I see exactly what you're saying. Glad I made your notable exceptions list.
Dantonio declines comment on Rucker
My question to you, and the rest of the GoBlogWorld.
Is there a reason why you always drop the "M" in the name of the blog? Are you pulling a Woody Hayes?
I had no idea you were following my posts in such great stalkerrific detail, Blue....err JMBlue.
Now, if you excuse me, I'm going to de-list myself from Whitepages
That was a starting QB not a CB and it was smoking crack or whatever , it's just kind of fun to pile on.
He wasn't convicted of Driving While Impaired. He pleaded it down to Misdemeanor Reckless Driving. There's a HUGE difference.
That said, I wonder what our collective tone would be if one of our own was in his position?
(Disregarding, of course, the Rather Hall soiree).
"(Disregarding, of course, the Rather Hall soiree)."
Yeah, but the Rather Hall soiree is the point, isn't it?
Other than that Mrs. Lincoln . . .
I didn't know that. I used to do criminal defense in another state. That is a total gift plea reserved for the very well-connected drunk drivers. Prosecutors, for a variety of reasons, don't regularly plead Drunk Driving cases to anything less then the lowest alcohol related driving offense. They are normally adament that the conviction be noted as alcohol related.
Don't have the case jacket to review the facts, but such a deal leads to a reasonable conclusion of favoritism.
Talked to a friend who does the same type of defense work, he is also a Sparty, and
he was very surprised at the ability to plead down. He mentioned that most county prosecutors would never allow a DUI to be reduced .
Also, the kid should be judged by his conduct, not by the skill of his lawyer.
Is the OWI (not DUI as routinely claimed) worse because of a previous violent offense? I am not sure that the rather hall incident speaks to a .10 driving. I am not saying drinking and driving is okay (it is absolutely not and should be punished with 10 days in prison... as it was) and certainly this kid should have toed the line. But let's remember something here. He had just beaten his chief rival, it was his birthday and he went out and had a few drinks. He had a .10 (.02 above the legal limit which we all know is about a half a beer).
Had this been his second alcohol related offense, throw the book at him. But he made two independent mistakes. One was peer pressure (once again, he was 21 at the time) and the other was irresponsibility (on his 22nd birthday... totally unheard of). He should not play this weekend, or even against minnesota. But I don't think this needs to ruin his life. Being away from the team for 4 games (1/3 of his senior season) is painful and 10 days in prison is not easy either.
One one hand, I want them reinstate Rucker and do it loud and proud. Why? I guess Valenti has been saying all day that doing so would wreck the goodness of the best MSU team in his lifetime. If that's so, come on Mark. Reinstate him and bless him 7 times, fer gawds sake.
But, you know what? Sparty is deeper. Deeper than most here want to give them credit for. They dont need this guy. He's been a weakness in the secondary. The Darqueze Dannard kid played well in his absence and they're also getting Isiah Lewis on the field more. Just cut bait Dantonio.
Otherwise, i find obssessive threads like this to be, sadly, definitive proof of where we are in the pecking order right now.
Agreed to an extent, especially with the pecking order comment. I guess I have always taken pride in being a fan and alum of a school that has higher standards though. Have we had troublemakers in the past? Of course we have, but nothing even close to this before and I'd rather go 7-5 every year with high character players than win National Championships on the backs of convicted felons. I mean that from the bottom of my maize and blue heart too.
The whole point is that zero tolerance should be zero tolerance. If he is going to get credit in the media for being a disciplinarian because he declared a "zero tolerance policy" for Rather Hall participants, then he should be taken to task when he deviates from that stated policy. Does the zero tolerance policy only refer to future beatings of women on campus, while turning a blind eye to everything else?
It is hard to get too riled up about kid gloved double standard treatment for a Michigan State coach by MSM. A. It involves coverage by MSM. B. Of a team or university that none of us care much if anything about.
Unreadable media coverage about an unreadable topic.
