Thoughts on Hazing

[FLCatEng]

In America we appear to be wildly inconsistent about hazing and how to respond to it. I happen to know two kids currently enrolled as Freshman at the US Naval Academy. Do they perform hazing? In the most generic sense, yes. They make it uncomfortable for the plebs for various reason with the ultimate goal of creating a strong minded person. Like many of you, I was in a Fraternity. Was there hazing? Of course. Fortunately, I would always categorize my experience as a "low level" hazing - cleaning, drinking, learning useless info, etc.

I was a Beta, which of course famously had a pledge die at PSU in 2017. Numerous brothers were blamed for the death in a court of law. To my knowledge, no one in the National or Regional leadership was directly penalized. Was it because they were "removed" from the situation? A common refrain is that "Fitz should've known" and he should pay the punishment. Given that logic I don't know how any Fraternity exists. My nephew, at a different school, was a pledge just a year ago, for a different fraternity. Even his Dad, a "brother" at the same chapter, was aware of the chapter's hazing practices applied to his son. Yes I assume most, if not all, fraternity situations are probably not as gross as the reported incidents in the NU locker room. That brings me to the next issue.

It frustrates me that numerous people have acknowledged hazing incident within the football team and it appears they did not attempt to elevate the issue. Without blaming the victim(s) I would like to explicitly know why they did report the issue. Some said something similar to "Fitz must've known". If he did nothing, then why did they not elevate to the AD, NCAA, State of IL? I know some of incidents were reported by players. I will regretfully admit their immaturity. The members of the staff, no matter how low their position, should have used their maturity and reported the issues. I wish they would not have assumed the problem would go away and intervened. I struggle with not finding them culpable. Regardless, asking why someone didn't report earlier, allows us better assess the culture prevalent in the locker room and the team. Maybe this will unveil issues with Fitz.

I listened to Barnett and he further cemented the idea that Fitz was Player's Coach to a fault. I suspect he had too much trust in his Leadership Council. In conjunction with his "open-door" policy, he thought that no major issues would occur. Sure he wanted strong team unity, but not to expense of the allegations where the team becomes fractured.

We have been told this hazing has occurred for many years. Returning to the question as to why was the reporting was only done recently, bothers me. I never played organized football in HS. I ran X-Country where we "hazed" ourselves by the miserable conditions of running. I sense that many of players experienced some hazing in HS. When at college, they could accept the elevated hazing to help develop the bonds and metal toughness akin to the millitary. This is just a theory, but given the words of praise by many former players for Fitz I would otherwise have a hard time resolving their experiences with hazing.

I believe many issues could have been resolved with better environment. I have worked in the Defense Industry for multiple decades. Every year we are required to have Ethics and Security Training, We must watch ethics vignettes based on real live industry situations. Our security training asks us to report issues. They train us for indications of a person potentially violating a security policy. The phone number to report Fraud, Waste and Abuse can easily be found either on signage around the facility. Although I wasn't directly involved, I knew a Manager that was accused of fraud. The company evaluated the accusations and decided to fire the Manager and several others associated with him. Uncannily, I heard the suspected whistleblower appeared to have issues with the Manager. The Manager sued my company and his pension was ultimately re-instated.

I brought that story up because it parallels the situation with the football team, but most importantly how our Culture was easy to report a potential issue. At a minimum, I hope NU can properly create a culture based on training and access such that no one feels discomfort from a hazing event. If they do have a hazing issue, they know it can be reported without any concern of potential retribution.

In summary, I suspect some elements of hazing will always exist. I wish we could normalize the response to hazing, but that's just dreaming. At a minimum, with annual training and an open culture to report problems this will not happen again at NU and other institutions.

 

[CoralSpringsCat]

In America we appear to be wildly inconsistent about hazing and how to respond to it. I happen to know two kids currently enrolled as Freshman at the US Naval Academy. Do they perform hazing? In the most generic sense, yes. They make it uncomfortable for the plebs for various reason with the ultimate goal of creating a strong minded person. Like many of you, I was in a Fraternity. Was there hazing? Of course. Fortunately, I would always categorize my experience as a "low level" hazing - cleaning, drinking, learning useless info, etc.

I was a Beta, which of course famously had a pledge die at PSU in 2017. Numerous brothers were blamed for the death in a court of law. To my knowledge, no one in the National or Regional leadership was directly penalized. Was it because they were "removed" from the situation? A common refrain is that "Fitz should've known" and he should pay the punishment. Given that logic I don't know how any Fraternity exists. My nephew, at a different school, was a pledge just a year ago, for a different fraternity. Even his Dad, a "brother" at the same chapter, was aware of the chapter's hazing practices applied to his son. Yes I assume most, if not all, fraternity situations are probably not as gross as the reported incidents in the NU locker room. That brings me to the next issue.

It frustrates me that numerous people have acknowledged hazing incident within the football team and it appears they did not attempt to elevate the issue. Without blaming the victim(s) I would like to explicitly know why they did report the issue. Some said something similar to "Fitz must've known". If he did nothing, then why did they not elevate to the AD, NCAA, State of IL? I know some of incidents were reported by players. I will regretfully admit their immaturity. The members of the staff, no matter how low their position, should have used their maturity and reported the issues. I wish they would not have assumed the problem would go away and intervened. I struggle with not finding them culpable. Regardless, asking why someone didn't report earlier, allows us better assess the culture prevalent in the locker room and the team. Maybe this will unveil issues with Fitz.

