Playing Colvin - Mac's biggest mistake

[jsb]

While you are at it, please ask the Moral One Deace how he can defend his Michigan head football coach who was knowingly breaking the rules of practice time limits because "everyone else is doing it" and "it's a stupid rule anyway" but can trash a coach for lifting a suspension that HE put in place????

No kidding, that's a question begging for an answer.

I think it is because Steve likes to think he is the next coming of Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reily rolled into one. And those guys regulary find one issue to scream about and then won't give it up. This isn't the first time in the last few weeks that Steve has come after McDermott. It's his pet project for the year.

 

[Cyrocks]

I don't recall Mac ever saying that" there would be no circumstances in which the suspension could be altered". Out given.

Let me ask this, and the way some of you are talking it really sounds like it .... but had Feb 1 rolled around and CC was still acting like a punk, is GMac honor bound to allow him back on simply because he set a date? Simply because he didn't say "indefinitely". After all, if we're nit-picking over the simple issue of a date... we probably have to work both sides of the date, don't we?

The date was for CC's benefit. Not Gmac's. And sure as hell not for you or I.

I didn't care one way or another about the suspension of Colvin.

But what you write, DM, makes sense. Could be the Feb. 1 deadline was a "hey, you have until this date to straighten up. If not, then you will remain suspended or be off the team."

 

[khess83]

No kidding, that's a question begging for an answer.

I think it is because Steve likes to think he is the next coming of Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reily rolled into one. And those guys regulary find one issue to scream about and then won't give it up. This isn't the first time in the last few weeks that Steve has come after McDermott. It's his pet project for the year.

If you listen to Steve's opinions you would know that he doesn't want to be any of those guys. That is just a fact. I still don't like his approach against those of us who support McD's deciscion, but Steve does not want to be any of those guys.

 

[Cloned4Life]

No, he didn't make a mistake with the public...This wasn't about you, me, or the public. This was about Colvin and the team. Mac needed to know if Colvin was serious about being part of the team. You're making it into a bigger deal than it is.

Question Mac's integrity, that's fine....but I know better.

This. Jon and Steve don't seem to understand this.

Perhaps with the fans...Definitely not with the players. Which one would you choose?

This also.


And Jon, I do appreciate you replying to my post earlier, even though you dodged the things I had to say about Steve's opinion. I was curious to what you thought about Steve overblowing the Colvin situation and insinuating that Mac might as well just cheat because playing Colvin is on that same level...Go back and listen to how ridiculous Steve's argument on this issue is. It's embarrassing to Iowa State fans, and makes me more embarrassed that he claims to be one.

And you ask why Mac would feel bad?? Is that even a serious question??? He felt bad because he had to break his word, even if it was the for the good of the team. He found himself in a HORRIBLE predicament; not let the kid play but hurt the whole team or let the kid help the team so the team doesn't have to suffer, but go against your word in doing so. It's a NO-WIN for Mac! I don't agree when he said he had "no choice," but that still doesn't change that it was a no-win situation.

 

[Clonehomer]

Maybe Mac should take a page from KF's playbook and not comment about any discipline and never comment about what is going on. That way, Jon could always give the excuse on the radio that we don't know all of the facts. Then we can just sweep it under the rug and we can assume that it is being taken care of in house.

 

[Cloned4Life]

That's where you are wrong. Through your comments you are implying Gmac caved, can't be trusted to keep his word. That hurts the program.

I have to agree with DaddyMac on this. Why all the "moral" outrage over this. Colvin broke team rules. If the team was okay with his return, then why should you or anyone else be outraged over it.

I think it shows Gmac has a lot of respect for his players to go to them and give them the opportunity to give input on lifting the suspension or keeping it in place. I have no doubts that if the players would have said keep it in place, Colvin would have remained suspended.

Good point...good post.

 

[jsb]

If you listen to Steve's opinions you would know that he doesn't want to be any of those guys. That is just a fact. I still don't like his approach against those of us who support McD's deciscion, but Steve does not want to be any of those guys.

He sure acts like one of those guys.

 

[jsb]

Maybe Mac should take a page from KF's playbook and not comment about any discipline and never comment about what is going on. That way, Jon could always give the excuse on the radio that we don't know all of the facts. Then we can just sweep it under the rug and we can assume that it is being taken care of in house.

Nice job!

