Agreed. Sorry but I can't take anything positive from a loss.
spoiler alert: i linked this
Agreed. Sorry but I can't take anything positive from a loss.
College football is based on hope. Until this game, there really wasn't any reason for hope. The offense looked incoherent and the defense couldn't budge from very good. MSU had improved vastly. OSU hadn't lost in nearly two seasons.
Now Michigan will return the majority of an offensive line that didn't totally suck today. It gets some play-immediately talent to drive the defense into potentially elite status. It retains its improving quarterback, running backs who performed much better down the stretch, and thank-you-God Funchess.
You don't celebrate the loss. You feel relief that this may not be unbearable for another full season.
I think one useful lesson that might be taken from the last couple of years is that this is not something that can be counted on. Treat what you get from true freshmen as a bonus; don't assume they're coming in ready to play at this level.
I wanted to add that I had a particularly interesting MGoMoment today. We had two extra tickets that we sold to the people who sit in front of us. They arrived with an extremely, extremely large guy and his wife. He's wearing a letterman's jacket. Turns out he's a former player who was one of the RR attritions, a guy both Brian and MGoBloggers treated particularly harshly. This was the first time he'd been back to the stadium since the last game he played.
Turns out he's been incredibly successful in life. Done very well for himself in business, has a very nice wife he's dated since high school, just an all-around fun guy to watch a game with. At the same time, we were told it was hard for him to come back, because there was so much emotional baggage thrown on him for leaving the program, a lot of it based entirely in nonsense and bogus assumptions among the fanbase. I'm glad it seemed like he had a great time. And it was definitely weird high-fiving a guy after a score whose palm is almost bigger than your entire hand.
So I guess we have to take into account that the blog has a real impact on real people, and that sometimes we don't have the whole story. Like I said above, I'm with Brian in my embrace of the ennui. But we have to be careful.
Sounds like a cool guy to meet. However, what was the point of this:
"a guy both Brian and MGoBloggers treated particularly harshly."?
If you aren't going to say who it is, then what is the point of even bringing that up?
Justin Boren? O'Neill didn't letter.
Be high fiving the same plays?
I was kidding.
But did he letter?
Guess it could be some other school's jacket.
It sounds like, to me anyway, that we need an airing of grievances.
I'm putting the pole up right now
I've got A LOT OF PROBLEMSWITHYOUPEOPLE!
1. Is there another team-devoted blogger, let alone a Michigan-devoted blogger who goes to further lengths to spell out and explain his opinions for everyone to understand/critique? I see people talk about how Brian never played football and doesn't know what he's talking about and how he is biased towards the spread, and then I see people disagree with him on Picture Pages and UFRs. But unsurprisingly the groups don't coincide at all.
2. The folks who are now able to ignore that this team went 3-5 in the B1G and finished second to last in the division, because Michigan only lost by one at home to OSU remind of the famous Dumb and Dumber "Totally Redeem Yourself" scene.
and a weak argument. You ascribe characteristics to your antagonist that they likely don't possess, then rail against them for it. There are probably zero fans who have forgotten about 3-5, given, you know, they're fans and they pay attention to the win-loss record. Saying the team played great today or that you shouldn't give up on the team when they lose lots (if those are the people you're aiming at) is not the same as saying the B1G record should be ignored.
Pot kettle black. Brian and others did not "give up on the team". They certainly extremely frustrated with the direction - or nondirection - of this ossified dinosaur of a program that has failed to keep up with college football.
They are also extremely frustrated with those who make comments about how "you shouldn't give up on the team when they lose lots". Especially when you are talking about guys like Brian who suffered through the worst of the RichRod years with hope and dedication.
This game, where Michigan played its most complete game of the season and still lost at home to Ohio State (who was far from taking Michigan seriously at all) only reinforces the fact that Michigan is far closer to Iowa as a program than OSU. It also reinforces the denialism of those who don't have a problem with the general direction of the program as it becomes The Iowa Up North.
But hey, maybe we should be satisfied with moral victories now and wait to see if the predictions of Michigan being able to compete with OSU in 2015 come true.
If Hoke ran an offensive system that Brian deemed interesting, he'd be just as dedicated and optimistic as he was in 2008. That's my main issue with the coverage here... the general malaise that's set in since Hoke was hired, the barely concealed desire to either see a spread installed or Hoke fired, and the constant sense that nothing short of going to the BCS/"New Years Six" every season will ever a cause for something other than more effing otter pictures.
also the increasing "GET OFF MY LAWN" rants about THE BAND and THE UNIFORMS and THE BRAND, which are basically irrelevant to me and somewhat antithetical to the "just win baby" tone of the rest of the coverage.
Complete BS about wanting Hoke fired. Brian has been pretty consistently positive about Hoke and seems to like Hoke's demeaner, aggressive style, and recruiting prowess.
And while I'm sure Brian would like to see a more "interesting" brand of offense played, he has been fairly enthusiastic at times about what he thought Borges was building as an offense in ways that were not like a RichRod spread team, memorably the recruiting and use of tight ends and the switch to big linemen over the spread guys RichRod recruited.
I do believe there is some of Brian's affection for spread offenses coming through, but I don't think there is much of it whatsoever if this staff (and the program in general) didn't hold horribly stupid and outdated beliefs about spread offense, and oppose implementing its components into the offense to the detriment of the team.
And two things you said that strike me as silly:
1) Michigan has been to one BCS bowl game since 2006 and didn't deserve to be in that one (and managed to pull out one of the most embarrassing victories I had seen - until UConn/Akron). Michigan has had more losing seasons in that period than BCS appearances. This team was closer to a losing record than a BCS appearance. This team is so far short of "BCS every year" that we have no idea what might feel acceptable short of that level of success. I propose once every three or four years, without being sandwiched around 5-6 loss seasons.
