August 31st, 2010 at 12:34 PM ^

No no no, MSU basketball, not Michigan.

Izzo, like Dantonio, is free to give as many second chances as he pleaes with no repercussions from the local media. (No disrespect to Izzo though, just screw Drew Sharp)


August 31st, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^

... depending on the judge it's bad or a nightmare.

Then the Secretary of State gets their pound of flesh ($1K or $2K over two years depending upon your breathalyzer).

Michigan's drunk driving laws are among the most severe in the US.  Unless you are the president of an NFL franchise, that is...


August 31st, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^

Like he said it completely depends on the judge.

I had a friend, first time offender at the age of 30, blew .09.  Right after the limit was lowered from .10 to .08.

Spent the night in jail.

100 Hours community service.

About $5,000 in fines and fees and stuff.

1 year probation license.  Could only drive to work and back.

If you get a judge who's life has been directly effected by a DUI, he's going to throw the book at you.


August 31st, 2010 at 1:01 PM ^

Seems like a good kid.  Has to take his lumps and move on.  Thankfully we won't read anymore about this in the media outlets.


August 31st, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^


Can we please stop acting like underage drinking is a big deal? It's certaintly not newsworthy.

How many people do you honestly know who waited until they were 21 before they drank alcohol? Give me a break.

And .09? Whoopty frickin doo. The legal limit was .10 in Michigan as recently as the 1990s, and still is in many states. We're not exactly talking about dangerous levels of intoxication here.

oriental andrew

August 31st, 2010 at 8:10 PM ^

You did comment that you didn't believe that a BAC of .09 puts anyone in danger, but you put it in the context of legality.  Your argument thus comes off as it's not dangerous b/c the legal limit is .10. 

Also, you never once addressed Gillette's statement explicitly.

Also also, unless you can show empirical evidence that driving with a .09 BAC never poses a danger to others, just stop trying to make the argument.  That you or thousands of other have done it and not gotten caught or hurt anyone does not make it a safe action, regardless of the outcome.  It is inherently risky and carries a much higher probability of a poor outcome than driving sober.


August 31st, 2010 at 7:52 PM ^

I advanced both arguments in my original post, since both issues (underage drinking and drunk driving) are relevant here. I wasn't aware of any rule that requires me to choose to talk about only one.

Of these two issues, you decided focus only on the drunk driving aspect in your response, which is why my response to your response was limited to that issue.

Now please, quit being a douche.


August 31st, 2010 at 2:54 PM ^

I'd rather have a highway filled with people at .09 (.01 over the legal limit and below the legal limit in some states prior to the Feds setting .08 nationally) than a highway filled with people on their cellphones.   

The kid should be smart enough to take a bus or a taxi when drinking underage, but I really doubt he was any more of a threat than some day trader screaming into his Blackberry while driving.   

Edit: I'm not saying DUI is acceptable, but that screaming "OMG he was drunk, he could have killed people!" is a massive overreaction.   People have horrible response times when on the cellphone and on cold medicines, so I have a hard time getting worked over .09.  Some community service, a bit of a fine and move along.   


August 31st, 2010 at 3:55 PM ^

It's not the underage drinking. It is the drinking and driving.

That said however, this is not ski masked gang like attacks on dorms and frat houses, where innocent victims were assaulted (one to the point of brain damage).

So if Izzo comes back with discipline, and Korie accepts responsibility, and still malkes the team, then much like Stonum and before him Grady, I have no problem with it.


August 31st, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^

Regardless of whether you agree with the laws or not, they are still laws and must be followed. Do you think they might have dropped the limit from .10 to .08 because they found that there were a good number of accidents still occurring that were caused by those with a .09 BAC?

I'm guessing you haven't had a family member killed by a drunk driver because otherwise you probably would find it to be newsworthy.


August 31st, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^

As much as I despise all things Sparty, I don't see this as a problem, any more than I saw Kevin Grady being let back into school after a DUI as a problem.  I would, however, like to see the media treat Lucious and Izzo the same way they would treat a Michigan player and his coach arrested for the same thing.



August 31st, 2010 at 2:02 PM ^

all things considered, I will say this:


Izzo != Dantonio.


I have a lot of respect for Izzo and the way he runs his program.  He runs a clean ship, and I can't remember the last time one of his players ran afoul of the law like this.  He doesn't say ridiculous shit like dantonio either.

I'm pretty confident that Izzo will handle the situation properly, and will make sure that Lucious learns a lesson here so as not to repeat this kind of behavior.


August 31st, 2010 at 2:51 PM ^

Izzo runs a clean ship, and I expect this to be handled appropriately.  Still interested, though, to see if there is any residual animosity/uncertainty toward Izzo and his near-move to Cleveland.


August 31st, 2010 at 2:57 PM ^

It will get handled.  Izzo knows what he is doing might be the understatement of the year.  The only time I remember him saying anything dopey was when he tried saying the media was overblowing the fight at the dorm last thanksgiving.  They clearly weren't and soft peddled it. Especially the columnists. 

Moral of the story: don't try to venture into the ridiculousness of Dantonio speak and pose; and you'll have no problems.