I listened to Barnett and he further cemented the idea that Fitz was Player's Coach to a fault. I suspect he had too much trust in his Leadership Council. In conjunction with his "open-door" policy, he thought that no major issues would occur. Sure he wanted strong team unity, but not to expense of the allegations where the team becomes fractured.

We have been told this hazing has occurred for many years. Returning to the question as to why was the reporting was only done recently, bothers me. I never played organized football in HS. I ran X-Country where we "hazed" ourselves by the miserable conditions of running. I sense that many of players experienced some hazing in HS. When at college, they could accept the elevated hazing to help develop the bonds and metal toughness akin to the millitary. This is just a theory, but given the words of praise by many former players for Fitz I would otherwise have a hard time resolving their experiences with hazing.

I believe many issues could have been resolved with better environment. I have worked in the Defense Industry for multiple decades. Every year we are required to have Ethics and Security Training, We must watch ethics vignettes based on real live industry situations. Our security training asks us to report issues. They train us for indications of a person potentially violating a security policy. The phone number to report Fraud, Waste and Abuse can easily be found either on signage around the facility. Although I wasn't directly involved, I knew a Manager that was accused of fraud. The company evaluated the accusations and decided to fire the Manager and several others associated with him. Uncannily, I heard the suspected whistleblower appeared to have issues with the Manager. The Manager sued my company and his pension was ultimately re-instated.

I brought that story up because it parallels the situation with the football team, but most importantly how our Culture was easy to report a potential issue. At a minimum, I hope NU can properly create a culture based on training and access such that no one feels discomfort from a hazing event. If they do have a hazing issue, they know it can be reported without any concern of potential retribution.

In summary, I suspect some elements of hazing will always exist. I wish we could normalize the response to hazing, but that's just dreaming. At a minimum, with annual training and an open culture to report problems this will not happen again at NU and other institutions.

Thank you for a rational and well written post.

 

[phatcat]

In America we appear to be wildly inconsistent about hazing and how to respond to it. I happen to know two kids currently enrolled as Freshman at the US Naval Academy. Do they perform hazing? In the most generic sense, yes. They make it uncomfortable for the plebs for various reason with the ultimate goal of creating a strong minded person. Like many of you, I was in a Fraternity. Was there hazing? Of course. Fortunately, I would always categorize my experience as a "low level" hazing - cleaning, drinking, learning useless info, etc.

I was a Beta, which of course famously had a pledge die at PSU in 2017. Numerous brothers were blamed for the death in a court of law. To my knowledge, no one in the National or Regional leadership was directly penalized. Was it because they were "removed" from the situation? A common refrain is that "Fitz should've known" and he should pay the punishment. Given that logic I don't know how any Fraternity exists. My nephew, at a different school, was a pledge just a year ago, for a different fraternity. Even his Dad, a "brother" at the same chapter, was aware of the chapter's hazing practices applied to his son. Yes I assume most, if not all, fraternity situations are probably not as gross as the reported incidents in the NU locker room. That brings me to the next issue.

It frustrates me that numerous people have acknowledged hazing incident within the football team and it appears they did not attempt to elevate the issue. Without blaming the victim(s) I would like to explicitly know why they did report the issue. Some said something similar to "Fitz must've known". If he did nothing, then why did they not elevate to the AD, NCAA, State of IL? I know some of incidents were reported by players. I will regretfully admit their immaturity. The members of the staff, no matter how low their position, should have used their maturity and reported the issues. I wish they would not have assumed the problem would go away and intervened. I struggle with not finding them culpable. Regardless, asking why someone didn't report earlier, allows us better assess the culture prevalent in the locker room and the team. Maybe this will unveil issues with Fitz.

I listened to Barnett and he further cemented the idea that Fitz was Player's Coach to a fault. I suspect he had too much trust in his Leadership Council. In conjunction with his "open-door" policy, he thought that no major issues would occur. Sure he wanted strong team unity, but not to expense of the allegations where the team becomes fractured.

We have been told this hazing has occurred for many years. Returning to the question as to why was the reporting was only done recently, bothers me. I never played organized football in HS. I ran X-Country where we "hazed" ourselves by the miserable conditions of running. I sense that many of players experienced some hazing in HS. When at college, they could accept the elevated hazing to help develop the bonds and metal toughness akin to the millitary. This is just a theory, but given the words of praise by many former players for Fitz I would otherwise have a hard time resolving their experiences with hazing.

I believe many issues could have been resolved with better environment. I have worked in the Defense Industry for multiple decades. Every year we are required to have Ethics and Security Training, We must watch ethics vignettes based on real live industry situations. Our security training asks us to report issues. They train us for indications of a person potentially violating a security policy. The phone number to report Fraud, Waste and Abuse can easily be found either on signage around the facility. Although I wasn't directly involved, I knew a Manager that was accused of fraud. The company evaluated the accusations and decided to fire the Manager and several others associated with him. Uncannily, I heard the suspected whistleblower appeared to have issues with the Manager. The Manager sued my company and his pension was ultimately re-instated.

I brought that story up because it parallels the situation with the football team, but most importantly how our Culture was easy to report a potential issue. At a minimum, I hope NU can properly create a culture based on training and access such that no one feels discomfort from a hazing event. If they do have a hazing issue, they know it can be reported without any concern of potential retribution.

In summary, I suspect some elements of hazing will always exist. I wish we could normalize the response to hazing, but that's just dreaming. At a minimum, with annual training and an open culture to report problems this will not happen again at NU and other institutions.

