If ______ Played Davis's Schedule

[kalm]

Lance brought up a great question in this week's FCS Wedge Podcast Review Show intro. How many teams in all of FCS would do better than 5-5 if they had played Davis's schedule so far?

https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmxvZ3RhbGtyYWRpby5jb20vdGhl LWZjcy13ZWRnZS9wb2RjYXN0&episode=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ibG9ndGFsa3JhZGlvLmNvbS90aG UtZmNzLXdlZGdlLzIwMTkvMTEvMTIvMjAxOS0xMTEzLS13azEx LXJldmlldw%3D%3D

[maine612]

Since they lost to #17 Montana, I will go with 16.

612

[Professor Chaos]

Depends on how tough you view a game at UND to be. 3 pretty decent teams (including UC Davis) have lost at UND but all 3 had chances to win. The 5 wins that Davis has gotten I'd say the majority of top 25 teams should/could get also. There's probably only 5 or so FCS teams in the country that would be better than 6-4 with their schedule but how many could get to 6-4? I'd say you could make the argument for 10-15 more.

[uofmman1122]

Maybe only a handful. 4 or 5 at the very most, perhaps. They should have beat UND, but made stupid mistakes to get out of field goal range.

[BisonTru]

10

[F'N Hawks]

Maybe only a handful. 4 or 5 at the very most, perhaps. They should have beat UND, but made stupid mistakes to get out of field goal range.

"should've beat UND". Rinse, repeat....

[Professor Chaos]

Maybe only a handful. 4 or 5 at the very most, perhaps. They should have beat UND, but made stupid mistakes to get out of field goal range.
Really? You think only 4 or 5 FCS teams at most would pick up wins @San Diego, vs Lehigh, @UND, vs Cal Poly, @SUU, and @PSU?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Really? You think only 4 or 5 FCS teams at most would pick up wins @San Diego, vs Lehigh, @UND, vs Cal Poly, @SUU, and @PSU?


But kalm said "do better than 5-5" so I think the effort is to show how many teams come up 6, 7, or more wins out of the schedule and that is pretty tough. Getting the 5 is not overly tough for a lot of T20 teams I would think.

[Reign of Terrier]

I don't know, about 70 teams in this subdivision are just bad.

[Professor Chaos]

But kalm said "do better than 5-5" so I think the effort is to show how many teams come up 6, 7, or more wins out of the schedule and that is pretty tough. Getting the 5 is not overly tough for a lot of T20 teams I would think.
The teams I listed are the ones you'd have to beat to get to 6 wins. Like I said in my first reply getting more than 6 wins out of UC Davis' schedule to date is something very few teams could do but getting to 6 wins with their current schedule at this point wouldn't necessarily require an elite team IMO.

[Reign of Terrier]

There are two theories here. I will call one the Massey Theory, and the other the Execution Theory.

The Massey theory uses the logic of the Massey Ratings: there's a rank order of teams and though some may have more losses than you'd expect, in an abstract sense, given the stats and scores they put up, they are better than other teams (Davis I think is ranked 10th right now in these rankings).

The Execution theory isn't averse to stats, but asserts that executing and winning games is a fundamental part of the game and the inability to win these games is evidence of not being as good as that abstract aggregate ranking. I am a proponent of this theory, obviously.

We can argue about the abstract all day, but we'll never get a clear answer unless they get a bid to the playoffs. But if they get a bid, we'll never know the counterfactual of other well-deserving teams with good cases for the playoffs.

The cost of using the Execution Theory is that you penalize teams that play better teams that don't execute in tougher schedules. The cost of using Massey Theory is that you erect pretty big barriers for teams/conferences with less tough games, which many can't really help. There's no right answer here, what it comes down to is your personal values and what you as an individual want out of the playoffs and assessing good/bad teams beyond just wins and losses.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter though because bubble teams with 4+ losses never win the whole thing or get farther than the semis if they're lucky (I don't think a 5 or 6 loss team ever has), so I'm not investing too much energy in it. If my team doesn't get in with 4 losses, we made that bed ourselves.

[uofmman1122]

Really? You think only 4 or 5 FCS teams at most would pick up wins @San Diego, vs Lehigh, @UND, vs Cal Poly, @SUU, and @PSU?
How many schools would beat Cal, NDSU, Weber State, Montana, or UND @ UND?

I could give you that last one, but that's an FBS, 3 top 5 teams, and an undefeated team @ home who has beaten several top 25 teams. I could be convinced to go as far up as 10, but I'd bet there are several top-10 FCS schools that would struggle playing @UND.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

The teams I listed are the ones you'd have to beat to get to 6 wins. Like I said in my first reply getting more than 6 wins out of UC Davis' schedule to date is something very few teams could do but getting to 6 wins with their current schedule at this point wouldn't necessarily require an elite team IMO.