2) You start out this comment by saying that Brian would be happy with a team that sucked but ran his preferred style, but then say that there is a "just win, baby" tone to his coverage. Pick one or the other.
Perhaps it would be more fair to say that Brian doesn't actively support Hoke in the same way he would a coach whose philosophies he agreed with... I don't believe Brian thinks he should be fired per se but I do believe that his presence alone it worth a +1 for the editorial ennui level. You don't go from "Hoke = death" to wholeheartedly supporting the guy.
I'd be interested in knowing what "horribly outdated beliefs" this staff holds about spread offenses. They've incorporated many spread elements into our offense in the past, but if you want to get to the point where you can run a pro style effectively you have to make the transition sometime. It sucks that the season was sacrificed in the name of instilling this scheme, but it was probably necessary. And, I mean, that's completely ignoring the 600 yards of offense against the 12th best D in the country
1) If your attitude about the Sugar Bowl victory is that it was undeserved and embarrassing, we're already operating on irreconcilable wavelengths. There will be no agreement between us, I do not and cannot see the world that way. But I dispute the notion that we're closer to a losing record than to a BCS bowl. If anything, we're just as close to 11-1 as we are to 5-7. I do not think that the posters here who I take issue with believe one BCS bowl per class would be satisfactory, either.
2) You're correct, that was more of a general critique of the site than Brian himself, though I believe that his issues of late largely boil down to "plz win plz"
"I believe there's a physicality that comes with pro-style offense that doesn't come with other offenses. ... A lot of it is how you coach it. You can be a pro-style team that throws every snap and you're not going to have a lot of physicality with that. We don't have that philosophy."
You're extrapolating a lot from that quote. I'd also note that Ohio State is mostly operating with personnel recruited to run a pro style offense.
The point is that both Hoke and Borges have repeatedly expressed their opinion that the spread makes you weak on offense and defense and that you can't be physical or tough out of the spread.
Urban Meyer came in with a bunch of maulers, lined them up in the spread, and beat Michigan's brains in.
They seemed to be fundamentally wrong about what the spread allows a team to do, as well as what a pro-style offense prepares the defense to stop.
Hoke and Borges has been spouting this for a few years now. Its hardly secret.
if it isn't select then provide a better quote.
Also, it may be worth asking why Urban was able to turn Tresselball into a functional spread immediately while we were repeatedly told it would take 3 years to turn our big fatty fattersons into spread players.
come on Brodie, you can't seriously compare the state of Tressel's program in 2011 with Michigan in 2008. especially on offense- we had absoultely no offensive talent. total rewrite.
I would guess if Urban had the personnel situation with specifically the Threet/Sheridan combination at QB, he probably would have had a lot of trouble in his first two seasons.
But I don't know what the point is. If you are asking what Urban could have done if this had been his first season as the Michigan head coach, I think somewhere between 10-12 regular season wins.
This team almost certainly has the skill position talent that last years OSU team had.
Braxton Miller : Pro Style : Spread Option : Ryan Mallet
Braxton Miller was recruited by Tressel to run the same offense as Smith and Pryor. If you think that was the spread option, I don't know if you know what that term means... it's not shorthand for "black mobile QB"
Also coming back to this:
Michigan itself was selected over a couple of other teams higher ranked in the BCS poll. It was then matched up against VaTech who was even more of a reach. Then in the game VaTech managed to outgain Michigan 377-184 in what was a brutally poor football game for at least 3 quarters. Then Michigan wins because a TD gets overturned when it probably shouldn't have.
Maybe it wasn't embarrassing, but it wasn't pretty.
Michigan did everything asked of them and were rewarded by the system. This is like saying the 1997 National Title was embarrassing and undeserved because we played a crappier bowl game than Nebraska.
Knowing we had a banged up offense we played wet book bend but don't break, letting them get the yards if they had to, but not letting them get TDs. We broke one big plays and got TDs, even if our offense stalled the rest of the time. And our FG kicker made more than theirs...which really shouldn't have made it that close because their 3rd string guy comes in and makes every kick before the last one. If he falters like you'd expect any kicker deep on the bench to, it's never that close. And doesn't come to a debatable but correct call in OT. (And even if they called that TD it just meas we have to score a TD rather than kick the FG).
If anything, we're just as close to 11-1 as we are to 5-7.
that is... wow. I mean, i feel compelled to test the hypothesis that if someone pissed on your back and told you it's rain, that you'd be like, "oh, OK then thanks for the info!"
yes, we are 4 close losses from 11-1. but Neb (w/o half the O starters), Iowa and (talent depleted) PSU are NOT good teams (tho clearly not bod either).
Team 134 is absolutley just as close to 4-7 (3 close wins) and in fact, those close Ws were to TURRIBLY AWFUL CRAPTASTIC teams comprised primarily of 85 guys who combined went 1-7 in the B10, and 12-25 overall in godawful conferences.
This is NOT the same as 2012 when we lost to ND, Bama, and OSU who went a combined 36-2 with one loss coming from one of those 3 vary (very?) teams. Plus a good SC in the bowl and @Neb when denard went down. those losses were understandable- dissappointing that we couldn't squeek out one win in there, but no onw was that upset.
most years I always say you deserve the record you have. just as many close games that fell one way as the other. but M consistently struggled since the ND game, and often against incontrovertably awful teams. we are a 7-5 team that in no way deserves to be anything other more than 7-5.
re: Brian. I think most people don't quite understand his thought process. He forms his opinions of coaches (and everything else it seems) based on evidence. The evidence for Brady Hoke in Jan 2011 didn't say too much in terms of overall record. clearly, he could take a team and turn it around from 4-7 to 9-3 or so in a few years. that Ball state 12-0 start was certainly something (tho no one cites the 2 losses at the end). He clearly had support from the program alums/blue hairs/donors and brough us all under one roof, so to speak. seemed to be able to speak to the M crowd well (Ohio, don't wear red, etc), but those are platitudes at best. In contrast, there was a lot of evidence to suggest that RR could have been successful here back in 2007-8. took a no where WVU program to curbstomping OU in Fiesta Bowls, developed everything on his own (JUST like John Beilein, i might add). So, he took more stock in the numbers, stats and analysis than the feelingsball bullshit about "fit" and "Michigan man" and "spread is a gimmick." maybe he, along with amny of the rest of us, underestimated the "fit/MichMan" horseshit- but that's understandable.
They're the 2nd best team in the division, on the road. And were ND and Minnesota really close? I'm not even sure U-Conn was even in real danger once we stormed back. But it was an awful half and 2nd half start. But in any case I don't see how a made 2 pt conversion, 4 down stop (where a penalty was missed), or a bunch of missed FGs is any less likely to flip than one play vs. the teams we beat.
And Brian may have used evidence to assess coaches when coming here. But by 2010 he was also ignoring a lot of evidence that was going against him at that point too. So he's not immune to bias.
Iowa has been unranked all season. they are not a good football team, not bad, not good. like PSU and Minnesota and everyother team in the B10 save Pur, OSU, MSU, Ill.
ND and Minn weren't close wins, but they were good wins so i included them for completeness.
re: Brian. if anything, I think he was mostly ignoring the root cause of the "never forget" secondary. we couldn't recruit or retain enough talented players in the secondary (and a few other positions). who's in charge of that ultimately? the HC.
My sense of it is that this is partially true. However, Brian loved Rogriguez for the same reasons he failed here. There was no Fort Schembechler. Rodriguez was interesting to write about, regardless of the writer) becuase he was so prone to open his mouth and say whatever came to him without any filter whatsoever. That's fine if you're a blogger. Not as fine if you're the Michigan Football Coach.
So, it's not as intersting to write about Michigan now. And, there likely aren't as many posts or site visits now that our coach has some self respect, and intelligence, and doesn't put his foot in his mouth once every week.
There is nor will there ever be a Josh Groban incident with this coach. Nor will you see or hear about Brady Hoke assistants getting into a fight on the sidelines. These things kept people coming here, and anywhere. That is gone. Permanently. With that absence, are less clicks. I'd like to say that has nothing to do with the lack of poster moderation on this site, but I don't know anymore. Too many one sentence posters with nothing to conribute. The same posters bring as much to Brian those posting with thought.
you didn't address my point, which is that you're making false claims in your argument. I suspect because you have no counter.
Yesterday's game doesn't reinforce anything other than if M had played like that all year, their record may have been 10-2. The fatalist "Iowa up north" argument assumes so many negative extrapolations forever, and seems inconsistent with the actual game results against the opponent you hold up as the model (Ohio).
I'm very happy with the way the team played today, primarily because of the way the team blocked. I thought the offensive game plan was excellent, but Borges still needs to go. I of course am not ignoring 3-5 in the B1G, as nobody is, most importantly Hoke and evil Brandon. Unless you believe it prudent to remove Borges during the year, I see little about this season that means Hoke = worst of Lloyd forever
I don't know why "not being a dick" is so hard for some people. This blog is brilliant and I'd hate to see it radically overhauled. I'd like to think a thorough troll-cleaning and a simple admonition to keep things civil would put us on the right path but I'm too old and cynical to expect that to work. We await the imperial fiat...
What happened to you?
Or maybe we need to understand that all of this is just opinion that on occasion maybe supported by fact but is generally not. I guess I am impassioned about this because prior to that MSU game last year I had lost my father. I had always gone to Michigan games even as a student with my dad. I hadn't been on campus in a while, all my friends had left the area, my wife thought buying me tickets to the game would cheer me up but I couldn't wrestle up enough interest from people to go. It was cold, dark and over cast and I walked aimlessly to the stadium being surrounded by " fans" but not particularly invited by anyone. Until Brian let me stay at his trailer and feel like I was a part of Michigan again. To him I was just a fan, another curious oddity of an acolyte he barely knows who reads this blog and pontificates on occasion like I know something. But to me he gave me back something special - the chance to just be a fan, talk about the team and belong to something. The way my dad made me feel about being a fan until the day he died.
Brian doesn't like being deified or think he's anything special. He just loves Michigan football and has been part of a family that's been tailgating at Michigan longer than I've been alive. He was a fan like the rest of us way before it was his job and he always will be. It hurts for him to see Gardner broken or Lewan wasted or PDFT. He knows they are players and have families and read this blog and he takes that responsibility seriously. But when it's your life and you feel your life is being wasted - that the opportunity cost of time is invading the ability of that thing you love from even being meaningful, and you voice that frustration because all you have is a voice and all you get is crapped on - by friends, colleagues, nameless readers - people who think you are being glib is lacking passion or not being fan enough well shit...you snap.
Brian...take a deep breath, finish bowling, laugh at Seth's three gutter balls, quote the big Lebowski, hug your wife and take care of you. If you wake up tomorrow and still have the passion for this then you still have this faithful reader. My dad loved this blog and I think if he was alive he would say the same.
posts like yours are why I keep coming back. Faith in MGoBlog, Brian, and Michigan Football restored.
