further adventures in Jed York being unsuited for his position
For those who haven't seen it yet, it's a nice little video on ESPN lauding Gardner and sportsmanship in general.
And here's a Freep appreciation article on Gardner as well:
While I continue to believe that we have some of the most knowledgeable and passionate fans in college football, I am a little confused at the amount of outrage (multiple threads calling for Hoke’s head) over the way he handled Morris today and the utter lack of outrage we have collectively shown when Devin has taken big shots, been gimpy and PLAYED AN ENTIRE QUARTER WITH A BROKEN FOOT – without being taken out (http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/various-sources-twitter-gardner-played-fourth-quarter-against-osu-broken-foot)
Let me be clear with what I’m saying here – in no way, do I condone the way Hoke and staff handled Morris today – and I think every Michigan fan (including myself) is or should be appalled with the way the situation was handled this afternoon. My question is whether we as a fan base, have shown a double-standard when it comes to big hits / injuries suffered by Gardner vs. Morris? And if so, are there any legit reasons for this? (i.e. we are fed up with Hoke, and using this as a trigger for our anger)
I know I will probably get neg-bombed to Boliva for this, but I also now I’m not the only one who feels this way as evidenced by other comments, and think it’s a discussion worth having
Best possible scenario: Morris starts and performs well. He gets better each game and UM wins 6-7 BIG games. The record is OK, but the team shows hope for next year.
Worst possible scenario: Morris performs poorly. He is replaced with Gardner after a game or two and UM wins 3-4 BIG games. The record is terrible and there is no hope for next year.
Let's hope for the best.
For all of the questions along the OL this fall, things could be considerably worse.
242 YPG and 6.3 YPC.
I'll take it.
Michigan rushing attack is currently ranked in the Top 25, and incidently tied with Oregon and in good company with some other notable offenses in college football:
Analysis by The Michigan Daily shows that in direct revenues, a player like Gardner can add $5.5 million to the University per year. In free advertising alone, Gardner generating more than $8 million through media exposure over one month.
The current NCAA system, which prohibits monetary compensation to student athletes, makes it impossible to precisely evaluate a player’s market value. But as the debate over player compensation continues, the question is as important as ever.
We've had the "pay the players" topic of conversation here quite a few times, but this article from the Michigan Daily puts some dollar amounts on just how much some of those top tier student athletes really make for the university, and it's staggering. Michigan spends about $275K on each football player every year - but that includes the almost $9M spent on coaches' salaries. I'm all for a stipend, or an Olympic model. Still the best line I read (elsewhere, Bacon?) was how the NCAA spends millions employing people just to make sure that the students don't get a dime.
I find most of what Charles P. Pierce writes to be worth a read, and this column didn't disappoint.
Saturday afternoon, as the autumn haze burned away, there was no BCS. There were no delicate made-for-TV calculations. When and where and against whom undefeated Ohio State would be playing at the turn of the year became irrelevant within the confines of the Big House. (And may we now paraphrase the late football aficionado R.M. Nixon and point out that it is, indeed, a Big House.) Because of the way simple history can reassert itself, this game, this one right here in Ann Arbor, and later that one down in Jordan-Hare Stadium in Auburn, solved all of college football's annual end-of-the-season conundrums. History solved all those conundrums by complicating them, and by providing the simplest answer of all to the question "Who's no. 1?"
The answer: Who the rammer-jammer hell cares? Did you see those games?