U of M still needs to lead the way to correct any issues. No worries. Go Blue!
I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
U of M still needs to lead the way to correct any issues. No worries. Go Blue!
dont work on my computer. anyone want to summarize what van pelt said?
90-100% of teams would be guilty of these same offenses. The NCAA is very hypocritical. "Violations like these are just ammunition for other programs that hate [Michigan]. It is disappointing that former players were behind this. None of this would have even come up if they went 10-2 in RichRod's first season."
First commentary on the issue that I actually enjoyed listening to.
Me too. It's also the first to honestly look at the big picture, not just that of Michigan. I liked that.
They think at least 90%, if not all colleges do exactly what Michigan did, and had they gone 10-2 in RR's first season, this never happens, cause the former players wouldn't have an axe to grind. They mentioned this is very small in comparison to the USC stuff, and they give UM a pass, cause again, they assume so many others are doing the same stuff. That's it, more or less...
They did mention the now famous Big Blue cruiser analogy that everyone is using, that everyone is out speeding (doing wrong), but that it's Michigan who got caught and pulled over. That's my favorite, by the way.
Ugh. It really bugs me when the national guys keep calling us Big Blue. For the love of all that is good and holy, please stop. We are not Big Blue. Kentucky is. I think Old Dominion goes by that too but I could be wrong.
We are the Maize and Blue. We are the Wolverines. We are the Leaders and Best.
We are not Big Blue. No matter what Lee Corso (and now everyone at ESPN) calls us. Please spread the word. Thank you.
I think the NYG go by it as well.
The first time I remember hearing 'Big Blue' was in reference to IBM in the 80's and I was a huge Michigan fan way back then as well.
It's pretty much an ESPNism where they scam on some old commonly held nicknames with general application and make them stick as an identity for particular entities... i.e. - Chris Berman and his player nicknames like Amani "Armani" Toomer. Hell, it probably WAS Chris Berman who started calling us Big Blue back in '87 because who fucking cared about UK or Citadel football?
Good call on IBM, forgot about them.
Found this on Wikipedia (so we know it's accurate :) )
Big Blue (disambiguation)
The term Big Blue may refer to:
* A common nickname for IBM
* A nickname for the Pacific Ocean.
* A nickname for Consolidated Rail Corporation
* A nickname for the video rental chain, Blockbuster Inc.
* A nickname for Progressive Corporation
* Big Blue, a fictional planet in the F-Zero racing video game series
* Big Blue (crane) that collapsed during the construction of Miller Park, killing three
o An episode of Blueprint for Disaster about the crane collapse
* A nickname for the New York Giants football team
* A nickname for a large type of American handball
* A nickname for the fictional character Superman
* A fictional blue whale in the video game Ecco the Dolphin
* A hotel at Pleasure Beach Blackpool
* An informal nickname for sports teams at the University of Kentucky
* The Mascot of Utah State University
* The Mascot of The Pingry School.
* The Mascot of Old Dominion University. 
* The nickname for the famous residential duplex north of the University of Washington
* The Big Blue, a 1988 film by director Luc Besson
* A legendary lake monster in The X-Files episode "Quagmire"
* A nightclub/bar in northern Mexico City popular among teenagers and young adults of the Ciudad Satélite suburban area
* A blue colored spin-off of Big Red soda.
What's a better approach?
1) Follow this entry to ensure no one edits it to include a reference to University of Michigan.
2) Edit it to say "often inaccurately attributed as a nickname for University of Michigan sports teams".
SVP said "Go Blue car"
Pretty much says that 90% of schools do the same thing. Everyone's speeding, but the Go Blue car was the one that got pulled over. The investigation is mostly a problem because we've sucked the last two years. Compared to USC, this is small potatoes, but the NCAA tends to focus like a laser on small problems while allowing the bigger injustices to go uninvestigated.
Basically, it's everything we've been saying here, minus the OMG DAMN FREEP JIHAD HEADLINES stuff.
ESPN is still garbage. Scott Van Pelt has always been reasonable though.
i think the product they put out is sub-par. with all their "predictions" and "why (team X) wont/will win/lose their next game" and stuart scott expressions, sportscenter is exceedingly painful to watch. there is very little actually news reporting; most of it is just insider opinion/garbage that is passed off as fact when, in actuality, it is wrong more than 50% of the time.
with all that said, i watch PTI religiously, and whenever im bored the first channel i turn to is epsn.
EDIT: i know you said espn, but to me, espn is synonymous with sportscenter. so there ya go.
I stopped liking ESPN when all content became editorialized. Stephen A. Smith was the straw that broke the camel's back.
The more SportsCenter morphed into ESPN The Magazine the more I grew disinterested.
but I'd like to know why you think ESPN is garbage?
Good lord where to begin?
-The ESPYs: Really ESPN? Sports already recognizes the best in sports. That's why they play the games. You don't have organize this elaborate circlejerk simply so you can point out the greatness of your network.
-The constant need to BE the story as opposed to just reporting it. My favorite example? The push to declare USC the greatest college football team of all time during the 2005 season. At one point Mark May said that that USC team would have put up something like 50 points on the '97 Michigan team (in a segment where they compared prior national champions). And then USC went out and lost to Texas. It was amazing.
-More importantly, the constant need to declare things the GREATEST ever. It's the scorched-earth approach to sports broadcasting.
-Stuart Scott. He sucks. Unequivocally. BOO-YAH!
-Skip Bayless. Once criticized Phil Mickelson for stating that he would leave the US Open to be with his wife for the birth of their first child.
-Colin Cowherd. Is Colin Cowherd.
-The decision to put Drew Sharp on television for any reason.
-The continued Tiger Woods deification. Mike Tirico (who I have a soft spot for because he lives in Ann Arbor) said that we'll all remember where we were when he gave last week's press conference. Good grief.
-RED SOX YANKEES GREATEST RIVALRY IN SPORTS.
-DUKE NORTH CAROLINA GREATEST RIVALRY IN SPORTS.
-They're in bed with the SEC. Why should what the people in SEC country think have any effect upon my opinion of ESPN?
ESPN is just too loud and too obnoxious. Ugh. ESPN.com is fine because you don't have to hear anyone offer "analysis." But the television station is awful.
Tell me how you really feel.
+1. I hope that was cathartic.
I mostly agree with this list but you did forget one segment that made me want to kick puppies "who's Now" That is all.
Crap. I can't believe I forgot "Who's Now?" That was the absolute worst. An inexcusable omission from the list.
The sad thing about the Tirico comment is that ESPN, I'm sure, will do all it can to make sure that press conference is burned in our memories forever.
I don't "hate" ESPN, I hate how people follow the talking heads like a bunch of sheep. I also hate how the report false information, or rumors as factual news. The one that got me the most was them reporting during the last NHL lockout that the NHL ended the lockout and would resume play on a condensed season with a longer playoff. Needless to say, that was completely bunk. I learned after that to take ESPN with a grain of salt.
I don't really mind ESPN. They do a good job covering games for the most part and SportsCenter is usually entertaining if not particularly substantial. The only thing that really bugs me about ESPN is their "ESPN Next Level" stats. Most are non-sensical or historical stats like, "The New England Patriots are 15 and 1 all time when leading by 6.5 heading into the final 3:57 of the Super Bowl (starting 1776 in their game vs. the British)." Lame. Other than that, not much else to say. They're there when I need a quick fix, but anytime I need real info, to the blogosphere I go.
Where are all the ESPN bashers now?
Van Pelt has long been the exception to the idiocy that is ESPN's rule.
Anyone who brings us the Not Top 10 is okay in my book.
I'm not a big ESPN fan, but it's not because I think it's biased against us or anything. I just think the network's become a little full of itself, thinking that we tune in to see the sportscasters blather on and tell bad jokes, when in reality most of us just want to watch the games.
Here's why I say that:
One week after the Rosenberg-Snyder front-page story on Aug. 31, Free Press publisher Paul Anger wrote a column defending the two reporters. That was the column wherein he mentioned some vague, laughable e-mail threat from somebody who wished "pain and death" on Rosenberg. (I wonder when Anger last visited the Freep's "moderated" Comments pages for a sampling of some good ol' fashioned internet hate-mail concering coach Rich Rodriguez and his family.)
Anyway, Anger cited ESPN "reporting" as confirming the Free Press' reporting. What it was, was an interview that ESPN did with Toney Clemons at Colorado, wherein he first said that yeah, they went over supervised limits. Clemons later denounced the quotes attributed to him. It didn't phase Anger.
In that editorial column, Anger not only cited ESPN, but he stated that all of the Freep reporting had been fair, and that "Meantime, we'll continue to give all sides their say -- and to report the facts, whatever they are, unvarnished."
So there you have it; the Publisher of the Free Press on the subjects of ESPN, fairness and giving "all sides their say."
Enough to induce vomiting.
The zombie apocalypse could be closer than we think.
Thanks for posting this, though. It's refreshing to hear someone in the media use common sense on this issue.
Just read World War Z huh? Great book.
Great book. My co-worker had an advance copy of it or something, but yeah, I really enjoyed it.
Scott Van Pelt's perspectives are usually reasonable and well reasoned. This was also the line taken by Doug Gottlieb this afternoon on his show. Used the speeding ticket analogy and said USC vs. U-M isn't even comparable. Said one is cheating, the other is breaking the rules.
Michigan won't be one of them going forward.
Old reality: Michigan's rep is squeaky clean.
New reality: Michigan got caught; takes accountabilty; does not try to wallpaper over the facts; doesn't make BS excuses; but makes a reasonable defense; and takes its medicine. Michigan ends up with the squeakiest cleanest program again.
I'm not happy this happened. But I'm proud of the way MSC, Brandon and RichRod are handling it.
Totally agree that MSC and Brandon are handling this precisely as they should. I expect RichRod will too. I've gotta say I'd be near my breaking point if I was RichRod. Holy crap, the load on his shoulders. If he can fight through all this and succeed on and off the field, I will be one very impressed fan. I'm pulling for him.
You couldn't pay me enough to take RichRod's place.
I feel awful about this and I'm just a fan. I can't imagine how he even sleeps at night.
If he gets through this and builds a winner, he'll become an institution within an institution. I'm pulling like hell for the guy.
Van Pelt has always had a good take on sports - he gets that they are important, but also that taking them too seriously just makes you myopic. A good take.
1. At least we seem to be out of the woods as far as the violations go
2. I heard something objective from ESPN
3. If this is the reaction Michigan gets, can't wait for USC to get it's due
That is all.
Wait a minute ESPN was on our side for a change??? This can't be.
Rittenberg had a pretty good take on Cowherd this morning:
1. Most schools would be guilty of the same conduct. The allegations aren't really a big deal, maybe the quality control coaching is a little bit more of problem but not a huge one.
2. Nobody would care if RR was 16-8 instead of 8-16.
3. RR just needs to worry about how to improve a bad defense that list it's two best players. He thinks the offense will be very good next year.
Overall a very reasonable take on things.
Really the only people from ESPN that I actually like(alongside Cowherd), only ones that seem to take an unbiased middle of the road point of view in all of their articles.
I find it very hard to like Cowherd ever since I listened to that BS
Cowherd is TERRIBLE.
He goes on rants about the stupidest things for the sole purpose of riling people up.
Yet we're talking about him. So it "works" in that sense. It's the same reason Skip Bayless still has a job...they need blowhards like Cowherd and Bayless to play Devil's advocate.
You are assuming that they are smart enough to 'play' devils advocate not just be the devils advocate.
I just can't stand Cowherd's effing voice.
Hes to USC, as Lou Holtz and Beno Cook are to ND. Its gonna be fun listening to him when(if) the hammer drops on USC. Agree though Cowherds a Idiot.
that people continue to watch and read things they despise so much (i.e., ESPN, the Freep).
With ESPN, people basically have no choice because they have almost a monopoly on sports coverage and watching shitty coverage of your favorite sports team is better than not watching them at all.
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer....