Hockey pet peeve: "when a teammate tips a puck in on you, which is exactly how my first collegiate goal against happened. Thanks, Copper."
|20 hours 23 min ago||Depends||
On who you ask:
FWIW, Sporcle considers it a country, so it's a country.
|23 hours 28 min ago||I always come back to this quote||
Because it's one of my favorites and seems to apply all the damn time, but Churchill said that "when you are winning a war, almost everything that happens can be claimed to be right and wise."
|1 day 20 min ago||I don't think it was ever personal||
I always got the feeling it was just a very in-depth football-related disagreement. It was X's and O's and footbal strategy. And everyone was pissed off anyway because of the excessive DERP on the field, so it came off as personal.
|1 day 43 min ago||Plus||
It's the only* way to learn my real name!
*not counting a rudimentary Google search.
|1 day 1 hour ago||Depends||
When the thing that people believe is flat-out wrong, pointing out their errors is not just okay, it's often the right thing to do. If they believe the Earth is flat, or that the Earth is 6,000 years old and humans rode dinosaurs to work, or that organic foods contain more nutrients, saying "you're wrong" is good. We don't have the need to tolerate incorrect "beliefs" just because people firmly believe them.
Besides, in any setting, challenging people on what they believe (including, and possibly especially, through satire) is an appropriate exercise.
|1 day 1 hour ago||Every generation feels that way||
Before it was the whiny millenials, it was the free-loving hippies, or the beatniks, or the flappers, or any number of other perceived cultural shifts away from "traditional hard-working values" and towards namby-pamby weakness.
Some current trends seem ridiculous (often because they are), but society itself keeps plugging along.
|1 day 1 hour ago||They won't win||
If the question is "does the lawsuit have a chance to succeed on the merits," the answer is no. This doesn't meet all of the elements of any of the causes of action they claim.
So whether it's a money grab, a principled stand by the plaintiff, or a thing he did because he was bored, the plaintiff won't 'win.'
|1 day 1 hour ago||In summary||
Mocking disabled people is bad.
Filing baseless lawsuits that have no prayer of succeeding in court is also bad.
|1 day 1 hour ago||Not to go all Godwin...||
but that was the Germans' theory in WWII. Americans were soft, privileged, effete wimps who would never stand up to the battle-hardened Germans.
|1 day 19 hours ago||FWIW||
Brian Kelly insists that they're sticking with a 3-4 base despite bringing in Brian VanGorder. I don't think they want to waste Day at NT in a 3-4 (he's the most dynamic and disruptive linemen they have), but they don't have another pure nose on the roster (Jarron Jones is 6'6").
|1 day 19 hours ago||They did.||
Louis Nix III, Stephon Tuitt, and 3-4 OLB (so quasi-DL) Prince Shembo. They also lost both inside linebackers (who weren't that good to begin with). The front seven is Sheldon Day, Jaylon Smith, and ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
|1 day 20 hours ago||Hey Ace||
What about Kurtis Drummond?
|1 day 22 hours ago||So you're saying||
We should be hitting players in the penis.
|2 days 2 hours ago||Yeah||
That's not remotely the same.
And Ohio State sold 30,000 student tickets to Michigan's 13,000.
So, in conclusion, not remotely the same.
|2 days 4 hours ago||At this point||
It isn't even smoke. It's, like, they pay players and everyone knows it. I don't know what that means for the metaphor.
|2 days 18 hours ago||But||
Were the fireworks approved?
|2 days 18 hours ago||Also||
I found a typo. I demand a refund.
|2 days 23 hours ago||But...||
But we're still sending JMFR on an A-Gap blitz, right?
|3 days 39 min ago||Why?||
They were really, really f***ing good.
|4 days 18 hours ago||Nah||
During the offseason, MGoBlog is sort of a cross between a sports blog and Angie's List. With a dash of "What Are You Drinking?"
|5 days 14 hours ago||Funny you should mention that||
He's now been banned, but not for this comment. A review of his comment history should give you a good idea why.
|5 days 19 hours ago||Luck||
As a way to describe things that happened or didn't happen? Sure, luck exists. As a causal force or predictive indicator? No, very much not.
|5 days 19 hours ago||That's the worst law ever.||
By a lot.
|6 days 18 hours ago||Yeah||
You're my favorite too.
|6 days 18 hours ago||My comment wasn't directed to Shaw's point||
It was directed to Mike and Mike's point. People exclaim a fundamental difference between athletes getting paid and anyone else (GAs, interns, etc.) getting paid, and I don't see it.
|6 days 19 hours ago||Exactly||
I find it hard to reconcile the NCAA's twin arguments that (a) they give these athletes lots of compensation, including a free education, room and board, food, and Bill Walton, and yet (b) compensating athletes would somehow undercut the very fabric of the NCAA.
|6 days 19 hours ago||Even so||
There are lots of people who have jobs while going to school. Does a student who works in the Admissions Office in the afternoons care less about studying because her "job" is at the Admissions Office?
And as far as whether "the education is actually worth more in the long run than what payment would most likely be," why does that matter? This isn't an either/or proposition. Can't they get that education AND get paid for their likenesses?
|1 week 1 day ago||No way||
Two VERY different systems of punishment, with different standards of proof, rules of evidence, etc. No one suspended for steroids is ever convicted of anything. No one suspended for bumping an official or attempting to injure an opponent is ever convicted of anything. Tropp and Conboy never saw a courtroom.
In this case, there are witnesses to Ray Rice punching a woman in the face. There is video of him DRAGGING an unconscious woman out of an elevator. Conviction or no, you suspend his ass for WAY longer than two games.
|1 week 2 days ago||What I know:||
Run the blade flat-wise on your skin, NOT long-edge-wise on your skin. I'll never make THAT mistake a sixth time...
|1 week 2 days ago||Indeed||
And there are no other variables...
|1 week 2 days ago||You divided by zero.||
You divided by zero.
|1 week 2 days ago||MIKE JONES||
|1 week 3 days ago||More Seven Nation Army||
More Seven Nation Army
|1 week 3 days ago||Indeed.||
It shall be done, possibly in a follow-up/recap edition.
|1 week 3 days ago||I always appreciated you analyses...||
...but I appreciate it even MORE this week.
|2 weeks 20 hours ago||Yeah||
And they say Penn State fans are conspiratorial...
|2 weeks 22 hours ago||The problem is||
Which one? Odds are, if you took one of Kalis, Bosch, and Magnuson, you'd have a heck of a player in there. But it'd be gambling when you only have five players and don't get the luxury of boom-or-bust prospects.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Your complain has been noted||
And forwarded to the office of complaints in the complaint division.
(Seth. That's Seth.)
|2 weeks 3 days ago||But you know what IS a good one?||
|2 weeks 3 days ago||When I say "no prayer"||
I'm not saying this is a David vs. Goliath case where the little guy faces a great uphill struggle despite being buoyed by the forces of good. I'm saying this is the case where the plaintiff is just legally wrong. Really, really wrong. The State Constitution says so. They have NO case. None.
The power the regents have to do business in this manner is protected by a document that requires a statewide vote of the electorate to change. No lawsuit can change it unless the Supreme Court has changed its mind on a pretty easy question of interpretation in the last decade.
Taking on the issue is fine. But the suit is frivolous as hell.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||That reminds me||
Of one of my all-time favorite filings:
|2 weeks 3 days ago||For future reference||
Was it because we talked about Kurtis Drummond too much? Or because we didn't talk about Kurtis Drummond enough?
