm, I have a few questions for you...what if BYU tried to deal with it privately? What if it was maybe swept under the rug and dealt with internally? Then someone finds out and exposes BYU for being hypocritical...and that goes national? Yes, it is unfortunate that everyone knows about Davies and his indiscretions...but remember, BYU is not out there rubbing Davies nose in it. BYU is not the one running to every news outlet and shouting it out. The news outlets want to know why Davies would no longer be playing. BYU is not placing a Scarlet letter on Davies (Have you read that book because the comparison is very unfair and comletely different). BYU is not shunning Davies, nothing can be farther from the truth.

Kiwi, I'll wager thousands of students at BYU each year are guilty of gravely breaking the HC, many on the same level of Davies and his girlfriend. No one is crying hypocrisy because we don't know about those incidents.



Let's suppose it was handled privately and for some reason at a later date it came out. BYU simply says, "We handled it privately and given the circumstances felt it didn't warrant a public announcement. We thought it better for the parties involved that it not be made public. If something transpired that warranted a public announcement, etc. then we would have made it."

Believe me I can understand your point. I just don't think it is fair to say that BYU is putting a Scarlet letter on Davies and is parading him around for everyone to point at and ridicule. That is not what BYU is doing and it is not the intent of BYU or the HC office.



Also is your concern for Davies or is your concern that BYU's baskball hopes are very small now? Only you can answer that one and tell yourself if you are being sincere about your answer.

I agree!I'm so upset over how this has been handled.

I was under the impression that it was Davies who disclosed what his transgression was, not BYU. BYU only said he'd been suspended due to HC violation, which could have meant anything. What more could BYU have done?

kiwibacon wrote:
dm, I have a few questions for you...what if BYU tried to deal with it privately? What if it was maybe swept under the rug and dealt with internally? Then someone finds out and exposes BYU for being hypocritical...and that goes national? Yes, it is unfortunate that everyone knows about Davies and his indiscretions...but remember, BYU is not out there rubbing Davies nose in it. BYU is not the one running to every news outlet and shouting it out. The news outlets want to know why Davies would no longer be playing. BYU is not placing a Scarlet letter on Davies (Have you read that book because the comparison is very unfair and comletely different). BYU is not shunning Davies, nothing can be farther from the truth.

I don't see anything wrong with it being handled privately, as long as that is consistent with the standard operating procedure used in handling these types of matters. That's what happened with the other athlete I know. If someone (a reporter like Franchuk, for example) finds out and threatens to disclose the matter, BYU has a perfectly explainable position: they are handling it according to their standard procedure. BYU's detractors will detract, like they always do, but so what? That isn't going to ever change. BYU's supporters will be OK with it, because BYU is doing what they always do in these situations. The problem would arise, I suppose, if BYU wasn't doing what they always do and the publicity would look really bad. Maybe something like that is what happened here. I don't know. I'm just heartbroken about the whole situation, like a lot of people are.

kiwibacon wrote:
dm, I have a few questions for you...what if BYU tried to deal with it privately? What if it was maybe swept under the rug and dealt with internally? Then someone finds out and exposes BYU for being hypocritical...and that goes national? Yes, it is unfortunate that everyone knows about Davies and his indiscretions...but remember, BYU is not out there rubbing Davies nose in it. BYU is not the one running to every news outlet and shouting it out. The news outlets want to know why Davies would no longer be playing. BYU is not placing a Scarlet letter on Davies (Have you read that book because the comparison is very unfair and comletely different). BYU is not shunning Davies, nothing can be farther from the truth.

No of course BYU didnt place a Scarlet letter on Brandon....intentionally. And their "ends justify their means" in their minds and standard operating procedures--and dont tell me they prayed about Brandon's situation and got revelation.

Shall we ask Brandon's family if they feel shamed publicly and nationally? Even if his mom knows he made a bad decision. She has to feel her whole family has gotten thrown under the bus.

