October 26th, 2011 at 7:07 PM ^

I honestly don't care about this shit anymore.  This issue is so over and thank god the longest and worst timed-bye week that I remember is coming to a close.


October 26th, 2011 at 7:54 PM ^

GTFO. Mind showing me something as bad as the punch or the helmet twist that a Michigan player should have been suspended for? Didn't think so.

Also, if you are a Michigan fan because you went to both schools, you wouldn't have said "of course Michigan fans don't acknowledge the truth..." You would have said "of course we don't acknowledge the truth..." As I said, get the fuck out Spartan. We don't really care what you have to say.


October 26th, 2011 at 7:50 PM ^

Clearly you're a fan of both teams, you've been pretty unbiased your entire tenure here. 

You realize there's a difference between a cheap shot and a blatant punch to the face/throat, right?  Guys getting chippy after the whistle or under the pile is usually allowed, no matter the team.  I haven't seen anything yet of an M player doing anything that would warrant such whining.  If you find it, you're welcome to embed the video on this thread.


October 26th, 2011 at 8:00 PM ^

what I'm saying is that if the punch is the main issue for the B1G than one suspension shouln't have been all that came from that game. You all saw them game, you know that shots were taken on both sides during the course of play. In fact that was the very reason the ref gave for throwing the flag only and not also throwing Gholston from the game was that from his vantage, the punch occured in the normal course of play.


Again, of course he should've been tossed for the twist, nobody disputes that.


October 26th, 2011 at 8:11 PM ^

When you say "shots" were taken on both sides, do you mean rougher-than-average blocking near the play or punches to the face 20 yards away from it? If it's the latter, I do not believe there were shots taken on both sides. Unless you mean Gholston giving shots on the left and right side of the field.

And if you think that Michigan is so awesome and superior that they get preferential treatment from the league, then you probably should have considered that before you decided to be a State fan. /high road


October 27th, 2011 at 1:45 AM ^

Sup little bro - and I say that with the utmost love.  Posts like these prove why you and your school will always consider themselves little brother - regardless of your team's success, you are STILL trolling on a Michigan blog. After a bye week, nonetheless. 

Look, I respect sibling rivalries as much as the next guy, but there's a time where you just give up. For starters, you beat us, congrats. On top of that, your team just beat Wisconsin.. but rather than enjoying that W, you choose to visit the most popular Michigan fansite known to man. There are various reasons as to why this happens, but as a whole, we'll call this "little brother syndrome." 

At the end of the day, we own you, and you can take your three RR wins and this year.  To say MSU > UM is like saying Oklahoma State > Oklahoma, or A&M and Tech > Texas - it is only true in your eyes, and noone else even acknowledges you.  Enjoy your season, and I'm sure we'll enjoy ours. Now please get back to "Packaging", or whatever it is MSU specializes in. I ordered my size 12s about 10 days ago.


October 27th, 2011 at 11:17 AM ^

And yet, at the end of the day, it's still 28-14. How this translates to "owning us" doesn't really make sense. And to forestall your "LOLZ ALL TIME RECORD" argument (because wins in 1901 have a lot of significance in 2011 anyway, just ask the Boers), you already implied that the last three wins didn't count because you were "down". Well, MSU was "down" for the first forty years of our existence, yet you still cling to those wins because they're the only thing keeping you sane these days. You can have one, but not the other. Either all the "down" wins count, or none of them do.

We can enjoy the win over Wisconsin and call you out for being arrogant hypocrites. Pride in a football team is not a zero-sum game; it's not like I run out of "Spartan Pride Points" by using them all on mgoblog rather than Bucky's 5th Quarter. You state that "no one else even acknowledges you" somewhere in there (let's just ignore MSU being a top ten team, coming off a Big Ten Championship) to try and salvage some sort of point from your incoherent rambling. Yet lost in that drivel is the fact that you don't really need to acknowledge us; we're there anyway. We've been beating you with a club four years in a row, and your desperate assurances to one another that "DON'T WORRY, THIS ISN'T REALLY HAPPENING" doesn't change the reality of the situation.

