I never said the suspension was the ONLY reason. I said it was speculative. No one knows it. Injury is all we know. So I offered addition potential speculation based off what it could be if it truly isn't an injury. That's it. It's that simple. Not sure why you're having a fuss about it. Its fine to disagree, but to claim you know it because it's "not logical" is asinine. So drop it and move on.What is logical about suspending him several games later and during the UNC game when you could have suspended him for 2 cupcakes instead? Do you understand what logical means?