A question for Brian Cook
Brian,
You recently stated that you would not be attending the football game against Maryland on November 22nd as a boycott against the current athletic department administration and Coach Hoke. While I commend you for this stance, as you are one of the loudest and brightest voices currently covering Michigan sports, I do have a question for you about your choice.
There are two more home games before November 22nd. October 11th sees Michigan hosting Penn State, in what will most certainly be a heavily scrutinized game played during prime time. November 1st is Homecoming against Indiana. Why is it that you chose to boycott, and by extension, essentially call for your readers to boycott this game? Would it not have made more sense to try to get this done for one of the other two games? Especially considering that the Marlyand game is Senior Day, it seems like that might be a poor choice. Through all of this turmoil, the one thing we all here have agreed on is tthat supporting the current players is of the utmost importance.
Again, I want to make it clear that I agree with your stance on this matter, but only seek some clarification on the timing.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:42 AM ^
It does seem like Penn State would have made the most sense, what with it being the next home game.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:46 AM ^
But that's a night game and under the lights and sparkly uniformz. And, and, and Indiana is like Homecoming and old guys and cheerleaders. And Maryland is, well, like Maryland.
So yeah, let's boycott Maryland.
/s
September 30th, 2014 at 10:59 AM ^
Seriously. If anything, boycotting Maryland over Penn State because Penn State is a really cool environment against a good team at night with all of this cool other stuff surrounding the game means Brandon wins. Penn State at night is perhaps the most "Brandon-ized" game on the schedule. Waiting for a worse game is ridiculous.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:01 AM ^
Hopefully that's what happens.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:09 AM ^
The reason for a boycott is to push people to take action. But a boycott should be a last resort -- before doing it, we should give the Board of Regents some time to actually, you know, take action. It is reasonable to wait two or three weeks to fire your athletic director if you are getting your ducks in a row.
It would be terrible to ruin the 100,000 attendee streak for no reason, if Brandon was already in the process of being fired regardless of the boycott.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:23 AM ^
This whole situation may be Overcome By Events.
The AD may have just done to themselves what Brian was trying to do to them with a boycott: Remove them from the picture.
I'd be surprised if Dave Brandon is still here in November.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
Here comes the ban-hammer.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^
A private email would be a more appropriate way to address your question.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:50 AM ^
I'm curious as well.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:45 AM ^
I'm going to address this in a mailbag today.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^
Thank you Brian. I know I emailed you about it, but I figured you were inundated over the last few days. Feel free to lock or delete this. I've just seen a lot of stuff through various threads questioning the timing. I hope this came off as a respectful question, and not as me trying to "call you out", as that was not my intention.
Also, since you're in here; I'm wondering if you, or anyone else knows how older alumni can sign the petition being circulated by the students. My mother is in her 60's, and graduated long ago with an MSW. She wants to know if she can sign the petition, but has no idea how to go about it.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^
You need a uniquename to sign it, so unfortunatley, I don't think she can. However, she could always contact the AD's office, the President's office, or the Regents, which I'm sure all have information available online.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^
My dad was able to get a login today, without making any phone calls. He graduated in the 70s.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:56 AM ^
I think she just needs a unique name. I'm an old alum and have one - I think any alum can. Take a look here:
https://accounts.itcs.umich.edu/create/alumnirec
September 30th, 2014 at 11:00 AM ^
I sent her the link. Hopefully she'll be able to.
Now to find the email address for the Pres that was posted a couple of days ago.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:56 AM ^
I think there might be a way to sign up for a temporary UMID, but don't quote me on it. I'd fiddle around a bit with the page, give it a try.
I wish there was a way to have a petition open to all Michigan fans, though.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:59 AM ^
There is an option to actually create a unique name. Click the 'login', follow the links to create/recover a unique name. Not sure if it will work, but it's worth a try. Just have to put your name, year of first degree, and last four of the SSN to verify eligability, and if eligable, I'm guessing you can create a login to sign the petition.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:51 AM ^
I'm pretty sure the question was directed at the Brian Cook who the Pistons just signed (from the University of Illinois), but you should double-check with the OP about that.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:58 AM ^
going to be posted at 1 a.m.? Sorry I couldn't resist.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
The MGoLawyers need time to rewrite it.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^
What the....? Do you even have a....oh wait.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
Brian, I, Carlos Angel Juan Pablo Abanger, must regretfully inform you that I will no longer be on the Board of Regents ticket for 2016.