Just nit picking a couple of issues in an otherwise we'll written post. 1. I don't know why national fraternities have escaped scrutiny, but one could argue that if they have, say, 30 chapters in a region, that they could claim plausible deniability. It would be akin to trying to hold the conference accountable for shenanigans at MSU, OSU, Mich, MN, IA and now, sadly ,NU. 2. Surely having a pledge drink themselves to death is egregious, but I seem to remember some culpability, accused or convicted, in those instances. In Fitz case, he hasn't been charged with a crime, that's not the University responsibility. Instead, he's been charged with breach and has been discharged, and will avail himself of the legal system to defend himself. 3. Finally, I, personally, don't ever want NU to be of the attitude "we're no worse than others". Let's strive to be better. I've accepted that we won't be better than everyone on the field, but in the classroom, community and locker room, we can

 

[curdog]

In America we appear to be wildly inconsistent about hazing and how to respond to it. I happen to know two kids currently enrolled as Freshman at the US Naval Academy. Do they perform hazing? In the most generic sense, yes. They make it uncomfortable for the plebs for various reason with the ultimate goal of creating a strong minded person. Like many of you, I was in a Fraternity. Was there hazing? Of course. Fortunately, I would always categorize my experience as a "low level" hazing - cleaning, drinking, learning useless info, etc.

I was a Beta, which of course famously had a pledge die at PSU in 2017. Numerous brothers were blamed for the death in a court of law. To my knowledge, no one in the National or Regional leadership was directly penalized. Was it because they were "removed" from the situation? A common refrain is that "Fitz should've known" and he should pay the punishment. Given that logic I don't know how any Fraternity exists. My nephew, at a different school, was a pledge just a year ago, for a different fraternity. Even his Dad, a "brother" at the same chapter, was aware of the chapter's hazing practices applied to his son. Yes I assume most, if not all, fraternity situations are probably not as gross as the reported incidents in the NU locker room. That brings me to the next issue.

It frustrates me that numerous people have acknowledged hazing incident within the football team and it appears they did not attempt to elevate the issue. Without blaming the victim(s) I would like to explicitly know why they did report the issue. Some said something similar to "Fitz must've known". If he did nothing, then why did they not elevate to the AD, NCAA, State of IL? I know some of incidents were reported by players. I will regretfully admit their immaturity. The members of the staff, no matter how low their position, should have used their maturity and reported the issues. I wish they would not have assumed the problem would go away and intervened. I struggle with not finding them culpable. Regardless, asking why someone didn't report earlier, allows us better assess the culture prevalent in the locker room and the team. Maybe this will unveil issues with Fitz.

I listened to Barnett and he further cemented the idea that Fitz was Player's Coach to a fault. I suspect he had too much trust in his Leadership Council. In conjunction with his "open-door" policy, he thought that no major issues would occur. Sure he wanted strong team unity, but not to expense of the allegations where the team becomes fractured.

We have been told this hazing has occurred for many years. Returning to the question as to why was the reporting was only done recently, bothers me. I never played organized football in HS. I ran X-Country where we "hazed" ourselves by the miserable conditions of running. I sense that many of players experienced some hazing in HS. When at college, they could accept the elevated hazing to help develop the bonds and metal toughness akin to the millitary. This is just a theory, but given the words of praise by many former players for Fitz I would otherwise have a hard time resolving their experiences with hazing.

I believe many issues could have been resolved with better environment. I have worked in the Defense Industry for multiple decades. Every year we are required to have Ethics and Security Training, We must watch ethics vignettes based on real live industry situations. Our security training asks us to report issues. They train us for indications of a person potentially violating a security policy. The phone number to report Fraud, Waste and Abuse can easily be found either on signage around the facility. Although I wasn't directly involved, I knew a Manager that was accused of fraud. The company evaluated the accusations and decided to fire the Manager and several others associated with him. Uncannily, I heard the suspected whistleblower appeared to have issues with the Manager. The Manager sued my company and his pension was ultimately re-instated.

I brought that story up because it parallels the situation with the football team, but most importantly how our Culture was easy to report a potential issue. At a minimum, I hope NU can properly create a culture based on training and access such that no one feels discomfort from a hazing event. If they do have a hazing issue, they know it can be reported without any concern of potential retribution.

In summary, I suspect some elements of hazing will always exist. I wish we could normalize the response to hazing, but that's just dreaming. At a minimum, with annual training and an open culture to report problems this will not happen again at NU and other institutions.

I was thinking along similar line with the military. Isn’t boot camp one giant hazing event?

 

[kaTNap]

I was thinking along similar line with the military. Isn’t boot camp one giant hazing event?

A lot of the boot camp stuff is done for a legitimate purpose. For example, if you look at videos of recruit training in the Marine Corps, you'll often see two or three DIs screaming at a recruit. The reason they do that is to get the recruits used to a combat situation, where people will be screaming at each other, and there will be other distractions, and it's absolutely essential to stay calm, figure out the correct course of action, and execute it.

 

[wicker]

When did they start including sodomy?

 

[curdog]

A lot of the boot camp stuff is done for a legitimate purpose. For example, if you look at videos of recruit training in the Marine Corps, you'll often see two or three DIs screaming at a recruit. The reason they do that is to get the recruits used to a combat situation, where people will be screaming at each other, and there will be other distractions, and it's absolutely essential to stay calm, figure out the correct course of action, and execute it.