Yeah, I guess I was thinking it would be a tougher stretch maybe to get that UND win for most of those other 10-15 teams after that 3 week stretch. But at the time it didn't look like they would necessarily lose that road game either...I'd say it was sort of a 50/50 at that point for me. Pretty tough traveling schedule when you are taking it on the chin in that span.

[uofmman1122]

"should've beat UND". Rinse, repeat....
Taking a false start and then a delay of game penalty pushing you out of game-winning field goal range with 31 seconds left sounds like a pretty avoidable, stupid mistake, to me.

[Grizzlies82]

There are two theories here. I will call one the Massey Theory, and the other the Execution Theory.

The Massey theory uses the logic of the Massey Ratings: there's a rank order of teams and though some may have more losses than you'd expect, in an abstract sense, given the stats and scores they put up, they are better than other teams (Davis I think is ranked 10th right now in these rankings).

The Execution theory isn't averse to stats, but asserts that executing and winning games is a fundamental part of the game and the inability to win these games is evidence of not being as good as that abstract aggregate ranking. I am a proponent of this theory, obviously.

We can argue about the abstract all day, but we'll never get a clear answer unless they get a bid to the playoffs. But if they get a bid, we'll never know the counterfactual of other well-deserving teams with good cases for the playoffs.

The cost of using the Execution Theory is that you penalize teams that play better teams that don't execute in tougher schedules. The cost of using Massey Theory is that you erect pretty big barriers for teams/conferences with less tough games, which many can't really help. There's no right answer here, what it comes down to is your personal values and what you as an individual want out of the playoffs and assessing good/bad teams beyond just wins and losses.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter though because bubble teams with 4+ losses never win the whole thing or get farther than the semis if they're lucky (I don't think a 5 or 6 loss team ever has), so I'm not investing too much energy in it. If my team doesn't get in with 4 losses, we made that bed ourselves.


You make reasonable points. Yet there is Kennesaw State "Executing" at what 9-1 this year. They are not a bad team and they're certainly executing. Though this is where Massey (or something else) is needed to quantify that those 9 wins they executed may not be as valuable as somebody else's 7 wins.

I'm not going to argue with you. I too believe that winning the games played is most important, and you can only play those on your schedule. Yet somehow an objective comparison is needed to determine who is in or out. This isn't the first year a team has had 9 or 10 wins yet is not worth one of the eight seeds. It will come up again.

FYI, as to the bubbles never matter... I believe it was JMU several years ago that won the championship after winning ALL their playoff games ON THE ROAD. Can't tell you what they were ranked before the playoffs began, nor their record, but it had to be a relatively poor ranking and record. That was an extremely impressive feat they pulled off. Some day someone else just might repeat it.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

How many schools would beat Cal, NDSU, Weber State, Montana, or UND @ UND?

I could give you that last one, but that's an FBS, 3 top 5 teams, and an undefeated team @ home who has beaten several top 25 teams. I could be convinced to go as far up as 10, but I'd bet there are several top-10 FCS schools that would struggle playing @UND.

This is about where I am at as well.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

You make reasonable points. Yet there is Kennesaw State "Executing" at what 9-1 this year. They are not a bad team and they're certainly executing. Though this is where Massey (or something else) is needed to quantify that those 9 wins they executed may not be as valuable as somebody else's 7 wins.

I'm not going to argue with you. I too believe that winning the games played is most important, and you can only play those on your schedule. Yet somehow an objective comparison is needed to determine who is in or out. This isn't the first year a team has had 9 or 10 wins yet is not worth one of the eight seeds. It will come up again.

FYI, as to the bubbles never matter... I believe it was JMU several years ago that won the championship after winning ALL their playoff games ON THE ROAD. Can't tell you what they were ranked before the playoffs began, nor their record, but it had to be a relatively poor ranking and record. That was an extremely impressive feat they pulled off. Some day someone else just might repeat it.

2004 if I remember correctly on that one.

[Silenoz]

I don't know, about 70 teams in this subdivision are just bad.
Don't you love scrolling through 40 ESPN box scores to find the 7 that matter?

[Reign of Terrier]

You make reasonable points. Yet there is Kennesaw State "Executing" at what 9-1 this year. They are not a bad team and they're certainly executing. Though this is where Massey (or something else) is needed to quantify that those 9 wins they executed may not be as valuable as somebody else's 7 wins.