And Kiwi, if you want to start utilizing a little smack-down, I can go there. Have you read it? I realize you need things in a nice tidy simplified format. And that is fine. BUt you better bring something a little more rigorous to discuss the point than whether I have read the book or not. Shall we make a list of your infractions in life and put it out there for the whole world to see? And if you are "without sin" with your stone-casting defense of the HC office's tactics, what if you slipped up and had sex with a girl. Would you want the whole nation to know about it? THink about it.



NO BYU is not running to every news outlet. But they have thrown Brandon under the bus of the national spotlight as though they had very little forethought about how Brandon would be run over and drug through the mud AND absolutely how they want to maintain the perception that they, the mighty BYU is above reproach and would rather have Brandon get run over than face the potential for what would be an infinitesimally smaller amount of media coverage because a star bball player had sex.

Why? Because of their commitment to the almighty code? Or their supposed policies and procedures? I guarantee that many folks in the HC office are questioning in their hearts whether there was a better way to handle this. They just dont have the courage to think whether Brandon really had to suspended from the team.

If you cant stomach and accept that our precious university and its HC office isnt at least indirectly and unintentionally Scarlet lettering this kid, then try to argue that this kid is not scapegoated--meaning (and I wont dishonor you by suggesting you havent read the old testament--although I will give the simple version) he has been "cast out" THERE into the national spotlight. Intentional? NO. UNintentional and occurring right before our eyes? Absolutely.

How many polyanna's or pundits are going to be hanging onto the sacro-sanct status of the never imperfect honor code office when the byu hoops team continues its demise and fall from glory? (not that bball is as important as some things). BUt guess who will get tagged for this most colossal collapse in byu sports history? The HC office? NOt now!! Thats Right. Brandon Davies. Scarlet letter? ya youre right, nothing there. "Not fair to byu?" Ya, who the freak cares about BDavies. Do you think a hug from TH and DR is gonna take that label off? Good for them for being so loving, BUt how in the world will the history books ever be written to explain this fall wasnt as a result of BD? Brandon got injured? Brandon withdrew from school? Brandon transferred? There will be a literal and/or figurative asterisk by this season and EVERYBODY will know what derailed it. Instead of Danny Ainge driving down the court for the epic win forever in the history books, it will be Brandon Davies and his sexual indiscretions leading to the collapse of this team. Is this registering for you yet? Lets try this. "All the kings horses and all the kings men wont be able to put humpty dumpty together again." Brandon may or may not make a come back. BUt history has been written. And even the mighty Jimmer-nation and Jimmer-mania--as stratospheric as that was, isnt going to save Brandon Davies from his Scarlet Infamy.

CougarPeasant wrote:
I was under the impression that it was Davies who disclosed what his transgression was, not BYU. BYU only said he'd been suspended due to HC violation, which could have meant anything. What more could BYU have done?

NO offense CP, but you are proving my point.



"What more could the [mentally restricted--not to be confused with retarded] BYU [and the HC office] have done?"



And Kiwi, dont give me the "moral fabric of BYU would have been tattered forever" speech.

Gotta agree with dm here. It really seems as though BYU failed to recognize the scope of the publicity that would be given to their decision to suspend Brandon. David James on 1320 made a pretty good point this morning. He said, why couldn't BYU wait for three or four weeks? The season is over and won't be impacted by the decision. BYU could explain that they needed to investigate and needed the time. BYU's detractors would say that BYU is hypocritical and gives athletes special treatment, but so what? They will always say that and it won't change. The people that love BYU will still love BYU. In a few days it blows over and people move on. BYU is more capable of taking any P.R. heat from doing this than a 19 year old kid is. Yet, the decision they made puts the P.R. scrutiny on Brandon, which apparently BYU failed to anticipate. That's tough for me to believe because the BYU people that are involved in these things aren't dummies. But that's how it looks.