When did they start including sodomy?

Probably since the very beginning

Six Men Tell Their Stories of Sexual Assault in the Military (Published 2019)

More than 100,000 men have been sexually assaulted in the military in recent decades. Shame and stigma kept the vast majority from coming forward to report the attacks. Six men are speaking out to break the silence.

www.nytimes.com

 

[TheC]

In America we appear to be wildly inconsistent about hazing and how to respond to it. I happen to know two kids currently enrolled as Freshman at the US Naval Academy. Do they perform hazing? In the most generic sense, yes. They make it uncomfortable for the plebs for various reason with the ultimate goal of creating a strong minded person. Like many of you, I was in a Fraternity. Was there hazing? Of course. Fortunately, I would always categorize my experience as a "low level" hazing - cleaning, drinking, learning useless info, etc.

I was a Beta, which of course famously had a pledge die at PSU in 2017. Numerous brothers were blamed for the death in a court of law. To my knowledge, no one in the National or Regional leadership was directly penalized. Was it because they were "removed" from the situation? A common refrain is that "Fitz should've known" and he should pay the punishment. Given that logic I don't know how any Fraternity exists. My nephew, at a different school, was a pledge just a year ago, for a different fraternity. Even his Dad, a "brother" at the same chapter, was aware of the chapter's hazing practices applied to his son. Yes I assume most, if not all, fraternity situations are probably not as gross as the reported incidents in the NU locker room. That brings me to the next issue.

It frustrates me that numerous people have acknowledged hazing incident within the football team and it appears they did not attempt to elevate the issue. Without blaming the victim(s) I would like to explicitly know why they did report the issue. Some said something similar to "Fitz must've known". If he did nothing, then why did they not elevate to the AD, NCAA, State of IL? I know some of incidents were reported by players. I will regretfully admit their immaturity. The members of the staff, no matter how low their position, should have used their maturity and reported the issues. I wish they would not have assumed the problem would go away and intervened. I struggle with not finding them culpable. Regardless, asking why someone didn't report earlier, allows us better assess the culture prevalent in the locker room and the team. Maybe this will unveil issues with Fitz.

I listened to Barnett and he further cemented the idea that Fitz was Player's Coach to a fault. I suspect he had too much trust in his Leadership Council. In conjunction with his "open-door" policy, he thought that no major issues would occur. Sure he wanted strong team unity, but not to expense of the allegations where the team becomes fractured.

We have been told this hazing has occurred for many years. Returning to the question as to why was the reporting was only done recently, bothers me. I never played organized football in HS. I ran X-Country where we "hazed" ourselves by the miserable conditions of running. I sense that many of players experienced some hazing in HS. When at college, they could accept the elevated hazing to help develop the bonds and metal toughness akin to the millitary. This is just a theory, but given the words of praise by many former players for Fitz I would otherwise have a hard time resolving their experiences with hazing.

I believe many issues could have been resolved with better environment. I have worked in the Defense Industry for multiple decades. Every year we are required to have Ethics and Security Training, We must watch ethics vignettes based on real live industry situations. Our security training asks us to report issues. They train us for indications of a person potentially violating a security policy. The phone number to report Fraud, Waste and Abuse can easily be found either on signage around the facility. Although I wasn't directly involved, I knew a Manager that was accused of fraud. The company evaluated the accusations and decided to fire the Manager and several others associated with him. Uncannily, I heard the suspected whistleblower appeared to have issues with the Manager. The Manager sued my company and his pension was ultimately re-instated.

I brought that story up because it parallels the situation with the football team, but most importantly how our Culture was easy to report a potential issue. At a minimum, I hope NU can properly create a culture based on training and access such that no one feels discomfort from a hazing event. If they do have a hazing issue, they know it can be reported without any concern of potential retribution.

In summary, I suspect some elements of hazing will always exist. I wish we could normalize the response to hazing, but that's just dreaming. At a minimum, with annual training and an open culture to report problems this will not happen again at NU and other institutions.

I do have some thoughts on your question of why no one reported anything. I think it's so easy to say, in hindsight, that a person should have just reported the hazing at the time and everything would have been fixed. But I have to imagine that is not what is going through that person's mind at a time. I can certainly see someone having that experience thinking....


I really should report this. This is wrong. But what if I report it and my coaches don't care? What if I report it but the people doing this to me are protected? If I just say nothing and endure this for a little while, it will be over and then I can go about my life on this team and my future is intact. If I report it, everyone on the team may hate me. The coaches may not trust me. I may lose my opportunity to play football on this team and go to this school and my future will be in doubt. If I just shut up and take it, it will be over soon and life can go on.

I imagine many women who suffer from sexual abuse and assault think the same way. I think it explains why a culture of abuse can become almost normalized and why when the dam does finally break (think Me Too), then there is a lot of anger and emotion and a great need for a reckoning. It is a much bigger risk to speak out then many of us may appreciate. However, when one does, the response can be very powerful as they are often, likely unknowingly, speaking out for thousands more.

 

[NUCat320]

“Hey coach, thanks for meeting with me. Just wanted to let you know that, yesterday, a whole bunch of my teammates made me strip naked, and made (freshman QB) strip naked, and made me bend over and made him shove his hands against my scrotum so that we could execute a Center-QB exchange.”

“What!? Who were the ringleaders?”

“Tough to say, really. (3 year starter) took my clothes, and (academic all big ten backup) rallied everyone to watch. Probably 30 people were there.”

