2012 TSUN football news

[buchtelgrad04]

According to Stadium & Main, Gardner will shine at WR and be unguardable.

 

[buxfan4life]

According to Stadium & Main, Gardner will be forced to play at WR and will be knocked out of multiple games layng out for D-tards jump balls.

FIFThem

 

[Dryden]

http://espn.go.com/college-football...rines-dt-ondre-pipkins-hurts-neck-movement-ok

Michigan DT Ondre Pipkins injured

ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- Michigan freshman defensive tackle Ondre Pipkins suffered a neck injury at practice Friday morning and was taken to the University of Michigan Health System for precautionary measures and evaluation.

"He had movement in all of his extremities," coach Brady Hoke said in a statement.

Pipkins, from Kansas City, Mo., last season was rated No. 164 overall, and the No. 16 defensive tackle in the country, by ESPN 300. He was expected to be a contributor as a true freshman for the Wolverines.

Cont'd ...

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

http://espn.go.com/college-football...rines-dt-ondre-pipkins-hurts-neck-movement-ok

Glad to see he's OK movement-wise...neck injuries are some scary shit.

 

[OH10]

According to Stadium & Main, Gardner will shine at WR and be unguardable.

It's a good move for them. What would be really scary is if they moved Denard to slot receiver and actually had a QB who could throw the ball. You could get him into the open field more where he's probably the most dangerous man in college football.

 

[k2onprimetime]

http://espn.go.com/college-football...rines-dt-ondre-pipkins-hurts-neck-movement-ok

Ouch, They really need him too. The depth on their DL was bad before the Wormley injury, now this kid is hurt too? Strobel might have to play no matter what.

 

[ant80]

Ouch, They really need him too. The depth on their DL was bad before the Wormley injury, now this kid is hurt too? Strobel might have to play no matter what.

Don't see how. Didn't he have an ACL tear?

Aniways, I was wondering how the scUM practices were going. Any news on that front? I'm saturated with all the news on tOSU, and I don't visit any scUM forums anymore. Any websites for that similar to the ozone or elevenwarriors for scUM around?

edit: Wormley had the ACL tear. Not Strobel. My bad.

 

[NFBuck]

Don't see how. Didn't he have an ACL tear?

Aniways, I was wondering how the scUM practices were going. Any news on that front? I'm saturated with all the news on tOSU, and I don't visit any scUM forums anymore. Any websites for that similar to the ozone or elevenwarriors for scUM around?

edit: Wormley had the ACL tear. Not Strobel. My bad.

mgoblog

 

[Taosman]

Pipkins injury status could hurt them against Bama even tho that's several weeks away. Neck injuries are very scary and dangerous. Get well young man.

 

[WolverineMike]

Pipkins was back and observing the afternoon practice with no neck brace on. Football or not, I would say that's good news.

 

[Beaver]

The link at the beginning is the second quote in this post

This: ​

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s...8&t=9268785

... is new-news

Conventional wisdom up until just this past weekend has been, 'no way is Fitz playing' ... so these latest whispers imply ​

maybe

some late rethinking ...

However, how it turns out in the end -- is still being decided. If Brady happens to announce something today (12:30 ish presser) ... then that'd mean to me that he made a final decision this morning. If he says he still hasn't made a final decision ... then he really is still thinking about it.​

​

This was posted before the above:
Based on whispers only

Based on whispers only

We've heard whispers (A2 whispers, not internet whispers) on these things below ... so, while not definitive ...

we would not be surprised if Thomas Rawls is dinged up a little ... he was practicing in a flack jacket late in the week afterall, and we're told he didn't really do anything on Saturday ... doesn't mean he's out for Saturday or anything like that

and, in an unrelated matter (honest, the 2 are not related ... they merely happen to appear in the same post here)

we would not be surprised if Fitz Toussaint did play, at least some, on Saturday ... (it's not definitive that he'll play yet tho ... Hoke would have to announce it to be definitive, or Fitz'd have to appear on the field, lol)​

only if you don't trust Hoke's judgement

only if 'image' is more important than the facts of the situation, etc

I trust Hoke to judge the situation on the facts (including how Fitz is responding to punishment) --- and I trust this whether Fitz plays, or doesn't play​

