Fitz "might" be available against Bama

Submitted by Phil Brickma on July 26th, 2012 at 4:49 PM

According to Joe Schad's Twitter feed.

@schadjoe RB Fitz Toussaint is not necessarily going to be suspended for all or some of Bama season-opener; going through discipline now

 

Personally, I don't know how I feel about this. Granted, I'd love for him to be available, but if he is prosecuted for a DUI, I feel he should miss adequate game time. We hold ourselves to higher standards than MSU and the Chris Rucker-gate or ND and the Michael Floyd situation.

Thoughts? Besides possible euphoria imagining Fitz ready to go against Bama?

 

Edit: My apologies to Mr. Rucker.

Comments

beachbum69

July 28th, 2012 at 12:03 PM ^

lol, my e-stalker bringing it strong on the weekend.  

 

NOTHING about that is trolling and it was up for almost two days before you came and removed it.  Go screw yourself. 

Section 1

July 26th, 2012 at 5:57 PM ^

"...Are you basing that line on anything other than Brady Hoke's vague and noncommittal statement at the B1G Media Day?"

Brian Cook could have Tweeted the same thing, I suppose, but Brian is a better reporter.  This is rediculous.  I thought Twitter was down for most of the day.  It's back, I see.  With a vengeance.

Somebody who actually cares about what Joe Schad has to say might want to ask him for the detailed basis for his Tweet. 

[Wow, that is a weird thing to type; a detailed basis for a Tweet, to appraise journalistic accuracy.  It's like asking for a bibliography, for an episode of "Keeping up with the Kardashians."]

Edit. - Does anybody know how to put a question to Joe Schad directly?  Like, 'What exactly do you know, Joe, that wasn't posted earlier in original-transcript form on MGoBlog hours before you sent your cryptic Tweet?'  I don't see any email address for the guy at ESPN.com

This thread is almost instantly going up over 100+ posts for, what... a Tweet, based on... what... a non-decision by Brady Hoke.  And now, with MGoBloggers of all description debating all manner of existential disciplinary issues, all presuming that Toussaint actually is going to play, based on a Tweet from Joe Schad that Toussaint "might" be available for Alabama (a Schad quote, not a Hoke quote) which was in turn based on Brady Hoke's comment that Toussaint was one of two players who was currently indefinitely suspended and no final decision had been made about specific game suspensions yet.  Is this how mass-hysteria illness outbreaks start?

Logan88

July 26th, 2012 at 4:55 PM ^

Nope.  Not a fan of the the Dantonio/Kelly school of non-punitive punishments.

I don't like the possiblity that he might not miss game time. He should miss at least 2 games IMO. I definitely don't want to see winning games (not that I think UM will beat Bama even if Fitz plays the whole game, unfortunately) take precedence over doing the "right thing".

This is Michigian, fergodsakes!

MichiganMan2424

July 26th, 2012 at 4:55 PM ^

If he playsagainst Bama I'd be disappointed. A DUI is serious business and should be treated like it. If he plays, the question would be brought up, and rightfully so, if this were Joe Shmoe, would he have gotten the same treatment or not?

artds

July 26th, 2012 at 4:55 PM ^

I hope he plays but if he's kept out it might be a blessing in disguise, as it probably just increases our chances of winning a conference title since there'd be no risk of him coming out of week 1 with an injury.

bdog073

July 26th, 2012 at 4:56 PM ^

Is an actor who co starred in the Rush Hour series of movies along with the all time classic, Friday! I think you mean Chris L. Rucker who spent 8 days in jail only to fly to Iowa with MSU and play in that game. However, they still got destroyed...

NateVolk

July 26th, 2012 at 4:57 PM ^

Everyone makes good sense right down the line. Let's wait see what Hoke does. There were many who thought he'd let Stonum play in 2011 after his last alcohol crime. He crafted a perfect punishment.

RakeFight

July 26th, 2012 at 5:00 PM ^

I suppose this is one downside to scheduling such a big game as the first game of the season... all of the potential disciplinary actions accumulated over the off season increase the probability of suspended players for an important game.

I think he should be suspended for at least one game no matter who the opponent, but it sure would be easier to swallow if it were UMass or Air Force. 

/hypocrisy

lhglrkwg

July 26th, 2012 at 5:01 PM ^

Honestly I think it might feel a little dirty if we play with Fitz. I trust Hoke to discipline Fitz appropriately but the public expectation is that he should be suspended at least a game (myself included) so I guess it'll feel a bit like we're sacrificing discipline for a W

Frito Bandito

July 26th, 2012 at 5:01 PM ^

I can't get behind this. He has to take responsibility for his actions and Hoke needs to make things clear. Behavior like this will not be tolerated at The University of Michigan.

SC Wolverine

July 26th, 2012 at 5:03 PM ^

One thing we all have to realize is that the details matter.  Were the mitigating or extenuating circumstances?  How does this fit the overall character of the young man?  Are there other punishments that might suitably punish and deter future mistakes of this nature.  I realize that we all want to see UM set a higher standard than the gross pragmatism of some other schools (cough:MSU:cough).  I also realize that a strong example in this case may deter others.  But justice is not done with cookie cutters.  Let's see what Hoke decides to do and the explanation that he gives before we rush to judgment on his decision.

bronxblue

July 26th, 2012 at 5:04 PM ^

I think there is some ambiguity in the situation because, obviously, it is still working its way through the court system.  No coach is going to come out and say 100% that a player is guilty and punished before the actual issue is addressed.  My guess is that he is found guilty, he'll sit for a couple of games.  If Fitz is acquitted or something else materializes that substantively changes the situation, Hoke will probably reevaluate it.  But I'd be amazed if Fitz sees the field against Alabama is the DUI or something similar. sticks

wolverine1987

July 26th, 2012 at 5:06 PM ^

punishment for Fitz. Or alternatively, setting a court date sometime after Bama and before ND, so that Hoke can't pull the trigger. Sorry, it's a bad decision by him but just being honest. Bama will be hard enough with him

STW P. Brabbs

July 26th, 2012 at 5:05 PM ^

I sincerely hope Hoke sits him out for 'Bama, even though that will be an enormous blow to the team (and to Fitz, given the national coverage for that game.) 

Give the idea that punishment is dependent to some degree upon the importance of the player to the team and the schedule, and you're going to encourage future fuck-ups. 

I'll really be disappointed if Hoke compromises on this.

corundum

July 26th, 2012 at 5:12 PM ^

Men representing the University of Michigan should never drive drunk. Just because others do it does not make it acceptable for Fitz. Plus, if you allow him to play, other players might get the notion that they can get caught driving drunk and avoid missing game time, so long as it's their first offense.

Logan88

July 26th, 2012 at 5:14 PM ^

There are a lot of people who have had their lives ruined or completely taken away by drunk drivers. It is a serious crime that is brushed off too much by our society which exalts the "virtues" of alcohol and ignores the negative consequences.

Driving drunk is tantamount to walking around outside with a loaded gun, periodicially closing your eyes, spinning around and then discharging the gun. There is no guarantee that you'll harm someone, but there is still a pretty decent chance that you will.

NOTE: In case you were wondering, NO, I have not driven drunk (I don't consume alcohol at all), so I think I can safely take the moral high ground on this issue.