On Mitch McGary, Nietzsche, and Ressentiment
They did a segment on McGary, I'd like to watch.
Whitlock basically said "let kids be kids." Both he and Wilbon disagreed with NCAA's decision. No shocker there.
Whitlock railed against the harsh drug penalties. Also said if a kid makes a mistake it shouldn't effect this harshly.
..it was Maize and Blue haze. Good stuff. I saved it from when Manningham and I used to roll around. I usually chief it with incoming recruits; of all skill level. Shit. How do you think Jeff Ziegler got on campus? And some folks in the SEC call themselves "The Bagman" HA .. King Kong aint got shit on me.
Hold on I need to get high before I can read something this philosophical.
Dooobie Dooobie doo (my favorite commercials from that era)
I stopped reading at "Nietzsche".
Thank you, Nietzsche, for "ressentiment". I've long felt that way about people in matters far beyond drug use who feel they have a right to make other people's closed-door business their own. I think many get it wrong by automatically assuming it's rooted in some puritanical, fundamentalist religious leaning. No doubt that is often the case, but I think for many it's much less complicated than that: they're simply resentful over their own failings and "If I've followed the rules this whole time, then goddammit, so is everyone else."
I think there are plenty of people whose opposition to marijuana use has nothing to do with faith and everything to do with the simple dogmatic fact that because of someone else's arbitrary moral code, they've always been told it's wrong, and hence, it is.
On the other hand, I've been hard at the single-malt since getting home, so I'm very likely full of shit.
I don't think you really understand the point Nietzsche was getting at with "ressentiment". Bringing it up in this context is very misleading and Nietzsche certainly wasn't talking about a 19-year-old kid smoking pot.
And I wasn't referring solely to the McGary situation, hence why my statements about "ressentiment" and marijuana use weren't in the same paragraph. I was simply appreciating Nietzsche for coining a term for something I believe is unfortunately a widespread sentiment.
And my point is that Nietzsche was coining his term in regards to a greater philosophy advocating something completely different than what you are saying and what the link in the OP above is alluding.
I agree it doesn't fit perfectly, because those directing their anger over this at McGary are obviously not striking at the overall source of their life's frustrations, as would be applicable against, say, "cultural elites," or "Washington." But I don't see why the writer can't apply a "micro" version of it as opposed to the "macro" of Nietzsche's. Maybe it wasn't accurate to say what is going on here is exactly "ressentiment," but I don't think it's wildly off.
The problem is that Nietzsche uses his ideas to go down the path of abandoning morals as a basis for laws and rules. Our system of laws is imperfect but the morals upon which they are based did not appear from ether. We are either ingrained with certain mores or have evolved a system based upon them. To think there are Ubermensch who define their own morals that are beyond rules and laws leads on a path to anarchy (or worse) and takes this post to the brink of Godwin's law.
I think Mitch McGary got shafted FWIW. And I have no love of the NCAA. And I wish him only the best in the NBA. So no resentment or ressentiment. Shakespeare would have been better to quote than Nietzsche: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" is much more apro pro to the situation.
but I didn't find the author's take to be valid, reasonable or even interesting, let alone great.
Probably like Drew Sharp's article on the topic today then.
Yup. It was an academic being a drama queen.
I feel letdown, embarassed and dissapointed...who knows why....I think pot should be legal ..but its not so WHY? would MM risk it?..its like hes being FORCED into the NBA by the NCAA...I hate the NCAA..I wish the 5 major conferences would wthdraw and form their own Organization but that still doesnt erase the letdown and dissapointment I feel..BUT...we move on without him....Next year will be step back and thats OK...I totally trust John Belien to know it wont be for long...
new what he was doing.
"Instead of stewing in your suburban hole where you stoke the glowing embers of your resentment by bullying those weaker than you and berating the strong from a safe distance"
If you've ever wanted to say "haters gonna hate" and sound like a total douche while saying it this article just solved one problem for you.
I've always thought those who actually say "Haters gonna hate" already have the douche part covered.
I smoked mad rips in undergrad. Take away my degree, bros
DECEPTION! DISGRACE! FOR SHAME.
would have had a very hard time dealing with the 1980's 'say no to drugs' and 'this music is bad for you' culture .
i know this may sound too conspiracy theory-ish, but it feels very coincidental that the one game mcgary dressed for (even though he had no chance of playing) he got "randomly" chosen to take a drug test. almost like someone was looking to screw him. add in the unwillingness to alter the one-year ban (even though it had just been revised to 1/2 a year), and you wonder about someone with a michigan axe to grind being involved.
oh wait, sorry, that's just the paranoia from the weed i just smoked talking
In theory he could have been tested at home per the Yahoo story - didnt matter if he was dressed or not. Or where he was.
If you want to go all conspiracy what about mr "zen like" guy suddenly transferring - hmm....if anyone like the doobs.... and provided it to other players.
ok I'm being bad but just saying was there just 1 doobie provider in Dallas in 1963? Paging Jesse Ventura.
