Salve Regina Men’s Lacrosse Player Arrested On Animal Cruelty Charges

The headlines sounds bad. It only gets worse.

The Providence Journal is reporting that Salve Regina sophomore lacrosse player Nick Coyle was arrested Wednesday for allegedly killing a rabbit with a hockey stick then using its corpse as a puck. No, really. I’ll let that sink in for a second.

What possibly inspires you to kill a rabbit in your yard then take its body and further abuse it? It’s a rabbit. You know, those soft fluffy cute things that people often have as pets. Wantonly killing animals is disgusting and senseless. Listen, I’m all for dressing up in some camo, rubbing doe piss all over yourself and hiding in a tree for five hours just to drop some unsuspecting buck. Hunting is as old as man himself and I am certainly not any  sort of animal rights nut. But this offends basic human decency and the standards that we set for how we should treat any living thing. It is generally accepted that the torture and killing of animals is one of the signs of a potential sociopath. Now, I’m not saying that Nick is a sociopath. Perhaps this is just an isolated incident that doesn’t define who he is. However, that doesn’t mean he should escape punishment. There is no acceptable excuse for this behavior. To their credit, Salve Regina has removed him from the prospective 2012 roster which likely means he has been removed from the team entirely. Good riddance.

Between this and Chris Scott, I feel like I need to wash the filth off of me. Jesus. I can’t wait until springtime rolls around and we can get back to talking about lacrosse.

Doing Right

“It takes a big man to admit he’s wrong. It takes a bigger man to do something about it”

Geoff Hebert called me out. Any you know what? He was right. He didn’t complain about me intentionally dragging the Stevenson name through the mud, something I didn’t feel I did anyhow. He compared my recent work on the Paterno situation and the serious manner in which I addressed it to the cavalier attitude I took in dealing with this case and then he took me to task. When I finished reading his email, I had one thought: I fucked up. Now it’s time to do something about it.

I must admit, when I first read the Barstool story about the arrest, I laughed. I’m not sure why. Part of it is I don’t see this as a case where the victim is free of all responsibility. The affidavit says that she was “manipulated” into making the video, though it fails to mention specifically how she was manipulated. Ultimately though, the tape was made with her knowledge. I know we often fail to appreciate how our actions can come back to bite us in the ass in the future (like me with my original article. D’oh.) but the implications of placing a 26 minute video of you performing sex acts into the hands of someone else are pretty obvious. Is it her fault that the video made it to the internet? No. Does that mean she should have made it anyways? No. She learned a hard lesson there.

Some people might say she got what she deserved. I disagree. No one deserves to have their life torn apart because they made one bad mistake. On a personal level, I did something really extremely incredibly unbelievably stupid last spring. I was on the verge of losing a lot of things that I had worked extremely hard for and nearly had my life turned upside down over something that was a dumb decision but ultimately not egregious. So to the ex-girlfriend in this story? I feel you. You don’t deserve to have your life ruined because you consented to something foolish when you were twenty-two. Doing something dumb that doesn’t break any law other than ones involving common sense shouldn’t define your life.

Some more personal sharing here: I may be a NESCAC boy, the product of an elitist collegiate culture and a believer that such an experience is unparalleled, but I am a blue-collar guy at heart. My parents, how do I say this, strongly encouraged me to learn the value of hard work. I wasn’t the beneficiary of parents who handed me money, cars and toys at my every whim. My parents did me one better. They gave me a strong moral upbringing, something that I hope comes through when I express my outrage about what happened at Penn State and my sincere sorrow at the death of Derrik Flahive. I almost went into law enforcement with a NESCAC education simply because I find those who victimize others so detestable.

In light of that, I have no idea how I brushed over the mention of child pornography in the stories about Chris Scott. I have no excuse for this. If he did indeed possess such images, I believe he should be locked up for however long the maximum sentence may be. Crimes against children are deplorable and the possession of child pornography promotes the commission of those crimes. By possessing child pornography, a person reduces their self to the level of those who originally took the pictures. Given the graphic and violent nature of the pictures allegedly in Chris’ possession, he would be promoting a particularly abhorrent brand of child exploitation. Such a criminal, if the charges proven to be true, is deserving of no mercy and no leniency.

One of my best friends was raped when she was a teenager. I wish I had remembered how I felt when I first heard about that when I was reading about Chris Scott. Geoff, thank you for setting me straight. I owe you some cold drinks and a hot meal. I will leave the original story up because I do not believe in hiding from our mistakes. One of my favorite websites, ProFootballTalk.com, once reported that Terry Bradshaw was dead when he was in fact very much alive. To this day, that post still exists in their archives. This is emblematic of the attitude I take in running this site. I will not hide from my shortcomings.