Do I dislike the coverage here when I disagree with it? Absolutely. But anyone who tries to heap shit on Brian is being a dickbag. He's not the voice of the Michigan fanbase, he's not under any obligation to behave a certain way or think a certain thing just because you or I might think it's the only reasonable position to take.
He is a fan with a blog. A popular blog, but a blog nonetheless. If he's not happy with today, he's more than entitled to that.
Brian, I havent met you, or tweeted you ot emailed you, but I agree 100% with your tweets. Keep up the fight! GO BLUE!
I went back through Brian's tweets looking for something controversial...That bit about OSU's hypothetical manball rushing stats didn't make much sense(As Borges and the OL were inexplicably killing it all game) but that's pretty much par for the course. If I'm handing out blame...30% is on Hoke for not even efforting for the field goal at the end of the first half(stupid), 30% on defensive personnel(youth and Rodriguez recruiting)' and yeah, 40% on Mattison. That read option made him look stupid all day.
I'm not entirely sure what the tweet said, but if you think Michigan was killing it with 35 rushes for 152 yards (4.34 ypc), I wonder how you would describe OSU's performance at 46 rushes for 393 yards.
When you staunchly oppose a spread attack on the opinion that you need an under-center, pro-style attack to have a controlling ground attack, and then your rival with a spread offense puts up 8.5(!) ypc on 46(!!!) carries right in your face, it kinda makes you look like you don't know what you are talking about.
That is not directed at you, btw, just the folks that Brian probably feels like he has been at war with since 2008.
It just plays into the general consensus(right or wrong) that Brian was going to whine about Borges whatever happened(which yeah, Michigan put up 600 yards today, in the context of the game it was rather silly...and exactly what you'd expect).
Remind me, can you retroactively assign some of the points and yards against OSU to the MSU, Nebraska, NW, and Iowa games to make them less of a shit storm?
No, but that's irrelavent to the point he was making: the tweet feeds to the perception that even if our offense is fully operational Brian will still find it unsatisfactory when compared to his chosen offensive system.
I'm not really sure how you can deny this.
It is relevant because having four abysmal games and one really good one does not make for a fully operational offense. A fully-operational offense wouldn't leave us so clueless as to what to expect in the bowl game.
And like I have said a couple times, he wasn't commenting on Michigan's offense, he was talking about OSU's, who was repeatedly gashing Michigan up the middle with a 240lb bruiser.
And also, it was in the context of OSU flat out slamming the football down Michigan's throat.
If you're going to put that out there to counter such a hyper specific argument, though, you should probably make it clear. Because like yeah, but we also put up 450 yards passing to Ohio State's 100-something. This game was essentially a text book display of both offensive styles working perfectly... if it looks like you're complaining about how our offense performed, it feeds the perception that you can never be satisfied with this style in any capacity.
I'm not saying Michigan's offense didn't perform well. It obviously did.
I'm saying that OSU did what the opponents of spread offenses (what beleaguered few there are) - including the current staff - said a team couldn't do, and they won in the process.
I would like a quote from a member of the current staff stating that you cannot gain over 300 yards rushing with a spread offense.
I'm not going to track down the quotes because the forum is messing up on chrome for me for some reason and you have google, but there were two main opinions that were completely blown out of the water Saturday (if not completely refuted earlier):
1) Two part idea: A) The pro-style makes an offense more physical up front running the ball, B) facing a pro-style offense in practice makes a defense more physical up front, and alternately, facing a spread offense makes it weaker.
2) Spread quarterbacks take too much of a beating when you run them.
None of those things are untrue provided that by physicality you mean having a size advantage on the line.
Also, our offense, that many on here were saying was worse than the 2008 outfit, put up 600 yards and 41 points against their defense. So, the coaches might have a point about the spread not being conducive to having a good defense.
Mind you, that is NOT what I'm saying. But yesterdays game does nothing to disprove that. I'm confused as to why you even added that #2 up there.
Had ever put those numbers up vs. OSU in a losing effort, they'd have made him a red carpet of roses around here....and he'd probably still be the coach.
in plain english, what is Brian upset about? I know he's been down since the PSU game. That's when I decided I didn't want to invest anymore emotion in this team.
People were mean to him on the Internet and it hurt his feelings.
He's sick of ad hominen attacks. If you argue with his ideas that's one thing, but increasingly the criticism of his writing is about him and not what he's saying. Or doesn't address what he's actually saying.
Sorta guessing here, but Brian has seen this team stay stagnant since 2007 at least, and where he endured through RichRod as there seemed to be a real attempt to move this program forward during those years, he doesn't have the same hope now.
As such he has emotionally tuned out the team. Some folks have responded by calling him a fairweather fan who bails on the team when it loses.
A very hollow criticism considering how much he devoted to the RichRod teams.
Is it hollow? Brian could certainly be described as a fairweather hockey fan, given how quickly he bailed on what was Michigan's only bad team in a quarter of a century last season. In darker times, he'd also shut down live blogs of basketball games when he became convinced that they were unwinnable. So I'd say it's fair if not accurate.
Also, during the RR days many who were loyal Michigan fans previously were accused of being fairweather fans for not accepting THE PROCESS. I suppose as long as you accept the spread uber alles line of reasoning, that's different, though.
given how quickly he bailed on what was Michigan's only bad team in a quarter of a century last season.
I htink he bailed in mid-late Jan no? that's more than half the season, and the preverbial STBTCB was the levelling of a captain, to which there was no retailiation or even reaction.
that team mailed it in back in October. not until late Feb did an essential change in captainship and leadership take place and then they started playing better-
I've been on this blog for a couple years now. Got on here daily for updates and to read sports discussions. (just started posting recently) I really enjoyed this site but lately it's almost been unbearable to read. I hope Brian and the mod's do actually start to "clean house" because the trolls and ultra-negative posters are ruining it for everyone.
If Brain wants to run a blog about how horrible canned music is, the evils of alternate jerseys, and why everything is awful every season forever, he's more than welcome to. If you think he's wrong on any of that, as I do on all of it, you should probably just avoid this place. That's the message he's sending.
Michigan played their hearts out, the offense scored 41 points and they lost on a very sound and aggressive decision to go for two. The defense played poorly, but they were up against an explosive offense. Michigan has been bad against OSU this past decade, but that's hardly the result of the current coaching staff. I don't see why everyone is having a goddamn coniption about it. I enjoy this blog and all, but some people need to calm the fuck down and that includes Brian. If you're a any sort of publishing writer, people (often stupid people) are going to talk shit about what you write. That's just life. Like much of life, it isn't fair, but you just have to let it go. I don't mean to sound pious, because it happens to everybody.
First and foremost, Brian, you've been obviously frustrated this year. How would anyone know that any part of that frustration is related to something other than Michigan Football? That's what you have portrayed. (I assume by your commentd above your kitty kat posting has been partially caused by factors other than just the football team).
It would be one thing if this team was not competitive, but as bad as our record is, what some of us realize is that despite a limited depth, and a handful of contributing seniors, this team has been in a position to win every single game this year except for one. (By the way, that is a polite way to say that the former coach you love so much was NEVER competitive against OSU).
Now, it's time to suck it up, and act like a big boy. You cover MICHIGAN football. It is not about your blog. It is about something bigger than your blog. It is about the mass of Michigan Fans out here looking for a place to congregate and discuss OUR team. Not your team. OUR TEAM.
If you want to go off like a pansy, go for it. If you want to nuke posters, go for it. This site is out of hand the last half of the year. With little or no objectivity. It is sad. If you want to start banning people, how about the obnoxious people who simply flame others without any input to the discussion.
I hope you take a vacation. Take some time to reflect. You've done a great thing with this site, and there are a lot of us old timers, from the haloscan days, that would like to continue here with some good discussion. That is what made this site so great -- open, intelligent, sometimes funny discussion about UM.
With all that said: Go Blue! Next year is shaping up to be undefeated year at home. If we can pull off a couple fo close one's on the road, who knows? Longer term, the Hoke recruiting train is on time, and things are looking up. Very up.
There are some posters who should have been nuked awhile ago for dummy accounts, flaming other posters, etc. That would help the level of discussion around here, although I do think the bannings a few weeks ago helped a tiny bit.
I'm a big fan all you do. Admittedly i dont visit TTB as much as i should. Do you get a lot of this too? Hard enough putting all this great content out just to have it mocked by weirdos i imagine. I say all this knowing full well i have lit a few people up who were defending Borges and probably went a bit over board myself.
I tend not to get as much Twitter hate as I have expected at times, but perhaps that's because the people who hate me don't follow me...and I don't have 25,000+ followers like Brian does. I do get quite a bit of hate in my TTB e-mail, and I get a lot of inappropriate comments on TTB. Unlike Brian, however, I have my site set to moderate the comments, so if people post hateful messages, I simply delete them before they see the light of day.
People on the internet say hateful things. It's sad but true. Luckily, I'm able to stay pretty level-headed about it.
I've seen Magnus draw from other posters was when they were hammering him about posting random pics of hotties on TTB.
I am a big fan of those pics, for the record, and I it's not like he posted any tasteless pics (in fact they are all tasty!).
LOL. You must have missed the threads about Logan Tuley-Tillman, David Dawson, and the various threads where people call me all manner of names.
but I remember the hottie pics one better because of personal interest.
Why are people holding up last year as some sort of great success?
Michigan had a TD pass for 75 yards and a TD run of 67 yards. Other than those two plays Michigan managed about 120 yards on the other 9 drives. The other scoring drive included a punt on 4th and 18 that OSU fumbled at their own 25, and that drive still required a roughing the passer on a failed 3rd down to get the touchdown. On the sixth second half drives, Michigan got 68 total yards and 4 TO (one on downs).
It was much like this year's Iowa game, a domination everywhere but the scoreboard.
Considering Michigan was essentially without its best player for the second half (Denard Robinson, in case you were wondering), I don't think 21 points and a lead is that bad.
And yes, I guess if you take away the big plays, Michigan didn't have any big plays. Good point.
They were no more without Denard than they were in the first half or the bowl game against USC. He had four carries for -2 yards in the second half against OSU because Borges didn't have a plan for getting him in the game once OSU adjusted (SHOCK!). Denard was on the field for 19 of the 51 plays Michigan ran that day.
And my point, as you know, is that if you take out the two big first half plays, Michigan had no offense. Those drives went for 3 plays for 83 yards and 2 plays for 75 respectively. The other 9 drives went for 46 plays for 121 yards, or 2.6 YPP. Only Miami (NTM) had fewer first downs and only that horrible Illinois team managed fewer yards against OSU in 2012. The defense did a great job of forcing OSU to settle for 5 FG attempts and forcing a fumble in the red zone, but the offense was worse than UAB, Cal, Purdue, and even that embarrassing MSU offense.
You should go back and look at your write up of the game, Borges' playcalling got a "WTF" and a "Play action BS", lamented how Borges didn't use Denard and Devin as he had against Iowa, called it Devin's worst game, and clamoring for Derrick Green due to the poor performance of the running backs.
