They're here......sitting in tanning beds?
Dear Diary's Argument is Invalid
Wife day. Also a hit for "non sequitur" on google image search.
6.81 – New Hampshire: 5.50, UNLV: 5.79, Toledo: 6.33
|FOLLOWING THE APPEARANCE OF A GUY IN A GOAT MASK, FOUR DUDES FROM 2009 SAID THINGS THAT ARE MOSTLY TRUE, ONE OF THEM DOING SO IN A DICKISH MANNER. THUS WAS THE INTERNET WRITTEN.|
6.39 – Temple: 4.76, Purdue: 4.74, Michigan State: 3.58
6.85 – UCF: 7.21, James Madison: 5.30, Louisiana-Lafayette: 5.68
4.01 – Towson: 5.61, Maryland: 7.06
That is a Michigan's offensive output in yards per play in four games, versus what our opponents' opponents posted. You might say from this that we're 0.39 yards per play better than a mean offense that consists of New Hampshire, UNLV, Toledo, Temple, Purdue, MSU, UCF, James Madison, La-Lafayette, Towson, and Maryland. You might say that's not very good. That's how bad Ron Utah says it is. He also says the offense was actually pretty good except against UConn, and the defense has been alright except against Akron. When you put it that way…sorry it doesn't count if you're going to go "Screw it: Denard" against Akron.
Let's have bronxblue talk about the feast-or-famine offense and depress us further:
For better or for worse, though, this is probably the best fans can hope for this outfit during the conference slate: a depressing number of minimal gains punctuated by some massive runs from Gardner as well as Fitz when he is able to make the first 2 or 3 guys miss.
|This Non Sequitur is a non sequitur. Or is it?|
Fortunately we are now entering the Big Ten slate, and an offseason did nothing to stop the Big Ten from being Big Ten!!! Here we are against the spread the last three seasons along with the two rivals:
Team 2011 2012 2013 Michigan 8-4-1 6-7 2-2 Ohio State 6-7 7-5 3-1 Michigan State 10-4 5-8 2-2
I updated his numbers since that diary was written a week ago. He tracks the whole conference but I was low on space before the jump. Look on the bar later today and you'll probably see the new one.
As always I recommend you read ST3's Inside the Box Score except I'm not going in there again to pick out a quote for you because there's a flatscreen with the UConn game at the top of it and my doctor has told me not to look at any more TVs with the UConn game on them for awhile. Ditto: Turnover Analysis.
Etc. A lineup of Big Ten offenses by avg. points goes 1) OHIO STATE!!!, 2) a crowd, 11) lolMSU, 12) LOLOLOLOLOLPURDUE!!!
[Jump so you can scroll to the moment of zen, which is all you want to see right now, and not what people were arguing about on the board].
Worst of the Board
THEY ARE HERE, AND THEY HAVE CHANGED THEIR AVATARS
In the dark days of the Era We Do Not Speak Of, a Bolshevik Revolution sprung from the MGoBoards which were half as visited but just as vitriolic and everything else as they are today. They espoused a brand of Communist Football. They envisioned themselves liberators. They were constantly having to explain that the communism thing was a metaphor from a coach's quote and not people trying to use a football message board to overthrow capitalism. They had a spinoff website for awhile.
They were appreciated as a good source of contrarianism, which various people have various levels of tolerance for. The example this time, best as I can gather, is they questioned whether 'tis noble to be interviewing 15-year-old recruits, which is a perfectly fair question to ask us. It has been answered and quite thoroughly.
All this followed Brian's thread with 650 replies where he called out some people for forgetting that recruits probably read what you say about them. In fact we know they do.
So a reminder: four posters who are among the forty well-known voices among the four hundred or so regular posters who are among four thousand active posters on a site that gets forty thousand readers per day are not a body politic or a side. Personally, I'd rather read a comment by chitownblue than a 100 from sycophants. There, I've said my piece; let us have an airing of grievances.
DO WE ALWAYS RUN ON 1ST DOWN?
Against Akron: yes. Probably not when the coaches have gameplanned something besides a tuneup.
O'BANNON SETTLES WITH EA AND CLC, NCAA STILL IN CROSSHAIRS
The news broken down by Leaders And Best. I thought the CLC was going to get stuck with the NCAA but apparently they managed to show they're not policy setters. Or something. I have a history degree. Lawyers: to the O'Bannon thread. Related: EA's not going to make it next year. Michigan players have a price and it's a lot like an NFL rookie's.
WIFE DAYS GONE
A short history of Michigan bye weeks, and by "short" I mean "only dating back to 1885." Wolverine Devotee shows the scores of M games following a bye. I'd love to see the game before the bye, and where available, the spread. I meant to point out in the roundtable this week that Hoke's byes so far have been two very nice performances against Purdue that showcased actual running backs doing running things, so this staff at least has some evidence they know what to do with an extra week.
Your Moment of Zen:
Somebody needs a power saw so they can carve that thing up and get it on e-Bay
is it not 2009?
When are you?
it's all so cold
It's over by the Burkina Faso somewhere.
is that south or west of monday
except that Northeast quit.
I actually may be the only person that believes that this team is 1) going to get its shit (back) together, 2) still going 11-1, 3) still going to Indy. This site is suffering from very pronounced clinical depression. 2 games. It was 2 games. We play like 10 freshman who are just getting warmed up. We won them both and did not suffer any significant injuries. I hope when we beat Minnesota like 50-2 that people around here will relax a little.
FIRE BORGESS!!!!! SHAWN MORRIS SHOULD BE THE STRATER!!!!!
Osyter, I just visited your site. That post you have about your studies and mother from last year is tremendous. Your writing style is very good - you should post more often. I'm glad I finally clicked on that link in your signature line.
Thanks for the kind words. I'd have time to write on there more often if I weren't incessantly checking every thread here.
>> I hope when we beat Minnesota like 50-2 that people around here will relax a little.
- I'd rather Minnesota not score a safety. Please change to 50-3. ;-)
- As I said in the lead-up to the CT game, I'd happily settle for a boring 35-10 score if in return we'd see Michigan execute like a well-oiled and relentless machine.
My sanity will be restored when Michigan plays a game with no turnovers, gives up no sacks, and some running back gains 100+ yards on 20 carries.
is the crazy shit. It is not a safety. It is two extra points.
Your mind = blown.
Actually no I'm fine with a safety, since it means Devin at least took the sack instead of throwing it to a defensive end.
50-2?!?!? That means we give up a safety. Damnit Devin....throw the ball away!!!!!!! We're so screwed when we meet a real opponent.
you are sooooo wrong.
13-1 we will be. we will play OSU in game three for the national championship and beat them...
doesn't believe in an OSU-UM rematch for a national championship. A one-loss SEC team must always be in the MNC game.
***Still annoyed about 2006***
If anything, the best thing to happen these past several days is that the old MGoHomies started showing up again. Even if it was a quasi-battle, its still great to see old e-faces again. It sounds silly, but it does pay to respect or at least appreciate the elders. Remember where you came from, pander to your base, etc. etc.
Thanks for saying something about this, Seth. I want to speak my piece too, but I won’t push this forever or pick a fight.
Here’s the way that this exchange came across to me and the reason that I found the whole thread depressing. It felt like MGoBlog was essentially saying this:
How dare you, MGoBrewMom (and others), say that this 14/15-year-old, whose photo I just posted, looks young? Guh. Of course everything we’re doing is totally appropriate, stop asking questions and giving advice. Since social media exists, it’s totally fine to approach anyone there directly, however young, interview them without extending the courtesy of contacting their coaches first, and then post those interviews – without showing them to coaches or parents before publishing – on a blog visited by tens of thousands of people daily. You guys are pricks for asking about it and we don’t need you.
It’s hard to reconcile that with the blog’s critiques about the NCAA’s exploitation of college kids, antagonistic mocking of other schools’ recruits (e.g., MSU’s WR-turned-rapper), harsh treatment of Michigan athletes for their play (the Obi Ezehs of the world), frequent comments that seem at least as likely to offend as the “he looks young” stuff (e.g., frequently posting Jeremy Gallon’s photo alongside that of a girl), and, I think worst of all, the expressed frustration with the UM AD making Michigan more like every other school (for short run $) instead of emphasizing what many of us believe makes Michigan unique and worthy of our absurd devotion. I thought this thread showed signs that same kind of move from the MGoBlog staff.
