Unverified Voracity Should Have Kept A Longsnapper In A Coffin
A preview. Apparently they played an FCS game last weekend. How did it go? Strangely, because Austin Peay was missing all three of their longsnappers:
The announcers noted that Austin Peay's long snapper didn't make the trip and a backup was in, but that's not quite right.
— Rodger Sherman (@rodger) August 30, 2020
Austin Peay has *three* long snappers on the roster, #43, #46, and #47.
But last night, #33 was snapping. That's not any of those guys! pic.twitter.com/BHnH7kLnxs
That guy was a backup LB at Mississippi State who transferred in and those snaps probably cost his team the game, not that any blame should fall on the emergency fourth-string long snapper. Rodger goes into all the detail you could possibly want on this eventuality in that twitter thread. Austin Peay isn't saying it was COVID, but I mean come on.
Moral of the story: keep a longsnapper in a bubble. And get ready for this to happen in a ton of games.
[After THE JUMP: is it because he's from Chicago and a cow burned the city down once?]
Overheated but uses the word "sources." Dennis Dodd has an article that's pretty over the top about the dilemma facing the Big Ten. I mean…
There may not be a clear solution. The presidents have the power to fire Warren. There is no evidence they are considering such a move.
Eyerolling commences. The Big Ten is not going to fire the guy who announced the decision. I link it anyway because Dodd has a couple of sources that say the Thanksgiving start floated a couple days ago is unlikely:
One Big Ten source said a fall 2020 start may hinge on a medical "miracle" surrounding COVID-19 (better testing and contact tracing).
Big Ten sources increasingly indicate the league's focus is on developing the best spring 2021 schedule possible.
Better testing is a possibility, as this space has mentioned a couple times in the past. If we ramp point of contact testing to the point where college athletes can be tested regularly then it's a different world. The one we're currently in features fourth-string long snappers.
From "we couldn't possibly" to hawking shirts. No students on campus used to be a no-go for college athletics. Not so much now:
The NCAA has filed a trademark for "BATTLE IN THE BUBBLE."
— Josh Gerben (@JoshGerben) August 31, 2020
The filing, made on August 26th, indicates:
1. The NCAA intends to use a bubble for potentially multiple sports.
2. The NCAA intends to sell BATTLE IN THE BUBBLE branded clothing.#NCAA #bubble pic.twitter.com/9M1bobLBw5
When beetles battle baskets and the basket's in a bubble we call that a Emmert memmert ding a dong monetization opportunity.
Wagner returns, speaks on draft status. 50/50 he's gone after this year and I only give college a 50% shot because of Franz's inherent Wagner-ness:
“For me, I just wanted to see how the (NBA undergraduate advisory) committee evaluated me and that’s really all I did. I just waited to hear back from them and I heard what I wanted to hear and was really ready to get back to work with Michigan.”
What feedback did Wagner receive from NBA teams?
“I heard that I’m at least on the radar,” Wagner said. “A couple had me in the second round. That’s kind of what I expected after the year I had, or what I hoped before the year. So I was really happy about that, but also know that I have a lot to learn, so I’m really excited that I have opportunity to go back (to school).”
If his shooting remains stuck at the spot it was last year that would be the most likely scenario for a return.
Now do a hook and ladder off it. Hal Mumme's latest innovation:
Only Hal Mumme. Belhaven goes for it on 4th and long and the Blazers move the chains in the weirdest way possible @RedditCFB @edsbs pic.twitter.com/YeM37Tx9TG
— Chris Hudgison (@ChrisHudgison) October 29, 2016
So that's a lateral to a receiver who threatens to throw and then punts it off an opponent, allowing one of his teammates to recover. Austin Peay should have tried it.
Economist bakes cake. Also writes a paper. If you're interested in 71 pages of economics research about where the money that's flooded into college athletes over the past 20 years has gone, here you go. If you're more of a Cliffs Notes person:
Using a variety of identification strategies, we identify three consistent areas sharing increased rents:
— Craig Garthwaite (@C_Garthwaite) August 31, 2020
(1) Other money-losing sports;
(2) Coaching and administrative salaries; and
(3) Facility spending.
Revenue sport athletes don't enjoy more money because they can't (5/6)
I know this is not a shocking finding to anyone who's glanced at an athletic department recently but having academic heft behind arguments is always good. Also this guy baked a cake shaped like Michigan Stadium:
One final point, and this is from a fan that baked a cake yesterday to memorialize the loss of Michigan Football.
