Trgovac
Article on profootballtalk.com speculates Trgovac could be in danger of losing his job. I'd give this a speculation rating of "High", but if Trgovac does become available, I think RRod owes it to himself to give this guy a look. A high profile guy that would be more likely to give M a chance than otherwise, being an alum and all. Link below.
http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/18/could-peppers-power-play-get-…
January 18th, 2009 at 2:30 PM ^
Dammit, why can't anyone understand the whole "Let's have informative headlines" thing?
January 18th, 2009 at 6:59 PM ^
Completely Agree with you on that one Magnus.
January 18th, 2009 at 2:32 PM ^
I was a pseudo-serious Trgovac for head coach guy last year, and I think he'd be a great fit.
January 18th, 2009 at 4:35 PM ^
Back after the '05 season when Lloyd decided to whack Hermann & Malone, Doug Karsch of 97.1 came up with the idea that Carr should hire Trgovac as DC & assistant head coach and give him $1 million a year salray with the understanding that he would take over as HC when Lloyd was ready to retire. Interesting idea.
Until Michigan increases the salary that its willing to pay its DC, I highly doubt we have a crack at landing a recently employed NFL coordinator. Now, would a positions coach in the NFL make the move to collegiate DC? Quite possibly.
January 18th, 2009 at 5:16 PM ^
Jeez, if you have a panic attack over a thread titled "Trgovac" then help is seriously needed. Just click it, read it, and move on.
The degree to which people care about "non-informative headlines ZOMG?!!?!?" is getting out of hand
January 18th, 2009 at 5:45 PM ^
It's Brian's blog and he has made it a quasi-rule.
January 18th, 2009 at 6:05 PM ^
I'm pretty sure the spirit of the law is to prevent the "OMG" and "A new DC?!?!?" that mislead and annoy. A thread titled "Trgovac" doesn't exactly do the fear striking he referred to.
January 18th, 2009 at 6:17 PM ^
From the sticky: "first and foremost I'd make the thread title more informative, like 'Tate Forcier is awesome.'"
Also, the thread is titled "Lets make informative thread titles." A last name is not informative. There are probably 20 threads just titled "TomVH" because people fail to put info in the title. That makes searching for old threads useless and makes people waste time by clicking on threads that turn out to be old info or something they don't care about.
January 18th, 2009 at 6:21 PM ^
And Lord knows, those 3 minutes lost in searching for old threads are some of the most valuable minutes of their life.
It's a blog, who cares
January 18th, 2009 at 6:30 PM ^
who lets you post here cares. Especially since he cared enough to make a sticky post out of it. Maybe I'll make a bunch of posts with misleading headlines and fake info in them. It only takes a minute to Google and check out if it's true, right?
Just follow the goddamn rules. They are there for a reason-they make the blog better for everyone.
January 18th, 2009 at 6:41 PM ^
Promote RichRod, look at anyaskman's post titled "not so much" like 3 posts above yours and tell me your last post doesn't sound like an argument for his point. The headline for this thread isn't misleading or purposefully fake. I looked at the title and instantly knew it was about Trgovac. It told me what his post was going to be about; that seems informative enough to me.
I don't post too often on this board; I really just like to read and browse, and the non-informative thread titles are annoying, but certainly are not the big deal people are making it.
January 18th, 2009 at 6:51 PM ^
"Trgovac in hot water in Carolina?"
Is that really so hard?
"It told me what his post was going to be about" hardly gets at what the actual article was about. A post titled "Trgovac" could be about his days at Michigan. His taste in music. His charity work in the community. His secret identity as an alien. His impending divorce. His fistfight with Jake Delhomme in the locker room. His ascent of Mt. Kilimanjaro.
January 18th, 2009 at 7:07 PM ^
A more informative title to this post would have been "D-Bags arguing about the level of information in my title." At least that would have given me an accurate representation of the conversation that was occurring within.
January 18th, 2009 at 7:11 PM ^
simple and clear rules?"
January 18th, 2009 at 7:49 PM ^
this is absolutely retarded. First off, this post was titled just fine. Could it have been more informative in its title? Sure. Could it have been worse, very much so.
I lean more to the informative side.
January 18th, 2009 at 6:56 PM ^
First he said "well, it's not misleading!" So I said OK, well it wastes time, Brian wants it, and it makes the blog better. So then he says "nuh-uh it only wastes like 3 mins." My response is a lot of things waste just a few minutes, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make the blog as good as possible.
If that argument doesn't work for you then change if from making misleading titles into naming threads just a random letter from the alphabet. It doesn't mislead, but it forces you to click on every thread to see its contents. If the titles tell you nothing there is no point in having them. It is a waste of time. The time it makes the post creator to type 3 extra words in the headline the 30 seconds wasted by the 1000 people that click on the thread.
January 18th, 2009 at 7:23 PM ^
Trgovac a possibility?
Come on fellas, we're texting here.
January 18th, 2009 at 7:27 PM ^
Trgovac a possiblity for what? For a truly informative post, it seems like "Trgovac a possibility for new DC" would be necessary. But no matter how much complaining there is, I don't think every poster is ever going to be that clear in their titles.
January 18th, 2009 at 7:25 PM ^
I'm definitely with all of you that informative titles make the board a lot better. I just don't think it's as big of a deal as people make it out to be.
"Trgovac" ended up being a post about Trgovac. True, it's ambiguous, but in no way is this the least informative one out there.
January 18th, 2009 at 7:33 PM ^
arguing, you could have already added "a possibility" to "trgovac"...COME ON PEOPLE! JEEZ lol
January 19th, 2009 at 10:34 AM ^
Every time I start a thread, I'm going to title it "Football." Because, I mean, it will be about football and that's informative enough because when you open it, I will have started a discussion about football?
I think from now on, everyone should just title their threads with the sport they're going to discuss.
Anyway, the point is, this thread could have been about any number of things. For example:
"Mike Trgovac just got fired"
"Mike Trgovac should have been picked over Rodriguez"
"Trgovac is a weird name. What other weird names have Michigan players had?"
"I saw a porno with Mike Trgovac in it"
"I met Mike Trgovac at the airport"
There are a few of those subjects that I would not have cared to read about. I imagine there are some people who agree with me. It would be easier to add a couple words to a thread title than to have a few hundred people click on the thread only to find that someone's selling a Mike Trgovac autograph.
January 19th, 2009 at 10:43 AM ^
"lol who cares just a blog" is a cover for "uh oh i'm too stupid to put any thinking at all in my posts so if i just title them real vague like then people will have to read and i'll be omg internet popular!!!".
it's basically a topic sentence. is it that fucking hard to type a topic sentence for your post title? do we need the front page to constantly be clogged with threads titled "DC?!?!", "STOKES", "Trgovac", and "i'm a dipshit who can't take the time to see if anyone already posted nine topics about this already!!!" ????
January 19th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
Is that like the thing on the front of a figure skate blade? I'm so confused!
January 19th, 2009 at 11:33 AM ^
lol figure skating u r queer.
January 19th, 2009 at 12:11 PM ^
Man, you are some kind of genius. It's amazing how you cut right to the heart of people who title threads "Trgovac" instead of "Trgovac is a possibility?".
Clearly they're stupid if they can't figure out that some other posters are going to wet their pants and waste PRECIOUS SECONDS of their lives clicking on a link that possibly contains info they already knew.
Good Lord, this is ridiculous
January 19th, 2009 at 12:18 PM ^
It's simple human decency, man. Just follow the suggested guidelines and make everyone's life a little more pleasant!
Has the whole world gone crazy? Am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules? INFORMATIVE POST TITLES!
January 19th, 2009 at 12:27 PM ^
Garlic Cheese Grits
6 cups cold water
1 teaspoon garlic, minced
1 1 / 2 cups hominy grits
1 tablespoon yellow onion, minced
1 / 4 cup milk
2 eggs, beaten
8 ounces Velveeta, cubed
1 / 2 teaspoon salt
Preheat oven to 350°. Bring water to a boil. Add grits and return to a boil. Reduce heat and simmer about 5 minutes. Remove from heat,add all other ingredients, and put into oiled casserole pan. Bake covered for about 45 minutes, stirring midway. Makes 10 big servings.
January 19th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
Cow Udder Eclairs
12 fresh lean cow udders
1 pint whipping cream
1 cup brown sugar
1 (14 ounce) can artichoke hearts
1/2 cup butter
1 small smelt, filleted
Soak the cow udders in Nair to remove the hair. Repeat several times if necessary until all hair is removed. Rinse in warm water. Place a stick of butter into a warm frying pan. Wait until all of the butter has melted, then add the cow udders. Fry them for 15-20 minutes until golden brown. Chop the artichoke hearts and smelt on a cutting board into fine pieces. In a large bowl, add the whipping cream, brown sugar and the chopped artichokes, and smelt. With a mixer on low, whip until creamy with a consistency like vanilla pudding. Remove the udders from the pan and make a long slice down the side of each udder. Spread the pudding mixture into each slit. Serve warm or cold and have an "Udderly Wonderful" snack.
January 19th, 2009 at 12:33 PM ^
HOLYSHITTHATISAWESOME. NAIR????
January 19th, 2009 at 1:27 PM ^
I think they serve those at Blimpy Burger.
January 19th, 2009 at 1:15 PM ^
I, for one, would like to motion that we just do away with thread titles and put the entire thread on the front page of the forum.