I have heard nothing to back this up at all. In fact, they've mentioned hopkins few times during those preview shows on the BTN, FSN and inside Michigan football that would lead me to believe we'll see him play in situational downs.
Stephen Hopkins - Suspended for WMU?
Boards a while back, for what it's worth.
Everything I've heard...he's the short yardage back and the running FB.
How dare you talk about rumors. Who are you? Mike Rosenberg? Mark Snyder?
And this is what we might call an exercise in rumor-killing. Naturally, I hope the rumor is untrue. I am not unbiased. I don't wish to spread rumors that would hurt Hopkins' reputation. I would very much like to kill a false rumor about him. But I am not sure at this time.
Remember, its only true if you choose to believe it. I choose not to believe it, so its not true!
with my wife. Erm, that discussion did not end well.
just someone who seemed to know what he was talking about. Maybe people should pay more attention in the future!
I don't understand how you leapt to this conclusion?
because various outlets were reporting that he would be serving a one game suspension about two weeks ago, and now there is no mention of it
he was making a joke on the title of a feature on this website. His spelling of veracity, a word describing truthfulness was correct. I don't believe he was unsure about his hunger.
you people need to look up the reason the feature on this site has the name it does.
Where is this coming from?
It was "reported" on the Board and elsewhere back when Hagerup's suspension was reported. I remember reading it as well.
Oh OK, seems to me though that if it had any merit, more would have come out by now, especially player discipline type stuff.
Other sites have mentioned Hopkins is in the newly built doghouse multiple times during fall camp. Our buddy Ace Williams also threw out (pronounced: "Made Up") some very specific details about a suspension and the reason, which has never been verified.
It seems the coaching staff doesn't like to talk about internal things like who's banged up and who's being disciplined, so I doubt we'll ever know. They had to mention Hagerup because they couldn't hide him not punting for 4 games without getting a ton of questions. Hopkins though, if he doesn't see time during Western they can just say "Shaw, Smith, and Fitz were ahead of him" and end the discussion. So if he plays, it's proof he wasn't suspended. If he doesn't...?
I actually think your logic is very...um, logically. However, then I thought about Terrence Robinson. Why announce that suspension, when it too could just as easily be hidden. Perhaps the details surrounding Robinson's suspension were more public and therefore, a public mentioned had to be made?
He's not suspended, he isn't being talked about because we have 3 other backs that are apparently playing better than him..
I'm unconcerned with how Hopkins is playing right now. I presume he's doing fine.
I'm unconcerned with the substance of any news, or any rumors, about Stephen Hopkins. I know of absolutely nothing that casts him personally in a bad light. I presume he's doing just fine.
This has a lot to do with reporting of rumors and another, unrelated story. Hopkins is purely the unfortunate object in this case.
Section 1= Drew Sharp?
That Section 1 and Drew Sharp want nothing to do with each other, and that the feeling is very much mutual.
And all this is probably the total opposite of what is lurking in the dark corners of your mind.
Get all your up-to-the-minute, right from the source, rumor verifying information from tRCBM and 247sparty (that's 24months to 7 years, if you didn't know).
They had a thread on Hopkins a while ago. One of those "a friend who knows this guy" thread. You can find out the "real" story over there. Of course, you have to sift through the "Suggestions on a new Mower", "Would you eat lab grown meat", "foosball", and a littany of other important topics that MUSTbe discussed 4 days before opening kick-off.
Dont forget "Ever banged a chick who was blackout drunk?," "cHoke is a fat ass," and "Best couch burning accelerants."
A thread should really be started on this topic, there are just far too many hilarious possibilities. It would also serve to replicate the dearth of intellectual discourse occurring on RCMB and allow us all to avoid perusing it in the future.
Here's one place that the rumor was brought up, by someone who doesn't appear to be an idiot:
I just meant that he wasn't repeating a rumor that was floated by some idiot that has no reputation for reasonableness on the board.
I don't think Section 1 is an idiot. I think his obsessive, incessant Free Press-related drumbeat is irritating, but he strikes me as an intelligent dude with an unhealthy man-crush on Rich Rodriguez.
There are a lot of us around here who have unhealthy man-crushes on RR and despise the Freep. That doesn't change the fact that this post was inappropriate.
I doubt anyone would be freaking out like this if it was someone other than Section 1 that posted it.
It ordinarily doesn't end well.
Anyway, now that I see people negging me at every possible opportunity, it probably needs to be said, for the third or fourth time, that I am not reporting that Stephen Hopkins is suspended. I am asking whether that rumor, started by others and spread in the first instance on this board by people other than me, is even true.
I see no evidence, so far, that it is true. Sometimes, suspensions are not announced until the Wednesday or Thrusday before a game. (Sometimes - ahem - the Conference doesn't even decide if people are suspended until Wednesday, but that is another Boilermade-story.)
Who knows; raising the issue now, might prompt some statement from the team, or it might prompt a question to be put to Hoke later today.
It appears from this thread that you have some work to do in building up your "goodwill" here on the Board (i.e. your "intangible but quantifiable 'prudent value' of an ongoing business"). Just hang in there and weather the storm.
who i've noted often just regurgitates premium info from other boards likely ran with the Ace Williams C&P that also claimed Oregon and Michigan would be implicated in Pryor recruitment. it also garnered two responses, one in mockery. it did not require a thread to 'demand answers' that validate Section 1's constant demand for THE WHOLE TRUTH
Look, I'm not saying I was coming to the site to post this exact thing when Section 1 took the words out of my mouth. Of course this was unnecessary, but I think it's just not that big of a deal. 80% of what gets posted on the board is unnecessary.
People were jumping down his throat like he was pulling this out of his ass. I thought it relevant to note he was pulling it out of someone else's ass.
anybody else posts this and nothing comes of it. instead, the Truth Fighter who hates anything resembling a rumor posts an item he KNOWS to be untrue and redundant in order to play an endaround game of 'outting' people who claimed it to be true. it's passive aggressive bullshit from someone who obviously believes they are smarter and more in tune with 'the truth and reality' than the rest of us.
Whoah, man. You got all of that from S1's posts in this thread? I intepreted the OP and thread to be saying "hey, this was thrown out there, floating around...haven't heard anything about it in awhile; it's not true, right?"
I think you're imputing scienter that doesn't exist. Or, isn't based on anything in this thread, but your (I presume) unbridled hatred of S1 as a poster.
Yes, because this thread does infact happen to be in a skew universe, unrelated to everything we've had thrown at us before on "rumor mongering."
he said. even the smarter than everybody portion
Honestly, this response adds nothing to the conversation. We've already established that several "reports" identified Hopkins as being suspended. The point of this thread was to debunk those "reports" so that it was clear that Hopkins is, in fact, not suspended. So far, I'm still not sure if that is apparent or not. Your response was not helpful in reaching the conclusion.
the point is that the reports have yet to be substantiated so they should be allowed to sink back into the shadows rather than regurgitated as fact. posts like this lend credibility to the notion UM isn't forthcoming about some of their suspensions - it's a lose lose because the OP does not have the patience to wait 3 days.
I hear you, but the opposing viewpoint is that, at some point, rumors appear to be "substantiated" by the sheer volume of reports, notwithstanding the fact that the best source (the program itself) has not weighed in or even hinted at confirming/debunking the rumor that is circulating. I'm not saying that they have to debunk rumors - definitely not saying that. But I think Section 1 was justified in at least asking the question, at least justified to the extent that others felt the information would be useful. As such, the harsh responses were unnecessary and unhelpful. That is how I see it, anyway.
[EDIT: Neg me if you want, but at least use the proper drop-down choice - this post is clearly not "off-topic" in any way, shape, or form.]
the only thing i've seen on this board was the original question, where nobody had a source and it was likely based on a RCMB posting that day, and this. there wasn't a post yesterday, or the day before, or any time recently AFAIK. for anyone coming in blind, this would be the ONLY reference point. Section 1 is trying to be clever and is instead redeploying the same stupid shit he rails against. there is no sheer volume to the reports - the original wave came out, the fake 'backers' claimed it was true to show they were Insiders, and then nothing came out. at all. Section 1 is trying to act like the most clever kid in school and instead is ending up at prom with his mom. it's getting tired and is literally getting to the point of trolling.
I guess I'm one of the dumb ones that actually believed the rumor posted a few weeks back to be more than just a rumor. I assumed that Hopkins was unavailable for the game this weekend due to suspension. What I learned: The Board is not as reliable as I first thought? I didn't want to believe that to be true which is why I appreciated this thread.
was my exact point of why this shit shouldn't be allowed. but also note it wasn't its own Board Topic (until now), which substantiated rumors tend to receive, and that it didn't come from an MGoReliable. it was a passing flit based off of an Ace Williams post. did it out some people who claim to know all? sure. but posts like this only connect the dots between Hopkins - Suspension - Naughty Substances more than, say, not bringing it up. the passive fan will skim and assume a) there was something of merit to it and/or b) it was swept under the rug. this post would have been way more qualified on Monday as a "huh, Hopkins played Saturday. guess you can't believe everything you read - keep that in mind next rumor!" PSA than a "THERE'S A POINT TO MY QUESTION YOU JUST DON'T GET IT" Wednesday post intended to show Section 1 is so intelligent and aware.
All that you say is useful. I tend to put more creedance in the Board than many, probably. If only because there are a lot of things I do not know and this is my go-to source for information. I don't have time to read other publications (and don't want to read the Free Press) so I appreciate the collective information gathering that goes on. I admit that I did not recognize that the rumor was started by Ace Williams. I should probably look at the source more often . . .
...called "getting out in front of the story." And a lot could happen in three days. Think of how much happend in the three days surrounding August 31, two years ago.
We all just might need to have patience for 3 more days. And that might solve things. I really don't know. Personally, I'd like to see somebody ask Hoke today: "Is Stephen Hopkins suspended for this week's game?" And my hope is that Hoke will say, "No, he is not suspended."
is to post on a message board with a ridiculous title. got it. journalism 101, i just 4 pointed ya.
it's like you feel entitled to something. it's genuinely sad.
I mean, certainly a story like that matters to Stephen. And for what it's worth, I and many others have all pointed out that there appears to be no basis for the Hopkins rumor. And I went one step further, saying that I want the rumor to be proven false. I personally think that it would be helpful to Stphen, for Hoke to conclusively shoot it down if it is untrue.
No; the real story that may need to be addressed is page 26 of the February 8 NCAA transcript of the Tressel interview. As reported by one Ace Williams.
Ace Williams told us that "a news story will break before the season starts naming Michigan and Oregon as schools with questionable recruiting practices when pursuing Terrelle Pryor...." And I think that Ace Williams, Terelle Pryor, Jim Tressel and Ted Sarniak are all liars.
I had a feeling I'd regret half-heartedly defending you.
So this whole thread was a contrived platform for pointless posturing about some perceived slight against UM (of course while under Rodriguez) by a member of the quasi-media?
I have to say, even I am amazed at the number of people presuming that I somehow wished to injure Hopkins' reputation; that I was somehow promoting this rumor. It almost doesn't matter what I say; comprehension seems to be impaired beyond understanding. I raised a question -- one simple question -- today, so that just perhaps Hoke can be asked about it in one of his last couple of daily pressers before the season begins.
- I asked whether Hopkins had been suspended. It was a question that had been earlier posed on this Board, without too much of a freakout. Based on a published rumor that I had nothing to do with.
- I did not suggest that Hopkins had been suspended.
- I did not vouch for the rumor; I said that I had checked around myself, and thought it to be unfounded.
- I went further; I said I hoped that it was merely an untrue rumor, and that I knew of no untoward information about Hopkins.
That covers it, as far as my starting this thread goes.
"No; the real story that may need to be addressed is page 26 of the February 8 NCAA transcript of the Tressel interview. As reported by one Ace Williams.
Ace Williams told us that "a news story will break before the season starts naming Michigan and Oregon as schools with questionable recruiting practices when pursuing Terrelle Pryor...." And I think that Ace Williams, Terelle Pryor, Jim Tressel and Ted Sarniak are all liars."
So you don't think the Hopkins story is the "real story"? Or you do? Or is the "real story" some dumb shit about Ace Williams impugning RR's reputation with rumors about recruiting Pryor? And if not, then why are you mentioning it here?
I don't know if Hopkins is suspended. Every indication (mostly subsequent to Ace Williams' report) is that Hopkins is NOT suspended. Nobody would be happier than I would, to have that confirmed. I hope that by the end of today, it is confirmed that Hopkins is not suspended. But I honestly don't know. That's why I asked. It was absolutely not a rhetorical question.
And, I also think that for my own personal purposes, "Hopkins" is not the "real story," for a couple of reasons. One is that even the allegation/rumor about what might have led to any supposed suspension was sort of silly. Certainly not any serious bad news about Hopkins. Two is that Hopkins' unavailabilty for Western does not seem to be a very big deal. A third reason, that I don't anybody else to care too much about, is that an allegation that Michigan may have committed one or more NCAA violations in recruiting Pryor is a VERY big deal. To me, at least. And if that story were to come out in the next two days, I'd like to be able to say, "Ace Williams? He's the guy who lied about a suspension of Hopkins!") Now, it may not be Ace Williams who is behind any such reporting. But he is the only one reporting that story right now.
nobody thinks you're hoping he's suspended. everyone is saying you're an idiot for bringing the notion he might be suspended up because you're merely lending credibility through rememberance.
also it was not published outside of one stupid idiot who makes shit up on a crappy website.
also Tressel never said it was Michigan. you're concluding that based upon the posting of one stupid idiot who makes shit up on a crappy website.
see where you're not a paragon of intelligence and, instead, the dunce?
are for unicorns, not for warriors.
The Free Press would do that. That is, credulously "report" something that had no more basis than a post on RCMB. See, e.g.; MSU 2011 Pro Combat uni designs.
Our standards here on the MGoBoard are higher. This story ('story" is kind of a stretch) did not "start on RCMB."
the guy who hates the publication, or readdress, of rumors just asked people to substantiate a rumor he admitted to have not seen publically discussed.
my mind exploded three times. i'd see it again.
You really don't understand. You are not thinking three plays ahead. That will be later. Maybe. I really don't know yet.
Anyway, isn't it pretty explicit? I am not hoping to "substantiate a rumor." I am, frankly, hoping to destroy a rumor. One that was published elsewhere, and which was posted on this Board previously, not by me. Can you suppose why?
Some of you guys really disappoint me.
that was already dead via silence and a Borges interview on the front page. got it. very timely effort there Section 1.
You are equating "dead silence" with "Hopkins not suspended."
I would equate "Brady Hoke says Hopkins not suspended" with "Hopkins not suspended."
you do not understand how horribly backwards that concept is and how it flies in the face of the very journalistic and program integrity you demand.
by responding to rumors on the internet started on fucking chat sports, not SI.com, not espn.com, fucking ACE WILLIAMS, Hoke shows the program is run by reactionaries and is at the mercy of the press. UM barely uttered a whimper when the Forcier transfer was rumored and that was by a reputable institution (not the vocalizer, however). you're talking out of both sides of your mouth: I demand Michigan hold itself above the rumors and offbeat crap that publications throw out but i demand the silence be broken on this topic because 5-6 people posted it on MGoBoard. Good God dude.
First, I do not expect that the Michigan Athletic Department would issue a press release to combat something from Ace Williams and "Chat Sports." We agree.
Second, I do expect that once the question had been raised in that manner, that in the course of one of his fall camp pressers, Hoke would be asked about it by somebody in the Michigan-beat press corps.
I timed how long it would take for someone to ask this: "Q. - Coach, is Stephen Hopkins suspended? A. - No." It would take about 4.5 seconds.
You are essentially talking out of both sides of your mouth, as another poster indicated. You've regurgutated a rumor that had no legs to begin with (Beavis'd), and now you think that because its been mentioned more than once on the intertronz, its deserving of mention by the coaching staff, despite complete lack of notice, mention or acknoweldegement from any legitimate journalistic source...but you're also trying to say that because its an intrawebs rumor, its not deserving of mention by coaches... *until* they've been asked by a journalist, who in your mind, should feel it his or her journalistic duty to mention an intrawebs rumor...
you just don't get it. Section 1 is light years ahead of us on the logic trail.
That was written on a message board. Someone should pick that up and ask him, just so we can get an official answer stating that no, in fact, he is not beating his wife. (Though by all the insinuation of "maybe the department is just covering it up", maybe the wording should be "Hoke, when did you stop beating your wife?")
finding out if Hoke answers no to the wife beating would prove the other allegation within the same post, that Rich Rodriguez never brushes his teeth, was inherently untrue.
To make any West Virginia and teeth jokes.
come to think of it, Section 1 kind of reminds me of him
response showed up under a comment I wasn't trying to respond to...attempting to replace.
you've gotta be the only person I've ever seen try to kill an internet rumor by starting a message board thread about said rumor.
and even more entertaining is you think its everyone else who is the problem.
You are a douche. If he was suspended coach Hoke would let us know. I don't appreciate your post. I think you should be suspended for two games for your post.
Knock it off with the personal attack. It may be that he is, in fact, a d--che. If not, there is no reason to start such a rumor on this Board. If anything, it may result in a new thread a few weeks from now asking whether the rumor of Section 1's d--chiness has been confirmed or not.
So the rumor can be put to rest?
after doing many searches... there has been no concrete information stating that Hopkins is being suspended.
The only snippet of information has been a guy asking about Hopkins being suspended cause he/she "heard something". Another member even asked for a link or proof and nothing was provided.
Section 1, I understand what you're asking, but there has been nothing to substantiate this rumor so we can only assume it's just that, a rumor.
So, of course, I too had done a search. And like you, I found nothing authoritative. Your finding reassures me that I did not overlook anything.
And like you, the conclusion I was left with, was that it was and is just a rumor. And yet, there is nothing that says that Hoke cannot announce a suspension any time he chooses, including Friday night right after Clam Chowder.
Anyway, it is customary (if that is the right word) to announce something like this on a Wednesday or Thursday of game week, and as I have already indicated, I just wanted an authoritative answer to the straight question. If the question has not yet been put to Hoke, now would be the time to do it.
And if the "Stephen Hopkins suspended" rumor as it was begun by someone else is a false one, then hell yeah the venom of this Board ought to be aimed at the guy who started it, and I will be very pleased to have been a part of putting the lie to that guy.
One step at a time. First thing is to determine if Hopkins was ever really suspended.
"So, of course, I too had done a search. And like you, I found nothing authoritative. Your finding reassures me that I did not overlook anything."
Have you been screwed over by Google before?
like I'm caught in a circle of stupid.
Have you tried actually reading what you write, and interpreting it with logic and rationale?
The only reason this is a 'question' weeks after the completely unsubstantiated rumor squeaked out on a message board, is because you dug it up from its grave, and brought it out for the mgoworld to see. it doesn't need to be addressed simply because your powers of reasoning seem less potent than those of the average bear (or wolverine)...
leave the rotting corpse where it lies, and move on.
"I will be very pleased to have been a part of putting the lie to that guy."
What part would you have in it? He would have been a liar all the same Saturday night had you not posted this. You're so desparate to be a truth-seeker and hero of the board you don't see how ridiculous you're being. This is an outright joke to think you're playing some great part in this story - let me guess, you're the martyr?
This link claims that hopkins is suspended by the team for Western for testing positive for painkillers.
i swear to god if this is an attempt by Section 1 to prove himself a more veritable source than Ace Williams and claim he put the dagger in AW despite, you know, being beat to that punch by several weeks, he'll have lost what little support he even has right now
since you came on here and announced he was in the dog house and suspended a game...
One way to get questions answered is to ask them.
It is of course your right as a free-thinking American under our great Constiution, to dismiss Ace Williams as a "loser."
It is another thing, to be able to say something like this; "On August 16, 2011, Ace Williams reported, as a 'confimed rumor,' that Hopkins was to be suspended for the first game of the season. Brady Hoke has been asked about that, and has refuted the story. Hopkins is not suspended."
I prefer the latter method. The latter method would have the additional benefit of eliminating any confusion about some sort of
double-secret probation "silent" suspension, that you seem to suspect.
even the most amateur beat-writers try to find legitimate substance to rumors before they put public questions to coaches in front of a room full of their peers...and there are about a half-dozen beat-writers who *get paid* to cover the wolverines...yet none of them has seemed to find this 'rumor' substantive enough to question the coaching staff about it in the last two+ weeks...maybe it's because there's nothing to it?
let it go. you're doing more damage by bringing this crap up and insisting it be addressed than the original rumor monger did in stating it.
Even if he is "silently suspended", why do we need to know? Why is it that we have to know EVERY DAMN THING that a program does? Let them handle it. I trust the coaches. The media, and frankly us fans, don't need to know everything. The truth is coaches probably do this sort of thing ALL. THE. TIME. without us ever knowing (unless it's an obvious high-profile player). And that's fine. It's the way it should be. Maybe they're trying to protect Hopkins' image. He's a freaking college student...they make dumb mistakes all the time. Let the program discipline him in the way it sees fit, if it's necessary (ASSUMING the RUMOR is correct in any way. Which is a hefty assumption in itself). No need to bring him down by parading about it to the media if you can help it.
See, I still don't know what to believe! Luckily it doesn't matter anyway since Hopkins was not likely to see much action on Saturday. But still, the unresolved matter remains . . .
"Reserve RB Stephen Hopkins will be suspended for the home opener after testing positive for prescriptionpainkillers that he was not prescribed. This is his 1st offense of this nature and he has gotten a good “chew out” from the M coaches. This has placed him in the ‘doghouse’ and will certainly effect the amount of playing time he receives in the early going."
Okay everyone just hang in there. Take a few more prozacs and a long nap and the season will start momentarily.
Until it's been tweeted by some questionable source, it didn't happen.
(I'm certainly not doing the /s thing. If you don't understand the sarcasm, then I failed.)
why don't we have a tag for rumors? like Rumor Maybe Could Be true?, abbreviated RCMBt:
or RMCBt.....if you switch the c and m it looks like sparty's message board.
we both failed there, didn't we?
If Hopkins is suspended, we'd know about it. Hoke has been very clear re other suspensions. So I doubt he'd make an exception here. Making this sort of thing public is part of the punishment.
Junior Vincent Smith and sophomore Stephen Hopkins could receive occasional carries, but Borges said Shaw and Toussaint will be his primary ballcarriers to begin the season..."
aa.com article today
OT. Have we ever gotten to the bottom of who was behind those damn billboards on I94? The unrelenting anxiety I've felt over that little piece of tom foolery is driving me bananas
Ask Brian Cook. I think he wrote about it.
The sparties were behind the billboards
Brian clearly didn't act alone, I saw you on the grassy knoll Section 1
The point being, I think that Brian Cook and I agree on about 98% of our On-Topic content on MGoBlog. And it is his blog. The I-94 billboard was one such affair. When I got ridiculed for posting an idea, that turned out to be true. I think that Brian and I mostly agreed on the content, the relevance and the merit of that story.
"Dear Brian, I feel like I can call you 'Brian' because you and me are so much alike. I would love to meet you some day. It would be great to have a livechat. I know I can't write as fast as you, but I think you would be impressed with my veracity. I love your hair. You post fast. Did you have a good relationship with your father? Me, neither. These are all things we can talk about and more. I know you have not been getting my letters because I know you would write back if you did. And I hope you write back this time and we get to be good friends. I am sure our relationship would be a MGoBlast."
This was the post of the year.
where Section 1 was actually me posting under another account when I was asleep a la Fight Club and that the beratement I posed at him was actually at me and that I would end up unleashing a virus bomb on MGoBlog and all other sports blogs to force the industry to start over from zero. You know... "I am Jacks' uncontrolled rage towards all things Free Press. I kill Jack" type of stuff.
However I have confirmed with co-workers I have been awake all afternoon. As such, that's a HUGE weight off of my shoulders. Wheeeeew!
Post of the year.
It is weird considering that it seems like he'd be a somewhat good fit for a power style offense.... a big brusing back who has the ability to run a little..... maybe even a fullback, who also could run the ball.... yet it appears like he's not going to get the ball much....
Everyday is one day closer to Section 1 going batshit crazy, shooting Rosenberg, going to prison, getting jail sexed by a guy name Bubba and leaving us all in peace