It’s a hard conversation.

 

[CoralSpringsCat]

“Hey coach, thanks for meeting with me. Just wanted to let you know that, yesterday, a whole bunch of my teammates made me strip naked, and made (freshman QB) strip naked, and made me bend over and made him shove his hands against my scrotum so that we could execute a Center-QB exchange.”

“What!? Who were the ringleaders?”

“Tough to say, really. (3 year starter) took my clothes, and (academic all big ten backup) rallied everyone to watch. Probably 30 people were there.”

It’s a hard conversation.

Or they could have taken this approach:

“Coach, this is tough for me to say as you know how much I love NU and our program, but I believe there is a hazing issue on the team…I don’t want to say anymore nor do I want to throw any of my teammates under the bus. I just want you to be aware. Based on what I’ve seen, it’s nothing you would condone or tolerate. I know you will do the right thing with this information.”

 

[TheC]

Or they could have taken this approach:

“Coach, this is tough for me to say as you know how much I love NU and our program, but I believe there is a hazing issue on the team…I don’t want to say anymore nor do I want to throw any of my teammates under the bus. I just want you to be aware. Based on what I’ve seen, it’s nothing you would condone or tolerate. I know you will do the right thing with this information.”

And then that player has to get ready for all the shit that follows that including possibly completely disrupting the life they thought they had planned. I realize it seems so easy to do in hindsight, but really put yourself in their shoes in that moment. I agree what you suggest is the right thing to do, but it is damned hard and incredibly risky.

 

[phatcat]

Or they could have taken this approach:

“Coach, this is tough for me to say as you know how much I love NU and our program, but I believe there is a hazing issue on the team…I don’t want to say anymore nor do I want to throw any of my teammates under the bus. I just want you to be aware. Based on what I’ve seen, it’s nothing you would condone or tolerate. I know you will do the right thing with this information.”

Agreed. For that matter, send an email or text from a burner account. You don't have to throw yourself on your sword. Did the whistle-blower have privacy protection. Many organizations do.

 

[TheC]

Agreed. For that matter, send an email or text from a burner account. You don't have to throw yourself on your sword. Did the whistle-blower have privacy protection. Many organizations do.

Whistle blower protections don't always work. Even if they are protected from recriminations at work/school, it doesn't protect them from being targeted socially. To an 18-23 year old kid, keeping quiet could easily seem like the best course of action.

 

[NUCat320]

Agreed. For that matter, send an email or text from a burner account. You don't have to throw yourself on your sword. Did the whistle-blower have privacy protection. Many organizations do.

A certain noodle-armed backup QB had protection too, until some asswipe former student manager decided he didn’t deserve it.

 

[hdhntr1]

I was thinking along similar line with the military. Isn’t boot camp one giant hazing event?

Of course it is. And it is often done for a combination of purposes. These can include getting people ready for something they will faced with, giving them a common basis and quickly bonding a group together. As broadly as the term is interpreted to be, there is likely to always be something that someone can consider to be hazing, So should the real question be, what is crossing the line? And is that the line the same for every person?

 

[hdhntr1]

In America we appear to be wildly inconsistent about hazing and how to respond to it. I happen to know two kids currently enrolled as Freshman at the US Naval Academy. Do they perform hazing? In the most generic sense, yes. They make it uncomfortable for the plebs for various reason with the ultimate goal of creating a strong minded person. Like many of you, I was in a Fraternity. Was there hazing? Of course. Fortunately, I would always categorize my experience as a "low level" hazing - cleaning, drinking, learning useless info, etc.

I was a Beta, which of course famously had a pledge die at PSU in 2017. Numerous brothers were blamed for the death in a court of law. To my knowledge, no one in the National or Regional leadership was directly penalized. Was it because they were "removed" from the situation? A common refrain is that "Fitz should've known" and he should pay the punishment. Given that logic I don't know how any Fraternity exists. My nephew, at a different school, was a pledge just a year ago, for a different fraternity. Even his Dad, a "brother" at the same chapter, was aware of the chapter's hazing practices applied to his son. Yes I assume most, if not all, fraternity situations are probably not as gross as the reported incidents in the NU locker room. That brings me to the next issue.

It frustrates me that numerous people have acknowledged hazing incident within the football team and it appears they did not attempt to elevate the issue. Without blaming the victim(s) I would like to explicitly know why they did report the issue. Some said something similar to "Fitz must've known". If he did nothing, then why did they not elevate to the AD, NCAA, State of IL? I know some of incidents were reported by players. I will regretfully admit their immaturity. The members of the staff, no matter how low their position, should have used their maturity and reported the issues. I wish they would not have assumed the problem would go away and intervened. I struggle with not finding them culpable. Regardless, asking why someone didn't report earlier, allows us better assess the culture prevalent in the locker room and the team. Maybe this will unveil issues with Fitz.

I listened to Barnett and he further cemented the idea that Fitz was Player's Coach to a fault. I suspect he had too much trust in his Leadership Council. In conjunction with his "open-door" policy, he thought that no major issues would occur. Sure he wanted strong team unity, but not to expense of the allegations where the team becomes fractured.

We have been told this hazing has occurred for many years. Returning to the question as to why was the reporting was only done recently, bothers me. I never played organized football in HS. I ran X-Country where we "hazed" ourselves by the miserable conditions of running. I sense that many of players experienced some hazing in HS. When at college, they could accept the elevated hazing to help develop the bonds and metal toughness akin to the millitary. This is just a theory, but given the words of praise by many former players for Fitz I would otherwise have a hard time resolving their experiences with hazing.

