Official Michigan State/Mel Tucker Hate Thread

[Fred 2]

Of course he is. His problem is that groundwork so far appears to be a pile of slippery mud.

He will come to a settlement with the school, mainly because the school coming off the damage of the Nasser situation has no interest in this thing being drawn out in court or the media.

I just think that the final settlement is going to be much less lucrative for Mel than he or others might be assuming. They aren't going to make him rich.

Sure he will. He’ll come out this just fine financially. Bet on it. It won’t be 77m. But he will live happily ever after until his wife sinks her teeth into him.

 

[Hank]

*emphasis included in original

 

[Buffman64]

Possible but I wouldn't bet on it.

Unless there is some evidence to the contrary though the woman involved didn't initiate the actions and we have nothing that would call her statements into question. It is therefore very inappropriate to start speculating about her without evidence or actions on her part justifying that speculation.

I think Tucker is a POS , but it is just as inappropriate to speculate about him. She could be as culpable as he is. So many on this board are blind to that possibility, because they like to virtue signal.

 

[hawg1]

Possible but I wouldn't bet on it.

Doesn't matter though. Unless she gives consent there is no consent, prior history either with him or otherwise matters zero.

Nik is right though, the appropriate way for MSU to handle it is to suspend him so he does not have contact with any university students or staff members and put the appropriate time and resources into a thorough investigation.

When the investigation is complete then give him due process with a hearing allowing him to hire and use legal representation. Probably appropriate to provide his counsel with legal standard discovery prior to the hearing.

Would also be appropriate since it is a personnel situation that the hearing be closed to protect his privacy and the privacy of his accuser(s) and potential witnesses.

If the school finds actionable evidence then they may proceed to terminate him or offer him the opportunity to negotiate a mutual separation.

The school also has the responsibility to turn over any evidence of possible criminal actions (different standard than school policy) to law enforcement for evaluation and action if called for.

We don't have any evidence that she was engaged in a sexual relationship with him, short or long term. Again it also doesn't matter, what matters is his conduct and her consent.

As fans though we aren't a part of the process for the school or the legal system. We have a right to speculate on him as much as we choose. He is the one who brought it on himself.

Unless there is some evidence to the contrary though the woman involved didn't initiate the actions and we have nothing that would call her statements into question. It is therefore very inappropriate to start speculating about her without evidence or actions on her part justifying that speculation.

Mel states that the hearing on Oct 5/6 doesn’t afford him some typical defense and due process parameters.

Is the investigation complete? Haller seemed to infer not. Mel mentions a 1200 page investigative report Tracey released to the media.

 

[Buffnik]

I think Tucker is a POS , but it is just as inappropriate to speculate about him. She could be as culpable as he is. So many on this board are blind to that possibility, because they like to virtue signal.

Yep. Both virtue signaling and misogyny are things I'm hoping to limit. Especially since we're in the sports part of the board. This is the area that should bring us together with our support of the Buffs and hatred of other teams. It's never good when things are said here that would make a fan who isn't a hateful idiot feel unwelcome. Not that I haven't crossed that line, but we need to try to avoid it and be able to pull back when we know we've hit that line.

 

[hawg1]

I think Tucker is a POS , but it is just as inappropriate to speculate about him. She could be as culpable as he is. So many on this board are blind to that possibility, because they like to virtue signal.

This board has crucified Tucker. He likely deserves it. That’s my bias.

Pointing out questions about Brenda Tracey, especially dispute over consent, got me shouted down yesterday - and warned today.

I have no intention nor desire to victim shame Tracey, but there is a report that likely answers key questions. In the meantime, we have the green light to call Mel a POS, which he probably is, but might not necessarily be in this situation. We need to let this play out with due process before we convict.

 

[hawg1]

Yeah, but it's Mel Tucker so F him. A large number of institutions would not have waited for title IX to remove him outright. They interviewed him, he admitted to masturbating on a campus phone and having sexual relations with a consultant of the university. That in itself violates the moral clause in his contract. Bobby Petrino was fired for failing to disclose his relationship with a former Arkansas volleyball player whom he hired. There is merit and plenty of examples where it cost a coach their job and cash, without waiting for a Title IX investigation. Quite frankly, of all the schools who should be in front of this and removing him asap, it would be MSU.

Mel disputes Title IX at play. Several here have wondered how it applies. I don’t think it is an issue from what I’ve read.