What changed between then and now?
In the aftermath of the game, it appeared that Denard was not capable of playing much more (kind of like the same reason that Hoke went for two this year, because Gardner was dinged up). We kind of knew that Denard Robinson was Michigan's only hope last year because of the dearth of offensive talent.
I am not a staunch Al Borges defender, but I also think he deserves some credit for putting up 21 points on Ohio State last year and 41 this year. Those aren't paltry totals. As always, the real truth is probably somewhere between "he's terrible" and "he's pretty good."
Extraordinarily revisionistic view of last year, IMO. Especially considering your treatment of Borges following the game.
I've posted the highlights below. Nearly 10 minutes from the BTN. You'll notice that there are three offensive highlights:
1) Denard breaking a tackle in the backfield, then breaking a tackle 5 yards on, then finishing the run 30 yards down field.
2) 1The 75yd Roundtree TD reception
3) The OMG DENARD run where he gets sandwiched, then sprints to the end zone
4) A thirty yard reception by Gallon
Then there are at least a half-dozen highlights of OSU defenders blowing up plays in the backfield.
Borges didn't manage to call a single sustained drive all game long, there was the aforementioned blown coverage that Roundtree scored on, Denard making one of his signature runs, and then another TD drive where Michigan had a three and out, punted on 4th and 18, OSU fumbled and Michigan recovered on the 25, Michigan then went three and out again and had a roughing the passer call extend their drive, and then scored from the eleven.
Borges can't claim anything from that game.
"Borges can't claim anything from that game."
False. He can claim partial responsibility for the 21 points, just like OSU's offensive coordinator could claim partial responsibility for their 26 points. And they had their starting QB for that game, and their best player didn't get knocked out of the game slightly more than halfway through.
I don't understand why an offensive coordinator doesn't get credit for the calls he makes putting guys in a position to succeed. The defensive backfield blew a coverage? Well, maybe that had something to do with breaking tendencies, running a new route combination, personnel choices, formation, etc. Ohio State missed a tackle on Denard? Hmm...well, somebody clearly called that play to put Denard in a position where he was in open space to make a play.
Does an offensive coordinator only get credit for calling plays on which the defense aligns and reacts appropriately?
brian - please replace "I HAVE NEVER READ MGOBLOG" -Chris Perry
With "0 Fucks Given"
I dont know why you talk to anyone that has spent less time than you understanding michigan football. There is simply no point in listening to a certain percentage of your fan base, points or not, tenure or not.
This next season, I would request that you implement one thing: A more granular level of understanding of the Oline.
Thanks for your work this season and fuck those that are not incendiary for going 2-13 the past 15 years
and fuck those people that think this season is still going.
Til next year,
so I was lucky enough to go to the game, and having traveled 800 miles or so to do so, I kind of resented the insinuation that I was a sucker to have done it.
similarly, it was a privilege to be at the game, and watch our guys compete at a level many seemed to think they were incapable of. while I woke up this morning still with a pit on my stomach about the final result (and with some component of my brain running the conversion attempt in an endless loop, trying to make it successful), I also feel like the players and coaches showed something that exists as a truth in this world every bit as incontrovertible as the tally that must be added to the loss column given the final score.
and in that, maybe there's something about sports, and life. for some, its only about the w-l column. details, stories, journeys, transformations (etc.) are irrelevant. that's fine, but a cold existence in my view. but for me, the core of sports is about character, which teaches and inspires in so many ways, maybe especially when its correlated with 12-0 or whatever, but necessarily so.
yesterday was not a day to leave the stadium singing "it's great to be a Michigan wolverine", but it was one in which I left feeling, inside, proud to be one.
Hopefully Brian will get back that same feeling with a little R&R.
And much better seasons are ahead simply because there are so many alums and former players that care so deeply about the program. Whether its the optimists or the pessimists, passionate fans make UM great and fuel Brian's clicks. Apathy is the worst response.
I have been on the site for a few years now. This rant is kind of weird to me. I am glad I found the site and even though I agree with Brian most of the time especially when it comes to not being happy about almost winning, I spend most of the time on the message board and just skim the UFR's and front page stuff . None of the morons or trolls bother me and I am able to tune them out. It is a public forum regarding a college sports team where people can anonymously post. I guess I expect morons and am sometimes even entertained by them. Do I want them posting on the front page? No, but do I care that someone posts a stupid comment on a message board? Not even a bit, I just ignore it or maybe laugh at it. I agree with some moderation and I loved the point system, but I don't see it as a big deal.
Cheer up Brian
Can somebody shed some light a to the genesis of Brian's tweets? It sounds like they were caused by tweets he received but the general tone of this thread would indicate its blog related. I'm a bit confused.
Go read his timeline. He retweeted several people that were just attacking him. I'm sure that those weren't the only trolling tweets he got. It is obvious that several of the people responding in this thread about how Brian needs to "man up" didn't take the time to actually click on the link to his twitter account located at the top of the page, or they would understand where he is coming from a bit better.
Thanks. I'm pretty twitter-ignorant I didn't even know u could do that
Taken in a vacuum, that tweet might not seem like a really big deal (it probably isn't). However, god help the unfortunate dumb ass who snaps the thread reining in Brian's (or anyone's) levity. After all of the vitriol spewing about this season, directed this way and that, it's no wonder that Brian had finally had enough. We all have those moments.
Exactly. I don't really think it was any one event, but it's the end of the season and I think Brian finally had it with the people who have been metaphorically - and perhaps literally, for all we know - on his back.
