UMGoRoss

October 8th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^

You wouldn't attibute something left in the comments section of the NY Times or any other news source to the actual news source, would you? I get that the lines maybe a little more blurred on a blog, but the lines do still exist.

APBlue

October 8th, 2014 at 1:05 PM ^

Exactly right - if it's not content created by the blog's owner or employed writers, it's not the idea of MGoBlog. It's the idea of a poster in the comments section on MGoBlog.

Shop Smart Sho…

October 8th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^

Must be a pretty thick hair.

Brian has stated that he isn't going to the Maryland game, and that he IS going to the PSU game.  Wouldn't it be strange to think that he is calling for a boycott of a game he is going to?

There is a huge difference between what some random person posts on the message board versus what Brian & Co. post on the main page.

Magnus

October 8th, 2014 at 2:19 PM ^

I agree that it's splitting hairs. Not so much because it was on the blog/message board to boycott the kickoff, but because Brian *is* attempting to organize a boycott of the Maryland game. I don't really see why he or anyone else would take offense to this.

Is it factually inaccurate? Yes. Is the gist accurate? Pretty much. In fact, I'd say boycotting the kickoff of the PSU game is a less radical step than boycotting an entire Maryland game.

Shop Smart Sho…

October 8th, 2014 at 9:42 PM ^

Brian is most definitely not trying to "organize" a boycott of anything.  He has said, repeatedly, that people can do what they want.  He has said that, as a fan, he is not going to the Maryland game.  Spin that how you want, but there is no logical way to get to organization of a boycott unless you have an agenda to push.  

M-Dog

October 8th, 2014 at 2:33 PM ^

Have you ever seen the comments on CNN?  There are some nut-jobs out there.

You could not possibly say they represent the opinion of CNN because "it was on CNN, message board inclusive".

I guess it's time for the Emeril tag on this blog to go, and to be replaced with "Comments left on the MGoBlog message board and diaries do not necessarily reflect the opinion of MGoBlog.  DUH."

 

mGrowOld

October 8th, 2014 at 12:57 PM ^

GREAT post.

This is the participation trophy generation and the thought of actaully having to DO something to get rewarded is somewhat foriegn to them.  Monday night my 10 year old was trying out for the local travel basketball team and missed his first two layups badly.  He was pumped up and excited and totally air-amiled the shot over the rim.  My wife starts clapping and saying "good job Tommy - good job" cause she didnt want him to get "discouraged".  

I said cut that shit out immediately.  He did NOT do a "good job" he missed the shots.  Ok to not boo (obviously) and ok to give general encouragement (you'll get it next time) but is't NOT ok to me to tell a kid he's doing great when they arent.  

I'm guessing our football team gets a "good job Tommy" when they come off the field after fucking something up.  Hoke is like my wife in that regard and I'm not sure they have somebody like me there to tell them the truth.

notetoself

October 8th, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^

STRONG BAD: Here, The Cheat, have a trophy!

{Strong Bad tosses him a trophy}

THE CHEAT: {The Cheat noises}

HOMESTAR RUNNER: Here, The Cheat, have another trophy!

{A trophy falls out of Homestar's mouth and The Cheat catches it. Strong Bad kicks Homestar in the face.}

aiglick

October 8th, 2014 at 1:35 PM ^

I agree with most of what you said although I'll admit it: I'm a millenial.

Not sure if our football players are still considered part of my generation they may be part of generation z but I made my comment mainly because I think our football players are tougher than people give them credit for being.

I do think some of their recent statements have been over the top although that's part of the problem with putting 18 - 23 year olds in the spot light. They could say anything.

No matter what even though I'm frustrated I do hope our team gets to bowl eligibility and maybe even takes down OSU even though yeah it looks like those are impossible events atm.

Everyone Murders

October 8th, 2014 at 12:58 PM ^

The writers at The Michigan Daily generally do a superb job both writing and researching their articles.  Part of its brand / throws up a little / is due to its staff being diligent.  It is a terrific college newspaper, and its journalists can withstand constructive criticism. 

I have a hard time getting too upset with the Daily for using what I'd consider shorthand for the MGoBlog message board.  But I think the OP is well within his/her rights to point out when the Daily falls short of its standards.  We're not "supporting" these budding journalists by treating them with kid gloves.  The Daily staff writes for a readership, and the readership is entitled to comment on the quality and accuracy of their writing.

Rochester Blue

October 8th, 2014 at 2:47 PM ^

That will only work if there are 10,000 other season news-paper subscribers who also do the same, and if ESPN shows you all doing it from an aerial blimp view while explaining why you're doing it.  You alone will not get publicity and the attention of the University President.

4roses

October 8th, 2014 at 12:53 PM ^

So if I post a comment on ESPN or some newspaper's website that organizes a boycot would it be attributed to ESPN or said newspaper? I'm thinking probably not. 

maizenbluenc

October 8th, 2014 at 1:00 PM ^

1) attributing this to MGoBlog - it was just posted here as the OP describes

2) the headline uses just the word boycott without the qualifiers - the proposal is to boycott the kickoff as described in the details

And maybe a third - the question asked of the players, and the way the daily presents it does not clearly delineate that the specific kickoff boycott proposed is a demonstration against David Brandon's continued employment: not the football players.

 

 

maquih

October 8th, 2014 at 1:16 PM ^

I know the article was about the Penn State game, but still, I think the Daily can be forgiven on this one, the idea of a boycott did come from MGoBlog, even if they were technically mistaken on which game it was.

bj dickey

October 8th, 2014 at 1:31 PM ^

I don't think anyone suggested Brian cook instigated this. He did however instigate a proposed boycott of Maryland game. Beyond that, we all know the mods are constantly on here deleting threads, posts, etc. so even though Brian or the other paid writers may not have come up with the idea they are complicit in it since they have neither removed the post or spoken out against it. And that's fine, I'm not suggesting they should have. Reasonable people have disagreed about whether the boycott is appropriate or will be effective. While I would suggest the mgoblog community is responsible for the proposal (or at least it's floating) the article isn't mistaken in its characterization, I would also suggest that the owner and the mods have been complicit in this idea and have even floated their own version, and as a result own this. Whether they intended it or not, the clear perception among the larger michigan community is that this blog is trying to injure the current coaches and ad. Some think that's great. Some don't. More importantly, even Brian must realize that it's no stretch to impute that complicity and position regarding the ad and coaches to the players themselves. I'm on board saying Brandon's decisions regarding the stadium have been poor. There are many alums that share my view. On the other, we don't impugn the team by the constant shouting about fire hoke and running cc posts. Perception is reality to those who perceive it, and this blog has earned it's perception the past few weeks.

danimal1968

October 8th, 2014 at 3:02 PM ^

logic like this is going to lead to much more heavy-handed moderation in the future.  If people are going to say that Brian endorses every post on here that isn't deleted, get ready for moderation that will be as bad as it was at GBW during the RR days.