I'm not going to argue with you. I too believe that winning the games played is most important, and you can only play those on your schedule. Yet somehow an objective comparison is needed to determine who is in or out. This isn't the first year a team has had 9 or 10 wins yet is not worth one of the eight seeds. It will come up again.

FYI, as to the bubbles never matter... I believe it was JMU several years ago that won the championship after winning ALL their playoff games ON THE ROAD. Can't tell you what they were ranked before the playoffs began, nor their record, but it had to be a relatively poor ranking and record. That was an extremely impressive feat they pulled off. Some day someone else just might repeat it.


As I said, there's no one right answer to this. There's lots of shades of gray. With Kennesaw State, on one hand I think we know they are a program that can do stuff in the playoffs and should deserve some deference. On another, there's no excuse to lose you're one big game of the year like that. So there's a strong argument to keep them in leave them out. heck, had they lost to Monmouth by only a touchdown or even two touchdowns, it would be more understandable. But they didn't.

I think it's unfair to both tell teams they have to go undefeated to make the playoffs and to keep out teams that aren't in the top 10 but play a tough schedule and have an impressive win or two. There's no easy answer or universal rule for this one, you just have to weigh each team relative to the bubble.

IMO Massey won't answer that question for you. Massey is probably at its best when it comes to comparing seeds, but it's terrible at clarifying the bubble.

[Reign of Terrier]

Don't you love scrolling through 40 ESPN box scores to find the 7 that matter?

Rookie, I filter by conference!

[Silenoz]

Rookie, I filter by conference!

But I have to see if NDSU won!

Spoiler, they did

[Professor Chaos]

How many schools would beat Cal, NDSU, Weber State, Montana, or UND @ UND?

I could give you that last one, but that's an FBS, 3 top 5 teams, and an undefeated team @ home who has beaten several top 25 teams. I could be convinced to go as far up as 10, but I'd bet there are several top-10 FCS schools that would struggle playing @UND.


Yeah, I guess I was thinking it would be a tougher stretch maybe to get that UND win for most of those other 10-15 teams after that 3 week stretch. But at the time it didn't look like they would necessarily lose that road game either...I'd say it was sort of a 50/50 at that point for me. Pretty tough traveling schedule when you are taking it on the chin in that span.
So I think we're all in agreement that @UND is the swing game there. The 5 wins UC Davis has are easily winnable for a top 25 caliber FCS team and the other 4 losses UC Davis has are games 95% of FCS teams lose.

I don't think UND is as bad as their road losses to EWU and Idaho St indicate but I also don't think they're as good home wins vs SHSU, UC Davis, and Montana St have made them look either. They've had some self-inflicted issues on the road but they've taken advantage of the similar issues from visiting teams when they've been at home. Bottom line is a good team is capable of going to Grand Forks and beating UND and any one of those 3 could've did that had they played cleaner games.

Just off the top of my head I'd take NDSU, JMU, Weber St, Sac St, Montana, UNI, Illinois St, and SDSU go to UND and win. I think you could make arguments for teams like Furman, Dartmouth, Monmouth, Nova, SEMO, Austin Peay, and Central Arkansas. That's 15 teams right there.

[ncspiderfan]

2004 if I remember correctly on that one.
You are corect on the year.

Old Atlantic 10 sent 4 teams and I think all four were 7-1 conference quad champs, and 9-2 overall (excepting Delaware at 8-3).
Did not look for regular season final standings, but googled 2004 fcs playoffs, that was one impressive bracket.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

So I think we're all in agreement that @UND is the swing game there. The 5 wins UC Davis has are easily winnable for a top 25 caliber FCS team and the other 4 losses UC Davis has are games 95% of FCS teams lose.

I don't think UND is as bad as their road losses to EWU and Idaho St indicate but I also don't think they're as good home wins vs SHSU, UC Davis, and Montana St have made them look either. They've had some self-inflicted issues on the road but they've taken advantage of the similar issues from visiting teams when they've been at home. Bottom line is a good team is capable of going to Grand Forks and beating UND and any one of those 3 could've did that had they played cleaner games.

Just off the top of my head I'd take NDSU, JMU, Weber St, Sac St, Montana, UNI, Illinois St, and SDSU go to UND and win. I think you could make arguments for teams like Furman, Dartmouth, Monmouth, Nova, SEMO, Austin Peay, and Central Arkansas. That's 15 teams right there.

I think we do agree on most all of it. The small disagreement might be that even though an argument can be made for 15, I don't believe that argument for about 5 of those I guess but it is not because I can or would make a case against any of them I just think 1/2 would win, the other 1/2 would not...outside of the top 5 or 6.

[ElCid]

2004 if I remember correctly on that one.

You would be correct. Not a bad memory for old guy. Beat Lehigh, Furman, W&M, all at their places, and the Griz in Chattanooga.

[Grizalltheway]

You would be correct. Not a bad memory for old guy. Beat Lehigh, Furman, W&M, all at their places, and the Griz in Chattanooga.
Unfortunately, it's hard to forget the pain of being one game away.

[lucchesicourt]

Well, UCD has yet to play Montana State and Sac State. If they win both games are they a playoff team?

[kalm]

I think we do agree on most all of it. The small disagreement might be that even though an argument can be made for 15, I don't believe that argument for about 5 of those I guess but it is not because I can or would make a case against any of them I just think 1/2 would win, the other 1/2 would not...outside of the top 5 or 6.

It’s not as if UND would go 0-15 and might even pick off a top 5 at home. It’s also not a lock that everyone would go 5-0 with Davis’s wins.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

You would be correct. Not a bad memory for old guy. Beat Lehigh, Furman, W&M, all at their places, and the Griz in Chattanooga.

Yeah, I definitely remember their path that year. Especially remember the thought was W&M were probably gonna be the likely ones to win at that time. JMU had a bruising O line, great team. The safety was a monster too. Damn good running back, WR, hell they were Champs so I don't know why I'm going back over it they were just damn good everywhere.

They were great, the field f'n sucked. But I always loved going to Chattanooga and spending some time there.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Well, UCD has yet to play Montana State and Sac State. If they win both games are they a playoff team?

I would think it would be a strong case that could be made depending on what else goes on of course but those would be at least a couple of top flight wins.

[Professor Chaos]

It’s not as if UND would go 0-15 and might even pick off a top 5 at home. It’s also not a lock that everyone would go 5-0 with Davis’s wins.
That goes both ways... it's also not a lock that everyone goes 0-4 against the elite teams that UC Davis has played.

I think the whole point of this conversation is to pitch UC Davis as a bubble team or a team that should be getting more love from pollsters because of how tough their schedule is. I do think they're a playoff team at 7-5 just because of who they'd have to beat down the stretch and the overall strength of their schedule. I don't think they're top 25 material right now because they've lost to every playoff caliber team they've played to this point. I don't buy the notion that team X ranked 20th wouldn't be any better than 5-5 with UC Davis' schedule so UC Davis should be ranked around 20th as well. You need to prove you belong in the playoffs/top 25 by winning and UC Davis hasn't done enough of that to this point IMO.

That's the risk you take by scheduling a team like NDSU OOC. You're not hurt by that loss but you're also not helped when it comes to comparisons to other teams that have more wins. The reward is if they pick off NDSU then they're in the conversation for a high seed.

[RabidRabbit]

Weber St struggled to win vs UND at Weber St. Other than the NDSU dismantling of UND to start the year, UND is a borderline play-off team.

[Professor Chaos]

Weber St struggled to win vs UND at Weber St. Other than the NDSU dismantling of UND to start the year, UND is a borderline play-off team.
UND got beat by 2-7 (vs D1) Idaho St by more than they were beat by NDSU. I do think UND is a playoff team if they win out to get to 7-4 but if they're not they can look to that brutal 35 point loss in Pocatello as the main reason why.

[caribbeanhen]

Yeah, I definitely remember their path that year. Especially remember the thought was W&M were probably gonna be the likely ones to win at that time. JMU had a bruising O line, great team. The safety was a monster too. Damn good running back, WR, hell they were Champs so I don't know why I'm going back over it they were just damn good everywhere.

They were great, the field f'n sucked. But I always loved going to Chattanooga and spending some time there.

was this the game the JMU QB was hit and spun around 360 degrees. Dudzik ?

[Grizalltheway]

was this the game the JMU QB was hit and spun around 360 degrees. Dudzik ?

That was the 2008 semis @JMU. One of the sweetest Griz victories in my lifetime.

[caribbeanhen]

That was the 2008 semis @JMU. One of the sweetest Griz victories in my lifetime.

ah ok... that was a good game even though I couldnt remember the year

[ursus arctos horribilis]

ah ok... that was a good game even though I couldnt remember the yearIn the 2004 game I think the quarterback had the last name of Rascati. I cannot remember the name of the kid butt she was if memory serves a freshman free safety and the dude was outstanding.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Derby City Duke]

was this the game the JMU QB was hit and spun around 360 degrees. Dudzik ?

Back up QB after Rodney Landers got his ankle twisted in a pile. We didn't stand a chance after that happened.

The 2004 Dukes -- only team to win the title w/o a home game -- beat #2 Furman on a 4th and goal TD w/less than 30 seconds left, then beat #3 W&M in the first night game ever at Zable Stadium.

The title game was sealed on Rascati's 6-yd TD run that followed a personal foul penalty on the Griz's DL that punched Rascati in the face. Good game all around. Ochs could sling it and he had good receivers. Ursus is correct on our OL; we rushed for over 300 yards that night.

[Derby City Duke]

In the 2004 game I think the quarterback had the last name of Rascati. I cannot remember the name of the kid butt she was if memory serves a freshman free safety and the dude was outstanding.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

The safety's name was Tony Lezotte. His brother Matt was the incumbent starting QB and Rascati (sophomore xfer from Louisville) won the job. M. Lezotte was a team captain and instead of pouting, and possibly destroying the locker room, he supported the move. He was the first person the JMU players hoisted up on their shoulders after the win in Chattanooga.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

The safety's name was Tony Lezotte. His brother Matt was the incumbent starting QB and Rascati (sophomore xfer from Louisville) won the job. M. Lezotte was a team captain and instead of pouting, and possibly destroying the locker room, he supported the move. He was the first person the JMU players hoisted up on their shoulders after the win in Chattanooga.That is definitely the name. Secretary of State Mike I remember thinking back then those guys all had some kind of cool names. And for some reason I remember them being sort of confusing this was the quarterback and which was the free safety and now that you mention it I remember that is older brother was the quarterback so that explains the confusion I suppose.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[caribbeanhen]

In the 2004 game I think the quarterback had the last name of Rascati. I cannot remember the name of the kid butt she was if memory serves a freshman free safety and the dude was outstanding.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Rascati, yes that is it...... thanks

- - - Updated - - -


In the 2004 game I think the quarterback had the last name of Rascati. I cannot remember the name of the kid butt she was if memory serves a freshman free safety and the dude was outstanding.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Rascati, yes that is it...... thanks

[caribbeanhen]

Back up QB after Rodney Landers got his ankle twisted in a pile. We didn't stand a chance after that happened.

The 2004 Dukes -- only team to win the title w/o a home game -- beat #2 Furman on a 4th and goal TD w/less than 30 seconds left, then beat #3 W&M in the first night game ever at Zable Stadium.

The title game was sealed on Rascati's 6-yd TD run that followed a personal foul penalty on the Griz's DL that punched Rascati in the face. Good game all around. Ochs could sling it and he had good receivers. Ursus is correct on our OL; we rushed for over 300 yards that night.

Yes, in first round Delaware was up big on William at the start of the 4th quarter only to blow it... the game that should of been

[bobcathpdevil56]

Back up QB after Rodney Landers got his ankle twisted in a pile. We didn't stand a chance after that happened.

The 2004 Dukes -- only team to win the title w/o a home game -- beat #2 Furman on a 4th and goal TD w/less than 30 seconds left, then beat #3 W&M in the first night game ever at Zable Stadium.

The title game was sealed on Rascati's 6-yd TD run that followed a personal foul penalty on the Griz's DL that punched Rascati in the face. Good game all around. Ochs could sling it and he had good receivers. Ursus is correct on our OL; we rushed for over 300 yards that night.

That punch is what I remember. I think it was a 3rd down and the play wasn't going to get a 1st. Would've been only a field goal. DL straight up punched him.

[MSUBobcat]

That punch is what I remember. I think it was a 3rd down and the play wasn't going to get a 1st. Would've been only a field goal. DL straight up punched him.

Wow.... I don't recall that game so I looked it up. It was 2nd and goal from the 13 and the pass sailed out of the endzone. It was a brutal jump-punch by Kerry Mullan. I checked the Griz archives for 2005 and Mullen doesn't appear on the participation list for the 1st two games so hopefully that means Hauck suspended him, but I don't know how you don't kick that kid off your team.

If anyone's interested, here's the video. The 2:09:55 mark is where he connects.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUfQs2nSwv0

[Silenoz]

Yep, thanks for costing us a championship Mullan.


Blast from the past:
https://www.egriz.com/grizboard/viewtopic.php?t=7440

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Wow.... I don't recall that game so I looked it up. It was 2nd and goal from the 13 and the pass sailed out of the endzone. It was a brutal jump-punch by Kerry Mullan. I checked the Griz archives for 2005 and Mullen doesn't appear on the participation list for the 1st two games so hopefully that means Hauck suspended him, but I don't know how you don't kick that kid off your team.

If anyone's interested, here's the video. The 2:09:55 mark is where he connects.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUfQs2nSwv0

Yes, of course, a death penalty should be incurred and no chance to redeem allowed when a mistake like this is made. We lost that game, that was a big part of it, we deserved to lose after that due to not having enough control and discipline. But young dudes make mistakes sometimes but you don't have to go f'n overboard on it.

