(havent talked to either of them personally)
This parenthetical should have made it clear to you that you probably shouldn't have written this entire fucking diary.
(havent talked to either of them personally)
This parenthetical should have made it clear to you that you probably shouldn't have written this entire fucking diary.
Well..... posts like this??
This was a diary and got demoted to the board. Your points are dropping because you said something stupid, then brought up the point system, which is a no-go here.
Wrong. This was never a diary, that much is fact.
Isn't is obvious? Because you get negged for it!!
Ricky Bobby? You can't just say no offense or with all do respect and have it be nice.
Sorry, the "no offense line" just reminded me of that. Anyway, it's a no-no because Brian didn't want people bickering about points and filling up board space with "Why am I getting negged" type comments. It goes back to a phrase that is currently on this board: "TAKE IT LIKE A MAN" and just let a few negs come in. The more you post asking why your getting negged is a pretty simple linear equation approximation:
neg_total ~= k * n ^ (sqrt(k)
where k equals the number of posts made and n equals the number of negs rewarded after one complaint about negs.
the popular kid in high school, weren't you?
So, just to confirm, you literally have no opinions of anybody you havent personally talked to? How on earth do you ever vote during elections?
The reason this is sad is that it is not one of the stupidest comments that I've read on this board. That said, it is still incredibly dumb.
Maybe he votes based on issues of policy, rather than his opinion on who is more likable or who has a better personality. As opposed to making an opinion on whether he likes a collegiate QBs personality based on minimal anecdotal evidence after one year without ever even talking to one.
Maybe he votes based on issues of policy, rather than his opinion on who is more likable or who has a better personality.
I'll give you that as a possibility for his specific case, but to act as though perceived personality does not play a large role in politics for the majority of the public in any country is either willfully naive or just downright, as you put it, "incredibly dumb."
This is the reason why I feel bad for scholarship athletes. This kid isn't making a cent, and still has to put up with dipshits who do not know him making public posts on a message board read by thousands of his peers about how he's a douchebag. I wish "Communications" was as popular as football, so people who don't know you could make public internet posts about your personality.
"this kid isn't making a cent"
What do you call not having to pay for a U-M education then?
Is that income?
Wow you are an idiot
Touche - I think you are about to prove your idiocy. Please continue.
Is that income?
In a way, yes. It's a form of compensation for services rendered. Congress chose not to tax that income, but it still counts.
...but I thought scholarship athletes effectively earn $30k to $40k annually in paid tuition as well as a top-notch education from a premier university.
If they can't stand the heat (and the competition), they should get out of the kitchen.
Team success is #1. Individual accolades should be secondary.
I like Tate a lot. Cool head. Lots of confidence. Decent touch. His only shortcoming is he slightly diminutive to be playing B10 football. I think of him as more of a MAC QB, but he is proving to be surprisingly effective against B10 opponents.
Technically, you can say they earn the $30k and pay for school with it, or you can say they get a free education (I know you didn't say free, but you implied it).
I know the football program is a huge profit center so this effectively absorbs the cost of tuition. Of course, they marginally shrink the number of students who can attend U of M, so I guess you could say they cost "normal" kids slots at the school.
I just know that I would have been thrilled to have been offered a full ride scholarship at a B10 school to play a sport I love. It would have been a tremendous honor, whether I saw the field much or not.
It's a scholarship. It is not taxable as long as it is used for tuition, books, and fees. And it can't be used for anything else, or even those things ANYWHERE else.
...it is HUGE compensation, regardless of how the IRS classifies it.
It is granted on past performance and expectation of future behaviors that will benefit the university far in excess of the individual outlay.
My previous post was hasty and left holes for quibblers to quibble with. Nonetheless, a scholarship is not income.
While perceived personalities obviously affect politics, your original statement suggested that it should, a thought that I found offensive and indicative of a lot of crap that is wrong with the world in general. That said, I clearly overreacted in my original response and for that I apologize.
