All my Mgopoints that he will not be let go even if M gets 'blown out' with Saiboat still at the helm RR is not going anywhere.
Peppers at 10, which seems low.
All my Mgopoints that he will not be let go even if M gets 'blown out' with Saiboat still at the helm RR is not going anywhere.
Please stop posting Mike Valenti material and questioning it's accuracy. He is regurgitating speculation that EVERYONE can speculate about. Of course if the administration was going to let him go, this NCAA investigation/CARA report garbage would be their excuse to avoid the buyout. I think we can all be intelligent enough to connect those dots. However, when Mary Sue and Bill Martin have come out and blatantly said we support Rich Rodriguez, anything other than that is pure SPECULATION. Niiiiiinety sssseeeveeen onnnneeeeeeee.
Quite simply, Matt Dery is the only one worth listening to on that station. Too bad he doesn't have his own show.
Why in the flying hell would U-M lay groundwork to fire RR based solely on the outcome game that most sane people would expect U-M to lose?
I've got as much hope as anyone that we pull off a win, but come ON. Odds are against us, a "blowout" would be an unwelcome kick in the 'nads but hardly reason you would suddenly pull the rug out from under a coach you have publicly said would be given time to rebuild.
I can't believe Valenti didn't just have a good laugh and hang up.
... that most sane people would expect U-M to lose?
are you calling me insane? nobody calls me insane!
except of course, my parents. oh, and dr. dalack.
Haha. +1 for using "unwelcome kick in the 'nads" to describe a blowout on Saturday. A tip of the cap to you.
As opposed to a welcome kick in the nads? Is there such a thing?
Although, if say, Brandon Graham wanted to kick me in the nads and it somehow guaranteed a Michigan win, I'd gladly take that one for the team. Just fill me up with booze first, and have some ready for afterwards (assuming I don't pass out from the impact).
I would pay many rupees to see this. Super Cereal.
Personally, I still want to have children. I don't know that I would sacrifice the lives of my future sons and daughters for a single Michigan victory...but I'd have to think about it. Kudos to you for your willingess to take one (and in so doing, lose two...) for the team.
If Brian had heard anything we'd have heard it.
Actually, Brian usually waits until he has several good sources on the topic so that he doesn't spread rumors that aren't true. So, he could have heard something along these lines, but is still waiting for confirmation from more/better resources to post it.
Which is why this is probably an unsourced dumb rumor that Valenti is spreading.
Seriously, if I was a person with "inside information", my first choice of an outlet would NOT be Mike Valenti. If you had it in for Rich Rod, why not go to Freep/Rosenberg/Snyder/Albom?
I don't disagree that this is an unsourced dumb rumor, but to say that Brian would have posted it by now goes against the precedent that Brian has laid down when it comes to revealing inside information.
That was the perfect response.
I smell sparty bullshit.
At this point, there are only allegations of violations, not proof. I can't imagine any contract that would allow for a multi-million dollar buy-out to be waived just because someone levels an accusation.
Plus, and this isn't a minor point, Valenti has never had a scoop on anything. Ever. He's a mildly interesting talk show host prone to douchiness to attract attention, but he has never broken an story of any note. I highly doubt this is the time that changes. Without reading an exact transcript, it's hard to comment fully, but while I don't believe that he is completely making this story up, I still put zero credence in it.
Valenti knows Michael Wilbon? I'm mean, if that's the case, he may be onto something.
RR's contract requires actual that it be "determined by the NCAA...to have committed a major violation..." This is from page 8 of his contract Section 4.02(e).
If they fired him and refused to pay him before the finding of any violations, the University would fnd itself in a similar position as OSU when they fired Jim O'Brien. If you remember, OSU fired him before the violations were finalized, and they ended up losing a breach of contract suit and owed O'Brien a large chunk of cash.
I can't believe I just did this much to disprove Valenti.
Valenti is a biased douche. Take everything he says w/ a grain of salt.
I wonder if he will address this claim if Michigan does end up getting blown out and Rich is still here. I'm guessing he will ignore what he said completely.
If Rodriguez is fired right now, who will be running the next coaching search? Not Martin, he won't want to go through that again, not right before he retires. Not Mary Sue, she doesn't want that pressure or responsibility.
Even if Michigan theoretically wants him gone, they are going to wait until next season.
It is his job to lob crap out there to drive phone calls/text messages into the station. That is why he keeps poking UM fans with DG rumors, Tate/Denard transfer crap, and now RR firing rumors. I riles up the masses and garners phone calls. Then he rips the callers to create more calls. It's his job speculate to drive interest in the program he hosts. He is not a reporter or journalist (not like they don't do the same thing).
MGoPHILLY said it right: take it with a grain of salt. It is not factual, just BS to get a response.
It is sad that the actions of idiots in media are defended in this manner. It's like defending racism or hate mongerins because it increases viewership. Just because it makes them money doesn't make it right.
Did you just compare Valenti speculating on the (very real) possibility that people at Michigan want RR out to racism?
Even if you really did mean the people defending it is similar to defending racism you should still find some freaking context. That's a ridiculous statement.
I think that Valenti is right: if sanctions come down and M loses this game very badly, there will be factions pulling for RR's head. And that's all Valenti was saying. He didn't say it was likely to happen, he said that this is the scenario that he could see it happen in, if it were to happen.
Am I as bad as someone who defends racism now?
Holy overreaction. Read some context.
I'm just saying the ends don't justify the means. Just because it increases viewership doesn't mean we should excuse it.
I'm sorry I went to the extreme example of this. I didn't say it was as bad as defending racism.
I'm just saying that stirring the pot and being outrageous just to increase viewership or ratings shouldn't be excused.
No, I don't think you, Valenti or the pope are a racist.
A lot of the time I cannot stand Valenti, but you have to admit, he does a GREAT job. How many Valenti threads are there on here? Whether you like him or not, he does his job extremely well. He stirs people up. He knows a lot about ALL SPORTS. I can't see him staying in Detroit very long though. He is ESPN material all the way.
When Howard was at his peak people who loved him listened to him less than people who did not love him, because those people were curious what he would do next so they could get pissed about it.
Valenti is no Howard Stern (it is an insult to Stern to say so), but the same kind of principal rings true here. He knows Michigan fans will listen, if to do nothing more than to get pissed at him for what he says. I do not always agree with him but he does do his job very well.
Bill "The Huge Show" Simonson does the same thing here in GR (I think he's syndicated around the rest of the state too).
It's poor schtick and one more reason I never listen to the radio.
Anymore, podcasts are where it's at.
I wonder if his source is Mike Wilbon?
Seems crazy to have this be true, but Valenti noted that his source was the same person who was the first to tell him RichRod was getting hired. I put the BS factor at about 98%, but I still hate stories like these piling up one after the other.
So when did Valenti "break" that news? I don't remember him being the first source..
everyone taking part in this mgoblog community should be smart enough to know rich rodriguez is going absolutely nowhere (barring some ridiculous sanctions being handed down from the ncaa as a direct result of something rich rod was directly responsible for). by far the biggest evidence supporting this is the fact that mary sue and bill martin have said so within the past two weeks. these two people are not nick saban. the fact that mary sue said something is the kicker here. no way she jeopardizes her credibility if there's even the slightest chance rich rod could be fired after this season. these are not stupid people. they know full well all the negative ramifications of firing rich rod at this time as much as we all do.
that Rodrigeuz is not going anywhere. Such a statement is every bit as outrageous as Valenti saying that he is fired for certain if they get blown out. Both sides of the argument, that being "he is gone for sure" and "he is not going anywhere" are equally preposturous at this point. I think "he will likely return if there are no major NCAA violations" is a sustainable position, but stating that anybody should be "smart enough to know" that he is not going anywhere clearly does not have the information to lay such a claim. Michigan is not really in a position to let him go, but he really cannot make a strong case to remain the head coach here either based upon on-field performance or off the field program management. I want RR to stay, but I don't really think you can argue that his tenure has not been a disaster so far.
I believe RR's contract states that he will be terminated if any major violations are found by the NCAA. I'm assuming the accusations don't meany shit until the NCAA finds RR/Michigan guilty.
(Edit: sorry, I didn't see that "me" already posted this)
PLEASE NO MORE STUPID SHIT!! I am tired of hearing it.
Cmon Mods, Mgoblog is better than this. Delete the thread and send the idiot OP an MGOWARNING.
what did i do that was so wrong??? i heard something on the radio and i posted it here and that means my thread should be deleted and i should get a warning from the MOD's??? its not like i found this rumor on MLIVE, Rivals, Scout or some other half assed message board. did i ever say once that believed what valenti is saying??? NO. yeah there are people that think valenti is just a biased sparty that is trying to piss of michigan fans so that they'll call in.
the MOD's can do what ever they want and thats fine by me, but they don't need you to tell them how do their jobs.
on a half-assed message board.
on the radio is somehow better??
How did you rationalize that in your head ?
rationalize calling me an idiot??? people post stuff that they hear on the radio all of time, so does that make them idiots as well???
yeah well I heard that if michigan wins big on saturday that the university has laid the ground work to get RR a huge promotion without having to pay for his new hot tub.
this person said that because of the allegations that have been brought forth that its is enough for michigan to let RR smile for once.
brian what have you heard??? or has anyone else heard anything???
valenti has said it would be stupid to give a coach more money because of one game and then not pay for his new hot tub. i'm not sure if i agree with that.
That rumor better not be true, and I doubt it is anyways. Firing a coach, especially one with a good track record (yes, I said good track record motherfucker) after two years would be the biggest mistake ever, whether or not it's Michigan.
One reason is that it makes the job too high pressure, and who would want to be hired by a place that is so quick to fire coaches. And even if UM fired RR due to the NCAA finding Michigan guilty, I think there is the possibility that coaches would still not want to work for UM because practicegate was just a witch hunt. Man I only hate Michael Rosenberg more.
Somehow I dont see the University of Michigan finding qualified people that want to coach for us.
Don't feed the monkey
I won't claim him to be an expert source; however, Todd McShay seemed almost apologetic about the potential of RR being fired this off season. He seemed to suggest that the mere threat of violations against the school was enough to fire RR and not pay his remaining contract. I'm in no way suggesting that McShay is "close to a source" at UM and has insider access; so, please don't hammer me for being the messenger.
My opinion is that if RR is fired, UM will be the next Nebraska.
The next Nebraska, Notre Dame, Washington...basically one of many former powerhouses that are in coaching turmoils right now.
Bill Martin and MSC's repeating RR is safe and will be given time, Brian and no people from scout or rivals with legit connections in the AD saying this is a possibility
Mike Valenti source rumors
Hmmmmm, who will I ever believe?
Where is Bill next year? Mary Sue will be there, but Bill won't. I am not saying he will be fired, but one of his fans will be gone.
I heard form a friend of a cousin's sisters uncle that RichRod had a blue sock on one foot and a black sock on the other.
But was he wearing a yellow jersey?
How original of you to post something so HIlarious.
My head hurts. Those who stay will be champions and right now Rich Rod is our coach so lets get behind the team and support them as loud and as positive as we can in the stadium on Saturday.
about stupid nicknames.
Fearless leader declared said phrase an offense worthy of the almighty BANHAMMER.
Yeah, Peter, did you get that memo?
Learn all about it in three simple steps.
1. Click hyperlink labeled "memo" I attached above
2. Read Brian's Post near the end
3. Look at the number after "Points:" and consider all of the possible meanings of swift justice.
this punishment is more along the lines of the ancient Roman use of exemplory violence.
Take one for the team!
Can't be worse than the Michael Scott Paper Company.....
I dont think "fair" is determined by how much you read the board, rather it is about what it means when you have a propensity to use words like you used and also try to post with the caliber of fan that posts here.
North Korea is not so bad, relax it will be ok
My advice to you is to chill out. I am guessing you are getting a temporary reprimand. Dont turn it into something permanent.
The points still have no real value. You obviously didn't get banned because you are still posting every five seconds to complain. Just move on.
Besides, King of Belch has had like twice as many negative points as you do and he bounces back every time. Learn from a pro.
Dude. You are your own worst enemy right now. Learn when to pick your battles and when to STFU. It's a useful life skill.
I had iniitially thought you had a vailid point. I didn't see that post either and don't think people should be held accountable for breaking a rule that isn't widely publicized and isn't patently obvious. But the way you responded, I now have no sympathy for you. And you weren't banned. If you were banned, you wouldn't still be able to post. Poster "blueblueblue" speaks wisdom.
Yes, your treatment here immediately calls to mind the suffering of the North Korean people.
Has someone called Amnesty International, or are we going to the UN on this one?
Next up, I compare someone's cruel mocking of my grammar to the Armenian Genocide. The horror, the horror.
You know something, I never got that memo either.
And I'm on here like, a lot.
Nor did I even know of this word of instant death that rhymes with a certain bar on Tatooine. As in, nobody has ever said it around me nor have I thought of it myself.
It doesn't sound all that clever.
Sometimes we draw arbitrary lines in the sand because we know "on this side of the beach" is safe and "over there on THAT side of the beach" is like where the Canadian Government tests mines,* and even though nobody is really hurt if you go just over the arbitrary line in the sand, you still get arrested for it, because that's the only way you can have this really nice beach next to where they test mines.
For the time being, there's going to be this massive neg total next to your name, so other beach goers know that the line is serious. Then you'll be okay. Just don't make a deal about it.
* Ipperwash Beach, on Lake Huron
How did you get negbanged 99,700 times?
Never mind, I figured it out. Definitely won't make that mistake!
The media in Michigan makes Fox News look objective.
I always think it is funny when the left criticizes fox news for being subjective when everyone else in the media leans all the way to the left. seems a bit a hypocritical.
and that's coming from someone dead in the center.
I am not really passionate about any one political direction or another (I'm also moderate/center), but I do find it ridiculous when people get angry at Fox. Fox took the opposite stance of left wing bias of CNN, NBC, etc., and stupidly called it "fair and balanced." Big deal. One reason Jon Stewart sucks is because he spends all his time trashing Fox news when it's too easy a target. The problem with almost all media today is that it is biased, and sports media is no exception. I think that what happened this season at the Freep and what ESPN does every day illustrates that point.
Whoever is negging me is a fucking idiot. Show yourself you coward. But first, how about you actually read my post.
Well, there's 4 negs on that statement now. I'm guessing most of them were for talking your politics on the board.
I'm the 4th.
I'd expect more, too. I mean, c'mon, you're a "moderate" but you don't even know the difference between the inadvertent bias of CNN (and all media) and the shilling of FoxNews? There's a big difference in intent here.
Plus: "fucking idiot" , "coward" , "read my post." You and I have been reading each others' stuff on this board for years now -- since when did you of all of a sudden start using troll lingo?
How is CNN's (and most other media) bias inadvertent?
The author isn't going into the story thinking "how can I spin this to help my cause."
Journalists' "lenses" (one word we use for it) can color coverage, but it's an accident. A good journalist is like a good football player -- the ability to identify your own biases and keep them out of your work is as essential to a journalist as running routes is to a receiver, or accuracy is to a quarterback. It's a talent that's necessary for the job. Still, not every receiver runs a perfect route every play. Not every quarterback throws every ball D.O. Likewise, inadvertent bias seeps through coverage, despite the journalist's best efforts, the editor's best eye, and the ombudsman's penetrating patrol.
Mediocre journalists, like those employed by CNN, are probably worse at this than good journalists. Nobody's impervious, but the lower the quality of reporting ability, the more biases I'm sure you will notice.
It works both ways -- there are journalists with conservative leanings (my editor is a good example) whose biases come out in their reporting. But for the most part, I would agree that if you polled every journalist working for national media outlets, more would fall toward what in this country we currently identify as liberal. I think the reason for this is that it takes a certain kind of personality to want to find information and disseminate it, and this personality type identifies with some liberal politics. Plus, most live in urban or suburban environments, and are highly educated, and very "tuned in," and socially conscious, and are probably in a low tax bracket -- these are all markers that in recent years have trended Democratic.
It's a lot more complicated than that -- political positions are hardly as black and white as two-party electoral politics make them out to be. Journalists were generally much more Republican than the country at large from the 1860s up until basically FDR, and trended that way for much of the Reagan years.
Anyway, that's why I think a lot of Americans today see a liberal bias in national media. It has as much and probably more to do with readers' biases than journalists' biases. Peoples' opinions don't change as easily as you think.
