Would You Swap Tradition For More Wins?
Slow day today on the board, so I'll throw out a goofy hypothetical:
Coach Harbaugh is known to respect tradition, but he's also known as an innovator. And one could argue that the biggest Michigan tradition of all is winning without cutting corners. Would you be OK if Harbaugh radically changed one narrow element of Michigan tradition if it provided a concrete boost in team performance? Assume for the sake of argument that the NCAA woud allow any changes.
Example: My understanding is that the origination of the winged helmet was so that the QB could spot their receivers more efficiently (as opposed to just a sea of brown leather helments). If Coach Harbaugh painted all receiver corps helmets neon orange--or hell, even just solid maize-- and because of it our passing game impoves to the point that we win one extra game per year versus what we would have normally, would you be OK with it? Or would the pitchforks come out even though the team had a markedly improved passing game?
This is Michigan. We can have both.
Next question.
“Those who surrender tradition (freedom) for success (security) will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
we don't have neon helmets? I agree it was a pretty bad post but it was not all how you describe it.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
they play the games: please get here post haste. Thank you.
Amen brother. The only reason I put this topic up here is to give people something to think/talk about. At least it's Michigan related.
FWIW, I think the argument of "we don't need to do it b/c we are already there without it" is a valid point. The counter-point to that would be, "the better you get, each incremental 1 game boost gets more significant---going from 7-5 to 8-4 doesn't do much for you, but going from 10-2 to 11-1 or 11-1 to 12-0 does."
Anyway, saying "I want innovation but without disrupting tradition" is the easy answer. There's no cost that the tradition-loving fan has to pay. I get that it's the first option, but that isn't the point of my hypothetical.
The question essentially is--"without getting into the realm of cheating, how much change to our traditional program would you tolerate to get a significant boost of us going to the playoffs or the NC each year"?
Maybe some guys don't want to play that game, but in light of a terribly slow day on the board, I figured that some folks on the board might want to debate the point constructively. EDIT: Apparently I was wrong.
We will get to 11 and w12 wins on a regular basis without changing a damn thing. The change we needed to make was made and he is now referred to as Coach. And when we get to 11-1 and 12-0, the 13th will follow.
More wins is our tradition.
We're just trying to get back to that.
No. College football is nothing without tradition. And the two aren't mutually exclusive. Alabama wins with ''boring'' uniforms.
True, but in the hypothetical I provided, if Alabama innovated their WR helmets, they'd win even more.
Are you asking if I'd rather have all maize helmets if it meant more wins?
Yes. The choice before you: receiving corps with all maize helmets and in exchange we get +1 win each season, or status quo and take our chances with what we've got.
You can't just change the receivers though, it's a uniform.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Thoughts about football while high on a Sunday afternoon in the off-season...
What if we filled the Big House with nacho cheese. Would you bring chips?
That does sound tasty. Bring 42 tons of that. A ton for every Big Ten championship as a nod to tradition!
I dunno! Let me pack another bowl and ponder on that for a while.
I'm thinking about a 10 bags of those would cover us all. Or better yet, 11--one for every National Championship as a nod to tradition!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
If we count the war of 1812 as an American military victory, then counting a victory against Yale in 1903 is fucking legitimate.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
OP: Save for one example, you asked a hopelessly murky and open-ended question.
A word on "tradition" and UMich football: For something with such an vague definition, it sure does constrain the thinking of many Michigan fans. I'd be OK with not hearing about it again.
The reason I gave the example is to provide precision. People can answer that specific hypothetical.
Would you be better if you didn't follow the post anymore?
Seriously, if you don't like the topic, just find another thread!
Did that start with Bo who used it as a rallying call? Was tradition something heralded as much as it is today prior to Bo?
Winning does create tradtition but we live in a world of "what have you done for me lately" and outside of a few seasons, Michigan hasn't done much at all in the winning department. Hopefully 2015 was first year of a long winning streak to last many years if not decades.
gets a pass on a technicality, as those are the same kind of berries as in "Crunch Berries". So +1 to you, too.
But these???!!!
And WTF is with this?????
it gets counted twice?
Cap'n Crunch, and all of his flavors, are abominations in the cereal world. They get soggy the moment you puor milk on them! Aweful things, those...
I'm a Cinnamon Toast Crunch and Fruit Loops guy...
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I mean, I guess think it another way--the reason Fritz Crisler used the winged helmets originally was as an innovation over what other teams were doing. That "tradition" was born out of a desire to win by innovating.
I can see why some would say not to mess with tradition if we are already good enough to win without availing ourselves of every possible legal advantage. But I don't think the other side of the argument is crazy.