Big Ten Imposes Suspension of Purdue Football Student-Athlete Zach Reckman and Issues Public Reprimand
This was posted on Rivals but I figure it's worth a repost/discussion here.
Purdue Player Suspension
I'm certainly not rooting for guys to get suspended, but it's nice to see that the Mouton situation was not an isolated incident. I'd rather let teams police themselves in this regard, but if the Big Ten is indeed going to step in to this extent, it's good to see consistency.
September 23rd, 2009 at 3:55 PM ^
interesting...after the Blount Oregon incident they seem to be taking this more seriously... at least for the time being
September 23rd, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^
Jim made the bed and now has to sleep in it. I bet they move away from this next year.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^
Why would they move away from suspending players for cheap shots? They are obviously making a point of it and there is no reason not to continue past this year.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:16 PM ^
I think that Jim didn't really consider the term implications of suspending Mouton and catered to Charlie and the mass media. However, because of Richrods statements and the resulting suspension I think the coaches will be quicker to sit guys down for a week and eventually the commish won't have this on his plate. Or maybe the coaches won't suspend anyone anymore for on the field behavior and leave it up to the commish. I guess I have no idea how this will impact anything. But, if the Big10 does stay involved I would guess that the rest of college football will eventually follow suit.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:26 PM ^
I agree.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:28 PM ^
and have guidelines if it takes players out of future games. Also, they need to at least alert the coaches that the player is under review of being suspended the Monday after the game, so the coach and team can prepare for the next game.
This should be an NCAA issue, not a conference one, because we don't know how other conferences are enforcing these rules.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:33 PM ^
I agree that some rules/guidelines need to be set. The NCAA could come up with some set of guidlines and the conferences could enforce them if the specific team doesn't follow through first.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:33 PM ^
And I agree as well.
It does seem that:
a) Delany reacted hastily to pressure from Charlie Weis, who happens to be a head coach at some out-of-conference school that happens to play several Big Ten Conference teams.
b) RR laid it down; you gonna do this to Mouton? OK, you (and/or Weis) just set the Delany policy for the Big Ten, because we're gonna be watching every game film from every week, just to see if non-Weis games get treated the same.
c) And yeah, schools are now going to abdicate some of their disciplinary authority to the Conference in these situations. The coaches and AD's will say; let's let the Confernce decide. If they suspend our guy, well, we move on. If not, they've given us sanction.
d) It is shitty precedent, and probably bad policy. But what else would you expect from Charlie Weis, Notre Dame & co.? Thank you very little.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:29 PM ^
The issue isn't that they are suspending players, the issue is in deciding a line between 'suspension' and 'just football'. The commish is in over his head on this one, though we won't see it until Big Ten play. There will be suspensions galore following most rivalry games if this is kept up, there are always tiny cheap shots everywhere. It's football, and as long as they define a line between potentially harmful and not so much, there shouldn't be problems. If they leave it open to interpretation, they could wind up with a pandemic of suspensions on their hands. Or of equal punishment complaints.
September 23rd, 2009 at 3:59 PM ^
informatively titled thread. To be consistent though, they would have to have waited until Thursday before dropping the news, allowing no practice time for adjustment. If the Big 10 is going to play policeman, not allowing convicts to be released directly from jail to MSU's practice field would be much more beneficial than suspending people for love taps. This is the same conference that did nothing when Robert Reynolds choked and crushed the windpipe of Jim Sorgi, one of the dirtiest plays in the history of the sport.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:03 PM ^
Maybe the Big Ten is stepping up. They do have rules in place for ejections. Going forward its perfectly fine to hand out a 1 game suspension for punches, leg twists, and other cheap shots. Personally I would really like it. As long as its the same across the board.
The thing about Mouton was there was the precedent was do to nothing. Obviously what happened to Mouton was not what took place in the past. But its perfectly fine to receive a 1 game suspension, if the same thing happens to other Big Ten schools for the rest of the season.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:09 PM ^
Until Pryor or another star (no UM please!) does something questionable in a game and a team has to wait until Wed./Thur. to find out if they have him for Saturday.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:09 PM ^
this is awesome. We can bet on this. It'll be sort of like a reverse form of Fantasy Football.
"Which Big Ten player will be suspended this week?"
