Miami officials miss opportunity to set an example

In the aftermath of the Oct. 14 brawl between Florida International and the University of Miami, Miami President Donna Shalala has said all the right things. She’s done all the wrong things when it comes to punishing the players involved.

Shalala issued essentially 12 slaps on the wrists – or vacations – to the players who participated in the third-quarter fight. Only one player, Anthony Reddick was suspended indefinitely. Miami’s punishment standards are like a parent sending a child to their room, which is fully equipped with a television, Xbox, computer and cell phone. Sure, “punishments” have been issued, but the players involved will play again this season.

Sitting out against Duke … in football? Big deal. If anything it gives the players a break before playing Georgia Tech, a game that is more important to Miami’s ACC title hopes.

Looking at the facts, you would have expected Miami officials to hand out harsher penalties. The fight was a bench-clearing brawl that resembled a mix between a hockey fight and a WWE pay-per-view match between two South Florida programs. One Miami player, Brandon Merriweather, was seen repeatedly stomping on a Florida International player in a fashion similar to the Tennessee Titans’ Albert Haynesworth’s incident with Dallas Cowboy player Andre Gurode.

Haynesworth was suspended five games. Merriweather was given a week off.

Shalala in her public comments wants the nation to move on from the incident. It is hard to place the fight on the back burner when officials have written it off to young men who made a mistake. One can understand the concept of making a mistake. We all make them from time to time. When we do we are punished accordingly for our actions. So far, only one player, Reddick, has been punished accordingly.

A one-week vacation against the ACC’s weakest college football program and the passage of a zero-tolerance policy (that should have already been understood) is not being firm nor it is punishing the athletes involved. If, as an athlete, you participate in an assault during a game, you should not have the privilege of participating in the sport again. Period.

When compared to Florida International, Shalala is weak in handling on field and off field disciplinary issues. Florida International suspended 16 players indefinitely and two more were kicked off the team. It’s clear which school took responsibility (FIU) and which did not (Miami).

Miami and the ACC, for that matter, missed an opportunity to set an example. Instead, the message sent is that depending on the program some actions can be overlooked. In 2004, South Carolina and Clemson players participated in a fourth quarter brawl that resulted in both schools issuing bowl bans on their programs, even though both were eligible to participate.

Don’t look for Miami or the ACC to lay the hammer down to that level. Why? What matters most to Miami and ACC officials are bowl berths and national titles, and the television revenues that come from both. Though Miami is having a down year, to its standards, the Hurricanes can still qualify for the ACC Championship Game and a New Year’s Day bowl, both of which would bring tremendous revenues to the school and conference. Most likely, those involved in the fight will be on the field and in doing so Miami will continue to embrace the “Thug U” reputation that Shalala wants to believe is long gone.

Until college administrators, like Shalala, take the initiative to discipline players appropriately, the players will continue to push the envelopes of what they can get away with on campus and during games.