Response from a parent of a player on the team
This is from Michael Schofield's father, on one of the premium message boards -
"As a parent of a Michigan player I will say that the Freep is full of shit. Michael spent more time this summer on class work than any thing eles, he came home to visit, there were no Barwis police chasing him making him pratice, he played basketball, goofed around with other sports athlets at the dorms, like all college kids do. To say that these kids are training or being made to train over the NCAA limits is untrue...what my wife and I like about Michigan Football was there committment to education first. Some thing the Freep dose not belive in.
GO BLUE"
August 30th, 2009 at 8:04 AM ^
He needs to say this to a bigger media outlet than a message board online. Like maybe the Det News ? Any good feedback on this situation needs to be expressed,
August 30th, 2009 at 8:05 AM ^
This is good to know. Hopefully more people linked to the program come forward to refute the article.
August 30th, 2009 at 8:14 AM ^
The freep will come out with anything that makes Michigan look bad and everything that dantonio touches will turn to gold. Remember this report came from the same guy who wrote the "win at all costs" article on fegean a few weeks back. Their whole sparty love fest-bash Michigan started when Boren left and hasn't stopped since. I love that they even threw in a "MSU is NCAA compliant" article below this joke of a story just to top it off. There's just no way with as much as the football team means to the university that they would EVER allow this to go on. The freep is a joke. I'm never reading it again.
August 30th, 2009 at 8:44 AM ^
And the truth (and winning!) shall set you free...
August 30th, 2009 at 8:46 AM ^
Mr. Schofield,
Please contact Angelique Chingalis at the Detroit News. She is a journalist that has never raked in the mud. I have talked with her personally through email. She is extremely fair. It is time Michigan players and family combat the slander at the Free Press.
August 30th, 2009 at 8:47 AM ^
whole thing is bullshit
EDIT: meaning the allegations by rosenberg
August 30th, 2009 at 8:51 AM ^
wtf, i hate everything about this.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:22 AM ^
This is the most positive thing I've seen about this if it is indeed legitimately Michael's father saying this. The FREEP is a joke. Reread the article and reazlize how freakin' slanted this article is. There is absolutely no balance to the article whatsoever and rosenburg's shitty journalism techniques come right to the surface. To not tell the players he was interviewing what his story was about and why he was interviewing them - then he was being deceitful. Again, let's just get to gameday and win a damn game!
August 30th, 2009 at 9:22 AM ^
I'm sure coach is well aware of the guidelines and is careful not to overstep them. Those reporters were F'd up to even publish this. Is this supposed to give them status as reporters? They lost all status in my book, and Rosenburg went to UM!? I thought the journalism program was better than this! I don't think the team did anything that will result in sanctions and hopefully other parents and players come out to stand up for the team. If some impropriety went down, fine, publish, but writing up sour grapes, screw you guys.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:03 AM ^
There is no journalism program at UM.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:25 AM ^
Hey Michigan set a high for GPA by football players. Do you want us to print the story ?
No go with the false report of them practicing too long.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:26 AM ^
This is a critical comment. It demonstrates that we are dealing with the perception of individuals in the original complaint or else the Schofields would report the same thing. As I suspected, this report from the Freep is total bullshit and yet another attack on a man who demands excellence...within the rules.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:53 AM ^
Brian needs to blow this up in large letters in his response for the slow crowd out there.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:54 AM ^
Mr. Schofield has Angelique's e-mail. Hopefully we have a nice rebuttal coming from her soon.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:58 AM ^
Indeed, he and other parents who feel the same way ought to be encouraged to contact her. It'll take more than one parent to fully rebut the allegations.
August 30th, 2009 at 9:55 AM ^
I wonder when ESPN will talk about this story.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:10 AM ^
Great...
August 30th, 2009 at 10:13 AM ^
It was on the front page last night, and MSNBC and CNN have a link to the story on their front pages too.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:13 AM ^
They've mentioned it a few times on Sportscenter this morning, but all they've done is say that there is a report from the Free Press about it, and then they gave RichRod's response.
August 30th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
So he's calling Je'Ron Stokes a liar?
August 30th, 2009 at 11:00 AM ^
This is the only quote from Stokes, how is that inconsistent with Schofield's father?
Stokes didn't talk about involuntary workouts, he just commented about long days.
The Free Press also asked freshman receiver Je’Ron Stokes about Michigan’s off-season program. Stokes, from Philadelphia, arrived at the Ann Arbor campus in June. “Hooooo!” Stokes said. “A typical week is working from 8 a.m. in the morning to 6 or 7 at night, Monday through Saturday.” And that was starting in June? “Yes, sir,” Stokes said. “We do the weight room at least three times a week, and seven-on-sevens and one-on-ones. Speed and agility on the other days. Every day we have something new to get ready for the season. The coaches have done a great job of stressing the importance of getting us ready for the big season that we’re about to have.” Stokes was not complaining. Like Hawthorne, he apparently was unaware of the rules.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:06 AM ^
Yeah, ok. You can believe random Scout poster claiming to be the father of a player or you can join the rest of us in the real world who know that two media sources independently verified this by talking to current players.
Stokes claims coaches were present for 7-7's. That is, in itself, an NCAA violation.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:09 AM ^
Again, that is the entire section about Stokes, where does Stokes say coaches are present at 7 on 7? I'm not talking about other players, I am asking specifically about Stokes.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:11 AM ^
The implication is clear when you talk about seven on sevens and then say "The coaches..."
August 30th, 2009 at 11:15 AM ^
Or he's talking about his strength and conditioning coach, which is allowed.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:33 AM ^
You're making the same leap that Rosenberg made. You are inferring based on your interpretation of Rosenberg's writing, not based on the actual words from Stokes.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:37 AM ^
Uh, no. I'm inferring based on what Stokes said.... what Rosenberg said is of no consequence to me.
Though I'll openly admit to not believing this all an elaborate conspiracy between Rosey, Snyder and Joe Schad like some here seem to want to believe.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:39 AM ^
I just re-read it. You are making an inference that isn't necessarily true, though.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:42 AM ^
Brodie
for the record I don't believe there is some elaborate conspiracy. The underlying facts (practice times etc) are more than likely true. I merely took exception with you claiming Stokes was the one saying it. I think Stokes quotes are vague at best and are being improperly used by the Freep.
But as to the rest of it, I don't think the Freep is making anything up. I just think they jumped to conclusions that may not be accurate.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:50 AM ^
They're either accurate or making it up. There's no middle ground where 23 hours of practice a week isn't a violation. Are they blowing the fact that it's a violation out of proportion? Probably because we know every program does it.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:53 AM ^
How much of the 23 hours was voluntary? How much of it included treatment of injuries, taping ankles? How much of it was team meals? How many of the hours just don't count per NCAA rules? Just saying that the time adds up to 21-24 hours without answering those questions means that all of the facts could be correct and there could still be no story.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:55 AM ^
See this is where I think the Freep is jumping to conclusions. The players say they were there on ten hours on Sunday. I have no doubt that is true.
But what were they doing? That is my question. The Freep assumes all ten hours were mandatory team time and count as practice. However, there are exceptions and certain time doesn't count towards the limit.
For example, (I think it's the ESPN article) a player says he was in rehab for two hours and that that time doesn't count. I think it's possible that you could chip away at that 10 hours and get down to the 4 hours mandatory time.
Or maybe not and I am being way too naive and that is completely possible. My only point is the Freep went from "players at Schembechler hall for 10 hours" to "all hours mandatory and chargeable to the limits and therefore major violations." I think that is too big a leap.
August 30th, 2009 at 11:58 AM ^
There is a middle ground. It depends on if the 23 hour practice weeks are voluntary or mandatory.
August 30th, 2009 at 12:39 PM ^
Struggling paper that cuts its printing down to twice a week.$ are driving this story. brodie I loled at your comments.I still see nothing that says coaches were present. But no shit the coaches stressed getting ready for the season after going 3-9.
August 30th, 2009 at 12:48 PM ^
For the double post. Blackberry drivin down road
August 30th, 2009 at 12:53 PM ^
I'll downvote you not for double posting, but for commenting while driving. Drive safe!
August 30th, 2009 at 1:09 PM ^
Pulled over to write this one. How how bout that point back
August 30th, 2009 at 1:47 PM ^
I gave you a point because that fact that you would pull over and cost yourself several minutes in getting wherever you are going, for the sake of an MGoPoint, gave me a good chuckle.