I would say unless you know specifically know what all of the situation, and I would assume that only a few people know all of it, then you really can't say there should have been an exception.

I have a son, whose mother has allowed to have exceptions to everything, for example if he is grounded he can pick the days he is grounded, so if his friends can't hang that day then he is just grounded that day, or if he has a ton of homework then he is grounded. However what is he really learning? If you ask me nothing as he is now stealing stuff from me, looking at things on his phone that are inappropriate, doing things with drugs that should never be done, sneaking out at his mom's and no consequences, getting to drive the car they have for him and no matter what happens, just because it is more convenient for his mom.

All I am saying is no one knows what Bronco did or didn't do to allow JJ to be able to play in the game. So I don't think it is acceptable to say that Bronco is wrong in the situation when in reality we don't know. Yes I feel bad for JJ and yes I think it would be good for him to be able to play at UConn in front of all his friends and family, however if he broke the rules and knew that he would be suspended for the first game then this is on JJ and not on Bronco.

What if you worked in a place where they have a no tolerance drug policy but you did drugs because you were with your parents and family. Would you think this is ok? I am NOT saying that JJ did drugs, but just because of family doesn't make the situation go away or change the issue that you broke the rules and there has to be some kind of CONSISTENT consequences. If you aren't consistent then trust me you will never have the respect of your kids, players, employees, or whatever you want to put in here.