Until our "friend" from South Carolina sent the thread to Siberia, we were beginning to delve into whether certain students should be held to a higher standard - namely athletes. I will go a step further and include those that represent the university in an official capacity such as the student senate president or editor of the Post. Should these folks, particularly those on scholarship, be held to a higher standard in terms of their public behavior?

I think there's a question of a "higher" standard and the question of a "double" standard. Perhaps they are one in the same.

I would hold people of office, or faculty/coaches in this case,to a higher standard. Anyone who is in a position of power has more responsibility to conduct themselves in a positive light.

For athletes, there may be a perception of a double-standard. Do they get softer or harsher penalties than the typical student because of their "status"? I've seen it both ways.

I am with the coaches on whatever they do with Irons. I am talking about in general. Football teams are supposed to be families and you don't discard family. As far as Irons, I would consider his statement his grades and what judiciaries has to say before I would levy my punishment.

+1

I believe athletes represent what is the finest of your university. Student athletes I believe are the cream of the crop on campus. Sure they may not get 4.0's, but you better believe they are maintaining good grades while staying off the social scene and continuing to do good. Always remembered the line our coach in hs gave us and one I use for our interns: "Don't do anything that will make the front page, especially because of who you represent." Whether this is family or employer you represent, you can't afford to pull a Maleek Irons.

As to the strike policy, I am a believer in second chances. Kids can be young and stupid and naturally events occur. That said, the fact that this was strike two, I don't want to know what strike 3 would have looked like. I am sorry that the situation occurred and we have all made young mistakes. For me, this is one I can't justify in any way, shape or form. And yes, every violation of team or societal laws have to be weighed differently. For him to be driving drunk, not only does it put him at risk but puts others walking home or whatever at risk. Don't get me wrong, I may be what some would call a social drinker as some posters on here know, but I will NEVER commit the sin of being stupid with beer and a car. Always know your options when it comes to this and even more surprising we as a university don't have a sponsorship slot for green cab (cough, athletes get home sober).

Nonetheless, let me get back on my rocker and talk other topics on this board about the lack of recruiting Ohio for football, and the great recruiting of Ohio for basketball.

Interesting question and thread, inspired by the Maleek Irons situation.

To me, when an athlete is given a full scholarship and possibly even a stipend as the NCAA now allows, yes they should be held to a higher standard. As JFK said, to whom much is given much is expected.

In college I played soccer and wrestled on the D1 level,as a walk on.

Tore the cartilage in both knees and had one badly separated shoulder.

I still live with the effects of those injuries.

Participating in college sports is not mandatory.
You know the risks going in.

The fact that you may get injured,doesn't take away from the advantages a "full ride" gives.

I don't know if I speak for most athletes,but the experiences I had in college sports,without a scholarship,and with the injuries were worth it.

I played soccer for O.U. and wrestled for F.D.U.
It was made clear to us at both universities that we were very visible representatives (ambassadors) of the school and were expected to act accordingly.

As far as being treated the same as other students.
One night at O.U. some guys used the window in my dorm room to shoot off a couple of bottle rockets.
I wasn't involved,but,obviously,knew who was.
The RD for the dorm saw them being shot off and brought me in for some type of
hearing,don't remember what they called it.
I told them I wasn't involved.
I got asked to tell them who was.
I asked, if I gave them the names,would that affect my punishment ?
No.
I got one Quarter probation,they never got any names.

I think he might have dual citizenship. His father is American.

Seriously????? Give that a break!!! The man made a mistake, it happens, the community, his friends everyone has moved on. But the entire claim was proven a sham when his attorney embarrassed the entire process by producing samples and having them tested in an un-certified labratory (place lost their license for poor practices of handling and testing samples). The samples had so much HGH it would have killed a horse. So NO need to bring that mess into this!

Interesting. Do you know where he was born?
===========================

According to the U.S. Immigration Service website:

"Child of U.S. Citizen Parent and Foreign National Parent​ [9]

​"A child born outside of the ​United States​ and its outlying possessions acquires citizenship at birth if at the time of birth:​

​•One parent is a foreign national and the other parent is a U.S. citizen; and​
​
•The U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States for at least ​5 ​years, including at least ​2 ​years after 14 years of age.​"
==========================

Frank choose the wrong firm to do the hair analysis. This means we really have no proof, one way or the other, what a legitimate analysis would have shown. I, for one, take Frank at his word that he believes he was drugged. Your mileage may differ. I, therefore, respect others who might have other opinions on this matter. But, as I said, we actually have no firm evidence one way or the other.

I keep seeing people using HGH.
As far as I know,that's Human Growth Hormone.

I thought the issue with Frank was GHB (the date rape drug).