Stevenson Responds

Preface: Following the posting of the Chris Scott story earlier today, a few past and present members of the Stevenson lacrosse program expressed concern via Twitter over the original title of the article, “The Pride of Stevenson Lacrosse.” Upon receiving their complaints, I extended an open offer to any of them to explain why they found it inappropriate with the promise that I would post it here. Both Michael Simon and Geoff Hebert provided responses. I would like to thank them for their efforts.

Geoff Hebert, Stevenson Class of 2010:

I just want to say that I do not blame you for covering this story. It is an awful situation and the particulars of the story need to be examined in order raise awareness and prevent these situations from happening in the future. It happens too often and it ruins lives. This young woman’s life will never be the same because of what he did. Barstool has mentioned that, “The clip, which was viewed nearly 36,000 times on XTube, was copied onto other porn sites, where it remains available.” (Barstool) This video will likely never get taken off the Internet, and the video also includes her hometown and work information. It is truly unfortunate, and I believe he deserves to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for what he did. As far as the child pornography goes? Absolutely disgusting, and given the recent events in regards to Penn State, this is obviously a problem that needs addressing and should be mentioned as well.

I also don’t blame you for mentioning that it took place in a Stevenson University dorm room in 2009, or for the fact that you mentioned that he was a former Stevenson lacrosse player. These are facts of the story and are necessary to provide context. What I don’t understand is the tone of the article, which I found borderline malicious.

First, I think that given the severity of the allegations and the consequences that resulted, the “tongue-in-cheek” tone of the entire article is inappropriate. In the article you wrote, “I thought about leaving it at that, but me being me and this situation being too hilarious to ignore…” Is it really that funny? This girl was manipulated, according to the affidavit, into making a sex video. The manipulator than put it on the Internet and included her hometown and work information on the video. Yes, she put herself in this situation and she has only herself to blame and all that…but someone whom she had trusted manipulated her. This kid is sick and took advantage of this girl. It will be almost impossible for her to find a career, and it will most likely do irreversible damage to her self-esteem, not to mention put tremendous strain on the relationships she has with people she cares about and who care about her. Imagine if this was your daughter or sister or friend you cared about? Not to mention the fact that they found child pornography on his computer. The description of the content of that picture is horrifying. Why would you write about Paterno with such moral conviction, yet write so carelessly about this unfortunate event? I know these two cases are drastically different, most obviously one involves consensual sex with an adult and possession of child pornography while the other involves the rape of multiple children. I am not saying that they are equal on the spectrum of morality; however, I do believe such a lack of empathy in your most recent article contradicts the values of strong morals and empathy you have expressed in your previous articles.

Of the articles that I have read (and rather enjoyed) you write thoughtfully with linguistic accuracy and support morality, empathy and the common good. One only has to read your articles on the Colby player, Derrik Flahive, and Joe Paterno to observe this. However, in your article, The Pride of Stevenson Lacrosse, you use strong profanity, mention hard-drugs, and condone blackmail? In your letter to Chris you wrote, “You just hang the threat of going public with it over her head so that she tells other girls what a great guy you were and how she never had a better lover. Maybe you even get her to take your laundry and do some folding for you.” The crass narrative of the article creates a perceived “stance” on this matter that is so far off from the positions you have taken in the past. I understand the sarcasm of the title; I just find it to be in extremely poor taste for someone who has such a strong moral stance on similar matters.

As it pertains to offending the Stevenson alumni, I’m sure your intentions weren’t actually malicious. However, can you see how the inconsistencies of your most recent article in comparison to articles written in the past, in addition to the title of your most recent article, could lead some to believe that this WAS a shot at the program? I know you changed the title, but I find the “update” equally offensive. This spiteful retort is embarrassing to both of us.

Having said that, the inconsistency and tone of this article does a disservice to your credibility as a respected blogger/author/journalist. I have always respected your opinion because, although you have your biases (who doesn’t), your arguments were always well structured and articulated clearly.  This recent article looks like it was copy and pasted from Barstool or Brobible. I know you are much, much better than the literary garbage you just posted. However, that might not mean much to you; so take it for what it is.

Whether this was an actual shot at the program or it was an impulsive vent brought on by the negligence of college kids, that’s for you to decide.

