ADVERTISEMENT

Should Mo be kicked off the team?

Should Mo be kicked off the team

  • Yes

    Votes: 153 44.7%
  • No

    Votes: 189 55.3%

  • Total voters
    342
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think Mo should be kicked off the team at all. I'm just saying that the people screaming for Mo to go should also be screaming for Frost to be in trouble.
You're grasping at straws my friend.
 
Why would he? MW wasn’t even charged with anything. I don’t get the premise that the coach would be responsible in a case like this. He knew MW was being investigated for something, sending an inappropriate text, so he should have kicked him off the team? Even if he was never charged with anything? Even if it turned out to be a false accusation? I understand wanting MW to be held accountable table, but they Lynch min coming after Frost now?? Wow.
X1000.

People must not know the difference between voluntary questioning and an actual court order/charge.

By their logic, I could literally call the cops right now, accuse someone of doing something, and the coach should suspend that player before authorities have even figured out whether the player needs to be called in by a court order.

But even that doesnt matter. MW was obviously denying this. Who would have told SF the details of this case? I still dont even think he could have known this.
 
Anybody who thinks Frost is or even should be in trouble over this is really out of their mind. Nothing more needs to be said.
They are out of their mind or they want him to be in trouble.
Dont kid yourself, they lurk.
Pay attention to who is always in the negative threads and never posting in the positive ones, or never posting about positive recruiting news.
 
Let’s pause here a bit, the lawyer who is mentioned does not appear to be an employee of the University that I can tell, he claims he never represented himself as such either.

Here is an article from a larger news outlet

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...85a31c-2fef-11e9-8781-763619f12cb4_story.html

Bruning said he represented only Washington. In an email to AP, Bruning wrote, “First, I’ve never represented the University of Nebraska as legal counsel, and I’ve never held myself out as doing so. Second, I did not share the search warrant with anyone at the university. My sense is that it was protected by attorney-client privilege.”
Agreed. Very irresponsible and stupid journalism by 10/11 claiming that the athletic department knew about the nature of the investigation. There was nothing in the 10/11 article at all or anything publicly available that the athletic department knew the nature of the allegations regarding Maurice.
 
Agreed. Very irresponsible and stupid journalism by 10/11 claiming that the athletic department knew about the nature of the investigation. There was nothing in the 10/11 article at all or anything publicly available that the athletic department knew the nature of the allegations regarding Maurice.
Thank you. I had to read it twice because I thought I missed something big.
 
They are out of their mind or they want him to be in trouble.
Dont kid yourself, they lurk.
Pay attention to who is always in the negative threads and never posting in the positive ones, or never posting about positive recruiting news.

Are you talking about me? I post plenty in positive threads. If you think otherwise you have selective memory or are just willfully ignorant.
 
Not at all. You wouldnt have to ask if it was you because youd know.

Cool. FTR, I don't think Frost should take any heat for this, and I DON'T think Mo should get kicked off the team. I am just saying that with the way people portrayed this as such a big deal, if it is found to be true that Frost knew and still let Mo play, then by their own reasoning he should get some heat for it.
 
Anybody who thinks Frost is or even should be in trouble over this is really out of their mind. Nothing more needs to be said.
Yeah, it should be Moos. He’s not only a drunk, but he’s also a liar.







I kid. I kid.
 
Oh, and NebrasketLOL is beating Minny right now, we're gonna get the upset W! How's that for positivity!!!? :Cool:
 
What does it mean by "the university knew"? Spell it out. Literally. If you beat around the bush on this question, it means you dont know anything "for a fact."

Also, if Frost knew, which I still very much doubt he knew the details or seriousness, especially since it was an investigation at the time and not an actual arrest/summoning/court order....

What the hell is he supposed to do? Break the attorney/client confidentiality and blow the lid off the entire investigation, even though no one at the time, including the invesigators, knew what would come of it?

Is he supposed to say "we are suspending MW because authorities want him to voluntarily answer questions about a case hes not even curently being charged for, or even summoned for questioning by a court for. Oh and dont ask what its about as details arent supposed to be spilled here."