That's how I see it.

ljlawdog wrote: It would be pretty disappointing if Fitz played.​

What facts are those, Tom? That he committed a felony and you only find fault with in-house punishments at rival schools?

yes ... when the fact is, nothing in life is ever as cut-and-dried as some people want it to be

(and a corollary to this is -- in the absence of facts, people make up 'facts' and then make arguments based on them ... that's human nature, we all do it -- it's called speculation based upon speculation)​

BigJes wrote: Some people believe that punishment has to equal mandatory suspension from games.​

There's no speculation about the FACTS, Tom, other than guessing at what Hoke refuses to announce: punishment. There are people wondering whether Hoke will actually punish his season at all.

The subscribers are not all in:

Tom,

What are the "facts" you speak of? Something other than what is publicly reported? Because he was intoxicated and he drove and he got caught. So, it's hard to think of any mitigating facts, and then think of reason why they are not public.​

response:

those are certainly part of the facts (or factors) of the case ... but (as any trial lawyer will tell you), there's aLOT more involved, always ... intent, 'priors', the person's character, and a variety of punishment possibilities based on this plethora of factors

And, often, not all factors are made public - whether we as the public like it or not .. in which case it comes down to -- do you trust The Judge?​

No, those are the facts. Your loopholes are reasons you'll make an exception for Fitz to the benefit of your program.
Other's are not all in (there were many other posts expressing disappointment if he plays)

so ... you don't trust Hoke's judgement, you clearly lay that out ... me, I happen to trust it, whatever he decides ... (and I don't see things in black and white: ​

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s...p;stm=125443080

) ... (and, I taught school for 10 years and was a very strict teacher, extremely so in fact ... but, with serious situations, every case is different, you can't borad-brush it ... my IMO)​

Trusting someones judgement is one thing, but to send a clear message to the team that this type of behavior will not be tolerated is another. As much as I would like to see our best players on the field, there has to be a consequences to ones actions. Unfortunately in todays society we have forgotten that. After a person makes a mistake they want to move on as quickly as possible from that mistake without consequences. IMO, its not about what the fans trust or not, its about what type of team and character are you going to have. ​

​

Mocking someone for not putting absolute trust in Hoke, then claiming superiority because you don't think in absolutes. Classic Tom Beaver, right down to the "my IMO"

so is the media 'the decider' on whether we are, or arent, "just like everyone else"???

I reject that notion.
​

williemazehaze wrote: Let's face it, if the kid plays, we will never hear the end of it from our sparty friends/coworkers. We as Michigan fans are proud of our program and tradition we have built. With that comes an expectation that we do things the right way and by the rules. We rag on msu and osu for similar situations because these programs normally are pretty lax on the penalties for kids that get into trouble. Everyone else would let fitz play in this game, I as a Michigan fan don't think he should play, but if he does I want to let it play out and hear why he is allowed to play. I trust Hoke and love that he is our coach, but the days of punishing a player BO style on your own are a thing of the past. The media will kill us this one if he plays, and we will be just like everyone else.​

​

​

No, clearly Michiganders should put unconditional trust in Hoke and still get to define and judge themselves objectively.

​

**Re: Aair16 - agree, and **

and ... remember, these are 'whispers' we hear ... it's quite possible that the final-FINAL decision still hasn't been made

Aair16 wrote: Why is it that the majority of the board is going to be so disapointed if Fitz plays?

Is it because you don't trust Hoke? I've never witnessed a coach who puts the program above himself as much as this man. Me personally, I KNOW that coach Brady Hoke tested Fitz in order to see how he would respond as a teammate and representative of the Michigan program...and I trust that based on how Fitz responded Brady will do the right thing...no matter what that is.

What's most important here IS NOT the image of our program but setting the right example for the players within it. If Fitz did EVERYTHING coach Hoke asked of him and then some and in a way in which caused his teammates to rally around him & push for him to play...you gotta play him! Period or your players will be resentful towards you & Fitz for Burton their chances to beat a team they've given there all to beat.

