Dunlap the disciplinarian - What do you think?

beast of the east

beast of the east

Active member
Against Fordham, Coach Dunlap played 4 players the full 40 minutes, and the 5th player 36 minutes, because of what was described as a disciplinary action over a minor academic infraction by Malik Stith.

You can read this either of two ways:

1) The bench was already incredibly short with the departure of Lindsey, and Dunlap potentially cost his team a win with a hard-core measure. Given the fact that a loss to Fordham would continue the team's 2011-2012 spin into oblivion, could Dunlap have jeopardized the entire season, or:

2) This was a strong sign of Dunlap placing more value on academic responsbility and adherance to rules than W's and L's.

What do you think? It's easer to vote for #2 because the team won, but what do you have done given the scarce information that's been provided?
 
 It was mentioned prior to the game that Stith would miss the entire first half at the very least, due to a team infraction.
I'm certain Dunlap and Lav reached their conclusion on Stith's playing time prior to the game.
I go with option 2 above.
 
 I don't think it's that complicated. Rules are rules and they are established before the season. I think any player would get the same treatment if they didn't follow the rules. Of course, if you're playing for Mick Cronin, you get a 6 game suspension for sucker-punching and knocking out an opposing player. Had one of their other players knocked off a bank, they would have gotten an 8 game suspension... ;')
 
Lav may be away from the sidelines, but he still makes the decisions... like this one.
 
Lav may be away from the sidelines, but he still makes the decisions... like this one.
Click to expand...
 

No intention to put blame or heap praise. The question is, given the short bench, do you think this was the correct decision?
 
 It was mentioned prior to the game that Stith would miss the entire first half at the very least, due to a team infraction.
I'm certain Dunlap and Lav reached their conclusion on Stith's playing time prior to the game.
I go with option 2 above.
Click to expand...
 

During Lavin's interview he mentioned Stith would return in the second half.
 
You can read this either of two ways:
Click to expand...
 
You can read it a third way: Dunlap isn't making any decisions, he's implenting the head coach's. And it was a pretty good decision, because it sent a powerful message to the rest of them while they're still young and impressionable: disciplining the lone upperclassman for academics, despite the personnel situation, at the risk of a lost game. The freshman learn that at a minimum they need to physically attend class. That's a cheap lesson in a meaningless game against an awful team in a throwaway season.
 
You can read this either of two ways:
Click to expand...
 
You can read it a third way: Dunlap isn't making any decisions, he's implenting the head coach's. And it was a pretty good decision, because it sent a powerful message to the rest of them while they're still young and impressionable: disciplining the lone upperclassman for academics, despite the personnel situation, at the risk of a lost game. The freshman learn that at a minimum they need to physically attend class. That's a cheap lesson in a meaningless game against an awful team in a throwaway season.
Click to expand...
 

Amen.
 
Ok everyone good responses. I have a feeling there would be some on the other side of the coin if we had lost, fickle as we are.

Here's a question for ESPKEN: When was the last time we played the starters so much in a regulation game (196 out of a possible 200 minutes)? 
 
Could it just be that our 5 starters are just so superior talent wise to Malik Stith that he did not merit more than 4 minutes of pt?
 
Hey, you don't follow the rules, then you have to pay the price.

Ahmad Bradshaw learned that last week. Now, Malik Stith learned that.

For the record, I do think that Malik is a good young man, who works very hard. The rules are what they are though, he knew them, and he had to serve his punishment. It's a dead issue now, IMO.
 
As mentioned, it was Stith, which I think made the decision just a little easier. But, nonetheless, it still sends a firm message to the players that they can't get away with breaking the rules that they agreed to, even the minor ones.

If you give them an inch, then we all know what they take after that, and then after that, etc., etc. The last thing we need is more problems with players and this is where it can start. This program needs to stay clean in every way, and it starts with the simple stuff like adhering to what is expected of them academically.

Two thumbs up to Coach Lavin and Co. I just wish Coach was back on the bench where he belongs. 
 
Good for Coach Lavin & Asst Coach Dunlop!
Rules are rules. We must enforce them especially after Lindsey. They are setting the tone to be successful in the long run
Bravo!   
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top