Where to even begin? Front page Freep headlines.

Submitted by Section 1 on

Where does one even begin, in deconstructing David Jesse's completely-garbage report on booster donations to the Michigan athletic department.

The headline might be one place, although Jesse no doubt doesn't write headlines.  Giving to the Athletic Department has "Soared" under Brady Hoke?  Even Jesse's own reporting notes that donations had already started to climb -- up 14% -- in Rodriguez's last months.

There might have been a story here; that donations are up, due to a vastly improved economy, and final sales (after a rush of intial pre-sale purchases to the most inside of Athletic Department insiders) of suites.  Dave Ablauf apparently did his level best to give David Jesse that story:

Although an uptick in the economy might have helped, the timing of the increase points to one thing -- the hiring of Brady Hoke to replace Rich Rodriguez.

Athletic department spokesman Dave Ablauf downplayed it, saying the increase is in large part because of work done by the athletic development office in selling seats. He said a big reason suites weren't sold out last year was because those selling the suites were selling something no one had ever seen.

"There might be a slight correlation (with Hoke's hire)," Ablauf said Tuesday. "(But) that number is primarily because of the suite sales."

But the Freep wouldn't have it.  They had to have the "get Rodriguez" angle.

And so, the resort to "some fans."  Sounds a lot like "some current and former players and their parents."  We know about that one.  Anyway, "some fans" are apparently a critical journalistic source:

Although athletic department officials would not make a direct link to Hoke, some fans did.

"It's all about Hoke," said Ted Walls, who splits premium seats with a friend. "(Rodriguez) lost too much, plus there was all that off-the-field stuff. We're just glad they decided to go back to someone who knows Michigan. We didn't really want to give them any money to support (Rodriguez), but we really like Hoke, everything he is saying. I think you'll see a lot of fans who gave up on the program coming back now that Hoke is in charge."

Does anybody know "Ted Walls"?  If so, I think it would be nice to hear from him, and get his side of his interview with David Jesse.  But you go downhill pretty rapidly after Ted Walls, who is at least a part-owner(?!) of some premium seats.  You get to Mike Warren.  Who, uh, has tickets through his wife's brother's cousin's friends' grandparents' family:

Ticket holder Mike Warren of Grand Rapids, who has tickets through his wife's family, said he thinks it is all about Hoke.

"Me and some friends were actually talking about getting some of those club seats, but they sold out before we got them," he said recently. "We weren't going to do it if RichRod was still there, but I think Brady is going to turn this whole program around."

But if "some fans" aren't good enough for you, there is always the ever-reliable "many fans."  "Many fans" are good if, like, you have no data and the data you do have just totally sucks:

Many fans were discontented with Rodriguez during his three years prowling the sidelines. They didn't like that he broke a long streak by not going to a bowl game, brought NCAA sanctions to the program for the first time, and some didn't warm up to him as football coach because he wasn't a "Michigan man."

Let's be fair to David Jesse; he's a skilled writer.  Skilled enough, to write a cleverly meaningless paragraph like that.  And "prowling" is a nice touch, wouldn't you agree?  Every word of it is true, just like every word of this alternative paragraph is true:

Many fans admired Rodriguez during his three years commanding the sidelines. They didn't like that he was the main vicitm of a front-page Free Press story in 2009, that made substantially false and misleading allegations about the football program's compliance with NCAA sanctions, which led to an investigation which badly hurt the program for most of Rodriguez's last two years, and which in the end turned up violations which were vastly less serious and which might well have been "secondary" violations but for the splashy Free Press campaign against Rodriguez.

Naturally, I have grave misgivings about linking to the story, or even recommending that any of you read it.  What I do assure you, is that if you do decide on your own to read it, you will not go more than a paragraph and a half, without face-palming yourself and thinking, "That's crazy...  No, that's a gross abuse of that statistic...  Wait, I know that's not a true statement..."

And as always, there is the qualifier:  It really seems that nothing, but NOTHING sells newspapers and webpage-hits for the Freep, quite like its never-ever ending personal vendetta against Rich Rodriguez.

