|
Message Replied To ========== I didn't really get involved in that suspension debate, and I see both sides But the biggest factor to me in how I view this (and how I feel outsiders can view this) is Muschamp clearly wasn't lifting suspensions because he felt we needed the competitive advantage those players might offer to help us win the next game. If we played an SEC game Saturday, then his motives could possibly come into question. The fact he decided to do this before a presumably (your opinions may differ) less than equally matched team, says to me he felt the players were sufficiently punished via the embarrassment, additional punishments during the week, the lack of involvment in game prep, and generally maybe through their individual contrition leading up the Idaho game. And that is good enough for me.
Had this happened before a bigger game, it may have felt more Bowdenesque to me. But given our opponent, it just doesn't bother me and I trust the justification.
============================== We as fans or media really don't have any of the facts of the suspensions. If the offense committed is not something that is public knowledge already like arrests etc, who are we to determine what the appropriate discipline should be or how/when it should be carried out? We also don't know what other disciplinary measures may have taken place besides the obvious game suspension that was visible to us. Muschamp's track record thus far has been sterling and I trust him to make the appropriate call w/ his guys. He knows the situation intimately--we do not. |