And of course, you close with a blanket statement trying to bring academics into a football discussion. Notwithstanding the fact that MSU's Packaging program creates a lot of jobs, your blanket denunciation of an entire university's academics comes off as a little desperate in light of the context. Many of MSU's programs are superior to Michigan's. Many of Michigan's programs are superior to MSU's. They're both fantastic institutions that provide much needed education in this state. Yet somehow, you feel the need to denigrate our academic qualities in order to validate yours. It's like you cannot tolerate success by anyone else, because it somehow detracts from your own. Pardon me for pointing it out, but doesn't that seem more like the "little brother syndrome" than kicking back and enjoying a victory?



October 26th, 2011 at 9:23 PM ^

just to neg the op. The sparty response link you attached is total garbage. I don't know why I was stupid enough to believe the link was going to be credible or worthwhile in any way. The sparty author refers to 20+ unnamed sources throughtout the text. The sparty author must be the best connected journalist in the country. We are all dumber for clicking this thread and I wish I had 5 minutes back of my life for clicking the link that you've deemed credible.

Michael Scarn

October 26th, 2011 at 7:09 PM ^

Thoughts? Who cares about what some hack Sparty wrote about Jim Delaney suspending Gholston when everyone not associated with MSU knew it was not only the right call, but one you have to make.  Good God I can't wait for Saturday when we can beat Purdue and just move on.  

Section 1

October 26th, 2011 at 10:17 PM ^

I still have a hard time understanding why it was that B.J. Cunningham got away with one of the most blatant offensive pass interferences I've ever seen, which was probably determinative of the final play:  B.J. Cunningham's push in the back of Marcus Cromartie, shoving him out of position (Cromartie was behind Abardaris who jumped but could not reach the descending ball) where Cromartie would have been in perfect position to catch or deflect the ball (Cromartie had been standing directly in front of Cunningham, who shoved him, and it was Cunningham who was hit by the ball, deflecting to Nichol.

It was pure, clear, egregious offensive pass interference, and Cunningham's been flagged for it before.  But sadly this one was missed.  It almost certainly determined the outcome of the play.


The open letter from Hondo to the rest of Spartan Nation is classic Sparty; first step is to blame Michigan.  (I really wish that my three calls to Dalany's office, asking specifically for a multi-game suspension of Gholston and a suspension for Marcus Rush had had some effect.  Sadly, they didn't.  I really wanted to fuck up the Spartans, but it didn't work.  I am as sorry about that as anybody.)

Second step is to claim that Michigan and Ohio State get better treatment.  Naturally, that Sparty assertion is wrong too.  See, e.g.; Mouton, J./Michigan (suspended after punching a Notre Dame player in retaliation after a late hit in the back, on the ground. 


See also, Coleman, K./Ohio State (suspended for a helmet-to-helmet hit).


Hondo doesn't acknowledge the prior suspensions (including Zach Reckman's late hit which was a love-tap compared to Gholston's thuggery); a good lawyer would know that you need to assess the opponent's case-law and distinguish it or argue around it.  Hondo makes no attempt.

Except to blame "Michigan" and "Ohio State" and "money" and presumably "all of the Trilateral Commission in their black helicopters and the Jewish bankers who control it all..."

Thank you, Hondo, you have given me my first good laugh in two weeks.


October 26th, 2011 at 11:31 PM ^

He got away with it because pass interference will never, ever be called in that situation on either team. And both teams know that and play accordingly. It's an accepted part of the hail mary. I haven't heard even Wisconsin fans complaining about offensive pass interference.

If Abardaris times his jump at all, the pass is incomplete regardless.

Section 1

October 27th, 2011 at 12:38 AM ^

It is absolutely unmistakable in the video.  B.J. Cunningham shoves Cromartie to the ground; the ball arrives precisely where Cromartie had been before Cunningham shoved him to his knees.