Its insane.
I've never claimed to know anything "for a fact" so I'm not sure why you're getting upset with me asking questions and giving my opinion what what's been publicly shared.

The last thread on Washington, the OP linked an article and in that it stated that the university knew about this situation back in the fall of 2018.

All I'm saying is that IF that is true and the university was told of what Washington had allegedly done, then I have a hard time believing that someone from the university wouldn't have reached out to Frost to tell him what's possibly going on with one of his players. Then I would have even a tougher time believing that Frost wouldn't have approached Washington about to inquire more detail about the alleged incident.
 
I've never claimed to know anything "for a fact" so I'm not sure why you're getting upset with me asking questions and giving my opinion what what's been publicly shared.

The last thread on Washington, the OP linked an article and in that it stated that the university knew about this situation back in the fall of 2018.

All I'm saying is that IF that is true and the university was told of what Washington had allegedly done, then I have a hard time believing that someone from the university wouldn't have reached out to Frost to tell him what's possibly going on with one of his players. Then I would have even a tougher time believing that Frost wouldn't have approached Washington about to inquire more detail about the alleged incident.
Theres the beating around the bush.
Please read the article again.
What did MW tell Frost when he approached him, as youre so sure about?

The point of these questions is to try to get you to come to the realization by yourself that the article really tells us nothing concrete, and certainly nothing concrete regarding frost. Biggest thing I took out of it is that MW was asked by a lawyer and denied anything.
Have you ever seen American Psycho? Random I know but I have a point if youve seen it

Finally, what was Frost supposed to do as I asked in the 2nd half of my post. My american psycho ? Has a lot to do with that.
 
Theres the beating around the bush.
Please read the article again.
What did MW tell Frost when he approached him, as youre so sure about?
I'm not certain why you're getting mixed up on this? I never once claimed that MW spoke to Frost on this issue or that Frost approached MW on this issue.

The point of these questions is to try to get you to come to the realization by yourself that the article really tells us nothing concrete, and certainly nothing concrete regarding frost.
Of course it doesn't tell us anything concrete. I've never spoke on anything being 100% concrete in any of my posts on this topic.

The rest I'm ignoring because it probably doesn't apply since you're getting mixed up in what I'm actually asking.
 
I'm not certain why you're getting mixed up on this? I never once claimed that MW spoke to Frost on this issue or that Frost approached MW on this issue.

Of course it doesn't tell us anything concrete. I've never spoke on anything being 100% concrete in any of my posts on this topic.

The rest I'm ignoring because it probably doesn't apply since you're getting mixed up in what I'm actually asking.
In post 788 you said its fact the university knew. I asked who that would be, and what would they know.

In that same post, you asked me two questions. I tok those questions as slightly rhetorical with the conclusion that you believe the coaches were told or at least researched and found out. I was responding to that assumption.

If that was not the intent of your questions or the meaning of them, I apologize for misreading or assuming your thoughts.

You dont have to answer the 2nd half of my question, but I hope someone who believes frost should have done something can. I just think theres people who are "putting the carriage in front of the horse" so to speak in regards to the preliminary investigation process. I falsely assumed you were one of them.
 
In post 788 you said its fact the university knew. I asked who that would be, and what would they know.
I'll concede when I said I have yet to state that anything was concrete. I did state it was a fact that the university was told about this incident. I was going off of 2 reports claiming this to be true which it seems one (1011now) has now updated their article saying differently. As of now I don't know if the university knew about the incident in the fall of 2018 or not.

In that same post, you asked me two questions. I tok those questions as slightly rhetorical with the conclusion that you believe the coaches were told or at least researched and found out. I was responding to that assumption.

If that was not the intent of your questions or the meaning of them, I apologize for misreading or assuming your thoughts.
It wasn't my intention and thank you for clarifying your train of thought. I was asking more of a hypothetical, but I can see where you would believe what you did given that I did say it was a fact that the university had known about the incident in 2018.

