Moderators: peeker643, swerb, Ziner
by yogi » Fri Oct 29, 2010 2:43 pm
by JCoz » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:00 pm
by yogi » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:04 pm
by motherscratcher » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:17 pm
""Gusts of wind up to 60mph well today will be fun at work . . . I guess I've lived long enough,
by JCoz » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:20 pm
Motherscratcher wrote:God, this whole tragedy is just awful. It probably has something to do with having a son myself, and when I see pictures of that kids smiling face I feel so horrible for his parents and family that it makes me feel like crying.""Gusts of wind up to 60mph well today will be fun at work . . . I guess I've lived long enough,
That was one of his tweets that day.
Should ND fire Kelly? Hell, I don't know. Who the hell could know the right thing to do after something like this?
by daddywags » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:26 pm
by JCoz » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:29 pm
by Fire Marshall Bill » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:16 pm
The head football coach has final say over everything that transpires on the practice field. Everything. That’s why Ohio State’s Jim Tressel moved the Buckeyes’ practice inside on Tuesday when wind gusts made conditions unsafe.
“I don’t know if we’ll be inside or out,” Tressel told Ohio reporters 24 hours before the Notre Dame tragedy. “It looks a little nasty. I worry about our cameramen, their well-being up there 50 feet in the air.”
That’s the proper mindset of a head football coach. He’s paranoid about everything.
by Fire Marshall Bill » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:22 pm
"Motherscratcher wrote:God, this whole tragedy is just awful. It probably has something to do with having a son myself, and when I see pictures of that kids smiling face I feel so horrible for his parents and family that it makes me feel like crying.
[quote]"Gusts of wind up to 60mph well today will be fun at work . . . I guess I've lived long enough,
by FUDU » Sat Oct 30, 2010 11:30 am
by aoxo1 » Sat Oct 30, 2010 1:31 pm
by yogi » Sat Oct 30, 2010 3:04 pm
3. Is firing Kelly the way to prevent this from happening in the future? No, b/c ultimately you can rewrite your rules and procedures on this stuff.
by idoctribefan » Sat Oct 30, 2010 8:05 pm
aoxo1 wrote:Kelly should be arrested. Or whomever is responsible.

by Cerebral_DownTime » Sun Oct 31, 2010 4:08 pm
aoxo1 wrote:Kelly should be arrested. Or whomever is responsible.
by jfiling » Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:43 pm
by JCoz » Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:49 pm
by jfiling » Sun Oct 31, 2010 7:11 pm
JCoz wrote:What do you mean Jfiling?
by aoxo1 » Mon Nov 01, 2010 2:02 am
Cerebral_DownTime wrote:aoxo1 wrote:Kelly should be arrested. Or whomever is responsible.
So you're saying we should arrest God?
by leadpipe » Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:28 am
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:57 pm
idoctribefan wrote:aoxo1 wrote:Kelly should be arrested. Or whomever is responsible.
+1
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:59 pm
jfiling wrote:JCoz wrote:What do you mean Jfiling?
It's the Blame Game. I just was suggesting where to look, if it's not Coach Kelly who is at fault .
by yogi » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:00 pm
jb wrote:jfiling wrote:JCoz wrote:What do you mean Jfiling?
It's the Blame Game. I just was suggesting where to look, if it's not Coach Kelly who is at fault .
No one.
There doesn't have to be blame for every tragic incident.
Or maybe there should be a law, eh Mr. Liberatarian? ;-)
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:09 pm
yogi wrote:jb wrote:jfiling wrote:JCoz wrote:What do you mean Jfiling?
It's the Blame Game. I just was suggesting where to look, if it's not Coach Kelly who is at fault .
No one.
There doesn't have to be blame for every tragic incident.
Or maybe there should be a law, eh Mr. Liberatarian? ;-)
You are right, not every accident has someone who caused it or allowed the accident to happen.
This case may or may not be different. But they have law professionals investigating the incident and will give us the scoop of exactly what went down.
The little piece of evidence of the kid tweeting that he thought he might die before he went up, even if partially in jest, will certainly be interesting to the investigators.
