Per Chengelis: Darryl Stonum indefinitely suspended

Submitted by JJB2 on May 7th, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Tom shows the following:

 

RT @chengelis Michigan receiver Darryl Stonum has been indefinitely suspended from the football team per Brady Hoke
 

No details on what for.  Hope it's not for long.

Note:

This may go back to when he was arrested in 2008 for impaired driving.  It the past he has not  always fulfilled his probation duties per an article last year from sbnation.com:

 

From May 15, 2009, through June 1, 2010, according to court records, he committed probation violations such as leaving the state without consent, failing to submit to random alcohol testing nine times in a 63-day span, failing to complete additional alcohol testing and failing to report for probation on multiple occasions.

At his June 2 review, according to court documents, 15th District Court Judge Julie Creal sentenced Stonum to enter jail at 1 p.m. June 4 and be released at 7 a.m. June 7.

Comments

OMG Shirtless

May 7th, 2011 at 12:39 PM ^

@chengelis: Hoke left an opening for Stonum -- "if he fulfills all of the commitments to the legal system and our program."  

@chengelis: Hoke: "We will provide the appropriate support and counseling in order for him to learn and grow from this mistake."

http://twitter.com/#!/chengelis/status/66902070086742016

http://twitter.com/#!/chengelis/status/66904376639361024

snowcrash

May 7th, 2011 at 4:09 PM ^

It looks like he left himself some wiggle room with "and our program". He could decide that Stonum won't be reinstated unless he does X, Y, and Z in addition to serving any legal punishment. In that case I hope he makes it clear to Stonum what X, Y, and Z are even if he doesn't make this public. That said, if this is indeed a second serious offense I would not be inclined to give a player a third chance. In any case I hope Stonum can get his act together.

justingoblue

May 7th, 2011 at 12:39 PM ^

If it is his second offense I agree that it's serious. Whether it's serious enough to warrant a dismissal is another question; I don't think I would have a problem if he were allowed to stay with a big time suspension.

Either way, this won't be comparable to Dantonio and his "discipline" system.

GoBlueInNYC

May 7th, 2011 at 1:00 PM ^

It's debatable whether or not this should affect decisions about punishment, but I think it's worth noting that Stonum is a senior. There is no "find somewhere else to play" for him. If he gets booted from the team, his career is done.*

[*Exception being a transfer down to D-II.]

njv5352

May 7th, 2011 at 1:10 PM ^

All the more reason he should know better and keep his nose clean. I don't feel the university owes him a shot at proving he can play at the next level he earns that by doing the right things both on and off the field. If this is his second offense for DUI and with his lack of follow through the last offense he deserves to play DII.

GoBlueInNYC

May 7th, 2011 at 1:39 PM ^

Again, I'd say it is debatable whether Stonum's senior status should matter or not. There was a lot of discussion about Blount's year-long suspension because people said it effectively ended his shot at the pros (and he did in fact go undrafted despite his obvious ability to play at the pro level - though he did get picked up as an UFA), which is a much harsher punishment than the year-long suspension was intended to be.

And it's not about the university "owing" him something. It's about taking into account the unintended consequences of the punishment. If the punishment is meant to end his playing career forever, then that's what it is, but I doubt that would be the intent.

It sounds like I'm arguing that Stonum should be let off easy because he's a senior, but I'm mostly playing devil's advocate. I think his lack of follow-through on his probation is pretty damning, that he doesn't seem to really care or take the situation seriously.

Moralizing aside, I love Stonum, and I really hope this gets resolved in a way that includes both him being punished but still seeing the field (for totally selfish "I just want to see him to play" reasons).

Noleverine

May 7th, 2011 at 12:35 PM ^

So is the consensus opinion this is something new? I hope it's just Hoke saying 'get your shit together, son, and make yourself right for your past offenses.' I hope this isn't something new.

True Blue in CO

May 7th, 2011 at 12:38 PM ^

We need to have a high standard program. If a player messes up then the penalties need to be strong to help discourage others from future mistakes. Stonum is a valuable member of the team but for the long term it is best that he be punished.

JJB2

May 7th, 2011 at 12:39 PM ^

may be failure to live up to his probation responsibilities.  It may be too early to assume it was a second DUI.

Hoke may just want him to get take care of his old mess first.

marti221

May 7th, 2011 at 12:40 PM ^

FWIW @chengelis just tweeted that Hoke will leave a spot for him 2 come back if he "fulfills all of the commitments to the legal system and program"

Bb011

May 7th, 2011 at 12:44 PM ^

Just as much as hurting us at receiver this hurts us at the return game. We've had some problems lately in that area and having a returner that is returning is needed.

GehBlau

May 7th, 2011 at 12:53 PM ^

Common now, we don't even know what he did. The kid is in college, I know I did some stupid shit in college that would have gotten me suspended for a game or two. Give him a break, people make mistakes and he is paying for it as you can see by these tweets. He doesn't need random people he doesn't know making this situation any harder for him.

GOBLUE4EVR

May 7th, 2011 at 12:50 PM ^

guys that i worked with at the stadium is good friends with stonum, and lets just say that he didn't really learn a lot from the first time he got in trouble... there were a few stories of stonum being at a bar and sitting on the bar doing shot after shot after shot...

Kal

May 7th, 2011 at 12:55 PM ^

I could care less how many shots he does, hes in college. He should realize that his full ride scholarship to a prestigiuous university is at stake when he deicdes to DRIVE afterwards.