Is there a difference between having an opinion, and posting my opinion of a 19-year old amateur athlete (formed with anecdotal evidence)on a message board frequented by thousands of his peers ans classmates?
Yeah, there's a huge difference Chitown: this 19-year old seems "cocky" "douchey" and like a "douchenozzle" to some moron, so he totally deserves it.
DC, you say you don't want Tate representing your school? Because he doesn't sit and chat with you, or "seems" like a douche? That's insane, and you're an asshole.
There's "I prefer Denard as our starter and Tate isn't my favorite player," and that's a very reasonable opinion. The stuff you posted, on the other hand, makes you the douchenozzle my friend.
I hope when people read this idiocy they realize you speak only for the mouth-breathing population of Michigan fans.
He tried to walk past the line to get into a frat party the night of the Penn State game. the bouncer started to herd him back into the line when Tate said "dont you know who I am? I'm the f****ing quarterback of the football team!" and the bouncer said "put some poiints on the board and you can walk past the line" and sent him back on line. Tate and his friend left.
I kind of remember stories like that about a former kicker. That is a douchey move. Although I'm glad the bouncer put him in his place.
He actually seemed very comfortable with his place... After the game I asked who they all were on that team (all wearing official M gear, and huge) He said "Tight End, Tight End, O line, and I'm just a fat kicker"
Didn't seem douchey to me
Hell, Mike Cox tried it at SAE during welcome week his freshman year, and with a whole crowd of friends with him.
Sounds like a proposal is in the cards!
As for the "wall of shame" thing, it was pretty well discussed around here. The issue is that Tate doesn't actually run the site, his dad does.
And you should hate yourself for it.
Nope, I don't like Forcier either. Pretty much lost the Ohio State game single-handedly
He single handedly won the Notre Dame and Indiana games. He put up ridiculous numbers in the Purdue and Wisky games and decent ones in the Illinois game.
He was a true freshman, what did you expect from him? He's only going to get better!
Tate didn't lose the Ohio State game singlehandedly, but he didn't win Notre Dame and Indiana without some help either (ridiculous Kevin Koger catches? DWarren's icing INT?)
I agree with not bashing him, but spread the love around.
He forced a bunch of passes he shouldn't have, but he also repeatedly made plays on his own to keep us in that game. Long drives that end in turnovers are still better than 3 and outs.
(Edit: on my browser this is showing up as a reply to Tacopants' post. I wrote it as a reply to the post accusing Forcier of singlehandedly losing the OSU game.)
Don't be afraid to share your opinion here. I also was very disappointed to hear about Denard ending up on his "wall of shame".
I can't speak for anyone else and certainly you are entitled to your opinion but I would say I am a fan of his. The only reason for this is that he plays for UM and they are my team.
I also have never met the guy or even seen him in person, so Ihave no personal perspective from which to base my opinion.
Having said all this, I simply have been hoping that Denard wins the QB job this year purely because I really like the guy and want to see him on the field more. It is nothing negative toward Tate, I just would like to see Denard progress enough to win the job.
I should clarify that I only want him to win the job because I would be excited to see what he could do if he got the passing game down. He would be electric back there.
Though qbforce is straight up weird, a quarterback should be very confident. Maybe other teams don't like him, but he's OURS. Every fan of other Big 10 schools I've talked to hated Mike Hart, but can you say the same?
I love Tate on the field and try to ignore everything he does off of it.
as well as your avatar, I'd say you excel at compartmentalization.
There are two types of players I want on my team:
Both of those types of players have one thing in common. As long as that's the case, I could care less. I'd love for every player to be personable and friendly, but that will never happen. Just give me winners.
A la A.J Pierzynski?
I'm one of very few of my friends who are much more excited about Denard than Tate. I think that Denard has the skill set/ability to be a top 5 QB in the league by his senior year, while I think Tate wont get any better physically, but hopefully he'll get better mentally.
I think the future at QB is Denard... but I'm going to support both guys because the present needs them both to succeed.
If Denard can continue to improve his passing, and plays in Big 10 games the way he played in the Spring game, he would be the true run/pass threat that will open up the defense.
but Gardner has the look of a future NFL QB....sort of Vince Young 2.0
Tate is a nice QB, and a very grittly competitor, but he doesnt have a rocket laser arm, he isnt a significant running threat, and he seems to get banged up a lot. He forced a number of passes in the Spring game, and was lucky a few werent picked.
Confidence and cockiness are two different things. You can have the guy who doesn't know if he can lead the team down the field to beat Notre Dame with 11 seconds left (no confidence, no cockiness), the guy who knows he can (confidence, no cockiness), or the guy who thinks he is entitled to his position and it doesn't matter if he leads the team down the field (confidence, cockiness). Which would you prefer?
while i've never had any interactions with tate personally, I've dropped enough eaves around him and heard enough stories that make me a much bigger denard fan. Sure, probably not all these stories are true, but a lot of people like to say unflattering things about tate, whereas they agree that denard is a nice guy.
say that. One of my friends works with the student-athletes. I was there talking to him during the spring game and his exact words were, "Tate is an asshole." He said it twice to make sure I got it. He also said that he's getting into a lot of trouble. Nothing major, but little bullshit knuckle head type stuff. Just telling you what I heard about him from a source that works closely to everyone.
We said the same thing about Rick Leach in the day. He was a damm good quarterback and won a ton or games. Was he a nice friendly guy? No. It would be nice if our QB was nice, kind and good. I'll settle for good.
spit on you avatar
diary of a 12 year old girl.
And this reads like the reply of a 13-yr old teenaged girl who is sooo superior. Dude. Please.
OMG! Tate is so dark and mysterious, he just keeps to himself and his web page, and Denard is soooo cool and funny. I'm all, like, you know, confused about which one to like more!!! If only one of them would ask me to the dance, i would know how my heart feels. I think i saw Tate drive fast and has glittery skin and Denard ate some raw meat and howls a lot, i am soooo confused.
Shows an uncomfortble familiarity with the Twilight franchise, iykwim.
Well let's just say I bought an authentic Forcier jersey last fall and now wish it was a D-Rob jersey.
If you're that worried about it, just tell people you bought a Vlad Emilien jersey.
You'll have to explain away why Emilien's a bust, but that might be easier than explaining why you don't like a true sophomore QB who, to be honest, had a quite excellent true freshman year given the circumstances of the 2009 season.
I guess I can call it an Emilien jersey. I mean, the guy does have a knack for making our offense look stellar in spring games...
in every single comment you post, you don't need () explaining your freaking point! OMG every freaking one of your post is like this
"Hey I don't like Tate" (But what I mean is that I do not like him as a QB, but I like him as a person)
I don't like when you post (what I really mean is you suck)
...they could start Satan McLucifer out there and I wouldn't care as long as he remains academically eligible, abides by the rules, and helps us win.
You probably never met Ryan Mallett either
was common with him too. Not from a close source. Just people talking Michigan Football.
Or Drew Henson for that matter.
Same complaints: was reserved, kind of cocky, nobody really knew him enough to get a real opinion though.
I knew Henson (I was a TA and he was in one of my sections) and he was a nice guy, never gave me any kind of attitude. One time I ran into him when I was doing my laundry and he was hanging out with some other guys in my apartment complex, and he offered me a beer.
I don't care as much about fans perception of the player as much as the other players perception. It seemed that Mallet was not liked by a lot of the older players, and that was concerning to me. Tate seems (again only a perception from seeing him interact on the sideline and at spring practice) like he has the team on his side and they trust and back him. As long as he has the team's trust, he has mine.
Now if you are asking me who I am more excited about playing QB this fall, I really like Tate and have a number five maize shirt ready to go, but D-Rob seems pretty special and crazy dangerous on every play. I usually always go for the safe bet, but if I had a choice, I want the high stakes gamble with Denard.
I also wouldn't worry to much about how they interact with other students either. As someone mentioned, they are not pro's. From your description it sounds like Denard is just one of those personalities that can talk to anyone, and just kinda can own a room without trying. Tate sounds like he is just a little more reserved and doesn't always want the spotlight off the field. I remember hearing my freshman year that Drew Henson had a sign up list for girls to visit his dorm room. No one cares about these stories when you're winning. I say give the kids a break.
Was one of the most douchy people I've ever met. Also one of the ugliest people I've ever met.
That said, the "cockiness" displayed by a quarterback is necessary. Some call it Moxie. To a certain extent you need to have the "I'm the fucking man" mentality to succeed. There are multiple ways to know you're good and use it though. For example, Peyton Manning knows he's the man, and he works hard to stay on top. Tony Romo has been told he's the man, so he goes to Cabo. Just examples.
I think in general I like my dominant athletes who know they're dominant to also be humble about it and be good people off the field while they're at it. (See Graham, Brandon)
With Tate - he had a great start to his freshman year, and was The Man during October. He got hurt, Molk got hurt, the wheels came off, and he wasn't that sweet any more. I'm just hoping that he takes the pressure from Denard and others and uses it to improve himself and the team.
You are not alone. I don't like his attitude either, and I have always been suspicious of his work ethic. That said, if he can perform on the field and be a team player, I'm not sure I care that much.
honest, the thing that really pissed me off was the osu game. He comes out, pumping the crowd up, doing a little clowning and before you know it..............Touch down osu. Not to mention the 50 picks he threw that game.
How dare he get pumped up for Michigan vs. Ohio State. The nerve.
wow, almost spit out my coffee.
about him getting the crowd involved but lets make some things happen first. Lets move the ball and then make some noise.
I want all the home field advantage I can get. Let's make the other team uncomfortable from the second warm ups start to the time they go back to the locker room. No need (or reason) to wait for something to happen.
you disagree. Let's just say that whole first series didn't look good for the sake of this argument.
You're absolutely right.
I look forward to the team stopping games this fall after they get a lead, going back to the locker room, and THEN running out to jump and touch the M Club Banner.
After all, there's no reason to make noise UNTIL the team does something, right?
Yeah, I would question the work ethic of a kid that's been training since gradeschool and used to ride the train to additional practices after his team workouts.
Or inviting a wide receiver to visit him in California so they work on reps together in the offseason.
Work ethic, really? You want to question the work ethic of anyone spending their off season on Barwis Beach?
Yeah, that Mike Hart guy was a real cocky asshole too. Did you like him?
I loved Mike Hart and I love Tate for the same reason. They both give their all for Michigan Football. Are they both a bit arrogant? Sure, even over the top with it at times. However, we call ourselves "The Leaders and Best." Isn't that a bit arrogant too? Anyone who bleeds for Michigan Football is okay in my book.
Calling out a kid like this is pretty unacceptable, at least in my mind. Players read this site, and cheerfully suggesting one of them transfer to another school serves no purpose. Nor does calling them out as assholes.
Sorry, but I've got to neg you for that. I'm trying to stay out of this since I got absolutely hammered the last time I started a thread on Tate but for you to compare Forcier and Hart is pretty unfair, IMO.
Hart was a proven beast on the field. He bought himself the right to say what he wanted. And really, what did he say during his career besides the "little brother" thing? When you go 4-0 against your in-state rival and do it impressively (on his part, anyway), you have the right to say that.
If Forcier can produce the way Hart did, then I couldn't care less what he has to say. Until then, I think it'd be in his best interest to keep a lid on it.
Hart was cocky from the start, not just his senior year. And he loved him because of his swagger and his performances. Also, Tate did a pretty good job this last fall for a true freshman. Compare the talent level on the team in 2009 to Hart's freshman year when he had Braylon, Avant, Breaston, and Henne to stretch a defense and ran behind Baas, Long, Lentz, Stenavich. Not taking anything away from Hart but considering the drop in talent, Tate did just fine except for some freshman QB mistakes.
So, guys and girls, am I the only who one doesnt really like MGoDc at the moment?
I really just dont like the cut of his jib.
Let me start out by saying that I root for Tate, and will continue to do so as long as he is wearing a winged helmet (unless he transfers to University of Delaware). I also think that this kid has a lot of potential because of his ability to create on the run and under pressure. That said . . .
I was also troubled by the Facebook thing. Yes, his dad runs the page, but if he played for a different team, we would never accept that excuse. I also didn't like the sort of douchy "I don't get nervous" comments when he was doing well. Confident (almost cocky) QBs are a good thing, but that did sort of seem a bit toolish.
A lot of these things could simply be the result of being 18/19 and having been raised by a father that is a bit, shall we say, crazy. I hope that during this upcoming year, he grows up and sheds some of these behaviors.
Although I think your take on Tate is probably short-sighted (and I think you would agree), I applaud you for sharing what you knew would be an unpopular opinion. We all formulate uninformed opinions about people we have brief, random, and secondary encounters with. We are evolutionarily programmed to do so, a tendency we often have to work against. Keep your mind open, we'll see how things play out this season. My guess is that Tate's true character will have plenty of opportunity to surface during this season.
To me Tate does seem unnecessarily cocky. For example, his oft-uttered "I don't get nervous" smacks of the immaturity of a 12-yr old more so than an 18-yr old (even if that is what you think, you don't need to go around chanting it. Plus, it is faulty - nervousness can have good impacts as well as bad). And some of his behavior on the sideline toward RR was childish and insubordinate. RR indicated this spring that Tate needed to do some maturing.
The OP brings up a valid topic. As for all of you negging him for having the balls to post an unpopular opinion, one he adequately prefaced as ill-informed, one he admitted could be faulty, you all should be fucking ashamed. Keep up the homogenization of MGoBlog, and keep attempting to make it a boring place.
This is an anonymous cheapshot at someone the OP has never met. Who cares if Tate is cocky? What does this topic add to anybody's understanding of or appreciation for Michigan football? The OP made no effort to connect Tate's perceived character flaws with his performance on the field, so this just amounts to a pointless exercise in public masturbation.
The OP made no effort to connect Tate's perceived character flaws with his performance on the field, so this just amounts to a pointless exercise in public masturbation.
First, discussions here have never been limited to on-field performance. Just drop that ill-informed argument. Second, this is not about Tate's on-field performance. This is about his character outside of performance, and how that impacts whether the OP wants to cheer for him. They are different topics. If you cant see the nuance, I don't know what to tell you.
I understand that the OP was not referencing on-field performance. That was my complaint. Sure, as a matter of fact, discussions here sometimes to regress to gossipy bullshit about players' off field behavior or attitudes. This thread is evidence of that. But these threads don't add anything of value to the discussions here. They're juvenile and pointless. I just wish people would take this shit to an ESPN forum.
Well, my impression from hanging around here is that Brian and the mods would agree with you. DIssension isn't favored around here. Look for a thread lock soon or for this thread to even disappear.
Being critical of the personality of someone you've never met isn't dissention. It's just ill-informed internet talk. It's noise.
If I remember correctly, the thread dealing with that in the spring clarified that the article was on the "wall of shame" because the reporter was ready to anoint Denard as the messiah after his performance in the spring game and in the process proceeded to act like Tate had already lost his starting spot. Tate/Tate's dad wasn't upset by Denard performing well, they were upset at the reporter's handling of it.
Were you a fan of Tate when he won the ND game?
How about after the diving TD against IU?
We have two very skilled QBs who really seem to genuinely root for each other even as they're competing. Leave your HS cafeteria drama out of this.
Ya got balls kid, I'll give ya that.
I will say that I think that Tate has the kind of personaility where if he was playing at a different Big Ten school he would be a guy that we'd all love to hate. That said, I'm very glad he's playing for us, cockiness and all.
I think this thread is stupid. I love Tate, but I don't care who our QB is because I just want to win. Having said that, when Tate runs around with the ball in one hand I could literally run on the field and strangle him.
"As a current student I've seen both Denard and Tate around the Union some (havent talked to either of them personally) and Denard is usually laughing about something and talking with regular students. Tate, on the other hand, seems to keep more to himself, keeping himself relatively separated from the random student body."
Extrovert vs. introvert
Gregarious vs. shy (confidence athletically is not the same as confidence socially)
Does the "random student body" treat the two differently because one is the starter and the other isn't?
So we don't think it is fair that Tate reads all the Denard love, and feels frustrated that no one (in the press) really acknowledged that he was playing with the two offense against the one defense and vice versa, and he vents it out on his wall of shame???
I have no problem with it. Neither should Denard really.
What if the guy has been hounded, gawked at, and facebook stalked by wide eyed fans for the last three or four years, and his way of dealing with it is to keep to a closer circle of trusted freinds???
I mean really, come on. Granted, anecdotally is has been alluded to that his early success went to his head, and maybe he isn't towing the line as much as he should have. Still, he's all of 19, and is in an incredibly challenging situation (how to be somewhat normal in a fishbowl, and how to make the transition from a lifetime of a father overseeing most aspects of your life to being successful and managing your own life).
There are some great guys on this team, who are clearly extroverts and fun to be around: funny dog stories, rap videos, and smiles, etc. Just because someone keeps to themself, doesn't mean they're not a great guy.
I say unless Tate walks up to you at the Union and says "bow down lowly commoner", maybe you cut him a break.
... i'm surprised by the negative reaction to the OP. As if you haven't insulted opposing 19-year-old amateur athletes? There is a certain emu and OSU QB who would beg to differ.
While I agree that we should always root for him because he is on our team, I can say that I don't like the way he interacts with the media and he does come off as insincere. Strike it up to immaturity, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. The OP should be entitled to his opinion without people making hypocritical statements about how we shouldn’t negatively speak of “unpaid” athletes. If you don’t think we should insult unpaid athletes, hold to that rule for all teams not just UM. If you think we shouldn’t be critical of our own team than you should just state you are circling the wagons and are refusing to listen to alternative viewpoints.
You can be critical without being negative. For example,
Critical: I don't think this thread is in the best interest of this blog and does not meet the viewpoints of most Michigan fans.
Negative: I think this thread was started by the stupedist, most narrow-minded fuckhead on the planet.
I don't know Tate but I'm guessing if he reads this thread he has more reasons to call a couple people "douchenozzles" than they claim to have...
I met Tate once outside the Union. I was like "sup brah" and he was like "sup"
Then I punched him in the face and he was like "haha ow u punched me bro"
And I decided he was a chill brohammer after all
So I have no beef with Torts Falconer
a 19 year old star quarterback of a major college football program acting smug and entitled!!!???!?!?!?!?!!?!???!
The public isn't entitled to know which athletes are genuinely good people, which are douches, and which are in between. Sometimes you get to learn a bit about their real personalities, but I don't think there has ever in history been a guy who you can judge one way or another after one year in the public spotlight.
Things you might not choose in a friend are fine qualities for an athlete on a team you root for. As mentioned above, Hart was a loudmouth with a Napolean complex, but when he held a football, he fought for every yard as of he didn't know the difference between 36 inches and salvation, and in doing so earned our undying admiration.
Forcier stood for an entire season opposite dozens of future NFL defensemen, with only Ortmann, Schilling, Moosman, Huyge and Dorrestein between him and them. Before his shoulder exploded, Forcier's gutsy play won the Notre Dame game, sparked a thrilling comeback win against Indiana, and tied an MSU game that shouldn't have been close (unless offsides suddenly became a penalty in the Big Ten...which...if they haven't they really should make offsides a penalty in the Big Ten, even if it would ruin Dantonio's career).
For that, he has my respect.
Unless he starts dating Misopogal's sister or something, that's really all I need to root for him.
reads this blog then I hope he does see this thread. Maybe it will be a wake up call. And it also may go a lot farther to Tate hearing it from hear vs. other sources.
I would put money down that he would have greater success with less attitude and is'nt that what college is really about. Figuring out who and what you are?
nothing like a thread on the mgoboard to straighten out your attitude!
How soon we forget him giving it his all last year in the MSU game.
So you want the guy who would be our most experienced QB to transfer because he's cocky? And you justify it by saying he's quiet and citing a webpage his dad runs... I see no flaws in your logic.
Here's my take, which means next to nothing in the scheme of things.
I will be interested to see how Tate handles adversity this season. And I'm not talking on the field. Denard has made some significant gains since 2009 and he has a higher ceiling than Tate in terms of potential, IMO.
I think the two will split a lot of playing time early, and it is very possible that Denard wins the job outright.
Now, should this happen, I will be curious to see how Tate handles himself off the field. Will he complain about it or will he continue to work hard and support Denard?
Wow, the season really needs to get here. These threads are getting ridiculous. Maybe we can talk about actual football soon? Probably not, we're just going to cluck like a circle of chickens for a few months.
All kinds of threads get deleted/locked by the mods...
...and yet this one is left to stand?
I thought dude was a troll. Still don't know if he isn't to be honest.
100+ replies either make it an interesting thread or a troll thread, since its not interesting, I'll go with the latter choice.
If the OP isn't a troll himself, his thread certainly has attracted a lot of them. My guess is he isn't a troll. Immature? Yes, but I don't think he's purposely on here to start a flamewar.
with 1100 points...
But "jumpbalya" is trying real hard to get banned today
how about eliot mealer? that guys the biggest jerk. he is so selfish to come back after a tragedy and guilt everyone into giving him attention. and barwis, that fraud. i cant believe he would donate his own time to help out someone recovering from a spinal injury. some people.
There are some things that should not be used in a flame war. Call up this story if you simply want to give an example of the character of the Mealers, coaches, and our athletic department. But don't use it in a flame war - it only cheapens it.
close, but Haikus are usually about nature. Nice try though, i'll still give you a +1 for using poetry.
Just think of this one as the exception that proves the rule.
No, but your opinion is the only one Tate cares about.
Tate has drawn comparisons to Garcia many times, both on this blog and in the Detroit media.
I remember seeing John Navarre (!) a couple of times on campus and, based on my completely uneducated eye, he looked pretty "cocky", what with his height and athletic ability and his name in the UM record books. I knew right then, staring at him silently while he passed, that he was a total d-bag who was a horrible teammate and who never should be allowed to wear a UM jersey, especially not one worn by suck humble characters as Desmond, Woodson, and Hart.
Come on! This is big-time college football, and Tate Forcier is the presumptive favorite to be the starting QB at UM. I fully expect him to be a bit cocky, and given his size and the number of times people have doubted him, about the only chance he has to survive and succeed is to go out and believe that he is the best player on the field, in the Union, in the classroom, etc. The minute he stops believing that he is the best QB at UM is the day he might as well pack up his bag and sit on the bench.
And while I am all for Denard becoming the starting QB if he earns it on the field, let's look at this situation from Tate's perspective. Last year, as a true freshman, he took a pretty mediocre offense into one of the better ones in the conference, put together some transcedent performances, and played injured for most of the 2nd half of the season. Along the way, he was dissected and analyzed by all types of pundits, from ESPN personalities to the random MGoPoster. His coach, perhaps as motiviation, pointed out to the press when he succeeded and when he failed. He also had to contend with a new living situation, thousands of miles from home, in an academically-rigorous school.