Michael Simon, Stevenson Class of 2009:

Regardless of your intentions or actual feelings, as a novice writer, I would have thought you would have better regard for how your words fall. “The Pride of Stevenson Lacrosse” from the start takes the focus off the individual and shines it directly on the program. I mean think about, before you even read an article the title is going to tell you what it is about. So already you shot yourself in the foot by making this about Stevenson Lacrosse. You then follow it up with your opening line “Per The Smoking Gun, former Stevenson Men’s Lacrosse player Christopher Scott”. Again I would have expected you to have better understanding of how constructing the sentence this way, carefully choosing to put that he was a SU lacrosse player before you even identify the suspect, makes the focus all about Stevenson Lacrosse. From there the rest of the writing is fine doesn’t do anything further to implement SU Lacrosse but the damage is already done and the reader is already honed in on the program itself.

 On top of that there is the title itself. You remind me of teenager who using sarcasm for the first time gets called out by another individual. Immediately the teen says “hey that’s not what I was saying at all! All I was saying was “Fill in the Blank” but then completely fails acknowledge how the context and tone ultimately determined the meaning of their words and not the actual words themselves. What’s worse is you say you were being sarcastic and that should be evident. Ultimately you fail to do anything to back that up in the writing such as stating that this is an isolated incident or explaining how appalled members of the Stevenson Lacrosse community are by this individuals actions. Instead you want to the readers on their own to make this great leap of faith and reach what you were going for despite setting them so nicely (as discussed in the previous paragraph) to think the complete opposite.

I don’t know that if you were intentionally trying to take a shot at SU Lacrosse or not and frankly I don’t care. All I am telling you is this article definitely depicts Stevenson Lacrosse in a bad light, more so than any of the other countless articles I have read about the incident.

Former Stevenson Lacrosse Player Arrested After Posting Video of Ex-Girlfriend Online

Update: In all fairness to Stevenson University and the lacrosse team, it bears mentioning that Scott was not a member of the team in 2011 and was not enrolled at the university. The Smoking Gun report included a link to Scott’s athletic profile from the 2010 roster, which the Stevenson administration has since removed from their athletics website, presumably as a result of the news reports. Unfortunately for them, his name still appears on the statistics page. He did appear in nine games for the team in 2010, registering one assist and taking five shots. I can understand the obvious motives behind the removal of his profile, but for members of the program to attempt to entirely disassociate the fact that he played on the team in 2010 from the situation is a misrepresentation of the facts. In accordance with the facts, I have edited the title to better reflect the situation at hand. None of this changes the fact that this article was about as serious as Rick Perry’s chances of being president of the United States and should be taken as such.

Per The Smoking Gun, former Stevenson Men’s Lacrosse player Christopher Scott was arrested earlier this week for posting an amateur porn film he and his ex-girlfriend made in 2009 in his Stevenson University dorm room. He cited being depressed over the breakup as his reason for posting the video, which included the girl’s hometown and work information. The only thing that could make this better would be the cops finding some cocaine speed meth PCP weed and a bong when they searched his house. Which of course they did. They also found child porn on his computer including, “one image of child pornography that showed a naked, prepubescent girl tied facedown to a weight bench.”

I thought about leaving it at that, but me being me and this situation being too hilarious to ignore, I figured I’d write a brief letter to Chris which you can find below.

Dear Chris,

You fucked up. The number one rule of having a porno of your ex-girlfriend is YOU DON’T GO PUBLIC WITH IT. Period. You just hang the threat of going public with it over her head so that she tells other girls what a great guy you were and how she never had a better lover. Maybe you even get her to take your laundry and do some folding for you. But you don’t just throw it out on the internet. What if her dad had stumbled across it on XTube while the Mrs. was out of the house on a Friday afternoon running errands? That’s just cruel and unusual man. As for the weed, just tell the cops your were using it medicinally to help you get over the depression of losing a girl who was so classy that she agreed to make a sex tape with you. Yeah, that’s marriage material. In the words of Celine Dion, “Your heart will go onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn and onnnnnnnnnnnn.”

Sucks to Suck,

Swank

The moral of the story, as always, is don’t date girls who have back tattoos or who make sex tapes.  To borrow a phrase, you’re going to get what you pay for.

Colby Men’s Lacrosse Player Dies In Accident Abroad

Colby Men’s Lacrosse junior Derrik Flahive died Tuesday in an accident while abroad in Chile. Details are scant, but according to a Chilean news source Flahive and another person were in Vicente Pérez Rosales National Park when the accident occurred. They were apparently jumping into water from a height of about 10 meters. Flahive struck his head on a rock, lost consciousness and drowned before he could be rescued.

