Stupid things you heard from the blue hairs on Saturday

Submitted by bouje on

Besides the usual "what formation is this" and (after the first half) "This is the type of play i was expecting jeez". The worst thing I heard an old alum mutter was this gemstone:

"Next week is really going to be a battle of coaches on the hot seat. I think whichever one loses will be fired this year. I'm not sold on either of their coaching abilities."

I heard it, bit my tongue and tried to forget it because while Charlie has shown that he's not a very good HC I don't see how ANYONE with a brain could ever say that "I'm not sold on RR's coaching abilities". Luckily I wasn't drunker or I would have gotten angry.

david from wyoming

September 7th, 2009 at 3:42 PM ^

Bouje, I don't think you've earned the right to call people out for saying stupid things just yet. Everyone gets to have their own opinion.

bouje

September 7th, 2009 at 4:06 PM ^

I get called out for saying something stupid. I realize that I've said something stupid. I want it to be the end of the story.

You say that everyone has a right to an opinion well my OPINION is that that guy and everyone that thinks that is an idiot.

I think it's a bit hypocritical for you to say that I cannot call out people for saying stupid shit yet everyone can have an opinion.

You can have sentence A
You can have sentence B

But you cannot have both Sentences together. And frankly I'm getting sick and tired of having to defend myself every time that I say anything.

david from wyoming

September 7th, 2009 at 4:19 PM ^

It's the way you phrase things and the part at the end "Luckily I wasn't drunker or I would have gotten angry" that I don't like. The old alum isn't sold on Rich Rod. Why not talk to him like a human being and ask him why? Why not seek to understand his/her point of view and further enlighten yourself? Why not start a civil debate with the alum?

To just start a post about "stupid things overheard at the game" seems mostly unnecessary and not productive. You just come across as a angry guy/girl that is to fast in putting others down.

bouje

September 7th, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^

about me enlightening them during halftime or the several other times that I talked civilly with them.

This topic was mostly just to see what other stupid things that Michigan "fans" said during the course of the game.

I guess sorry I failed to mention this maybe the pot needs to stop calling the kettle black.

noshesnot

September 7th, 2009 at 3:56 PM ^

Some of it was the drunkards, especially the neon-blue-clad Greeks. However, most of it centered around Sheridan needing to go into the game immediately after the first stalled drive, how Chad Henne never threw interceptions as a freshman, and how the second half was going to be the norm from here on out (especially on defense).

The blue hairs were talking more about how they liked the qb pressure, the turnover battle, and the fact that Sheridan should never see the field again.

CleverMichigan…

September 7th, 2009 at 4:45 PM ^

ughhh slight tangent here but it pisses me off so much how the councils order us to wear that shirt to the game and it is NEVER maize. Since I was a football fan before I was a Greek, I compromised and wore the shirt to pregame but took it off and wore a maize one to the game.

But OTOH, one of my fellow rebelling Greeks in my seating section is also on teh mgoblag, and we made occasional tacopants comments and refrained from making asses of ourselves.

noshesnot

September 7th, 2009 at 4:59 PM ^

Lots of my friends were Greek, and most of them were okay people, okay fans.
I have just never understood why the need to feel different than the rest of the student fan population? The excuses I've always heard always center around "recruiting", etc., but I highly doubt that seeing some guy/girl in a shirt that has their letters on it would sway someone to pledge. Just my opinion.

p.s. Tacopants was mentioned by some folks with me in reference to Sheridan's dead-on pass to him to the left side of the field.

CleverMichigan…

September 7th, 2009 at 5:35 PM ^

According to pre and post recruitment surveys, apparently the most common way freshmen first hear of UM greek life is the shirts... way to go freshmen. So we continue to do it to essentially advertise the system as a whole without violating the sorority council's 43892490304892 recruiting rules. But I agree, I don't get why it has to be for opening day too, you would think first day of classes and other random days would be enough.

tmiller

September 7th, 2009 at 3:52 PM ^

Might be dumb question, but would you say that Desmond's comments about the locker room being divided, even after Craig James refuted them, was stupid or just sticking by his opinion?

KBLOW

September 7th, 2009 at 3:53 PM ^

That old alum was just repeating the conventional wisdom that the MSM has been spouting since the start of the season. He'll change his tune soon enough.

98xj

September 7th, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^

Although, I will say that RR's clock management the 2nd half could have been a little better. I can understand getting as many snaps as possible for the 2nd and 3rd string Offense, but would prefer that we let the play clock wind down.

No worries, In Rod We Trust.

Go Blue!

98xj

September 7th, 2009 at 4:44 PM ^

RR could've thrown on every down in the 2nd half, and I wouldn't have minded.

My point is once you have a healthy lead in the 3rd quarter, it is smart football to let the playclock roll down if the game clock is rolling. Good clock management (tempo) does not equal conservative football (ie Lloydball).

98xj

September 7th, 2009 at 5:28 PM ^

...had we not had two Frosh QBs in their first game, we probably would have gone even faster.

Uptempo is RR's style, and that's good. I hope we go even faster vs NDp.

However, good clock management is not something you do just in the last two minutes of a game. It starts as soon as somebody scores. As the game progresses, there is usually a point where managing the clock becomes more important than managing your opponent. Most people, including many football coaches, don't understand this balance. Lloyd Carr really wasn't all that good at it either.

A former FB coach named John Reed has an excellent book on this subject, called Football Clock Management:

http://www.johntreed.com/FCM.html

I recommend it.

jmblue

September 7th, 2009 at 5:43 PM ^

I don't think you're looking at this from the right perspective. This is not the plodding Mike DeBord offense. For this offense, good clock management means snapping the ball early in the playclock. We want to run more plays than our opponent and make it hard for them to substitute. We're not going to go into a shell as soon as we take the lead. We're going to keep on trying to score. That's the RR philosophy. That's what we need to be working on.

98xj

September 7th, 2009 at 6:43 PM ^

Yes, I understand RR's philosophy. Yes, we SHOULD be uptempo for as long as possible--as I said, we could've been even faster. No, I am not advocating boring, predictable playcalling at any point in the game.

Becoming predictable in playcalling (ie "going into a shell") is not the same thing as going to a slow tempo to manage the clock. The issue is: At what point in the game should I change tempo? In the case of the WMU, we probably should've slowed the tempo in the 4th quarter. Had the game still been in doubt, or if we were behind, then staying uptempo would've been correct.

FWIW We could be no-huddle for the whole game, mass substitute our players in and out, jump in and out of various formations, but allow the play clock to run down whenever we want to (ie when the game is in hand).

jmblue

September 7th, 2009 at 8:23 PM ^

I know what you're saying. There is some value in slowing it down at times. But it was the first game of the season. If you want your team to be able to hurry up for four quarters next week against ND, you should work on doing that when you have the chance against WMU - especially when you have backups in the game who haven't been in the game earlier. If you slow the game down right when they first come in, how are they going to be prepared to come in if needed during a close game? Keep the gameplan as normal as possible for as long as possible.

Maize_and_Drew

September 7th, 2009 at 4:08 PM ^

but it was pretty clear in the second half that this game was in hand. Getting as much real time experience for the backups was a good idea. Just running the clock out doesn't really get them up to speed.

jmblue

September 7th, 2009 at 4:14 PM ^

I've got a real man of genius behind me. Not old enough to be a blue hair, but whiny enough all the same. A sampling of his work on Saturday:

-Before the game, he bitched that the coaching staff wasn't introduced. (He most likely was planning to boo.)

-Before the opening kickoff, he went ballistic over the fact that we had a couple of starting players on kick coverage. (Heaven forbid that we put actual quality players, who know how to tackle, on a unit that determines field position.)

-On Tate's first TD play, he blurted out, just before Tate threw the pass: "They don't know what they're doing out there!"

-When we scored to go up 21-0 (or maybe 24-0), he drolly commented: "I can't believe how excited we are to have the lead over a MAC team."

-When WMU went on its little drive at the end of the first half, he sighed: "We're giving up too many yards."

-In the third quarter, he lamented that Sheridan's INT "killed our momentum."

-He made the most dreadful shrieking noise - akin to the noise a rabbit makes right before it dies - when WMU completed that long pass.

-At the end of the game, he made fun of Cone. WTF?

He'll be here all season!

mtzlblk

September 7th, 2009 at 5:05 PM ^

'witch hunt'.

It seems to me that there is some contingent of the M fan base that is happiest when it is unhappy.

I know that all fan bases have some form or another of this, but does anyone else feel like perhaps M's longstanding run of relative success has bred perhaps a larger percentage of them within our ranks?

Seriously? You are in the stadium on a beautiful day, your team is/has made a pretty large statement about the state of the program and all this guy can do is piss and moan? And I have read so many stories like this one that it makes me think it is more common for M fans than for most.

How do we get rid of them? Is there a special shampoo or something we can use?

I suggested in another thread that we, nicely, confront boo-ers and their ilk and ask them why they are in the stadium if they aren't going to be supportive?

Maybe this should apply to curmudgeons as well? If people around him indicate that his negative attitude is really a drag on those nearby and their enjoyment of the game, maybe he will realize that the majority of people do not share his opinions and don't want to hear his puking and mewling all season?

Worth a try.

bringthewood

September 7th, 2009 at 4:30 PM ^

I'm an old FB, but not as old as the guy behind me. He was complaining about #6 (he did not know it was Donovan Warren) "mixing it up" and continued to complain when #6 (Je'Ron Stokes) "was mixing it up" - blissfully unaware that they were two different people and playing on opposite sides of the ball.

nedved963

September 7th, 2009 at 4:32 PM ^

I had the people behind me yelling at 31-0 in the second half that WMU had to take out Hiller, because he's a bum and they couldn't salvage a win with him in there. Earlier when it was freshly 14-0, they were praying for Tate to throw a pick at michigan's 20 to "even things up a bit". They were Michigan fans though. Weird.

Also Rich Rod can coach. That's not debateable or something you can have an opinion refuting without being ignorant. He's a very good coach based on all the evidence. You get to debate whether he's better than very good, and how much better. It isn't my opinion that USC can't win games. I can't have that opinion without being ignorant. Because of evidence.

Blue boy johnson

September 7th, 2009 at 4:33 PM ^

Bouje you had a great opportunity to point the poor ignoramus to this here blog where he could enlighten himself. I have had the pleasure of watching you sharpen your debating skills to a razor sharp edge over just a few months. We need to educate the masses not just the blue hairs.
ps nobody likes an angry drunk

bouje

September 7th, 2009 at 4:41 PM ^

when they have no idea what the internet is. Then I'd have to explain that the internet is a series of tubes and sometimes (like during practice-gate) when too many people are trying to dump too much stuff into the tubes at the same time they get clogged up!

Ezeh-E

September 7th, 2009 at 7:31 PM ^

but after watching the bouje carnival for the last month or so, I've come to the following conclusions on the standard course of events:

1) bouje says something which could be constructive criticism, but he says it in a less than ideal way.

2) bouje then defends himself. Fine.

3) bouje then whines about getting negged. At this point I start getting annoyed.

4) bouje presses the argument further and usually says something that is logically problematic.

5) bouje repents and everyone starts throwing points at him.

jamiemac

September 7th, 2009 at 4:40 PM ^

She was not actually at the game, nor do I consider my Mom a bluehair.....but after a summer of having her puncuate every UM football conversation with 'now we're stuck with rodriguez and have no idea whats going to happen.'.......the first words out of her mouth when she picked up the phone when I called her afterwards was not hello, but rather a genuine schoolgirl crush like exclamation of "I love Shoelace!"

To quote, uh, Tracy Chapman: Finally the tables have started turn, we're talking about a Revolution.

petered0518

September 7th, 2009 at 4:41 PM ^

Stupidest thing I heard all day was said by me: "We are going to win a national championship"

It is a tradition of sorts for me to make this prediction after two or three plays. Makes me happy on the inside, even if it is stupid.