A Look At Moorhead's Discipline

[ShotgunDawg]

We are starting to get some feedback on Moorhead as coach, particularly with how handles discipline.

I'm not trying to make a point in this post, but rather attempt to lay out facts to see if we can get a handle on what to expect in the future. Thus far it appears that Moorhead is a strict disciplinarian that lays out a "championship standard" & it must be followed with the penalty being suspension from games.

While I understand & believe that, due to Moorhead being a player's coach, he has to lay out objective expectations that come with objective punishments if expectations are not met, however, I wonder if suspension from games will always be the punishment or if those objective punishments can be something other than games? My fear with the punishment always being games is that we end up like Georgia under Mark Richt where it seemed like 5+ players were always suspended for early season games.

Perhaps it is way to early to make that assumption though as here is the current evidence we have:

Brandon Bryant - Suspended for Spring practice. We aren't sure why but grades were rumored.
Reggie Todd - Kicked out of school. Not sure how much Moorhead had to do with this or if he even had any control over it.
Michael Story - Arrested. I don't think anyone can blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Korey Charles - Arrested. Just like Story, I can't blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Nick Fitz - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.
Cory Thomas - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.

I guess it's too early to judge, but it's an interesting topic & question: should a violation of team rules = being suspended for a game or should it be handled some other way? I just don't want to see us turn into the Georgia team under Richt. Heaven forbid we open the season with a big game some years as it is almost automatic that since some players will always violate team rules, we are bound to have players suspended for every season opener.

If you believe in suspending players for games, due to a violation of team rules, then why? Why do you prefer that rather than handling it in some other way?

[RiverCityDawg]

We are starting to get some feedback on Moorhead as coach, particularly with how handles discipline.

I'm not trying to make a point in this post, but rather attempt to lay out facts to see if we can get a handle on what to expect in the future. Thus far it appears that Moorhead is a strict disciplinarian that lays out a "championship standard" & it must be followed with the penalty being suspension from games.

While I understand & believe that, due to Moorhead being a player's coach, he has to lay out objective expectations that come with objective punishments if expectations are not met, however, I wonder if suspension from games will always be the punishment or if those objective punishments can be something other than games? My fear with the punishment always being games is that we end up like Georgia under Mark Richt where it seemed like 5+ players were always suspended for early season games.

Perhaps it is way to early to make that assumption though as here is the current evidence we have:

Brandon Bryant - Suspended for Spring practice. We aren't sure why but grades were rumored.
Reggie Todd - Kicked out of school. Not sure how much Moorhead had to do with this or if he even had any control over it.
Michael Story - Arrested. I don't think anyone can blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Korey Charles - Arrested. Just like Story, I can't blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Nick Fitz - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.
Cory Thomas - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.

I guess it's too early to judge, but it's an interesting topic & question: should a violation of team rules = being suspended for a game or should it be handled some other way? I just don't want to see us turn into the Georgia team under Richt. Heaven forbid we open the season with a big game some years as it is almost automatic that since some players will always violate team rules, we are bound to have players suspended for every season opener.

If you believe in suspending players for games, due to a violation of team rules, then why? Why do you prefer that rather than handling it in some other way?

Not saying this is what it is for Fitz or Thomas, but just pointing out that a failed weed test is an automatic one game suspension based on policy, so there's no changing that. Georgia has a similar strict policy which is why so many of their players would miss the first game. Other schools have different policies, for example you would have to fail two tests to miss a game.

Good topic, but I'm not sure we have enough sample size to make any determinations since it's possible/likely that these penalties would be the same if it were Mullen or any other coach.

Also, when did Charles get arrested and what for? I missed that, maybe because I always forget he's on the team.

[ShotgunDawg]

Not saying this is what it is for Fitz or Thomas, but just pointing out that a failed weed test is an automatic one game suspension based on policy, so there's no changing that. Georgia has a similar strict policy which is why so many of their players would miss the first game. Other schools have different policies, for example you would have to fail two tests to miss a game.