Now, if it ever happened again, yes.

[MSUBobcat]

Yes, of course, a death penalty should be incurred and no chance to redeem allowed when a mistake like this is made. We lost that game, that was a big part of it, we deserved to lose after that due to not having enough control and discipline. But young dudes make mistakes sometimes but you don't have to go f'n overboard on it.

Now, if it ever happened again, yes.

If punching a dude in the jaw is acceptable behavior from one of your team's players, that's clearly your prerogative. I think there's no place for that on a football field, and I wouldn't want that kind of player representing my university. This wasn't an escalation from some pushing/shoving/chippiness that led to emotions boiling over. He didn't get to the QB so he punched him in the ****ing face. If a person blasts someone for no reason walking by him on the street, he probably gets a couple weeks in jail. But since he did it on the field, he gets 2 weeks of bench.

[uni88]

If punching a dude in the jaw is acceptable behavior from one of your team's players, that's clearly your prerogative. I think there's no place for that on a football field, and I wouldn't want that kind of player representing my university. This wasn't an escalation from some pushing/shoving/chippiness that led to emotions boiling over. He didn't get to the QB so he punched him in the ****ing face. If a person blasts someone for no reason walking by him on the street, he probably gets a couple weeks in jail. But since he did it on the field, he gets 2 weeks of bench.

I'm with Ursus on this one. Kids do stupid things and they can learn from them. Suspend him for x number of games and let him know that if he crosses the line again he's done. That is not saying the behavior is acceptable.

[uni88]

Is this a Mad Lib? If so you forgot to tell us if it's a noun, verb, adjective, adverb, etc. xlolx

[Professor Chaos]

Hey, some coaches let players sell weed to cops and just suspend them for a few weeks of summer workouts if they're a good enough player. xwhistlex

[caribbeanhen]

Hey, some coaches let players sell weed to cops and just suspend them for a few weeks of summer workouts if they're a good enough player. xwhistlex

big corporations are selling it, Cops should go buy some donuts

[ursus arctos horribilis]

If punching a dude in the jaw is acceptable behavior from one of your team's players, that's clearly your prerogative. I think there's no place for that on a football field, and I wouldn't want that kind of player representing my university. This wasn't an escalation from some pushing/shoving/chippiness that led to emotions boiling over. He didn't get to the QB so he punched him in the ****ing face. If a person blasts someone for no reason walking by him on the street, he probably gets a couple weeks in jail. But since he did it on the field, he gets 2 weeks of bench.

I said it wasn't acceptable and therefore punishment but being some overly asinine, overreacting, dickhead and dumping a guy that did something stupid just ain't the way to fix it.

And you have had players rep your school that have done things like that. But as I said, young men, violent game, dumb **** happens sometimes.

[MSUBobcat]

I said it wasn't acceptable and therefore punishment but being some overly asinine, overreacting, dickhead and dumping a guy that did something stupid just ain't the way to fix it.

And you have had players rep your school that have done things like that. But as I said, young men, violent game, dumb **** happens sometimes.

You are welcome to your opinion on how your players are punished for their actions on the field. A player committing an unprovoked misdemeanor assault ON THE FIELD is how I want my school represented. It's not equivalent to Lorenzo Brown breaking a dude's jaw at a house party. That warrants a suspension and the person struck probably even bears some of the responsibility for the incident. Mullan would have had a chance to make amends by finishing school and becoming a productive member of society. He doesn't need to have the opportunity to make amends on the football field.

Put another way, his "job" was to play football. If I walk out of my office and blast an employee unprovoked, I highly doubt I'm given a 2 week suspension and then welcomed back with the opportunity to make amends for my transgression. And as the controller of this company, I'm a MUCH more valuable member of this "team" than Mullan was to his.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

You are welcome to your opinion on how your players are punished for their actions on the field. A player committing an unprovoked misdemeanor assault ON THE FIELD is how I want my school represented. It's not equivalent to Lorenzo Brown breaking a dude's jaw at a house party. That warrants a suspension and the person struck probably even bears some of the responsibility for the incident. Mullan would have had a chance to make amends by finishing school and becoming a productive member of society. He doesn't need to have the opportunity to make amends on the football field.

Put another way, his "job" was to play football. If I walk out of my office and blast an employee unprovoked, I highly doubt I'm given a 2 week suspension and then welcomed back with the opportunity to make amends for my transgression. And as the controller of this company, I'm a MUCH more valuable member of this "team" than Mullan was to his.