 

[acqflisu]

That's where you are wrong. Through your comments you are implying Gmac caved, can't be trusted to keep his word. That hurts the program.

I have to agree with DaddyMac on this. Why all the "moral" outrage over this. Colvin broke team rules. If the team was okay with his return, then why should you or anyone else be outraged over it.

I think it shows Gmac has a lot of respect for his players to go to them and give them the opportunity to give input on lifting the suspension or keeping it in place. I have no doubts that if the players would have said keep it in place, Colvin would have remained suspended.

Regardless of what dates were put on it and whether a date should have been put on it, doesn't it come down to whether or not Chris has grown as a person and teammate as a result of the disciplinary action? Every indications says yes, from Mac, to his teammates, and to Chris himself. The situation has changed drastically, and called for action.

BTW, stating to the media that Brackins and the rest of the team were in favor of bringing Chris back does not mean they made the decision, only that they supported it.

 

[Cyrocks]

No kidding, that's a question begging for an answer.

I think it is because Steve likes to think he is the next coming of Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reily rolled into one. And those guys regulary find one issue to scream about and then won't give it up. This isn't the first time in the last few weeks that Steve has come after McDermott. It's his pet project for the year.

"Morally" indignant people tend to stick together and tend to be hypocritical.

Rush speaks out against drug abusers -- he becomes a drug abuser -- says he sorry and moves on. Deace forgives and exhalts the man.

Gmac lifts his own "self-appointed" suspension of a player -- says he felt like he had no choice -- Deace rips on him.

 

[khess83]

Lets leave how the Hawks would handle this out of this discussion. Everytime we bring them into the discussion it looses any credability. In a way we are doing what someone earlier accussed Jon of doing, which was deflecting attention from our issues and piling on others' problems.

 

[Clonefan32]

Here is my view of this issue:

Playing 7 guys is really not much of an option in college basketball. I know Wayne Morgan did it, but he did it with the luxury of knowing that the did have 8 other guys he could play if circumstances made that necessary. Greg's only choice was to either suite Colvin, and play him in spot minutes as the fatigue of the other players required, or pull redshirts and set a young man's progress back by a year. I think this was clearly the best option.

 

[VeloClone]

Contrast these two coaching decisions:

Coach MacD's decision to dress Colvin and eventually play him for significant minutes despite not a single player having fouled out. His rationale being that Craig Brackins told him he had no choice.

The story told by the announcers during last night's broadcast that the TT team came to Coach Pat Knight during the off season asking for their names to be put on the back of their jerseys. When the jerseys arrived they all said "Red Raiders" on the back of them. He told the players that was their name afterall.

Who is in charge in Ames and who is in charge in Lubbock?

For the record I have been a MacD supporter and frankly still am. I believe that he was in a no win situation however he would have done the best for his integrity to dress Colvin so he was ready for the emergency situation (ie. at least one guard fouled out) but not play him and not play him for extended minutes.

I disagree with the decision, but I still support our coach. I am just disappointed in his decision here. He probably doesn't care and shouldn't care what I think.

 

[Gitwitit]

I don't recall Mac ever saying that" there would be no circumstances in which the suspension could be altered". Out given.

Let me ask this, and the way some of you are talking it really sounds like it .... but had Feb 1 rolled around and CC was still acting like a punk, is GMac honor bound to allow him back on simply because he set a date? Simply because he didn't say "indefinitely". After all, if we're nit-picking over the simple issue of a date... we probably have to work both sides of the date, don't we?

The date was for CC's benefit. Not Gmac's. And sure as hell not for you or I.

I would say that it is much easier for a coach (in the public's eye) to extend a suspension than it is to shorten one abruptly. Had Feb 1st rolled around and Greg didn't feel CC was living up to his part of the deal, he could have just said that and a lot of people would have praised him for staying true to what he feels is the right thing to do.

This move just makes him look desperate.

 

[ISU4ME]

What Colvin did to get suspended affected the coaches and players. As long as the coaches and players were in agreement Colvin should play, I really feel I have no reason to be upset with Coach Mac. There were significant changes to the roster that warranted Mac reassessing his options for both his personal reasons ans well as the team. The fact that he went to the team to get their opinion and the rest of the coaches shows he is a leader.

Now if Colvin was accused of raping a girl in a "ghost room", and the suspensions was lifted given the circumstances, I would be ****** as hell right now as a fan. If he was charged with a DUI riding a moped down the street through an accident scene, yes I would be ******. If he was passed out in an alley, yes I would be ******. If he punched a cabbie in the face, yes I would be ******.