"Gusts of wind up to 60mph well today will be fun at work . . . I guess I've lived long enough,
by peeker643 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:47 pm
by Bayou Tribe » Fri Nov 05, 2010 3:04 pm
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:53 pm
peeker643 wrote:I would think Tweeting takes two hands.
Two hands that would have served him better holding the fuck on.
![]()
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 4:55 pm
Bayou Tribe wrote:What would he have held on to? He didn't fall out of the scissor lift, the entire lift toppled over. Working in refineries, it's commonplace to know that you don't even raise a scissor lift un-manned if the winds are up to 25 mph. 50 mph gusts, that kid was dead before he woke up that morning.
by yogi » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:05 pm
jb wrote:Bayou Tribe wrote:What would he have held on to? He didn't fall out of the scissor lift, the entire lift toppled over. Working in refineries, it's commonplace to know that you don't even raise a scissor lift un-manned if the winds are up to 25 mph. 50 mph gusts, that kid was dead before he woke up that morning.
OK, now being serious.
Anyone ever ben to SB?
I'm there --- alot. I drove by the practice FB fields (they now have Bellichikian CIA security around the fields thanks to Fat Charlie) and there are pernanant multi-level built like brick shit house observation decks at the 50's.
I have no idae why they even needed a scissor truck.
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:08 pm
yogi wrote:jb wrote:Bayou Tribe wrote:What would he have held on to? He didn't fall out of the scissor lift, the entire lift toppled over. Working in refineries, it's commonplace to know that you don't even raise a scissor lift un-manned if the winds are up to 25 mph. 50 mph gusts, that kid was dead before he woke up that morning.
OK, now being serious.
Anyone ever ben to SB?
I'm there --- alot. I drove by the practice FB fields (they now have Bellichikian CIA security around the fields thanks to Fat Charlie) and there are pernanant multi-level built like brick shit house observation decks at the 50's.
I have no idae why they even needed a scissor truck.
I read that they used it for End Zone POVs.
by peeker643 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:25 pm
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:30 pm
peeker643 wrote:Also being serious.
Dude shoulda jumped straight up in the air right before the thing hit the ground.
That's my fool-proof way to survive a plane crash by the way. I don't see how it can fail if you just time it right.
Alright, that wasn't really serious.
Suffice it to say some impressionable kid thankful to be a very small part of that tradition and program is going up that fucking platform unless specifically told otherwise.
The fact he wasn't specifically told otherwise is damn near willfull and wanton recklessness by the university. They can parcel out blame (or attempt to muddy the water by doing so), but bottom line is the institution fucked up bad.
Hope the family gets a fair shake. They're playing an away game regardless of whether the case comes locally or is removed to federal court. Any idea where the kid is from and if/how they might attain diversity?
by peeker643 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:51 pm
jb wrote:No the U's fault. Maybe not even BK's. Unrealistic to expect there to be that level of safety protocol and detal outside of an industrial setting IMhO. Sometimes you need brains and not rules. But whomever was in charge of securing the practice film who was over aged 25 and had the over all responsibility for that?
Culpable.
by jb » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:55 pm
peeker643 wrote:jb wrote:No the U's fault. Maybe not even BK's. Unrealistic to expect there to be that level of safety protocol and detal outside of an industrial setting IMhO. Sometimes you need brains and not rules. But whomever was in charge of securing the practice film who was over aged 25 and had the over all responsibility for that?
Culpable.
Whomever that is works for the Univ though JB. It's not a private contractor. Whomever it has has their course and scope decided by the university. That's why it hangs on the university and needs to stay there so that family ain't chasing ghosts and facilities coordinators/supervisors/maintenance personnel all over the earth.
The family doesn't have the resources (I'm assuming) to fight that nebulous fight. Put it on the university, get it taken care of and resolved and then let the university parcel out the pink slips as they see fit. And it won't be BK (and maybe like you say it shouldn't be, IDK) if he's winning football games.
No more than sending some kid into traffic is what they did. Whether it was an act of commission or omission doesn't matter. Someone had the authority to get that kid down and that someone works for the university in all likelihood.
by peeker643 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:56 pm
jb wrote:peeker643 wrote:jb wrote:No the U's fault. Maybe not even BK's. Unrealistic to expect there to be that level of safety protocol and detal outside of an industrial setting IMhO. Sometimes you need brains and not rules. But whomever was in charge of securing the practice film who was over aged 25 and had the over all responsibility for that?