I think you’re all good dudes and I’ll keep reading, at least until something else comes around, but the whole thing is sad to me. I also disagree with the “it’s only four posters” point, but I’ll leave that alone.
I believe the point about offending Mr. Savage could have been handled with a more delicate touch. I don't believe there is anyone on this blog who wants to (or meant to) offend recruits.
The offending thing is actually something I've been pondering for awhil and it does present a problem. Least we forget, Tuley-Tillman has very displeased when a blog called him raw and basically failed to declare him the next coming of Long and Lewan.
This blog has always excelled because when recruits are covered, attempts are made to break down their game film and critique their play. Things are said like "Likely won't start until their junior at the earliest, very raw.", "Likely to be passed from behind unless he works his ass off", and other such things. If the content is going to target kids who are 15 and not used to hitting the camps and being critiqued in a such manner, we're going to tie our hands in the future in terms of analysis. Last year it was unhappiness over being called raw, this year it was being young looking, and perhaps next year someone will mad when Ace says he doesn't have the world's greatest hands and is prone to dropping balls. You're always going to have to recruits who don't like the grading they get, but at least the older ones should in theory have gotten used to it after hitting those camps and talking to coaches on their officials.
We have an admittedly small sample size here, but so far the trend line has started out in an extremely poor direction to say the least. We're not the kind of blog prone to mindlessly hailing fluff pieces, because if we were we'd all be watching Sports Center rather than hanging out here.
This blog, much like the sports media in general, is set up for 24 hours-365 day coverage of a topic that by itself, really cannot support that much content. Thus, it hits recruiting really hard, probably harder than it should because 1) there are sites that do that already, and 2) I really think a majority of people on this blog (myself being one) would really rather just learn about these players when they get here. There is a reason that a go onto this site and not Scout or Rivals, and that reason is because I care about Michgian players, not players that may or may not be Michigan players three or four years from now.
I think with recruiting, sometimes this site tries to become part of the story instead of just reporting or opining on the story. In that way, I can be a little turned off by some of the things that are said about recruits around here. There is only so much you can say about an unknown commodity, which is really what all recruits are, before things are said that are either irrelevant, completely speculative, or offensive. I think in some ways the very fact that there is so much discussion about a 15 year old is an example of "the problem" as opposed to what lead to "the problem."
Just to add on a very little bit to what you said:
I don't believe most people that were complaining about the recruiting coverage were doing so about the actual existance of said coverage. They (we) were complaining about how the coverage was being generated. I, personally, don't see anything wrong with talking to recruits in any fashion. It was simply how those conversations were initiated.
With that being said; what I had a problem with after the fact was how some of staff responded to the issues raised. I can understand if they got frustrated with us because of the number of comments that kept saying the same thing, but the volume of posts should only emphasize the issue being raised.
Apparently I have to say this. No, just because you have "haters" doesn't necessarily mean you are doing something right. Sometimes, you have "haters" because people disagree with you. Of course you could think of someone who disagrees with you as simply raising a cogent point and not refer to them as "haters". That might be the mature thing to do.
People who talk about haterzzz.
Savage looking young is an opinion. Jeremy Gallon looking like Snoop is objective, empirical, verifiable fact.
I had something that might have been witty to say, but then the caffeine killed it between clicking on reply and the box showing up.
In short, I've had way too much coffee.
Your post reminds me of something I read a couple of years ago in which the writer quoted a very long-winded, amphetamine-fueled statement by Jean-Paul Sartre and then said, "...or, as the Ramones said much more succinctly, gabba gabba hey!"
I think that this is a ridiculous distinction.
Would you be more offended by someone saying you looked young or that you looked like a woman? Both could certainly be construed as an insult. I don't think Gallon would feel any better, if he was indeed insulted, if you said "but you do look like a woman, it is a fact!"
At this point, Seth's approach of "mistakes were made" is the best. Stop digging.
That I didn't even know that snoop was a woman? I literally have no clue who that person is. Plus Gallon looks just like her. For a good three months when I started visiting this Blog, I really just thought that was a picture of Gallon from his recruiting days, or in street clothes.
And saying a man and a woman can't look alike is absurd. It is sexist to say men and woman cannot be equals. Comparing Gallon's looks to only men is like comparing Dileo to Wes Welker because he is a white slot receiver instead of comparing the effectiveness of his route running and hands.
