The punch exists...
The fact that the ND blocker illegally blocked Mouton in the back and then hit him again after he was down has nothing to do with this! Mouton should have been called for a 100-yard (yeah that's right 100-yard) penalty for grazing the ND player's helmet and the refs should have awarded ND 10 points. It's only fair.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:35 AM ^
Would you take away Charles Woodson's Heisman because he clearly punched another player, David Boston, on the helmet.
^See? He punched him.
Its a physical sport. People run as fast as the can into each other. Players hate each other. There is pride involved and so if two players are battling it out and happen to take a few shots at each other then so be it.
That's called football. If it gets too rough for you then stop watching.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:42 AM ^
If someone pisses you off during the game, do you take a cheap shot at him after the play? or do you blow him up within the context of the game, i.e. tackle, run through a block, etc.
From your post, you are saying that it is perfectly fine for a player to jack another player, after all they are running at full speed into each other and hate each other and therefore it is a part of the game? My answer to that is heck no. That is not football, that is bush league. Play the game, and if the guy pisses you off, make damn sure your team gets the victory and the last laugh.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:46 AM ^
Neg me all you want but these are rivalry games. These players dont like each other and they are going to battle to the whistle and beyond. Jake Long was famous for punishing his opponents after the whistle as was Charles Woodson. Braylon Did it. Branch did it. Woodley did it.
You can call all of those guys bush league.
I call them football players.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:52 AM ^
the context of the game. Long punished opponents by physically manhandling them, same with Woodley. Granted the Woodson/Boston incident involved punches. Show me where any of those guys used a closed hand uppercut/punch to a guys face.
15 yard penalties, game ejections nowadays is how that stuff is handled. What good does that do in the game?
September 16th, 2009 at 1:00 AM ^
Dude. Did ever ever watch Jake Long play? I love the guy, and I loved him because he would drive somebody to the ground the whistle blows and he would still be pushing/walking on them, not letting them get up. Woodley would do the same thing.
All of this shit is within the context of the game. They hit each other. The hitting doesnt always stop when the whistle blows.
Players gets shots in at each other all game. They scratch, claw, punch, slap, and battle each other play in and play out. When its Michigan Notre Dame and you're jamming a receiver at the line, or blocking someone, the play doesnt end when the whistle blows it ends when you drive that sucker into the ground. Its intrinsically football.
Obviously no penalty was called. Not on Mouton. Not on Cissoko who shoved Floyd down right in front of the ref, and not on #74 who pushed a michigan player to the ground after the whistle. So obviously the refs know its a rivalry, shit gets heated and its gonna happen. Its all apart of football.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:06 AM ^
And that was my point in the previous thread. Those players abused their opponents within the context of the game, without using a closed fist to deliver a punch.
I am all for the style that Long and Woodley played. They were tough players who played through the whistle, money players.
I am very glad the ref missed it. I thought he could've thrown one on Cissoko, but he let it go... cool.
My point is a closed fist punch has no place on the football field... driving your opponent through the ground while finishing a block is within the context of the game and should be applauded.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:17 AM ^
Dude watch the tape again Mouton's hand was partially open. He slapped the guy. It was not a closed fisted punch. So no suspension, no nothing. Just two football players going at it giving it their all.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:27 AM ^
I did. Here is what I see:
Mouton on the ground getting up before the ND player which fell on him. While in the process, Mouton places his left hand on the ND players right shoulder pads and braces him, then connects with a punch, which wasn't overly powerful, but enough for the linemans head to bounce back.
You have no idea whether or not his fist is partially open or closed, but I can assume that it is closed based on the fact that when delivering a punch, you NEVER use a partially opened fist, good way to damage your hand/wrist.
At the end of the day, you think it is OK to jack another player, I don't.
September 16th, 2009 at 2:02 AM ^
I always find it quite funny when one contradicts oneself in consecutive sentences.
"You have absolutely no chance, not one, not even a little bit of an idea of whether or not his fist is open or closed for that hit. I, on the other hand, am different from you and I am going to say that it was closed because that suits my argument better. I base this on an opinion that I am going to pass off as fact, again, because Mouton using a closed fist goes along with my argument. I have NEVER used an open fist when smacking an offensive lineman while I play for the Michigan football team, therefore not a single other person can ever use an open fist. NEVER!"
September 16th, 2009 at 8:34 AM ^
He bitch-slapped that Buckeye on his way to the end zone! Sickening!
But honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing Mouton sit for a quarter or two.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:01 AM ^
Really, we paid the refs?
Is my sarcasm detector broken?
September 16th, 2009 at 1:12 AM ^
Just as PSU fans feel there is a conspiracy against them, ND fans felt they were jobbed, so why fight it? It makes them even more irate.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:30 AM ^
Ah. I'd go ahead and take a rest from posting for the rest of the night as you'll only get negged from now on.
Then again, there doesn't really seem to be any confirmation that anything bad comes of it, as r_mahorn is currently at -Jay point levels.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:36 AM ^
Quick question... how does one get negged? Is it just from replying specifically to a post?
Anyhow, I will take your advice... thanks.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:51 AM ^
but if you get above 20 points, you gain the privilege of up/down-voting individual posts, as well as the privilege of starting new threads.
A "neg" is a downvote. This is also called a -1. In the case of a poster receiving a -1 for each post in a thread by nearly everybody that visits the thread, this is called a negbang.
A "+1" is an upvote. I don't believe other, widely-accepted terminology has arisen for it yet.
For most posters, the other forum-goers' votes are where the majority of a user's points come from.
ps: don't talk about points.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:59 AM ^
I nominate just calling it banging.
"Man, bouje never gets banged."
"It would seem like Brodie gets banged all the time, but the reality is, there is no one to actually confirm that fact."
"Jay has been banged more times than Brian at a Statistics convention"
Etc.
September 16th, 2009 at 7:37 AM ^
Brian has already coined the phrase "posbang" in reference to going back and posbanging the guy that posted Roh would start the WMU game (remember he was negbanged before the game because a lot of folks thought he was making it all up).
September 16th, 2009 at 1:14 AM ^
IDIOT. That could be one of the stupidest things i have heard in awhile. Go back to your domer board.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:19 AM ^
Unless you are referring to someone else (the cascade gets confusing, so if it is someone else, then I apologize), I am no Domer. It is obvious that objective Michigan fans are not welcomed to voice their opinion.
I am amazed at how many actually condone punching a player. Notice how I don't call you, or anyone else an idiot for holding that stance... it is your opinion, and while I disagree with it, you are entitled to it, same goes for me.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:23 AM ^
the page. Me calling you an idiot was me thinking that you actually thought the refs were paid off. My bad. But ur 3 game/Thug U arguement is dumb.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:30 AM ^
Well without going too much into it since I have negative points, is where does the line get drawn? I like Mouton, but he stepped over the line. Is 3 games a bit much? Probably, but I believe in setting a precedent and making an example out of the first player who does something boneheaded. He will probably be suspended for at most 1 game, and if so, fine, I won't lose any sleep over it.
September 16th, 2009 at 7:12 AM ^
I personally liked the balls that Mouton had to do that. Where in your argument did you mention that the ND player shoved him to the ground from behind (illegal block in the back) and then went after him after the play? If anything, there could have been offsetting penalties. Why would Rodriguez put out his players' fire with a suspension for something that ONLY ND FANS NOTICED? Really, do you want the media to pick up on this so they can spin the story and say that RR recruits thugs again?
September 16th, 2009 at 1:34 AM ^
It would be fine if you were being objective but you're not.
Just because you're taking the, let's call it "not-michigan" side of this little debate we're having here doesn't make you objective.
Making statements such as "We are not Miami (FLA), Thug U, or whatever." or, "1. using a closed fist and uppercutting the ND player under the face mask 2. Doing it in clear daylight." and essentially calling a player bush league, is about as far from objective as you can get. You're rushing to judgment, equating Mouton with those "thugs" at Miami Fla, and saying he intended to uppercut a Notre Dame player in order to hit him in the face (as can be inferred by the statement "using a closed fist" and "under the facemask").
You watched the tape and formulated an opinion about what happened as did several other people. Its all subjective, as we all bring our biases, with regards to what it dirty and what isnt. What is a punch and what isnt.
