Uh no....only wrongly accused persons with NBA potential should have the right to sue.
Bubu Suing ISU
- Thread starter DSMCy
- Start date
- Status
Uh no....only wrongly accused persons with NBA potential should have the right to sue.
I'm aware of that. All of that, however, was not related to him being a "crappy walk-on". It was related to him developing into a legitimate player.
Simply denying and going against everything in this thread because he was a "crappy walk-on", especially when relating it to the original assault case instead of the new case against ISU, doesn't make sense.
I didn't relate it to the original case. Maybe you meant to quote someone else. Angie was talking like Bubu was a crappy walk-on who did nothing professional. So I pointed out D league. Then Angie talked like he is better off not playing a senior year at ISU. So strictly speaking on the case of was he harmed by ISU's decision. Yes he was. The rape being true or not and ISU being right or wrong I'm not arguing.
Oh no, I wasn't arguing with you. I was just making an observation based off of your point.
I also remember articles on this website saying how good Bubu was playing during the summer.
No matter what you think about this case, University Faculty are not fit to serve as judge, jury and executioner, especially with this sensitive of a matter. Victims of abuse and victims of false accusations deserve better.
I disagree with your first sentence, from what I have heard from within the university.
First off - Monte would declare for the draft if he left this year. We don't know if he would be drafted or not, but it's pretty safe to say that Bubu would not have been drafted with the stats he had. Let's look at 2011-2012, his last whole hear playing: http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/iowa-state/2012.html
He was 9th in that class (also the following year, in which he only played part). He was a role player, as others who are FOR him in this instance, have stated. You and cyfanatic13 can be his little cheerleaders all you want, but the dude wasn't getting drafted even if he played all year. He just wasn't. He played some solid defense, and we all know how far that alone takes most in the NBA.
(Also - let's not pretend we want Monte to come back for Monte's sake. It's so the ISU team doesn't suck.)
Cyber, you DO realize that we're talking about him suing the university for lost opportunities, right? His ability to produce money after the fact is absolutely an issue. But thanks.
1.) Not Cyber, just pretending to be due to the label already being established. See signature.
2.) You were the one earlier in the thread arguing about the original case contexts, then relating that to his former non-scholarship status. I know what the new case is about. What you were arguing against earlier (see: altercation with KCClone) was more related to the original sexual assault case than to the new case.
And, I would say him currently succeeding in the D-League is a pretty good indicator that he could've had better opportunities if the situation ended differently. Then again, I'm not sitting at the Judge's bench to decide that. Honestly, I was also on the idea of "be done with it and move on" since he won the defamation suit, but if this is what he wants to pursue, I'm not going to downplay his ability to pursue it.
Did Bubu's male accomplice get convicted of rape or did that case ever go to court?
I just found that charges against both Bubu and Cruise were dropped. Could not find any information of additional "pursuit of justice" cases against Cruise.
I just found that charges against both Bubu and Cruise were dropped. Could not find any information of additional "pursuit of justice" cases against Cruise.
Last edited:
I would say that Bubu made a pretty drastic improvement while NOT playing, as seen from his current success in the D League. Who knows how much better he could have gotten had he seen more game experience.
Let's not forget that players can improve over the course of a year (Naz fr to Naz soph).
Like I said - my statement was not necessarily fact, just my opinion. Also garnered from conversations with colleagues within the university. We have different sources, apparently!
So should ISU expel students if they're accused of any crime? or just sexual assault?
If they're later found not guilty, can they re-enroll next semester?
You have said a senior season at ISU would have done nothing for him and that the D league was in fact more helpful to him. That's wrong. If you boil it down to was Bubu harmed by not getting a senior season at ISU any BB follower is going to say yes. Except you I guess.
What I actually said was "given a year of college ball at ISU he could have improved his game and received enough attention to be paid more somewhere. Europe or an easier path the D league or whatever."
Last edited:
1.) You were labeled that way before the general public for a reason. We're not dumb. But I can understand why you'd want to disassociate yourself from your past. (Cough *geodes*)
2.) I have never said that him being a crappy walk-on affected the original case at all? The case now is directly affected by him not having elite pro potential. You can sue all you want, but if your argument is that you lost out on wages, you probably should have been elite in the first place. The discussion about the earlier case only came about because people were victim-blaming, and I responded to it (see my very first post in this thread). I'm sorry if you are unable to keep up, but I can't talk slower over the internet. Maybe just pause between every word while you read?
Uh, MeowingCows is not CyBer... I've met MeowingCows in real life and know who CyBer is and they're not the same person.
You are far overreaching. I never said that another year would have done "nothing" for him. The lawsuit at hand is alleging that he was out money based off of inappropriate actions by the university. That implies the following:
- That there was a certainty of him not only improving in essentials, but remaining healthy enough to make more money.
- That these improvements would have displayed better at the combine. He continued to practice with the exact same coaches and trainers that last year - it is well-documented that being a star at the collegiate level does not matter as much as when you get into the combine and how you perform there. Visibility does not matter as much as everyone wants it to in the NBA, or else there would be no question about someone far better like Georges' game translating to the pros, or where he will be drafted. It's absolutely possible that another year could have helped his visibility, but he was already training and practicing to improve the actual measures that would be on display in the combine.
- That the university did not hold up their end of their "contract" with the player. They gave him a chance to play basketball at a level which nobody had before. He violated the school's code of conduct, at the very least, so they revoked that contract. If I am remembering correctly, they still paid for the year of education?
It's absolutely possible that another year would have helped Bubu. But, given the sheer number of people who declare early to either go overseas or go to the draft, there obviously is a benefit for some to that path. There is no way to go back and say, "Oh, Bubu FOR SURE would have benefited from another year." Given his current stats, he was not getting drafted. I don't think he had to pay for tuition. Hence, there doesn't seem to be a monetary loss.
Personal attacks at me aren't going to change the points that your arguments are not adding up short of reaching arguments and obvious bias towards the situation; insults don't validate claims. Do I need to send you a picture of my driver's license and Student ID or something as validation of my identity? Or are you just going to ban me for disagreeing with your viewpoint and just make it quick?
"Victim blaming" is a tough term here, when there legally and officially was no victim. If there was, please point it out to me, 'cuz all I can find is that this case was not legitimate... Yet, it was approached with a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality by the university (which is more or less the norm/required by public opinion), and prematurely punished as such. Sorry, you and I do not agree on this point. It is what it is.
That's also not what I'm saying, or said. My stance is that the university should make decisions that are consistent. Either you revoke all privileges, or none.
Nobody is attacking you. People are, however, using the same amount of condescension which you have displayed up-thread. I've never banned anyone for disagreeing with my viewpoint, but you can keep on with that if you'd like. Go ahead and provide a list of all of the members I have personally banned, putting an asterisk next to ones specifically for disagreeing with me. Short answer - I almost never ban, other than temp ones as agreed upon by the mod team for violating signature site rules. So the "big bad mod" thing is irrelevant here, and an attempt to deflect.
You are correct; the case was dropped on a technicality - a very ridiculous and far-reaching mistake on the part of the female. That doesn't mean there wasn't a victim.
- Status
