Mitch being Mitch
He is not the one that got high.
Wanna bet the OSU kid that just got charged with drug possession won't get a year?
Not to mention Noah Spence. Tested positive for ecstasy and got 3 games.
How many players (including Michigan players, to be fair) have even busted for "undisclosed violations of team rules" and gotten slaps on the wrist? I am not diminishing how annoying it must have been to run stairs at the stadium at 6 a.m. or bring Lloyd cottage cheese at the crack of dawn but that's a lot different from a 12 month ban...
Mitch failed an NCAA drug test, those other players who violate team rules got busted at the team or school level. That gives the coach more power to determine the punishment, whereas Mitch was unfortunately given the 1 year suspension because that's the NCAA's punishment.
Then he shouldn't be smoking dope when there's a chance he gets tested by the NCAA. End of story. He is a representative of The University of Michigan, first and foremost. Secondly, as much as you potheads would wish it to be otherwise, the marijuana you all so enjoy is still illegal. End of story.
Maybe Mitch chose the wrong time to try out a not-so-legal remedy for his back pain, but it's pretty goddamn obvious the NCAA targeted him as soon as it was announced that he would dress for Tennessee.
Secondly, it's marijuana. He had it in his blood stream; he didn't get caught with kilos upon kilos in his trunk with intent to sell. That deserves a YEAR-LONG suspension?
You probably think so, judging by your post, but you're an insufferable cock and act like you're 107 years old and know everything, judging by your past "BAH! THREE LOSSES IS TOO MANY" nonsense and your inane rant against Mary Sue Coleman. And in a year or two, marijuana will be legal everywhere. Does your little 1950s world crumble into dust when that happens?
Judging by the maliciousness of your post, I take it that you are also an insufferable cock. Although your point of the harshness of the penalty and the logical discrepencies between various crime and punishments has its merit, the fact that societal norms are changing in regards to the acceptance of weed has little to do with being caught breaking an NCAA mandated rule. Hence, his poor decision and even worse timing is the reason why he suffers from a previously defined punishment.
So we're not allowed to be pissed off at the NCAA for having stupid, stupid punishments and apparently targeting an athlete who was never going to play in the tournament anyway? Is that what you're saying? Because F that.
the fact that societal norms are changing in regards to the acceptance of weed has little to do with being caught breaking an NCAA mandated rule.
I didn't bring up the legality. Public_97_Ivy did. I just used it as a jab unrelated to the McGary situation.
The NCAA rule on marijuana are old and outdated. Are the rules just and equal. No. For that, feel free to be pissed. However, you raise two points: the NCAA has stupid punishments and 2)Mitch was targeted.
as to point 1, your point is that it is a stupid rule, however, you fail to argue the point that it is unfair that he got caught breaking a rule in the rulebook and got penalized accordingly. What would happen at your job if you failed a drug test. You would either be penalized or your employment contract would be severed.
and for 2), what evidence do you have besides conjecture that Mitch McGary was targeted by the NCAA? He never failed a drug test before that. Why would they think targeting him would end his tourny? You keep saying it happened, but I have never seen proof to this claim.
you fail to argue the point that it is unfair that he got caught breaking a rule in the rulebook and got penalized accordingly.
That's because I don't hold that position. Must feel good to attack an argument nobody's making, though.
what evidence do you have besides conjecture that Mitch McGary was targeted by the NCAA?
Oh, it's only conjecture, but when a supposedly "random" drug test sweep hits a guy who never suited up before a game in which everyone knew he wasn't going to play, my skepticism alarm goes off.
Read Public Ivy's posts history. Monocle Smile is spot on, if a bit abrasive.
Mitch broke the law by smoking the weed.
Regardless of when it is legalized, at the time he did it, he was breaking the law. He knew that and he did it anyway. He then got caught by the NCAA. Was it fair for the NCAA to target him? No. Is it fair for a cop to hide in a speed trap to catch speeders that are unaware of the trap? No. But the fact is, when they get caught, they face the consequences of their actions. There are kids who get put in prison for smoking weed or possessing a little bit of it. The worst thing that happened to Mitch was a suspension that resulted in a 1st round draft pick and a multi-million dollar contract to play for an NBA contender. Really, the only people that truly suffered are John Beilein and the basketball team, and the fans. And furthermore, the NCAA does test for legal drugs, and if you test positive without a prescription, the punishments are the same.
