Rittenberg on Gholston

Submitted by Lordfoul on

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/36066/no-word-on-possible-gholston-discipline

 

My quick take: Gholston should be suspended for this week's game against Wisconsin. His conduct in both cases is completely unacceptable. If Michigan State doesn't step in, which wouldn't totally shock me, the Big Ten should do so.

 

I agree that a one game suspension for Wisky would be about right.  Love how he says that Dantonio doing nothing wouldn't shock him.

ILwolverine

October 17th, 2011 at 7:09 PM ^

Punching Lewan was a 'heat of the moment' action.  Had he just dove on to Denard late, that would be 'heat of the moment', but then grabbing his facemask and ripping his head to the side then laying like nothing happened, is a deliberate action with an intent to injure.

DaBigDaddy

October 17th, 2011 at 10:38 PM ^

 

I just think the Wolverines and the Spartans have different perception of this in-state rivalry...

Likely reasons 1. Both players,  Most current Michigan players(RR players) grew up not being a Michigan fan and had no idea of our traditions. Unlike the Spartan players, atleast they did not like Michigan.

2. Two QBs, Kirk Cousin is a leader no doubt, but DRob still seem like a stats leader instead of a vocal leader to this Michigan team.

3. Two HCs, Hoke is still trying to get this team back on track of what a Michigan team is all about, but yet Dantonio really made a statement to his team and this state. 

Tagg

October 18th, 2011 at 12:00 AM ^

Number 1 and 2 is where I take some issue. 

 

Many key players are from Michigan and Ohio. Demens, Thomas Gordon, Cam Gordon, Devin Gardner, Rocko Khoury, Ryan Van Bergan, Will Campbell and Mike Martin are just a few from Michigan. Patrick Omameh is a Michigan fan from Columbus, Kovacs grew up a Michigan fan in Ohio, same for Koger who is from Toledo. Yes, there are a number of kids from out of the region but there are plenty from Michigan and Ohio who know Michigan and what Michigan is about and that should rub off.

 http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/mich-m-footbl-mtt.html >>>>

  

I think two coaching changes in 4 years has a significant effect compounded by the switch from pro to spread and back to pro styles. MSU in my opinion is usually more amped up for the game anyways. It's what they live for. Even in some of their less that stellar years a win over Michigan saved their season regardless of what else happened. If they went 1-11 and the 1 was a win over Michigan it isn't a "lost" year it's a "good" year. Michigan has higher goals and standards and arguably the biggest rivalry game in all of college football with Ohio State where MSU worries about beating Michigan and the rest is cake.

 

I can't say what kind of leader Denard is because I'm not in the locker room. From what I have read however the players seem to think he is fine so I have to go on that. There are a few articles that I have seen that says he has leadership skills but I don't think you need to be vocal to be a leader. A guy like Steve Yzerman led (lead) by example and I think Denard does that.

BluByYou

October 17th, 2011 at 8:12 PM ^

and the Sparties shrug it off as just football, but when you look at it, those were girly acts, all done when a player was on the ground or othewise defensless.  They are nothing but girls (no offense to girls).

sum1valiant

October 17th, 2011 at 7:20 PM ^

If it were just an armbar, or just the twisting of the facemask, or just the punch, I could probably be convinced that it was heat of the moment, however that wasn't the case.  It was all three incidents, which is a trend.  This kid was out to injure someone, and was going to continue doing it until someone stopped him.

Sckon

October 17th, 2011 at 7:21 PM ^

Do not get me wrong I am not saying his actions should not be punished, because they should. All I am saying is it is really hard to say suspend him for a year for it. Whether he should be suspended for x number of games is something I could care less about, but taking a season away from him? Really? Punishment should fit the crime and in this particular instance I just do not see a year.

maizenbluenc

October 18th, 2011 at 10:01 AM ^

but to reach out after the late hit, and intentionally twist a player's head with his facemask ... Gholston should have been ejected right then, and if the Big Ten doesn't suspend him for a significant portion of the rest of the season ... well they're sending the wrong message.

I can understand the judo chop (Lewan had his jersey in hold, he was aggressively trying to get free). I can even understand the punch (Lewan mashed his face into the turf / heat of the moment).

Attempting to injure someone's neck is not heat of the moment, it is not accidental, it is intent to injure someone, and injure them badly.

BiSB

October 17th, 2011 at 7:39 PM ^

Assume for the moment that you're right, and that they were "heat of the moment" incidents.  Why would you not suspend him for a significant amount of time anyway? Heat-of-the-moment isn't a defense to crimes (your honor, you can't send me to jail for hitting him with that bottle; I was REALLY pissed at the victim at the time), nor in civil cases.

Besides, he's going to be exposed to intense situations in future games, so they need to do something to dissuade him from reacting that way in the future.

Belisarius

October 17th, 2011 at 8:17 PM ^

Well, technically "heat of the moment" isn't a defense, but it is a mitigator. It can be the difference between murder and manslaughter, for example. That said, if Gholston were to charged with assault, I would have nooo problem with it.

The Nicker

October 18th, 2011 at 12:47 AM ^

Whether in incident is in the heat of the moment, or rather, within the course of the game, makes a huge difference in punishment.

 

Additionally, you don't think missing the Wisconsin game (MSU's biggest game of the year) will dissuade him from engaging in similar behavior in the future?

joeyb

October 17th, 2011 at 7:43 PM ^

At first, I thought you were being sensational with the punishment, but then I compared what happened here to what Legarrette Blount did, and I'd say that the crime and punishment are on par with that. I was in favor of a game, maybe two, but seven seemed a bit much. I'd say that the repeated offenses are on par with Blount's inability to back down after the initial punch. I mean, it's not like this is Gholson's senior year like Blount, so suspending him for the rest of the year isn't as damaging in this case.

2plankr

October 17th, 2011 at 7:50 PM ^

 

Everyone saw the game. Everyone knows that they played dirty. It doesn't mean we have to hold onto for all of eternity. If we lost a close game because they injured Denard on a dirty play, then there would be something to bitch about for a while. It was a 2 TD loss in a game where those penalties only benefited us. It does nothing to continue complaining about it except to give them something to laugh about. The same goes for all of the "Start Gardner" threads (He was 3/7, not better than Denard, and missed wide open receivers). Threads like this just make this place intollerable to come to because this is supposed to be a place for rational discussion, but instead it's mlive or rcmb after a loss and it causes me to lose faith that our fanbase is actually an better than any other fanbase.Everyone saw the game. Everyone knows that they played dirty. It doesn't mean we have to hold onto for all of eternity. If we lost a close game because they injured Denard on a dirty play, then there would be something to bitch about for a while. It was a 2 TD loss in a game where those penalties only benefited us. It does nothing to continue complaining about it except to give them something to laugh about. The same goes for all of the "Start Gardner" threads (He was 3/7, not better than Denard, and missed wide open receivers). Threads like this just make this place intollerable to come to because this is supposed to be a place for rational discussion, but instead it's mlive or rcmb after a loss and it causes me to lose faith that our fanbase is actually an better than any other fanbase.

UMfan21

October 17th, 2011 at 7:00 PM ^

2 games minimum.  The helmet twist was so intentional and so severe, I could see it getting more. But really, I agree with the majority that it was two separate offenses each with a minimum 1 game suspension.

justingoblue

October 17th, 2011 at 7:03 PM ^

I hate to keep making hockey comparisons, but shouldn't football (as another contact sport) have an equivalent to a match penalty? That was an obvious intent to injure and should be more than fifteen yards and a game (with no ejection from the first).

The punch was just unsportsmanlike. They should suspend him for that, but I only say that because of the Mouton suspension. If they had assessed fifteen yards and an ejection that would have been more than fair.

Edit: I'll get my other hockey comparison out here too. You should not be able to injure someone on a personal foul and not be ejected. Obviously that's discretionary, but Denard didn't come back once after the Rush hit. That fifteen yards was more than worth it for their defense, and that shouldn't be the case.