Here is Cunningham, in another play/another game, doing exactly the same thing, and very properly getting flagged for it:


It is almost the exact same kind of interference that Cunningham does to Marcus Cromartie on the last play versus Wisconsin.  It should have been called.  MSU is as lucky as they are dirty.


October 26th, 2011 at 7:16 PM ^

Yeah I know people are going to be upset about this being posted, but I liked it because reading Gholston's response and he was like fuck you big ten punching people is perfectly acceptable.


October 27th, 2011 at 12:09 AM ^

"Before the release, word spread throughout the B1G that MSU was preparing to fight back against Delany.  What we learned on Tuesday evening at Spartan Nation was that other schools had employees rising to the occasion.  MSU had 37 game video clip incidents involving Lewan, and during the game had pleaded with the officials to do something about the rough play.  They knew LeMonnier’s reasoning for NOT kicking Gholston out, but there was more.  Delany was going to use the punch-suspension rule as the basis for the suspension, but it was not something that had been enforced as an automatic in the past.  According to a source who works within Ohio State football, someone from OSU contacted MSU football to mention specific plays with the same UM OT involvement that underscored his style of play.  According to people who work in Indiana athletics, the same player had grabbed at the testicular region with what they thought was intent to injure one of their players, and that he had stomped on a chest of a Hoosier player after a play.  Both incidents with accompanying video and neither equaled a suspension."

Go ahead, and ignore it.  Your guys are saints, and MSU are thugs and worse.  Read the whole article, or go ahead and stick your head in the sand. 

Section 1

October 27th, 2011 at 12:27 AM ^

Really, if you don't like Taylor Lewan, I suggest that you call Delany and tell him that you think he should be suspended.  Call the office three times in fact.  I know it won't work, because that's exactly what I did, trying to get Gholston suspended for two games and Rush for one game, and it didn't seem to have any effect at all.

So knock yourself out.

As for winning the hearts and minds of the rest of the country, at least on Gohlston, I think we've won.  The video got replayed 1,064,392 times by my count.  And most of those replays drew gasps.

I'd just like it if some of you guys would decide what your position is going to be.  Was the Gohlston 1-game suspension warranted?  Yes or no.  If yes, I'm not quite certain what the bitch is.  If no, then please explain exactly how Jonas Mouton would be suspended and Tom Gohlston would not be suspended, based on their two video sequences.

I gotta say this too; you can put a thought down in type a lot better than shit-for-brains "Hondo" can.  That's thin praise for you, but only because "Hondo" has set the bar so low.  Like, lying in the gutter low.


October 27th, 2011 at 12:27 AM ^

I read the article. Please show me any of the videos that MSU and the rest of the B10 have that warrent suspensions for any Michigan players. I'll wait.

I actually think I am going to come out with a story about how Michigan heard about all of the video tape that everyone had on them so they came up 45 separate incidents where MSU should have been fined and suspended and Delany did NOTHING about it. That's right, Michigan has 74 different incidents where an MSU player should have been suspended and we only got the 1 for Gholston. I think the B10 is trying to protect MSU. I mean, there wasn't a single penalty called against them in the Wisky game. Obvious the B10 is trying to help them get to a BCS bowl.

Section 1

October 27th, 2011 at 8:34 AM ^

There's video; we know what Gholston did.  What Gohlston did was exactly like what Mouton did, that got Mouton suspended.  So I don't understand -- NOBODY understands -- the claim that Gohlston should have escaped suspension.

If you want to claim that there was some uncalled dirtiness on the part of Taylor Lewan, in the MSU game or in some of Michigan's other games, I'd like you to let me know when you are making a disc of all of those videos to send to Delany, beause I'd like to include the no-call Cunningham offensive pass interference, so I can save on FedEx charges.  You won't get Lewan suspended, and I won't get the Wisconsin result overturned but what it is really all about is maintaining our mutual disrespect and hatred, isn't it?

Go Big Red!

Section 1

October 27th, 2011 at 10:51 AM ^

So great; you've got video of Hawthorne giving a ND player a shot at the end of a play.  You want a suspension because you're butt-hurt about about Gohlston?  Go ahead, make Delany's day.  Send him the video.  See how that works for ya.