Please keep his family, friends and teammates in your thoughts and prayers. As someone who had the misfortune of losing a teammate far too young myself, my heart breaks for the men of Colby lacrosse. The bond you form stepping on the field, ice or court together day in and day out is so powerful that losing someone who toiled at your side is a huge blow and one that is not easily healed. Flahive exemplified the unique benefits of the NESCAC experience. Not a lot of serious athletes have the opportunity to go to Chile in their off-season and return to their team as a major contributor. It is painful to see that kind of opportunity and promise taken from someone in a manner this tragic.

Colby Community Mourns the Loss of Derrik Flahive

The Future of Pacquiao-Mayweather

Editor’s Note: From the CAC to the ‘CAC is proud to welcome Alex Henrie as a contributor. He is a junior goalkeeper at Bates and will be offering his opinion on a variety of topics. His work here is unedited by me and he is free to opine as he wishes. -Swank

Looking forward to the long-anticipated fight between Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather? You might want to get comfortable and find some snacks, because this one might be on hold for a while. Despite the fact that each fighter stands to make enough money to start a colony on Mars, there has been little to no progress over the course of the last two years, and there is no reason to believe that will change any time soon.

In my opinion, most of the problems that have led to the constant delays in the negotiations have come out of the Mayweather camp. In just the past year, Mayweather has accused Pacquiao of taking steroids (and been taken to court by Pacquiao in a subsequent defamation lawsuit), appeared in an online video in which he demeaned Pacquiao by using racial slurs, and was arrested for a myriad of offenses, including felony coercion, grand larceny, and robbery, as well as misdemeanor assault and battery. While the issues not related to boxing such as the video or the arrests serve to show that Mayweather is, simply, put, an idiot, the boxing-related issue of steroids seems to show Mayweather’s true intentions about the fight. Mayweather has been dogged in his accusations against Pacquiao, repeatedly accusing the eight-division world champion of using steroids and of being a cheater. Mayweather used that accusation as an excuse to demand Olympic-style drug testing, which not only requires standard urine testing but also includes random blood tests before and after the fight. Mayweather’s demands come despite the fact that Olympic testing isn’t required by any boxing commission (outside of the Olympics, obviously), and despite the fact that no other boxer or analyst has ever raised the suspicion of performance enhancing drugs in relation to Pacquiao.

What appears to be the case is that Mayweather was looking for a way to avoid fighting Pacquiao. Even when Pacquiao did agree to Mayweather’s demands midway through 2011, Mayweather changed his mind and said his offer wasn’t good anymore. Although Mayweather has one of the loudest mouths in sports and is known as a relentless self-promoter, his actions during the negotiations for the proposed super-fight expose him as a paper tiger whose bluster covers up what seems like a kind of nervousness. As he is quick to remind anyone within earshot, Mayweather is undefeated and has never even been knocked down. Mayweather sees himself as the greatest of his era and one of the greatest of all time, and points to his unblemished record as obvious proof of that. His career is marked by dominating performances, including a brutal KO against undefeated Diego Corrales where he scored five knockouts, wins against titleholders Arturo Gatti and Oscar de la Hoya, and a total demolition of lightweight champion and world-ranked #2 Juan Manuel Marquez. Pacquiao, however, represents a different challenge. Mayweather is used to being the favorite and has always enjoyed the confidence that comes with being expected to win. This is not the case in the hypothetical Pacquiao-Mayweather fight; as many, if not more people think that Pacquiao is the best pound-for-pound fighter in the world and would beat Mayweather. This creates a conundrum for Pretty Boy Floyd, who gets that nickname from the 1930’s mobster by the same name. Although on the surface he is brimming with confidence, one has to assume that an enormous debate rages in Mayweather’s mind.

While a win would cement him beyond a doubt as the greatest of his era and one of the greatest of all time, his place in history is already assured even if he doesn’t fight Pacquiao. A loss, on the other hand, would destroy everything he has worked for. His proudest achievement, his undefeated record, would be gone, as would his aura of invincibility. His proclamations of greatness and his loud, public insults of his opponents would no longer seem like they were made out of confidence, but instead of unfounded arrogance. In short, Floyd Mayweather has a LOT to lose by fighting Manny Pacquiao. While he is an insufferable loudmouth, he understands boxing history. Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Liston, Robinson, Leonard, Tyson, and all the other greats all lost at some point in their career – Mayweather hasn’t.