|2 weeks 3 days ago||FWIW||
This is pretty standard for a first offense. For those (like myself) who don't believe his punishment should be harsher, or less harsh, because he plays football, this seems about right.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||I pray thee||
In the name of all that is holy, read this. The exemptions outlined in the law are irrelevant, because article 8, section 4 of the 1963 Constitution trumps it. They are CONSTITUTIONALLY permitted to regularly conduct business in informal meetings behind closed doors, so long as they properly hold any formal meetings. It is 100% within their power to go behind closed doors, decide how to vote, and then go into a formal meeting to vote. Don't like it? Blame the 1963 ConCon.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||...||
they aren't just allowed to discuss some matters in informal sessions they are allowed to discuss all matters in informal sessions as long as they do the voting in formal sessions so they are not violating the law because they are not subject to that law because the state constitution says they aren't subject to that law and the michigan supreme court says they aren't subject to that law and you don't get to file a suit against someone who isn't violating the law you claim they are violating and oh god my brain just fell out and is running away and yep it just stole my car and now I am brainless and without a ride
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Okay, I'm only saying this one last time||
Because my forehead is getting sore, and the desk is starting to crack:
YOU DON'T GET TO SUE SOMEONE FOR DOING SOMETHING THAT IS WITHIN THEIR LEGAL RIGHTS BUT IS "BAD PRACTICE" OR IS "NOT A GOOD IDEA." THE THING THE REGENTS ARE DOING IS LEGAL. THE STATE SUPREME COURT SAYS SO. THE STATE CONSTITUTION SAYS SO. I SAY SO. THE FREE PRESS CAN WRITE A THOUSAND OP-EDS BEMOANING THE SECRECY AND LACK OF TRANSPARENCY, AND THAT'S FINE AND WELL AND PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA. BUT YOU CAN. NOT. SUE. THEM. FOR. THIS.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Fair point||
But the decision was less than a decade ago, and this is basically the same question they just answered. And the state constitution is pretty darned clear on the issue: the universities and the legislature are basically co-equals. The legislature can't impose OMA restrictions on the way Universities operate.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Fine||
But you don't get to sue for a violation of the SPIRIT of a law, especially when it is a law that the defendant is constitutionally exempted. That's all I'm saying. The lawsuit lacks in any merit, and will not survive a preliminary motion to dismiss.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||They can do everything privately||
A 2005 cout decision involving Oakland U clarified that the constitutional autonomy that allowed public universities to conduct searches in private applied to ALL university business. They are exempt from the OMA in that regard for all issues. http://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/court-of-appeals-unpublished/2005/20050830-c252391-43-252391-opn.html
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Actually, I misspoke||
The legislature can't even change this issue. This is one that is woven into the very fabric of the state constitution. Michigan public universities enjoy constitutional autonomy, which means that the legislature can't tell them shit. The OMA barely applies to UofM.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Okay, then tell me this||
You're a lawyer. Someone walks into your office and says "we want to sue some guys to make them stop doing something we think is bad. It isn't illegal, necessarily, but it's still bad. So we want to file a lawsuit claiming they are violating a law they aren't violating in the hopes that it will get them to change."
How are you, as an officer of the court, going to react? Are you going to say, "sure, the lawsuit has no merit, but we should file it anyway," or say, "gee, I agree that the thing is bad, but I am ethically bound to not file a claim I believe to be without merit"?
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Totally agree||
I have no problem with the sentiment. And if a citizen watchdog group file the same action, I'd be more sympathetic (while still probably pointing out it was doomed beyond doomed). But when the Freep does something like this, I can't generate much more than a loud farting noise in their direction.
I suppose I never really answered your question though; yes, the state Supreme Court can reverse its own ruling. But on questions of the interpretation of a specific statute, once they weigh in, that's pretty much the ballgame. They won't rule on the same issue again.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||It isn't a frivolous issue||
But it is very much a frivolous suit. For whatever you think of the way the Regents operate, they (and many, many other public institutions including the state legislature) operate under the rules as set forth in statute and as interpreted by the Supreme Court. The regents are, from the best I can tell, acting within the bounds of exiting law, even if they don't meet with the highest aspirations of those laws.
This is a political issue, not a legal one. The legislature can change the law if it wants, but that's the only recourse. You can't sue someone for violating the law as you wish it was. That's the definition of frivolous.
As for raising attention to the issue, they're the goddamn Detroit Free Press. They have a giant (though admittedly shrinking) platform to raise the issue. The lawsuit is a cheap attempt to try to grab clicks.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||It's a little of both||
It's a loophole in the law a the law was interpreted by the Michigan Supreme Court. That's why this pisses me off; the Freep is suing Michigan even though they are complying with the law because they (the Freep) wish the law was different. That makes it, as I mentioned earlier, shit. Their beef with this aspect of the law should be with the legislature and the drafters of the latest version of the Constitution. Not the regents.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||To be clear||
I have no opinion about whether the Regents should be more transparent. What I'm saying is that regardless of whether they are obeying the SPIRIT of the law, they aren't breaking the LAW of the law. So the lawsuit is shit.
The state legislature and the state constitution decide the scope of "accountability" public bodies need to adhere to. And generally speaking, accountability for elected officials comes in the form of, like, ELECTIONS. So when entities file frivolous lawsuits that have no hope of success in the name of trying to make a point, that pisses me off.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||So...||
You know what they call it when someone takes advantage of legal loopholes? They call it "acting within the law."
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Which is all well and good...||
...except that the actual suit they filed has absolutely no prayer whatsoever.
|2 weeks 5 days ago||A friend 'ruined' the '12 Nebraska game for me||
I very much appreciated it.
/Goodnight, sweet prince.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||Well||
Seeing as two of their touchdown drives were 14 and 20 yards, and their final touchdown drive was made of hail marys and unicorn farts, it doesn't seem that terrible to me, especially when the defense scored a touchdown of their own.
|3 weeks 54 min ago||Exactly||
You have to look WAY deeper than total rushing yards. Way, way deeper. Hell, by this guy's logic, total number of kneel-downs should be a key focus.
|3 weeks 1 hour ago||FWIW||
Since 2008, the average rush defense rank of the Big Ten champ in terms of yards per carry was 33rd. The average offensive yards per carry rank was 31st.
|3 weeks 1 hour ago||In ESPN's defense||
This... uh... isn't about Lebron? So it has THAT going for it?
|3 weeks 5 hours ago||You're fun.||
|3 weeks 14 hours ago||Send me your number||
I'll read it to you over the phone.
For $.99 per minute I'll read it in a seductive voice.
For $1.99 per minute I'll read it as Yoda or Cookie Monster
|3 weeks 14 hours ago||It's the result||
Of trying to keep the file from reaching incomprehensible size. The print version is nice and crisp.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I'm not unsympathetic||
But your argument is that there was any decent offensive coordinator who would have taken that 11-2 team and won three games? Even knowing that the 11 win team was the first year of a transition from a spread-to-run/read-option offense to a west coast pro-style offense?
I mean, holy freeking balls, dude, if we're just going to compare things Dave Brandon did with the worst hypothetical post-nuclear moonscape doomsday interpretation of events that may have occured in the most twisted, hellish alternate universe you can draw up, then sure, Brandon has been swell.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Jeebus||
Arbitrary dreck is arbitrary.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I like the approach||
"Okay, your scholarship will be good for TWO lifetimes. Is that good enough, O'Bannon? Fine, how about THREE lifetimes?"
|3 weeks 1 day ago||FWIW||
If you give him credit for Mattison, you have to give him credit for Al Borgess as well.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||True||
Several local personalities engage in great debate on this topic in a future (and presumably to-be-published-at-some-point) installment of Draftageddon. Someone tries to make the case that Michael Rose's insertion into the lineup was the turning point, using the stats you cited above.
My response was that they did so against the #6, #7, #8, and #11 rushing offenses in terms of YPC, and then a Georgia team that was basically an ASPCA commercial by then. Michigan was a train wreck, and MSU actually had a pretty decent day on the ground (Langford went for a season-high 151 yards and 3 tds on 32 carries) that was obscured by random statisical stuffs.
They were BETTER, but I don't think I'd say they turned a corner.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I think he did sack Gardner||
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I think I stared at the list too long||
Because in the light of day, I should really have Iowa ahead of Penn State. Penn State will be somewhat overmatched in the interior, but I do like their linebackers (perhaps more than many people).
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Indeed||
Their run defense is predicated on that flawless quarters defense that leaves their linebackers free to CHHHHYYYYAAAAAARRRGGGEEEEE and almost always has a safety available in run support. They'll be just fine.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||My take:||
If Nuss coaches from the sidelines and the offense works, that's good.
If Nuss coaches from the sidelines and the offense doesn't work, that's bad.
If Nuss coaches from the booth and the offense works, that's good.
If Nuss coaches from the booth and the offense doesn't work, that's bad.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||In the words of Winston Churchill||
When you are winning a war, almost everything that happens can be claimed to be right and wise.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Be careful with ground beef||
Because ground beef is basically all surface area, cooking it rare is very risky.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Agreed||
Domestic violence is a complex, convoluted issue. I don't feel comfortable judging people in those situations.
Now, pick-up games at a basketball court? Oh I'll judge the SHIT out of that.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||But it's not just intent||
We punish result all the time. Drive drunk, smash into a telephone pole? You're going to jail. Drive drunk, kill a pedestrian? You're going to jail for longer.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Legally speaking||
Man or woman, you can use the force necessary to prevent physical injury to yourself or others. The issue is that, generally speaking, given the size and strength disparity between the average man and the average woman, the punch-in-the-face level of force is rarely necessary for self defense.
If Ronda Rousey starts hitting you, you're more than welcome to try to punch her to protect yourself. Though I'd suggest running like a mofo.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||One thing||
The phrase "some kids are naturally hard workers or leaders." To imply that working hard and "leading" are the same thing is ridiculous. The purported 'leadership' knock on Gardner is that he's not vocal enough. No one has ever suggested he doesn't work hard enough.
If you want my educated guess, the coaches are trying to get him to be more vocal, so they've been suggesting he needs to lead more. It doesn't change the fact that the whole "quarterback controversy" thing is a hilarious facade, but it is what it is.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||Indeed||
I intended to go deeper into the appellate stuff, but I was already at like 2200 words and I wanted sleepy. You're right, though. On appeal, everything is up in the air... which will hopefully provide fodder for another article. Summer content ain't easy.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||So||
If a B-Schooler takes a paid internship between his junior an senior year, his motivation suddenly changes and he is not the same student as a senior? Because that's the NCAA's argument.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||Correct||
Just because the NCAA rules vanish doesn't mean individual schools or conferences can't have rules. And most still would to some extent, and they would probably look similar to current rules in many respects. Which is part of the reason the NCAA's OMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN is overblown.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||To be clear||
It was just an example. Lots of engineers very much enjoy engineering school (which is why I got out of there: I DIDN'T love it, so I realized I didn't really belong). But I'd venture a guess that every single person in engineering, just like every other student in every other major, has an eye on the career aspects associated with a degree, including future salary.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||True story||
My drive from work to my son's day care goes right by the stadium. The police kept closing intersections and redirecting traffic, so I ended up doing a full lap of the stadium. I was anti-evacuated.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||True...||
But ND's LB corp is not deep, and Sykes looked somewhat promising. Not a huge hit this year, but not something they will shrug off as nothing.
|4 weeks 2 days ago||This should be OT||
After all, this isn't relevant to Michigan anym...
|4 weeks 5 days ago||Can anyone tell||
what kind of footwear they are all wearing?
|5 weeks 1 day ago||Nice speech||
You know who ELSE gave nice speeches?
|5 weeks 1 day ago||It isn't larceny||
What you're describing (the taking of another's property with the intent to permanently deprive them of it) is larceny. IP theft isn't larceny. However, "stealing" and "theft" are colloquial terms meaning "the generic term for all crimes in which a person intentionally and fraudulently takes personal property of another without permission or consent and with the intent to convert it to the taker's use." It isn't captured as stealing under most older criminal anti-theft statutes, but is nevertheless very much 'stealing.'
As an example, theft of trade secrets is a federal crime (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1831).
|5 weeks 1 day ago||Obligatory|
|5 weeks 1 day ago||This case||
Is the best possible example of how a party can have the better legal argument, and can win the case, and yet still be a flaming bag of turd.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||Ah||
Gotcha. Yeah, they'll do that.
I just saw it more as an issue where come Congressmen could jumpt out front and say "HEY LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME SPORTS FOOTBALL THESE ARE INTERESTING THINGS LOOK AT ME."
|5 weeks 1 day ago||How would they get their hand on the money?||
They already have the power to tax this stuff and largely don't. Besides, we're talking about large sums of money in regular person terms, but to the federal government a couple of hundred million dollars is pocket change.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Interesting||
Any feedback on WeatherGard?
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Just dropped a down payment||
On some WeatherGard windows. I'll keep you posted.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||No||
|5 weeks 4 days ago||I don't know||
But on the bright side, Draftstreet paid for express shipping, so you'll get it within a couple of days of when it rolls off the presses.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||Exactly||
We know there are very fast people on the team. When compared to those very fast people, Funchess was the fastest. Regardless of the number, we know that Funchess is very fast.
This is good.
|6 weeks 1 day ago||Yes...||
But the trademark isn't.
|6 weeks 1 day ago||Oh REALLY?|
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Safety||
has a steeper learning curve. It's a tough place to throw a true freshman, especially one who didn't enroll early.
Yes, even one like Peppers.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Out of curiosity||
All for it which way? For using the name, or getting rid of it?
|6 weeks 2 days ago||[pun warning...]||
Speaking of 'Black and White,' this isn't really a gray area. "Braves" or "Chiefs" are in a grey area; you can argue for the relative merits of offensiveness vs. honoring a heritage.
"Redskins" isn't in that category.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Uh...||
Moving west to look for gold has absolutely nothing to do with skin color or cultural background. It's a thing that people did.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||I think it's more||
about the balance between the potentially offensive nature and the nature of the name itself.