I'm with you. I thought snoop was a dude the whole time. That makes is better than other people
...but enough about my dating life.
Clearly, I have lost my ability to figure out what is for real and what is a joke but I have to say, this really did make me laugh.
If someone doesn't know whether to laugh, 80% of the time it's on the joke-teller.
I make-a da funny. No one laugh.
We won 34-14. Mr. Savage had two receptions for 1st downs. He looks just like the photo, though you have to scale him up to 6'-2".
Perfect synopsis ferguson. I was especially shocked about the reaction or overreaction to "the four posters" considering what the writers wrote about Dat Bull. They tore that kid apart for weeks but saying a kid looks young is offensive?
Fairly well said Turd but I just wish we could all find a way to disagree on the blog without it being a 'fight' or an 'argument'. AND without degrading one another. Lord knows I'm not perfect but i have been rereading my posts lately to make sure of two things:
1.) they make a point
2.) I'm not name calling and when I have a problem I address the problem not the person.
What went down the other day has been boiling for a while and I'm surprised it hadn't happened already. Lets hope we can learn from it.
I would ask that Brian et. al free the mgoblog four! Maybe in restating their accounts we could began to address the disconnect between our fearless leader and his seething masses?
I also would like to formally ask that this blog take a stance and speak with parents before they speak with recruits; if we did that we could really stand out as the classiest recruiting site on the web. And in turn we, the seething masses, could follow my two rules of making a point and addressing issues instead of people.
huh? can we get a peace offering?
jdon aka the rape ewok of kindness and friendship
I've held off posting for days because there's no way I'd be able to keep my emotions under control and use good judgement.
I had a 14 paragraph post ready to send in the Meta recruit thread, but din't bother. I can't tell anymore what is "getting it off my chest", and what is picking another fight.
but for the record:
1. Unhappy with the editorial staff with the way issues were handled, and general rule opaqueness.
2. Comment moderation makes people think twice before posting, provides a sense of ownership & community, and ultimately make your job easier. I tmay have prevented most of this, fix it.
3. Brandon is almost certainly 100% ethical. But please don't just stop after you've taken an easy contact shortcut, cross all your T's & dot all your I's. I'm the parent you never want on your doorstep.
4. while admitting to being a completely useless contributor, I am a long term member that has bought from the Mgostore, beveled my guilt, supported sponsors, and attended events.
My Blog love has been waning for months, seeing the parents fight makes me think it's all my fault.
IIRC, ShockFX (one of the posters who was banned) offered to do a complete overhaul of the moderation system, so we'd have our pos and negbangs back.
Brain gave him the OK, so Shock went out of his way to help fix something people have been complaining about forever, and then Brain just didn't use the code at all because he is either too lazy or just doesn't give any shits about the board.
That is part of my qualm too. Quite a few of the individual WLA members have put a lot of work into helping this place become what it is, through moderation, live blogs (i think they might have started the live blogging on the site), helping with coding and other stuff, but Brain just treats them like dirt.
Actually, Brain doesn't get along too well with a lot of former employees and contributors.
That is becoming a very interesting trend, IMO.
To the best of my knowledge everything you just said is complete bullshit. Liveblogs, old staff (there's only two and the one I know is still quite friendly) grudges, a simple fix for a major module dying... You just made it all up or someone lied to you.
ShockFX has more credibility than the site does right now after its vindictive run.
And the list of particularly happy former mods is pretty short.
Well I didn't ban anyone and didn't discuss it with Brian, and didn't make a single comment in that thread. How did I lose any credibility on the history of liveblogs?
Nicely said, even though I tend to look askance at Ewoks in general.
Personally, and though you'd never know it from some of my posts, I've taken a vow of "Right Speech". That means that, prior to saying anything, I'm supposed to consider the following:
1) Is it true?
2) Is it helpful?
3) Is it the right time to say it?
(Some folks add, "is it kind," but screw that. If it's helpful and true, I consider it kind, even if it's a verbal slap.) I also have a personal exception, which is that if something is funny enough, I'm saying it and to hell with y'all.
I realize that the Interwebs will never adopt this standard, but it seems something for the thoughtful folks hereon to consider.