For all his stalling, recent events may force Mayweather to pursue the fight. First was his controversial fight against Victor Ortiz in September. In the midst of a flurry of punches near the end of the fourth round, Ortiz leaned in and headbutted Mayweather, and was docked a point immediately. What followed was one of the most bizarre ends to a fight in recent memory. Referee Joe Cortez brought the two together and stepped back without giving a true signal to restart the fight. While Ortiz was reaching with both arms outstretched to either embrace or apologize, Mayweather wound up and clocked him with a sucker punch left and finished him with a straight right. Ortiz went down and would not get up, and the controversy started. While it was technically a legal punch, Mayweather’s knockout was a disgusting display of poor sportsmanship and dirty fighting. The boxing community immediately recoiled, and Mayweather was blasted for the way he won the fight. We as a society have a short memory; the most recent thing is often the thing we remember the most. With the bad taste of the Ortiz knockout still lingering around Mayweather in the eyes of many boxing fans, fighting Manny Pacquiao would be a foolproof way to refocus public opinion on his boxing, and not on his dirty tactics.

A far more important reason Mayweather has to pursue the fight is because of a bout he wasn’t even involved in. Last Saturday, Manny Pacquiao fought Juan Manuel Marquez in what was supposed to be a dominating performance that would prove that no other boxer could stand toe to toe with him, and that it was time for Pacquiao and Mayweather to finally decide who was the best boxer alive. Instead, Marquez refused to play the part of gallant loser. For 12 rounds he denied Pacquiao’s combinations and kept him on his heels; unlike the first two fights between the greats, Marquez was not knocked down. Although Pacquiao won by judge’s decision, Marquez (as usual) felt he won the fight, as did many who watched in the arena and around the country. While Marquez’s incessant whining about the judges makes it hard to take his case seriously, he did put a serious dent in Pacquiao’s status as the best fighter in the world. In the eyes of many, Pacquiao lost that unofficial crown by failing to even knock down a fighter who he had knocked down four times in two previous fights, and who he was expected to dispatch within six rounds (according to ESPN’s prediction).

So where do we stand now? Despite Pacquiao looking shakier than he has in a while, and Mayweather looking in top form in his recent beatdown of Victor Ortiz, it doesn’t appear that the fight of the century is any closer to being finalized than it was a year ago. This week, the Mayweather camp came out and said that Pacquiao promoter Bob Arum told Mayweather that he was not interested in organizing a fight between the two; instead, Mayweather alleges that he was told Arum is more interested in putting together Pacquiao-Marquez IV. While yet another matchup of two of the most evenly matched fighters alive would certainly be entertaining, it is a fight that no one wants to see. We already know that neither can figure the other out, as none of their three fights have ended in knockouts. We already know that they are about as close as possible in terms of skill level; all three of their fights have been controversial judges’ decisions. Putting it plainly, there is nothing else that Pacquiao and Marquez can show us. Mayweather, on the other hand, is the last frontier for Pacquiao, and vice versa. The winner of that fight would surely be the undisputed best fighter alive, and be able to lay claim to the title of best of his era.

This fight is far too important to pass up, not just for the two boxers or their respective promoters, but for the sport of boxing itself. What used to be the ultimate spectator sport has been reduced to also-ran status. While upstart UFC is now appearing in primetime on Fox, boxing has long occupied the pay-per-view market on HBO. It is true that this undoubtedly drives revenue (both fighters would be expected to take in over $50 million and perhaps as much as $75 million – yes, $75 million – from the fight), but it hurts the overall popularity of the sport. Boxing fans will always be there to pony up the hefty $50-70 charge to watch marquee fights, but outside of that minority, no one is going to pay that much money to watch a maximum of an hour of TV. As a result, boxing suffers from severe underexposure. Great fighters, and even average ones, fly under the radar of the average sports fan, simply because they don’t appear on cable TV in America. Pacquiao and Mayweather are the only two boxers on the planet who have the capability to singlehandedly revive the public’s interest in boxing. We won’t return to the days when Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier commanded the attention of the entire nation, but perhaps we will see a new age of boxing. Either way, this fight needs to happen, and soon. Otherwise, we might miss out on what could be the greatest and most important fight of our lifetimes.

Linking the Penn State Scandal

I’ve been on a Twitter rampage for the better part of a week now. I’ve wasted no opportunity to admonish the inaction of the Penn State athletic department. I’ve passed on stories and videos pertaining to so many aspects of the tragedy of errors that has transpired in Happy Valley. With the help of some of my followers, I’ve created something of a collection of information that I feel obligated to pass on. Below you will find links to some relevant stuff. Read it, become more educated, then form an intelligent and objective position. There’s really only one way that turns out. Feel free to add anything you found that was interesting in the comments. I would have included a link to an intelligible defense of Paterno and company, but I have yet to see one.

The indictment of Jerry Sandusky

How did we miss this April article?