— Craig Garthwaite (@C_Garthwaite) August 31, 2020
Even I was shocked by how fast the money grew in the past decade.
We are all frogs in boiling water that haven't noticed how exactly much money there is now (16/6) pic.twitter.com/yrO3B2b2yl
So you have to trust him.
A protest. EMU and Michigan players participated in a protest on the Diag:
Reynolds, like many of the athletes in attendance, wants to use his platform for change. Wearing a shirt featuring a kneeling Colin Kaepernick, the senior defensive back for the Wolverines spoke after the event about the importance of activism.
“It’s just tiring waking up, going on Twitter, and seeing there’s been another instance of police brutality against an African American,” he said. “Even though it’s tiring, it’s something we have to continue to speak out against.”
Always up for person in animal costume interviews. This iteration is a bunch of cows referring to themselves as "Howard's Herd":
“After Beilein left, we didn’t really know where we would go,” Goldstein said. “We weren’t even sure if we would dress up anymore.”
About a week later, Juwan Howard was named Michigan’s coach. Almost as soon as the deal was finalized, the Bee-Line began brainstorming potential ideas for a new name, and came up with the aforementioned “Howard’s Herd.”
Despite new costumes, the spirit of Howard’s Herd has remained steady. Whether they're dancing to “Everytime We Touch,” executing free throw distractions or trash-talking opponents, Howard’s Herd is always front and center in Section 130 and a constant presence on TV broadcasts.
Nothing is likely to best Smotrycz's Lobstryczs, but there's no shame in that.
Sacrifice all for hockey. Chris Dilks on the prospects for starting hockey:
What has changed in recent weeks is a strong push from college basketball to begin their season around Thanksgiving weekend. If college basketball is able to start, then there is little reason that hockey can’t be played as well. The theory is that most colleges will be sending students home after Thanksgiving and with no students on campus, it will be easier to keep the virus in check and out of locker rooms. I think there will be enough push to get basketball games back on the court that it will happen, and college hockey should be able to start around the same time.
There are still a lot of unknown variables, however, that could change things, both for the good and the bad. On the plus side, cheap, widely-available rapid saliva testing is looked at as a potential game-changer for allowing sports to go forward. If that becomes an option, we’ll almost definitely see sports this year. Increased awareness and mask use could also play a role in keeping virus counts heading in the right direction.
Dilks notes that hockey is break-even at best and that the prospect of playing without fans would make financial situations worse for an already expensive sport. This probably wouldn't impact the Big Ten enough that they wouldn't go forward, especially if hockey might offer a couple months of content that football isn't late this year.
Etc.: RIP John Thompson. Allen Trieu talks Michigan's recruiting situation. Aidan Hutchinson says he wants to play another year of college football before a potential NFL departure.
August 31st, 2020 at 3:50 PM ^
Solid Fox In Socks reference, Brian.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:18 PM ^
My God, yes. I had to track down my lost password just to comment on it.
August 31st, 2020 at 7:57 PM ^
I have a 3 year old daughter, so I appreciate the reference as well!
August 31st, 2020 at 8:31 PM ^
I love how youtube is a repository of talented people doing relevant things. The part Brian mentions starts at 4:56. Enjoy.
August 31st, 2020 at 8:35 PM ^
This is also a solid Bubble related read if you have young kids.
August 31st, 2020 at 9:08 PM ^
Thank you for
a lot of fun, sir
August 31st, 2020 at 4:02 PM ^
So does that mean all 3 longsnappers have Covid? Or did 1 test positive and they quarantined the position group, as the 4th string guy was in the LB meetings?
August 31st, 2020 at 4:49 PM ^
It doesn't sound like they're gonna say one way or the other, but functionally it's the same result. So the lesson is make sure you've got an actual long snapper that isn't in the meetings with the other guys, so you have someone available regardless?
Or the better idea as some interwebs people have noted: the RPPO. Your QB reads the defense pre-snap from the gun and either punts it or runs an actual play. Boom, no long snapper needed.