With CNN, the biggest problem I think is that they're bombastic, not slanted. That's a trait shared by pretty much every TV News program. They are out to get viewers, and viewers want 'splosions and helicopter chase scenes and footage of cops standing around outside some crummy neighborhood the viewer would never venture into. If everyone clamored for unbiased, considered news, you'd get Good Night, and Good Luck. You'd probably be bored to tears.
Anyway, that's my problem with CNN. For the record I don't watch it -- I'm hardly a paragon; I get my news mostly on Yahoo and from co-workers and friends' blogs, and what Misopogal e-mails me and stuff.
With FoxNews, in particular, they don't have the same approach. They realized there's a big market for people who actually WANT slanted news (remember: it's harder to change peoples' minds than you think). They're an overt spin machine, a shill. This in itself is fine. Brian's, in some ways, an overt shill for Michigan, and so am I. What gets my goat about FoxNews is the pretense that they're not shilling, or the suggestion that they're only shilling because "those other guys are, too."
Brian's raison d'etre is to provide better Michigan coverage from a Michigan fan because a Michigan fan cares more. Bias is a necessary side effect, but a side effect nonetheless. His homerism is identified, part of the schtick. It's not "because the other local media hate us and this makes up for it."
Think of people you know who have taken it upon themselves to "even things up" or "make things square." Human beings have a long and well-established track record of being very bad at actually identifying what's "fair," especially when they have a stake in things. We have ways of dealing with this. The worst way -- you should have realized by now -- is to have some guy go rogue, dealing out injustices until he deems justice has been served.
That's basically what you're getting with the "FoxNews makes up for the media's liberal bias" argument.
Their coverage is purposefully bent to certain political views. They invent talking points and plan out long-term coverage narratives because that's what they're really peddling. Contrast that with CNN, whose coverage is purposefully bent toward titillating audiences. Their talking points are always reactionary, any coverage narratives complete accidents, because they're peddling "you never know wat SHOCKING thing will happen next, so TUNE IN!" Any political bent is, for the most part, coincidental, a reflection of a person's natural biases and their mistake of letting those biases shade the journalist's coverage.
I think the whole picture becomes a lot easier to understand if you can divorce yourself from this silly idea that all politics are either red or blue. Neither political party has squelched dischord in its ranks, or has everybody on board one single platform. You also have to get rid of the idea that "MSM" or whatever is a sentient entity -- each medium is pretty much independent of another, and when assessing the coverage of each, you have to actually look at the audience they're playing to:
Michigan Daily: (pseudo?)-Intellectual college students who love Michigan sports and whose mean political identity is kind of scarily close to Ralph Nader.
Result: preachy but generally high-minded news and Wolverine-biased sports coverage.
New York Times: Urbanite intellectuals, particularly East Coasters. Highly educated (often post-graduate), generally white collar.
Result: Incredibly, incredibly, pretentious, with biases inadvertently but far-too-often pouring through coverage thanks to an enterprise (and readership)-wide holier-than-thou complex
Fox News: Republicans and conservative-leaning moderates who are particularly sensitive to lapses in journalistic judgment from national news media
Result: Republican shill
Detroit Free Press: Dwindling population of Detroit and Metro-Detroit, most of whom don't have time for subtleties, mostly Michigan State fans (who often seem to care more about what's going on at Michigan than their own team)
Result: News and editorial sections that are knee-jerk protector's of Detroit's reputation, sports section that plays up whichever team is winning, hypes up MSU, and hates on Michigan.
MGoBlog: Michigan fans with media standards WAAAYYY above those of mere mortals
Result: Circle-jerk of douchey high-standard Michigan fans with massive paranoia of trolls and low-quality media
I know I am, and I'm guessing you too are a douchey, high-standard Michigan fan with massive paranoia of trolls and a low-quality media. Which demographic above fits us best, then?
j/k, I will read it, I just can't right now.
since when did you of all of a sudden start using troll lingo?
Ever since I realized that nothing gives me greater satisfaction than chewing people out. Seriously, you should try it in your morning commute. It just feels so good to scream at people. Hopefully it should take some heat off future Tim Waymen Jr.
I'm going to have to apologize for this one then because I didn't make myself really clear, and I can't expect people to know what I'm talking about if I'm not making my point clearly. Yes, I know the difference between each bias. I try to avoid politics and I thought I was being fair and apolitical by being moderate. Apparently I didn't come off that way and/or moderate is still political.
The media often has a left-leaning bias. That's just the way it is, and it doesn't really bother me whether I agree with it or not. It gets the job done. So Fox News comes along and offers reactionary right-wing (and cheesy IME) news to make up for what they claim liberal MSM fails to do, all in the name of "fair and balanced." FNC knows that. They attract an audience (and apparently one that doesn't care about quality). I don't watch it, and that's exactly what people should do if they don't like it. It's all about money, ratings, and personal advancement, whether it's Fox News, CNN, ESPN, or WBFD Duluth Channel 5 Action News. I don't think saying that pushes me in one direction or another.
I find yelling only makes me angrier. Not that I don't do it.
I'm good with this as an accord.
Yeah come to think of it yelling can probably lead to bad things, especially when directed at policemen. I figure it will eventually cause my blood pressure to skyrocket, or at least cause the slime flowing under my city to accumulate and resurrect an evil guy with a funky name.
I'm pretty center too, but there's no question that Fox News is biased. It's not that MSNBC/CNN aren't too, but I find them too annoying to watch in the first place. Personally, I hate politics because it's all too much hype and posturing. That's why I mostly watch ESPN. Oh, wait.
my best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Rich Rod pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.
LOL! That is almost always funny! :-D
My dad was listening to the show and he said the argument was fairly convincing. My dad is pretty skeptical and 97.1 is notoriously pro-MSU, so he always takes it with a grain of salt. However,I live in Virginia now and he felt the need to call me because of the conversation being had on the radio (My dad is totally pro-Rich Rod so he was a bit upset and needed a friend).
He said that they also mentioned the new athletic director being a motivator because they would have an opportunity for him/her to find a football coach right away. Also, apparently RR has a stipulation in his contract that any violations of NCAA rules are grounds for semi-uncompensated dismissal. I would think that the university has to see this as a lucrative time to release a coach (who they are paying ALOT), who may not YET be earning his paycheck (notice I didnt say that he could never earn his paycheck, but no one can argue that if he continued on this pace that we would continue to pay him that much).
as in really really bad for a school
Rick Neuheisel was fired prematurely by U Wash just b/c of a NCAA investigation, he later sued and settled for $4.7 mill. It would be much worse for Mich to even go there with RR. People need to stop looking for ways out of this contract with RR and start supporting him in his 3rd year.
It is never good to be premature.
There are a LOT of people associated with the school both north and south of Hill Street (thats a reference line many use for the academic side of campus and the athletic side of campus. Athletics being south) who are saying the A.D. job is David Brandon's to turn down AND Brandon was on the hire committee for Rodriguez so why wouldn't he just be involved now (if it were to come to that).
Still think that Valenti is full of crap (maybe in his demented Sparty way he thinks this will lead to decommits and further instability, who knows) and I really don't see RR going anywhere this year but the lame duck A.D. excuse isn't going to be reason to hold off a change in-and-of-itself.
On a side note, after reading an article somewhere yesterday about how RR's son had some nimrod Sparty physically accost him as he got off the team bus and all the other negatives that have gone on since he got here, do any of you wonder if RR might WANT out? Its been said after these two years that he has no value but do any of you remember that article some time at the beginning of the year where some writer out east was predicting RR would somehow lose his job and end up back in West Virginia, but at Marshall. I don't know. Not that I really have feelings one way or the other at this point if he were to go, just wondering from his position whether he's beginning to think that maybe he wants to get out of here?
That's all I gotta say......name your source if you're about something other than getting ppl to listen to your show and the ability to sell advertising.
I'm tired of nameless "sources" slandering our coach and university behind some washed up, not-known-outside-Michigan "journalist".
Seriously, speak up, name sources or shut-up.
By the way, why is anyone still listening to talk radio?
Because it's funny to hear Dave from Phoenix, who likes to piss in everyone's Cheerios.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. And I suppose they are going to have a meeting to determine what a blow out is - 20 pts or more? What if the margin is 17pts? 16pts? What will they do then!!!!! Refer to the official definition in the NCAA rulebook of a 'blowout'? Professionals aren't going to determine the fate of a head coach of one of the biggest programs in the nation on whether he gets blown out. And it takes bush league minds to buy into that sort of talk.
It was way better when MSU beat Michigan in Ann Arbor by 14 in 2008 than the nailbiting down to the cuticle in that 26-20 OT win in East Lansing this year.
Spartans need to come to Ann Arbor and beat Michigan next fall.
MSU is 2-0 vs. RichRod. Since RR is such an awful coach and the replacement would likely be "so much better", then shouldn't Big Ten opponents and their fans be pulling for RR to stay on at Michigan?
I WISH THAT I COULD NEG THIS A MILLION TIMES. SOMEONE, PLEASE, DELETE IT NOW!
Have we already forgotten what Craig Roh's dad taught us?? Recruits read this forum. SO PLEASE - do not post a bunch of unbased garbage on the verge of the biggest recruiting weekend in recent memory!
I am pretty sure that we are allowed to bring this kind of stuff up as long as we keep the conversation intelligent. I feel an intelligent response to Valenti from "we the fans" is important. Which means someone needs to bring it up. Its the commenters jobs to say that this is a bad reporting by Valenti, but its not the origanters job to keep the crazy people at bay.
Pigs, wrestling, mud, you know the rest.
I wish we could make this a life lesson for all future blog posts.
It could even have its own wrist band:
Mike Valenti and all radio show hosts, sports or otherwise, operate with an aganda. That agenda is gaining ratings and ad revenue. Making outlandish claims using unverified "I know someone who knows someone who works as a janitor....." sources are just one way of getting peoples interest. Now I love sports and unfortunatly find myself drawn to 97.1, even though I can only take so much of the bullshit that permeates from their know-it-all attitudes. Valenti has the kind of arrogance that makes me feel as though he auditioning for a national show on a network. And TerryDrewRobFosterSharpParker plays the perfect side man, never really disagreeing, but when he does he has a tinge guilt in his voice. Sorry for the back tracking. But the point I am making is that listening to or believing wholeheartedly to what these guys, or anyone in the media says could drive you batshit. Everything is said with a wink, or hint of "believe what you want, but MY sources say......" mentality.
Right now it looks like open season for anti-RR people. The team plays bad, some NCAA investigation, they may not qualify for a bowl so let's just fire away.
No need to pile on.
This is Valenti, AKA He Of Numerous On-Air Meltdowns.
I'm sure he has a ton of what he believes is inside info, and I am also sure they're as full of hot air as he is.
I heard 97.1 has it arranged to give Mike Valenti the boot.
I have heard from several current and former players that RR is out if we get blown out. -Rosenberg
a hack propagandist desperate for ratings, not a reporter...although that may be an oxymoron.
Mike "Les Miles is a lock" Valenti.
Move along, nothing to see here.
Man. A victory this weekend would probably put all this pointless conjecture to rest. Just like our 4-0 start quieted much of the criticism in the offseason.
Please. Start a website and try to put Brian out of business.
Wait. Let me get a beer first. I gotta see this. I haven't seen a good car wreck in a while.
I actually prefer the Free Press (to be precise, I prefer battling the Free Press) rather than debating the 97.1 crowd.
I almost never listen to it. I pay attention to it only when they are dealing with Michigan football, and even then only in cases of important/breaking news, ususally when the station's hosts are trying to create news.
Thse are guys who have nothing, really to report, and so the standard fare is guys giving their non-expert opinions about all manner of subjects. They are not experts. They are not experts at anything, and indeed it is rare that they ever entertain real experts on anything, even for the simple purposes of an interview. I suspect that it is easier, and perhaps cheaper, to forego the kind of real radio producer that is needed to book guests and organize a show around real guest appearances.
I am serious; the Free Press, for all of its malevolence, its vile lack of ethics, is at least a more serious news outlet than sportstalk radio as represented by 97.1. "Garbage" looks good by comparison to 97.1.
How does the Free Press look good in comparision to a sports talk radio show? 97.1 has done their jobs quite well, considering their whole job is stimulating any sort of sports talk and speculation. The Free Press on the other hand is supposed to use judgement in what they report, checking the facts and ethics of their articles. And they clearly did not when publishing and article, prompting an NCAA investigation of UofM. When 97.1 manages to do this, let me know. Yes the Free Press is a more serious news outlet than 97.1, seeing as they are a news outlet and 97.1 is not. 97.1 does not pretend to be a news outlet, its a forum.
You have it pretty much right. By comparison to 97.1, the Freep is far more careful, and claims to be carefully-sourced.
97.1 is just a mosh pit of guys trashtalking. None of it is deserving of serious thought or consideration.
The Free Press, on the other hand, is likely to be sourced out, or linked to, other national news outlets. ESPN, the networks, the BigTenNetwork, etc., are likely to quote a major story from the Freep. Whereas there are no "major stories" coming out of 97.1. You have it right; 97.1 ought not to pretend that it is in the business of presenting any news, about sports or otherwise.
So yes, the Free Press is more serious, and is thereby more dangerous when their malevolence takes hold as it has in the case of Michigan football.
Funny thing is, like there's anyone seriously on the in at Michigan who considers Valenti a friend. Particularly when they have a guy on the station right before him who WORKS FOR THE SCHOOL.
If this turns out to be true, and RichRod resigns, options?
#1) Brian Kelly - I don't care if he lacks people skills, he might be the best x's and o's coach on the planet. If our head coaching position is enough to put his NFL aspirations to rest, he's the man.
#2) Jim Harbaugh - I don't care that he trashed UofM's student-athlete policies (I actually thought that he made some good points). I sort of care that he's been forgetting his wallet at bars. I really care that he pulled a class-less Woody Hayes. Still though, a hot young coach and a Michigan man. He would really turn things up recruiting-wise around here.
#3) Les Miles - I'm a member of the camp that believes he would have taken the UofM offer last time around IF it was ever given to him, legitimately (I don't think it was). Plus, he's gotta be sensing that his time is coming to an end at high expectations-crazy LSU with Saban and Meyer in town.
#4) Kirk Ferentz - He'd give us pretty much what we had in Lloyd, maybe a little better. Solid coach. Probably our worst case scenario. He wouldn't turn the job down.
...I don't like Chris Peterson, don't ask me why. I don't like one hit wonders, whoever TCU's coach is.
Maybe the coaching carousel preview is a bit premature.
Michigan coaches will always take heat unless they are undefeated.
He's been listing his source's comment, but has been against the intent since he brought it up. He doesn't think Rich Rod should be fired, but he's talking about an alleged source (Captain Ice Breaker) that says Rod could be out. The ground work IS there, losing seasons, and an investigation to get out of the buy out. I want Rich Rod to stay, but I don't think Valenti is too wrong here. He's right, a case could be made to fire him. But he also acknowledges that it would be very stupid to do so.
NO way I believe this for a second. Nobody on local FM radio knows the terms of Rich's contract governing what will discharge and what will not discharge his or the school's duties, especially the lynchpin of the entire contract, the buyout clause. What you are saying clearly has no chance of being true.
Nobody on local FM? How about anyone with Google?
Nobody could know the lynch pin of a contract? What is it, a state secret? The lynchpin would clearly be the salary. Where did you even get that idea?
NOt necessarily... The lynchpin is the buyout clause because party A seeks to forbear the right of a successful coaching career at WV where he is being highly paid and is virtually guaranteed employment for at least 10 to 20 more years (he is the program icon) in turn for the right to a higher salary at michigan( a damaged team) yet without any guarantee at all for so much as a term of even five years (especially given the state of the team Carr left us in) Thus if he was fired and there was no buyout clause party A would be left with no money coming in and a tarnished reputation when he could have had a career at a good West Virgina school where he was guaranteed a coaching career and plenty of money.
SO here is the damages diagram
WV 20 years + salarY - ((Richrod yearly salary at michigan X 2) - (buyout) - tarnished reputation (speculative damages)) = [something far greater than 5 million)
THERFORE, the actual terms in the contract that would expressly allow the university to terminate their duty to pay the buyout clause are the lynchpin of the contract. These specific terms are obviously a well kept secret to which Ann Arbor radio programs can only speculate.
Do you understand?
as posted earlier in this thread, here is his contract with all of his buyout details
Valenti screen capture from a video on the 97.1 website. Is this guy a d-bag or what?
Why the hell was this thread resurrected? LOL! Is this the one that the one dude got negpwned by Brian for -10k?
I wanted to see what happened for myself.