More News From Hypocrite U!

tycat947

Active member
Joined
Nov 6, 2008
Messages
5,243
Reaction score
11
I think maybe we can see that, as good as Hypocrite U was, there wasn't a cohesiveness and probably led to their demise in the hunt for the NC. Can't say that I'm surprised a bit although I'd guess Mulkey was more worried about the Hypocrite U administration's look at the program rather than the recruiting difficulties.

brittney-griner-says-baylor-coach-kim-mulkey-told-players-keep-quiet-sexuality

Hypocrite U fans are also upset (on the whole) with Griner for sullying their hallowed name!

http://www.baylorfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=256866
 
Agreed, let sleeping bears lie, but it is hard for me to imagine that any observant adult would be surprised by Griner's comments.

I didn't think about it one way or the other, but I certainly wasn't surprised.
 
Note: I have called an offseason truce with a Baylor fan on SF.com and therefore am not allowed to speak ill of Baylor.

I think I am not voiding the truce by saying that the fan reaction and the media reaction does not surprise me.
 
Just read about Griner's comments in multiple news outlets.... WOW

But then it doesn't surprise me. One headline said it all for me:

The real sin at Baylor? Losing.

The headline I would have loved to see?

Wink Wink
 
Yeah, like that's a conversation you are going to have in a group of people.

Maybe she just said something to Brittany because Brittany is a man.
 
Sounds like Griner was imagining things that weren't true. From the comments from former BU players, it appears Kim is telling her players basically the same things I expect Sherri tells her team... work hard in the classroom first, basketball is secondary, and she stays out of their personal lives.

How can they "stay out of their personal lives", when the majority of their lives during the 4+ years are spent with their respective teams? If you believe that coaches are not involved in their personal lives...including relationships (with men, women, family, friends)...I have some organic veggies to sell you. Never-mind that they are labeled "grown in Chernobyl".

The NCAA is involved in their personal lives! Right down to the "complimentary tickets" that are left for their guest for games. The compliance office at NCAA Div I schools ask for the name of the person the ticket is for, their phone number and your RELATIONSHIP!

At the same time...parents trust coaches to mentor their son/daughter, and take some type of responsibility for their well-being since they are recruiting them. Where is the line drawn?
 
What I mean is, the girls can date whomever they wish, can go wherever they wish, hang out with people of their choosing, and do whatever they want, as long as their activities do not violate NCAA, OU, or team rules. I also believe when it comes to sex or sexuality, Sherri does not involve herself in those issues.
 
What I mean is, the girls can date whomever they wish, can go wherever they wish, hang out with people of their choosing, and do whatever they want, as long as their activities do not violate NCAA, OU, or team rules. I also believe when it comes to sex or sexuality, Sherri does not involve herself in those issues.

Would you like carrots and peas?
 
From the comments from former BU players, it appears Kim is telling her players basically the same things I expect Sherri tells her team... work hard in the classroom first, basketball is secondary, and she stays out of their personal lives.

a couple of problems with that interpretation. 1) BG says she told Mulkey when she was being recruited that she was gay and Mulkey's response was: no problem. Points to Mulkey for that response, but ... 2) Griner says she was not aware of Baylor policy towards homosexuality until she was on campus. Opppppps, it seems that might be a problem that Mulkey forgot to mention 3) Mulkey, as a Baylor employee, has some obligation to uphold the policies of the University. Now the problem becomes Baylor's, IMO. How much latitude does am employee have in choosing which policies to support? While I don't support the policy re homosexuality, the institution either does or does not expect/demand compliance with those policies from its staff and students. Of course, to forgive is said to be divine so maybe .....
 
Her sexuality should have come under the heading, "don't ask, don't tell". Sounds to me like Griner is the only one who wanted to tell everyone she is gay. The truth is, I don't think anyone is surprised.
 
The interesting thing about Griner's statement is that it didn't answer the question that everyone had. Lesbian? So what---except at Baylor, well, and maybe wherever Debbie Patterson coaches.

But, it is interesting that the loss of a key member of the 2005 title team wasn't explained to Griner. We had already seen the problems of being a lesbian affect Baylor.

You really have to be a devotee of conspiracy theories to say that Griner is a man---by definition in the State of Texas or NCAA. You would have to believe that her parents chose to identify her as a girl, knowing she was a male, almost at birth simply so she could enroll and play basketball at Baylor. Now, I wouldn't put a lot past Mulkey, but even she wasn't there are Griner's birth.

But, there is another issue that may become addressed due to the Olympics and international standards. We create a division called women's sports. We do that because we accept that women, by physiology and morphology, find it difficult to compete with men in sport, at least in sports requiring speed and strength. For years, we had problems with East Germans giving hormones to females to enhance their building of strength. We disqualified them. We even disqualify men for using steroids, even if those steroids can be produced via induction, apparently. But, there have always been women who manifest various levels of the influence of male hormones. For them, it is quite natural to have very masculine features, traits, and even voices. They are still female.

But, does that really fit with the idea that we define the category as being only for women because we are trying to give women an equal chance amongst themselves. Is it fair to let someone who has such strong masculine influence on development, affecting strength and agility, compete with other women as though they had equal opportunity? It kind of defies the reason that we separate men's and women's basketball, or gymnastics.

I don't have a clear opinion since I don't think the answer is clear. I think the Olympics are struggling with these definitions and how to measure them. Women who have always been considered women are now being disqualified. Confusing.
 
I don't think there is any doubt that Griner was told not to discuss her sexual preference until she left Baylor. If she had said anything sooner some enterprising reporter would have ask the question of Baylor how this fit with their stated beliefs. This way they can say they never knew!
 
I don't think there is any doubt that Griner was told not to discuss her sexual preference until she left Baylor. If she had said anything sooner some enterprising reporter would have ask the question of Baylor how this fit with their stated beliefs. This way they can say they never knew!

+1
 
I don't believe Kim would have just told Griner to be quiet unless she told the entire team to keep quiet about sexuality.
 
Back
Top