Andy Christensen Re-Instated to Nebraska Football Team

Andy Christensen was reinstated to the Husker football team today. He will be suspended for New Mexico State, but be able to practice. One has to wonder how much he can contribute this season as he's already missed a lot of learning.

I'm not 100% sure how I feel about this. On the one side, he was found not guilty of sexual assault, but plead guilty to misdemeanors. If you take it from that perspective, he's already served a long suspension.

On the other side, it doesn't represent the Husker program well, and it leaves you wondering how Pelini will handle other discipline as he goes forward in his first stint as a head coach.

about 1 year ago corn blight 4 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Why...

does this make you wonder how he will handle other disciplinary actions? He dismissed Kevin Dixon (still haven’t heard y other then team rules). This started before Pelinin I believe and he has told Andy and his family that it is now a zero torlerence rule for him.

Pelini talked to the player, his family, the coaching staff, the Unity Council, and Tom Osborne before making a decision so I would say he had a pretty good idea of how to handle it. Its not like he made some rash decisiion without getting some outside input.

I agree with the decision.

by taflorom on Sep 8, 2008 8:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Fair statement

Maybe it’s because I worry about the public perception of the University, something that we really have little control over and therefore should not worry about. Maybe it’s getting dragged back into the whole “Tom Osborne sold his soul” bullshit that i have to listen to every once in a while.

I’m just not 100% sold on it.

Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!

by corn blight on Sep 9, 2008 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i went back

and thought further about why this is bugging me and what it comes down to is that there was plenty of evidence that he committed sexual assault, but there wasn’t enough to get a conviction. So what we’re saying (again) is that it’s okay for the guy to be around because he wasn’t convicted, yet what he’s accused of was downright heinous.

If that’s how we’re going to feel about it, why does America still hate OJ? Same rules apply, don’t they? Or are we willing to give Christensen a pass because he’s our guy?

Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!

by corn blight on Sep 9, 2008 12:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

what

are you basing your “there was plenty of evidence that he committed sexual assault” on? I have not read anything other then the woman said so. No eye witness, no dna, so where do you get that? Have I missed something? (I could have because I certainly have not been able to read every paper that has covered this).

I have to believe that if there was that much evidence against him that either Bo or his staff would have made the decision to remove him long before they took it to the Unity Council and then I think TO would have said no freaking way is he playing here again. And yeah I do think if a player is found not guilty that he should be reinstated. Kind of a double edged sword here, if you kick a player off the team for being accused of something what is to stop someone from accusing a player of anything just to get them kicked off? Where do we draw the line if not at conviction? How heinous does the crime have to be just to be kicked off for being accused of it? How much evidence should there be to be kicked off with no conviction?

And I dont care what America thinks of OJ (or Andy Christensen for that matter) it only matters what Bo thinks of him and I guess he believed him or he wouldn’t be on the team.

by taflorom on Sep 10, 2008 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs