Boise State Punch: What if Byron Hout Deserved LeGarrette's Punch?

TAMPA—For the record, I do not condone violence, nor should anyone for that matter. I do not favor a college athlete striking an opposing player, ever. This is a game, and as such, no game should turn into a battle.

There are far greater reasons to fight for a cause. People die for causes, not for football games.

That being said, last night's "cheap shot" by LeGarrette Blount on Byron Hout, while uncalled for, does not necessarily suggest that what unfolded was the inner workings of some deviant destructive psychopath.

There is an expectation in football, especially college football, where institutional pride is the beacon by which players and fans alike live, sleep, eat, and breathe.

I myself am a "Seminole." I will be until the day I die. I tutored athletes at FSU, and I graduated with a degree in Economics. I will forever be passionate about my Alma Mater, under any circumstances.

If someone felt the need to get in a cheap shot when I was at my lowest, after the completion of a game (which has happened all too many times in recent memory—so, thanks for that, Gator drunks,) I would walk away. Most people would acknowledge that my course of action would be the exception—not the rule.

Tempers can heat up quickly in the face of something as simple as a loss. A loss is hard, but in Oregon's case, the loss to Boise State may very well define their entire season.

Keep this in mind, Oregon was a sleeper to play for a BCS bowl game and possibly go undefeated. If Oregon finishes in the top 10, alongside USC or Cal, and Boise State is undefeated too, who do you think will get left out?

USC? Not likely. Jahvid Best's Cal? Doubtful. It'd probably be Oregon, especially when Boise boasts a head-to-head win against them.

Did Blount contemplate any of this information in the two seconds it took for him to have a lapse in sanity? Probably not.

But I'm more than sure that Byron Hout didn't either.

It was a case of two young kids who are still maturing, not realizing the impact that words can have on the other. Blount likely had some effect on Hout for stating that Boise State needed an [expletive] whipping, and Hout likely had an impact for verbally retaliating following the heartbreaking loss for Blount.

Should Hout be suspended for trash-talking? No. But then again, you have to ask yourself—do you know what Hout said? I sure don't. I doubt his coaches are talking to the press to uncover what he said. So odds are nobody ever will.

Hout could have said any number of things, most of which would not warrant a punch to the face. But whatever was said was enough to provoke an obviously emotional character. This is like putting a red sheet in front of a bull and expecting it to give you kisses. I'm sorry, but I just don't see how anyone can look at Blount before this incident and think, "We need our [...]es whipped, so I think I'll go over there and provoke him!"

I won't overlook where the blame needs to be placed.

Shame on you, LeGarrette Blount—certainly your suspension is warranted. But more importantly, shame on you, Byron Hout—you won your game, and your lip service got you smacked in the mouth.

As the saying goes, "It is better to be thought of as a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

These two guys should have kept their mouths shut. Now it looks like they both will have to learn that the hard way, one with a bruised jaw to match his bruised ego, and the other a bruised career in college football.

It's too bad, because last night's slugfest between two fools overshadowed a great early season contest.