All the while, he didn't complain to the press, he didn't say anything stupid along the lines of "everyone murders", and he kept his nose out of trouble (at least headline-generating trouble).
And for that, as soon as Denard showed some flashes of brilliance in summer workouts and the spring game, everyone annointed Denard the heir apparent and threw Tate behind both him and uber-recruit Gardner. People said he was immature, that he couldn't cut it in this system, that maybe he should transfer somewhere else. The local press treated him as an afterthought, and random bloggers started calling him an ass because he is quiet and isn't laughing all the time (and let's see how Denard acts after the fans skewer him for throwing 3 picks or fumbles twice in a game).
So yeah, taking all of this into account, I don't blame him for being a bit down, for being annoyed that he played against the #1 defense with the #2 offense while Denard received heaps of praise for his ability to carve up walk-ons. Is it a bit immature to post it on Facebook? Sure, but then again, show me a mature 19-year-old's Facebook page and I'll show a potential sting operation by Chris Hanson.
People don't freak out here if you question Tate because we have some crazy man-crush on him (okay, some of us do) provided you supply some tangible, coherent points behind your criticism. Questioning the kid's heart because he didn't shake everyone's hand as he walked across campus or struggles to adjust to constant criticism gives you absolutely no leg to stand on.
In terms of football maturity: injury dramatics, holding that ball out there, taking off and scrambling too soon (even before protection breaks down).
But he's a great player, and he'll be even better when realizes that working hard with his teammates and listening to his coaches is what's best for him right now.
Just needs to realize: there will be enough drama when he wins a National Championship for Michigan. Need only ask his dad
Edit: remember he was also gracious re. Denard's PT last year "you can't keep a talent like that off the field." We learned a lot about Denard in terms of not giving up when Tate took over. We'll learn a lot more about them both this year. I'm optimistic
Were you one of the people calling for him to win the Heisman after the ND game too?
I'm a fan of anyone who helps us win football games. End of story.
If this thread gets jumpbalya banned than it's the best tread ever. If it doesn't well at least you got to get some shit off your chest. Should Tate read this thread and have tears in his eyes, I will never be able to forgive you MgoDC.
I think people are way over reacting here. This guy is entitled to his opinion first of all. Everyone here keeps saying, "well as long as he wins I don't care." Well, this guy is saying he does care and he is allowed to think so.
Also, I think it is a valid topic to say hey, i don't really like player x, what does this rather large and representative group of michigan fans think about him. What is wrong with that?
I think he is perfectly entitled to not like Tate and to wonder what other peoples feelings are on him. To neg bang him and say that this topic and his opinion are dumb is imo...dumb.
For the record, I think Tate does come off as immature and a bit douchy, but you can put me in the camp of people who say as long as he wins I don't care. I am not saying he is that way, I am just saying he comes off that way and if he were on another team, I would make fun of my friends who were fans of said team
You (and the OP) don't have to like him. Calling him a "douchenozzle" and such is where it crosses the line.
If Tate wins games and steers clear of the law or NCAA then I don't care what kind of a person he is.
If Tate loses games and sucks or gets arrested or busted by the NCAA then I don't care what kind of a person he is.
I guess I just don't care. Partially, because I will never know Tate or talk to Tate so I have no way to judge his personality. But also because Tate is just a football player to me so I will tend to judge him on how he plays football.
This guy was basically the Isner v. Mahut of douchiness; after such an epic display, no other douchiness will ever seem impressive.
I think it's one thing to have the private opinion that a person is a kind of a dick, and its something else entirely to post your opinion that that somebody is kind of a dick on the interenets.
That's kind of a dick move.
you take some potatos, hopefully from IDAHO, and you cook em and thrown in some musturd and mayo and carrots and celery and blueberries and onions and a spoon of sassafrass. mix it all up real good like and serve at 4000 degrees centegrade.
I always miss the morning negbangs!!