I believe many issues could have been resolved with better environment. I have worked in the Defense Industry for multiple decades. Every year we are required to have Ethics and Security Training, We must watch ethics vignettes based on real live industry situations. Our security training asks us to report issues. They train us for indications of a person potentially violating a security policy. The phone number to report Fraud, Waste and Abuse can easily be found either on signage around the facility. Although I wasn't directly involved, I knew a Manager that was accused of fraud. The company evaluated the accusations and decided to fire the Manager and several others associated with him. Uncannily, I heard the suspected whistleblower appeared to have issues with the Manager. The Manager sued my company and his pension was ultimately re-instated.

I brought that story up because it parallels the situation with the football team, but most importantly how our Culture was easy to report a potential issue. At a minimum, I hope NU can properly create a culture based on training and access such that no one feels discomfort from a hazing event. If they do have a hazing issue, they know it can be reported without any concern of potential retribution.

In summary, I suspect some elements of hazing will always exist. I wish we could normalize the response to hazing, but that's just dreaming. At a minimum, with annual training and an open culture to report problems this will not happen again at NU and other institutions.

A lot of all of this comes down to assumptions. Fitz assuming that they had put in place as system that it would not happen or if it did people would report it. Considering that he constantly came out against hazing and had open door policy and a coaching staff that he trusted, easy to see why he might feel he had it covered, That proved to be false. A lot of others assume that Fitz, coaches and others "should have known" That too seems to have been false.

With those failures, I am reminded of that saying, Do you know what you do when you assume? You make an ass of u and me. Sure seems true here

 

[FLCatEng]

“Hey coach, thanks for meeting with me. Just wanted to let you know that, yesterday, a whole bunch of my teammates made me strip naked, and made (freshman QB) strip naked, and made me bend over and made him shove his hands against my scrotum so that we could execute a Center-QB exchange.”

“What!? Who were the ringleaders?”

“Tough to say, really. (3 year starter) took my clothes, and (academic all big ten backup) rallied everyone to watch. Probably 30 people were there.”

It’s a hard conversation.

That is a tough conversation indeed, but I think other options were available, namely the AD, if they felt uncomfortable with Fitz. Given the cozy relationship between Fitz and Phillips someone might hesitate, but Dr Jim has been gone for a while. Gragg, with no obvious ties to the program, could possibly be viewed as an outlet - despite his perceived ineptitude. I admit bringing this up is difficult and I'm more willing t give a pass to the players, although I think we have plenty of high-character individuals in the locker room that would do the right thing if they perceived the actions to be "out-of-bounds".

This is why I truly struggle more with the staff members IF they experienced anything resembling the allegations reported in The Daily. Yes their jobs hinged on the team, but they are more mature and I hope they would be able to evaluate the situation from a bigger perspective than a college kid.

 

[hdhntr1]

I do have some thoughts on your question of why no one reported anything. I think it's so easy to say, in hindsight, that a person should have just reported the hazing at the time and everything would have been fixed. But I have to imagine that is not what is going through that person's mind at a time. I can certainly see someone having that experience thinking....


I really should report this. This is wrong. But what if I report it and my coaches don't care? What if I report it but the people doing this to me are protected? If I just say nothing and endure this for a little while, it will be over and then I can go about my life on this team and my future is intact. If I report it, everyone on the team may hate me. The coaches may not trust me. I may lose my opportunity to play football on this team and go to this school and my future will be in doubt. If I just shut up and take it, it will be over soon and life can go on.

I imagine many women who suffer from sexual abuse and assault think the same way. I think it explains why a culture of abuse can become almost normalized and why when the dam does finally break (think Me Too), then there is a lot of anger and emotion and a great need for a reckoning. It is a much bigger risk to speak out then many of us may appreciate. However, when one does, the response can be very powerful as they are often, likely unknowingly, speaking out for thousands more.

Remember how when you grew up no one liked the tattle tail? Lots of reasons why individuals would not bring it up.

 

[hdhntr1]

And then that player has to get ready for all the shit that follows that including possibly completely disrupting the life they thought they had planned. I realize it seems so easy to do in hindsight, but really put yourself in their shoes in that moment. I agree what you suggest is the right thing to do, but it is damned hard and incredibly risky.

It is never as easy as those who say the person should have reported it seem to suggest, That said, if Fitz is the man most of us here think he is, he would look into it and try to make appropriate changes, He would not be the source of where the tip came from, Does not mean people would not eventually figure it out (just like people figured out that it was Richardson)

 

[hdhntr1]

That is a tough conversation indeed, but I think other options were available, namely the AD, if they felt uncomfortable with Fitz. Given the cozy relationship between Fitz and Phillips someone might hesitate, but Dr Jim has been gone for a while. Gragg, with no obvious ties to the program, could possibly be viewed as an outlet - despite his perceived ineptitude. I admit bringing this up is difficult and I'm more willing t give a pass to the players, although I think we have plenty of high-character individuals in the locker room that would do the right thing if they perceived the actions to be "out-of-bounds".

This is why I truly struggle more with the staff members IF they experienced anything resembling the allegations reported in The Daily. Yes their jobs hinged on the team, but they are more mature and I hope they would be able to evaluate the situation from a bigger perspective than a college kid.

If the person was not willing to go to the HC or any other coach and you think he/she should go directly to the AD???