Each week, you have until 12:00 EST noon Monday to view the weekend's action, and get your pick in for Most Likely to be Suspended for a Game. So, hit up those blogs and the youtubes! Find that incidental contact the losing team is bitching about! You could be next week's big winner.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:11 PM ^
The aggravating part is that this all stems from Charlie the Hutt bitching the entire week after the game. Delany has actually allowed Notre Dame's incompetent head coach to influence Big 10 policy in this area. Unbelievable.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:23 PM ^
And Reckman gets suspended for the Purdue/ND game.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^
Why did they announce this suspension on Wednesday when they waited until Friday to announce Mouton's?
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:55 PM ^
Mouton was the first. You would assume as more comes up they'll be more efficient in dealing with it.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:25 PM ^
But if that is the case, doesn't it imply that there was not a framework in place to handle these incidents? Doesn't it speak poorly of the Big Ten to not have anticipated this situation and to have to come up with something on the fly to deal with it?
Otherwise, if this had been in place from day one, there shouldn't be any inefficiency which would cause the suspensions to be announced at different times.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
Charlie is getting the payoff from his actions. Thanks [presumably] in part to his complaining about the Mouton incident, the B11 took action on Reckman this week, suspending him for a game against... Notre Dame.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:29 PM ^
People - take the tinfoil hats off. Two players punched opposing players, and they were both suspended. Period. It's consistent, and it's fine. The Big 10 has decided that they're going to have a more stringent punishment of cheap shots. Does anyone seriously have a problem with this?
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^
Tuesdays? I don't think it's anything personal against Michigan, I just think it's sloppy planning.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:42 PM ^
No problem with punishment per se. The problem (as you know), is that if Mouton had been called for it during the game, his punishment would at the most have been to sit one half. The timing was pretty poor as well.
I'm no conspiracy theorist, I just thought it was a bit extreme.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:48 PM ^
I am fine with the concept of the conference policing poor behavior since they have a conference reputation to uphold.
My issue is that this process seems a bit loosely defined. I would like to better understand the named enforcement committee for this, rules regarding suspension length, specific acts that require suspension, timelines for informing the teams, can a player be suspended for a bowl game for a year end punch, etc. You can't randomly half-ass this.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:55 PM ^
I have no problem with the policy. What I have a problem with is writing the policy on the fly in the middle of the season because Charlie is running his mouth. We are already seeing inconsistencies in the timing of the suspensions that could create a competitive advantage or disadvantage. Is seems really sloppy and under thought to be a "policy".
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:13 PM ^
What evidence do you have that this policy was written on the fly, in the middle of the season, because Charlie is running his mouth?
Did Charlie say a word about the Purdue player? Did someone punch someone in the face in the first week and not get suspended? It seems that certain on-field behavior now warrants a 1-game suspension, previously it did not. The first incident of this behavior happened to be Jonas Mouton.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:31 PM ^
So you're just going to ignore the public bitching by Charlie Weis about that play, subsequent media shit-flinging about it, and Weis explicitly saying he was going to write complaints to the Big Ten about all the calls or no-calls he thought were unfair. No evidence there. Especially considering that the conference never stepped in and suspended a football player in this fashion before. There's literally no room for argument at all, that the aforementioned goings-on influenced the Big Ten's decision.
Induction is for chumps.
September 23rd, 2009 at 7:40 PM ^
So you think that the Big 10 has instituted a rule that they are going to enforce on the entire conference for the entire season because Charlie Weis complained? Color me skeptical.
September 23rd, 2009 at 8:17 PM ^
If it ended with Weis, then I imagine the story would turn out differently. But the media caught on to the issue and blew it up; in light of the previous events re: Oregon & BSU, Delany's hand was forced to do something or risk bad publicity for the conference.
Is this a policy written in stone? No. But it is a de facto policy that must be consistently enforced if the conference is to avoid being accused of favoritism.
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:39 PM ^
That's a pretty naiive interpretation given the sequence of events.
September 23rd, 2009 at 8:01 PM ^
Chitown, I think the sky is blue.
This was a test… This was only a test.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:40 PM ^
It seems silly that shots like the one the Purdue player took, if flagged by the refs would probably warrant only an unsportsmanlike conduct, but because it was missed results in a game suspension.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:46 PM ^
The Purdue player was flagged for his hit, FWIW. It just happened when the clock read 0:00 so the penalty carried no weight.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:53 PM ^
Fair correction. I still doubt that this would have even been reviewed by the league office if the penalty had affected the game.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:37 PM ^
But, I thought suspensions were not announced until Thursday afternoon.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:57 PM ^
It's a sliding scale. If you're playing Eastern Michigan, you find out Thursday afternoon. If you're playing Notre Dame, you find out Wednesday afternoon. If you're playing the #1 team in the nation, you get to hear about it Tuesday morning, and if you're playing the University of Chicago they tell you two minutes before kickoff.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:09 PM ^
Any one seen a video on internet of this most recent unsportsman like act.