IME you're overreacting to a play which A. Wasn't anything at all. B. Wasn't called a penalty on the field. C. Happened multiple times in this game and every rivalry game before this game.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:02 AM ^
He shouldn't be punching him...but its not worth a suspension. I got popped like that in high school ball, and I made sure I got back at him later, within the rules that is. I'm sure the ND player did the same.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:03 AM ^
In the words of Dan Hawkins: "ITS DIVISION ONE FOOTBALL!!!"
September 16th, 2009 at 12:17 AM ^
how dare cissoko violently shove the guy into that vicious haymaker?
September 16th, 2009 at 12:22 AM ^
I thought this thread was going to be about Rosenberg punching dolphins...my mistake lol.
September 16th, 2009 at 12:31 AM ^
Oh for fuck's sake- take off your skirt made of vagina. It's big boy football and this shit happens. We're not better than anyone else. Nor are our players.
September 16th, 2009 at 7:10 AM ^
Where do I get me one of those?
September 16th, 2009 at 12:45 AM ^
probably deserved as well, although i'm not condoning the act.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:00 AM ^
That looked more like the Marty McFly "your shoe is untied" bit than a punch. We don't want to condone cheapshots, but that looked more like a love-tap to get the guys attention than an attempt to hurt the guy. Mouton should get some serious Barwis time for risking drawing a stupid penalty, but not for giving a little chin-music to a player on one of the nation's dirtiest O-lines that had just taken a cheapshot at him.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:24 AM ^
I like how Boo Boo had Jonas' back...no doubt that ND Goon said some Shit and Michigan stood up for themselves and responded.
We play with an Edge now. Don't fuck with Michigan.
September 16th, 2009 at 7:28 AM ^
the words, but the ND guy blocked Mouton in the back and pushed him while down. Charlie is teaching his guys to be dirty and block in the back.
September 16th, 2009 at 1:30 AM ^
it's classless and something should be done. everyone that says "it's part of the game" should answer why it's met with a flag and consequences when seen. it has no place in Michigan football and gives Weis validation after his bullshit "punch" claims against MSU. he should sit and workout "voluntarily" twice as hard to be on the 1-2 against EMU while sitting and gaining clarity.
September 16th, 2009 at 2:17 AM ^
It's football, it happens every game. So does much worse than what this video showed. I played college football and believe me punches are the least of your worries next to biting, hair pulling, players grabbing body parts trying to inflict serious damage with MMA style holds. If the coach sees fit to discipline him he will. But in a very amped up rivalry game with that atmosphere I'd be highly surprised if they do anything.
September 16th, 2009 at 9:14 AM ^
Like the officials, I missed this during the game. I have read through most of the posts (all to this point) and still can't really figure out which side of the fence I am on.
I am an MD so I don't usually rush to judgements and normally analyse something thoroughly before making a decision. I also played sports all my life and was never one to back down from an opportunity to throw down with the other teams players. I think we all know that it happens in sports, that is a given. The question I keep coming back to is: Just because it happens, does that mean it's ok?
To try and be objective I look at real life situations and try to apply them to the context of the arguement in question. In this case I look at the law as we know it.
The argument seems to be Mouton didn't do anything that many others don't do as well. It is against the rules, but lots of people do it so it is alright (maybe I am wrong, but that is what I see as the main point for the "it was nothing" side).
To put this into a different context I would say that in "real life" many people murder other people (I won't go as far as Pryor and say everyone murders, but lots do). Does that fact that many people do something make it right? Should they not be punished even though it is against the law because many people do it and get away with it? These are the questions that come to mind when analysing this side of the arguement.
Do I think it happens in games, I know it does. As I said I played sports all my life and took part in this portion of the game far too often to be honest. But does the fact that it happens make it right, I don't believe it does.
I guess in writing this post I have decided which side of the fence I am on. If it is just "part of the game" than I don't think there would be rules against it. Just like if murder wasn't wrong their wouldn't be laws against it. Do I think he should sit for 3 games, hell no. I think the punishment should fit the crime and in this case I think the appropriate penalty would have simply been a 15 yard penalty.
As I said, I think what he did was wrong and falls outside the boundries of what is acceptable in a game, but if the refs missed it I am not sure anything should happen. I have faith RR will make the right decision.
September 16th, 2009 at 9:38 AM ^
much better if you used something a little less severe/dramatic....like driving over the speed limit.
September 16th, 2009 at 10:55 AM ^
Granted I used a severe analogy but I think the point remains the same. An arguement based on "it is alright because others do it" is not an arguement at all.
If someone wants to argue that the other player deserved what he got (and many make that point), that would hold water far better than it's ok because others do it. If what one player did was outside the boundries of what is acceptable in a game, he can hardly cry about a player reacting outside those same boundies.
After much thought on the issue, I think offsetting unsportsmanlike conduct penalties would have been the order of the day had ref's seen it. Only my opinion of course.
September 16th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^
And I'm not arguing it. No need to attribute arguments to me that I'm not making.
My point was simple: there are a myriad of less heinous crimes you could have used to make your point. Things like speeding, illegal downloading of music, public intoxication, etc.
Otherwise, it makes it look like you are equating the jab that Mouton threw to murder. Which, like...really?
Let's not try to turn this into LeGarette Blount, or Conboy/Tropp here.
September 16th, 2009 at 6:19 AM ^
At least there is a shred of merit to one of Weis' excuses.
September 16th, 2009 at 6:30 AM ^
Weis is a man who boldly claims to not make any excuses and then writes an entire library full of excuses.
If he would spend less time making excuses and more time coaching they could have won that game.
A good coach would have told his players: "look there is 9 seconds left in the game, if we get a deep pass in the middle of the field just go down and we'll use our timeout...don't run horizontally across the field until time expires."
September 16th, 2009 at 10:47 AM ^
After seeing that video, I agree that he should be sat for a half or a game. There's no place for that out there.
Almost as disturbing are the attempts to explain away the intent by guessing at the impact. If an Irish player had committed the same act, we'd be giving him the Robert Reynolds treatment.
September 16th, 2009 at 8:25 AM ^
For what's being called a "weak punch," you can see the guy's head pop back right at impact. That's not that weak. That's not the passion of the game. That's not football. That's someone not controlling their anger and taking a cheap shot. That's either a ton of extra conditioning and a half game suspension, or a full game. I don't care if it happens all the time. It shouldn't. Take out your frustrations by winning football games.
September 16th, 2009 at 9:54 AM ^
And we lose our credibility (with whom, I have no idea) when we express outrage at opponents who twist our players legs/ankles after tackling them on punt returns, but dismiss punches to the face after whistles blow.
Nobody (well, not the sane among us) is saying Mouton is a thug or was completely unprovoked, or should lose his scholarship or be suspended for the season; but we recognize that acts such as this are wrong, not to be tolerated at Michigan, and, when observed, deserve punishment.
September 16th, 2009 at 9:04 AM ^
cheap shotted Claude Lemieux. I'm willing to bet everyone (including myself) on this board thought that was awesome.
Now, I'm not comparing the two situations here, but the fact is the ND guy got in a little extra shot himself, and Mouton responded. Was it the best way to respond? Probably not. If he needs to sit a quarter or whatnot, fine. But I don't get where all these moral police are coming from, talking about suspensions and shit. Its footbal for God's sake. Some of you are acting like he stomped the guy with his cleat, or hit him in the nuts. He gave him a little shot on the chin. I'm willing to bet this happens multiple times in every football game played, from high school to the NFL. If he is suspended, it will be because of outcries from people the likes of we are reading in this thread.
September 16th, 2009 at 9:36 AM ^
The preceding block was a low-level cheap shot, but something still within the confines of typical gameplay and something--let's be honest--we may have supported if it was Jake Long.
Mouton's punch was quick, it was reactionary, it was not thrown with all the strength he had...but it was more than a swipe. And it was 100% wrong. And stupid. RR should sit him for a half.
September 16th, 2009 at 9:45 AM ^
Mouton didn't actually mean to hit the guy in the face, but when Cissoko gently nudges the lineman, it places his face in harm's way.
This is all just a simple misunderstanding.
September 16th, 2009 at 10:19 AM ^
lineman should be suspended for hitting Mouton's fist with his chin.
September 16th, 2009 at 10:46 AM ^
Mounton deserves some from Rodriguez. At least some extra condition and some bench time in the next game.
September 16th, 2009 at 5:28 PM ^
there won't be any punishment. The refs can't see everything. We have to get that under control for the MSU game though, because their fans will be going crazy and drawing flags on us if this continues.