Does "Vikings" potentially cast aspersions on the nordic peoples as being warlike? Eh, maybe. But it is a historically accurate name, and contains generally neutral connotations. Fighting Irish SOUNDS potentially bad, but if you read the generally accepted histories of the name (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notre_Dame_Fighting_Irish#Moniker), it doesn't sound terribly demeaning.
This isn't like when they named the coffee chain in the Lansing area "Beaners" a while back, but changed it to Biggby a couple of years ago because... well, Beaners is a bad thing to name something. "Redskins" was a slur when they picked it, it's a slur today, and it doesn't contain connotations other than (a) being a team name they've used for a while, and (b) being a slur.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||***||
[/insert WhyDontYouSitThisOneOutChamp dot jpg]
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Okay||
There is a subjective component to this, sure. But the USPTO looks at the relatively objective interpretation of the mark, and HOLY BALLS THEIR NAME IS THE GODDAMN REDSKINS.
If your argument is REALLY that I'm a bigot for referring to people who participated in the gold rush as "49ers," I'm willing to take my chances in the court of public opinion.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Yes||
Calling people "Patriots" and "49ers" is exactly the same as calling them "Redskins."
|6 weeks 3 days ago||This is the correct order||
This is the correct order
|6 weeks 3 days ago||The way it used to be||
It used to always be during a Michigan possession, because the fans don't need to be "involved" with the noisemaking and whatnot. A big play would often break up the wave.
|6 weeks 3 days ago||General principles||
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Leadership||
Leadership is a wholly case-specific thing. It is a real thing, and an important one.
But when people outside a group talk about leadership (or a lack of leadership), it tends to be in the same vein as "momentum," "desire," and "will to win": it's a post hoc rationalization. It is whatever a team is doing or not doing while winning, or doing or not doing while losing. When Bill Parcells was winning, it was because he was a disciplinarian. When he was losing it was because he was a taskmaster.
A team that wins has good leadership because teams that win have good leadership. Teams that lose didn't want it bad enough because teams that want it bad enough find a way to win.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Well, duh.||
|6 weeks 6 days ago||True||
I just find it amusing that they took the effort to contest the claim that they are a cartel, yet they couldn't (or at least didn't) find an expert who hadn't gone on the record in such a fashion.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Yep||
That's one of the proposals. I doubt we're going to see Judge Wilken drop the banhammer on the entire NCAA structure. But we'll see something, and the door will be open to REAL reform.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Eh||
To an extent I'm in favor of the plaintiff, but more to the point, I think they "win" this case to some extent.
The remedy is probably a loosening of the NCAA's rules regarding licensing, because that's the main issue in the case. If I had to guess,it'll result in players being able to be paid for their own likeness, and/or preventing the NCAA from requiring everyone to sign over their rights to the NCAA as a matter of course.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Indeed||
I'm personally skeptical of their argument, but it almost seems like a first impression kind of thing given the distinct nature of the claims.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Yes and no||
You're right that the way I phrased it wasn't great. It was among the last bits I added, and I wanted to go to bed, so I didn't flesh it out.
The NCAA's theory is that the existence of the players is basically irrelevant. Their TV expert testified yesterday that they aren't purchasing the rights to record and disseminate the event because of the players involved. The NIL rights themselves have, in his words, "no value." Their argument is that they DON'T acquire the NIL rights of the players, but instead the obtain ONLY the exclusive right to place cameras. This is in direct conflict with the language of the TV contracts that were introduced yesterday; the Fox/Big 12 contract explicitly guarantees the granting of the NIL rights of all participants, and others contain an indemnity for NIL claims against the broadcaster.
Whether athletes HAVE those rights is a separate (and very tricky) argument, and when tied into the anti-trust nature of the "voluntary participation" angle, it becomes a very sticky wicket.
|7 weeks 21 hours ago||...||
"Who's your favorite Civil War hero?"
"Joey Harrington, sir."
|7 weeks 1 day ago||I like his idea, actually.||
It sounds like more fun than the way we did it. Less informative, of course... but more fun.
|7 weeks 1 day ago||How about this||
They work in an incredibly dangerous industry for long hours which has a monopoly, and which fixes wages and benefits below market value.