September 1st, 2020 at 8:52 AM ^
Or never punt. FG's and PAT's would be problematic; I suppose you could go for two every time.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:12 PM ^
Though the economic paper you Cliff-Noted rehashes much of what's been covered often here, dnak438's Board post mentioned something that I'm not sure has often been stated so directly:
— Basketball and football players in effect pay for the education and support of athletes in other sports.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:27 PM ^
This is something I like to point out in every discussion about paying college athletes, and I don't really see what's so wrong with it. I know that athletic department revenue pays for gold-plated facilities and excessive admin fluff, but it also pays for athletes to get a shot at a scholarship and opportunity who happen to be good at something that doesn't generate revenue, which is no fault of their own.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:45 PM ^
Well as the academic paper pointed out its not so great a look when its the financial contributions of majority black sports like football and basketball paying for traditionally white and wealthier sports like golf, tennis, rowing, etc.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:04 PM ^
Filing that under not giving a shit. How about we look at it another way if we have to woke-ize the economic equation: women's sports would not exist, period, without revenue from men's sports. Except for maybe women's basketball at a number of schools that you can count on your hands, women's sports are massive money losers.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:09 PM ^
Forget woke. Think economics.
Would you work at a job where you got subsistence, got to do something you enjoyed, BUT it generated revenue that didn't come to you? Especially if it supported people whose parents probably could have supported them just fine.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:19 PM ^
Well, the worst-case scenario is that I get a degree that others had to pay up to a quarter million dollars for, or else go heavily in debt (which I never have to deal with), plus a better alumni network than most of those others could've hoped for. The best-case is that that job was actually on-the-job training for another future one that will make me rich beyond my wildest dreams. And if I don't want this job, millions of others would line up behind me, clamoring for one of those very limited and extremely coveted spots.
So the answer is yes, in a heartbeat.
I mean, if what you say is such a rotten deal, it wouldn't be so popular among all the participants. For every D-I football or basketball scholarship there's at least a hundred more kids who wanted one and couldn't get it. That's the economics.
August 31st, 2020 at 6:08 PM ^
An athletic scholarship can be both an opportunity many would jump at and an absolute scam for those who are qualified.
August 31st, 2020 at 8:24 PM ^
Great! I was thinking it's a unfair deal but maybe you've got something there.
So, assuming you enjoy your work, how about this: you do your work, you live on $10,000 a year (I did that one year in the most expensive city in the US), and send me the rest!
: )
September 1st, 2020 at 7:40 AM ^
Only if after three years of that, you start sending me 82 checks a year for $100K apiece for the next 12 years :)
August 31st, 2020 at 9:34 PM ^
You might get a degree that is worth a lot on paper but is not exactly fungible. And there's a serious case to be made that in many cases D-1 athletes get a less valuable education than their non-athlete peers because they're forced into courses of study that don't challenge them or set them up for future employment.
Here's more economics: a college degree may cost up to a quarter million dollars (is it worth that much? No it's v likely overpriced, but that's another debate entirely) but if your value to the university is at least $140,000/year, as the study finds, then it appears you're being shortchanged. That's exploitative. And just because others really want a roster spot/scholarship doesn't make it priceless. The experience of non-athletes/non-scholarship students is irrelevant.
September 1st, 2020 at 7:46 AM ^
If it comes down to a question of intangible worth, can we put a price tag on the coaching they get? Arguably a D-I athlete gets better job training than everyone else at that school, and their earning power immediately upon leaving is 1) also better than everyone else at that school and 2) boosted supremely by their time there, particularly for football players.
September 1st, 2020 at 12:29 PM ^
That's true, but only a fraction of players, even at the top programs, go on to the pros. So, if you play for four years under Harbaugh but then go on to work for a bank or real estate firm or whatever, that coaching has an approximate value to you of $0. It's a bit exploitative to point to huge pro contracts that most players will never get to justify the status quo of what basically amounts to free labor.
Again, it's not fair to compare the experiences and prospects of scholarship athletes to the general student body. The athletes are financial assets to the university, while the vast majority of students are not. Athletes are not normal students and we should stop pretending they are.
It also sucks for players who aren't good fits for the pros. For example, Denard was a sensation for Michigan - he drove jersey, merchandise and ticket sales and was likely a big ratings draw for many casual football fans. But he got none of it and he had a relatively short NFL career. Fan favorites like Teske and Simpson played 4 years and nearly won a national title but will never get any compensation from Michigan and it's unlikely they will ever land on an NBA roster. This doesn't seem fair.
I wouldn't have a problem with the "amateur model" if there wasn't so much TV, merch, sponsorship and ticket sale money in college sports now. And if idiots like Warren/Delaney, Emmert, Barta, etc. didn't get 7-figure+ salaries and piss money away on absurd facilities that cost tens of millions of dollars. There's just too much money now and the players need to get a cut.
September 1st, 2020 at 3:55 PM ^
That's true, but only a fraction of players, even at the top programs, go on to the pros.
But it's also really only that fraction of players that is underpaid under the current model. Others who aren't going to the pros at all are getting a far better deal, economically, than most students. I think it's perfectly fair to compare them, since the average backup offensive lineman is entirely replaceable with some other dude and has zero effect on school revenue at all.
Teske and Simpson are actually perfect examples of guys who benefited greatly from the college model. They are now qualified to play professional basketball - it doesn't have to be in the NBA. Lots of worse college players than them have made great livings playing overseas or in the G-League. For free, they got on-the-job training that made them eminently qualified to do something they weren't capable of doing out of high school and make a terrific living doing it. Would that college were such a good deal for everyone.
I agree that the people running college sports make it really hard to make the case for amateurism based on how much they pay themselves and bloat their expense ledgers, but even so, the current state is a bad deal for a very, very tiny sliver of the college athlete population and a great deal for the vast majority of it.
September 2nd, 2020 at 11:12 AM ^
I still disagree - that paper found that the lowest paid players on college rosters are worth approximately $140,000. And as much as bench players are invisible to most fans and TV networks, the team still needs them for practice, backup purposes and future player development. And athletic, nimble, backup 6'-5" 300-lb. offensive linemen aren't exactly growing on trees; they're hardly "entirely replaceable". Just because they're not Charles Woodson doesn't mean they don't have value to the program.
Teske and Simpson still generated a ton of revenue for the school but they still won't get a dime. But this model works because they can go overseas and get professional paychecks from obscure European leagues? Again, that's not particularly fair and the university/athletic department is essentially taking advantage of them. How about the guys at the end of the bench? Unless they're going on to coach or play themselves, the value of their coaching from Beilein/Juwan is minimal.
I favor a generous stipend system that would still underpay the players but would allow them some share in the revenue and would allow college sports to maintain it's classic structure. But, I think it's wrong to say that this current system is fair.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:25 PM ^
Then cut *all* athletic scholarships and make the degree of financial support offers from the university variable and contingent on economic need (but still guaranteed for the 4 years of expected attendance).
Instead of railing about where all the money goes that comes into the university from the revenue sports, maybe people should instead be asking how to mitigate it. For example, public universities should perhaps be compelled to make their broadcasts publicly available? Also, maybe advertising should be banned at all public university venues? Just some thoughts (and many other similar actions can be conceived) and I'm sure everyone will find their own unique ways to deride them... but I'm just a guy who thinks that "business" of a university is to provide academic (i.e. classroom) education and not to sell sports programming.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:55 PM ^
That's fine but they are increasingly in the business of selling sports programming so lets stick with reality.
August 31st, 2020 at 6:14 PM ^
Believe it or not, we (voters, alum, fans, donors, etc.) have the power to change that.
August 31st, 2020 at 8:32 PM ^
Ah so this is a do as I say not as I do thing? I mean you're here right? Must be for the covid talk.
August 31st, 2020 at 9:03 PM ^
The article specifically says that it is only describing power five conference schools,Outside of those conferences, Football mostly loses money and like all other sports (except Men's basketball in some cases) is subsidized by University operations. In 2017-18, Akron some 24 million of the Athletic department's 35 million dollar budget was supported by University operations, meaning about 1350/year per student. Akron is a tire fire, but student tuition and fees support athletics most places outside the 65 Universities that are in power five conferences. Students at power five schools are perhaps one fifth or one sixth of the college students in nation.
Since the gender distribution of college students is approximately 55/45 female/male, at most places female students are subsidizing the participation of male athletes.
August 31st, 2020 at 9:25 PM ^
It's not "men's sports" as much as football and basketball, and even that's not a given at every D1 school. Men's swimming and cross country don't produce any more money than the equivalent for women beyond the fact that women sports tend to have more scholarships allocated to them in order for schools to sorta come close to Title IX compliance. But that's it.
September 1st, 2020 at 10:34 AM ^
Women volleyball actually breaks close to even at a lot of schools. Turns a profit at two schools, Nebraska and Hawaii.
Sorry just boosting my point count. I want to start a thread to ask you guys on recommendations on where to visit Michigan. Thinking about a fall trip and something next summer.
Also I wouldn't mind being the resident volleyball coverage guy. Michigan has brought in a monster class and is gearing up for title run, imho. Would I do that in diaries?
