Penn State dismisses some BIG names

Gold · 05-09-2008, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by flynnpsu

Scott has a lot of issues and needs to get his act together. I don't think Rella was going to start next year anyway with Quentin Wright projected at 165 & David Erwin at 174. According to Jeff Byers from PSUs wrestling message board Rella wants to transfer to Ohio State.

Platt is a huge loss. 197 is going to be a problem for them next year.

It would be great to have Rella in the room. Maybe he could contribute next year at 174? Even if he's just a backup though, that would be awesome to have another quality guy like that on the team.

LkwdSteve · 05-12-2008, 06:50 AM

The manner of Penn State's handling of the announcement is a bone of contention among some of the involved parents and probably the high school coaches.

Were the wrestlers released at the request of the wrestlers or were they dismissed for violating rules or failure to adhere to standards?

Should the three wrestlers have been lumped together?

Judging from the conversation above, perhaps this isn't a big issue for most folks. But, I'm not sure that Penn St. should want to p*** off a couple of the coaching staffs involved and by extension some in certain Ohio communities.

Judging by the clarification announcment offered on the PSU website by Jeff Byers, we have some answers to the above questions.

While some are lauding the "class/intregrity/honesty/etc." of Byer's follow-up, it remains that the Rella family's posted objections were poo-pooed, and those dissing the Rellas and offering how Penn St. did nothing wrong, have not come back on any forum with appropriate words singalling that they understand that they were misled by the oringinal announcement.

Now we find (what appears to be) a member of the Platt family publically objecting. She is catching some flak. How about the Blair coaches?

Not good.

RYou · 05-12-2008, 09:02 AM

I think it obvious to all that the term "dismissed" can connote either apositive or a negative result. In fact, the term can be used in positive situation, "the case against the defendant was dismissed", "classes were dismissed". The definition of "dismissed" being, "discharged" or released". It is the contest in which the term is used that infers a negative or positive connotation.

"S/he was dismissed" is non-specific and unqualified, with interpretation by the reader. However, with the PSU wrestling team being the subject of the dismissal, the interpretation by most, if not all readers was clearly negative.

Would have such a negative interpretation had occurred, if not linked to the rumors of issues surrounding Scott? Would an announcement for Platt and Rella, separate from that for Scott had a differenet consequence? Who knows.

The fact remains, Rella, Platt and Scott were released by Sunderland. He/ PSU were in control of those releases, therefore use of the term "dismissed" was accurate, though unfortunately, perceived in a negative sense.

As for lumping all three in a single news release, to do it any other way could single out, one or two of the group. PSU is bound by FERPA and cannot release any details about a specific situation of a student. I think PSU was being careful not infer negativitity on any single student athlete, ergo, the single news release. The wording of the relese left it open to interpretation and much unfair speculation, but PSU was bound to protect itself and the students privacy.

grapplefan · 05-12-2008, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by RYou

I think it obvious to all that the term "dismissed" can connote either apositive or a negative result. In fact, the term can be used in positive situation, "the case against the defendant was dismissed", "classes were dismissed". The definition of "dismissed" being, "discharged" or released". It is the contest in which the term is used that infers a negative or positive connotation.

"S/he was dismissed" is non-specific and unqualified, with interpretation by the reader. However, with the PSU wrestling team being the subject of the dismissal, the interpretation by most, if not all readers was clearly negative.

Would have such a negative interpretation had occurred, if not linked to the rumors of issues surrounding Scott? Would an announcement for Platt and Rella, separate from that for Scott had a differenet consequence? Who knows.

The fact remains, Rella, Platt and Scott were released by Sunderland. He/ PSU were in control of those releases, therefore use of the term "dismissed" was accurate, though unfortunately, perceived in a negative sense.

As for lumping all three in a single news release, to do it any other way could single out, one or two of the group. PSU is bound by FERPA and cannot release any details about a specific situation of a student. I think PSU was being careful not infer negativitity on any single student athlete, ergo, the single news release. The wording of the relese left it open to interpretation and much unfair speculation, but PSU was bound to protect itself and the students privacy.

The language used on Intermat is:
"Freshmen Garrett Scott (Alexandria, Pa.) and Jared Platt (Blairstown, N.J.) and sophomore Dave Rella (Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio) have all been dismissed from the squad for violation of team rules and the standards of the program."

Sounds negative to me, and not just a perception.
What violation did they commit to deserve dismissal?