Who gives a damn abou the perception of the program by outsiders. The only thing that matters is what those inside the program take from this!​

​

Well that certainly doesn't add to the criticism of letting Fitz off too light.

Even a board moderator (volunteer, not staff) had this to say
​

That's fine reasoning and all, except for one point...

I agree with what AAir said about Hoke's allegiances to Michigan, etc ... but at the end of the day "did all Hoke asked him to ... therefore he has to play or it unravels the team's compact with the coach" is a strawman in and of itself. What you then HAVE to come back to is the sufficiency of Hoke's ask. If Fitz plays, then Brady's ask of him was too low, and he has cheated the young men on this team in setting the bar there.

It does NOT matter that Brady tried to drink every beer in Muncie, IN at the same age. It doesn't -- he's the head coach at the University of Michigan now, and that should not impact his judgment on this. Drunk drivers are either a massive threat to the lives and well-being of other people on the road, or they aren't.

Hoke sends a clear message on that point if Fitz plays. No soft-shoeing around it with 'shades of gray' and 'partial facts.' Did he blow >.08, or didn't he? That is black and white.

Hoke is entitled to his own opinion on this, just like everyone else is ... but the rest of the world is not without standing in the matter in saying this is a huge to-do if we play him.

If Fitz plays, I would not be the least bit upset if MAADD or some such organization called a major protest outside of Michigan Stadium on the game day of its choosing this Fall (maybe when College Game Day is here?) to draw as much national attention as possible to the issue. We would have made that bed for ourselves. JMO....
​

more quality rebuttals from the GBW populace​

Re: ljlawdog - IMO

Given the recent history of DUIs, I'm not sure what is needed to send the message, not only to Fitz, but to the entire team. Stonum was suspended for a year, and that didn't even work. Given the recent history, I'd err on the side of something more severe than less.

Tom mentions hundreds of facts that Coach Hoke is considering. But it's hard to think there are more pressing facts than the facts we already know. Sometimes when you have too much to consider, it gets difficult to discern the important facts from the unimportant ones.

So far, in my view Hoke has made very good decisions regarding player discipline. I expect that to continue. Bit it's just hard for me to imagine a situation where Fitz plays on Saturday, and I think it was a good decision.
​

So now the decision to play is left to the players and whether they feel their teammate did enough to get back on the field?

Sorry, there's an awful lot of spin going on here. And it's amusing, especially the straw man about trusting Hoke.

We may not know all the facts, but we do know the most important one. Fitz broke the law. And not a minor one. He was caught drunk driving. That's a huge mistake. Period.

You can also have a simple rule for the team - get caught drunk driving, you will miss a game, regardless of the game's importance. That also sends a message and sets an example. No one can afford to make that mistake, because that mistake can end a life.

Love Hoke. Think he has done a masterful job so far. Loved the discipline he has instilled so far. Thought he showed himself to be tough when it came to Stonum. Disagree with him if (if) he chooses to play Fitz.

​

 

[Beaver]

@BFeldmanCBS: RT @kmeinke: Suspended TB Fitz Toussaint listed as starting running back for Alabama game."

 

[buxfan4life]

@BFeldmanCBS: RT @kmeinke: Suspended TB Fitz Toussaint listed as starting running back for Alabama game."

So, you get suspended for games only until you are needed, then miraculously you "have done all it takes" to play in the game(s) you should have sat out.


Great job, Hoke! Way to make a statement!

 

[OH10]

If Fitz plays, Hoke won't be able to suspend anyone for a 1st-time DUI or it will look as if he's making an exception for the starting running back in a big game.

If it were the backup against Central Michigan, I think we all know what would happen here.

 

[jwinslow]

Actually Mr. Beaver, the more notorious news is Frank Clark listed as the back up DE.

Wherever you stand on Fitz, it is a common crime and an equally common light punishment from many coaches.

Robbery on the other hand... Yikes.