Culpable.
Whomever that is works for the Univ though JB. It's not a private contractor. Whomever it has has their course and scope decided by the university. That's why it hangs on the university and needs to stay there so that family ain't chasing ghosts and facilities coordinators/supervisors/maintenance personnel all over the earth.
The family doesn't have the resources (I'm assuming) to fight that nebulous fight. Put it on the university, get it taken care of and resolved and then let the university parcel out the pink slips as they see fit. And it won't be BK (and maybe like you say it shouldn't be, IDK) if he's winning football games.
No more than sending some kid into traffic is what they did. Whether it was an act of commission or omission doesn't matter. Someone had the authority to get that kid down and that someone works for the university in all likelihood.
I get it, dude. U right.
But no one goes to ND who isn't "resourced" or is an athlete.
by FUDU » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:09 pm
by peeker643 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:26 pm
FUDU wrote:Most of you probably wouldn't like the perspective that accidents do not just happen, and 99.999999999% of all "accidents" are avoidable.
......Outside of making sure the accident survivor has medical costs taken care of (which either insurance will do) what is the point of a suit?
People are unbelievable.
by FUDU » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:32 pm
peeker643 wrote:FUDU wrote:Most of you probably wouldn't like the perspective that accidents do not just happen, and 99.999999999% of all "accidents" are avoidable.
......Outside of making sure the accident survivor has medical costs taken care of (which either insurance will do) what is the point of a suit?
People are unbelievable.
What's the threshhold though Donny. If your relative had lost a limb suit is in order, right? Or fractured a bone? What about headaches or recurring nightmares that don't go away? What if his arms start tingling in a few weeks and he needs some type of procedure?
There's special and general damages. Specials are the cost of meds and wages. Tangible. The general damages seek to account for the pain (physical and mental) and the inconveniences.
It's like anything else brother. It's a fine and just system if it's not abused by people looking to take advantage of it.
There's a place for it. Believe me. I work for an insurance company and there are definitely times when a lawsuit is the only way to proceed.
All different types of negligence too. Would you feel differently if trhe dude who caused the accident was drunk? High? Overtired and fell aslee? Texting? Took the wrong meds?
by peeker643 » Fri Nov 05, 2010 11:56 pm
FUDU wrote:They had a small fracture, and there is a possibility of some long term disability at their age I suppose. If the driver at fault lived, then suing for a small amount of protection could be warranted sure, b/c IMO you'd be dealing directly with the root cause of the crash. Hence my point, why go after the remaining family, not only did they not cause the crash, but I'm sure they are suffering in their way as well, to them equal suffering most likely. It'd be like JB going after me b/c Ed's whooped Iggy's ass.
Notice too how I never said accident.
by Cerebral_DownTime » Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:38 am
by FUDU » Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:38 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:53 pm
FUDU wrote:I've never thought of JB as lumbering.
by FUDU » Sat Nov 06, 2010 6:06 pm
by Cerebral_DownTime » Sat Nov 06, 2010 8:19 pm
by peeker643 » Sat Nov 06, 2010 10:19 pm
The president of the University of Notre Dame sent an e-mail to students, faculty, staff and alumni Friday saying that the school is responsible for a student videographer's death because it failed to protect him.
"Declan Sullivan was entrusted to our care, and we failed to keep him safe," the Rev. John Jenkins wrote. "We at Notre Dame and ultimately I as president are responsible. Words cannot express our sorrow to the Sullivan family and to all involved."
by Fire Marshall Bill » Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:06 am
peeker643 wrote:Nice to see an institution go to those lengths and admit they were at fault:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5768852The president of the University of Notre Dame sent an e-mail to students, faculty, staff and alumni Friday saying that the school is responsible for a student videographer's death because it failed to protect him.
"Declan Sullivan was entrusted to our care, and we failed to keep him safe," the Rev. John Jenkins wrote. "We at Notre Dame and ultimately I as president are responsible. Words cannot express our sorrow to the Sullivan family and to all involved."
by jb » Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:42 am
Shame on the Lame for caring more about practice than the safety of its students
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests