When do the suspensions start?

[getoutgokayak 6]

My question is why were they allowed to even participate in Hoosier Hysteria and Haunted Hoops? They obviously knew about their failed drug tests before those events. If I lived in Indiana and my husband and I took our 3yr old son to those events and then found out later they had tested positive for drugs, not once but twice, and they interacted with him (very possible at Haunted Hoops), I would have been extremely upset.

[MartintheMopMan 7,765]

My question is why were they allowed to even participate in Hoosier Hysteria and Haunted Hoops? They obviously knew about their failed drug tests before those events. If I lived in Indiana and my husband and I took our 3yr old son to those events and then found out later they had tested positive for drugs, not once but twice, and they interacted with him (very possible at Haunted Hoops), I would have been extremely upset.

Really? You'd be that upset that your kids watched pot smokers play sports? Or shook his hand? Better keep him away from all professional sports players, comedians, 90% of college students, any retail or fast food worker, and probably 50% of people under 30 in professional positions. I mean, they were smoking dope not slinging crack. It would be like worrying about interacting with people who drink/drank underage.

I don't support what they did, I think when you're in a fish bowl and given an opportunity like this you have a higher standard than the kids around you. But, come on.  

[mamasa 15,581]

My question is why were they allowed to even participate in Hoosier Hysteria and Haunted Hoops? They obviously knew about their failed drug tests before those events. If I lived in Indiana and my husband and I took our 3yr old son to those events and then found out later they had tested positive for drugs, not once but twice, and they interacted with him (very possible at Haunted Hoops), I would have been extremely upset.

Good thing they weren't involved in a prostitution ring- you would've flipped out ;)

[bleedhoosier 3,627]

I mean, Hanner was cleared since we needed his help for the Wisconsin game. And now the suspension length is just convenient enough that it is lifted in time for a top 25 game in SMU. Sends a bad message in itself in my world.

[Parakeet Jones 3,838]

So if we lose with a suspension riddled team in the 2nd game to Texas So. coached by Mike Davis which of the following happens?

 

A.  B'town Banners collapses in on itself.  

B.  Satan buys a winter coat.

C.  I sit alone in a dark room and weep for 2.5 hours.

D.  All of the above.

[JSHoosier 21,021]

So if we lose with a suspension riddled team in the 2nd game to Texas So. coached by Mike Davis which of the following happens?

 

A.  B'town Banners collapses in on itself.  

B.  Satan buys a winter coat.

C.  I sit alone in a dark room and weep for 2.5 hours.

D.  All of the above.

It's Mike Davis, if Crean is worth his salt as a coach he should still be able to win.  Davis has no business coaching a pick up game.

[FortWayneHoosier 6,335]

I choose D lol.

[BubbleKnuts 569]

I'd run them til they can't even suffer.


Sent from my iPhoney. Yo.

[GloryDays 6,003]

So if we lose with a suspension riddled team in the 2nd game to Texas So. coached by Mike Davis which of the following happens?

 

A.  B'town Banners collapses in on itself.  

B.  Satan buys a winter coat.

C.  I sit alone in a dark room and weep for 2.5 hours.

D.  All of the above.

I"ll go with A.

B. Lucifer is window shopping as we speak. Not buying but looking. Bet Davis is salivating at the prospect.

C. Been there and done that.Twice this week!

 

Stranger things have happened lately.  Penn State comes to mind.

[AZ Hoosier 8,578]

I mean, Hanner was cleared since we needed his help for the Wisconsin game. And now the suspension length is just convenient enough that it is lifted in time for a top 25 game in SMU. Sends a bad message in itself in my world.

 

Agreed. I do get the sense that these "punishments" seem to be designed more to accommodate the schedule and the season record much more than to send a message to the offenders.

[MartintheMopMan 7,765]

Agreed. I do get the sense that these "punishments" seem to be designed more to accommodate the schedule and the season record much more than to send a message to the offenders.

Probably the best move on their part if they are.

I mean think about it, he could have suspended them for 6 games and you and other wouldn't cut him a break. It still wouldn't be enough, they wouldn't have proven that they are responsible yet, etc etc etc. Meanwhile, the people who are in the middle of the road will be bellyaching that we are losing games, maybe harming our post-season chances, and generally joining you on the unhappy side. This way, at least he's only making the people who are mad at him madder.

[AZ Hoosier 8,578]

Probably the best move on their part if they are.

I mean think about it, he could have suspended them for 6 games and you and other wouldn't cut him a break. It still wouldn't be enough, they wouldn't have proven that they are responsible yet, etc etc etc. Meanwhile, the people who are in the middle of the road will be bellyaching that we are losing games, maybe harming our post-season chances, and generally joining you on the unhappy side. This way, at least he's only making the people who are mad at him madder.

 

The point of punishment is to effect change in the "punish-ee". Sure I want IU ti go undefeated and with the NCAA tournament every year. But at some point, it’s more about the quality of the program and the people in it. When it comes right down to it, I’d much rather lose a game or two to teach a life lesson than offer a "selective" punishment that neither effects change nor teaches a lesson.

 

As I’ve already said, Stanford Robinson needs to be gone. He’s a repeat offender - two failed drug tests and an alcohol infraction. The kid refuses to learn.

 

Both Troy and Holt should sit for at least 6 games PLUS the exhibition shams. 

[MartintheMopMan 7,765]

The point of punishment is to effect change in the "punish-ee". Sure I want IU ti go undefeated and with the NCAA tournament every year. But at some point, it’s more about the quality of the program and the people in it. When it comes right down to it, I’d much rather lose a game or two to teach a life lesson than offer a "selective" punishment that neither effects change nor teaches a lesson.

 

As I’ve already said, Stanford Robinson needs to be gone. He’s a repeat offender - two failed drug tests and an alcohol infraction. The kid refuses to learn.

 

Both Troy and Holt should sit for at least 6 games PLUS the exhibition shams. 

But, doesn't everyone think the punishees aren't going to learn their lessons anyway? I've seen multiple calls for suspension for Troy and Stan. So, why bother? If you're a coach who is probably on his last season, why are you going to cowtow to the worst of the fans and lose everyone? If Stan isn't going to learn a lesson from 4 games, why keep him out of SMU?

Alternatively, if you think they're going to learn a lesson with their current punishment, then why bother listening to everyone who already hates you and suspend them for more just because they think they know these kids they've never met better than you?

Suspending Holt for 8 games is just crazy. 

[AZ Hoosier 8,578]

But, doesn't everyone think the punishees aren't going to learn their lessons anyway? I've seen multiple calls for suspension for Troy and Stan. So, why bother? If you're a coach who is probably on his last season, why are you going to cowtow to the worst of the fans and lose everyone? If Stan isn't going to learn a lesson from 4 games, why keep him out of SMU?

Alternatively, if you think they're going to learn a lesson with their current punishment, then why bother listening to everyone who already hates you and suspend them for more just because they think they know these kids they've never met better than you?

Suspending Holt for 8 games is just crazy. 

 

First of all, giving Holt "8 games" would certainly drive home the point that he screwed up. And he would at least learn that actions have consequences.

 

But on the other hand, nothing anyone here says will have any effect on Crean, the team or anything. I have no expectation that anyone at IU will even read what we write. It’s simply talk for the sake of talk. So in that context it’s all moot and/or an exercise in futility (ours).

[MartintheMopMan 7,765]

First of all, giving Holt "8 games" would certainly drive home the point that he screwed up. And he would at least learn that actions have consequences.

 

But on the other hand, nothing anyone here says will have any effect on Crean, the team or anything. I have no expectation that anyone at IU will even read what we write. It’s simply talk for the sake of talk. So in that context it’s all moot and/or an exercise in futility (ours).

Yes, it would certainly drive that point home. Really teach him a lesson about spending time with his teammates ever again. Heck, he should probably start smoking pot instead of having a single beer too, after all, he'd have to get caught twice doing that to get the same punishment as once driving his teammate home. 

[Dalton26 16,900]

First of all, giving Holt "8 games" would certainly drive home the point that he screwed up. And he would at least learn that actions have consequences.

But on the other hand, nothing anyone here says will have any effect on Crean, the team or anything. I have no expectation that anyone at IU will even read what we write. It’s simply talk for the sake of talk. So in that context it’s all moot and/or an exercise in futility (ours).

You do realize the accident was DD's fault right? I think he should be suspended for the drinking/driving but he shouldn't get the hammer dropped on him as if he just went out of his way to run someone over.

[BubbleKnuts 569]

I'd rather win games and have our failed drug test punishment be behind closed doors like every other top tier team in the country.


Sent from my iPhoney. Yo.

[AZ Hoosier 8,578]

You do realize the accident was DD's fault right? I think he should be suspended for the drinking/driving but he shouldn't get the hammer dropped on him as if he just went out of his way to run someone over.

 

Yes, I understand that DD walked into the (path of) the SUV. Doesn’t really matter. They were both (all?) at fault. Underage drinking. Then driving a car. There’s plenty of blame to go around. And I think DD should also be punished, but I am reluctant to say that because I don’t want to be accused of "piling on". 

 

But the bottom line is that it ultimately doesn’t matter what you or I think should happen. The die is cast, and punishments, however weak or overbearing, have been levied.

 

And in the end, it’s just a tragic event that could have (and should have) never happened - it was in the power of both Holt and Davis to prevent. But again, 20/20 hindsight.