So if I connect the dots here, Paul Jenkins, amoung others, is giving Brian shit via twitter while posting here on his site? Which would account for being pissed at something in the twitterverse but retribution occuring on the blog.
Do I have this right?
Well...ummm...essentially. And I'm guessing that Paul Jenkins posts on here anonymously, or perhaps not at all. Maybe he's just a reader. Maybe Brian just was talking in generalities. It just seems like that was the tweet that set him off.
but that comment was douchey for sure. I assume he's bitching because Brain didn't UFR the Iowa game. I don't blame Brian a bit for skipping it. He is a huge fan and that's gotta be painful sometimes.
I'm not a big fan of Brian's reasons for skipping it, but like numerous others have pointed out, this is a free blog. If I paid for a subscription to Rivals or the Detroit News or something, and their writer(s) just refused to write about a game because they were frustrated, that would be reason enough to get angry and cancel my subscription. Brian's free to skip a UFR if he wants. In fact, it seems like he rarely UFR's the Ohio State and/or bowl games.
I wouldn't want to UFR a loss, either; especially one that could have been summed up by two words: "We SUCKED." It has got to be a miserable, thankless job.
To paraphrase Bill Cosby (speaking of his wife's experience): I've seen the boss's job ... And I don't want it!
"It has got to be a miserable, thankless job."
I guess that's where we differ. There are usually positive comments on the losing UFR's saying "Thanks for doing this, Brian. It must have been painful." Furthermore, a lot of people give their "thanks" by donating, clicking on ads, buying T-shirts, and/or just visiting. I take a lot of criticism on here and on my blog, but I would never call it "thankless." Lots of people take the time to express their thanks. I would say that most of my big posts (not the videos, links, etc.) have at least one commenter expressing their thanks for my analysis, information, etc. And with many many more comments on MGoBlog, I'm guessing the number of thanks he receives far outstrips mine.
Painful? Yeah. Sometimes frustrating? Sure. Thankless? Not so much.
It certainly isn't thankless. I've received plenty of thanks, much more than I really deserve in my mind. It's more that those are never the ones that stand out as much, which is probably not the best way to look at it, but it is human nature.
This isn't Nam. It's bowling. There are rules.
I mostly agree with you. I was on the board for two years before I even knew who the "mods" were (or what that term meant). I guess Formerly Anonymous was one, not sure who else. Ever since the RR firing, the newly instated mods have taken on a much more public persona, which I personally think is unnecessary.
Brian has a great product here. As the blog has grown, there are inevitably more hosers. That's tough to control, but I feel like I can still get questions answered, meaningful discussion, and humor here.
It's easy to sift through the rubbish for the familiar faces I know will give a thoughtful or humorous response. Things work themselves out.
That said, there's no reason to outright insult or challenge Brian over everything. The problem is less people being rude (the King of Belch was rude, and he was great) but rather being arrogantly contrarian about everything.
I come here for the characters and the humor and Michigan news. Some of the x's and o's discussions are too esoteric for me; my vision and grasp of football is simpler than that. My favorite threads are the funny ones. Least favorite? Fire Borges, not because I don't want Borges fired (not qualified to comment on that) but really, how many times do people need to assert that they want Borges fired? It's like my son asking me for something the thousandth time, thinking I must not have heard him the first 999 because it hasn't happened yet.
The argument about fair weather fandom is stupid, too, but the argument about expectations for this team and this program isn't. In a nutshell, is losing acceptable?I have my own opinion, but I certainly respect the other side, and appreciate the discussion.
I miss King of Belch, by the way.
Seriously. I thought about the parenting equivalence to this blog but didn't write it. Thanks for noting what is (to me) an obvious analogy.
Obviously your son thinks he just needs to execute better.
lol the Party Room is making an appearance, my god the world might actually be coming to an end.
Trust me, as someone that has grown somewhat known in the blogosphere and on twitter, I think I can speak for Brian that sometimes you feel like going Marcus Hall on the haters. I'm sure I don't get nearly the amount that Brian does, but I've certainly my fair share of ad hominem attacks via twitter, I've certainly had a lot of unsolicited or unprovoked call outs here. My name is dropped on both sides of the argument and often times with words I've never said. And sometimes it's fine and other times you want to go Marcus Hall on people.
But I've been called everything from an "apologist" to an "arrogant contrarian" to a "troll" and pretty much every other word with a derogatory connotation. Maybe that's just part of putting yourself out there with an opinion, maybe that's part of going against the wave. But I have my feelings and opinions and I allow myself to take in others opinions and feelings - even try to understand them - but people will misconstrue, or twist what you've said deliberatly or not, and some people just won't like you.
There have been shots across the bow. At times I felt singled out. At times I feel like people have deliberatly tried to troll me despite my attempts to not go to the same places again, only for people to resort to name calling. I've been called "simple", "retarded", "arrogant", "dumbass", "contrarian", "apologist", I've been called gay slurs for some reason or another, and a lot of other things. The praise is always nice and appreciated, but it never stands out as much as the other stuff, and certainly doesn't make up for how much the other stuff wears you down. And it's part of the reason I've felt like leaving blogging completely, or just doing my blog and completely stay away from opinion stuff. I just hope my new job gives me the opportunity to get back into actually coaching, because I never realized how much blogging can wear you down, but it really does. And to a degree it makes you very negative as a fan (if not to the team, then to other fans).
I wish you would rethink that one.
Or at least eliminate stalking, where someone follows a user from post to post - including old posts - and negs them below the threshold. But then you can't eliminate group stalking, where a little band of merry asshats accomplishes the same thing.
