Is Bacarri Rambo Suspended, Being Punished, or Just Not Starting?
by T Kyle King on Aug 30, 2011 12:15 PM EDT
in Georgia Bulldogs Football
Email
PrintFirst of all, I want to thank tankertoad for serving as the de facto Dawg Sports night desk editor, in which capacity he picked up the emerging story about Bacarri Rambo’s uncertain status with the Georgia Bulldogs. While some understandable concerns were expressed about the definitive nature of the original headline in a confusing situation, I do not believe sensationalism was involved, though, of course, we appreciate the constructive criticisms, and the spirit in which, and the tone with which, they were offered.
Here is what we know:
- Despite being the team’s leading returning tackler, Rambo is listed on the new depth chart as the second-string safety, behind starter Sanders Commings.
- Mark Richt, responding to a radio report stating that Rambo had been suspended, gave a less than clear answer, saying: "I'm not going to address that. At the appropriate time, if anybody has anything like that, I'll let you know, though." Pressed to define "appropriate time," Coach Richt replied, "I don't know, I got to figure that out. I'm still working on that."
I would tend to agree with tankertoad’s take; when told that the University of Georgia student radio station had reported that Rambo was suspended and asked whether it was so, Coach Richt did not respond, "No, that’s not right. Bacarri Rambo is not suspended." Granted, not saying he isn’t doesn’t mean he is, but, if the answer’s not an unequivocal "no," doesn’t that have to mean it’s at least a little bit "yes"? Isn’t being suspended sort of like being pregnant; you either are or you aren’t?
Steve Spurrier might argue otherwise---about being suspended, that is, not about being pregnant---but Mark Richt has not hitherto been known for levying cosmetic suspensions that just happen to last for the precise length of time it takes for the punished player to avoid missing any actual snaps. Maybe Rambo is double-secret suspended; maybe he’s suspended for a half; maybe he’s just straight-up suspended, and Mark Richt doesn’t want to let Chris Petersen know that any earlier than he absolutely must (which would be my entirely speculative guess), but it sure seems like something is up, doesn’t it? I hope he’s not suspended---I think quite highly of Bacarri Rambo, for obvious reasons---but Coach Richt all but said there is another shoe out there, waiting to drop.
In any case, I appreciate tankertoad bringing this to our attention as swiftly as he did, and we appreciate all the feedback, and the quality and tenor of the comments that have followed. We try to address issues of interest in a timely manner, and to rush without rushing to judgment. For the record, I think tankertoad wrote a fair headline, given the fact that a media outlet---even if it was just the campus student radio station---had reported the supposed suspension as a fact, but, again, reasonable fans may differ, and, as we endeavor to expand both our coverage and the conversation here at the site, we remain grateful for your candor and your contributions.
In that spirit, what do you think? Let us know in the comments below.
Go ‘Dawgs!
42 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Might have reached a little
…but this sounds like more of a computer/editing issue than anything else. WSB reported that a source said he is suspended and I think a link to that would’ve been helpful. Again, it sounds like it was more of a problem editing than fear mongering or sensationalizing the issue.
I expect Rambo is suspended for a half or that the length of the suspension is not yet decided. I would think this would be a consequence of missing team functions rather than an NCAA or academic thing (although, perhaps missing tutoring could be in play).
Perhaps I’m wrong on this, but I think with an academic issue, the team would already know about it. Presumably it’d be something from the spring semester or summer at the latest, and unless I’m way off on my academic calendar, those grades are out and presumably any academic issues would’ve already been addressed. Further, it’s become apparent that any NCAA issues are quickly leaked to the media and we would know about an eligibility issue by now.
Which is why it’s my belief that this is a missing team meeting/practice/tutoring thing. It would explain the ambiguity (I can see Richt saying, “Bacarri, you’re going to miss some time at the Dome — how much will be determined by how you conduct yourself over the next 6 weeks.”)
PURE SPECULATION ON MY PART, but the most logical explanation in my opinion.
by WindyCityDawg on Aug 30, 2011 12:32 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Camp sticks out to me
He practiced most regularly with the second team throughout camp didn’t he? I’m just not sure it is a suspension as much as it could be he got beat out. But then again I think I read somewhere where he was being a mentor-type to the second teamers as well. Hell, for all we know, Richt might just have something up his sleeve…
by RussIsMyHomeboy on Aug 30, 2011 1:05 PM EDT reply actions
Has he been seen at all during daylight hours?
#Energy Vampire
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
Sounds plausible to me actually
I mean they’ve mentioned multiple times about putting players on a board drawn up as a vampire, but you haven’t heard too much about any players really making any negitive waves, except the waves made by Rambo being pushed back in the depth chart and not being made available to the media, at all. Add in Richts refusal to report on anything definite and you get Rambo being some kind of “Energy Vampire” breaking the ambiguous “Team Rules” and suspended for a half or losing 1st team reps to allow other guys to move up the depth chart. That’s just my reading the tea leaves thoughts.
All in all i hope its nothing serious disciplinary wise. I also hope its not because Rambo stopped playing well and just regressed to a point that he’ll never play meaningful snaps anymore. Either way, Get on the Bus Rambo, GATA, and when you get “there”, KTMFD!
Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win.
I Corinthians 9:24
by Southern Dawg on Aug 30, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
A distinct possibility.
“Bacarri Rambo” shall now be known as “Sylvia Wiss.”
/Dragnet’ed
by vineyarddawg on Aug 30, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Completely unrelated topic:
NCT, Kyle, anyone else who has an interest: why is the word proviso pronounced pro-vy-so and not pro-V-so? It would seem to me that with three vowels, each separated by a consonant (and the fact that it ends in a vowel), it should have a similar pronunciation as words like chorizo, machismo, stiletto, etc. (short second vowel, long third vowel).
I have heard it pronounced both ways, actually.
I think the best answer, though, is that proviso is a Latin word, with Latin pronunciation, and the two words you mentioned are Spanish words, with Spanish pronunciations.
by vineyarddawg on Aug 30, 2011 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I did think about origin,
but I didn’t think that origin really had enough of an effect on the American English pronunciation these days.
Also, I always thought it was pro-V-so as well, but after a discussion with my roommate yesterday, we looked up the audible pronunciation on a number of different sites and they all had it as “pro-vy-so”.
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Dr Wheelock told me
that a long i in Latin is pronounced like the i in machine. And the short i is like his. So its not really a Latin thing If I remember my Latin correctly.
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 30, 2011 3:37 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I'm not an expert on the specific word, but
We anglicize foreign words all the time, even if not every time. Mark Mandingo is correct that, to the best of our knowledge, a traditional Latin pronunciation of the word would have the “i” pronounced as “ee”. Among western European languages, English is a very strange animal when it comes to pronouncing our vowels. The Italians, French, Spanish, and even Germans, have much more internal and interlingual consistency when it comes to vowels. Our weirdness is the result of two events coinciding: The Great Vowel Shift of the 15th Century (it actually likely took a bit longer, starting much earlier and lasting into the 19th century) and the advent of the printing press (invented in 1440). Traditionally, words were spelled as they were pronounced, when they were spelled at all. However, since the great majority of speakers of English (or any other language, for that matter) could neither read nor write, changes in pronunciation continued to evolve long after print basically cemented their spelling (or came very close to cementing it, anyway). So you have a word like “knight”. At the time spelling was standardized, it was pronounced exactly like it’s spelled. All consonants pronounced (that “gh” would have been a fun guttural, back-of-the-tongue thing), and the “i” would have been much closer to our current “ee”.
Anyway, nobody knows what exactly caused the Great Vowel Shift, but it likely was a number of causes. But it was a startling change. I tend to think it was a massive and dramatic combination of centuries of various languages washing over Great Britain combined with the plague’s pushing many of them together. Whatever the cause, English vowels got pushed around in the mouth. “Meet” used to sound like we today say “mate”. “Goose” sounded like “gose” (think Roosevelt). The letter “i” may be the most dramatic of all.
But back to the original question. (Honestly, I just wanted an excuse to write “The Great Vowel Shift of the 15th Century” and talk about it).
I am certain that pronouncing “proviso” with an English long “i” is merely an anglicization of the word. Consider that many pronounce “bona fide” as “bone-a-fied”. And in my own profession, a lot of lawyers pronounce the “dire” in “voir dire” as they would pronounce the same spelling in “dire circumstances”. These things just happen. (Consider also the Georgia pronunciation Cairo or the Wisconsin pronunciation of Racine or the Idaho pronunciation of Boise.)
Hell, I sometimes pronounce “clientele” in the way (or close to the way) it’s pronounced in the word’s native French.
Depending on the word, the anglicized pronunciation might be more acceptable. Sometimes both pronunciations are acceptable, and sometimes you really should pronounce it in the way it was pronounced in its native language. How it should be pronounced in English depends, I think, on a number of factors, including how long it’s been an accepted English word, general usage, and how much of a pretentious prick one wants to be.
by NCT on Aug 30, 2011 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Great Vowel Shift is a fascinating topic...
and I’ve spent lots of time reading about it. My guess would be that the two largest factors behind it would be the printing press and the plague, in that order, but who knows.
After your explanation, I still find myself asking why it would be pronounced pro-VY-so (even if it has been anglicized). It would seem to me that it would still make more sense to pronounce it pro-V-so, but perhaps I’m wrong. How many words with three vowels each separated by consonants have all the vowels pronounced as a long vowel? Pocono? Nope. Serpico? Nope. Kokomo? Nope. I understand the point around bona fide, but then again, that’s consistent with how wide, side, ride, etc., are all pronounced. It seems as if proviso is actually an abnormality.
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Truly fascinating.
And here I thought that the Great Vowel Shift was when Knute Rockne told his offensive backfield of Bertelli, Huarte, and Guglielmi to shift to another formation just before the ball was snapped.
/troglodyte’d
by vineyarddawg on Aug 30, 2011 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the "all three vowels pronounced long" is a bit of a red herring.
“o” is almost always going to be pronounced “o” in words like this. We might laze it up a little and turn it into a schwa, but the "o"s in “proviso” ain’t never gonna be like an “o” in “spot”, unless you double up on some vowels. And, in any event, I’m pretty sure that when post people say “proviso”, they’re barely making that first “o” a long one unless they’re enunciating very deliberately. I think most people would turn it into a schwa.
How ’bout these? angina, vagina, potato, tomato, Carolina, Ohio, lumbago.
Clearly, “Ohio” ought to be pronounced “oh-hee-oh”, as Tuptim did when she presented “Small House of Uncle Thomas” to the king and his English guests. But it’s an English spelling of a Native American word, so I suppose the long i is appropriate. Unless it was first written down by the French in the area (like Chicago or Illinois or Michigan), in which case Tuptim’s pronunciation may be closer to the native (which takes us to why Mississippi ends in an i but Chattachoochee ends in ee — see also Navajo spelled with a j, but that’s another story).
I love this place.
Incidentally, seeing “potato” and “tomato” follow so quickly after “angina” and “vagina” caused an only marginally SFW song to form in my head: “You say ‘an-jee-na,’ I say ‘an-jy-na’; you say ‘va-jee-na,’ I say ‘va-jy-na.’”
This should not be misconstrued to suggest that I believe it would better to call the whole thing off, however.
Go 'Dawgs!
That's a fair rebuttal.
To your point about the “o” at the beginning of proviso, I’d say that the o turning to a schwa has more to do with the fact that it’s followed by a consonant that’s pronounced with the lips, as opposed to on the tip of the tongue, leading the person to automatically lessen the hardness of the “o” for ease of use (this would explain the long o in words such as total, motor, rotor and the schwa in words such as hover, lover, cover, shoved, etc.).
Angina and vagina, yes, but then it doesn’t follow suit with regina (seriously, can you imagine calling someone reGIna?). Are you sure that’s tomayto and potayto, or is it tomahto and potahto?
I think another thing that’s tricky here is the difference between how webster says the word should be pronounced and how linguists say the word IS pronounced. My qualm isn’t so much with the actual pronunciation of the word as it is with the rule itself.
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions
That is to say,
my qualm isn’t so much with the actual pronunciation (as in the varying styles/dialects/etc.) as it is with the rule itself (the way it’s dictated).
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Regina? Sure!
Ask people from the capital of Saskatchewan how they pronounce the name of their city.
Again, though...
that’s more a colloquialism than a rule of pronunciation, though, right?
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions
But that's the thing with English and its speakers.
I don’t think we really have rules of pronunciation. One of the cool things about Spanish and French (and, I assume others) is that once you understand very basic rules of pronunciation, you can pronounce every word in the language. English may have been like that at one time, but not in hundreds of years. We talk about rules of pronunciation, but we almost always talk about exceptions at the same time.
Here’s a paper topic: Is there a relationship between the flexibility of the English language and its accommodation of variation, on the one hand, and Anglo-American Liberalism, on the other? And if so, which came first? I look forward to seeing Kyle’s research on the matter.
German is the same way with pronunciation rules and spelling.
A basic comprehension of spelling and pronunciation rules and you can pronounce or smell just about any word.
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Spell, too.
/insert joke about smelling krauts here/
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Kyle's research?!?!
I specifically upgraded your user status so I could pass this sort of thing off to you! :)
Go 'Dawgs!
I've heard a lot of brits
say re-jI-na. Especially when used as a first name. So we might have the colloquialism.
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 30, 2011 5:38 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
The Brits
I think the Brits go out of their ways to over-anglicize French words for nationalistic reasons, and they probably do the same to words from other languages, as well. Plus, good grief, the way they pronounce some of their own stuff is downright mysterious.
Okay, so the bottom line comes down to this:
should I change my pronunciation to pro-VY-so, or should I stick with pro-V-so?
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm sad to say
That I said pro-V-so for all these years until this conversation. Nobody ever said anything. But its mute anyway <————— joke
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 30, 2011 5:49 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Don't be sad, Mark!
Stand strong and fight against the madness that is the long i in the middle of the word!
by hailtogeorgia on Aug 30, 2011 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions
If pro-V-so is good enough for the genie in Aladdin,
then it’s good enough for me.
by Cherokee's Grip on Aug 30, 2011 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Just think what it would be like to be a Bulldog fan . . .
. . . if we pronounced “Georgia” with hard consonants and long vowels!
Go 'Dawgs!
I guess its actually
pronounced rej-eye-ner over there. The adding of Rs to end of sentence vowels always drives me crazy. It’s like they’re butchering their own language.
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 30, 2011 5:46 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Clearly, you're correct about over-Anglicizing French words.
How else does one explain “mar-kwiss” instead of “mar-kee”?
Go 'Dawgs!
Kelsey Grammer's
Reaction when he found out his name was ironically misspelled:
"Don't go ninja'n nobody that don't need ninja'n!" ~ Kung Fu Hillbilly.
What a blog.
Football. BBQ. Grammar. Concision. And now, a vowel movement.
"If we score, we may win. If they never score, we'll never lose."
-Erk Russell
by DavetheDawg on Aug 30, 2011 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I've never had a blog post wake me up quite like this one!
This site never ceases to amaze!
Success is never final. --Winston Churchill
by Inteljumper on Aug 30, 2011 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok gang, let me get this off my chest:
I absolutely know and respect Kyle doesnt want to do breaking news on rumors. I had 3 different newspapers doing reports. I failed at links. But, my god, Google isnt that hard. I referenced the WSB site, just didnt link it. I dont think I am a dumb man, but I will say this editor hasnt like me so much. I am going to get better. But know one could link as much as TKK.
The point of adding Authors was to get variety. TKK is the "MAN". The rest of us are learning. There are different styles.
I apologize I couldnt get the links to work appropriately, but I assure you I wont do alarmist news to "get google hits" and none of us will. Bank on it.
That being said, something is just wrong. Rumors went out Rambo is suspended and the HC couldnt comment. THe rest, we will see.
Hang in there with us. The changes are going to bring you a lot more variety, faster breaking news, and even more fun. Enjoy – and the constructive feedback was appreciated actually.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Agreed all the way around, up to and including the constructive feedback.
You’re seriously not going to try to link as much as I do, though? :)
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Aug 30, 2011 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Its all good, bro.
I’ve been around for a little bit and after seeing the list of posters given author/moderator/what-have-you privileges I am excited about the direction of Dawgsports. After reading your comments for close to two years I trust that y’all will provide good content and make good decisions. So far that has been the case.
by UGAVike on Aug 31, 2011 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Dawg Sports
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
