I almost clicked on a Michael Weinreb article today but decided against it after his Michigan Sugar Bowl slam piece.

Show solidarity mr brothers. Fight the urge to read his articles. Remember it might be interesting but it might just be interesting fiction. Not worth your time.

A "Rosenberg boycott" was never my idea, but I certainly understand it and respect it.  I do like the fact that so many people have such strong feelings, that a boycott is something that they'd consider.

I didn't read this one, and I probably won't read it, and unless I do, I won't comment on it.

So there you go; how's that for a wild-eyed rant?

I have but one single meta-comment, and that is that Rosenberg (and Snyder) appear to have been reduced to pool-reporter status to a great extent.  They aren't getting any interviews, it seems, with Brandon, or Hoke, or Red, or any of the football players.  If they are, it isn't apparent to me.  So that's good.  It would be hard to expect an "interview boycott" to stand up, but I sure would like to encourage all of Michigan's current and former players to never give Rosenberg the time of day, ever again.  Depriving Rosenberg of reader-clicks is worthwhile.  Depriving Rosenberg of his life-blood -- access to athletes -- would be even better.

Bad advisors, shakey decisions and overall ego crushing sports failure, that Henson still seems to be a pretty nice dude. People hated when and how he chose to leave Michigan (timing even more than year, and not a good decision to begin with), but he seems to have accepted it all and holds no (outward at least) bitterness. And still seems to support the program. He's ok with me.

It's really interesting, especially if you were around then.  And I agree with you--and the article gives the same impression--that Carr totally screwed up the handling of Brady/Henson.  I had the misfortune of sitting through the Illinois game discussed in the article, and can still remember being livid that Carr went to Henson when Brady was playing well (and clearly the better QB that year if you were watching the games), whereupon Michigan began to stumble, the defense collapsed, and we lost despite a ferocious comeback led by Brady when Carr put him back.  I just watched the Orange Bowl from the end of that year on the BTN.  Michigan had TREMENDOUS TALENT on that team.  A shame the way it worked out.  (Rosenberg may be a jerk for the NCAA jihad, but even a jerk can write a good article now and then.)

Story from 2008/09 about practice hours / countable hours ... he never liked the Rich Rod hire and had a vendetta against the program.  

He's an op-ed writer who was also "investigating" Michigan for alleged violations.   Michigan did violate NCAA practice rules, and admitted it, but the FREEP's article went way beyond the boundary of "investigative journalism".   It was a witch hunt.   And Rosenberg parlayed that into a cushy gig with SI.com

I was reviewing Rosenberg's articles about Rich Rodriguez (excluding the NCAA violations) since December 2007.  The FREEP makes you pay for archived articles, so I just looked at headlines ....

Graduated from Michigan, and was an Editor of the Michigan Daily.  (Somebody help me with his year of graduation...)

He did some sportswriting at Michigan, and cultivated a lot of contacts with Michigan athletes that appear to have lasted.

My presumption is that Rosenberg had an okay relationship with Bo (not like John U. Bacon, but not bad), and a much better relationship with Carr.  I have a very, very large question in my own mind about the Carr/Rosenberg relationship.  Politically speaking, Bo was an unapolgetic Republican, publicly so after he left coaching.  Carr is a registered Democrat, publicly so as he ended his own coaching career.  Rosenberg and his paper are, shall we say, devotees of Lloyd Carr.

Rosenberg wrote a good book, carefully researched and well-written; War As They Knew It, about the ten year Hayes-Schembechler-Viet Nam era, and all of its sociopolitical components.  I reapeat; it is a perfectly good book.  I have told Rosenberg so, myself.  Jon Chait of the New Republic, another Michigan Daily editor, reviewed War As They Knew It for the NY Times Review of books, favorably.

Then came Stretchgate.  Jon Chait, Rosenberg's friend and reviewer, called it "journalistic malpractice."  Chait was right.  The Free Press (publisher Paul Anger, columnist Drew Sharp, Mitch Albom) circled the wagons to defend Rosenberg.

Someone with a brilliant mind suggested that people register protest votes on the Stretchgate story by rendering 1-star reviews for War As They Knew It on Amazon.com.  Naturally, I did so despite my true feelings about the book.  I have no regrets.  Several hundred other people did the same.

And what ugly crocodile tears from Rosenberg; what amazing chutzpah; to complain that "three years" of his working life had been damaged by a false and misleading publication (in the form of the Amazon neg-bomb).  Tell us about it.  Three, and out.  Eh?

This is where the term "lamestream media" gets it's definition...lazy, uninspired hack-writing disguised as "journalism."  Even though it's a sports article, journalistic standards should apply always.

And yeah, talk about fossilized "news."  (Think about that term - news.  It's supposed to be new!  Hence, NEWS!  Not olds!)

Nothing to see here, folks.  Move along...

Immediately confirmed by reading Simmons' mailbag:

Q: SI this week ran a feature about how Brady's Michigan experience helped Brady become the great QB he is now. I think I have read this story or seen a TV feature about it maybe 300 times in my life. But in the last 3 years alone someone has written a story or done a feature about how dropping to 24 made Rodgers the great QB he is now at least 150 times. Of course Rodgers is younger than Brady and has a longer career ahead. My question is this Sports Man — in 2030, when we finish counting these stories up after their careers, which story will have been beaten into the ground more? Would you go Rodgers or Brady?
— Frank, Lansing, MI