Paterno’s tainted legacy

Facebook craziness

Video: Penn State students are generally morons

This is not about football

Deadspin on Sandusky’s earnings after inappropriately touching a boy in 1998

Sandusky was still actively recruiting for Penn State

Video of just how out of touch Penn State students are

Grantland’s Jane Leavy on why Paterno didn’t do enough and the impact of abuse

The relationship between Sandusky and interim head coach Tom Bradley

Penn State fans embarrassing themselves at the Nebraska game

Paterno Must Go

By now you’ve all heard about the horrifying allegations against former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky and the failure of the athletic administration, including legendary football coach Joe Paterno, to report the allegations against Sandusky as witnessed by a Penn State grad assistant to the proper authorities. Whether or not Sandusky is eventually convicted in a court of law, there can no doubt about what should happen.

Joe Paterno must be fired.

To be clear, it does not appear that Paterno has violated the letter of any law. He did what he was technically obligated to do, reporting then-Grad Assistant Mike McQueary’s experience of walking in on Sandusky assaulting a ten year old boy to the athletic administration. Legally, he fufilled his obligations. Morally, his actions are as bankrupt as they come.

Let’s first consider Paterno’s position. He is the longest-tenured college football coach in the country. His name and image have become synonymous not only with Penn State football but with the university itself. He has had the opportunity to play an instrumental role in the maturation of thousands of young men during their time at Penn State. Beyond teaching them football, it was his privilege to instill in them values, lessons and morals that they would carry with them for the rest of their lives. He betrayed that privilege and the boys he was allowed to mold into men when he failed to do something substantive about the incident that McQueary reported to him. I say something substantive because reporting what happened to the athletic administration and watching them cover it up is tantamount to doing nothing. Paterno did nothing more than legally cover his ass.

Coaches are as much parents as they are teachers of sport. If you are a collegiate athlete, you spend more time around your coaches than anyone save your immediate friend group. That time affords them the privilege to impart wisdom both practical and moral upon young men who remain very impressionable. This role is as vital and sacred as their ability to actually lead their team to victory. Let’s think about the lessons that Paterno is teaching through his actions in this situation: that we should place our own interests above basic human decency, that we have no obligation to help those who cannot help themselves, and that doing just enough to escape legal culpability is fine even if we hurt others by doing so. Joe Paterno, you are morally bankrupt.

In displaying such low standards for moral behavior, Joe Paterno has sacrificed his privilege to teach young men. He has no credibility, no moral foundation to stand on and no reasonable defense for his actions or rather his inaction. If the Penn State administration values the role of coaches to not simply teach the game but to also impart wisdom, then they must fire Joe Paterno before he can coach another game. Paterno’s role in this situation is so fundamentally disgusting that he does not deserve the opportunity to resign or retire on his own terms, much less to ever roam the sidelines for the Nittany Lions again. At this point, it’s not about beating Nebraska on Saturday or anything related to football. It is about demonstrating that doing what is morally right is far more important than protecting yourself or your cronies from the negative ramifications of their actions. The Penn State administration has an opportunity to do just that.

Inaction in the face of injustice is morally indefensible.

Most Valuable Tweet: 10/31/11

Here’s our latest first running feature here at CAC to the ‘CAC, the Most Valuable Tweet a.k.a. the best tweet I saw today.

Our inaugural MVT goes to our own Ty Xanders (@tyxanders) who tweet this gem:

“This black lady waiting at the lightrail stop is definitely participating in Mustache Madness”

It gets better.

Steve Kazimer (@kazimer9) chimed in with corroborating Twitter testimony:

“@swanklax i have witnessed this lady on several occasions”

So what we have is some unfortunate lady patrolling the Baltimore area with a mustache so distinguished that not only did Ty notice it, but Kaz knew exactly who he was talking about. Wow. That has to be one hell of a lady ‘stache. Could it be worse than this or this?

Two thoughts here. Can we stop desecrating the good name of the mustache by calling hair on a woman’s upper lip a mustache? We need a new name for this nauseating phenomena. I’m open to suggestions. Also, ladies, please handle your body hair. I know you know that hair is there. Why tolerate it? Wax it. Shave it. Nair it. Fucking burn it for all I care. Get it out of my sight. This doesn’t just go for mustaches. I used to know this girl, beautiful, funny, well put together, the complete package. Well, except for the fact that she had hair on her arms thicker than the Black Forest. Gah. Dealbreaker. The moral of the story, as always, is conform to your gender role or you might get made fun of on some obscure lax blog.

Want to be featured on MVT or think a tweet you saw is worthy? Just tweet @swanklax and you may find your handiwork here.