Cook/Abanger is sadly, dead.
I do however have some good news. I have found a suitable replacement for myself who is every bit as qualified. He is a hard worker who I assure you will lead the way to victory.
He is my cousin, Clint Alabaster Dane.
How would you feel about a Dane/Cook ticket in 2016?
September 30th, 2014 at 11:50 AM ^
answer questions about it, then release a contradictory statement in the mailbag today.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:46 AM ^
September 30th, 2014 at 10:46 AM ^
I really don't think anybody is boycotting anything. If we beat Rutgers then the next week will be spent with people going "well, I guess Indianapolis could still feasibly happen..." And then if we beat Penn State people will be jacked up about the Michigan State game.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:49 AM ^
We're just two wins away from being "jacked up," eh? You've really got that finger right on the pulse, don't you?
September 30th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^
stick with your moral outrage, I will not try to take that from you. But make no mistake, what you are seeing right now has to do with wins and losses, not Shane Morris. Yes, if we win the next two games in impressive fashion the MGoBoard will be filled with Michigan-Michigan State hype videos for two weeks.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^
You will get no moral outrage from me. I never wanted Hoke. I wasn't excited going into this season or last. This is just the icing on the cake. Good riddance.
Regardless, you're simply wrong regarding the possibility of anything turning around here in a matter of weeks. Nobody will be getting jacked up for Michigan football as long as Hoke is around. We're going to be continually bombarded with bad news and negativity as long he is here. I can't believe anyone paying attention believes otherwise at this point.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
of who the coach is, if Michigan wins the next two games the focus will be on Michigan State, not this. You are failing to see that this outrage is a performance thing, not a concussion thing. We are not some unique fan base that really-really-REALLY cares about player safety in one incident that lasted 1.5 plays and really did not come close to resulting in further injury. We are not that richeous. Nor is this the first time a college player has played a down after a really hard hit before being fully examined, nor are all players "fully examined" after every hard hit. This is a fan base that lauded Devin Gardner as a Braveheart warrior hero for playing a half of football on a broken ankle.
Yes, I am saying that if Hoke stays, no disciplinary action is taken, and we win the next two games there is not a person on this site that will not be glued to the TV and eagerly awaitng the State game. And if by some miracle we beat State the Big House will be filled to the brim for Indiana and Maryland, Hoke or no Hoke.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
No, I am not failing to see that this is a performance thing. But the problem here is that the same incompetence that allows the Morris situation is the same reason Hoke is losing games. The program under Hoke is a disorganized mess.
Simply stating that if we were winning games, nobody would care, and leaving it at that is an oversimplification. If we were winning games, we probably wouldn't have a mountain of evidence that Hoke is simply not a good football coach. But we do have that mountain of evidence and it cannot be ignored.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:31 AM ^
it is a completely circumstantial premise. If we lose the next 3 games it will be all "BOYCOTT ON" but if we win them nobody is going to boycott shit.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:39 AM ^
You just don't get it. People want Brandon and Hoke gone, period. Winning a few games would not change the fact that people want to send that message. We've crossed the bridge. It's over.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:42 AM ^
People are outraged over the teams poor performance. With the player safety angle the fan base can breath a sigh of relief that they don't have to call for Hoke's head over wins and losses but now can turn him into not just a bad coach, but a bad guy, and have no reservations about essentially ending his coaching career.
I get it. But what you don't get is that if he does stay and the team turns this thing around this will be nothing but a footnote. People want Brandon and Hoke gone because the team is losing. It is not "Petition" worthy. I understand that you were never on the Hoke wagon, but for anybody that thought he should be given until the end of the year after the Utah game there is really not a whole lot of reason to have a different opinion now.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^
Okay. See ya at the Fire Dave Brandon rally this evening!
September 30th, 2014 at 12:00 PM ^
won't. I have to catch up on The Good Wife. Set a couch on fire for me though. Tx.
September 30th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^
September 30th, 2014 at 12:44 PM ^
Are you speaking only for "people" or are you, personally, okay with Brandon's handling of this situation such that beating Penn State will make everything hunky dory, Brandon uber alles for eternity?
September 30th, 2014 at 1:42 PM ^
saying that I am very dissappointed in how this season has gone, but it has very little to do with the way that Brandon has handled this situation. Personally, while I hate RAWK music, skywriting, and a lot of other things that the athletic department has done while Brandon has been there, I really don't see how this one particular incident is his fault. There are a lot of assumptions and rumors being used to come to the conclusions that a lot of people are. Rumors such as "no big time coaches will come here if Brandon is still here" and "Brandon was trying to get doctors to lie about the injury." To my knowledge, these types of statements are no more than unsubstantiated rumors. What I am saying is that, Brandon or no Brandon, I want Michigan to win games. Do I think that Hoke should be fired? Not for leaving Shane Morris in for one play after a big hit. No I don't. Do I hope this team can turn it around? Yes, I do.
September 30th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^
This is very true. Hoke still needs to go because the entire Morris incident shows that this regime is incapable of running a major football program.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:34 AM ^
This team under Hoke has had more than a year to show what sort of team they are. Their performance has been under scrutiny since the Akron game of last year. They have had numerous times and every reason to come out with fire in all subsequent games and what have we seen instead? A flat, lifeless team with no urgency, pride or fight in them. And that is direct reflection of their coach. A team with any sort of pride and belief responses to the Notre Dame humbling by making a statement in their next game, even if it was against Miami of Ohio. Instead they come out flat again, then come out with no fire against Utah, and look like they completely quit against Minnesota. And now we are suppose to believe that they will get some fire in their bellies and start to win. I don't see it. This team has no belief in themselves, their coach or the direction in which they are heading and it shows. They fold at the first sign of adversity, get pushed around and psychically beat up by teams that they should have outmanned.
The character of this team was evident on the last play of the Notre Dame game in which your QB, Devin Gardner, got laid out on a cheap hit by Notre Dame and not a SINGLE Michigan player went over to defend their QB. Even if a blowout with the game over, a team with any sense of pride or fight would not let something like that happen without a reaction. Their player delivers a blindside hit on the last play of a game that had long since been decided, and the entire team does NOTHING. We saw how the Eagles reacted when their QB, Nick Foles, took a hit on a similar play. Consider the differences.
I don’t mean to sound harsh on the players, cause that mentality has been set by the coaches. I believe we have a highly talented team, and they didn’t get to where they are by not caring, not trying or not having pride. However, when you have a coach that is setting a different tone and different mentality then it infests the whole program. And you end up having the product we see each Saturday.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^
Brian,
I heard you had eggs for breakfast, I would like to inform you that given the unease in the blogosphere, oatmeal would have been a better choice. Please inform us why you would make such a tactical breakfast error in these most dire of times.
Thanks
September 30th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^
Are we atributting Glasgow's emergence to:
1) The Heninger Certainty Principle
or
2) The Order of St. Kovacs
or
3) both, and if so, relative contribution of each?
The science of Mattison or the faith of walk-onabilty? Where shall my MGoPrayers be directed?
This is the 2nd time I've asked this and you're ducking me Cook. Straight duckin'. Got my eye on you, Pal.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:54 AM ^
Go to the game, cheer the kids, and instead use that Michigan intellect you've been blessed with to make clever "Fire DB and Hoke" signs. Oh, just spitballin here, like:
"1 TIX WITH 0 HOKE > 10 TIX FOR 1 COKE"
September 30th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
September 30th, 2014 at 1:29 PM ^
"The offense smells FUNKy"
"Doug MESSmeier"
I could be here all day.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:53 AM ^
but I think as long as Brandon is gone, we should not pursue the boycott.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^
Agreed.
Even if Hoke is still coach, that would not be a reason to boycott a game. That can be delt with on it's own. It's the deceit of the AD that's the issue.
September 30th, 2014 at 10:53 AM ^
Deleted