Good topic, but I'm not sure we have enough sample size to make any determinations since it's possible/likely that these penalties would be the same if it were Mullen or any other coach.

Also, when did Charles get arrested and what for? I missed that, maybe because I always forget he's on the team.

I didn't realize it was school policy. See odd that different SEC schools would have different rules. If so, it adds to my feelings that college football needs a commissioner that can bring all these types of rules under the same umbrella & standardize them.

Has UGA had the same amount of players suspended under Smart as Richt?

[gravedigger]

We are starting to get some feedback on Moorhead as coach, particularly with how handles discipline.

I'm not trying to make a point in this post, but rather attempt to lay out facts to see if we can get a handle on what to expect in the future. Thus far it appears that Moorhead is a strict disciplinarian that lays out a "championship standard" & it must be followed with the penalty being suspension from games.

While I understand & believe that, due to Moorhead being a player's coach, he has to lay out objective expectations that come with objective punishments if expectations are not met, however, I wonder if suspension from games will always be the punishment or if those objective punishments can be something other than games? My fear with the punishment always being games is that we end up like Georgia under Mark Richt where it seemed like 5+ players were always suspended for early season games.

Perhaps it is way to early to make that assumption though as here is the current evidence we have:

Brandon Bryant - Suspended for Spring practice. We aren't sure why but grades were rumored.
Reggie Todd - Kicked out of school. Not sure how much Moorhead had to do with this or if he even had any control over it.
Michael Story - Arrested. I don't think anyone can blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Korey Charles - Arrested. Just like Story, I can't blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Nick Fitz - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.
Cory Thomas - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.

I guess it's too early to judge, but it's an interesting topic & question: should a violation of team rules = being suspended for a game or should it be handled some other way? I just don't want to see us turn into the Georgia team under Richt. Heaven forbid we open the season with a big game some years as it is almost automatic that since some players will always violate team rules, we are bound to have players suspended for every season opener.

If you believe in suspending players for games, due to a violation of team rules, then why? Why do you prefer that rather than handling it in some other way?

Simple answer: because the coach was hired to lead the team, make decisions how he best determines to get the results he desires.

If we do not approve, we can change leaders who have other standards. Both have pitfalls. One has more than the other.

The inmates cannot run the asylum.

[Dawg61]

If the state of MS legalizes weed can players still get suspended for using it?

https://media.giphy.com/media/d3mlE7uhX8KFgEmY/giphy.gif

[LC Dawg]

I'm sure Moorhead has different punishments for different rules. I have no problem with a suspension for breaking team rules. If you don't want to be suspended its pretty easy to accomplish - just don't break the rule.
If we opened with KSU instead of SFA Fitz may have not been suspended for the opener. We don't know how Moorhead is going to handle different situations. I think most coaches look at it as they want to punish the player for breaking the rules but they don't want to punish the team. If suspending a player gives you a much greater chance of losing a game I think a lot of coaches would wait and suspend the player in another game unless it is an egregious violation.

[ShotgunDawg]

Simple answer: because the coach was hired to lead the team, make decisions how he best determines to get the results he desires.

If we do not approve, we can change leaders who have other standards. Both have pitfalls. One has more than the other.

The inmates cannot run the asylum.

It's just a discussion that reasonable people can have.

Nobody is asking for less discipline. I'm all about discipline. The question was just why does the discipline have to always involve suspending players for games. Whether they run their ass off in the stadium for 2 hours or miss a game, it's still discipline & prevents the players from running the asylum

[ShotgunDawg]

If the state of MS legalizes weed can players still get suspended for using it?

https://media.giphy.com/media/d3mlE7uhX8KFgEmY/giphy.gif

No because it's against NCAA rules

[ShotgunDawg]

I'm sure Moorhead has different punishments for different rules. I have no problem with a suspension for breaking team rules. If you don't want to be suspended its pretty easy to accomplish - just don't break the rule.
If we opened with KSU instead of SFA Fitz may have not been suspended for the opener. We don't know how Moorhead is going to handle different situations. I think most coaches look at it as they want to punish the player for breaking the rules but they don't want to punish the team. If suspending a player gives you a much greater chance of losing a game I think a lot of coaches would wait and suspend the player in another game unless it is an egregious violation.