 

[hawg1]

****ing quit it.

I wrote a perfectly true statement. It’s disputed.

Do I think he got verbal consent? No.

 

[Buffnik]

Mel disputes Title IX at play. Several here have wondered how it applies. I don’t think it is an issue from what I’ve read.

I've seen both Mel Tucker and Michigan State say that it's not a Title IX issue. I haven't seen acceptance of that from opposition counsel or a Title IX investigation. So my impression is that the 2 parties who are telling us this are the ones that have the most reason to not want it to be a Title IX problem. They might be right, but I wouldn't call it confirmed unless I missed something.

 

[hawg1]

I've seen both Mel Tucker and Michigan State say that it's not a Title IX issue. I haven't seen acceptance of that from opposition counsel or a Title IX investigation. So my impression is that the 2 parties who are telling us this are the ones that have the most reason to not want it to be a Title IX problem. They might be right, but I wouldn't call it confirmed unless I missed something.

Agree. Haller’s language yesterday carefully centered on violation of university policy iirc which makes sense wrt the suspension.

 

[slider]

Do I think Tuck is a nasty scumbag who carried on an affair with another woman ? Absolutely

Do I think he is some creepy sexual predator? No

He should and will be fired.

 

[Buffnik]

Do I think Tuck is a nasty scumbag who carried on an affair with another woman ? Absolutely

Do I think he is some creepy sexual predator? No

He should and will be fired.

I'm more open to the fact that people have different types of marriages. Is it an affair if the married couple has altered things to a "business relationship" by agreeing to stay together as parents and family but have also agreed that they can find sexual intimacy elsewhere? I don't judge that part, but if I did I'd probably judge it positively since I'm so big on putting your kids first if you decided to have kids.

I don't know if he's a creeper or not. I've heard things, but it's not something I'm prepared to make a declarative statement about when I haven't directly observed.

I'm pretty sure that his actions were a violation of university policy, probably in multiple ways. Also, those conduct clauses in college coach contracts are left very vague by intention from both sides since there are cases they each want the wiggle room on how an issue can be responded to.

 

[hawg1]

Do I think Tuck is a nasty scumbag who carried on an affair with another woman ? Absolutely

Do I think he is some creepy sexual predator? No

He should and will be fired.

Do you think he had consent? I don’t.

 

[Not Sure]

 

[slider]

Do you think he had consent? I don’t.

Who knows? Do I think at the time of the call she was an active and willing participant in a LONGTERM relationship with Tuck? Yes

Anyways don’t want to get too much into this because people get all huffy and puffy and we are simply speculating

 

[Buff_nc]

Yep. Both virtue signaling and misogyny are things I'm hoping to limit. Especially since we're in the sports part of the board. This is the area that should bring us together with our support of the Buffs and hatred of other teams. It's never good when things are said here that would make a fan who isn't a hateful idiot feel unwelcome. Not that I haven't crossed that line, but we need to try to avoid it and be able to pull back when we know we've hit that line.

Great points.

I vote we focus on what we're good at. Let's come up with more juvenile nicknames for him.

I also thought about midnight tugger, but just not specific enough. too many of our posters here would think we're referring to them.

 

[hokiehead]

Jerking off for 36 minutes is serial killer ****

Slow down
You're moving too fast
You gotta make
The moment last...

 

[JMBuffs]

Jerking off for 36 minutes is serial killer ****

One things for certain, Mel sexually harassed his dick.

 

[Buff_since76]

I will wait for all facts to be released before passing judgment.

That said, there’s an outcome I am hoping for:

MSU fires Mel Tugger, but are forced to pay the buyout (cause **** MSU!)

Mel Tugger receives the Art Briles treatment, and is considered untouchable in the college football community

Tracey is able to find peace and love in life, and avoids any other traumatic experiences for the rest of her life. (And maybe gets a good chunk of the Tugger buyout money).

 

[Buffarino]

Now that is a 5* mod post.

We don't have any of those.

 

[PAHIBuff]

I think that Consent To Wank was the name of a punk band that used to play at Herman’s Hideaway in Denver. Checking notes….

 

[Buffnik]

Great points.

I vote we focus on what we're good at. Let's come up with more juvenile nicknames for him.

I also thought about midnight tugger, but just not specific enough. too many of our posters here would think we're referring to them.