BYZoo wrote:
Gotta agree with dm here. It really seems as though BYU failed to recognize the scope of the publicity that would be given to their decision to suspend Brandon. David James on 1320 made a pretty good point this morning. He said, why couldn't BYU wait for three or four weeks? The season is over and won't be impacted by the decision. BYU could explain that they needed to investigate and needed the time. BYU's detractors would say that BYU is hypocritical and gives athletes special treatment, but so what? They will always say that and it won't change. The people that love BYU will still love BYU. In a few days it blows over and people move on. BYU is more capable of taking any P.R. heat from doing this than a 19 year old kid is. Yet, the decision they made puts the P.R. scrutiny on Brandon, which apparently BYU failed to anticipate. That's tough for me to believe because the BYU people that are involved in these things aren't dummies. But that's how it looks.

Yep



But regardless of our more eternal perspective, we have a tendency to react without thinking regardless of what the consequences might be because of the knee-jerk reaction. We have an inflated sense of "right" and because of that it tends to make Mormons insensitive when it comes to thinking such things through. Who cares what the consequences are, we're in the right!

CougarPeasant wrote:
I was under the impression that it was Davies who disclosed what his transgression was, not BYU. BYU only said he'd been suspended due to HC violation, which could have meant anything. What more could BYU have done?

What BYU could have done was to not disclose the nature of the violation, which they did by specifically identifying it as an honor code violation (and one that was sufficiently serious to merit suspension from the team IMMEDIATELY, before the honor code review was complete), and specifically identifying what it wasn't, officially and explicitly stating that it was not a legal issue (which eliminated DUI, illegal drug use and even under-age drinking, since Davies is a true sophomore), nor an academic issue.



Honestly, I love the LDS church and I will always bleed Cougar blue :love: (notice I separated those two words to indicate that my allegiance isn't to a message board that should not be mentioned ;) ), and a big part of that is my respect and appreciation for the way that the honor code creates a place where young adults can learn to stand firm for values in a world where values are so 50-years ago. I really appreciate the need for consequences to consistently follow actions so that the incentive remains to behave appropriately. I am a firm believer in choice and accountability. I even love that BYU's approach is to stand up and say, "look, we have nothing to hide." You have to respect that.



However, I feel strongly that BYU doesn't just need to establish integrity and trust with the media and the outside world. Keeping confidential things in confidence is critical to keeping and building trust with students and potential future students. BYU hasn't shunned Davies, but its spokespeople have definitely helped put a "scarlet letter" on him. In my opinion, it didn't have to be like that.



BYU is a private, religious institution. It doesn't owe an explanation to anyone in the general public about how its students do at keeping its moral standards, just like it has no obligation to publish how much the head coach makes every year. We are not talking about the violation of laws of the land for which BYU would need to comply with appropriate authorities. We are talking about eternal moral laws for which accountability and judgment rests with Almighty God and his chosen representatives.



Nowhere does it say that if a member of the press corp calls that BYU has to divulge anything about a perfectly legal activity that violates an eternal moral law. BYU is not sweeping anything under the rug by saying to the media, "Brandon Davies has violated an unspecified team or university rule, and will be suspended for the rest of the season. We will have no further comment about the nature of the violation. Thank you." And then the answer to every other question regarding the nature of the violation should be, "No comment. For the protection of the student, BYU will not confirm or deny anything other than that there has been a violation of a team or university rule or policy that has resulted in a suspension of said player."



Sorry to keep beating the same drum. I am not trying to be critical of BYU or its leaders. I am just seeing a conflict between the principles of honesty/forthrightness and confidentiality in a technicality not a principle. Honesty and confidentiality are both true eternal principles and both need to be honored.

dmcougar wrote:

dm, I have a few questions for you...what if BYU tried to deal with it privately? What if it was maybe swept under the rug and dealt with internally? Then someone finds out and exposes BYU for being hypocritical...and that goes national? Yes, it is unfortunate that everyone knows about Davies and his indiscretions...but remember, BYU is not out there rubbing Davies nose in it. BYU is not the one running to every news outlet and shouting it out. The news outlets want to know why Davies would no longer be playing. BYU is not placing a Scarlet letter on Davies (Have you read that book because the comparison is very unfair and comletely different). BYU is not shunning Davies, nothing can be farther from the truth.

No of course BYU didnt place a Scarlet letter on Brandon....intentionally. And their "ends justify their means" in their minds and standard operating procedures--and dont tell me they prayed about Brandon's situation and got revelation.

Shall we ask Brandon's family if they feel shamed publicly and nationally? Even if his mom knows he made a bad decision. She has to feel her whole family has gotten thrown under the bus.

And Kiwi, if you want to start utilizing a little smack-down, I can go there. Have you read it? I realize you need things in a nice tidy simplified format. And that is fine. BUt you better bring something a little more rigorous to discuss the point than whether I have read the book or not. Shall we make a list of your infractions in life and put it out there for the whole world to see? And if you are "without sin" with your stone-casting defense of the HC office's tactics, what if you slipped up and had sex with a girl. Would you want the whole nation to know about it? THink about it.

My whole point in asking if you read the book was just to make the point that the woman scorned was purposely being scorned. BYU is not purposely being scorned. From there it is I guess a viewpoint issue. Some may view it as BYU is harming Davies every step of the way and others may view it as BYU is answering questions that everyone wants answers. I however can not speak for BYU but I am merely suggesting that BYU's intent is not to shun and kick someone while they are down. Again maybe you see it different than me. So we see it differently. That is all. I am not trying for a little smack down. I don't see why you got so abrasive in your response. I was not questioning your intellect.

dmcougar wrote:
NO BYU is not running to every news outlet. But they have thrown Brandon under the bus of the national spotlight as though they had very little forethought about how Brandon would be run over and drug through the mud AND absolutely how they want to maintain the perception that they, the mighty BYU is above reproach and would rather have Brandon get run over than face the potential for what would be an infinitesimally smaller amount of media coverage because a star bball player had sex.

Why? Because of their commitment to the almighty code? Or their supposed policies and procedures? I guarantee that many folks in the HC office are questioning in their hearts whether there was a better way to handle this. They just dont have the courage to think whether Brandon really had to suspended from the team.

From everything that I have read, heard and seen Brandon brought this to Rose. I am sure Brandon and Coach Rose talked about it at length. They both are reasonably smart enough to know that the potential for this much public discussion could happen. Yes, the Davies family may feel shame. I will not attempt to guess why they feel shame though. It is not my place.

dmcougar wrote:
If you cant stomach and accept that our precious university and its HC office isnt at least indirectly and unintentionally Scarlet lettering this kid, then try to argue that this kid is not scapegoated--meaning (and I wont dishonor you by suggesting you havent read the old testament--although I will give the simple version) he has been "cast out" THERE into the national spotlight. Intentional? NO. UNintentional and occurring right before our eyes? Absolutely.

How many polyanna's or pundits are going to be hanging onto the sacro-sanct status of the never imperfect honor code office when the byu hoops team continues its demise and fall from glory? (not that bball is as important as some things). BUt guess who will get tagged for this most colossal collapse in byu sports history? The HC office? NOt now!! Thats Right. Brandon Davies. Scarlet letter? ya youre right, nothing there. "Not fair to byu?" Ya, who the freak cares about BDavies. Do you think a hug from TH and DR is gonna take that label off? Good for them for being so loving, BUt how in the world will the history books ever be written to explain this fall wasnt as a result of BD? Brandon got injured? Brandon withdrew from school? Brandon transferred? There will be a literal and/or figurative asterisk by this season and EVERYBODY will know what derailed it. Instead of Danny Ainge driving down the court for the epic win forever in the history books, it will be Brandon Davies and his sexual indiscretions leading to the collapse of this team. Is this registering for you yet? Lets try this. "All the kings horses and all the kings men wont be able to put humpty dumpty together again." Brandon may or may not make a come back. BUt history has been written. And even the mighty Jimmer-nation and Jimmer-mania--as stratospheric as that was, isnt going to save Brandon Davies from his Scarlet Infamy.

To be honest I don't care how others will see it. I am not looking for public approval. How I see it and how my kids will see it will be- Brandon Davies is a hero for making the right decisions on tough choices following a mistake. I am hoping that the story will continue and I can tell them that Davies made the biggest comeback ever in BYU sports history. A comeback that started off the court and ended with wins on the court and in life. 8)



Again my questions were just to understand your view on things. I realize we see things slightly differently and I was seeking for your insight. I was not questioning your reasoning.

dmcougar wrote:

I was under the impression that it was Davies who disclosed what his transgression was, not BYU. BYU only said he'd been suspended due to HC violation, which could have meant anything. What more could BYU have done?

NO offense CP, but you are proving my point.



"What more could the [mentally restricted--not to be confused with retarded] BYU [and the HC office] have done?"



And Kiwi, dont give me the "moral fabric of BYU would have been tattered forever" speech.

This is twice now that you have taken a condescending approach towards me. First you told me to not tell you that BYU HC prayed about it and then you said "I realize you need things in a nice tidy simplified format." You also then suggested that I feel I am a person "without sin" so I am suggesting others are casting stones.

And now this line about me giving you a speech. I overlooked your first tirade but now you single me out a second time. I am still trying to chalk it up to you misunderstanding my previous post and giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Nebraskacoug,

I think in your response you have helped me to understand maybe what dmcougar was trying to say and how he and you and others view this. The questions you raise Nebraska are valid. "Why couldn't they just respond with 'suspended for undisclosed rules violation'." I understand what you are saying Nebraska. As far as why did BYU suspend(I use the term "BYU" loosely--do we know exactly who suspended Davies from the team yet?) Davies? Well, the answer may come in knowing who actually suspended him. Was it Rose? Was it HC office? Did the AD step in and advise what should happen? I think if it comes out who suspended Davies that may give answers to the OP and others. The thread title after all is "did they really have to suspend"



If it was Rose that suspended Davies is it right or wrong? Maybe one of the team rules is immediate suspension for major violation of Honor Code. Does that make it right or wrong?



If it was the HC office is it right or wrong thing to do?



If the AD stepped in and said take action is that right or wrong?

kiwibacon wrote:
I think if it comes out who suspended Davies that may give answers to the OP and others. The thread title after all is "did they really have to suspend"



If it was Rose that suspended Davies is it right or wrong? Maybe one of the team rules is immediate suspension for major violation of Honor Code. Does that make it right or wrong?



If it was the HC office is it right or wrong thing to do?



If the AD stepped in and said take action is that right or wrong?

Excellent questions. If the offense is what it is alleged to be, I see no problem with an immediate suspension, or as has been stated by others, a revocation of the privilege of "representing the university," regardless of which body offered the suspension.



My beef is really only with the P.R. choices, not the principles or the code itself. I just really feel like the communications that have been made officially (i.e. honor code violation, not academic or legal in nature) coupled with the swiftness and gravity of the punishment (midseason, immediate suspension), coupled with Davies' age (<21) have left no other options than sexual immorality. No other infraction fits all those criteria. All that is really left to speculation is the degree of severity.



Disclosing that information, although probably unintended, is just not right, and hopefully will result in constructive discussions within the administration that will improve BYU's approach the next time this happens. What I really wish is that it just would never happen again, but in all honesty,it is remarkable how infrequently it does happen given the world we live in and the culture to which high caliber athletes are exposed.

NebraskaCoug wrote:

I think if it comes out who suspended Davies that may give answers to the OP and others. The thread title after all is "did they really have to suspend"



If it was Rose that suspended Davies is it right or wrong? Maybe one of the team rules is immediate suspension for major violation of Honor Code. Does that make it right or wrong?



If it was the HC office is it right or wrong thing to do?



