Clark, Toussaint Out For Alabama
![Fitzgerald Toussaint Purdue v Michigan D7mJDURiHBXl[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/Clark-Toussaint-Out-For-Alabama_B0A4/FitzgeraldToussaintPurduevMichiganD7mJDURiHBXl1.jpg "Fitzgerald Toussaint Purdue v Michigan D7mJDURiHBXl[1]")
![UMFB_SugarBowl_FrankClark-thumb-590x391-99369[1]](https://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/Clark-Toussaint-Out-For-Alabama_B0A4/UMFB_SugarBowl_FrankClark-thumb-590x391-993691.jpg "UMFB_SugarBowl_FrankClark-thumb-590x391-99369[1]")
Release:
Statement from Head Coach Brady Hoke on running back Fitzgerald Toussaint and defensive end Frank Clark:
"Fitzgerald Toussaint and Frank Clark have been suspended for one game and will not make the trip to Dallas for Saturday's game.
"The decision was not easy, but I feel it is in the best interest of this program and for these kids, and those always will be my priorities. We have choices every day, and you have to be accountable to this program, your teammates, your family and the University of Michigan.
"These are our sons. These are real lives, and I think too often many people forget that. It's not always just about football, or a football decision. It's about teaching life lessons, and if this helps these kids or someone else make a right decision later, then we've won. That is ultimately what we are here for, to help them grow and mature to become better sons, fathers, husbands and members of society.
"They are good young men who made poor choices, and we will continue to support them as members of our team and family."
Both will be back for Air Force. Thomas Rawls, Vincent Smith, and Dennis Norfleet(!) will have to pick up the slack at RB, with some possibility Stephen Hopkins will also get RB snaps. Black and Beyer will likely handle DE with some possibility Mario Ojemudia gets in as a rush specialist.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:48 PM ^
This is why we can be arrogant. =)
August 31st, 2012 at 12:49 PM ^
Definitely the right thing to do, but without any other running threat, I think 'Bama can shut down Denard and our offense.
If Frank Clark is convicted, one game seems light for something so premeditated.
August 31st, 2012 at 10:10 PM ^
If Clark is convicted he won't be playing football for quite a while. Clark's situation is very different because he has yet to appear in court. I would expect that he won't be playing until his legal issues are resolved.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:49 PM ^
I imagine that everyone who thought Hoke was gamesmanshipping all summer about this was probably right. Hoke had probably planned to suspend both of them for a while but hoped to have Alabama prepare for them anyway
August 31st, 2012 at 12:50 PM ^
Integrity, thy name is Hoke. And that clattering sound you heard was the sound of a bunch of people wearing red and green (plus a few "journalists") who had to drop the stones they were so eager to throw.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:50 PM ^
Alright, so now I'm waiting for the press conference when someone asks when he made the decision, to which he replies he made it a while ago. Then, Drew Sharp will snidely ask Hoke why he didn't announce it earlier, to which Hoke will respond "Because it's none of your damn buisness" and stare down Drew Sharp. Drew Sharp will then poop his pants and leave the press conference room crying. I really really want this last part to happen.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:53 PM ^
I fully expect a Drew Sharp column tomorrow arguing that Hoke never should have suspended Fitz and doesn't have what it takes to win. Being on both sides of an issue (or wrong) has never been a problem to him. He found a niche as the local antagonist, and why people take him seriously - or even assume that he believes what he says - is a mystery to me.
August 31st, 2012 at 5:20 PM ^
August 31st, 2012 at 5:55 PM ^
I don't think Sharp poops.
All of his waste emerges through his written words. Perish the thought!
August 31st, 2012 at 12:50 PM ^
I like this decision and I love that statement. We have the right guy coaching. Hell, even if you believe that this is a mistake because it could cost us this game, this is the type of thing that could win us games later on by making Michigan more attractive to recruits' parents, preventing future incidents, avoiding negative publicity, etc.
As a sidenote, I hope those MSU trolls who came to the "Fitz is on the depth chart" thread to say that we're no different from MSU return for this one. We are different from MSU.
August 31st, 2012 at 1:03 PM ^
Yes, the decision was definitely the correct one, but the press release was a masterpiece. And from everything we know about Hoke and the Michigan program right now, those words are sincere, too.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:50 PM ^
hoping for a wally pip moment, at least in some form.
certainly sad not to see Fitz, but 100% expected this - it's the Michigan way after all.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:50 PM ^
August 31st, 2012 at 12:51 PM ^
...that's the MICHIGAN DIFFERENCE.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:52 PM ^
I would have been OK with Fitz missing a series or two, but I'm happy to see Brady Hoke send a message here.
August 31st, 2012 at 1:26 PM ^
That's some sig line.
Are you talking literally about the animals? [If so, badgers are pretty vicious and courageous; you may want to brush up on your taxonomy before making such a sweeping statement FWIW]. If you're talking about the team represented by the animal as its mascot, then I'm confused.
