When I see "key defensive player", I'm thinking Jake Ryan, not the guy WRs lick their chops to match up against.
Mike Lantry, 1972
When I see "key defensive player", I'm thinking Jake Ryan, not the guy WRs lick their chops to match up against.
He's still drunk from celebrating their worthless undefeated season...
Did part of my comment upset you, or was it inaccurate? Feel free to take jabs at our secondary weaknesses, namely our senior CB that routinely falls down in coverage.
J.T. makes me nervous as shit back there in man to man coverage.
Guess you're going to be beside yourself now.
So we let a convicted felon play almost the entire season...but forbid a senior from playing his final game in the winged helmet against his hometown team?
Gotta figure whatever Floyd did is bad, real bad. Like felony bad.
Frank Clark was convicted of a felony during the offseason. He only missed one game, so the to force a senior to miss his final game in his home state it had to be a relatively severe transgression.
So we let a convicted felon play almost the entire season after his suspension...but forbid a senior from playing his final game in the winged helmet against his hometown team?
FTFY. Players get suspended for lots of dumb reasons. That doesn't mean this is necessarily worse than another suspension.
Actually Frank Clark is not a convicted felon, as long as he holds up his end of the bargain under the Holmes Youthful Trainee Act
was he convicted of a felony? Yes. Therefore, regardless of what stays on his record he is still a convicted felon.
Timing is everything.
Three strikes for Hagerup??
At least 2 that we know of. I wonder if we see a punter in this recruiting class now.
This is #3 that we know of.
Wile has two years of eligibility left, and has proven to be a good punter during Hagerup's intermittent absences. I don't think we need two scholarship punters; Wile only got a scholarship in the first place as a backup kicker back when it looked like Gibbons wasn't going to pan out.
Says a lot about his personal discipline. This is now habit forming. Gotta wonder how detrimental it would be to keep him around much longer.
I can't figure out why the earlier report was censored:
Heard from several that as of now, U-M will be down a key defensive player for the Outback Bowl. Will wait for the program to announce who.
Maybe this is why Norfleet is suddenly playing CB?
Mod edit: The threshold for saying a player is kicked off the team for potentially illegal behavior is higher than unsubstantiated rumors. Speculation that names particular players and/or suggests those players have legal or other serious problems should be kept off the board unless a credible source comes forward to report. If you think you are a credible source, I encourage you to email Brian at the address at the top of the page. JGB.
When it was posted, it was just speculation and rumors and rumors often drag innocent people/players into their crossfire. This time, its news straight from the team.
JGB wasn't censoring the Original Report. It was to stop a lot of commentators from acting like Ace Williams; throwing out speculation and saying "I've got an in with the team", but not actually giving us real sources
I suggested that it might only be a suspension, but I was in the minority. A lot of people made the leap from "won't play for UM again" (which is the case for any person in his last year of eligibility who misses a bowl game) to "did something that merits getting kicked off the team" (even if they would have had eligibility left) in the absence of any facts. From that point it's a very short leap to wonder if illegal activity is involved. It's a natural mistake to make, but it's still a mistake.
he is clearly not getting shorter/skinnier since he was an elite high school recruit offered by bama and many others but...
the young man is tiny--short, very thin legged.
can you play in big ten as a db at that size? i do not remember antoine winfield in college but he is thick now.
Probably still needs to put on weight. But the Norfleet to CB move might be more about protecting Richardson's redshirt than anything. No need to burn it just for a meaningless bowl game.
They were playing the SMOKE A BOWL and started training a bit too early for it.
Just baseless speculation but it's not as if this hasn't been a problem before.
They miss their last game and abdicate their leadership role. Mistakes have consequences, but man it's crappy timing.
Onward for the program.
I saw the thread from last night was locked- should I not post information like that when I hear it? I didn't speculate as to why they were being disciplined, but it was still before the athletic department put out a press release.
Mgobloggers + alcohol + Sat night + rumors (even if the info is correct). It's a train wreck waiting to happen.
But, I thank you for giving us a heads up. These three stooges should have their Michigan Men cards taken away, imho.
Maybe email Brian? The problem is that it's impossible to tell apart true word-of-mouth information from a random message board poster and trolling that can damage the reputation of an innocent person. So it's better to be safe than sorry.
Yeah I had actually emailed Brian earlier in the day. Then, Balas decided to tease the entire fanbase last night with his tweet, and that seemed like a fair time to post what I knew.
but all you did was name names with no details. Presumably you heard more than the names, but even if you didn't, you should say that, instead of acting like you have info but only want to tell the internet some of it.
Edit: How is this trolling? The guy still hasn't said anything about how he "knew" before any official statements. Having been associated with the university in several ways over the years, I'm pretty sure students don't just magically know what's happening unless somebody with an actual connection to the team tells them. He just repeated a rumor that could have easily been wrong. Sometimes The_Knowledge is right, too.
