On Thursday, "First Take" debated analyst Allen Pinkett's statements about Notre Dame suspending some of its players for violating team rules. Pinkett said he believed a successful team needs a few "bad citizens" who could create an "edge." Skip Bayless agrees with Pinkett's premise, although he takes issue with Pinkett's particular choice of words. Stephen A. Smith agrees, although he doesn't want people who actually break laws on his favorite teams. What's your take?

• ider1234: "There's a big difference between slightly crazy hard to control players who give you a toughness and privileged kids who can't handle the freedom of college and end up doing stupid stuff."
• Nswcbama: "Criminal, undisciplined players are not what you need. A few hard-nosed "bad attitude on the field" kind of players that follow their responsibilities and can still play within the rules though are what is needed. Black or white is not an issue, what is at issue is how you conduct yourself within the lines of the field and whether you have the self-discipline to play hard but play right."
• stephenbene40: "That has to be the most asinine thing I've heard in a very long time. Pinkett is encouraging these young men to be criminals because it gives the Irish an edge?!?! That kind of thinking is what is kiling this country, especially the arena of sports, today. We need men of character not criminals. Men who know right from wrong and choose to do right. Men who place the team's needs above their needs. Men who follow the rules not punks who break them. Pinkett should be reprimanded for such a ridiculous comment."
• juancatfish: "A successful team, sports or business, do not need to have criminals to be great. That statement is what a dumb jock would say. Irish football is doing the right thing with the suspensions. But these kids that got in trouble are by no means criminals either."
• knicholson0985: "I understand what he is saying. Not that hard to reason he is saying ND needs to take some chances on some guys with baggage if they want to compete with the other schools taking the same chances with those guys. Another guy getting criticized for being honest."
• LeBrownsJames: "This is an ignorant statement and dumb generalization. Guys can have a chip on their shoulder on the field without being criminals, and criminals only create problems for a team because if they're relied upon and mess up; it doesn't matter what type of chemistry they created because they're not on the field. He wants aggression & passion, like any football team needs. But to say you want criminals...not buying it."



Join the conversation or respond by signing in or creating a profile and blogging.