Oh that is a great analogy, thank you for the life lesson. Did you want to go research anymore 15 year old incidents to set up some manufactured outrage over? You ****ing had to go check and see if Bobby and held him out of the first games of 2015....xlolx

[uni88]

You are welcome to your opinion on how your players are punished for their actions on the field. A player committing an unprovoked misdemeanor assault ON THE FIELD is how I want my school represented. It's not equivalent to Lorenzo Brown breaking a dude's jaw at a house party. That warrants a suspension and the person struck probably even bears some of the responsibility for the incident. Mullan would have had a chance to make amends by finishing school and becoming a productive member of society. He doesn't need to have the opportunity to make amends on the football field.

Put another way, his "job" was to play football. If I walk out of my office and blast an employee unprovoked, I highly doubt I'm given a 2 week suspension and then welcomed back with the opportunity to make amends for my transgression. And as the controller of this company, I'm a MUCH more valuable member of this "team" than Mullan was to his.

If they kick him off the team and he loses his scholarship (I'm assuming he was on one), does he stay in school? What happens to his life if he doesn't? People make mistakes and can learn from those mistakes and be better for them.

[MSUBobcat]

If they kick him off the team and he loses his scholarship (I'm assuming he was on one), does he stay in school? What happens to his life if he doesn't? People make mistakes and can learn from those mistakes and be better for them.

If he decides to not go to college because he has to pay for it (like nearly all other college students in America), that's up to him. I didn't say he should be kicked out of school, but he should be fired from his "job". If I punch someone at work and I get fired, would you have the same concern for what happens to my life, or would you say that I brought it on myself??? I guarantee you if I was fired for punching someone while at work, I'd damn sure learn from it. Why the double standard just because HIS job is playing football and my job is keeping the lights on at my company? What job, outside of professional fighting (and hockey), can you commit an unprovoked assault WHILE REPRESENTING YOUR EMPLOYER, let alone on national TV, and keep your job? I'll hang up and listen....

[ursus arctos horribilis]

If he decides to not go to college because he has to pay for it (like nearly all other college students in America), that's up to him. I didn't say he should be kicked out of school, but he should be fired from his "job". If I punch someone at work and I get fired, would you have the same concern for what happens to my life, or would you say that I brought it on myself??? I guarantee you if I was fired for punching someone while at work, I'd damn sure learn from it. Why the double standard just because HIS job is playing football and my job is keeping the lights on at my company? What job, outside of professional fighting (and hockey), can you commit an unprovoked assault WHILE REPRESENTING YOUR EMPLOYER, let alone on national TV, and keep your job? I'll hang up and listen....

Will you hang up and listen...cool.

Hey what if you tackled some dude in the lobby, or in a hallway at your job? I mean seriously, it is a f'n great analogy. Nice work on that. xlolx

[MSUBobcat]

Will you hang up and listen...cool.

Hey what if you tackled some dude in the lobby, or in a hallway at your job? I mean seriously, it is a f'n great analogy. Nice work on that. xlolx

That's an asinine analogy. Nice ****ing work. If I'm performing my job description (TACKLING would be in HIS job description), nothing happens to me. Still waiting on an example where you can punch someone while representing your employer and not get fired......

[uni88]

If he decides to not go to college because he has to pay for it (like nearly all other college students in America), that's up to him. I didn't say he should be kicked out of school, but he should be fired from his "job". If I punch someone at work and I get fired, would you have the same concern for what happens to my life, or would you say that I brought it on myself??? I guarantee you if I was fired for punching someone while at work, I'd damn sure learn from it. Why the double standard just because HIS job is playing football and my job is keeping the lights on at my company? What job, outside of professional fighting (and hockey), can you commit an unprovoked assault WHILE REPRESENTING YOUR EMPLOYER, let alone on national TV, and keep your job? I'll hang up and listen....

While there might be parallels, I don't think playing collegiate football is a job. Football is a violent and emotional sport and the standard of what is and isn't assault (and battery) is different. Every single attempted tackle could be considered battery, the tackler is trying to take the ball carrier to the ground against their will.

[Grizalltheway]

That's an asinine analogy. Nice ****ing work. If I'm performing my job description (TACKLING would be in HIS job description), nothing happens to me. Still waiting on an example where you can punch someone while representing your employer and not get fired......
Well, Myles Garrett isn't technically fired...

[ursus arctos horribilis]

That's an asinine analogy. Nice ****ing work. If I'm performing my job description (TACKLING would be in HIS job description), nothing happens to me. Still waiting on an example where you can punch someone while representing your employer and not get fired......

