OT: D.C.'s elite Wolverines on RR

Submitted by BlueinDC on

Some Wolverines in high positions in Washington are opining about the fate of Rich Rodriguez. Their opinions certainly aren't of any more weight than another fan's, but I thought it just might be interesting to readers.

David Shepardson of the Detroit News tweeted Thursday:

Treasury adviser Gene Sperling, an Ann Arbor-native, said he had mixed feelings about whether #RichRod should be fired

Separately, I was at a function about a month ago, in the immediate aftermath of the Ohio State game. I asked Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), a two-time graduate of U-M (undergrad and medical school), about his opinions about Rodriguez.

Price didn't seem immediately familiar with specifics about the team, but said that he thought Rodriguez wasn't the right fit for the team. Price said he thought Forcier had been underutilized.

On an additional note, here's a list of U-M alumni serving in Congress. (It's not completely up-to-date; several alumni were elected in November.)

steve sharik

December 16th, 2010 at 7:51 PM ^

...there they are shooting off their mouths and exerting pressure without just cause.

I hate people like this.

How aboout, "I really am not familiar enough with the situation and, given my position of influence, it is in the best interests of the university if I decline comment.  I'd be happy to answer any questions with regards to the interests I represent, however."

pasadenablue

December 16th, 2010 at 4:49 PM ^

IMO it'd be good to have a single major OT thread of the day, where people talk about whatever they want.  Sports-related OT stuff like major Detroit pro sports news or other CFB news can still get their own topics.  But it'd be great to have that OT mega-thread which is just for people to fuck around and talk about random shit.  It seems like a solid compromise between people wanting to share funny shit and shoot the bull about stuff, and not clogging up the board with a bunch of random OT posts.

For example, facebook is currently down.  Now since I can't go on facebook to talk about facebook being down, I refuse to twat, and Google Buzz is lame, such discussion would be perfect for an OT-mega-thread.

Just make it a sticky, let a mod make it, and let it go.

 

We can have our cake, and eat it too.

pasadenablue

December 17th, 2010 at 12:59 PM ^

Take a look again.

 

 

Kronwall hits Havlat midstride.  At the time of the hit, he has one foot on the ice, and the other up as part of his skating motion.  The picture shows Kronwall with both his feet in the air because of physics.  Havlat was lower to the ice than Kronwall, Havlat went down, and Kronwall went up.  That's what happens on open-ice hits.  Kronwall just skated through Havlat.  It's Marty Havlat's fault he didn't keep his head up.

JeepinBen

December 17th, 2010 at 2:59 PM ^

exploding through a shoulder-to-head hit with intent to injure should be celebrated?

If his shoulder hit Havlat's shoulder or chest and he knocked the wind out of him like woah... that would be one thing. But this was headhunting. Your picture shows that he is moving "up" and hitting him directly in the head.

Also, based on the above video, he took 3 strides. Which is textbook charging

OMG Shirtless

December 17th, 2010 at 3:34 PM ^

He left his feet. That's all you need for it to be a penalty in hockey.

 I was pointing out that this statement was incorrect.  

Where else was Kronwall supposed to hit Havlat?  He would have to get down on his knees to put a shoulder in that guy's chest when Havlat has his head down like that.  Your 3 strides nonsense is a complete exaggeration.

The fact that you are so butthurt over a play from 2-3 years ago is amazing.   We've both won Stanley Cups in the past 3 years, get over it.  

JeepinBen

December 17th, 2010 at 3:59 PM ^

Not exactly. 

Upset that a dirty, dangerous play is now a FSD advertisement and being celebrated? Yeah, that I'm upset about. 

It was a dirty play at the time. He was (in my opinion, obviously not yours) rightfully kicked out of the game for a dirty play. Just because it's been 3 years doesn't mean it wasn't a dirty play. 

pasadenablue

December 17th, 2010 at 5:34 PM ^

Naw it wasn't dirty - it was just awesome.  Good solid hit on a player who, a) saw Kronwall, then b) was dumb enough to put his head down.

 

BTWs, how does it feel to be last place in the Central, 12th place in West, with 3 more games played than the conference leaders?

IvyLeague

December 16th, 2010 at 3:48 PM ^

I don't trust most politicians to start with, but anyone who says the problems with Michigan Football stem from Forcier being underutilized has no credibility.

profitgoblue

December 16th, 2010 at 3:54 PM ^

I would not use the term "elite" to describe a Treasury Department advisor or a US Representative.  Personally, I do not hold either of these opinions in higher regard than any member of the MGoCommunity.  (On the other hand, if you were referring to Gerald Ford (RIP) the use of "elite" would be appropriate.)

Captain Obvious

December 16th, 2010 at 3:58 PM ^

I have a great deal of respect for politicians generally.  It's a difficult and mostly thankless job for most, and then they have to be hated by at least 50% of the population at all times.

However, I couldn't give 2 shits about what they think about Michigan's coaching situation.  They have no greater insight than the rest of us and are likely working off of less than 1% of information known to the average MGoBlogger.

markusr2007

December 16th, 2010 at 3:59 PM ^

Instead, here's a novel idea: How about they start listening to us (their constituents) first?

In meantime, I can't say I'm entirely interested or impressed by the opinions of politicians regarding college football or the state of Michigan football in particular.

 

aawolve

December 16th, 2010 at 4:07 PM ^

I wish I could neg him. Specifics be damned, it's opinion time. Too many "fans" wrap their facts aournd their theory. Sherlock Holmes would be very disappointed, at least until his next dose of morphine.

"Rodriguez should be fired. Why? I'm not really sure about specifics, but that Tate should have played more."

Don

December 16th, 2010 at 4:06 PM ^

but said that he thought Rodriguez wasn't the right fit for the team."

Translation: "First, I acknowledge that I don't know fuck-all about the team I'm supposedly a strong fan of. Second, when I say he's not the right fit, I admit that's an incredibly imprecise and elastic term that means pretty much whatever the speaker wants it to mean, and in reality it's nothing more than a high-minded euphemism for "he hasn't won as many games as I'd like" but for some strange reason I can't just say that."

profitgoblue

December 16th, 2010 at 4:09 PM ^

This is a classic lawyer phrase that serves as a disclaimer and way to let people know that our opinion has no "immediate" factual support at the time made.  Put differently, we are able to form opinions on just about anything and make them sound reliable/valid without really have any backup for the opinion.  Its an acquired skill.

blueheron

December 16th, 2010 at 4:23 PM ^

Tom Price got a BGS in '77 and MD in (!) '79.  That suggests he may have been in the Inteflex program when it was a six-year path.  When I was in school it took seven years and their undergrad degree was something like "Biomedical Science."

JamesBondHerpesMeds

December 16th, 2010 at 4:27 PM ^

immediately after lamenting about Forcier's underutilization, Price also wondered why DeWayne Patmon didn't get more playing time this season and why the backfield was without Anthony Thomas for the Purdue and Ohio State games.