If the AD stepped in and said take action is that right or wrong?

Excellent questions. If the offense is what it is alleged to be, I see no problem with an immediate suspension, or as has been stated by others, a revocation of the privilege of "representing the university," regardless of which body offered the suspension.



My beef is really only with the P.R. choices, not the principles or the code itself. I just really feel like the communications that have been made officially (i.e. honor code violation, not academic or legal in nature) coupled with the swiftness and gravity of the punishment (midseason, immediate suspension), coupled with Davies' age (<21) have left no other options than sexual immorality. No other infraction fits all those criteria. All that is really left to speculation is the degree of severity.



Disclosing that information, although probably unintended, is just not right, and hopefully will result in constructive discussions within the administration that will improve BYU's approach the next time this happens. What I really wish is that it just would never happen again, but in all honesty,it is remarkable how infrequently it does happen given the world we live in and the culture to which high caliber athletes are exposed.

Who is giving all the information to the media? Is it Carrie Jenkins? Maybe she is not the right person to be in that position?



I am interested to know who did the suspending if only for an understanding for how and why things played out the way they did.

kiwibacon wrote:

Who is giving all the information to the media? Is it Carrie Jenkins? Maybe she is not the right person to be in that position?



I am interested to know who did the suspending if only for an understanding for how and why things played out the way they did.

I am not even trying to be a critic of Carrie Jenkins. Being a public spokesperson has got to be a terribly difficult job. When you are the "official" source for an institution as large as BYU (and by extension in the minds of some listeners the LDS church), it is definitely impossible to please everyone, and get everything right. I just hope that someone in a position of authority or administration is listening and offers some counsel for improvement in the future.



Although I agree that with how things have played out this time, it would be nice to know who passed down the suspension, I really feel like the sooner BYU starts saying "no additional comment" the sooner Brandon will be able to move on with his life. I'm hoping that Brandon's teammates can band together and recreate enough buzz to change the focus in the media back to where it should be in March.:love: 8) :crazy: :evil:

NebraskaCoug wrote:

Who is giving all the information to the media? Is it Carrie Jenkins? Maybe she is not the right person to be in that position?



I am interested to know who did the suspending if only for an understanding for how and why things played out the way they did.

I am not even trying to be a critic of Carrie Jenkins. Being a public spokesperson has got to be a terribly difficult job. When you are the "official" source for an institution as large as BYU (and by extension in the minds of some listeners the LDS church), it is definitely impossible to please everyone, and get everything right. I just hope that someone in a position of authority or administration is listening and offers some counsel for improvement in the future.



Although I agree that with how things have played out this time, it would be nice to know who passed down the suspension, I really feel like the sooner BYU starts saying "no additional comment" the sooner Brandon will be able to move on with his life. I'm hoping that Brandon's teammates can band together and recreate enough buzz to change the focus in the media back to where it should be in March.:love: 8) :crazy: :evil:

IMO, the problem is this: there is no way to suspend a high profile student without people eventually figuring out why. There will always be students that know about it and are willing to speak to the media. So the handling of press releases, while I agree with what you're saying, is not going to matter. The only way situations like this get avoided is if BYU makes fundamental changes with how these issues are handled.. i.e., refer the issues to the student's ecclesiastical leader first, let the repentance process play out, and if the student can't cut it, send it to the HC office for discipline as a last resort. And that has to apply to everyone, not just high profile athletes.



PR-wise this whole situation could conceivably turn out ok if Davies comes back, thanks BYU publicly, we all get warm and fuzzy, and the national media reports it. Seems unlikely. The reality right now is that this is a PR nightmare. Some of us may stick our heads in the sand saying those that are disgusted at BYU about this issue would be disgusted by the church regardless. Ridiculous. The public parading of Davies' transgression seems excessively heavy-handed to plenty of good, religious people everywhere..Right or wrong, that's the perception. And although BYU didn't send out a press release saying "he fornicated", they handled it in such a way that public knowledge was inevitable. Speaking of PR, the only thing my coworkers here on the east coast have read/commented on about BYU in the past 5-10 years has been Harvey Unga and Davies getting booted for sex. That's the PR reality for BYU.