Retro Diary: Colby v. Wesleyan

Setting the Stage: It’s April 9th, 2011 and Colby travels to Middletown, CT to take on Wesleyan in an important midseason matchup. Both teams are 2-3 in NESCAC play, though they have taken different roads to get there. Wesleyan started off hot with a road win over Bowdoin and knocked off Middlebury in OT before disaster struck with an unforgivable road loss to Bates followed by a 15-8 drubbing at the hands of Tufts and a close loss to in-state rival Trinity. Colby is coming off an overtime win over Bowdoin and took down Williams to open the year but lost three times between those two wins to Tufts, Trinity and Middlebury. Let’s go to the Bird Cage…

1st Quarter

It’s over a minute from the opening faceoff to Colby’s first attempt at a dodge. Shot clock, shot clock, shot clock…

Colby comes out in a dropback ride, which I hate. You have to be aggressive defending transition and force turnovers to get yourself some easy goals or you tend to lean a lot on your settled offense to get you 8 or 9 goals which is asking a lot. In an entirely unrelated note, Colby is going to lose this one 8-7.

Nobody likes to shoot more with less success than Teddy Citrin. 123 shots for 26 goals last year. Naturally, he takes the first shot of the game, a low angle bouncer that goes wide.

Colby comes down on offense, takes thirty seconds to sub and promptly runs into an easy double team. If you’re just gonna piss the ball away, you might as well do it pushing the tempo, right? Ugh.

Wesleyan picks up the GB out of the double, pushes it the length of the field and Gabe Kelley feeds it down to a pipe attackman for an easy G. A study in contrasts. 1-0 Wesleyan.

Bunker wins the face and we wait another 40 seconds for Colby to start running their offense. It’s the fastest fast kinda-on-the-slower-side game on two feet!

Jennings dunks off a Margolis feed and we’re square at 1. Kelley was ball-watching like a mf’er.

There’s someone on the Colby sideline with #55. Awesome.

Some up and down action, followed by Colby taking 40 seconds to sub again then taking a 15 yard low-to-low shot.

Colby poles > Wesleyan attackman, and it ain’t even close. Over the head checks for days.

Domingos with an extremely savvy coaching move to save a possession. After Colby threw the ball back into the defensive half for reasons that remain unclear, Colby had to force the ball into a box in under ten seconds through a double team. Anticipating the turnover that was coming, Domingos called timeout the moment the ball was touched in. A half a second later, the ball was in a Wesleyan stick. I don’t support the slow down offense, but if you’re going to run it, then you need to make every possession count. Saving a possession there with a timeout is big.

That possession turns into an Ian Deveau goal on a flag down slow whistle situation two minutes later. The ideal slow down offensive possession. 2-1 Colby.

Wesleyan knots it right back up with a superlative individual effort by Max Landow. It’s 2-2 even though Colby has dominated time of possession…

2nd Quarter

Horrendous flag on what should have been a loose ball push. Officiating is the turd in the NESCAC lacrosse punch bowl. It is consistently bad to horrible depending where you are.

Colby screws up their EMO play but still manage to get a goal after they come out of the ground ball scrum and dunk an easy one. 3-2 Mules.

Bunker is killing Wesleyan at the X. Insert DJ Khaled “All I Do Is Win” joke here.

Wesleyan is getting screwed by their home referees right now. Hmmm. A phantom push on good defense gives Colby the ball back after a turnover.

Wesleyan scores their first settled goal after Colby has to slide twice to the same dodger. As a general rule, if you have to send a third guy to the ball, you’re probably fucked. 3-3.

Bunker is winning everything backwards, depriving Colby of another opportunity for some unsettled goals. This probably has something to do with the fact that Bunker has no offensive skill set. I would have taken Ray Witte of Stevenson over Bunker last year and the 13 goals that Witte scored compared to Bunker’s 1 has a lot to do with that.

Not sure why he never gets his due, but John Jennings is one hell of a crease attackman. You’re never going to believe this, but Gabe Kelley is ball-watching again as Jennings cuts and sticks one to make it 4-3 Colby. Starting to see Kyle Menendez parallels…

On cue, Bunker wins the faceoff forward and takes one of his eleven shots on the year. Covington is unfazed.

Another longggggggggg Colby possession ends in a Jennings goal, this time off a dodge past All-NESCAC defenseman Mike Robinson. 5-3 Colby. The ball has been almost exclusively in the Wesleyan defensive end this quarter.

Make-it take-it as Bunker wins again.

The following sequence just happened: a Colby pole threw a wrap check, broke his own stick in half, then collided with the guy who stepped up to play the ball. Wow.

