OT: LSU RG Josh Boutte Suspended 1 Game for Late Hit

Submitted by Croatian_Blue on

LSU's RG Josh Boutte was suspended by Les Miles for 1 game for his vicious, late cheap shot on Wisconsin CB D'Cota Dixon. That game is against Jacksonville State. Les defended Boutte saying it was out of character and that Boutte believed the play was still live, which I totally believe.  /s

For those that didn't see the hit, here is the link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzMyFlGJvMo

Boutte is 6'5", 346 lbs and Dixon is 5'10", 203 lbs.  This could've done a lot of damage, but thankfully didn't.  

This brings me to my question: What punishment does Boutte actually deserve?

 

MGoBoard
Football
wisconsin
LSU
Dixon
Boutte

Bando Calrissian

September 6th, 2016 at 11:58 AM ^

So Les is claiming the kid could have reasonably thought the player was still returning the ball, as if holding the ball up in celebration while everyone else is standing around and the refs are blowing their whistles are signs of a live runner.

OK, Les. OK.

Joined: 07/02/2008

MGoPoints: 68096

CollegeFootball13

September 6th, 2016 at 12:10 PM ^

Yeah that was one of the worst parts of the whole thing. If you want to hand down a slap on the wrist, do it and own it and hope the story blows over in a day or two. But to call it an accident and imply that he thought the play was live is just stupid. And if you really believe that, why suspend him at all?

On top of that, since Boutte was ejected in the second half of the game, wasn't he by rule automatically suspended for the first half of next week? Which means that the punishment that was actually handed down by LSU was a suspension for one half of one game against Jacksonville State? Ridiculous.

Joined: 08/28/2008

MGoPoints: 1916

trueblueintexas

September 6th, 2016 at 12:21 PM ^

That rule is dumb because of exactly what happened during the LSU/Wisc game. Basically, you could seriously injure anyone you want on the opposing team in the last minute of a game and as long as it is not targeting, there is no negative impact on the player or team. Dumb.

Joined: 11/10/2008

MGoPoints: 36407

CollegeFootball13

September 6th, 2016 at 12:23 PM ^

Thanks for the correction. Kind of surprising that a flagrant PF ejection with under a minute left in the game could ultimately result in zero plays lost for the offending player, though.Is there anything else that results in an automatic suspension other than targeting? Punch thrown, etc? Or is everything but targeting ultimately up to the school/conference's discretion?

Joined: 08/28/2008

MGoPoints: 1916

ZooWolverine

September 6th, 2016 at 12:34 PM ^

Which that really should have been as well. That was shoulder to head of a defenseless player.

I mean, I don't know how much the officials thought through "are we ejecting him for targeting, or flagrant personal foul, or both" but, as you point out, it does matter in the second half of a game. 

Joined: 02/27/2009

MGoPoints: 3698

MGoMarley

September 6th, 2016 at 12:20 PM ^

Yea there's no way. He had to run past at least 3 of his teammates who had obviously stopped and were just standing there to deliver the blow. Lost all respect for Miles, especially because the job is already lost.. not too hard to do the right thing, who cares what LSU people you piss off. 6 games minimum, Id be okay suspending him for the year. No place for that cheap shit in a game that is already dangerous enough as is.

Joined: 08/18/2013

MGoPoints: 1246

WestSider

September 6th, 2016 at 12:16 PM ^

the street in a dispute, it would be a felony charge. It is felonious assault, pure and simple. Made worse by the fact the victim was blindsided and not really in any sort of mutual dispute with the assailant. The fact that the perp continued to seek conflict with the victims supporters is just added proof of the intent of the act. He should be thrown off the team, and charged in Wisconsin with assault-felony. The fact that it occurred in the context of a game is morally meaningless.

Joined: 02/04/2011

MGoPoints: 5979

ijohnb

September 6th, 2016 at 12:25 PM ^

is completely ridiculous.  The kid made a mistake, and it did happen during the course of a football game, not "on the street."  Should we be making charging decisions every time there is a late hit or everytime a player does not see a hit coming?   Everybody needs to relax a little bit here.  We can all agree that the suspension is insufficient, but this sounds like we are actively rooting for bad things to happen to this kid.  He made a mistake.  Jeez.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

Erik_in_Dayton

September 6th, 2016 at 12:38 PM ^

Football is a hyper-violent game, and the guy did a violent thing in the heat of a tough moment.  I'd suspend him for four games, but I would not treat him like a criminal.  This was nothing more or less than a football transgression.

Joined: 12/03/2008

MGoPoints: 58983

Bo Glue

September 6th, 2016 at 12:51 PM ^

Yes, I agree that more than one game would be perfectly legitimate. I don't think he should be treated like a criminal either. Sure, if he did that to someone on the street, he'd face charges. That sort of hypothetical isn't super useful though. I've never been a fact of counterfactuals.

Joined: 04/02/2012

MGoPoints: 13007

dragonchild

September 6th, 2016 at 1:31 PM ^

Are we taking seriously the premise that football turned an otherwise decent guy into a thug who'd mindlessly attack and possibly injure a defenseless player just for making a great play?  Then yes.

What's more likely, though, is that the argument is complete bullshit and this guy's an asshole who should've been suspended for a lot longer than one damn game.  Football's a "violent" sport in that there's a lot of contact, yes, but there's also a thick rulebook on illegal contact that for the most part the players have no problem following.  So the evidence that it's unchecked aggression is quite thin.  I see a few flagrant plays a year and generally think ill of the player, not the sport (I've seen dirty players in literally every contact sport).  So, I mean, can we blame the player, or do we want to throw football under the bus to defend a single asshole's indefensible act?  Because we sure don't want kids playing this sport if it gets them thinking they should react to a great play by decking someone into the turf.

Joined: 10/13/2011

MGoPoints: 60552

ijohnb

September 6th, 2016 at 2:24 PM ^

mean, you are talking about people who are not yet able to buy alcohol, some just barely old enough to vote, some of these kids are going to do some dumb things from time to time on or off the football field.  What he did was wrong and dangerous, however, it was in the context of a competitive endeavor when the moment can get the best of a lot of people.  You are acting as though I am defending the act.  I am not, I am saying that this one player made a stupid decision on one play.  I think he should be suspended from play for longer than one game.  I don't think anybody needs to be arrested or that they need to stop playing the sport.

Joined: 09/21/2009

MGoPoints: 69986

Heptarch

September 6th, 2016 at 5:21 PM ^

A mistake?  A mistake is accidentally driving over the mailbox while dad is teaching you how to drive.

What that kid did was malicious with intent to injure.  At the very least he has impulse/anger control issues that need to be addressed.  

I am not actively rooting for bad things to happen to him.  I simply want him to be duly punished for his actions.

Joined: 12/29/2014

MGoPoints: 7023

Bleedmaizeblue

September 6th, 2016 at 11:59 AM ^

He deserves more. That hit was uncalled for, irresponsible and completely intentional for all the wrong reasons. I'm no head coach but I wouldn't want a player like that on my team. I'd say at least a 4 game suspension. Along with other punishments outside of football to teach him an actual lesson

Joined: 07/11/2013

MGoPoints: 2919