Quality post & great points.

You're right in that we don't know how Moorhead will handle different situations & different schedules. Heck, for all we know, we've had 20 players violate team rules this year but only Fitz's & Thomas' violations reached the level of severity of being suspended for a game.

I'm not complaining about how Moorhead handled this situation but rather trying to look down the road to see how this could effect the program in the future.

[gravedigger]

It's just a discussion that reasonable people can have.

Nobody is asking for less discipline. I'm all about discipline. The question was just why does the discipline have to involved suspending players for games. Whether they run their ass off in the stadium for 2 hours or miss a game, it's still discipline & prevents the players from running the asylum

The answer is that is what the coach we chose deems necessary. As a manager, discipline cannot be doled out in a one size fits all manner. My personal feeling about our coach is that he weighs the merits of each situation, but I could be incorrect about that.

As fans we should assume that if he?s the right person for the job then it follows that his management is sound.

Without sitting in his seat, speculating what is or is not appropriate discipline is futile.

[ShotgunDawg]

Without sitting in his seat, speculating what is or is not appropriate discipline is futile.

Well this would eliminate discussion.

Do we extend this to play calling, personnel decisions, recruiting hits & misses, politics, etc?

I could take your statement & extend it to almost every aspect of his job. How the hell can I complain about the play calling when I haven't watched 30 hours of film & have nowhere near the Xs & Os knowledge of Moorhead?

[Ifyouonlyknew]

It's impossible to compare each case because we don't know what each kid has done. Tough to know what the breaking point is if we don't know the point.

[Jack Lambert]

He laid his rules down and everyone is going to live by them and he is not going to show favorites in handing out punishment. I like it.

[1bigdawg]

If the state of MS legalizes weed can players still get suspended for using it?

If a 21 year old player shows up with Alcohol in their system, can they get suspended even though it is legal? Of course.

[RiverCityDawg]

How the hell can I complain about the play calling when I haven't watched 30 hours of film & have nowhere near the Xs & Os knowledge of Moorhead?

You're being facetious, but you're actually right. Complaining about play calling is almost always an ignorant proposition. People are rabid over football and most know very little about what they are actually looking at, even the most informed and experienced. I'm not excluding myself, by the way, I'm guessing as much as the next guy.

[msbulldog]

If the state of MS legalizes weed can players still get suspended for using it?

https://media.giphy.com/media/d3mlE7uhX8KFgEmY/giphy.gif

If the state I work in legalizes pot, I still get fired if I fail a drug test.

[WPDawg]

We are starting to get some feedback on Moorhead as coach, particularly with how handles discipline.

I'm not trying to make a point in this post, but rather attempt to lay out facts to see if we can get a handle on what to expect in the future. Thus far it appears that Moorhead is a strict disciplinarian that lays out a "championship standard" & it must be followed with the penalty being suspension from games.

While I understand & believe that, due to Moorhead being a player's coach, he has to lay out objective expectations that come with objective punishments if expectations are not met, however, I wonder if suspension from games will always be the punishment or if those objective punishments can be something other than games? My fear with the punishment always being games is that we end up like Georgia under Mark Richt where it seemed like 5+ players were always suspended for early season games.

Perhaps it is way to early to make that assumption though as here is the current evidence we have:

Brandon Bryant - Suspended for Spring practice. We aren't sure why but grades were rumored.
Reggie Todd - Kicked out of school. Not sure how much Moorhead had to do with this or if he even had any control over it.
Michael Story - Arrested. I don't think anyone can blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Korey Charles - Arrested. Just like Story, I can't blame Moorhead for suspending an arrested player
Nick Fitz - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.
Cory Thomas - Violation of team rules: Should he have been suspended for a game or punished in some other manner? We don't know what he did.