Wendyk5

October 17th, 2011 at 7:02 PM ^

I just talked to a friend of mine, who is an MSU alum, who is totally disgusted with the state of the program, and believes that Gholston's actions, and Rush's too, are why MSU will never become an elite national program. But he believes this has been going on for while, even before Dantonio's watch. He was shocked when I read Narduzzi's "60 minutes of unnecessary roughness" quote. 

denardogasm

October 17th, 2011 at 7:03 PM ^

Wouldn't be surprised if the Big Ten didn't do anything about it.  They'll want MSU to have the best fighting chance possible to not get blown out so the conference doesn't look so top heavy. It looks bad if Wisconsin is far and away the best team and can't crack the top 5.

Sckon

October 17th, 2011 at 7:07 PM ^

MSU is an interesting spot if they do not suspend him. 1. If the Big Ten also does not suspened him, then MSU would think they are justified. 2. If he is suspended, then they have egg on their face, and in my mind, should have to explain why they did not personally suspend him.

 

I am curious to see the timetable on their decision.

Logan88

October 17th, 2011 at 7:04 PM ^

Two games IMO. One game for trying to break Taylor Lewan's arm and a second game for trying to break Denard Robinson's neck.

I usually try to stay away from calling out coaches but Mark Dantonio is a scumbag. It is patently clear that he wants his players to do sh*t like this on the field, especially against Michigan. He is a carbon copy of his mentor (and tragic hero) St. Jim Tressel: a blatant hypocrite who covers himself in a facade of righteousness (giving genuine religious people a bad rep) while exhibiting a win-at-all costs mentality and a complete disregard for the proper spirit of amateur athletics.

Yeoman

October 17th, 2011 at 7:41 PM ^

"Robert's conduct was totally unacceptable and has no place in collegiate athletics."--Jim Tressel commenting on Reynolds-Sorgi

"I think it was a cleanly played football game. A hard-hitting football game."--Dantonio in the aftermath of Gholston's neck twist

For all his many faults and his obvious hypocrisy, Jim Tressel never (as far as I'm aware) sent his players onto the field with instructions to injure opponents or commit repeated personal fouls in the knowledge that the officials couldn't possibly flag every single play. He may have done damage to the integrity of the game as a fair, amateur competition, but he didn't do so in a way that threatened the safety of the players.

I'll take Tressel over Dantonio/Narduzzi any day of the week.

Logan88

October 17th, 2011 at 9:00 PM ^

I would have spent more time discussing the Dantonio v. Tressel stuff but my post was already getting too long.

I was not suggesting that Tressel approved of dirty play (although I still think OSU was trying to injure McGahee in the BCS title game vs. Miami) but that Tressel was a guy who portrayed himself as a beacon of morality when, in fact, he was a win-at-all-costs weasel. His particular sin was not dirty play on the field but, rather, dirty play OFF the field.

BigBlue02

October 17th, 2011 at 9:10 PM ^

That is because Tressel actually respected the rivalry and respected Michigan. He disliked us, but respected us. Dantonio does not. Not only does Dantonio not respect Michigan, he doesn't respect college football.

m1jjb00

October 17th, 2011 at 7:05 PM ^

if Michigan State did anything "more" on Gholston.  Dantonio did take Gholston out for a couple plays after one of those personal fouls.  That's the pattern.  Isn't it after all just a scaled down version of Rucker?  In fact, I'm annoyed over the meme out there that Dantonio is a stand up guy.  Just because you don't smile doesn't make you an old school coach.  Rittenberg isn't as bad as Spielman, but geeze, have a 5-hour drink and wake the heck up.

m1jjb00

October 17th, 2011 at 7:23 PM ^

After reading some further comments and rereading AR's statement, all of the negatives confused me.  (DERP).  For those as slow as me, he's going as far as he possibly can by saying there is a probability that MSU does the wrong thing.