 

profitgoblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 11:26 AM ^

Do you mean to imply by this question that you agree with the Free Press reporting of the situation and are thus jabbing at the OP? Or do you mean to convey the message that the OP posted a very useful thread? This reader, for one, greatly appreciates the post. I will never, ever visit the Free Press website and am continuously disgusted by any articles I see coming out of them that include any kind of editorial or personal opinion of the writers. Posts like these that are thought out and extremely well-written just show how sub-standard the Free Press reporting really is. There are numerous MGoMembers that would blow the writers for that paper out of the water! Detroit metro area residents should be calling for the heads of the editors of that paper and forcing its bankruptcy by not buying the rag. But that's just the humble opinion of an out-of-stater . . . Thanks Section 1.

[EDIT:  How can I have a score of  "-1 Normal" ??]

 

 

Mitch Cumstein

August 3rd, 2011 at 8:58 AM ^

Just throwing this out there, but "many fans" were discontent with the job RR did.  I'm not entirely sure what problem you have with that statement.  Did you want them to take a poll and find that more than 5 people were discontented so they could use the word "many"?

Elise

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:04 AM ^

I think he's pointing more to the fact that using the words "many" or "some" is kind of a cop-out when it comes to supplying supporting numbers.  They can basically mean anything without supplying any actual information.

justingoblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:33 AM ^

FWIW it was between 33-66% (1/3 definitely stay, 1/3 undecided and 1/3 definitely fired) between OSU and Mississippi State. Well, actually that was for wanting him fired, but I'd go out on a limb and say that "many" of the people who wanted him fired were discontent with the job he was doing.

jmblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 12:35 PM ^

There was a discrepancy between respondents' answers about whether he should be fired and whether they liked him or not.   The poll found that while 32% of Michigan fans felt RR should be retained for 2011,  just 20% of them had a favorable opinion of RR.  Apparently, even some of those in the "retain him" corner weren't really fans of his.  Perhaps they just feared another coaching transition more than anything. 

The poll data:

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_MI_1209925.pdf

justingoblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 2:24 PM ^

The only thing about that is I'm not sure how many people answered to "do you like the Michigan head coach" or "do you like RR". To me, the question seems more personal, like a lot of polls have done with Obama: in-office performance vs. liking his personality.

Either way, my comment was more in jest than an actual statistical answer. It always seems like there's a three way split on a divisive issue.

Section 1

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:09 AM ^

And "many fans" were discontented with the Free Press and thought Rodriguez was being treated unfairly.

They are both true statements.

What David Jess did, was to imply a condition (we'll call it "resolved fan-discontent") which has led to vastly increased giving to the Athletic Department.  It is a relationship which the Athletic Department denies.  But Daivid Jesse ran with it anyway.  So the question becomes, "Mr. Jesse, what evidence is there that the discontent of "many fans" has anything to do with your story about Athletic Department fundraising?" 

Phil.engin2011

August 3rd, 2011 at 10:22 AM ^

"And "many fans" were discontented with the Free Press and thought Rodriguez was being treated unfairly," in the post you replied to, does not say that "many fans blame the FP for its report on RR," which you insinuated. It is possible to think Rodriguez was treated unfairly, with one instance being FP's report on UM. So it does not seem significant liberties were taken.

Geaux_Blue

August 3rd, 2011 at 8:58 AM ^

I didn't read this but as soon as you noted "its never-ever ending personal vendetta against Rich Rodriguez," I gave it instant credibility. When it comes to never-ending vendettas, you sir are an expert.

profitgoblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 10:10 AM ^

Geaux, I hear what you're saying.  However, I still believe that people need to be reminded about how the Free Press sucks.  I can look past the precise wording of a post as long as the premise is debunking or discrediting the Free Presss.

 

blueblueblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 10:16 AM ^

Um, the NCAA bunked/credited the Free Press, both here and generalized to WVA. Players were practicing too much under RR's coaching staff. It's beside the point whether it, at one time, was normal practice at most football programs. Their story on too much practice at Michigan under RR, to a larger or smaller extent, was found to be credible. This continuing holy war against the Free Press is just masturbatory. It is disillusionment run amuk. 