You dont have to answer the 2nd half of my question, but I hope someone who believes frost should have done something can. I just think theres people who are "putting the carriage in front of the horse" so to speak in regards to the preliminary investigation process. I falsely assumed you were one of them.
I really think you & I have been mostly on the same page or in agreement on this whole Washington situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: huskerfan1414
Anybody who thinks Frost is or even should be in trouble over this is really out of their mind. Nothing more needs to be said.

If we are in agreement that this is a serious issue for Maurice Washington to intimidate and shame this girl, and to possess the video...THEN if it is found that Frost knew about this before he allowed MW to play this year, Frost SHOULD take heat for allowing him to play in 2018.
 
I'll concede when I said I have yet to state that anything was concrete. I did state it was a fact that the university was told about this incident. I was going off of 2 reports claiming this to be true which it seems one (1011now) has now updated their article saying differently. As of now I don't know if the university knew about the incident in the fall of 2018 or not.


It wasn't my intention and thank you for clarifying your train of thought. I was asking more of a hypothetical, but I can see where you would believe what you did given that I did say it was a fact that the university had known about the incident in 2018.

I really think you & I have been mostly on the same page or in agreement on this whole Washington situation.
That's why people need to actually read the article and think critically. Absolutely nothing in their original article indicated the university athletic department knew any details about the case. The title they chose was completely irresponsible journalism and yet you had multiple people here who only read the article title and spout off that Frost and Moos need to be let go too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: huskerfan1414
If we are in agreement that this is a serious issue for Maurice Washington to intimidate and shame this girl, and to possess the video...THEN if it is found that Frost knew about this before he allowed MW to play this year, Frost SHOULD take heat for allowing him to play in 2018.
Knew WHAT? We know for a fact that MW had not been charged with anything at that time, nor was it clear that he was going to be. We really don't even know exactly what Frost knew of the investigation. And if he did know exactly what he was being investigated for, if MW tells Frost that he didn't do it, and there was no evidence that Frost knew of to the contrary, what was Frost supposed to suspend MW for? Unless you can prove that Frost knew exactly what MW was being investigated for, and knew that he likely was guilty of it despite claiming he didn't know anything about it and/or was going to face criminal charges related to it, I see absolutely no reason why Frost should have suspended him. I think that's a pretty high bar to cross to think Frost would know all of that and continue to let him play.
 
That's why people need to actually read the article and think critically. Absolutely nothing in their original article indicated the university athletic department knew any details about the case. The title they chose was completely irresponsible journalism and yet you had multiple people here who only read the article title and spout off that Frost and Moos need to be let go too.
The original article they wrote matched the headline and basically said that they had proof that NU knew. They then changed the story, but I don’t think they changed the headline. I think the issue lies with Bruning and people thinking he represented the University and since Bruning knew, that the University should have known. He has come out denying that he told investigators that he represented the University.
 
Last edited:
Knew WHAT? We know for a fact that MW had not been charged with anything at that time, nor was it clear that he was going to be. We really don't even know exactly what Frost knew of the investigation. And if he did know exactly what he was being investigated for, if MW tells Frost that he didn't do it, and there was no evidence that Frost knew of to the contrary, what was Frost supposed to suspend MW for? Unless you can prove that Frost knew exactly what MW was being investigated for, and knew that he likely was guilty of it despite claiming he didn't know anything about it and/or was going to face criminal charges related to it, I see absolutely no reason why Frost should have suspended him. I think that's a pretty high bar to cross to think Frost would know all of that and continue to let him play.

Fantastic.. If he had no idea what the kid did, then he's off the hook. If it comes out that he knew the details of what MW did before the start of the season, and choose to play him anyway, then he has some questions to answer. I can't imagine Frost would be that stupid, so I'm of the mind that Frost had to be unaware of the details of the story.
 