He disrespected the coaches and players. Ultimatley they made the decision to let him play earlier than planned. Why anyone else cares amazes me. I believe it is just displaced frustration for the lack of wins.

 

[Cyrocks]

Contrast these two coaching decisions:

Coach MacD's decision to dress Colvin and eventually play him for significant minutes despite not a single player having fouled out. His rationale being that Craig Brackins told him he had no choice.

The story told by the announcers during last night's broadcast that the TT team came to Coach Pat Knight during the off season asking for their names to be put on the back of their jerseys. When the jerseys arrived they all said "Red Raiders" on the back of them. He told the players that was their name afterall.

Who is in charge in Ames and who is in charge in Lubbock?

For the record I have been a MacD supporter and frankly still am. I believe that he was in a no win situation however he would have done the best for his integrity to dress Colvin so he was ready for the emergency situation (ie. at least one guard fouled out) but not play him and not play him for extended minutes.

I disagree with the decision, but I still support our coach. I am just disappointed in his decision here. He probably doesn't care and shouldn't care what I think.

Names on jerseys < trying to win games.

As another poster pointed out, and which I agree with, the players didn't VOTE to lift Colvin's supension. They gave input and were in favor of it.

 

[JonDMiller]

This. Jon and Steve don't seem to understand this.



This also.


And Jon, I do appreciate you replying to my post earlier, even though you dodged the things I had to say about Steve's opinion. I was curious to what you thought about Steve overblowing the Colvin situation and insinuating that Mac might as well just cheat because playing Colvin is on that same level...Go back and listen to how ridiculous Steve's argument on this issue is. It's embarrassing to Iowa State fans, and makes me more embarrassed that he claims to be one.

And you ask why Mac would feel bad?? Is that even a serious question??? He felt bad because he had to break his word, even if it was the for the good of the team. He found himself in a HORRIBLE predicament; not let the kid play but hurt the whole team or let the kid help the team so the team doesn't have to suffer, but go against your word in doing so. It's a NO-WIN for Mac! I don't agree when he said he had "no choice," but that still doesn't change that it was a no-win situation.

I dont speak for Steve. His email address is [email protected]

 

[Clonefan32]

Contrast these two coaching decisions:

Coach MacD's decision to dress Colvin and eventually play him for significant minutes despite not a single player having fouled out. His rationale being that Craig Brackins told him he had no choice.

The story told by the announcers during last night's broadcast that the TT team came to Coach Pat Knight during the off season asking for their names to be put on the back of their jerseys. When the jerseys arrived they all said "Red Raiders" on the back of them. He told the players that was their name afterall.

Who is in charge in Ames and who is in charge in Lubbock?

For the record I have been a MacD supporter and frankly still am. I believe that he was in a no win situation however he would have done the best for his integrity to dress Colvin so he was ready for the emergency situation (ie. at least one guard fouled out) but not play him and not play him for extended minutes.

I disagree with the decision, but I still support our coach. I am just disappointed in his decision here. He probably doesn't care and shouldn't care what I think.

I don't understand what the issue is with him consulting Brackins on the issue. Brackins is the undisputed leader of this team amongst the players. We have heard much grumbling about team chemistry, and the fact that players don't seem to enjoy playing for Mac. So why not, before making a difficult decision, try to guage the overally opinion of the players about bringing back Colvin? Why not allow the leader of your team on the floor play a part in this decision? This is a decision best made with Mac, his assitants, and Craig.

 

[Cyrocks]

I would say that it is much easier for a coach (in the public's eye) to extend a suspension than it is to shorten one abruptly. Had Feb 1st rolled around and Greg didn't feel CC was living up to his part of the deal, he could have just said that and a lot of people would have praised him for staying true to what he feels is the right thing to do.

This move just makes him look desperate.

Not really. Makes sense to me. Only to you does it look desperate.

 

[San Francisco Cy]

Again, who is running the team, the players or the coach?

Let's face it. Mac HAS to win now, or he's out of a job. Desperate times call for desperate measures. And if Colvin's teammates feel like he's made amends, then I agree that Mac plays him. It's not like Mac let the teammates make the decision. He obviously felt like it was time for Colvin to play, and out of respect, checked with his players. Playing Colvin without the approval of his players would have been his biggest mistake...