he grew a beard
So on ESPN's First Take Skip Bayless picked Michigan as the 5th best team in the Big Ten. His top four teams were Nebraska, Wisconsin, OSU, and MSU.
So when I was making a smart-ass comment on the Chris Wormley thread below, I got to thinking it might be a good use of our creative energy (or at least a moderately enteraining way to kill some mid-August time) to create a montage of Fred Jackson-esqeue priase quotes. You know, make up some ridiculous comments about player X, comparing him to players Y and Z from the past. I'll get us started with the comment that I was typing when I had this moment of clarity:
I heard Chris Wormley is like a cross between a more powerful Ndamukong Suh and a quicker Jevon Kearse. /fredjackson'd (/fredjackson'd stolen from dennisblundon)
A bonus entry:
Drew Dileo is really looking good out there. He actually reminds me a lot of a young Wes Welker, except with better route running ability and a little bit more grit. /fredjackson'd
It's a slow week with football not quite going yet, so I thought I'd pose a question to the board that has been occupying my brain since this whole OSU thing began and media members began talking about whether the NCAA was obsolete or not. Here goes:
In the not-so-distant future, schools run amok. Programs realize that after OSU got off with a wrist-slap, their program can do whatever it wants, as long as they deny knowledge of it. College athletics descend into anarchy. Teams no longer follow NCAA rules, making the NCAA obsolete.
Schools begin joining a separate entity from the NCAA, a new governing body of college athletics. While the NCAA was formed on the basis of amateurism, the new regime is only interested in one thing—money. None of the old rules will apply, including being allowed to pay players, and boosters are allowed to run amok.
Slowly schools pull away from the NCAA, beginning with those on probation, and moving through the SEC, spreading northward. Not all schools decide to leave—some of the more academically oriented schools want to continue to do things the right way. They decide to stay with the NCAA. The fear is that these programs will dissipate into oblivion when the new, money-laden, high-octane counter to the NCAA gets up and going.
The dispute moves north to Ohio, where OSU decides that they can be a lot more successful if they are able to pay players up front without worrying about tattoo parlors or car dealers blowing the whistle. Ohio U, however, does not have the money or prestige to make the move. The new governing body continues to leave small schools in its wake.
After picking up most of the SEC, Big 12, and a few schools from the Big 10, they move on to Michigan. State has already caved, moving to the protective wing of the new structure, and hopes that Michigan will follow suit so that they can keep getting blasted by Blue on a yearly basis. The commissioner calls Dave Brandon, and tells him if he wants to stay relevant in sports, and not turn in to an Ivy League school, UM must join the new governing body. He asks the fans what they would prefer through an on-line forum.
So, gents, here is my question: if the above scenario did occur, and Michigan had to choose between these 2 options, which would it be:
1.) Stay with the NCAA. This forfeits any sort of possibility of future championships on a national level, but will allow Michigan to continue to do things the right way. They become the equivalent of an Ivy League school with regard to sports.
2.) Drop the NCAA like it’s hot. We begin paying players, working with boosters, and forfeiting our century-long heir of superiority over other schools. We continue to be relevant in the national landscape, but our academic reputation takes a huge hit.
would love to see a pic of the new south scoreboard from the 18th tee at UM Golf Course - one of the most iconic views of AA you can have.
with the new "Block M" on the back it should be an epic pic. local? - please post.