The men's first round featured scandal, bad officiating, seeding that made absolutely no sense, and upsets galore. In other words, your typical tournament. It also generated almost 200 votes per game. I'm calling "success!"
Results are posted on the old entry, but here's some of the highlights:
- The football home unis demolished their 1st Round competition. More amazingly, 10 people voted for Gynmastics.
- After starting with the wrong shirts on (OP oops), the Men's tennis blues came back to defeat the Steve&Berry's-inspired wrestling unis.
- Two huge upsets in the first round, both involving the football's away uniforms. The whites worn from Desmond to Woodson to Braylon: defeated by the slick Nikes of the late Henne/Hart/Long era. Meanwhile, the current football aways went down to the baseball team's classic-looking grays. With the '70s white pants falling to the late-'90s championship hockey sweaters, that leaves only the short-lived Nikes (a uniform which, by the way, never beat Ohio State) left to represent Michigan football's traveling wardrobe.
Men's Bracket, Standing Out from the Crowd Region:
These are the unis that are made to show off our stuff, or at least burn out Ohio's eye sockets trying. When one of your colors matches the sun, you don't have to hide it behind blue sky and gray clouds. Sometimes, though, the sport calls for an alternate that's a little more subdued, a little more classy. There is such a thing as too much sunshine. I'll let the MgoBloggers be the judge of which alternate uniforms will put M over the top, or need to be returned to the costume department of Brüno.
Last round: The maize hoops unis demolished the maize tennis shirts. The current cagers' maize unis took out soccer's stylish yellows. The lower two games in this bracket were upsets, as the baseball blues demolished the golf shirts, and the maize lacrosse unis, in turn, handily defeated the baseball team's maize alts.
Preview: The hoops yellows have some stiff competition from those lacrosse unis. Meanwhile, the popular maize hockey sweaters should be able to move on, especially since all the hockey sweaters seemed to get a ton of votes last week.
Game 1: Men's Basketball - maize (1) v. Lacrosse - maize (5)
Game 2: Ice Hockey - maize (2) v. Baseball - blue (6)
Men's Bracket, Not Everyone Looks Good in Blue Region:
Navy blue, throughout history, has not been a color reserved for the masses. It's a color you have to earn. Those who put on an azure jersey, or sweater, or leotard, become part of a long tradition of excellence. Only after proving yourself worthy of that tradition may you don this hue. Blue says that you stand above the competition, that you are better than others. There are so many great reasons to wear this color, but if you're gonna go blue, you'd better do it right.
Last round: The football team's home unis took care of business against Gymnastics, and the Hoops blues had little trouble with cross country. Tennis, as mentioned above, came back and pinned wrestling to the mat. Meanwhile, the soccer blues dominated the 4-5 matchup.
Preview: The home football unis have been called the best in sports by national uniform contests, and they're the favorites to win it all again here, but those kick-you-in-da-face soccer unis aren't expected to go quietly. Meanwhile, the tennis blues get to show their stuff for an entire round, but the blues that Michigan wore for both games of its return to the NCAA Tourney are gonna be a lot tougher than the 1st round matchup.
Game 1: Football - home (1) v. Soccer - blues (5)
Game 2: Hoops - home (2) v. Tennis - blue (6)
Men's Bracket, In My Day We Wore X Region:
Michigan's been playing a full slate of varsity sports for longer than most Division 1 schools have existed. In that time, a lot of outfits have come and gone, though considering all those years, though not so many as you might think -- we're "traditional" like that I guess. Some have been brought back. Others never left. And some probably belong back on the shelf.
Last round: The first round saw some big upsets in this bracket. The (then-controversial) switch to the sleek Nikes for football's away uni proved justified in a close vote. Meanwhile, the beloved '89 hoops blues went down handily to Ice Hockey's blue block Ms. Ice Hockey's maize scripts had no trouble knocking off the white-pants of the '70s. And then, the controversy: approaching the last hour of voting, the score was tied with 89 votes apiece between the throwback '60s and throwback '90s hockey sweaters. Fortunately, the OP was saved from from an embarrassing tiebreaking post by the fortuitous waking of Misopogal, who in return for coffee, sat down and cast a final vote (and finally read one of my posts). Sorry Block M fans: she's an old fashioned girl.
Preview: The last football away jersey standing only served M for three years and never beat Ohio State, while the script maize sweaters of the late '90s took home a championship in their almost-as-brief stint -- this one's expected to be close. Meanwhile, the '60s throwback uni only beat its last Block M sweater by one vote, but with a better example photo they might have an easier time with the busy old Nike-era blue alts.
Game 1: Football - '05-'07 aways (8) v. Ice Hockey - maize script (4)
Game 2: Ice Hockey Block M's (7) v. Ice Hockey '60s (3)
Men's Bracket, Scientifically Speaking, I'm Actually Wearing Every Color Right Now Region:
White is a dangerous color, but for those who can pull it off ... oh, who am I kidding, as Misopogal can tell you, I really don't know anything about fashion. What I do know is that if you don't wash your white hockey sweater after every use, you'll develop some unintended yellow slashes at the drip-points of your pads (I'm still waiting for a hockey uni to be designed with color slashes where the sweat stains usually form).