Dantonio and Michigan State gets treated differently and better by MSM than Rich and Michigan. It won't ever change because the roles have already been cast in the media's production.
for future reference
Dantonio was quoted as saying, “Zero tolerance played into (their dismissal). Given a second opportunity, there’s zero tolerance.”
We find this statement more than a little ironic considering zero tolerance, in our minds, means just that — zero tolerance. There should be no second chances for players who engage in violent behavior, and Winston never should have been let back on the team after his first jail sentence. If there is no policy to prevent something like this from happening in the future, the university needs to create one. Immediately.
After being given a second opportunity, there is a zero tolerance policy; meaning that if there are any issues whatsoever, it's a done deal.
but i want state to lose so bad. ill never be able to speak to another state fan again if they go to the BCS championship game. pleeeeease iowa. pleeeeeeease
If he really said all of those things about second chances and zero tolerance, he should be crushed in the local media for not kicking him off the team.
I didn't realize that this kid was part of the "Geek Attack"....
The Woman reporter should be given credit for asking the question. His response is ridiculous.
It has become comical,the talk of Dantonios dicipline. After last years work release failure (Winston) the gang of 14 beating their way onto the Misdemeanor State wall of fame. Leaving us only to wonder which receiver will follow quicker the path taken by those who have come before. Who do you place your money on. Will it be Dell or Cunningham who are next. The path is before you, Rison, Inghram, Rogers, or Burriss, hurry along while you can still bunk with one of your heros. Sadly that school has never seen a starter they can't work with or seen a backup that can't be made an example of. Keep your head up, be proud of your peeps sparty, winning is everything. 2046
I have exclusive video of Dantonio's first comments to Rucker after he got re-arrested:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lbOtyWTRZ_g?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lbOtyWTRZ_g?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
A few years back we had a DL who was on his way to good things with Michigan. He had some incidences of exposing himself (assault). If I am not mistaken he was removed from the team, offered counseling and retained his financial assistence from the university. He chose not to accept either and left the school to a North Carolina school, I believe. This is the way to help the student . If I am wrong about the facts of this I am sorry as it is a sensitive issue but I think Michigan put all students welfare before the teams welfare in this case.
Obviously, these are rumors, but if it does play out like this, what would you think?
There are rumblings that Rucker will not suit up for the Spartans again, but will be allowed to remain with the team.
The idea is that if you screw up, there are consequences, but we won't completely abandon you. He'll get to keep his scholarship and still not severely damage his NFL chances, but he won't be able to help the team on the field.
Fire away if you will, but I'm just interested in your reaction to this possible scenario.
MLive writer Philip Zaroo suggested this very scenario in an article from earlier today. I wonder if that article is the source of the rumors you're talking about.
Would be a pretty good way to handle it. But without going into details, he could have said he won't play Saturday, and his future is to be determined. And left out the taunt at the end. What purpose did that serve? It wasn't even an attacking question. It was just a douche response. That if Rich had said it would have cause 3 columns wondering about his state of mind in tomorrows papers.
to be more forgiving because his transgressions appear to have occurred during high school, possibly while at MSU (given the fact he was charged in Oakland County, though that might be bc the original thefts occurred there, idk) and thus before, not during like this instance
really this is about Dantonio screwing MSU over by talking with forceful abandon about the integrity his team would maintain by not allowing third chances. if he had just said they'd be disciplined based upon their behavior and dedication to team values and rules, no biggy. but he had to say the second chances... and it is going to bite him in the ass.
didn't coach Dantonio institute a "zero tolerance" policy post Rather Hall? wasn't that clear particularly to those already given a get out of jail free card? how difficult a decision can this be? let the kid keep his scholarship and participate with the scout team but he no longer sees the field. seems fair to me.
All I can think of was the outrage over Demar Dorsey when he said he was coming to Michigan. Before admissions became an issue the media jumped all over this kid who was still under 18 years old. Yet now, MSU gets a free pass on this one. Just not fair. I hope he comes back for Iowa and they still get their asses kicked.