NCPUMA wrote:
IMO, the problem is this: there is no way to suspend a high profile student without people eventually figuring out why. There will always be students that know about it and are willing to speak to the media. So the handling of press releases, while I agree with what you're saying, is not going to matter.

I never said that BYU would be able to keep the media wolves from getting their prey. The important distinction is that BYU shouldn't be packaging and delivering the prey like the Schwann's guy. The way BYU handles issues like this one and Harvey Unga's situation, and even Elaine Michaelis' firing (and possibly others that don't immediately come to mind) demonstrates that there isn't enough emphasis on mercy or consideration for the feelilngs of high profile individuals, who despite their relative celebrity are no less human than other individuals who have a lower profile.



I just have a hard time believing that this is the way Jesus would approach this situation. When the woman was taken in adultery, he was quick to difuse the public outcry for harsh justice and root out hypocrisy by inviting the sinless to cast the first stone. And when all had departed, convicted in their hearts, he was quick to invite the sinner whom he had protected from her executioners, to repent, adding, importantly, that he did not condemn her.



Each of the three individuals I have mentioned are true blue loyal cougars who have given their time and ample talents to bring success and praise to the university. I don't know what precipitated the unceremonious firing of Michaelis, but for the other two, at the first sign of wrongdoing, they were pushed to the front line of the battle and left there while the official representatives of the university retreated back and offered somewhat hollow words of sympathy from their safe retreat. BYU needs to demonstrate loyalty and compassion to the individual in the way its representatives communicate.

The only way situations like this get avoided is if BYU makes fundamental changes with how these issues are handled.. i.e., refer the issues to the student's ecclesiastical leader first, let the repentance process play out, and if the student can't cut it, send it to the HC office for discipline as a last resort. And that has to apply to everyone, not just high profile athletes.

I don't disagree with this suggestion, however, I don't know for certain that it doesn't follow this path to some extent already. There is almost nothing but speculation about how this process happened for Davies. It is very possible that Davies was dealing with this situation with his bishop, and his bishop recommended that as part of his repentance process that he needed to confess to Coach Rose and/or the honor code office. To be honest, I don't know anyone personally who has had a serious run-in with the honor code office (and even if I did, I am not sure they would necessarily paint a true picture of the honor code office and/or their processes), so I don't know all the inner workings of the process. But, as long as the eternal principles and values are maintained, technical changes can always be made to improve any process.

The reality right now is that this is a PR nightmare. Some of us may stick our heads in the sand saying those that are disgusted at BYU about this issue would be disgusted by the church regardless. Ridiculous. The public parading of Davies' transgression seems excessively heavy-handed to plenty of good, religious people everywhere..Right or wrong, that's the perception. And although BYU didn't send out a press release saying "he fornicated", they handled it in such a way that public knowledge was inevitable.

You are eloquently making my point for me. Thank you. ;)

Speaking of PR, the only thing my coworkers here on the east coast have read/commented on about BYU in the past 5-10 years has been Harvey Unga and Davies getting booted for sex. That's the PR reality for BYU.

This is sad, but no doubt true.



We need to extend the same mercy and loyalty to the BYU representatives and honor code personnel that we wish had been extended to the violators of the code. They are humans with good intentions who make mistakes too. In that spirit, I hope that they are learning from their mistakes and improving as a result.

I appreciate those who have kept the discussion civil in nature, and I hope that we will all try to refrain from personal attacks on one another in the future.



Yes, I realize that some believe the HC Office can literally do nothing right, and others believe they have handled this situation about as well as it could be. But lets try to discuss the issue politely, or the thread will have to be locked.



Thank you.

Can't repentance wait until after the basketball season?

repentance was underway and ongoing.

I think you mean, if I read correctly, did justice have to be so swift?