I am just amazed at the dichotomy about "who catches you" for the exact same offense - if school catches you it could be running stadium stairs, 1 game suspension, 3 games.. 10 games, whatever. NCAA? Drawn and quartered. The more I think about this the more frustrated I get because he wouldnt have waited this long if he was dead set to go to the NBA. Grrr...
My problem is what happens when the 'student-athlete' can't go to the NBA? I think it's an awful rule regardless of the Mitch/Mich impact.
If the student athlete can't go to the NBA, couldn't he remain in school for the year and serve out the suspension, then play the following year? Or does the NCAA suspension mean you lose your scholarship for the year?
I don't care about people smoking weed. I think the NCAA is draconian. I think the rules for athletes are ridiculous. I admire MM taking responsibility for himself and admitting and accepting blame.
One thing I find annoying: what kind of idiot friends offered Mitch weed? I get that it is Mitch who said yes. But man, I don't care how many students partake, don't they have the sense to not put temptation in front of Mitch? Do students understand the repercussions of something like this? Just my grumpy old man rant.
No, they don't bother to think of the repercussions. Most college kids live in the moment and don't think about the potential implications of their actions.
source: I'm a college kid
they are high on pot.
Is that someone just asked, "Hey, you want some?" I don't remember worrying about repercussions.
it's a harmless drug. Right?
After seeing the reaction of the national media, namely ESPN, I am wondering if the announcement of Mitch intending to declare and his openness about the circumstances is a strategic PR move. It is amazing to me that with all the legal power Michigan has, that they cannot win an appeal to a rule that changed literally weeks after the offense. Mitch has implied that he would have stayed if not for the 1 year suspension; and if held to the new 6 month rule he would be able to play in the fall, correct? Is Michigan drumming up support and planning to take another swing legally?
The rule change for the NCAA would have began Aug 1
So I assume the 6 month ban for 2014-2015 would have began Aug 1. That would have held Mitch out until Feb 1. He would be gone either way as he would have missed Nov/Dec/Jan.
Sounds like if this had not happened, he would have returned however. Which is what has my head through a wall today.
But enacted recently. That doesn't mean the term of the suspension would begin for him individually when the rule changes, if it can be argued that the spirit of the NCAA view on the appropriate punishment is in effect now, and the punishment is meant to be served from the time of the offense. I am not a lawyer, but I wonder if there is precedent for this type of argument.
This is true - I am speculating. I would think suspension would begin when new rule hits rather than immediately but I am sure MGoLaywers know better than I would. I am sure it would be complicated either way. I dont' see the punitive action in suspending someone in April for 6 months when it would not affect their ability to play games (a mid April suspension = mid Nov playing ability)
I am just very curious how often the NCAA tests - Honey Badger admitted he got caught numerous times but it was by LSU and not the NCAA. I mean really this is like such a low probability event - a guy who was tested 5x this year by his school and not getting caught, getting stained by the 1x the NCAA does it. Bugger.
Please find my apartment. I would like to take a dump on your head.
having someone else verbalize this has helped me, in some small way, to deal with the rage this has been inducing.
Man, I just don't want to hear that stuff right now.
And I kind of feel like it is so "Michigan fan" to not properly direct all rage at that posse of buffoons called the NCAA.
1. NCAA policy: messed up, should change
2. MM: great kid, but did screw up
3. MBB fans: disappointment is fine, vitriolic overreaction is not
4. MBB: in great hands, will be fine
Article seems overwrought to me, esp when the author tries to do a general psycho-analysis on thousands of people he has never met
"But mostly I felt angry at Michigan fans who were sanctimoniously clucking and wagging their fingers at my student."
where this ridiculousness was rampant yesterday.
So depending on where that guy has been on the internet, it may be far from an invention of his imagination.
"But mostly I felt angry at Michigan fans who were sanctimoniously clucking and wagging their fingers at my student."
any student would have thought they were harming McGary by offering him pot. I mean, who in their right mind would think that an athlete could drink themselves half to death without any punishment at all, but taking one toke on a doobie is cause for a year's suspension? The rule is utterly ridiculous, written by out of touch old men with no basis in reality.
May have spent too much time with Fritzjof B., then drawing some questionable inferences
(I have never been culpable of that. Not once.)
Man, I hope someone gets this.
I think the author makes at least one good point. At least some of the people who are "mad" at Mitch are probably more upset that he blew a chance they'll never have than they are that he smoked pot. They likely think to themselves, man, if I were a Michigan basketball player, I would never smoke pot or ever do anything that would risk my eligibility or my team, etc etc. Maybe that's true, maybe it's not, but that person will never know. There are plenty of people who judge our athletes and our coaches that are coming from this perspective, I think. It's sad, and maybe it's even wrong, but I think our society has put athletes on such a pedastal that it's unavoidable. I think most Michigan fans support Mitch and wish him well in the NBA, and hopefully his back is healed and he gets drafted, and we can all continue to cheer for him.
Whoever they are I would like to follow them around and wait until the break some arbitrary rule and receive some ridiculously over the top punishment, by some archaic and hypocritical ruling body and then I will gladly laugh in their faces.
Don't read anything on the Freep then!