September 1st, 2020 at 10:44 AM ^
Many of us have been saying this for years. Pay the athletes the money their sports earn & parts of Title IX become untenable. Men’s non-revenue sports would be similarly impacted.
Revenue sports would have to be decoupled from Title IX. The veil of amateurism & of opportunity being provided by the university is needed to make Title IX make sense. If revenue sports are unleashed from the veil of a amateurism it will be clear that the market is providing the opportunity, not the universities. The universities & NCAA are just a conduit.
The idea of providing equal opportunity amongst subsidized activities is one thing. People buy that, probably a majority. Why should you provide free money to men but not women?
The discussion is very different if we’re saying that college sports need to level the entire economic market place & say that the NCAA must counter what the market wants. Some people will buy that, but I think short of a majority.
I’m fine with non-revenue men’s & sports receiving the same treatment. I say this as a former (scrub walk-on) male non-revenue sport athlete at Michigan When it comes to revenue sports, they need to be taken out of the equation. They probably should under the current system & the argument becomes (in my view) unassailable if they begin to pay players close to market prices.
September 2nd, 2020 at 5:57 AM ^
Ok commie
August 31st, 2020 at 8:33 PM ^
But isn't that like saying, "this starving artist is really good but makes no money through no fault of his own!"?
Should there be any expectation that a golfer should get his tuition paid for when no one wants to watch him play golf?
Should jugglers who also happen to be good at something also get a scholarship opportunity?
So without a market, it's arbitrary charity. And yes, that benefits some people and that's great for them but it's not like the revenue athletes agreed, yes, I would like to be compensated far less than market value so these other athletes can have scholarships
August 31st, 2020 at 10:28 PM ^
It's almost as though the idea of giving admission and financial aid decisions for students to a major academic institution based solely/primarily on their non-academic athletic skills is inherently problematic. Who would have guessed that?
August 31st, 2020 at 11:41 PM ^
Thankfully we have this University of Michigan Math Olympiad message board to come to.
August 31st, 2020 at 11:41 PM ^
Douchey double.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:15 PM ^
#Cheesemanmatters
August 31st, 2020 at 8:07 PM ^
He went to college a cheese boy and he will return a Cheeseman
August 31st, 2020 at 4:20 PM ^
The lateral-fake pass-punt is my new favorite trick play of all time. How far does a punt need to travel before the punting team can recover it? As long as we have this break, I'd like us to start practicing it.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:12 PM ^
My guess is only past the line of scrimage?
September 2nd, 2020 at 6:00 AM ^
Seems it only worked because it hit a player on the opposing team. Punts aren't free for alls like kickoffs. Don't think lateraling it first changes that.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:21 PM ^
Isn't there a rule in football that allows you to snap the ball sideways instead of between your legs? Sort of like how you used to snap in flag football or in the backyard? If so....why wasn't this the plan? Hell, snap it conventionally to a QB and have him lateral it to a punter!
We bought that cake pan for my mom so she could bake various desserts in it for tailgating. It is difficult to get it to come out like that.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:58 PM ^
Well their QB just started doing a pooch roll and kick thing after the 2nd botched snap. He ended up punting 7 times and averaged a pretty respectable 38 yards a kick.
August 31st, 2020 at 7:59 PM ^
In middle school we didn't have a long snapper. I was the QB so I took the snap, turned around, and pitched the ball back to our punter. It was wild.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:26 PM ^
Once Izzo ascends to post-basketball retirement heaven, what will they call the "Izzone"?
August 31st, 2020 at 4:28 PM ^
Smaller.
August 31st, 2020 at 4:29 PM ^
Dennis Dodd is a clickbait opinion whore and his articles often sound like...
September 2nd, 2020 at 12:16 PM ^
This gif reminds me of the time when a male and female duck were using my pool tanning ledge as a bath. I decided to scare the ducks away. I scared the male duck so bad that he sprayed diarrhea all over my concrete pool deck. Needless to say, I scared the shit out of that duck. Lesson learned, lesson learned.
August 31st, 2020 at 5:10 PM ^
To be fair, Austin Peay probably doesn't have the testing capacity that most Big Ten schools have with their world class on campus medical facilities.
A big part of the reason Michigan hasn't had a positive test in a month. So the Big Ten would be much better able to avoid that kind of situation.
August 31st, 2020 at 10:23 PM ^
Someone studied marketing for 4 years to give us the "Battle in the Bubble" t shirt. This is our concern, dude.
Comments