Football Display Case
good luck gents
You may be getting ahead of yourself, MLive dude. Drake Harris had 8 catches for 243 yards against Watts-Jackson's OLSM last fall.
i find this extremely interesting
i may have altered the title
i thought this was america
like I said on twitter: that was almost as intense as Iowa NIT games
...talks about how UConn hasn't been in contact and how they're out. (HT: UMHoops)
Jalen, Burke, and Simmons.
Mike Hart the heavy favorite in the trolling competition
just what the Pistons need: a third string center. Joe Dumars was replaced by a mean ol' alien a few years back you guys.
this would be a close approximation of hypothetical graduation speech
no you guys they're just super pumped about COLLLLLLLLLLLLEGE
not a surprise
That was your first post. Your first post is supposed to be completely irrational and angry and contain lolcats for no reason.
my first post was an angry GERG hating rant about burning his house to the ground and spreading salt on the ground. i feel no shame in it and feel the same way today.
I will fucking cunt punt the next person I hear about doing something like that, and I don't give a fuck if you SOR me, I WILL FUCKING ASSAULT YOU.
Liar liar pants on fire!
If you're doing nothing, how do you know when you're finished?
StraightDave owes me a steak dinner
I said this a few years back when Carson Butler was having troubles in the offseason and there was a possibility he wouldn't play: Trust in whatever the coaches are doing right now to determine if this player has learned from his mistakes and is committed to becoming a better man, and a better representative of his family and this university. While it's easy to say "Well we're doing what MSU, ND and SEC teams would do..." as soon as we hear a discplined player might play, remember this is Michigan (fergodsakes). I swear with every fiber of my being that the fire our staff is putting him through will be the test whether he's gets to put on his helmet on saturday, and you can bet that fire is hotter that any jail cell, community service or Sparty/ND decision making session.
Thusly, I feel no shame if Hoke lets Fitz play, because I will then know Fitz proved he deserves to.
A lot of these arguments are going to be for nothing because Fitz is NOT going to start against Alabama, unless the judge somehow finds him innocent.
fitz playing. if hoke thinks he's learned his lesson than i will leave it that. punishment doesn't always mean missing games. the punishment, in my view, should be whatever actually gets through to the person being punished. hoke has never come off as a win at all costs coach and i dont see that changing any time soon.
“Well, I was this close to bringing a sinner to Jesus, and now he is consigned to eternal damnation. I hope that you’re happy.” - Boyd Crowder, Justified
If Fitz plays, I am going to be wondering what happened to this Brady Hoke.
I can only assume that Hoke has ensured that his message has gotten across in some other way, but that does not really give a good image
I believe the decision has been made this is from the presser with Borges last week
MGoQuestion: Hoke hasn’t revealed Fitz’s status to the public, but has he discussed it with you?
For whatever reason they are keeping their decision under wraps.
They're keeping it under wraps to keep Bama guessing. I find it difficult to believe the coaches still haven't come to a decision on Fitz. I'm sure they know exactly what they want to do. But why reveal it ahead of time?
I am conflicted regarding this whole situation.
EDIT: After reading the transcript of Hoke's press conference, it seems highly probable that Fitz doesn't play on Saturday. I believe that Hoke is simply keeping private matters private . . . it isn't anyone's business what Hoke does in disciplining Fitz (& Clark.) This is consistent with the Fort Hoke mentality, where neither the coaches nor the players shoot off at the mouth more than necessary.
"It does not matter how many times you get knocked down, but how many times you get up." Vince Lombardi
The Puritanism in this thread is astounding, and this coming from a person who thinks the US treats driving under the influence of alcohol entirely too lightly in general.
People of high character do make mistakes. What sets them apart is that they tend to learn from those mistakes. Fitz got lucky, he didn't hurt anyone and so this incident is just a personal mistake that he happened to get caught making. I have to wonder if all the comments talking about how severely he must be punished are coming from people who've never driven in a state of intoxication that would have resulted in legal repurcussions had they been caught.
So let's assume that Fitz and Hoke are both of high character. Fitz appears to Hoke to feel great remorse for the possible ramifications of his poor decision. In Hoke's opinion, Fitz is sincere and will fulfill whatever obligations the court requires of him; more importantly, Fitz sees it fit that Hoke punish him beyond the court's decision because this is Michigan fergodssake. And so since the incident, Fitz has been doing whatever punishment Hoke doles out and doing so without complaint.