The original article they wrote matched the headline and basically said that they had proof that NU knew. They then changed the story, but I don’t think they changed the headline. I think the issue lies with Bruning and people thinking he represented the University and since Bruning knew, that the University should have known. He has come out denying that he told investigators that he represented the University.
The article didn't present any proof that the athletic department knew. And they have changed the article since then and the title. If you notice on the link you posted on pg19, the article is completely different than the original.
 
I am fine with people who want to believe Nebraska knew nothing about this. As I said before, this is why they have handled in this manner. They wanted to give themselves plausible deniability. No one told us directly, on the record, so we didn’t know about the details.

Here are a few quick thoughts that I stole from an attorney that I know about

(1) What about Jamie Vaughn?

(2) By stating there was no attorney-client relationship, did Bruning open door to Public Records Act request for Frost/AD staff comms w/him?

(3) Why did they involve Ball so late?

(4)When do Green/Bounds stop Moos from talking?
 
https://www.omaha.com/huskers/footb...cle_76cfa816-6e8f-5fc3-9e9b-e7eff780714a.html

Jon Bruning, the former Nebraska attorney general who represented Washington from mid-September to Feb. 8, said he did not share details of the allegations with the university because of attorney-client privilege. Documents recently filed in a California court also claim Washington rebuffed any request to talk about the case and told Bruning he was “befuddled” by the allegation that he’d sent a sexually explicit video of a minor to the girl two years after the video was taken.
 
The investigators didnt even know whether this would lead to a conviction yet, but Frost was supposed to know?:rolleyes:
Drama queens gonna drama queen. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics and speculation here to try to pin frost with wrongdoing here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timnsun and wkato
And in this instance the 17yr old would still be labeled a sex offender!

Sheesh!
Yep, I am assuming in cases like these that they are very rarely actually charged with as a sex offender. I believe the boy who originally recorded and sent out the video was charge with distribution of child porn, but only got probation. I would assume a judge would look at these on a case by case basis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuskerO
IANAL and am arguing law against perception of right and wrong.

Maybe it's just me, but if I saw "IANAL" on a bumper sticker, or really anywhere for that matter, I'm not going to presume it means "I am not a lawyer". Who first came up with this acronym and thought it was a good idea?

I contend that it came from the resume of a porn star with poor word processing skills, or who really wanted this "skill" to stand out.

BTW, nothing personal to the poster, it's just that it caught my eye.
 
https://www.omaha.com/huskers/footb...cle_76cfa816-6e8f-5fc3-9e9b-e7eff780714a.html

Jon Bruning, the former Nebraska attorney general who represented Washington from mid-September to Feb. 8, said he did not share details of the allegations with the university because of attorney-client privilege. Documents recently filed in a California court also claim Washington rebuffed any request to talk about the case and told Bruning he was “befuddled” by the allegation that he’d sent a sexually explicit video of a minor to the girl two years after the video was taken.
I doubt Mo used the word befuddled.
 
Maybe it's just me, but if I saw "IANAL" on a bumper sticker, or really anywhere for that matter, I'm not going to presume it means "I am not a lawyer". Who first came up with this acronym and thought it was a good idea?

I contend that it came from the resume of a porn star with poor word processing skills, or who really wanted this "skill" to stand out.

BTW, nothing personal to the poster, it's just that it caught my eye.

Since you have Tobias as your avatar, you probably remember Tobias was the world's first "Analyst" and "Therapist," which we're combined and created a new psychology specialty...
Tobias Fuenke-Analrapist!! RollingLaugh
 
Since you have Tobias as your avatar, you probably remember Tobias was the world's first "Analyst" and "Therapist," which we're combined and created a new psychology specialty...
Tobias Fuenke-Analrapist!! RollingLaugh
My favorite takeaway from that show! (along with ANUSTART, my user name)
 
As long as this thread has went on I'm disappointed we haven't found out if lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter or if there was a second gun man or Oswald was set up
 
  • Like
Reactions: scarletred
As long as this thread has went on I'm disappointed we haven't found out if lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter or if there was a second gun man or Oswald was set up

It was the secret service agent in the car behind JFK.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT