Gelen Robinson's Arrest Violated Prior Agreement
As most of you likely know, sophomore defense end Gelen Robinson -- son of Purdue basketball great Glenn Robinson -- was arrested over the weekend for driving under the influence and having an open alcoholic beverage in his vehicle. Gelen just turned 20 less than two weeks ago and thus also was driving over the legal limit while being underage to begin with. Not good. Making matters worse, the IndyStar reminds us that last August Gelen entered into what's called a "diversion agreement," whereby he agrees to basically behave himself with regard to alcohol for a year (to this August) and thus the potential charges from last August go away. By violating that agreement, Gelen is now subject to the charges stemming from that incident. That charge was a misdemeanor so that's a good thing in the grand scheme of how serious the punishment from the law might be. However, this is a mess. Sure, Gelen didn't wind up hurting anyone, but that's pure luck. Being a repeat offender when it comes to alcohol at this young an age is worrisome in a number of regards. Risking your ride (scholarship) is, of course, pretty reckless, but drinking and driving in general is just one of those things it's hard to have much patience for. Kids do make mistakes and many of us drank in college... but getting behind the wheel is what makes it serious to so many of us. If he'd been nabbed for underage consumption b/c an excise cop saw him walking home, well, I might say geez, give him a break. But as I said, it's hard to have that sort of mentality given the circumstances.
Time will tell how much this impacts Gelen's standing with the team. One has to assume he'll be suspended by Coach Hazell a game or two at least. In the meantime, there are a lot of harsh remarks and judgments being leveled at Gelen around the Purdue online community. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, of course, but I definitely think it's important to remember you're talking about another person and another Boilermaker. Calling what he did dumb is fine -- and accurate -- but calling him names is maybe something to rethink.