I'm not cool with kids losing their ability to get federal student aid because they get caught with a little pot. I'm also not cool with a kid like Fitz being denied a real opportunity to showcase his talent against Alabama because he made a similar, illegal, mistake. And my guess is that had Fitz copped an attitude with Hoke about being a star and not getting punished, he'd be out for at least a game. Maybe we should attempt to give some credit to both people in this, or all go turn ourselves in for the punishments we surely deserve for things we've never gotten caught doing but did all the same.
well put sir.
I trust in Hoke to make the right decision regarding Fitz. I'm guessing that if he plays, he has owned up to his mistakes and worked his butt off. Hoke wouldn't play him otherwise.
I do not mean to pry, but you don't by any chance happen to have six fingers on your right hand?
Obviously Fitz will not play. It's apparent Hoke is keeping the Alabama coaches on their toes with his deflections.
And frankly, Hoke is making the right decision in a lot of respects. Firstly he's keeping internal team matters just that - internal. He's also not giving the 'Bama gameplan anything to work with, especially with the sparse film offerings Rawls has.
But more importantly Hoke is doing the right thing for Fitz. Fitz has a five-year-old child. He's a young man that made a mistake. What kind of message would it send to not only the fans and media (which I hope everyone realizes Hoke doesn't give two poops about) but Fitz's young child that deadly choices do not have serious consequences? When the child is grown and asks why he never got to play in that spectacle of a game in Dallas, hopefully Fitz will be able to use it to impart some serious life lessons. Hoke knows these things, he doesn't live nor operate in a vacuum.
Meinke jumped the gun with that tweet this morning but please, let this play out before convulsing.
Still don't get this attitude. So because he's a football player he shouldn't play due to a DUI? How does that make sense? Do we tell PhD candidates they can't research as part of their DUI punishment? Normal undergraduates aren't allowed to take midterms? I'm sure the kid paid the price over the summer and if he starts, he paid his dues (and will likely pay a cash fine). We don't know what he had to do. But asserting that he shouldn't be able to play is just ludicrous. Football and DUIs have nothing to do with one another, and it's certainly possible to "learn your lesson" without missing an actual game, and one that's pretty important for national recognition and NFL aspirations.
Denard has spent the offseason working really hard and smiling at people.
I'm agnostic about Fitz playing. However, consider this:
One could argue that texting and driving is at least as dangerous as driving drunk. In fact, I think I'd rather have someone driving around A2 with a 0.08 BAC than someone with an iphone conversation going on.
DUI is a big deal because someone (MADD) made a big deal about it. The risk of crash increases dramatically, but is still small. Speeding has a similar, but smaller impact. There is evidence that distracted driving actually has an even larger impact in some cases (google around, I don't have time to now). Should people go to jail for all of them? Would you feel the same way if Fitz had gotten a ticket for texting and driving?
Who helped you with that higher math?
I thought the game depth charts come out on the Thursday before that week's game.
I just destroyed that toilet with a huge Rosenberg.
If they were playing Alabama State he wouldn't be playing.
I'm no conspiracy theorist, but it seems like Hoke might just be testing the waters a bit by releasing the depth chart w/fitz #1. Then he can make his decision depending on how large a stink it creates.
but I will go ahead and beat this horse. A first DUI can be a coincidence, and bad luck. The vast majority of drunk drivers do not get caught. I hope this is the case here. A second DUI is a sign of a serious problem, and a third is a sure-fire indicator of a serious alcohol problem. Such a person needs help, and needs to focus all of his attention on getting this addressed. It looks to me like the coaches have a handle on these distinctions. Regarding gamesmanship, I doubt that it would change Nick Saban's preparations one bit no matter which of our fleet of backs is the starter.
"I hope this is the case here"
Nope. Pretty sure he got caught.
And now we wait.
Abort, Retry, Fail?
You guys are sounding just like what the buckeye fans always say about Michigan fans, that they are arrogant with their nose in the air. Get off of your high morals.
Some of you disgust me.