"Presumably you heard more than the names, but even if you didn't, you should say that, instead of acting like you have info but only want to tell the internet some of it."
...I explicitly stated that I only knew the names and that it was disciplinary.
You didn't and still haven't named your sources. So there's no basis to believe you. You don't need to name names, like "Brady Hoke told me at lunch", but a talked with staff, know someone who rooms with x player, work in the department, anything more than "students are saying" elevates it from base rumor to potential new information.
So you did, eventually. You didn't initially, which I complained about, and then you did in a subsequent comment that I didn't see until now because you can't view it through the thread. But ok. I clicked on your name and saw it now, so my bad.
I think it's wrong that the thread got locked as it did. If people were out of line - that's what we have the moderation system for. They get negged and greyed out and nobody sees what they have to say.
But it was pretty obvious there was a lot of smoke and where there is there's usually fire.
Spot on. There is a bad case of MgoEgotism around here - an inflated view of one's importance and influence. Its the internets for crying out loud. Its all about speculation. That's normal. What's not normal is that mods here, perhaps trying to justify or bolster their sense of importance, feel that things said here have some sort of broader influence, and so they must step in, save the day, be heros. Trust me, what is speculated here matters very very little. If at all. I have seen it over and over with different mods, shutting down threads discussing speculative issues that end up being true. Where there is smoke, there is fire about 90% of the time here.
In any case, one of the mods decided to lock down the thread late on a Saturday night, and so what? We found out the truth the next day. Is this really something to get upset about?
We saw the same mentality with the Newtown posts went up on Friday. While OT, it still remains one of the most terrible tragedies of our lifetimes. And it gets shut down instantly because it might divulge into a policy discussion? Why does the moderation feature even exist if that's the case? For a lot of people, discussing a situation like that and how it effects them can even be thearaputic.
Maybe it's just me but I feel like we should trust the members of the board to police themselves in most instances - again that's what the moderation features are for.
If their objection was to the thread itself instead of the ensuing commentary they probably would have deleted the thread instead of just ocking it down. I wouldn't worry about it.
it was collateral damage as much as anything. I don't think it was the post, as much as the baseless speculation that got the thread locked. Look around, if you are still in A2 and not Bolivia, you're good to go.
Look around, if you are still in A2 and not Bolivia, you're good to go.
OMG I'm in Ohio. What did I do???
Well if those unfortunate souls who reside in the Buckeye state are "Hell people in Ohio", and MGoBlog hell is Bolivia, then by the transitive property, Ohio=Bolivia.
Also, if she weighs more than a duck... she's a witch!
Brian is the guy who can verify sources on his site, and I'm not involved with anything like that. Without being able to verify your sources myself (or, frankly, recognizing you or anyone else naming names as someone who has reported a bunch of things correctly before) I felt I had two choices: leave the thread up with a couple different posts like yours and speculation about the cause behind what you and a few others were saying, or locking the thread. Locking it put an end to discussion, but also protected the guys named from speculation getting out of hand until official news broke. Using my judgement about unsourced negative information, I locked the thread.
In the future, I would recommend emailing Brian with any inside information. He has experience with these kinds of things, and he can get it out there with or without your name attached, or give an MGoStamp of approval based on your access/info.
Absolutely, I'll do that.
The issue is that you actually think you are protecting someone. A lowly thread on a Saturday night on one blog speculating about adults who play on a college team with national recognition means very very little. But if you want to feel like you are actually protecting football players who need protecting from nameless commenters on a blog thread, then by all means stop discussion.
Exactly. This thread should be locked as well due to the speculation based on the ambiguity of of "violation of team rules."
The board is for breaking news and discussion on breaking news. If someone has been hearing rumors of players being suspended it should be a place where others can offer the information they have either refuting or supporting the rumors. Killing the discussion by locking every negative thread defeats the purpose of the board. We can take care of flamebait posts by downvoting.
Edit: I get why Justin locked it, but I think we need a more concrete policy on thread locking.
On the one hand I like the idea of protecting people's reputation. It's sort of in line with innocent until proven guilty. A false accusation can make you guilty in public opinion, and that is not fair. But, on the other hand what you just said reminds me these are adults. We have a tendency to repeat on this board that these are just "kids" or "college kids". It's one thing to reference recruits in that way becsause they are 16-18 year olds that live at home with mom and dad. But, once you hit 18 and move out and live away from home and become a college student you are an adult. Granted, there is a transition in learning to be responsible for your actions. But, part of that learning process means dealing with the consequences of your behavior, including negative consequences, which in this case is partly being talked about on MGoBlog. So, thank you for reminding me that 18-22 year-olds and college students in general are adults, not kids.
interesting.... one of A2.com's lead sports stories is about two more South Carolina players being suspended (WR D.L. Moore, and OL Kyle Harris)... no mention of the UM players... yet.
EDIT: Nevermind.... it showed up while I was typing this.