I'm not saying that the rules aren't stupid, or they don't unfairly target people, or that weed shouldn't be legalized. I'm just saying that when you get told on many occasions what the consequences are of using recreational drugs, the NCAA makes it clear that you'll be suspended, you take the risk and you get caught, you really have no one to blame but yourself.
Who exactly is making the argument that McGary shouldn't have been punished? I think the "random" drug test round is suspicious, but breaking rules accords punishment, and I haven't seen any user or blogger argue otherwise.
Instead, we're arguing that the rules themselves are stupid. The NCAA even agrees to an extent, seeing as they changed their punishment for that offense immediately after McGary got his sentence. They're still stupid, but this entire thing was mishandled.
from a one year suspension to a 6 month suspension when he was tested. Unfortunately, for whatever reason they made it effective at a future date and had not gone into effect when Mitch was tested.
I think the 6 month is still too long of a punishment.
It is your duty as a citizen to disobey unjust laws. Fire it up.
You should grow up and realize this is 2014 not 1950.
of authoritarian pricks would much rather be living in 1950.
Is this true? If so why would his punishement from the NCAA be different from MM?
I learned this Google thing-
The rules aren't consistent year round. He toked up in the NCAA, where the NCAA administers the penalties...not the B1G. so....doesn't matter what your point is because you are comparing apples to oranges. The penalty may be harsh, but he knew the penalties going in
The discrepancies in punishments between the conferences and the NCAA are glaring. There's clearly a problem. Also, the NCAA changed its own goddamn punishment to half the term immediately after sentencing McGary to the old one.
I've heard some players even engage in premarital sex. Shame on them all
Mitch screwed up big time. Everyone knows that. Most agree the NCAA penalty was way to harsh. I'm just happy for Mitch and wish we had him one more year. I love the way he plays the game.
I don't think he screwed up; just got screwed.
He did something against the law and NCAA rules that he KNEW he could get tested for and made his team and the program pay.
He screwed himself--and us!
The times when people look see smoking pot = smoking crack are quickly going away. Its really no worse than having a beer in my eyes at this point. Suspend a player a few games or something if they're breaking the rules but a one year ban is still outrageous considering the stuff other players get away with
My guess is If you ask Mitch he would say both. Oklahoma took him for his talent character work ethic team spirit leadership and enthusiasm. That's what I prefer to remember and wish we had for one more year.
"He can step up and shoot the three ball" -Isaiah Thomas. Are they talking about the right person here?
Of course he can shoot it.
Oh, you want him to *make* it too?
MM was always practicing his range and it was contemplated that it would be part of his game. He just never had the chance to showcase it because the NCAA rocks.
Yeah. Isaiah doesn't know what he's talking about. Mitch doesn't even have a consistent mid-range jumper yet.
Actually, I think there was talk of Mitch showing 3pt range at the Nike Camp or LeBron Camp (whatever it was) that GR3 & Mitch attended last summer. I was skeptical when they mentioned it then. He does have a decent shooting motion, but his struggles at the FT line made me wonder if he could be consistent with his shot.
Here's another write up of his performance yesterday:
It, too, is very positive.
Some good quotes. Sounds like the reporter actually went to the game.
Isn't that the newspaper that produced the headline "MR. UNRELIABLE" aimed at kevin durant?
I've heard of the writer Mayberry before, he's pretty good.
Yes McGary should have been punished for about 3 games. There is no justification for a year when Derrick Nix missed no games for operating a vehicle under the influence of weed and Noah Spence got 3 games for ecstacy. One year is perfect punishment. /s
what happened with Mitch's suspension sucked for him and for Michigan, but at least he landed on his feet. Getting a first round deal with OKC guarantees that if his back holds up (and it sounds like so far, so good) he should be able to make an impact. And if it doesn't, he should have a good chunk of change to fall back on.
Honestly, if he could have known for sure before the draft that he was going to go in the first round I would have told him to go even without the suspension. If he came back to Michigan next year and re-injured his back, I doubt he would ever go in the 1st round again IMO. He would have picked up the "often-injured" label and been too much of a risk.
Ayyy ayyy ay!
I thought it was going to be about Albom saying something stupid...