The perfect solution here would be a symbolic gesture such as sitting Fitz for the first series, or at least the first play. I don't think sitting him for the game or even a quarter would be appropriate, but starting him sends the wrong message, no matter how many hoops Fitz had to negotiate behind the scenes.
Sitting him for even one play could make a big difference, not only in the perception of Michigan football, but in reinforcing the lesson that Fitz has been learning this summer. I hope that's how it works out.
While I'm fairly indifferent towards Fitz' punishment (or lack there of) by missing some or all of the Alabama game, I've got to wonder what the reaction would be if someone on MSU or OSU blew a 0.12 while operating a vehicle.
Would we be saying we "trust whatever punishment Dantonio and/or Meyer has bestowed upon him"?
My guess is we wouldn't, and you'd be hearing chants of "burn the witch" from around here.
In this case, it does seem a double standard. If Hoke adds no (or "little") additional punishment, we say it's because whatever he did this offseason is enough. If Dantonio or Meyer does the same, we say it is because they don't discipline their players and run them "out of prison".
I put up a tough front, but deep down I just want to be held.
Not saying Coach Hoke thinks its okay to get DUI's but it was his goal at a young age to drink every beer in Muncy, IN. Fitz will play, but dont think for a second that it's because Brady condones his behavior.
"Yards of dust"
"Whenever you're in this position, you've got to make decisions that are best for the program," said Hoke, who suspended Toussaint indefinitely in the wake of the arrest. "That doesn't mean for one specific team. That means for the program. It means for the identity and the character of the program you represent."
Fitz is not going to play. just making Alabama prepare for him.
From the press conference that was frontpaged:
Do you feel caught between giving your team the best chance to win vs. making sure the players pay the consequences for breaking the law?
Well, I think whenever you’re in this position. You’ve got to make decisions that are best for the program. And that doesn’t mean for one specific team, it means for the program. It means for the identity and the character of the program that you represent. Are they easy decisions? No. Are they decisions you want to make because you love the kids? No. But you have to make them.
Emphasis mine. I also agree that this means Fitz won't play at least one half against 'Bama. After the legal proceedings tomorrow it will be more definite, but I think the answer is right here.
I'm probably reading too much into this, but I also see it as a subtle put-down for other programs.
The handling of DUI and DWI offenses has changed drastically since the politicization of these offenses by MADD, DADD, SADD et al. Previously the state quite reasonably was concerned about driving when impaired. This was the case without regard to the source of impairment. The initial introduction of a BAC level was as a safeguard for drivers against over zealous interpretation of impairment by law enforcement. At a BAC below, or in some states of, .1 the driver was considered unimpaired. Above that the officer was supposed to assess if the driver was impaired or not. Only if the driver was found to be impaired would the officer make the arrest. Now the state uses flat BAC levels selected to molify these political pressure groups whether or not they reflect actual impairment in the average person. Driving while impaired certainly increases the risk to yourself and others. Driving with a given BAC level whether .05 or .15 may or may not cause your driving to be impaired. It would be helpful to this discussion to recognize the difference and cease equating driving with a BAC of .12 to murder. It is quite conceivable that Fitz was perfectly capable of driving safely, of course he also could have been significantly impaired.
The second issue is that regardless of the soundness of the laws that cover DUIs and DWIs there is a reasonable expectation that they will be obeyed. If we assume that the BAC level of .12 was the result of a properly administered test on a correctly functioning machine, then whether or not it was deliberate Fitz broke the law. Here is where the details matter. Did Fitz honestly misjudge his level of intoxication or did he know he was in questionable shape and drove anyway? Was he impaired or simply above an arbitrarily set BAC level? Does Fitz have a problem with alcohol abuse? (Important because changing and alcoholic's behavor is much more difficult than a social drinker). These details will influence the sentence of the court, and similarly should influence Hoke's punishment for violating team rules.
I am conflicted about whether or not Fitz should sit out one or more games. Based on what is known at this point I lean to a two game suspension, but the answers to the questions above could mitigate this to the point that I would have no problem with him starting Saturday. Without those answers I am unable to make a determination about whether Fitz should play. Since I don't have the necessary information, I am comfortable with letting Hoke, who knows those details, make the decision.