 

[TheC]

It is never as easy as those who say the person should have reported it seem to suggest, That said, if Fitz is the man most of us here think he is, he would look into it and try to make appropriate changes, He would not be the source of where the tip came from, Does not mean people would not eventually figure it out (just like people figured out that it was Richardson)

You hit on the thing that is most difficult about this whole mess. I think many of us on here had reached a point where we were ok criticizing Fitz about football decisions, but I don't think any of us questioned whether he was a man of extremely high integrity. I'm with you in thinking that Fitz was the kind of person who would know how to handle a situation like this perfectly. So, then, how the heck did this happen on his watch??!! If anyone was going to create an environment where this sort of thing never happened, it should be Fitz, right? Those were probably unfair expectations to put on him.

 

[FLCatEng]

If the person was not willing to go to the HC or any other coach and you think he/she should go directly to the AD???

I was proposing an alternative for anyone not comfortable with taking the issue to Fitz. I can assume many people would feel the same as you with the potential ties the AD has to the coach. It makes sense that a whistleblower would be cautious, but if the issue bothers them so much I would hope the could find the right person(s) to inform. There is no guarantee their actions will work as planned either. I doubt Carl will ever take another snap of football again. I doubt any whistleblower could have guessed the chaos that we experiencing now.

I think almost would agree with me when I say I wish someone would have spoken up earlier.

 

[EagerFan]

"...any activity expected of someone in joining or participating in a group that humiliates, degrades, abuses, or endangers them regardless of a person's willingness to participate."

I suspect the "wild inconsistency" is in part because hazing runs a very wide gamut of activities from the relatively benign, to the comically embarrassing, to stigmatizing humiliation, to life threatening. And people tend to have very different attitudes about the events depending on whether they are recalling their own experiences or reading/watching reporting about something that happened and the results thereof.

 

[hdhntr1]

I was proposing an alternative for anyone not comfortable with taking the issue to Fitz. I can assume many people would feel the same as you with the potential ties the AD has to the coach. It makes sense that a whistleblower would be cautious, but if the issue bothers them so much I would hope the could find the right person(s) to inform. There is no guarantee their actions will work as planned either. I doubt Carl will ever take another snap of football again. I doubt any whistleblower could have guessed the chaos that we experiencing now.

I think almost would agree with me when I say I wish someone would have spoken up earlier.

I am not concerned about that. What I am concerned about is violation of chain of command. How can a coach solve anything if he does not find out about it and you suggest and end around? Then the coach ends up in deep s**t for something they don't even know about. Maybe set up an independent third party process whereby they can talk with someone and the coach can be made aware that something is going on so that they can address it and report up that something is going on that they are checking out so that they can have a coordinated approach with them working together

 

[GrandRapidsCatFan]

You hit on the thing that is most difficult about this whole mess. I think many of us on here had reached a point where we were ok criticizing Fitz about football decisions, but I don't think any of us questioned whether he was a man of extremely high integrity. I'm with you in thinking that Fitz was the kind of person who would know how to handle a situation like this perfectly. So, then, how the heck did this happen on his watch??!! If anyone was going to create an environment where this sort of thing never happened, it should be Fitz, right? Those were probably unfair expectations to put on him.

Perhaps we all collectively fell prey to the cognitive bias that arises when you see one good quality in a person and assume that goodness extends to other qualities that may or may not even be apparent. I think we now might have to admit that Fitz was very good at saying the right things at a presser, but this did not mean he was also very good at doing the right things at a practice or otherwise behind the scenes.

But even as I type this, my mind boggles at the job that *any* collegiate head coach has in front of them. Leading a large group of highly competitive, highly aggressive young men in such a way that you get maximum focused effort, it seems like a Herculean effort. I can understand why anyone, even a successful head coach, would overlook flaws and seek out shortcuts. The whole thing is a tremendous undertaking that requires more than just good sound bites for jumbotron videos.

Turns out Fitz was only human after all.

 

[IGNORE2]

I am not concerned about that. What I am concerned about is violation of chain of command. How can a coach solve anything if he does not find out about it and you suggest and end around? Then the coach ends up in deep s**t for something they don't even know about. Maybe set up an independent third party process whereby they can talk with someone and the coach can be made aware that something is going on so that they can address it and report up that something is going on that they are checking out so that they can have a coordinated approach with them working together

We have ombudsmen in our organization for just this purpose.

 

[hdhntr1]

We have ombudsmen in our organization for just this purpose.

Apparently it did not work. I think you probably have to have it completely outside of the program and safe for all sides

 

[hdhntr1]

Perhaps we all collectively fell prey to the cognitive bias that arises when you see one good quality in a person and assume that goodness extends to other qualities that may or may not even be apparent. I think we now might have to admit that Fitz was very good at saying the right things at a presser, but this did not mean he was also very good at doing the right things at a practice or otherwise behind the scenes.

But even as I type this, my mind boggles at the job that *any* collegiate head coach has in front of them. Leading a large group of highly competitive, highly aggressive young men in such a way that you get maximum focused effort, it seems like a Herculean effort. I can understand why anyone, even a successful head coach, would overlook flaws and seek out shortcuts. The whole thing is a tremendous undertaking that requires more than just good sound bites for jumbotron videos.

Turns out Fitz was only human after all.