Geaux_Blue

August 3rd, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^

and can negative sentiment from those who dislike RR be tied to that? 

i say yes.

while the Freep has been proven to be a sensationalist messenger, the fact anything did come out of the NCAA is not discredited or removed simply because the original story accused of more. the failure is tying those who dislike RR because of violations to the Freep. 

profitgoblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 10:35 AM ^

You can believe what you wish.  The Free Press had and appears to continue to have a chip on their shoulders as it relates to Michigan football and I, for one, will not put up with it.  They have a responsibility for providing fair and balanced reporting (except in the Editorials section) and they lost all credibility when they ran that so-called 8-part expose that they hyped for weeks and that turned out being almost entirely worthless.  Maybe "practicegate" had some truth to it and they revealed it, but the rest of the thousands of words were worthless and people paid good, hard-earned money to unknowingly support it.

But you feel free to go on ahead and excuse their misconduct and support them to whatever extent you please.

Geaux_Blue

August 3rd, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^

as of now, nobody believes RR what Section 1 is cooking. RR received his positive swing back when it became exposed that the only problem was stretching. What Section 1 fails to note is many people are angered regarding RR not because of the implied violations but the real sanctions. Like him or not, RR was commanding the process that led to NCAA violations. They were not as sensationalized as reported but people have a right to be pissed by the violations and that is completely separate from the Freep investigation.

Also: he fails to debunk or discredit the Free Press.

BigRedWolverine

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:00 AM ^

I wouldn't be surprised if donations did in fact incease as a result of the hoke hiring. i thought it was obvious that many almuni and boosters didnt like rich rod.  dk y u bothered to write this.

Geaux_Blue

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:01 AM ^

WHY DO YOU POST THESE RANTS WHEN NOBODY CARES? Make your own blog - if there's an audience for this crap, you'll have a readership. This is not your daily personal soapbox against shadowy press conspiracies. I'm about to go buy a freep simply bc it'd make you cry a single sobering tear like a piece of litter rolling by.

ijohnb

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:03 AM ^

Longtime mgoblogger who rarely "up" or "down" points anybody, but I still want to know how to do it.  Since the upgrades to the site and the new "normal" "funny" "informative" tags, I can't figure out how to point anybody but the OP.  How is it done now?

Geaux_Blue

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:04 AM ^

The alternative paragraph sucks. The alternative journalist should be ashamed and take some alternative journalism and/or alternative English courses. Alternatively.

Kaminski16

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:07 AM ^

Let it go, man. Even if all of the increases are not a direct result of the RR to Hoke transition (and I agree with you that they probably are not), one can't deny the new energy he's brought to the program, which naturally will excite people. Yes, the Freep is garbage. Yes, they seemed to be out to get RR, but there comes a time when enough is enough and we have to move on. I like/liked RR, his schemes, his personality, everything, but it didn't work out. Best of luck to the guy. 

CRex

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:09 AM ^

I'm pretty sure many fans weren't buying seats because they were unhappy with the direction of the program.  I know I donated solely to LSA in 2010 due to my feelings on the football program.  In other cases donations are up due to economic factors.  What is your point?  People withheld money for a variety of reasons and the article touches two of those reasons. 

Yes the author weights one more than the other, but get over it.

justingoblue

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:53 AM ^

You bring up an interesting point. Maybe this article would have been more effective if it had compared donations from other parts of the university. Are LSA/Ross/Mott donations up more than 14% or less? Less would indicate that maybe Hoke has something to do with the increase, but if the other departments (or schools or hospital) are above or near 14% then it probably means nothing about the coaching change.

I will say that I believe it's the latter. I don't think it's worth discussing daily, but it does seem to be clear that the Freep isn't a RR loving organization, and would use the other data if it helped bolster the article.

mgokev

August 3rd, 2011 at 9:11 AM ^

Even if it's NOT the case, so what if income and donations are up because we fired Rodriguez and hired Hoke? So what if that is the ONLY reason?  You're upset that we replaced a coach where after three seasons I can count the number of conference wins he had on one hand and then hired someone that has excited the fanbase and provided more funding to the student athletes by way of facilities, etc?

Rodriguez is gone, get over it already!