There's civility and then there's conformity. A change that increases civility is good. A change that decreases trolling is good. A change that makes this even more a place of conformity to the group think is terrible - the neg vote as a petty way of avoiding having to actually argue and defend a position is one of the smallest, ugliest things that exists on the internet.
Neg voting should be allowed, just perhaps not in the way that it was used in the past. Maybe negs should cost the negger 1 point. Maybe you should have 10,000 points before being given the power to neg (or vote, period). There are several ways to massage it, but I think negging is useful in some form or another.
I think it SHOULD cost a point to neg someone else, and I agree with a threshold before you are able to do so. I'd say 5000 points (even though I'm not there yet).
I just looked back in my post history, and some pre-teen actually neg voted me on a post where I donated $40 to save a dog (!) and called my post overrated!
I looked at my post history, and the run of drive by hits on my posts (normal comments denigrated as "trolling," "off-topic," "overrated") that all occurred over two weeks where a particularly nasty group tried to bully me off the boards - that's modding by mobocracy, and I don't think you want that.
I had never been neg voted before that incident. It's flat out bullying and it discourages civility and often pushes good posts below threshold limits.
So unless you have a way to combat that, reinstating neg voting is disastrous, imo. There should have been some sort of appeals process where if it can be shown that multiple neg votes have been used solely to satisfy personal animosity and have nothing to do with the contents of the neg voted post - well, the person abusing the system needs to suffer a heavy penalty.
It remains one of the most disgusting things I've been subjected to in any internet community, and it was simply astounding that such a practice could be tolerated on a moderated board. It was messed up.
I really wish I could neg this post, just for shits and giggles.
So I could ban you. This is the kind of post that detracts from the site, and is even more damaging long term, because the seemingly innocuous nature of it hides its true assholish nature.
In fact, letting it go enables and encourages snarky sarcasm, from where it is a slippery slope to mlive.
If I was Brian, I would ban you and then burn your house down. /s
Is someone writing five paragraphs complaining about some post being negged in a system that hasn't existed for months and comparing it to the downfall of humanity. Pointing out how self-obsessed and stupid it is to worry about points that don't matter is all that's left when a response like that would have just had a -34 to show how to nt tke it all so damn seriously.
Take a look at your recent posts...I see a lot of snark in there; maybe you see yourself being an asshole. There are no real "value added" posts, because hardly anyone knows anything around here. It's for fun. Your knowledgable 2% chance to keep it close wasn't close. Doesn't mean you shouldn't have contributed it. Just means it wasn't really adding anything more than any other post.
...do I not find it surprising that your tagline is what it is? chitownblue2, one of the biggest jerks here. Good riddance. And by the way, how was my 2% chance not close? Just because it happened doesn't mean that it retroactively increases the chances. I guess Saturday was one of the two out of 100. If you weren't shocked by the performance Saturday, you haven't been paying attention, or you don't know squat about football (or both).
"So I could ban you. This is the kind of post that detracts from the site, and is even more damaging long term, because the seemingly innocuous nature of it hides its true assholish nature.
In fact, letting it go enables and encourages snarky sarcasm, from where it is a slippery slope to mlive."
[EDIT: Since this argument is still going, I figured I'd put this back]]
"Questioning your incomparable football knowledge." As your reaction like there are some "value added" posters that deserve special treatment. Somehow the site survived your two year break sans your insights. I mean, how can you not be right when you say "Manball has nothing to do with scheme" then post a thread of all the teams that don't run MANBALL in the top 25 offenses? With your "2%" you said to keep it that close the defense would play well (it didn't), we'd need to be +3 TO margin with no turnovers (not even close), less than 25 yards in penalties (more), no bad punts or kicks (had one put at the 35), and Ohio will score 50 and we'll punt 8 times. It was so ridiculous in its excess I wonder if you've ever watched a Michigan and Ohio State game before. Because for a guy who acts like he knows a lot about football, you don't really show any more knowledge than the poster off the street you object to; same hyperbole and slanted viewpoints.
...onto other people's statements.
1. Same could be said of you, but you're still here.
2. I never said I wasn't prone to hyperbole or slant. I just think your arrogance over your "value added" posts when you're just as prone makes you part of the unwashed masses, not anything special. (And 1991 predictable? Vs. 8-2 #18 OSU? What?)
3. So you found the one prediction you were any way close on...ten a bunch of "ifs."
4. Predictions are like assholes, everyone has one. I don't really care what people predict as long as they don't act like theirs has any more moral imperative because of their "knowledge." I just know any list of people whose football knowledge I "respect'," you're not really high on it.
5. It took extensive research to click the mouse twice and see you being just as disagreeable as OMGShirtless.
6. Except your definition and your list are completely contrary to each other, and slanted.
Let me explain.
It's not that Brian has been a dick to posters and now he's getting what he's given out.
Rather, it's that this behavior towards value adding posters (e.g. Space Coyote) has gone largely--though not completely--unchecked. Now that this behavior is directed towards Brian, it is a "problem." In my opinion, had this type of poster-on-poster disrespect not been allowed from the get-go, the site wouldn't be at the crossroads at which it finds itself today.
Moreover, I believe that Brian hasn't shown enough gratitude nor protected the volunteer posters who have clearly added value to his site. In this regard is where the Bill James analogy fails.
I noticed the rant going on my timeline last night. Brian is a good man and this is a good site. I appreciate his passion and love for the game. I didn't think it was wrong at all for him to be pissed off or emotional following another loss to Ohio. He was well within his right to complain about haters.
This is a great site and the people in charge of this site are great people.