August 31st, 2012 at 1:49 PM ^
The wolverine is the largest and strongest member of the mustelid family, which also includes the badger. The badger knows its place in the hierarchy. It won't go against the boss.
August 31st, 2012 at 1:52 PM ^
Let's be honest, a badger is a poor man's wolverine, starting with the fact that wolverines are typically about twice the size of badgers. Pound for pound, no land animal is more ferocious than a wolverine.
If he's referring to the football team, there shouldn't be anything to be confused about. Don't make it too easy for us to make the spartan - intelligence joke.
August 31st, 2012 at 2:14 PM ^
You'd be right to make that joke as to me. Just look at my posting history, garbled mess that it is.
Because of that very deficiency that you point out on my part, I find your post confusing as well. It seems like you know precisely what the issue is that I raise, figured it out, and now regard it as obvious, while I'm still lost in the woods with discordant/amorphous chicken scratch pasted all over the interior of my skull. I have to presume we're talking about the same thing - what am I missing other than intelligence?
August 31st, 2012 at 2:16 PM ^
You're both good posters. I vote for the two of you to avoid a petty, stupid internet fight.
August 31st, 2012 at 2:48 PM ^
Well, I regard reason/measure as my worst and lowest drives, and therefore to be subjected to my predominant/fleeting whims. That's why I spend so much time on the internet.
However, on this occasion, you've sufficiently battered the irrational part of my brain into submission and thereby convinced me. Though I think you'll agree this is not a time/forum for reason (assuming such exists), so I have to wonder what the hell you think you're doing.
August 31st, 2012 at 2:42 PM ^
Using big words doesn't make you smart. It just makes you look arrogant, ironic as it is.
I think he means that we're better. We, as in the Michigan Wolverines. At football, but not just at football. Not to sound condescending, but is that clear enough?
Whether or not you agree with it is your prerogative, but that's different than being confused as to what it means.
August 31st, 2012 at 2:56 PM ^
Regrettably, no - not clear enough. Neither is your use of the word "ironic," which I cannot understand in its current context. I'm now even more confused than before. Again - as you noted, MSU grad here, so go easy.
I also don't know what "better" means, nor do I understand what appears to me to be an impossible contradiction between his post and his signature line. But you've figured that out such that it's clear/obvious. Therefore, you are a man of sophia, so I need you to explain it all to me.
August 31st, 2012 at 3:00 PM ^
BTW, according to my spartan level of understanding (incomparably low), I just employed "irony." But my understanding must be flawed given my inadequate education in East Lansing, so you might as well go ahead and explain what irony is while you're at it.
August 31st, 2012 at 3:06 PM ^
I used irony, mostly as a joke, because it's a Michigan grad calling an MSU grad arrogant. Like rain on your wedding day, basically.
You're making a bigger deal out of this than is necessary. If I was on an MSU board and someone had a signature that read "Spartans are the best" or "No one beats MSU" or "Knibb High Football Rules!" I wouldn't be all like, "what exactly do you mean by that?"
He thinks we're better. It subjective, and it's his opinion.
August 31st, 2012 at 3:13 PM ^
I'm going to have to run to the dictionary again to understand "irony." FWIW I don't think Ms. Morrissette understood it properly, and therefore don't think she's an authentic citation. And I'm still confused by how you're using the term. You may have to physically type on the keyboard more slowly, and perhaps present the words further apart, like two spacebars in between each.
BTW - can you explain to me how you reconcile the post and the sig line?
August 31st, 2012 at 3:17 PM ^
Now you're just being a dick - way overboard. You're a fine poster when you aren't trying to pick fights, but sometimes (like now) you do. You know exactly what his sig means, you just want to argue about it. But it's not going to be with me anymore.
August 31st, 2012 at 3:29 PM ^
"UM is better" should, IMHE, be based on the integrity that Hoke displayed today, not on the opposite "win at all costs" approach that the post seems to advocate. So as I see it, the two statements do not make sense in conjunction with one another. Either the post, or the sig line - you can't have both. If that constitutes "picking a fight," then I plead guilty. Notwithstanding that, you too are a fine poster when you're not being ad hominem.
I'm not sure how you interpreted by my questioning, but it was intended to be complementary to your school. Hence my continued confusion.
August 31st, 2012 at 4:11 PM ^
The poster said "We're F'ed." He didn't say he wished Hoke would have done anything different. He was simply expressing his frustration, and that doesn't conflict with his post. He could be saying, "Because we're better (by taking the high road here), we're F'ed."
It seemed to me that you simply wanted to argue about whether or not M was better, by saying that his signature "confused you."
September 1st, 2012 at 12:33 AM ^
I've always liked TF, and he was right about what he said above. This was a silly waste of time, though entertaining in a fleeting way. I hope my dry, self-deprecating sense of humor in response to him was received as I intended, i.e., praising his demand for reason.