We could go with "36 minute man" to make sure none of our posters here would think we're referring to them.

 

[SINKRATZ]

I've seen both Mel Tucker and Michigan State say that it's not a Title IX issue. I haven't seen acceptance of that from opposition counsel or a Title IX investigation. So my impression is that the 2 parties who are telling us this are the ones that have the most reason to not want it to be a Title IX problem. They might be right, but I wouldn't call it confirmed unless I missed something.

For what it’s worth, this was in the follow up USA Today article from today. It appears (based on my non-legal reading of this) the school’s position on this being a Title IX issue revolves around Tucker allegedly cancelling Tracey’s July 2022 planned visit to campus to train players and coaches on sexual violence prevention. From the article:

That cancelation was a key factor in the school's determination that its sexual harassment policy covered Tucker's alleged conduct, the investigation report shows. It had jurisdiction to investigate, it determined, because the matter affected Tracy's ongoing business relationship with the university.

 

[Liver]

here is what i know for sure-- married dude in a high profile position of power who is directly benefiting someone less powerful should keep his dick in his pants at all ****ing times.

this isn't that complicated. if he wants to bang outside his marriage, so be it. do it with someone whose livelihood you do not impact and so forth.

**** man this isn't rocket science. all this about the circumstances is irrelevant. he made a criminally stupid choice when he should have known better.

 

[Denver_sc]

I wrote a perfectly true statement. It’s disputed.

Do I think he got verbal consent? No.

Then we agree. “Yes” means “yes”. There is no dispute over consent, even according to you. Stop claiming there is. JFC.

 

[Buffnik]

here is what i know for sure-- married dude in a high profile position of power who is directly benefiting someone less powerful should keep his dick in his pants at all ****ing times.

this isn't that complicated. if he wants to bang outside his marriage, so be it. do it with someone whose livelihood you do not impact and so forth.

**** man this isn't rocket science. all this about the circumstances is irrelevant. he made a criminally stupid choice when he should have known better.

Yep. Every organization has their own version of the sexual conduct policy I put into our Employee Handbook.

"Don't try to get your honey where you make your money"

 

[Denver_sc]

I'm more open to the fact that people have different types of marriages. Is it an affair if the married couple has altered things to a "business relationship" by agreeing to stay together as parents and family but have also agreed that they can find sexual intimacy elsewhere? I don't judge that part, but if I did I'd probably judge it positively since I'm so big on putting your kids first if you decided to have kids.

I don't know if he's a creeper or not. I've heard things, but it's not something I'm prepared to make a declarative statement about when I haven't directly observed.

I'm pretty sure that his actions were a violation of university policy, probably in multiple ways. Also, those conduct clauses in college coach contracts are left very vague by intention from both sides since there are cases they each want the wiggle room on how an issue can be responded to.

People here who consider his status as a married man are reading themselves into the situation. As you say, people have different marriages today than they have in the past. The fact that he’s Married is immaterial.

What is material is that he gave a woman sexual attention that didn’t want it. He acted sexually towards a woman who didn’t give him consent for that action.

Full stop. End of story.

I really hope that some of the men in this thread can eventually understand the role in structurialized misogyny that they are playing in this thread.

Be better yall.

(Ps the last part isn’t directed at @Buffnik)

 

[hawg1]

Then we agree. “Yes” means “yes”. There is no dispute over consent, even according to you. Stop claiming there is. JFC.

I said what I think, not what I know.

What you or I think does not matter.

Yes, a dispute exists over consent exists between them.

 

[Buffman64]

What is material is that he gave a woman sexual attention that didn’t want it. He acted sexually towards a woman who didn’t give him consent for that action.

You don’t know that. Maybe she did give him consent. The current evidence indicates a strong possibility that they had a consensual relationship. Which would make them both scumbag losers. As I have said before, Tucker is a POS. But she may be as well.

 

[Denver_sc]

I said what I think, not what I know.

What you or I think does not matter.

Yes, a dispute exists over consent exists between them.

Holy ****. We’ll try this one more time.

If you believe that it is the woman’s right to give consent, and she didn’t, then why do you lend any credence to Tuckers assertion that there is a dispute in consent? It literally does not matter.

To put it more bluntly, there’s a “dispute in consent” between a rape victim and the rapist who says “she said no but I could tell she was begging for it.”

Stop. Carrying. Water. For. A. Sexual. Harasser.