Last round: The first round had one upset, but it was a big one, with the current football aways going down to the classy baseball grays. Hoops took out the old Nike pinstripes alts (which were much better than the current ones IMO). The hockey whites knocked out the soccer whites (despite the fact that they've never actually been worn). And baseball's whites knocked out lacrosse's whites.
Preview: It comes down to two almost identical baseball jerseys in the first game, and this one's expected to be a total toss-up. Meanwhile, the new hockey whites had a nice run to the 2nd round but face an uphill battle against the classic white hoops unis.
Game 1: Baseball - gray (8) v. Baseball - white (4)
Game 2: Hoops - white (2) v. Ice Hockey - white (3)
I've thought about what I said in the previous thread and realized my statements have been slightly unclear. I'll try to restate this in a way to spur the discussion and correct my own inconsistencies.
1. The NCAA is THE minor league for the NFL.
2. There are minimum academic standards to get into the NCAA football establishment.
3. Michigan minimums = NCAA minimums.
1. Admitted athletes go to class and are academically engaged at an appropriate level.
2. Athletics, whether or not it is explicitly outlined in the mission statement, is a HUGE focus for top universities. The school/AD spent $225M to renovate a hole in the ground so people have a nice place to watch football 6-8 days a year.
3. People acknowledge that in order to be an athletic powerhouse AND a top academic school, typical admission standards need to be compromised.
My points of contention with the current system and questions I ask posters to address:
1. While Michigan is not a vocational school, there is no vocational school for football players. One doesn't need a university degree to be a plumber, just to be excellent at plumbing (and pass trade school). Why SHOULD football be different?
2. There are arbitrary standards from the NCAA on academic qualification (GPA, SAT/ACT). Schools are free to set their own at higher levels. However, since the NCAA is the de facto gateway to the NFL, people seeking a career in a physical discipline are forced to meet intellectual standards. Is a non-qualifier better off struggling to jump through (totally unrelated to their intended pursuit) hoops at a community college or at a school with vast resources where they can pursue their desired career in a mutually beneficial way?
3. Referencing assumption 3, admission standards are already compromised. In effect, by even allowing athletes below normal admission standards, a school is clearly stating "you do not belong here, but we are making an exception because you have a certain talent". As a result, why does the degree to which an athlete is below the standard matter? A clear statement of "you don't belong here" is already present. The massive hypocrisy is astounding. Athletes are actively recruited to join a university, at which point they are immediately branded 2nd-class citizens of the institution. A university does NOT have to do this, they do so because it is a very beneficially endeavor for itself. This leaves a final choice: no athletic scholarships and be like Ivies, continued, institutionally sponsored hypocrisy, or acceptance of reality and restructure the student-athlete concept to be more equitable?
Huge UM fan and thank god I'm finally headed to AA from my home in NY for the Indiana game on 9/26 for my first visit to the Big House... and I have a few questions... as I've never been to AA before... and if any of you great people who've I've enjoyed reading for so long could help.. great.
I live near Syracuse, so understand that crowds of 25K are my norm.... but I did go to Penn State last year for the UM game.. the first half was nice... second not so much... but good times...but the 100K won't be a big shock.
What sections should I avoid getting tix b/c of the student ID issue?... high 20's - low 30's?
Any tips or suggestions for pre and post game?... and what are the good shops to get some good UM gear?
What is the area surrounding the stadium like during game day.. in terms of parking and such and getting to the Big House?
but anything anyone would like to offer would be so appreciated...
Thank you in advance...
If anyone has an article or something they could link to that would be great also.
I was asked to repost this from the MGoBoard. I added a few things (in Bold) so enjoy the read.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Having had breakfast with Coach Frey and "BIG" Dusty earlier in the year he wrapped up the Boren situation in a very easy way.
1. Boren wanted to go home whenever he need to help his dad with his snow plow business. He abused that excuse.
2. He had always wanted to go to Ohio State to be closer to home and his dad bribed him to go to Michigan, hoping he would grow to love it.
3. He wanted to do "his workout not Mike's"
4. He just simply "hated to run". Coach Frey jokingly told the linemen they had to run sprints at the end of practice before a holiday break (I think Easter Break). The intent was to have them line up and then surprise them with "I'm just kidding you don't have to run any sprints today". Instead of lining up Boren walked out of practice.
5. Even with all of that the staff wanted to make it work and get him on board...there is no doubt he is a talented player. After he left practice before the sprints Coach Frey confronted him about his actions. Even though he hated running he admitted that he was in the best shape of his life from Barwis "forcing" him to workout. Why the staff finally quit on him was when he talked about the new guys being "scrubs". By "new guys" I mean the current linemen not the new recruits.
If this is all true and I believe every word of it...then it really gives me a new level of respect for the way the staff handled it in the media...they could have trashed this kid but decided to concentrate on the players they were working with currently...can you imagine Lane Kiffen taking the high road like this?