If anything was gained, perhaps it was your self-affirmation via the masses. If so, well done. Even better would be self-affirmation regardless of, or in spite of, the masses (IMHE). I tried to complement "their" school and they either didn't understand or didn't like the complement. I'll bet you can discern which theory I subscribe to. You can have them. Popularity among self-hating CMU, WMU and EMU, etc... students/graduates is not my intention. In fact, I don't have a target demographic.
I don't recall any interactions with you in the past, yet you conjured up allegations of "arrogance" and "being a dick." Also well done - good logical support for your assertions. Which is to say: any put-out school boy could scramble together the same irrelevant ad hominem attacks/drivel/gibberish. But hey, it plays well with the voting public, so I suppose something was gained. And there's always that high point total on the internet. And you don't have to answer any intelligent questions to obtain it.
It's notable, not ironic, that you accuse me of the same thing you're proud of. Now find a meaningless distinction and throw it back at me.
August 31st, 2012 at 3:52 PM ^
I thought irony meant made entirely of iron.
August 31st, 2012 at 3:25 PM ^
Pound for pound, no land animal is more ferocious than a wolverine.
Aw jeez, I'm going to go all technical on you. Many folks believe that, pound for pound (gram for gram), the most ferocious land mammal is the shrew.
The most ferocious land animal pound for pound (milligram for milligram)? Maybe red ants? Hornets? Some bitter angry insect probably gets this title.
But I fully agree with your overall point - wolverines are 100% pure Colombian bad ass, and a regular old badger would not stand a chance against them in the wild. I imagine a wild encounter would go down as such:
- Badger - "What's up, wolverine - Imma kick your ass if you walk by my den again!"
- Wolverine - "Are you talking to me /looks over each shoulder, then back at the badger / ain't no other mustelid around here! YOU TALKING TO ME?!
- Badger - Shucks no. I wasn't talking to you. Here, take my sandwich, and come by any time!"
Also, shrews and red ants are really crappy mascots!
August 31st, 2012 at 4:23 PM ^
is probably the malaria mosquito.
August 31st, 2012 at 4:54 PM ^
(+1 to you Don, by the way.)
As I think about it, malaria mosquitos may be the most lethal, but I don't think they're so ferocious. Mosquitos are kind of cowards the way they fly away at the slightest threat. They're like the Roberta Flack of insects (or Fugees, depending on generation) - they're Killing Me Softly when they're killing me.
I know on the mg for mg measure I'm probably not picking the right animal, but the red ant and the hornet are total hardasses. I think we can all agree that red ants, hornets, and mosquitos are absolute dickheads (never invite any of them to a party, btw - terrible guests), but the red ants and hornets are just looking for a fight, and don't have much quit in them when "it's on".
Also (and I recognize Don did not say otherwise), a malaria mosquito would make a terrible college football mascot.
In conclusion, tomorrow's game can't come soon enough!
August 31st, 2012 at 5:24 PM ^
August 31st, 2012 at 5:24 PM ^
August 31st, 2012 at 5:38 PM ^
around a Sparty fan.
Their fluky win in the regular season vs. the Badgers like totally proved that they were way better than the Badgers despite the fluky loss in the title game.
PS - No BCS! = No Fair!
August 31st, 2012 at 12:52 PM ^
Interesting second to last paragraph there. While I completely agree with the sentiment it still comes off a bit "holier than thou" I think. It's very true and I like the way he treats the players and runs the program, but after I finished reading it I thought to myself, "Wow, did I just get reprimanded?!"
August 31st, 2012 at 12:52 PM ^
August 31st, 2012 at 1:10 PM ^
Their running styles are completely different, I'd bet they would both get a decent amount of carries until one becomes the predominant standout, most likely being Fitz. But there is nothing wrong with having two quality backs, even if Al wants a feature back for the most part.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:53 PM ^
Bitter pill. Right call. Go blue.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:53 PM ^
Adversity = Heisman?
August 31st, 2012 at 12:54 PM ^
Never be ashamed of doing what is right.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:54 PM ^
Great call, Coach Hoke. So glad you did not cave in. It will be interesting to see how many carries Justice Hayes gets, since Rawls may be dinged up. Up to the O-line now. We can still win.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:54 PM ^
I love The Fort. People were clamoring that the depth chart was an indiication that they wouldn't be suspended.
August 31st, 2012 at 12:55 PM ^
That just killed the mood. It was definitely the right thing to do but it's still tough going into this game without those guys. What's up with Justice Hayes? He never gets mentioned anymore and I thought he was a little bigger than Vince and Norfleet, seems less like a plodder than Rawls also.
August 31st, 2012 at 1:25 PM ^
Yeah I'm with you on Justice Hayes. Borges has been saying that Rawls, Smith and Hayes have all been getting a good chunk of carries in practice. To me it sounds like Hayes should see at least some action tomorrow.
Comments