Froats finally answers for Wesleyan with a shot from wayyyyyy downtown. An aside: him being the 2009 NESCAC Rookie of the Year makes even less sense in retrospect.

Halftime. Colby leads 5-4 and from their perspective, the game couldn’t be going much better. Their entire strategy is predicated on Bunker winning around 70% of his faceoffs and being able to dominate the time of possession and the pace of the game. So far, so good.

3rd Quarter

Pole takes the face for Wesleyan in the second half and manages to win it cleanly.

Referees showing extreme unfamiliarity with the quick whistle restart.

A terrible decision to double the ball ends Colby celebrating a 6-4 lead. Really, that couldn’t have been any worse of a decision. There was a pole on the ball, the ballcarrier could clearly see the double coming. Wesleyan gave that one away. We’re less than two minutes into the third quarter and Colby is only going to score one more time the rest of the way.

Elliot Albert gets smoked by Greg McKillop for Colby’s 7th and final goal only 48 seconds later. Not a strong series of events for Albert, the man guilty of the bad decision to double moments earlier.

17 yard shots with a three goal lead don’t make a lot of sense especially when you’re playing the slow down game.

And Wesleyan goes the other way. Gabe Kelley launches a missile from 15 yards. Reiley can’t control the rebound which is momentarily scooped up by a Colby pole before he is stripped. Sam Stanton cleans up the mess and dunks to bring it back to 7-5.

Colby actually generates some unsettled offense but Jennings can’t convert an easy one. When you aren’t getting easy goals in transition, you have to bury every point blank opportunity you get.

Wesleyan caps a disjointed offensive possession with a decent shot on the run from Aidan Daniell that gets by Reilly. I’ve got to imagine that’s one he wishes he could have back. 7-6 Colby.

Covington running the break! Covington running the break!

Wesleyan defense is playing appreciably better in the second half. They’ve figured out how the methodical Colby offense operates.

Gabe Kelley firing away with no conscience.

Clean hit. Flag down against Colby. I have no words.

EMO goal for Wesleyan as they cash in on the bad officiating. Cardinals simply run a variation on the old venerable wheel play. 7-7.

More insane officiating. A crosscheck call on what should have been a loose-ball push leaves Colby down a man again.

Wesleyan botches their wheel on EMO and then fails to back up their shot. Colby clears as their short stick splits the double and turns on the jets.

Robinson gets smoked by McKillop but McKillop can’t bury it. It bears repeating that you cannot waste chances if you’re going to run such a plodding offense.

Wesleyan settled offense is pretty pedestrian. They just don’t have a guy capable of creating offense both for himself and his teammates. Landow is the closest thing they’ve got, but he doesn’t seem to get enough touches. The quarter ends with them taking a bad shot then watching Colby clear.

4th Quarter

Jennings misses another good scoring chance. That’s three shots from 5 yards and in that Colby hasn’t finished in the second half. ‘Nuff said.

That Wesleyan pedestrian settled offense? Still pedestrian. They’re only getting offense off of individual efforts, no real team movement. Fortunately, Teddy Citrin dodges from X, gets a step and buries the eventual game-winner for an 8-7 Wesleyan lead.

Colby and Wesleyan trade ugly offensive possessions, culminating in a Wesleyan player launching a 20 yard shot. No, really, that just happened. Popcorn.

Colby manages to draw the first of three Wesleyan penalties in the final 6:47 of the game. If you go 0 for 3 on EMO down a goal in the fourth, you probably deserve to lose.

Reilly makes a great save to keep Colby in it. The Colby offense repays him by taking their sweet time subbing and setting up. Don’t worry, you’re not down a goal or anything.

Covington goes 1 man army and clears it all the down to the box. Timeout Wesleyan.

Colby transition leads to another Wesleyan penalty. So what you’re saying is that transition can lead to good things…?

And there’s the third Wesleyan penalty of the quarter. They sure aren’t doing themselves any favors.

Covington beats a Colby attackman to the endline and then celebrates by acting like he’s having a seizure standing up. Nominated for an ESPY for “Most Awkward Celebration”

Wesleyan does an excellent job of burning time of the clock. Reason #45 why we should have a shot clock.

Colby manages to get it back and call a timeout once they touch it in. Of course, they botch the offensive possession. After some up and down craziness, the game goes final. 8-7 Wesleyan, who won despite barely having the ball and not being particularly successful with it when they did. Transition goals, a strong second half from the defense and Colby’s own insistence on slowing down the game even more in the second half instead of pushing to blow it open gave Wesleyan the win and eventually was the difference between the 5th and 6th seeds in the NESCAC tournament.