C.C. or C.See-ya?
posted by David Cloninger, 5/26/2009 11:18:00 AM
Oh see, what you have done.”
------------------ MA RAINEY
It is important to note here that C.C. Whitlock is innocent until proven guilty. It is also important to note that I am not advocating one way or the other what should happen to the kid.
But something needs to be said, and I’ve got nothing else to do until this afternoon.
I am not offended by most of the charges brought up against Whitlock or any of the other knuckleheads it’s been my curse to write about since I’ve covered this team. Most of them fall into the category of “boys being boys,” or stuff I could see myself getting busted for had I not been born with more than half a brain and a fervent wish to never let my dear sainted mother see me wearing a jail jumpsuit.
What I am offended about is the situation these kids put themselves in. Whitlock’s case is another in a long line of troubles where I’d love to stand up in a press conference and ask them one simple question – “What the hell were you thinking?”
Let’s go ahead and brush aside the “police targeting” theory in this one. While I believe it has happened occasionally, I don’t believe every cop in the Midlands has got a vendetta against USC athletes.
It’s actually the opposite, in this case. According to the police report, the cops did everything they could to end the scene with no arrests.
So you’re sitting in a bar, underage, and you’ve just been asked to leave by a man with a badge and a gun. This is called a warning, or in the untrained tongue, a scarce opportunity akin to getting hit by lightning while winning the lottery.
That’s getting off light. That means you have been handed a get-out-of-jail free card and you need to lay it down or your hotel on Park Place is going to get foreclosed on.
The cops could have arrested Whitlock on sight and charged him with underage drinking and refusing to obey an officer of the law, plus anything else they could think of. Instead, they repeatedly told Whitlock to leave and he, for reasons known only to him, didn’t.
So they busted him. Anybody squawking how they should have given the kid a second chance is conveniently overlooking the fact that they gave him a third, fourth and fifth already and Whitlock didn’t take them.
They only charged him with trespassing – not underage drinking – although they mentioned the alcohol on his breath in the police report. It’s a minor charge that will probably end up being dropped.
The point is, why was Whitlock ever in position to be charged with anything? Here’s a young man that inhabited Steve Spurrier’s doghouse for the majority of last season, missed spring practice and was on the edge of not qualifying academically for this season. He begged for another chance and Spurrier gave him one.
A few days later, he’s in a club refusing to leave when the cops asked him.
The thought process – if there indeed was one – boggles the mind. You’ve been handed a second chance, you know what you have to do and not to do. Yet you put yourself right back in the cross-hairs.
I have no problem with Whitlock hanging out with his buddies. Ditto with him drinking underage, although I certainly don’t welcome that choice. He’s out of school and as long as he shows up for the offseason workouts, I don’t care if he’s a model citizen or not when he’s not lifting weights.
The problem – why do it in public? Especially when you’ve been asked to leave said public place?
I have said it before and I’ll say it again. I did my share of underage drinking in college (sorry, Mom). I also did it in places I knew stood zero to little chance the cops would bust in and ask me for my ID – like, my dorm room, a friend’s house, the roof of one building on campus (name withheld to protect the innocent, and maybe that wasn’t such a hot idea after all).
I know it must be tough being a Division I athlete. I’m not being sarcastic. Having your entire life planned out for you, especially when you play football, cannot be easy.
But the sacrifice is there because you have an opportunity that the rest of us normal schlubs only wish we had. You could be playing on Sundays while we’re betting the mortgage on your fantasy stats.
Like I said, I’m not advocating the dismissal or retention of Whitlock on the Gamecocks’ football team. I’ve seen him play and he’s a tremendous athlete who I think could definitely help the squad.
All I’m saying is he – and a few others around campus – need to wise up. If nothing else, when you get the urge to break a few laws, contact me.
I can show you my USC disciplinary file, now filling one file cabinet drawer and starting on another.
Link to this entry - Discuss this entry - Return to Blog Home
“I said C., C. C. Rider,
Oh see, what you have done.”
------------------ MA RAINEY
It is important to note here that C.C. Whitlock is innocent until proven guilty. It is also important to note that I am not advocating one way or the other what should happen to the kid.
But something needs to be said, and I’ve got nothing else to do until this afternoon.
I am not offended by most of the charges brought up against Whitlock or any of the other knuckleheads it’s been my curse to write about since I’ve covered this team. Most of them fall into the category of “boys being boys,” or stuff I could see myself getting busted for had I not been born with more than half a brain and a fervent wish to never let my dear sainted mother see me wearing a jail jumpsuit.
What I am offended about is the situation these kids put themselves in. Whitlock’s case is another in a long line of troubles where I’d love to stand up in a press conference and ask them one simple question – “What the hell were you thinking?”
Let’s go ahead and brush aside the “police targeting” theory in this one. While I believe it has happened occasionally, I don’t believe every cop in the Midlands has got a vendetta against USC athletes.
It’s actually the opposite, in this case. According to the police report, the cops did everything they could to end the scene with no arrests.
So you’re sitting in a bar, underage, and you’ve just been asked to leave by a man with a badge and a gun. This is called a warning, or in the untrained tongue, a scarce opportunity akin to getting hit by lightning while winning the lottery.
That’s getting off light. That means you have been handed a get-out-of-jail free card and you need to lay it down or your hotel on Park Place is going to get foreclosed on.
The cops could have arrested Whitlock on sight and charged him with underage drinking and refusing to obey an officer of the law, plus anything else they could think of. Instead, they repeatedly told Whitlock to leave and he, for reasons known only to him, didn’t.
So they busted him. Anybody squawking how they should have given the kid a second chance is conveniently overlooking the fact that they gave him a third, fourth and fifth already and Whitlock didn’t take them.
They only charged him with trespassing – not underage drinking – although they mentioned the alcohol on his breath in the police report. It’s a minor charge that will probably end up being dropped.
The point is, why was Whitlock ever in position to be charged with anything? Here’s a young man that inhabited Steve Spurrier’s doghouse for the majority of last season, missed spring practice and was on the edge of not qualifying academically for this season. He begged for another chance and Spurrier gave him one.
A few days later, he’s in a club refusing to leave when the cops asked him.
The thought process – if there indeed was one – boggles the mind. You’ve been handed a second chance, you know what you have to do and not to do. Yet you put yourself right back in the cross-hairs.
I have no problem with Whitlock hanging out with his buddies. Ditto with him drinking underage, although I certainly don’t welcome that choice. He’s out of school and as long as he shows up for the offseason workouts, I don’t care if he’s a model citizen or not when he’s not lifting weights.
The problem – why do it in public? Especially when you’ve been asked to leave said public place?
I have said it before and I’ll say it again. I did my share of underage drinking in college (sorry, Mom). I also did it in places I knew stood zero to little chance the cops would bust in and ask me for my ID – like, my dorm room, a friend’s house, the roof of one building on campus (name withheld to protect the innocent, and maybe that wasn’t such a hot idea after all).
I know it must be tough being a Division I athlete. I’m not being sarcastic. Having your entire life planned out for you, especially when you play football, cannot be easy.
But the sacrifice is there because you have an opportunity that the rest of us normal schlubs only wish we had. You could be playing on Sundays while we’re betting the mortgage on your fantasy stats.
Like I said, I’m not advocating the dismissal or retention of Whitlock on the Gamecocks’ football team. I’ve seen him play and he’s a tremendous athlete who I think could definitely help the squad.
All I’m saying is he – and a few others around campus – need to wise up. If nothing else, when you get the urge to break a few laws, contact me.
I can show you my USC disciplinary file, now filling one file cabinet drawer and starting on another.
Link to this entry - Discuss this entry - Return to Blog Home
Previous Blog Entries
David Cloninger. David is a full-time staff writer for GamecockCentral, and covers Gamecock football, men's basketball, baseball and recruiting. He may be reached by email at david(at)gamecockcentral.com. Replace (at) with @.