Players like Boren are not good for a program no matter what culture it is...I'm glad the coaches now weed out these guys that would have coasted during the Carr years.
I'm not saying Wermers or O'niell is that guy but having talked to most of the staff and having watched a half dozen practices up close I will tell you this...Coach Frey is a really nice guy to sit and talk with socially, he will talk to you about anything in the papers about the program, he is straight forward and will give you "real answers". That being said he does not even begin to take one ounce of shit from his players. He teaches very aggressively and that’s just his style. I can see why guys who don't want to work or don't fit in want to leave on the offensive line. He is much more vocal and demanding then a guy like Coach Jackson...you could probably go four years without him ever taking your head off the way Coach Frey will.
In football no matter the level you have to build a foundation. Sometimes the best laid foundations come from subtracting materials instead of adding them. I truly believe Boren is a good player, I also believe that if we would of had a strong senior class last season he would have straightened out over time and been a strong player. Since we had little senior leadership a guy like Boren...or O'neill...or Wermers can become a cancer to young a team and effect them for years. That attitude must be wiped out from a team that is struggling. It’s hard enough to turnaround a struggling program without having to pull guys who don't want to go. Coach Rodriguez has said many times before that when you lose you have two options...New Players or New Coaches. I'm glad to see its the players that are going (besides Shafer) and not this staff. I really believe these are the guys to take UofM to the next level.
"Hold the Rope"
Am surprised that I haven't heard this parallel before of Rodriguez offense to the Mad Magician offense in the media. Either way, for all you naysayers, this is a must read... a section in the book Stadium Stories: Michigan Wolverines" by Jim Cnockaert starting on page 59... here are two good links...
Here's a preliminary analysis, using a fitting class to start with - Oosterbaan's last, which was in a situation comparable to Lloyd's last class. In similar fashion to Lloyd Carr, Oosterbaan won a National Championship (1948) and a Rose Bowl (1950) early in his coaching career, and his success dwindled slowly until he resigned in 1958. It's obvious that Oosterbaan was working off of the recruits from Crisler's last classes when he won both his Championship and his Rose Bowl, which happened in his first 3 seasons as head coach. After 1950, he did not win even a conference title.
Here's a breakdown of Oosterbaan's last class: (Taken from Bentley Historical Library)
1959: 55 Freshmen, 0 with numbers assigned. 4-5 Record
1960: 32 Sophomores, 20 with numbers assigned. 5-4 Record2 Starters: Glinka (QB, 3); Raimey (RHB, 3) - 6 Man-Games Started of 99 Man-Games - 6.09%
1961: 20 Juniors, 18 with numbers assigned. 6-3 Record
5 Starters: Houtman (LT, 6); Minko (LG, 6); O'Donnel (RG, 1); Glinka (QB, 2); Raimey (RHB, 9) - 24 Man-Games Started of 99 Man-Games - 24.24%
1962: 10 Graduating Seniors, 7 Juniors. 2-7 Record
10 Starters: Houtman (LT, 1); Minko (LG, 9); Szymanski (C, 1); O'Donnell (RT, 9); Kocan (RE, 3); Ward (RE, 1); Chandler (QB, 2); Glinka (QB, 1); Strobel (LHB, 3); Raimey (RHB, 4) - 34 Man-Games Started of 99 Man-Games - 34.34%
1963: 4 Graduating Seniors. 3-4-2 Record
2 Starters: Houtman (RT, 1); O'Donnell (LG, 9) - 10 Man-Games Started of 99 Man-Games - 10.10%
Out of 11 Positions, 9 Games, 3 Years (297 Man-Games Played), The Class of 1959 started 74 Man-Games, or 24.9% of the possible Man-Games. This is low, if you take it that there were only 3 classes that could possibly play in those 3 years (Each class should play 33% of the Man-Games). If you consider the last year as an additional class, 24.9% is spot-on.
This implies that only 4 players out of a class of 55 completed 4 years of playing time, using the entirety of their eligibility, since it appears no freshmen played in 1959 (no numbers assigned). Also, this implies that Bump started off as a terrible recruiter, as shown by the absolute collapse when the last class he did not have anything to do with graduated. None of these guys were All-American Caliber.
For posterity's sake, here are the numbers from Lloyd's last class (Freshmen in 08) so far: (Taken from MGoBlue.com)
2008: 25 Freshmen, 10 of which saw playing time. 3-9 Record
2009: Lost 3 to Transfer, 9 Sophomores, 17 Redshirt Freshmen
RichRod must have had 4 kids come out of the woodwork somewhere.
This isn't as far as I intend to go with this. I would like to see just how much information I can pull out to show attrition relative to how good a season is, and how well each of our past coaches recruited, beginning with Bump and ending with Carr. As I go on, I will have clumped diary entries for each coach, showing the progress of each of their classes. I chose to begin with Oosterbaan's last because this is the 50th anniversary of that class, and prior to Bo's era, football did not mean as much to your average kid planning on heading to college, as there was no real big money career at the end of the line.