That's the whole f'n point is that his job requirements are much more lax than what you are presenting as an analogous situation at a normal job. xlolx

BTW, I've seen a few guys get punched at work. Landscaping crews, construction, etc. Nobody got fired, wasn't seen as a life altering event. Just some drama on the site(s).

[MSUBobcat]

Well, Myles Garrett isn't technically fired...

1st, the NFL has a poor reputation for punishing player violations, so if that's your moral beacon there's no more discussion necessary. 2nd, he HAS been indefinitely suspended. Lastly, Randolph was far less innocent in the altercation than the JMU QB was, as he was trying to rip Garrett's helmet off. So an organization known for lax punishment is punishing a player for an act not as egregious as the one Mullan committed. Yikes.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

While there might be parallels, I don't think playing collegiate football is a job. Football is a violent and emotional sport and the standard of what is and isn't assault (and battery) is different. Every single attempted tackle could be considered battery, the tackler is trying to take the ball carrier to the ground against their will.

Exactly. The battery part gave me the xlolx.

[Grizalltheway]

1st, the NFL has a poor reputation for punishing player violations, so if that's your moral beacon there's no more discussion necessary. 2nd, he HAS been indefinitely suspended. Lastly, Randolph was far less innocent in the altercation than the JMU QB was, as he was trying to rip Garrett's helmet off. So an organization known for lax punishment is punishing a player for an act not as egregious as the one Mullan committed. Yikes.
Relax Karen. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Also, being indefinitely suspended isn't the same as getting fired. I imagine they're deciding exactly how long it's going to be.

[MSUBobcat]

That's the whole f'n point is that his job requirements are much more lax than what you are presenting as an analogous situation at a normal job. xlolx

BTW, I've seen a few guys get punched at work. Landscaping crews, construction, etc. Nobody got fired, wasn't seen as a life altering event. Just some drama on the site(s).

Were these guys who were punched at work provoked or unprovoked? That's a big distinction. And I would argue vehemently that his job requirements are LESS lax while on national TV. I don't claim to know ALL the reasons why attendance at UM has declined by 40% in only 8 years, but the reputation as it pertains to the punishment of student-athletes can't help.

- - - Updated - - -


Relax Karen. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Also, being indefinitely suspended isn't the same as getting fired. I imagine they're deciding exactly how long it's going to be.

That would depend on if the suspension is ever lifted, wouldn't it Susan?

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Relax Karen. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Also, being indefinitely suspended isn't the same as getting fired. I imagine they're deciding exactly how long it's going to be.

Plus he's got it all wrong anyway. If I remember correctly there were bees on the field and causing a ruckus that night. Rascatti had one land on his face mask and Mullan was concerned so he raced toward him as fast as he could to try and swipe it away to save that rascal from getting a bee sting. No good deed goes unpunished.

[ursus arctos horribilis]

Were these guys who were punched at work provoked or unprovoked? That's a big distinction. And I would argue vehemently that his job requirements are LESS lax while on national TV. I don't claim to know ALL the reasons why attendance at UM has declined by 40% in only 8 years, but the reputation as it pertains to the punishment of student-athletes can't help.

- - - Updated - - -



That would depend on if the suspension is ever lifted, wouldn't it Susan?

Brain cell attendance in your noggin has declined by at least 85% in your last few posts.

I am sure that something that happened 15 yrs. ago has so very much to do with a decline in attendance over the last 8 yrs. You are a true Sherlock Holmes in spite of a claim to not know ALL the reasons. I think you have really nailed it down here.

7 years later that punch really took it's toll on UM. xlolx

Just f'n dumb man.

[Grizalltheway]

Were these guys who were punched at work provoked or unprovoked? That's a big distinction. And I would argue vehemently that his job requirements are LESS lax while on national TV. I don't claim to know ALL the reasons why attendance at UM has declined by 40% in only 8 years, but the reputation as it pertains to the punishment of student-athletes can't help.

- - - Updated - - -



That would depend on if the suspension is ever lifted, wouldn't it Susan?

But he hasn't been explicitly fired, has he?

[uni88]

1st, the NFL has a poor reputation for punishing player violations, so if that's your moral beacon there's no more discussion necessary. 2nd, he HAS been indefinitely suspended. Lastly, Randolph was far less innocent in the altercation than the JMU QB was, as he was trying to rip Garrett's helmet off. So an organization known for lax punishment is punishing a player for an act not as egregious as the one Mullan committed. Yikes.

Not as egregious? Are you crazy? A player punching another player who was wearing a helmet in the face vs. a player swinging a helmet into the unprotected head of another player? I'd rather get hit in the head with a fist than a helmet.