This does not mean Fitz is bad person., It likely means more that the system he had set up to keep this from happening did not work as it was intended

 

[FLCatEng]

I am not concerned about that. What I am concerned about is violation of chain of command. How can a coach solve anything if he does not find out about it and you suggest and end around? Then the coach ends up in deep s**t for something they don't even know about. Maybe set up an independent third party process whereby they can talk with someone and the coach can be made aware that something is going on so that they can address it and report up that something is going on that they are checking out so that they can have a coordinated approach with them working together

I agree with you that ideally the coach should have a chance to be involved. I may have misunderstood your position, but there's always a chance someone is afraid of retribution. A coach will also have to ask themselves why they were bypassed. Going forward, I would like some third-party/independent approach if a player or staff member is uncomfortable to discuss a situation.

In my original post I was referring methods we apply in the Defense Industry to come forward with issues. After I originated this thread I was required to perform some additional training on security. It verified that people with clearances are REQUIRED to report violations. Under most circumstances I suspect the Gov't would never charge anyone for not reporting but they have the capability since we signed our paperwork for our clearance. I think it helps the community to stay vigilant. Regardless with these safe guards we still have issues.

I've been wondering if it is possible that scholarship players could have similar verbiage in their "contracts". Although hazing is extremely broad in definition I would have preferred a player to have come forward long ago to allow the Athletic Dept/ coach resolve any potential issues, instead of the hellscape we are currently watching. I believe that Fitz's intentions were good but apparently had some problems to allow issues to fester.

 

[IGNORE2]

Apparently it did not work. I think you probably have to have it completely outside of the program and safe for all sides

Not at NU, in a 501c3 that I run. And it has worked to date.

 

[IGNORE2]

I agree with you that ideally the coach should have a chance to be involved. I may have misunderstood your position, but there's always a chance someone is afraid of retribution. A coach will also have to ask themselves why they were bypassed. Going forward, I would like some third-party/independent approach if a player or staff member is uncomfortable to discuss a situation.

In my original post I was referring methods we apply in the Defense Industry to come forward with issues. After I originated this thread I was required to perform some additional training on security. It verified that people with clearances are REQUIRED to report violations. Under most circumstances I suspect the Gov't would never charge anyone for not reporting but they have the capability since we signed our paperwork for our clearance. I think it helps the community to stay vigilant. Regardless with these safe guards we still have issues.

I've been wondering if it is possible that scholarship players could have similar verbiage in their "contracts". Although hazing is extremely broad in definition I would have preferred a player to have come forward long ago to allow the Athletic Dept/ coach resolve any potential issues, instead of the hellscape we are currently watching. I believe that Fitz's intentions were good but apparently had some problems to allow issues to fester.

I can tell you that being a hazer definitely would violate the letter of the contract the conduct provision in the scholarship. And also the student code of conduct. So the question is whether NU will pursue current players. And what if they were also prior victims?

 

[FeralFelidae]

I can tell you that being a hazer definitely would violate the letter of the contract the conduct provision in the scholarship. And also the student code of conduct. So the question is whether NU will pursue current players. And what if they were also prior victims?

Alas, many of those upperclassmen who would have presumably hazed Richardson have surely graduated by now, so threatening their scholarships would be meaningless. How could they be held accountable?

 

[IGNORE2]

Alas, many of those upperclassmen who would have presumably hazed Richardson have surely graduated by now, so threatening their scholarships would be meaningless. How could they be held accountable?

Criminal courtrooms. Civil courtrooms. Court of public opinion.

 

[PurpWildCatNation]

Played sports my entire life and a few semesters at the collegiate level. Never liked it or condoned it but truthfully told I never had to experience it because I was lucky enough to have size and the fight to be feared by teammates... even the ones who considered themselves leaders. Also am not a fan of that crap when it comes to fraternities or sororities... never understood it never will. I still hold onto a jersey with PF's name on it I bought and paid for literally 20+ years ago. For a guy who held the football program to the highest standards I find this essentially indefensible (can't believe I'm saying this). I have no problem with the firing because someone should be held accountable at the top if the allegations are true.

 

[IGNORE2]

Played sports my entire life and a few semesters at the collegiate level. Never liked it or condoned it but truthfully told I never had to experience it because I was lucky enough to have size and the fight to be feared by teammates... even the ones who considered themselves leaders. Also am not a fan of that crap when it comes to fraternities or sororities... never understood it never will. I still hold onto a jersey with PF's name on it I bought and paid for literally 20+ years ago. For a guy who held the football program to the highest standards I find this essentially indefensible (can't believe I'm saying this). I have no problem with the firing because someone should be held accountable at the top if the allegations are true.

You and corbi should grab a beer.

 

[PurpWildCatNation]

You and corbi should grab a beer.

Is that an insult or a recommendation?

 

[FeralFelidae]

Is that an insult or a recommendation?

I'm confident it wasn't meant as an insult. corbi has been defending Fitz through this and you voiced a different perspective.

 

[IGNORE2]

Is that an insult or a recommendation?

A potential PPO event

 

[Hkjb]

On your point about Fitz being a player's coach to a fault: I'm generally a Fitz fan but he's a lot like other people who were promoted quickly at a young age, before they had real time to develop their executive management skills.

As Fitz learned to set a "waterline" as a leader - the line below which he would not go - he probably learned that lesson too well, without enough experience to build checks and balances into it. Other signals of his "promoted too fast" blindspots were the JON hire, his unwillingness to innovate more offensively, etc. He didn't go though a lot of hard knocks as a coach until he was the head honcho, and that left some blindspots. I think the locker room and his understandable desire to delegate accountability to players was one of those blindspots.