But if you are complaining about Gohlston's suspension, then you had better explain how Mouton and Reckman would have gotten suspended -- one game each -- and Gohlston would NOT get suspended for essentially committing two suspension-worthy fouls in the same game.

I think the Conference had trouble with Gohlston simply because they had never had a guy who had committed so many suspension-worthy acts in one game.  The Conference could not possibly have been conflicted over suspending Gohlston for one game;  they must have been conflicted over making it a two-game suspension. 

Had I been Delany, faced with the situation in which Dantonio had not suspended Gohlston on his own, and Narduzzi had made a frankly provocative statement, and the video going across the world looked so awful, and with the national press (ESPN, the Wall Street Journal) piling on and making the Conference look bad; I would have suspended Gohlston for TWO games without hesitation.

Please don't come back here again wasting our time, unless you can make a serious argument about not suspending Gohlston, and a meaningful argument that Brandin Hawthourne (not flagged in his game for a harmless swing) SHOULD be suspended based on old video and Marcus Rush (flagged for his unquestionably late-hit personal foul) should NOT be suspended for his injury-causing behavior.


October 27th, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^

My point is simply that the Big Ten clearly does not see punching as an automatic suspension. How am I supposed to debate someone who harasses the conference offices? lol. And no outlet anywhere is talking about what Rush did. That is a lonely cause for one fan to take on. Have you called the NFL for any of the throwdowns that Suh has done to QBs? Until you call for that, you need to relax. You are pioneering a lonely thought.

Section 1

October 27th, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^

And I don't fucking care if no other outlet is talking about suspending Rush.  I am.  And for very good reason.  What Rush did in CFB would have drawn a fine in the NFL.  I base that on nothing more and nothing less than other similar NFL-fine videos.

I'm not a fan of NFL football, and I watched more of Suh at Nebraska than in the NFL, so I don't have much comment on him, other than that he has obviously been fined, and there is a simmering controversy that he has not been punished equally as with other rumored-outlaw defensive linemen and linebackers.  While the NFL can fine players under its collective bargaining agreement, the Big Ten cannot and does not fine players.  All that it can do in terms of personal fouls likely to cause injury is to suspend players and to let that be the message.

Your argument, should you decide to accept it, is that Gohlston did not warrant a suspension.  And based on the cases of Mouton (he retaliated to a hit in the back) and Reckman (he piled on a player in a way that was objectively far less offending than Gohlston's thuggery on Denard), that is an impossible argument to make.

Your non-response makes any real argument sort of frustrating.  But the one thing I like about the controversy continuing is the general notion that it keeps the meta-story of MSU thuggery alive.  You may have won the game, and there's nothing to be done about that now.  But if there can be some net detriment to MSU in terms of image, credibility, etc., then that's a good thing.


October 27th, 2011 at 11:57 AM ^

But the discussion, the imagery, everything HAS died down, dont you see? The only real discussion was whether or not he would be suspended. He was, msu played without him, and now no one is discussing it anymore. The media has completely moved on so there is no (more) damage being done to their image. Its an afterthought. Aside from this thread, even the mgoboard community has moved on as they look ahead to Purdue this weekend and msu to Nebraska. It's over.

Section 1

October 27th, 2011 at 12:26 PM ^

..per this thread.

So blame the Sparty blogosphere.

And I was mildly interested in the Spartan mindset.  I believe in "knowing the enemy."  The argument, such as it was, was vacuous.  Meritless, in terms of any defense of Gohlston or a challenge to his supension.  I wasn't convinced of anything mind-changingly new.  In the end, it was merely a tutorial on Spartan psychopathology.  That is, Spartan fanbase psychopathology.  We still don't know about Will Gholston's particular sociopathology.


October 27th, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^

Not exactly an apples to apples comparison:

1)  Foul occurred while being blocked, right at the whistle, rather than away from the play, after Lewan has disengaged from Gholston.