I THINK THIS IS SUCH A SLIPPERY SLOPE.
Blount clearly was trying to punch an opposing player.
Moose seend to mean it, but it was in the heat of battle and could have been a rip or swim or punch to the nose.
What happens when a player leads with the elbow rather than the fist? I saw a play this weekend where a blitzing DE fell on the opposing quarterback with some force and it seemed it was elbow first (a la the peoples elbow). Does this count?
This who suspension thing is getting way out of control, particularly with regard to this CONTACT SPORT that is played by hormone enriched and massive young men who were recruited for their strength, ability to hit and fight.
Is this going to continue all season?
What is offensive conduct?
Isnt this what these players signed up for? and if there good enough at it wont they be payed millions just to hurt opposing players for the rest of their life?
Come on, a post game punch is one thing, a post-play shove to the face is another, and a punch or shove during the play is just part of the game!!!!!!!!
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:54 PM ^
This is why RichRod is watching the rest of league. Was what Mouton did wrong? Yes. Was it worth a game suspension? Probably not. When Jim stepped in I just don't think he truly understood the door he opened. You can bet the Purdue coach in now going to keep a look out on the rest of the league. I can't wait until another ND player does something stupid and Charlie does nothing and makes Jim look like an idiot. Can RichRod petition the NCAA to bring down suspensions when Charlie drops the ball?
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:22 PM ^
Every time a Notre Dame player engages is conduct similar to Mouton's, Weis will have to suspend his players on his own or he'll come off as a classless whiner.
On the other hand, I'm willing to bet that ND would like that. It would almost be like having Urban Meyer as their coach.
September 23rd, 2009 at 7:52 PM ^
or he'll come off as a classless whinerHe’s been there, done that, still has a job.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:10 PM ^
was 100x more clear as a violation than Mouton's phantom punch, but the suspension news should be released on Thur after practice so they can't prepare with the fill-in. It would be great if karma punches Charlie in the multiple chins with a L at Purdue....
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:16 PM ^
Football is becoming a pussy sport. Pretty soon you are gonna see players flopping all over the field after the play like melodramatic soccer players.
Moreover, the refs/league often slide down the slippery slope. Look at the NBA. Things have regressed so badly that Tim Duncan was called for a technical foul merely for LOOKING at Joey Crawford the wrong way. And there are so many ticky-tack fouls called that players are visibly groaning and pouting over each one. Frankly, it's sickening (even though, despite all this, I still love basketball).
One of the refreshing things about football is that it's not a pussy sport. Let's keep it that way.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:25 PM ^
The NFL is heading that direction with some of the hideous roughing the passer penalties they've been handing out.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:26 PM ^
“We appreciate Purdue’s and head coach Danny Hope’s attention to this issue and feel a one-game suspension is appropriate”
RR obviously ignored or refused to see the violation re: Mouton.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:30 PM ^
i'm sure if you break down tape of just about every college or pro game you'll see something deserving of a one game suspension. do we really need to do that now??
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:56 PM ^
No but Jim does.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:59 PM ^
The punishment for a punch of a cheap shot should rest with the team. If something flagrant happens and it goes unpunished, then the B10 or NCAA needs to step in, and it should be very infrequently.
Just because you think someone got away unpunished doesn't mean it's true. Make the kid run extra laps, do stairs, extra reps in the weight room, etc. No reason to publically admonish a kid to the media for a youthful mistake.
September 24th, 2009 at 8:13 AM ^
ZOMG extra practice time!!!11!1!!!
Actually, yeah, I do feel that unless a player tries to, say, spear another player with his helmet or do something with actual intent to injure (see the ND game, ND vs Tate), the B10 should not get involved.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:05 PM ^
I have no problem with the conference taking control of punishment for on-field altercations. Relying on the coaches to do it is a little silly. Can you imagine a pro sports league allowing each team to set its own guidelines in case of fighting? My only complaint is that the conference should lay down its punishment on Monday.