Peppers at 10, which seems low.
Just saw a tweet about voting for the official T-shirt design for the upcoming football season. All voting will be via twitter.
Personally I like the #VoteTeam134, others seem too generic.
Here's the link: http://www.mgoblue.com/promotions/fbl-shirt-2013.html
Per @umichfootball on twitter.
MGoBlue release: http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/032013aab.html
What does this mean? Who will replace him? Will we see a Ross-Bolden-Morgan LB lineup?
March 20, 2013
ANN ARBOR, Mich.University of Michigan football senior/junior linebacker Jake RyanWestlake, Ohio/St. Ignatius) is out indefinitely with a torn anterior cruciate ligament suffered in Tuesday's practice, the team announced today (Wednesday, March 20).
"You always hate when anyone gets injured and unfortunately we've dealt with our share of injuries in the last 12 months," said Michigan coach Brady Hoke."We will support Jake to make sure he has everything he needs to get through this.I know he will attack his rehabilitation just like he does everything else and will be back when he's ready."
Ryan led the Wolverines in 2012 with 88 tackles, 56 solo, 16 stops for loss, 4.5 sacks and four forced fumbles.
He earned All-Big Ten second team honors by the media and was the Roger Zatkoff Award recipient as U-M's top linebacker.Dating back to 2011, Ryan had tallied a tackle-for-loss in 17 of his last 19 games.
From the end of the article:
The University of Michigan, for instance, is a Big Ten member with an endowment of about $8 billion. If it wants a field hockey team, it can most certainly afford one. Cutting football players past and present in on some of the tens of millions that program generates or allowing them to profit off their own likeness or to put a percentage of jersey sales into a trust fund, isn't going to bankrupt the school. And if Title IX can't be reworked (and it almost assuredly can), then Michigan would do just that to comply with federal law.
What Delany is saying is that left to its own decision, Michigan won't see field hockey as worth the money. He's acknowledging that outside the myopic prism of the athletic department, gold-plated, non-revenue sports don't make much sense.
Right now Michigan athletics gets 100 percent of the revenue and things roll on. If the players get a cut, then it will have to "reduce opportunities for student-athletes overall."
So it's the players' share of the revenue – the money the O'Bannon case is trying to divert – that is propping up the other sports … the same other sports that Delany doesn't believe the university itself considers a sound investment.
Which begs a simple, if inadvertent question: if Michigan doesn't think it should pay for a field hockey team, then why does it think Denard Robinson should?
Nauta was born in Grand Rapids and most of his family still lives in the Great Lakes State. One of those family members, Nauta's uncle, played for Greg Mattison while he was the defensive coordinator at Western Michigan.
Based on his tape it looks like he plays some TE as well. Rivals is reporting offers from Clemson, Tennessee and VT.
Obviosuly way to early, but has connections to Michigan and Mattison is his primary recruiter. Makes me wonder what Mattison will do at the end of this new contract extension, but I guess we will worry about that at a later date.
Andy Staples just wrote an article detailing the possible consequences of the O'Bannon lawsuit, if the plaintiffs win.
"...it has been my longstanding belief that The Big Ten's schools would forgo the revenues in those circumstances and instead take steps to downsize the scope, breadth and activity of their athletic programs," Delany wrote. "Several alternatives to a 'pay for play' model exist, such as the Division III model, which does not offer any athletics-based grants-in-aid, and, among others, a need-based financial model. These alternatives would, in my view, be more consistent with The Big Ten's philosophy that the educational and lifetime economic benefits associated with a university education are the appropriate quid pro quo for its student athletes."
"It's not that we want to go Division III or go to need-based aid," Delany said. "It's simply that in the plaintiff's hypothetical -- and if a court decided that Title IX is out and players must be paid -- I don't think we'd participate in that. I think we'd choose another option. ... If that's the law of the land, if you have to do that, I don't think we would."
Lately I've been torn about the issue of players getting paid or not, but this seems a bit hypocritical. Staples points out the discrepancy between the Big Ten adding Maryland and Rutgers for no other reason than cable money, and then trying to claim it's really all about the athletes education, that's all.
It's worth noting, that Delany isn't alone on this either, he's just the biggest guy to speak about it. Per Staples:
Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott, SEC executive associate commissioner Mark Womack, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby, Texas athletic directors DeLoss Dodds and Chris Plonsky, Wake Forest president Nathan Hatch and a host of others also filed declarations.
I thought this was an interesting turn of events, even if it is just an empty bluff (does anybody really think UM or OSU would drop Football as a D1 sport?). Curious what people here think