2)  It was an open-handed shove, rather than a punch.

3)  It should have been flagged as illegal hands to the face, which happens often during blocking.

4)  Tom Gholston's punch was to Lewan's throat, which is one of the least protected areas on a FB player's body.

5)  Gholston had already engaged in multiple attempts to injure Michigan players at the time of the punch.

Rather than be happy that TG only got one game and Rush got none, Sparty is complaining about a decision that no non-Sparty disputes.  Ever heard the phrase "act like you have been there before"?  No?  Neither has the rest of Spartyland.  That is why the little brother tag still follows them.


October 27th, 2011 at 11:19 AM ^

Personally, I think the suspended Gholston for the wrong foul. They should have suspended him for the rest of the season for intentionally twisting Denard Robinson's head by the facemask after making a late hit. That was nothing more than a blatant attempt to injure Denard. And there is no way Spartan Nation is going to come up with 27 clips of Denard twisting someone else s face mask or otherwise acting in an unsportsmanlike manner. In fact after Gholston had tackled Denard several plays later, Denard patted him on the helmet (like he often does after someone has tackled him).

Bottom line: the only reason you all are whining, is because you feel Gholston was provoked by Lewan. Meanwhile there is nary a mention of the nasty unprovoked attempt to take Denard out of the game or worse.

Your obfuscation may work with Spartan Nation, and the B1G front office, but it doesn't with us (or ESPN, or many other sports fans around the nation).

The saddest part of this whole episode is this: MSU could have played clean, like they did against Wisconsin, and you would may have won bigger than you did giving up all those penalty yards. For some reason though, your team takes Coach Dantonio's vitriol against Michigan as a signal to act like thugs, particularly in East Lansing.


October 26th, 2011 at 7:18 PM ^

Gholston: Imma wreck yo ass Tyler
Lewan: It's Taylor (pushes Gholston to ground), suck it Tom
Gholston in a fit of rage: My name is William!!!! (Punches Lewan)


October 26th, 2011 at 7:19 PM ^

I've moved on,why can't they?

But why is it that Sparty only concentrates on that punch thrown?  Isn't it more important when taken into context with the head twist of Denard and the drop-kick-elbow-smash against Lewan?  Especailly the drop-kick-elbow-smash against Lewan... that got no press, whatsover but I consider that more damning than the punch.  That's two very dirty plays and a personal foul punch (I don't consider that dirty, but certainly within the rules of if caught, should be thrown out)


October 26th, 2011 at 7:23 PM ^

The best part is by far the end when the blogger takes the "No comment" to mean "OMG I fear talking to a random blogger off the internet". I'm pretty sure everyone who calls up B1G HQ randomly gets a no comment brush off.

Also there is no excuse for Gholston's punch. In football one of the first things we were taught was if we felt the need to defend ourselves was never make a closed fist. Closed fist = suspension. Period. Guy messes around with your facemask, jerks your head, anything, you strike between the neck and ground with open palms. No punches, no take downs and wrestling moves, no kicking. Clearly the first thing we were taught was not to fight back, however as our coach said there will be that one time were you need to defend yourself or a fellow player from harm. In that case, open handed strike. Your teammates will be along to help you, as will the refs. Just get some separation with a push back. Then back away. Closed fist = suspension.

The whole six pages of justifying Gholston's actions are moot.  The standard in football is open hand is not a huge deal (aside from the possible unsportsmanlike).  A closed fist is a vacation, no appeal.  

Section 1

October 27th, 2011 at 12:27 PM ^

So you agree, that it is pointless to protest Gohlston's one-game suspension (basically the 'minimum sentence' under the circumstances)?

And consequently, that it was pointless for "Hondo" to waste all of that bandwidth on arguing that 'Michigan influence' got Gohlston suspended, and that there is a double standard, and blah blah blah?

And that all of this just boils down to Sparty Nation, butt-hurt over all of their program's bad publicity, wanting some other bad boys to, like, get suspended too?

What a stupid freaking embarassment of an argument.  GTFO.