Unverified Voracity Commences Insultingly Comment Count

Brian

Oh man. I will not mention anything about brothers.

image

Mary Sue Coleman? That's gotta sting. Compounding matters: Steelcase CEO James Hackett, another of their speakers, is also a Michigan graduate. Fergodsake, MSU, just put Narduzzi up there.

SCORE. Wolverine Historian has had his video library restored. Run around in circles, but in a good way. 408 painstakingly crafted retrospectives on Michigan past, back. Here is a randomly selected one:

2001 Iowa

The infuriating part of all of this was that no one who puts these things on the tubes is looking to get rich; they are just sharing their fandom, taking items of little financial but excellent emotional value. I'm not going to pay one red cent to watch a game from 2001 broadcast on free television. I will take in a highlight package and deepen my fandom. It's a soft benefit from the perspective on high, but man if I was looking at 0.01% of my revenue versus not being T3Media, well…

US Soccer gets this; they slap great highlight packages from every game they have rights to on YouTube (ie, no World Cup), and sometimes I get lost in them like it's Wikipedia. It's 100% feelingsball, but that kind of thing makes me like the USMNT more from the top down. Getting annoyed by whatever Michigan's latest un-embeddable video player that's crappier than YouTube by a factor of ten is a detraction, and the payoff is minimal.

Hopefully this is a sign that the hardliners have been relegated to the back. T3's channel exists, even. Now… can YouTube maybe unlock my previous UFR account?

LET US DISPATCH ENTHUSIASM. Man, I wanted to write a post on the Concordia game but it seemed like too much what with Ace saying all the things I wanted to. Still, UMHoops jumps in as they are wont to and I want to say things about things. So let's do that.

  • Concordia but. In 2010, Michigan played Concordia. They won 86-65 and Concordia's center went off for 29 points on Jordan Morgan. Michigan led 42-32 at the half. This was a different game, and a different level of team. That team was a Darius Morris bucket away from taking Duke to OT in the second round of the NCAA tournament. This game was an annihilation, and that was without the guy who's probably the best player on the team.
  • Oh, man, Caris. I will not get too excited about Caris LeVert. I will not get too excited about Caris LeVert. I will not WOOOOOOO CARIS LEVERT. LeVert flashed the ability to get where he wanted on the court last year, which is an impressive ability at 6'6". He never really delivered; he was always the kind of guy who might blow up hardcore with some more development. Blowing up hardcore is… I will not get too excited about Caris LeVert. Oh man.
  • GRIII, also. Robinson drove to about 15 feet and pulled up for a Jumper I Hate and it went down, back of the iron, smooth, and I wasn't even mad because Robinson going and getting it is something to look at.
  • Stauskas, also. Do not play the "not just a shooter" drinking game this year. You will die.
  • Walton… you get it. This is a team with many good players on it.

Racine back soon? The Daily's Greg Garno tweets that Red is "leaning" towards Zach Nagelvoort this weekend; he has returned to practice. That one word promises Racine back on the ice next week or the week after. Even if that seems far less urgent than it did when he went out against New Hampshire, Racine's still the starter and should be until he falters.

This will be cool or infuriating or probably both. Prepare thine vintage torches and antique pitchforks, ye mobbe of Ten Yeare War-ists.

BTN Originals will premiere Tiebreaker, the network’s first feature-length documentary, at 7 p.m. ET on Saturday, Nov. 16. Tiebreaker paints an indelible portrait of college football’s most storied rivalry and reveals a forgotten moment in college football history that helped shape today’s game.  

The 60-minute documentary examines the aftermath of the 1973 Ohio State v. Michigan football game that ended in a 10-10 tie. With both teams sporting identical 7-0-1 conference records, Big Ten Athletic Directors were left to vote on which school would represent the Big Ten in the Rose Bowl. At that time, only one Big Ten team could play in a bowl game. In a controversial vote, the Big Ten Athletic Directors voted to send Ohio State to Pasadena. Michigan head coach Bo Schembechler called the decision “the lowest day of my athletic career.”

Hopefully this is a little more hard-hitting than The Journey, which is about 20% cool inside stuff and 80% watching Aaron Craft make pancakes. That's not a joke. I caught an episode last year in which a good five minutes was dedicated to Aaron Craft making pancakes*. Moar NFL films, less soft-focus twee, please.

*[Naturally, he crowded the pan.]

Not looking great. The Power Rank's take on the Big Ten division race:

BigTenLegends_winprob_Nov2013[1]

A win Saturday and Michigan State is gone; so much for the preseason It All Comes Down To November meme. It comes down to this game. Win it and Michigan has a half-game lead. Lose it and State is 2.5 up on M and home free unless… uh… yeah, home free. Ed's numbers have Michigan with a 37% shot in East Lansing, FWIW.

Etc.: Dan on Fire is the best. Boy can the NCAA write a grabbing headline. Narduzzi's probably out the door soon, so at least there's that. Florida: the new Purdue? Come on, certify the players' class, man. More with that girl from the Indiana game. Someone find a different picture of her.

Comments

Erik_in_Dayton

October 31st, 2013 at 2:34 PM ^

The following procedure will determine the representative from each division in the event of a tie:

  1. If two teams are tied, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative
  2. If three or more teams are tied, steps 1 through 7 will be followed until a determination is made. If only two teams remain tied after any step, the winner of the game between the two tied teams shall be the representative.
    1. The records of the three tied teams will be compared against each other
    2. The records of the three tied teams will be compared within their division
    3. The records of the three teams will be compared against the next highest placed teams in their division in order of finish (4, 5, and 6)
    4. The records of the three teams will be compared against all common conference opponents;
    5. The highest ranked team in the first Bowl Championship Series Poll following the completion of Big Ten regular season conference play shall be the representative in the Big Ten Championship Game, unless the two highest ranked tied teams are ranked within one spot of each other in the BCS poll. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the Big Ten Championship
    6. The team with the best overall winning percentage [excluding exempted games] shall be the representative
    7.  The representative will be chosen by random draw.

 

http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-footbl/archive/081011aaa.html 

2Blue4You

October 31st, 2013 at 2:16 PM ^

My guess is 50/50 seeing as Michigan would control its destiny and hold the head to head tiebreaker but they have to battle a tougher schedule with Neb., NW, Iowa, and OSU whereas State has Neb, somebody, nobody, etc.  State could lose on the road to Neb. which would be huge but I would still put it at 50/50 race moving forward.  A lot of football to be played and it starts on Sat.

UMaD

October 31st, 2013 at 2:00 PM ^

I've always believed that having a clear objective/role is an undervalued thing in basetball (and life, but let's stick to basketball). 

In the last few years, Michigan has had very clearly defined roles from day 1.Morris/Harris/Burke have been the primary ball-handlers and initators, Morgan has passed/finished, Sims/Hardaway have been go-to second scorers, and various others mostly just shot open 3s on offense.  There have been a few guys who struggled with who they were (Smotrycz, Hardaway, LLP) but mostly everyone knew pretty quickly what their job was.  I think that's had a lot to do with Beilein's success.

This year, we have more depth and talent than ever before, which is a good thing to be sure...but there's also a lot of uncertainty.

I'm concerned about how the team will handle Stauskas, Levert, Robinson creating more off the dribble.  How much will Walton initiate and how much will be play the David Merrit 3&D role? Who gets the ball in crunch time?  How do Irvin, Stauskas, Walton, LeVert,and Albreht balance their aggressiveness with the desire to get the ball to McGary and Robinson.  Morgan and Horford know who they are...does anyone else?

In short, despite the influx of talent and athleticism, I think this coaching staff may have a harder job than in years past.  You can say they 'can't go wrong' (which may be true), but I think if this team is going to get back to the Final 4 (or win the conference) roles need to crystalize by February.  That means some players may be marginalized to narrower roles for the season than we might envision for them right now.

Things I'll be looking for in the non-conference schedule:

Who is going to emerge as the perimeter 'stopper'?  Stu Douglass did this great as a senior, sacrificing his offense as he exerted maximum effort on defense.

Is anyone willing to play the 'just a shooter' role?  We need someone(s) to sit tight and hang out, waiting for open looks.  Last year Robinson, Hardaway, and Stauskas all did this a lot.  This year, everyone wants to do more.

chunkums

October 31st, 2013 at 2:22 PM ^

Even if we beat MSU, their schedule indicates that they will win out. If that's the case still need to beat Nebraska and Northwestern, and we need to pull an upset against Ohio to get to Indy. Yikes.

GoBlueInNYC

October 31st, 2013 at 2:39 PM ^

MSU has won the week after UM going back through 2007, mostly beating Wisconsin. Before that, it was a nasty 5 or so year stretch of playing OSU right after UM (they lost all those games).

