By outscoring its last three opponents 94-14 and entering the polls for the first time since Nov. 2, 2013, Michigan looks like it has the potential to surpass preseason expectations.
TL/DR? We're going to beat them badly, 23 - 0.
The Daily published a thoughtful writeup on Frank Clark. It doesn't contain any new information, per se, but I do think it's worthy of bringing to the board's attention. Its tone is similar to that of the post that Brian published following Clark's dismissal. As someone who came out with a knee-jerk reaction of fury when the initial news broke, I think it's very important that we all read pieces like these.
Read the whole story here
The main bit regarding the e-mails:
On Oct. 28, MGoBlog.com published dozens of e-mails reportedly from the former Athletic Director to fans.
“I suggest you find a new team to support,” Brandon wrote in one. “We will be fine without you. Have a happy life…”
Other e-mails reportedly from Brandon were also met with anger and disapproval from the public. He told one to “quit drinking and go to bed,” and wrote to another, “I am sorry you are ‘upset.’ ”
Two days after MGoBlog.com’s report, Brandon stepped down.
The negotiations resulting in Brandon’s settlement are “confidential to the extent allowed by the law,” according to the document, limiting Schlissel’s ability to discuss the extent to which the e-mails pushed Brandon to resign.
“One thing I will say is I expect everybody who works at this public university to treat the public with respect,” Schlissel said. “That’s a sort of condition of working at this university.
“Everybody should be respectful to the public we serve.”
Here's the URL: http://www.michigandaily.com/sports/michigan-mark-schlissel-mgoblog-dave-brandon-emails-resign-comment-controversy
The Wall Street Journal has an article today claiming that F. Scott Fitzgerald often called Fritz Crisler to give him advice on football strategy.
The calls came “between 12 midnight and six a.m. of the night before our games—not just sometimes, but practically every eve of every home game,”
“Sometimes he had a play or a new strategy he wanted me to use,” said Crisler. “Some of the ideas Scott used to suggest to me over the phone were reasonable—and some were fantastic.”
This all happened while Crisler was coaching Princeton, but the information came from a 1956 interview with Crisler in the Michigan Daily.
The author of the WSJ article suggests that Fitzgerald may have originally given Crisler the idea to play platoon football. Elsewhere, though, the article seems to say that Fitzgerald didn't really have it figured out. His big idea may have been a sort of bizarre reverse goal-line offense, where you would bring in an extra small lineup to try to punch the ball in.
Sorry if this is a repeat, but I didn't see the article linked elsewhere on the site. The article as a whole is well worth reading, and perhaps a timely reminder that an innovative offense is not alien to Michigan tradition.
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.