SysMark

May 7th, 2011 at 1:21 PM ^

Always wondered when and why "couldn't" care less was replaced by "could" in the popular vernacular.  It is obviously completely senseless but must have seemed cool to someone.

I remember back in grade school wondering about the phrase "couldn't care less".  It always seemed to me it implied the speaker was insinuating that they were in fact contemplating caring a lot "more", since they couldn't care "less".  Then again I spent a lot of time lying on my back watching clouds.

GoBlueInNYC

May 7th, 2011 at 4:22 PM ^

Apparently "irregardless" is a lightning rod for hate among English language wonks. The 3rd Ed. of the American Heritage Dictionary has this to say about it:

the label ‘nonstandard’ does not begin to do justice to the status of this word...it has no legitimate antecedents in either standard or nonstandard varieties of English

As with many social blights, it may have originated in Indiana (or at least Indiana is the source of one of the earliest verified uses of it). It has been argued that "irregardless" evolved because of its phonetics. Specifically, the emphasis of "regardless" falls on the middle syllable (i.e., the "-gard-"), as opposed to "irregardless" whose emphasis is on the first syllable (i.e., the "ir-"), making "irregardless" sound more emphatically negative.

Source.

4godkingandwol…

May 7th, 2011 at 1:06 PM ^

... it sounds like the kid MAY have some more serious concerns than just having a couple too many drinks before heading home. 

Irrespective of football, hopefully he can get the support he needs if it is serious.

illinoisblue

May 7th, 2011 at 1:17 PM ^

I'm not sure why people are making this out to be more than it is when there is NO proof into what actually he is suspended for... Until we actually no that it is his second offense or just not living up to his responsibilties this kid will be fine. He is one of our best receivers on the team right now. Like it was said he is our elite deep threat. You can throw gallon and Odoms in there but Gallon is a slot receiver and a returner. I trust that Hoke would not have left a spot for him on the team if it was his 2nd DUI in 4 years. Can't we give him the benefit of doubt until we hear what actually happened?

jamiemac

May 7th, 2011 at 1:27 PM ^

Stonum might be the second most productive Kickoff Returner the program has had since the Howard/Alexander consecutive eras ended. Behind Steve Breaston.

If he is gone, who do we have? Gallon, who was actually good at KOR a year ago, save for two big gaffes: The Penn State muff out of bounds at the 2 and a fumble when plastered by Wisco; Odoms, who has periodically been back there in that spot throughout his three years; Dileo, a lot of folks thought kick returns of some sort would be his ticket to an impact on the field in Ann Arbor, does he get this job fulltime?

Anyone else?

I think we'd be excited about Gallon in this role had he not made key mistakes a year ago. But, it was his first year on the field and with the experience something like the Penn State thing doesnt happen this season. None of the three with experience have shown the explosiveness of Stonum in this role, however.

Magnus

May 7th, 2011 at 1:41 PM ^

Gallon actually looked really good returning kicks (unless he fumbled them).

Boubacar Cissoko also did a pretty good job, but I think he's busy.

I would like to see Dileo and Vincent Smith get a shot back there returning kickoffs.

mackbru

May 7th, 2011 at 1:29 PM ^

Well, Hoke said "legal," "serious" and "counseling." So one could conclude that Stonum either committed another offense or messed up with his probation. Bad either way, though I guess a second offense would likely be the worst of the two.

Let's just say, for argument's sake, that it's one or the other. What's a fair punishment? I say it has to be more than the ol' one-game suspension against a cupcake team. That's how hypocrites like Dantonio would handle it. Thoughts? --

Roy G. Biv

May 7th, 2011 at 1:34 PM ^

I'm not overly concerned about how MSU or OSU handle their in-house problems.  I'm worried about how Michigan handles theirs.  Just my opinion, which could be wrong, but it seems to me Stonum has had multiple chances and has apparently blown many of them.  I would think a multiple-game suspension is probably in order, if for no other reason than for Hoke to demonstrate to the rest of the team how transgressions will be handled.  I don't want to be unfairly hard on Stonum because I don't know all the details, but from the outside looking in it appears some strong discipline is in order.

MMBbones

May 7th, 2011 at 1:36 PM ^

Unfortunately, Angelique works for the News and not the Freep, so there's no point wondering whether or not the story is even true.

Hope Stonum finally gets the wake-up call this time.

Pdeaner

May 7th, 2011 at 1:37 PM ^

I believe that a DUI is a misdemeanor, but two in five years is a felony.  Could this have something to do with the harshness of the penalty?

MichiganMan2424

May 7th, 2011 at 1:42 PM ^

It would be best for both us and him. He obviously doesn't have his life straight right now if it involves the legal system a second time, so the best way for him to do that is get away from football. As a fan, I don't care how good he is, he needs to go. Why keep him around if he's going to be such a headache for the team, especially when he's a senior? Let him go and get his life straight, and let an underclassmen step in atry to fill the whole and develop. I don't want someone who's dumb enough to get into two major incidents with the law when he's going to one of the greatest universities, academically and athletically, representing us.

I commend Hoke for how he's handleing this though. If this was his second violation under Hoke, I'd say no questions he's gone. But the first one was under RR, so Hoke is probably doing his due diligence, seeing what the kids is like, and seeing if he can help him better than RR did.