Mgoblog (Brian) Twitter rant
Looks like bowling didn't go too well
I'm just done with people who are mad at me for reacting how I do to Michigan football. If you don't like it, I don't care
For years I let people talk shit to me because I felt some sort of duty to them because they'd been around a while.
That was a mistake. If you are surprised that I am emotional and moody at this point you are too stupid to care about.
I have taken epic tons of shit for being in a bad mental spot this year; and somehow I managed to feel bad about that.
No more. I'm done taking shit from internet anons because I'm not happy about losing to OSU 9 of 10 years.
I don't owe you a damn thing. Read it or don't.
most people are not reacting like that, but shitheads are louder. this is going to have an effect on MGoBlog.
Your point total is irrelevant to my decisions. If you're making our lives shitty, you're gone
This whole season has been 50% nightmare team, 50% nightmare community. I can fix half of that.
November 30th, 2013 at 11:31 PM ^
You make a good point in that my idea's probably unnecessary overkill
November 30th, 2013 at 11:34 PM ^
I don't believe that's in the plans
November 30th, 2013 at 11:37 PM ^
Thanks anonymous dog ;-)
I'm actually kind of excited to see what he's got 'cooked' up (swidt)
November 30th, 2013 at 11:10 PM ^
Regarding this one:
No more. I'm done taking shit from internet anons because I'm not happy about losing to OSU 9 of 10 years.
…one thing everyone needs to keep in mind is that the current staff/players are not responsible for most of those losses. Hoke has only coached against OSU three times, and he's 1-2, literally a play away from 2-1. It's not his fault that we had a long losing streak against them before he arrived.
Likewise, while it's frustrating that we haven't won a Big Ten title since 2004 - a fact that gets mentioned regularly by angry fans - Hoke was not responsible for the first six years of that drought. You can blame him for not winning one in the three years he's been here (although I think 2011 was his only real shot, what with Denard getting hurt last year and the team being so young this year), but that's all. Three years without a title isn't that long. It's the fact that we didn't do much from 2005-2010, on top of the three years, that gets people frustrated. But Hoke had nothing to do with those six years.
December 1st, 2013 at 1:11 AM ^
Hoke is actually incredibly close to being 3-0 against OSU. This amazing chasm between us is really non-existent on the field in the Hoke era.
December 1st, 2013 at 1:29 AM ^
What you say is basically true in a way. But since Urbs came to OSU, they are 16-0 on the field in the B1G, Michigan is 9-7. That's a bit of a chasm.
December 1st, 2013 at 1:40 AM ^
He also inherited a veteran team that went through their version of this season the year before he arrived and never had to deal with a recruiting class like ours in 2010-11. The only results that matter when comparing us to Ohio State are on the field of play... where we've lost by a grand total of 6 points in the Meyer era. How anyone can be pessimistic about our chances against him going forward after the past two seasons is beyond me.
December 1st, 2013 at 2:12 AM ^
Well, the whole OSU will likely play in the MNC while Michigan will be in the annual matchup of disappointing programs for a TV ratings grab is a result that matters to me, but I suppose keeping The Game close is important too.
December 1st, 2013 at 2:33 AM ^
I guess if you live in a context free world where things just happen arbitrarily that would be bothersome, yeah. and Ohio State only has like a 50/50 shot at actually playing for the MNC and that's partially down to how close we kept The Game. So yes, it is important!
December 1st, 2013 at 2:59 AM ^
Can't say I understand what you are saying in that first sentence.
December 1st, 2013 at 3:09 AM ^
This times ten. Yet, in an alternative universe, this loss is no different than MSU . . .
November 30th, 2013 at 11:11 PM ^
That game today was like a giant weight off my shoulders, win or no win. You can't win unless you play good football, and I haven't seen good football in a while out of this team. I saw it today. Depending on who you ask, I'm either a great, reasonable fan with perspective or a pussy fan who has abandoned my standards.
December 1st, 2013 at 12:44 AM ^
Which is weird, because I would've been sore if Michigan had lost this in the past. Today I was relieved for a team that played with an effective game plan and that played with heart (and not like thugs, as with the MSU game). My dread didn't totally dissipate until something like the 3rd quarter. I thought Ohio would adjust during at the half and Michigan would be totally hosed.
November 30th, 2013 at 11:12 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:16 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:17 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:30 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:57 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:18 PM ^
- I wonder who the longtime posters on the chopping block are for the sake of gossip if nothing else.
- I'm surprised by the timing of this. Michigan did the fans proud today. What's all the fighting for?
November 30th, 2013 at 11:31 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:33 PM ^
be MODS! Former or current? We shall see.
December 1st, 2013 at 12:56 AM ^
December 1st, 2013 at 1:08 AM ^
December 1st, 2013 at 2:10 AM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:18 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:35 PM ^
We lost. No wonder Brian's pissed. Half the board screams at him for being "emo"; The other half cheerily waits for their B1G participation trophy.
8-4 would have been bad if we had won. WE DID NOT. WE LOST. It should make you mad or sad or something. The players did great. Played hard. So what?
We lost.
December 1st, 2013 at 12:02 AM ^
December 1st, 2013 at 12:34 AM ^
December 1st, 2013 at 12:51 AM ^
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.
December 1st, 2013 at 1:08 AM ^
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.
November 30th, 2013 at 11:37 PM ^
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.
November 30th, 2013 at 11:41 PM ^
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?
November 30th, 2013 at 11:46 PM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:58 PM ^
Dann O'Neill
December 1st, 2013 at 12:19 AM ^
Justin Boren? O'Neill didn't letter.
December 1st, 2013 at 12:32 AM ^
December 1st, 2013 at 2:03 AM ^
I was kidding.
December 1st, 2013 at 12:19 AM ^
November 30th, 2013 at 11:48 PM ^
It sounds like, to me anyway, that we need an airing of grievances.
December 1st, 2013 at 1:15 AM ^
I'm putting the pole up right now
December 1st, 2013 at 10:48 AM ^
I've got A LOT OF PROBLEMSWITHYOUPEOPLE!
November 30th, 2013 at 11:57 PM ^
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.
December 1st, 2013 at 12:17 AM ^
December 1st, 2013 at 12:49 AM ^
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.
December 1st, 2013 at 1:22 AM ^
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.
December 1st, 2013 at 1:56 AM ^
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.
December 1st, 2013 at 2:23 AM ^
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"
December 1st, 2013 at 2:42 AM ^
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/bigten/2013/08/25/michigan-w…
Borges:
"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."
December 1st, 2013 at 2:48 AM ^
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.