That's because, besides his huge mental lapse deciding to go to OSU, Herbstreit seems to actually usually be a pretty smart guy.
is there such a thing as an etsy genuis? if so, this is it.
That's because, besides his huge mental lapse deciding to go to OSU, Herbstreit seems to actually usually be a pretty smart guy.
he's been pretty fair and balanced when talking about M in the last few years. He actually seems to believe in Coach Rodriguez. Alright for a Buckeye, I guess.
I've always thought that, if I had to pick one, Herbstreit actually favored UM more than OSU. This is probably a result of the time he got knocked the f*** out against us and couldn't remember what team he played for when he awoke.
Didn't his dad play and/or coach at OSU? I don't think there was ever much of a question about where he was going to school. (It's just as well - I don't think he would have beaten out Elvis Grbac if he'd come here, anyway.) Agree - he's one of the most well-informed and fair announcers out there.
Herbstreit is usually reasonably objective in his analysis when it comes to his former team and their rivals.
Holtz, on the other hand, is just embarassing when he talks about Notre Dame.
that Les Miles was leaving LSU on the morning of the SEC Championship game.
I prefer to get my College Football news from other sources.
but there's a difference between being a good analyst and having good insider info. He knows the game and does his homework (highly unusual for a Buckeye), but maybe he should leave the rumor mongering to the blogs.
But I only trust one source, MGOBLOG.
It's possible that the information Herbstreit reported was accurate at the time he heard it (or perhaps was even leaked out by one of the two parties). Things can change rapidly in coaching changes and information can quickly become out of date. I find that more plausible than the apparent alternative - that Herbstreit (or his source) knowingly spread false or sensitive information to harm us. Keep in mind that ESPN has to stand behind anything its broadcasters report, so I'm sure they're careful about what they release to the public. They wouldn't tolerate a rogue announcer looking to sabotage a school's hiring process.
including the "voicemail from someone impersonating Desmond Howard" theory. But the bottom line is Herbstreit (and ESPN, in general) should stick with analysis of what occurs on the field, and what participants say before and after; and stay out of the rumor mongering.
But I realize that's just my opinion ...
I may be mistaken here, but wasn't this rumor at least somewhat grounded in reality? i.e. Miles' agent trying to get a hold of Bill Martin, who was too busy sailing to be bothered taking the call.
I've always liked Herbie. If anything, he's biased in favor of the Big 10. Some Michigan fans like to believe that he's anti-UM and subscribe to the conspiracy theory that he demonstrated this by "sabotaging" UM's hiring of The Hat. (Even if Herbstreit did, Les Miles is not a good hire. Less adjustment needed, great recruiter, but he's kind of an idiot.)
He usually comes up with a right answer. A lot of those guys step off the deep end of opinions given without knowing the facts, from time to time. Some make a career out of it, but Herbstreit isn't one of them.
Agree with the national forum caveat, though.
I realize I'm the 20th person on the board to say it, but it's true. He screwed up on the Miles thing, but I'm guessing he probably had his sources and went out on a limb that he shouldn't have. The thing with him is that he typically doesn't do that. Other guys at ESPN (Mark May, Lou, etc.) love to make outlandish comments to generate buzz or whatever you want to call it. They seem to subscribe to the entertainment part of it more than analysis and what-have-you. Herbie is usually pretty fair and gives pretty decent analysis for the time he is allotted. Personally, I would like him to have more allotted time because I would like to see him go into deeper analysis about some things because I think he could be successful doing that, and I think the fact that ESPN has strayed from that sort of thing the past few years (or longer) is one of the biggest problems many have with the network. They employ a lot of people that could provide much greater insight but they always dumb it down and say a lot of things for entertainment reasons rather than for the actual sporting aspect.
it should have been named SEPN, and they'd have gotten the priority of Sport over Entertainment right.
Herbstreit is a self serving asshole
The Internet thanks you for your contribution to its collective knowledge, I'm sure.
And there it is.....have to love how some people think others can't express an opinion.
some people think others can't express an opinion.
At what point did I say don't express your opinion? Oh, that's right - I didn't. Instead, you chose to infer that from my comment combined with the fact that some anonymous poster (not myself, in the interest of full disclosure) negged you, and you couldn't possibly be more wrong. have to love how some people jump to conclusions, amirite?
I've no problem with you expressing your opinion - after all, that's the purpose of a message board. I just happen to think there's a better way to express it. Why do you think he's a self-serving asshole?
You can express your opinion all you want, but you must also realize that once you put your opinion out there, others can have an opinion on your opinion. By ripping on the poster that has an opinion on your opinion, you are contradicting your statement that you're not allowed to express your opinion by trying to supress his opinion of your opinion. I'm sure that your opinion of my opinion will be very poor, but that's ok, it's your opinion.
I see a few comments about Herbie being a homer when he's on in Columbus. That hasn't been the case at all in my experience. Herbie and Spielman have both been pretty supportive of RichRod from day one and they have always both been pretty fair in their assessment of our program post-Lloyd. In fact, many Buckeye fans have told me that they don't like Herbie because he is not homer-y enough on air.
I actually really like Chris Spielman. He always let's his opinion known, but it is usually very rational and intelligent. Though maybe that is because he was going to come to Michigan until his dad interfered.
They get their share of lols in at our expense, but I've never felt a complete lack of respect for Michigan out of them in any way, shape, or form. They leave the nonsense to Common Man and The Torg.
Hey, somebody used my converter hack. Nifty!
and freeplinkconverter.com is an unregistered domain; you can claim it, set up your site, sell ads and retire at 39.
Thanks for that. I just couldn't let it pass without mentioning it in my post. =)
After listening to Herbie on the NCAA games, I just can't take anything he says seriously.
He isn't as bad as Madden on the Madden games though.
Putting aside whether or not we like Herbie, whether he is pro or anti Michigan or whether he screwed up the Les Miles hiring, I do like the CONTENT of what he said.
RR has gotten slammed in the press for Michigan's crappy performance over the past two years, but nobody (in the MSM) discusses that in year 1 he started Sheridan at QB with an almost entirely underclassman O-line, and during his second year, he started perhaps the worst secondary in recent B10 history (no offense to the players, but there was just a real lack of talent). It is nice to see somebody in the ESPN world acknowledge this fact. Well done, Herbie. I look forward to you covering us in the Rose Bowl this year.
I bet Utah didn't start walk-ons and I also bet they had an actual 2 deep. I think the bare cupboard argument is more about numbers and less about talent. Teams need depth plain and simple, players get tired and injured. Those 2 and 3 star players at Utah were likely backed up by 2 and 3 stars, and most are likely better than walk-ons.
Starting walk-ons is both a depth and a talent problem, The Decimated Defense series by Misopogon points this out very well.
So true, it is a numbers issue not a star issue. Why else would RR and staff switch so many players to defense from offense. Walk-ons can develop or prove their worth but not 4 in the 2 deep and not 4 that have less then 2 years experience.
Utah wasn't starting it's third DC in as many years, and last year makes the 4th in four years...
No Spider, your logic is silly
On the offensive side, you saw a lot of improvement. Molk went from a nobody to someone who may be a 1st team Big Ten player this year. There are other players that have improved as well too. On defense, there is a different story, especially with the LB's. I thought Hopson was a very poor position coach who didn't teach his backers well. When Robinson got a hold of Steve Brown, he made him into a NFL draft pick. But, still, when you are putting walk ons into your two deep, this is a talent problem. As to your regime change, find me another program that was doing alright and brought in a completly different coaching staff? Should we have kept the staff continuity? You answer that one.
That you think of these rational explanations as "excuses" reveals your starting assumption: That the coach is responsible for everything that happens on the field.
Arguing with people like you is pointless, you're like conspiracy theorists: you can't imagine a world where there isn't a person or small group of people in total control, bearing total responsibility, regardless of factual evidnece.. Madness!!!
Go pick up Brian's 2010 season preview book "Hail to the Victors" and read the section of defensive recruiting, attrition, and star rating. The lack of defensive players and in what classes is very enlightening.
As far as the talent issue, we had four, count 'em four walk ons (Kovacs, Leach, Henniger, and Simmons) on the 2 deep. That's quite a lot. Name me the last time there was 4 walk ons in the two deep on a Michigan squad. When Kovacs played the deep safety, UM got burnt, and bad. His athletic talent was not on par with a starting FS. In regards to Utah, how many of those 2 and 3 star recruits were underclassman? You are also making an assumption that all 2 and 3 star recruits are made the same. Oh, and that Utah game? We had a walk on starting at QB.
anyone is saying there will be a depth/talent issue anywhere near as significant as what we saw in year 1, and even last year. What we will see this year is a good deal of youth at key positions, but that's ok. For my money, a conservative guess as to this season's results is 7 wins (in the regular season). 8 feels like a good number to me.
But I honestly believe that the hierarchy of issues on defense has been:
1. Lack of depth.
2. Lack of talent
3. Three defensive coordinators in five years (if we include this year)
All of these have contributed to the defensive woes - not just one.
First, the headline:
This headline could easily have been; "Herbstreit: Last two seasons likely no different under Carr." Right? For the cognoscenti, that was the news. Herbstriet's "absolution" as to RR, vis-a-vis Carr. Meanwhile, the same old hash about "Rodriguez needs to win" is yesterday's fish wrapping.
Then, there's this:
BY MARK SNYDER
FREE PRESS SPORTS WRITER
Oh, never mind.
So let's get into the first couple of paragraphs.
CHICAGO -- Michigan coach Rich Rodriguez remains a hot topic.
Naturally. Because Mark Snyder's only purpose in this life is to write ledes like, "Michigan coach Rich Rodriguez remains a hot topic." Because if Mark doesn't publish it, Rodriguez might slip from "hot topic" status.
ABC analyst Kirk Herbstreit said Monday at Big Ten media days that expectations are high after the two losing seasons, putting Rodriguez under close watch.
"It seems like they have to get to like a Jan. 1 bowl game," Herbstreit said. "That's not me saying that. That's the feedback I get from a lot of Michigan people.
So, Herbie is just being a reporter. Sports journalist that he is. No mention of who, exactly, are the "Michigan people", who have placed this requirement on Coach Rodriguez. Did anyone in any position of authority say that to Herbstreit? The people I know of in authority have said the exact opposite. Does it sound as though this is some sort of investigative story that Herbstreit has even thought much about? It sounds to me like a very highfalutin' way to say, "Rumor has it that..."
You could add to Herbstreit's comments, "I dunno, I may be talking out of my asshole here, but the nice thing is that with crap like this, nobody will ever remember, in December, what I said in early August."
I can sleep better at night, knowing that Kirk Herbstreit is out there on the job, getting "the feedback" that I need. As reported by Mark Snyder.
Herbie's hearing this from Dantonio.
You could add to Herbstreit's comments, "I dunno, I may be talking out of my asshole here...
You could preface any comment by a pundit/analyst or section 1 post regarding the free press with that, and it would be wildly appropriate.
He said this periodically last year when this discussion came up
Are these former players? Senior UM administrators? Influential boosters? Recruits? The guy wearing a Michigan hat taking a leak in the urinal next to Herbie?
I actually like Herbstreit, and I think he's generally fair to Michigan and has been to RR. Here, he's simply repeating what he's hearing from other media people, and these other media people are simply repeating what they hear from Cowherd, and Cowherd is simply repeating what he's heard from Herbie. It's a closed loop, a self-referential circle-jerk that doesn't mean anything of importance.
The only "Michigan people" who are decision-makers in this are David Brandon and Mary Sue Coleman, and they're sure as hell not talking to Kirk Herbstreit, or anybody else at ESPN.
The article has seven paragraphs.
Four were one sentence long.
Three were devoted to quotes.
Beat writers might not be paid too much, but I just wrote four paragraphs with the same amount of content for free.
I think this bothers me even more hearing him admit this (although, yes, it's nice to hear that he's a relatively unbiased observer when he wants to be). My problem with it is this: these guys/ladies (all of them) are supposed to be professionals who have professional staffs working on their materials. There is NO EXCUSE for all of the commentators on the networks and the network broadcast teams not to know the situation at Michigan with regard to scholarships and player talent/depth over the last couple of years. Sure, it's great that Herbstreit acknowledges this, but they should all be acknowledging this and they should have all been acknowledging this two years ago. It's just pathetic, in my opinion.