Even if, for SOME people, it is a good deal, that doesn't exempt the ENTIRE INDUSTRY from the kind of labor laws that affect everyone else. It's like saying "we hire really poor people, so if we only pay them five dollars an hour that's more than they would get otherwise, and they can always quit, so the minimum wage crap is a cop-out."
|7 weeks 1 day ago||Who?||
Happy Easter !!
|7 weeks 3 days ago||FWIW||
This isn't the O'Bannon suit. It's the related Keller suit.
The O'Bannon trial started today.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||True||
But at the same time, you're less likely to give a guy brain damage from a punch to the face than you are from repeated kicks to an unconscious guy's head.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||As if there's a debate...|
|8 weeks 21 hours ago||The fact||
that people continue to insist that Drake Johnson was #2 on the actual depth chart last year is interesting to me.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||I'm guessing||
His concern is more that he'll end up somewhere in the Midwest that could hurt Michigan. Like Purdue.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||You'll have to wait...||
...but there is GREAT debate about who the best remaining safeties are. And it largely revolves around those two names.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Yep||
We are beyond this point in the actual drafting process. And as you may have guessed, Mr. Longa IS one of those first 8 LBs taken. And you can probably guess who takes him.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||We've gotten to 8 LBs off the board||
So I'm curious who your undervalued LB is.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||yes||
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Indeed||
Things are amazing. And terrible. And terribly amazing.
READ WHY INSIDE!!!!!
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Probably both||
But also, last year they did a joint football and basketball/hockey Kickstarter, so it took in a lot more money because it was selling two products.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||For the price of a burrito||
You can watch me eat a burrito.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Thanks folks||
You's good people.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Did you not read the part||
Where things are HUGE???
|8 weeks 3 days ago||***DISCLAIMER***||
Neither MGoBlog nor HTTV can make football season arrive faster. We apologize for misleading you.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Being diplomatic||
It is unlikely that DJ will end up at the top of the depth chart at tailback. Nothing against the kid, but from my understanding of the depth chart and the assorted comings-and-goings, it is unlikely.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Well||
Not with our respective entourages in tow.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Also||
The headquarters is getting that long-awaited (and frankly much-needed) third hot tub.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Well||
That sounds like a pretty unethical quid pro quo.
So we are agreed. A point for every dollar raised.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Yep||
"Well, we got above the $30k mark, but then a couple of negative-donation plays put us back below the goal."
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Odds are||
We were in a nearby cell.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Wise advice...||
|9 weeks 54 min ago||In that case||
They'd better stop recruiting high schoolers. Those types tend to do stupid shit ALL THE TIME without warning.
|9 weeks 15 hours ago||Not if she (Dileo) overheard it||
If so, it's an Admission by a Party Opponent, and her (Dileo's) testimony of what she heard is therefore admissible.
|9 weeks 18 hours ago||This was discussed internally||
But there ARE no "running backs" in this draft. Technically, you just draft 6 "skill players." Which makes sense, because it isn't like I can sit on the pool of running backs, because more will be selected by people who already have running backs between now and the end of the draft.
Good catch though.
|9 weeks 20 hours ago||Thing about the 4-team draft||
There are only four QB slots, so when there are two equally-decent QBs left and two spots left, the two remainind QB-less teams will kinda stare at each other for a while, and just grab whichever one is left.
Unless something CRAZY happens.
(Something crazy happens).
|9 weeks 22 hours ago||Done||
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I like your reasons||
My reason was that SOMEONE has to be Skyler, and I don't like Nebraska very much.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I understand||
And the episode was fine. It was a bottle episode, and a perfectly decent one. It just wasn't what I (or probably most fans) want with a series like that. I liked the Gus backstory episode because it combined some force-fed character development with just enough action and plot advancement to make it interesting. Not so much with Fly.
Just a personal preference, I guess, but one shared by most BB fans: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0903747
|9 weeks 1 day ago||True||
I did like that it pointed out that this was largely a workplace drama as much as anything else. But you don't need to take an entire episode to do that. Let SOMETHING else happen.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I mean||
You do know you're replying to Magnus, who just said the traffic to his blog has ebbed a bit, right?
|9 weeks 1 day ago||Those were good times :/||
I was there as well nukin' threads and Bolivianing trolls, though I didn't really post in the Mod Action Sticky (I didn't think many people would come back and be like, "what happened to my 'TEH OFFICIAL THROW AL BORGESS INTO A VOLCANO THREAD' thread?'). And I discussed the possibility of locking things down with Brian after the game, but we doubted it would do much good. I took his "let it burn" thing as being a sign that we shouldn't feel the need to try to put all the fires out, because at some point there just aren't enough buckets.