I guess it's too early to judge, but it's an interesting topic & question: should a violation of team rules = being suspended for a game or should it be handled some other way? I just don't want to see us turn into the Georgia team under Richt. Heaven forbid we open the season with a big game some years as it is almost automatic that since some players will always violate team rules, we are bound to have players suspended for every season opener.

If you believe in suspending players for games, due to a violation of team rules, then why? Why do you prefer that rather than handling it in some other way?

Y'all over analyze to much.

[tireddawg]

Well this would eliminate discussion.

Do we extend this to play calling, personnel decisions, recruiting hits & misses, politics, etc?

I could take your statement & extend it to almost every aspect of his job. How the hell can I complain about the play calling when I haven't watched 30 hours of film & have nowhere near the Xs & Os knowledge of Moorhead?

Maybe it's a discussion that should be eliminated. You trust coach to make the right call or you don't. It's not something I'm willing to concern myself with, and maybe you shouldn't, but to each his own.

[tireddawg]

FIFY. He's a great Bulldog but,


Shotgun over analyzes to much.

[smootness]

If the state of MS legalizes weed can players still get suspended for using it?

Of course

[Homedawg]

It's just a discussion that reasonable people can have.

Nobody is asking for less discipline. I'm all about discipline. The question was just why does the discipline have to always involve suspending players for games. Whether they run their ass off in the stadium for 2 hours or miss a game, it's still discipline & prevents the players from running the asylum

Who said they didn't have to run their asses off? That's the problem, you don't know. It happens and happens a lot. People screw up and DON'T get suspended. These deserved suspensions.

[Jack Lambert]

It's just a discussion that reasonable people can have.

Nobody is asking for less discipline. I'm all about discipline. The question was just why does the discipline have to always involve suspending players for games. Whether they run their ass off in the stadium for 2 hours or miss a game, it's still discipline & prevents the players from running the asylum

If you make a player run it has to be during practice and that player needs to practice and not be running bleachers.

[deadheaddawg]

They should test for alcohol in players under 21 and treat it the same as any other failed drug test

[Covercorner2]

If we played KSU game 1 and SFA game 2, Fitz would be suspended for game 2. We just so happen to play our cupcake game 1.

[Lord McBuckethead]

If the state of MS legalizes weed can players still get suspended for using it?

https://media.giphy.com/media/d3mlE7uhX8KFgEmY/giphy.gif

Yes they can. Code of conduct doesn't just adhere to what is legal or illegal.

[Lord McBuckethead]

If you make a player run it has to be during practice and that player needs to practice and not be running bleachers.

Make them run on their own time.

[Jack Lambert]

Make them run on their own time.

You cannot do that either. That will be considered practice if you force him to do it and you can only practice a player for so many hours a day.

[BulldogDX55]

They should test for alcohol in players under 21 and treat it the same as any other failed drug test

Two things.

First: Alcohol is out of the system within 24 hours. Good luck testing for it in that window.

Second: Even if it was a reasonable window, do you want half of the players on every team in the country suspended?

[BroChris]

my feelings that college football needs a commissioner that can bring all these types of rules under the same umbrella & standardize them.

The SEC has a commissioner and each team still have different guidelines.

[Cooterpoot]

They should test for alcohol in players under 21 and treat it the same as any other failed drug test

Damn..no they shouldn't.

[deadheaddawg]

Two things.

First: Alcohol is out of the system within 24 hours. Good luck testing for it in that window.

Second: Even if it was a reasonable window, do you want half of the players on every team in the country suspended?

They make test that will detect up to 80 hrs. But honestly I'm just hoping one of those idiots who say "the law is the law" when weed comes up, will disagree with me.

[Liverpooldawg]

They make test that will detect up to 80 hrs. But honestly I'm just hoping one of those idiots who say "the law is the law" when weed comes up, will disagree with me.

We aren't dealing with the law here. We are dealing with team policy. We don't even know what rule was violated. There are other rumors besides a failed weed test.

[Lord McBuckethead]

You cannot do that either. That will be considered practice if you force him to do it and you can only practice a player for so many hours a day.

Don't make them do it. Choice, suspension or on your own running verified by other players.