I'm not sold on Nebraska's ability to stop them. They have looked way too beatable; even MSU's O is going to put up points on that Husker D. And years of watching NW has taught me to never attempt to predict anything related to NW football.

bringthewood

October 31st, 2013 at 2:58 PM ^

I was at the 10-10 game featured in the upcoming Tiebreaker special.  I was about 15 at the time.  The general consensus was that a tie would send Michigan to the Rose Bowl.  The rule of thumb was that you did not send the same team tto the Rose Bowl wo years in a row and that it would be Michigan's "turn".  Remember this when it was the Rose Bowl or nothing, there were no other bowl alternatives for Big Tem teams.

Still pissed 40 years later, and another reason to hate Sparty for their vote.

 

Alton

October 31st, 2013 at 3:52 PM ^

The strange part isn't Michigan State's AD vote.  Michigan State's AD (Bert Smith) was probably not going to vote to send Michigan to the Rose Bowl.  Really, according to the talk after the game, the only real question was whether the vote was going to be 8-2 or 9-1 in favor of Michigan.

But all of a sudden, 4 more athletic directors flopped their votes to Ohio State:  Cecil Coleman of Illinois (who told Canham he was going to vote for Michigan), Tippy Dye of Northwestern, George King of Purdue, and former Michigan football player Elroy Hirsch of Wisconsin.  If even one of those 4 had voted for Michigan, the right team would have been playing in the Rose Bowl.

 

Bando Calrissian

October 31st, 2013 at 3:59 PM ^

A common theory has it as not a vote against Michigan, Bo, or the team, but rather Canham himself. There was quite a bit of enmity amongst the other 9 against Canham for a number of reasons. And they took it out on the wrong people.

And, really, given how Michigan treated Michigan State before MSU finally got into the Big 10, it's no surprise Bert Smith voted OSU. Colluding to keep MSU out was not one of the university's proudest moments.

Alton

October 31st, 2013 at 4:15 PM ^

The Big Ten is and was pretty anti-Michigan.  Always has been, and probably always will be.  That's the price of being Michigan.  Look, for example, at the way they took the Michigan State game and put it on the same rotation as the Ohio State game, despite the games being on opposite rotations for 50 years.  There is no good reason not to keep it the same way that it always was (odd years at East Lansing, even years at Ann Arbor), and the only team the switch inconveniences is Michigan...so the rotation got switched, and 13 athletic directors laughed.

So yes, your first paragraph is 100 percent spot on.

The second paragraph I would argue with.  Michigan "colluded" with nobody in keeping Michigan State out of the Big Ten; as a matter of fact, they voted "yes" when the vote was taken.  I strongly recommend this book, despite its anti-Michigan rantings that you have heard over and over from Spartan fans:

http://www.amazon.com/Arrogance-Scheming-Big-Ten-Membership/dp/0615584195/

The opening premise of the book is that Michigan was the villain that tried to keep Michigan State out of the conference.  The actual evidence in the well-researched book, though, is that Michigan was apathetic about the whole thing, and did very little to actually keep the Spartans out (and publicly supported State's bid).  Ohio State actually tried much harder than Michigan to lobby against the Spartans--because the Buckeyes wanted Pittsburgh in the conference instead!

Team 101

October 31st, 2013 at 7:29 PM ^

I don't think so.  Those of us who were around  in1973 haven't forgotten it.  The incident was a travesty of justice and stole a Rose Bowl trip that belonged to to an undefeated Team 94.  Bo was livid and he should have been.  And to think that the thugs 60 miles to the north were co-conspirators.

The aftermath of event brought some reforms.  The formula for sending a representative to the Rose Bowl created a new tie breaker system that took the decision away from corrupt athletic directors.  Also the Big Ten eliminated the rule that limited Bowl participation to the Rose Bowl only.

I can't wait to see the show.

WindyCityBlue

October 31st, 2013 at 8:01 PM ^

...one of the founding rights of this country was around the provisions of private property (real estate or otherwise). If someone owns a something, like a IP or a television broadcast, they have full carte blanche to do whatever they damn please with it. If they want to share it, great. If not, so be it.



Personally, I would let WH do whatever he wanted with Michigan game footage if I owned it. But those who actually do own it may think otherwise. I was bummed when all those great WH videos were banned, but I was far more happy that the owners of the footage could exercise their basic and needed right.



Ok, off soapbox.

Bando Calrissian

October 31st, 2013 at 9:40 PM ^

I'm on board with this. WH and MGoVideo and the others know that what they're doing isn't kosher. Hell, it's in every game broadcast they upload (the whole "expressed permission" thing). You know you're playing with fire, and if you get burned, you get burned. Sure, it's great those things are on YouTube again. But copyright laws are a bitch, and enforcement is always annoyingly selective. That's just how it is.