State Street

December 16th, 2012 at 11:57 AM ^

So we let a convicted felon play almost the entire season...but forbid a senior from playing his final game in the winged helmet against his hometown team?

Gotta figure whatever Floyd did is bad, real bad.  Like felony bad. 

feanor

December 16th, 2012 at 12:06 PM ^

Frank Clark was convicted of a felony during the offseason.  He only missed one game, so the to force a senior to miss his final game in his home state it had to be a relatively severe transgression.

wile_e8

December 16th, 2012 at 12:03 PM ^

So we let a convicted felon play almost the entire season after his suspension...but forbid a senior from playing his final game in the winged helmet against his hometown team?

FTFY. Players get suspended for lots of dumb reasons. That doesn't mean this is necessarily worse than another suspension.

Dailysportseditor

December 16th, 2012 at 12:01 PM ^

I can't figure out why the earlier report was censored:

 

Michigan will be without "key defensive player" in Outback Bowl [Locked]

 

Heard from several that as of now, U-M will be down a key defensive player for the Outback Bowl. Will wait for the program to announce who.

Maybe this is why Norfleet is suddenly playing CB?

Mod edit: The threshold for saying a player is kicked off the team for potentially illegal behavior is higher than unsubstantiated rumors. Speculation that names particular players and/or suggests those players have legal or other serious problems should be kept off the board unless a credible source comes forward to report. If you think you are a credible source, I encourage you to email Brian at the address at the top of the page. JGB.

 
Does anyone have an answer?  Why was there an assumption someone was "kicked off the team for potentially illegal behavior"?

stephenrjking

December 16th, 2012 at 1:59 PM ^

I suggested that it might only be a suspension, but I was in the minority. A lot of people made the leap from "won't play for UM again" (which is the case for any person in his last year of eligibility who misses a bowl game) to "did something that merits getting kicked off the team" (even if they would have had eligibility left) in the absence of any facts. From that point it's a very short leap to wonder if illegal activity is involved. It's a natural mistake to make, but it's still a mistake.

pbmd

December 16th, 2012 at 12:02 PM ^

he is clearly not getting shorter/skinnier since he was an elite high school recruit offered by bama and many others but...

the young man is tiny--short, very thin legged.

can you play in big ten as a db at that size?   i  do not  remember antoine winfield in college but he is thick now.

Flood

December 16th, 2012 at 12:08 PM ^

I saw the thread from last night was locked- should I not post information like that when I hear it? I didn't speculate as to why they were being disciplined, but it was still before the athletic department put out a press release. 

Jon06

December 16th, 2012 at 2:01 PM ^

but all you did was name names with no details. Presumably you heard more than the names, but even if you didn't, you should say that, instead of acting like you have info but only want to tell the internet some of it.

Edit: How is this trolling? The guy still hasn't said anything about how he "knew" before any official statements. Having been associated with the university in several ways over the years, I'm pretty sure students don't just magically know what's happening unless somebody with an actual connection to the team tells them. He just repeated a rumor that could have easily been wrong. Sometimes The_Knowledge is right, too.

M-Wolverine

December 16th, 2012 at 3:45 PM ^

You didn't and still haven't named your sources. So there's no basis to believe you. You don't need to name names, like "Brady Hoke told me at lunch", but a talked with staff, know someone who rooms with x player, work in the department, anything more than "students are saying" elevates it from base rumor to potential new information.

State Street

December 16th, 2012 at 12:15 PM ^

I think it's wrong that the thread got locked as it did.  If people were out of line - that's what we have the moderation system for.  They get negged and greyed out and nobody sees what they have to say.

But it was pretty obvious there was a lot of smoke and where there is there's usually fire.  

blueblueblue

December 16th, 2012 at 12:53 PM ^

Spot on. There is a bad case of MgoEgotism around here - an inflated view of one's importance and influence. Its the internets for crying out loud. Its all about speculation. That's normal. What's not normal is that mods here, perhaps trying to justify or bolster their sense of importance, feel that things said here have some sort of broader influence, and so they must step in, save the day, be heros. Trust me, what is speculated here matters very very little. If at all. I have seen it over and over with different mods, shutting down threads discussing speculative issues that end up being true. Where there is smoke, there is fire about 90% of the time here. 

State Street

December 16th, 2012 at 8:13 PM ^

We saw the same mentality with the Newtown posts went up on Friday.  While OT, it still remains one of the most terrible tragedies of our lifetimes.  And it gets shut down instantly because it might divulge into a policy discussion?  Why does the moderation feature even exist if that's the case?  For a lot of people, discussing a situation like that and how it effects them can even be thearaputic.

Maybe it's just me but I feel like we should trust the members of the board to police themselves in most instances - again that's what the moderation features are for. 

justingoblue

December 16th, 2012 at 12:37 PM ^

Brian is the guy who can verify sources on his site, and I'm not involved with anything like that. Without being able to verify your sources myself (or, frankly, recognizing you or anyone else naming names as someone who has reported a bunch of things correctly before) I felt I had two choices: leave the thread up with a couple different posts like yours and speculation about the cause behind what you and a few others were saying, or locking the thread. Locking it put an end to discussion, but also protected the guys named from speculation getting out of hand until official news broke. Using my judgement about unsourced negative information, I locked the thread.

In the future, I would recommend emailing Brian with any inside information. He has experience with these kinds of things, and he can get it out there with or without your name attached, or give an MGoStamp of approval based on your access/info.