I don't have any insider info on the Purge. The Brian/WLA stuff predates my time, and I don't see most of his interactions with people. I'm just trying to level-set with people that we're human, and as such are subject to the same kind of stuff that makes any of us want to rage-quit things.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||You would be more subtle||
If ANY of your comments weren't about Ohio State.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||#Science||
|9 weeks 1 day ago||Go on...||
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I didn't even think about it||
But I just noticed that the pop culture reference I used to show my coolness is 17 YEARS OLD.
Damn. I might not be with it. Or hip.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||Agreed||
And here's the thing about banning long-time users: they can still rejoin with a new account like three minutes later. No one is prevented from participating on the board. I doubt we could do so even if we wanted. We ban personas. Often, those personas take on a life of their own, and nuking them almost frees the users from the conflicts that arise around that persona.
On the Union fisking thing, I don't feel bad, primarily for the same reason. Getting your username called out is different than being called out by actual real-world name. It was a little out of character (Brian doesn't engage with board posts very often), but I didn't think the responses were inappropriate content-wise.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||Well||
In that case, THAT one I don't feel bad about.
Brian's article on that subject (http://mgoblog.com/content/fisking-internet-capa) was basically just refuting the arguments of various posters. He didn't attach names (though he linked through to posts).
MINE was the article (http://mgoblog.com/content/bust-capa) that basically said that drawing other conclusions was stupid, but I wasn't even talking about peoples' opinions of what college sports SHOULD look like. I was simply analyzing the case from a purely legal standpoint, and posited that legally speaking, the decision was almost certainly correct.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I can assure you||
I saved a lot of my best zingers for HTTV, and I know the content provided by Space Coyote, MVictors, John U. Bacon, and others will be beyond what you will see on the blog and/or will have prettier pictures.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I beg a moment's indulgence||
I normally steer away from conversation of The Purge, but if I may offer my quasi-insider take and then I'll sit quietly in the corner for a while.
This is a labor of love for everyone who works on the blog, and I'm not talking from a financial sense. Sure, none of us do it because it brings us unimaginable riches. But I'm saying that we all genuinely love Michigan sports, and especially Michigan football. The malaise you speak of doesn't skip us. In fact, if there is a person who takes Michigan football bed-shitting more personally than Brian, I haven't met him.
So, when you combine your job with your passion, and one going to shit causing the other to suffer, it sucks, and forces people to redouble themselves into said shit. It's one thing to be able to turn the TV off after the Penn State game, throw the cat through the dog, and go drink your sorrows away and try to forget it. It's quite another to have to sigh and jump into tending a message board full of people who want blood, then to have to write about it, then to have to rewatch it a dozen times play by play. I'm only tangentially associated with it (this is obviously not my day job), and last year damn near killed me.
So in a situation like that, no one is immune from allowing long-standing personal/professional disagreements to boil into each other. I've had people call me a hack and undermine my (admittedly non-serious) work, and it pissed me off to no end despite it being just a hobby on the side. But I continue to write because it is a chance to share my fandom with others. There are many times I want to walk away (lord knows it would be easier), and sometimes the ability to cope with the difficulty of being a pissed-off fan and a professional discusser of fandom requires steps that take away from the things that cause one to bleed into the other. And so it is with the inter-personal conflicts that span tat gap between fandom with the management of the blog.
The bottom line is that Brian (and the rest of us) sometimes takes uncomfortable steps that make it possible to function as we need to. If that means banning people for personal reasons, sometimes that will happen. It doesn't make it great. But it is necessary for us as fan-bloggers.
So while I think The Purge went farther and became more personal than it needed to (which I've told Brian), you have to look at it from our side as well. People come here, at least to some extent, because it is a group of Michigan fans writing about Michigan, so you can't be surprised when they react the same way you'd expect any Michigan fan to react in the face of 27-for-27.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||WOO SPACE COYOTE ARTICLE||
wait... this is our fault, isn't it?
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I'll try not to take it personally||
That the first year I write content, NO ONE WANTS THE CONTENT.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Stick around.||
There are some serious stare-downs/games of chicken in later rounds. Things get interesting.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Eh||
I don't know of a fair system that accurately scores the contributions of, say, a left guard vs. a weakside linebacker vs. a tight end.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Yep||
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Four goals||
|9 weeks 4 days ago||Dave Brandon?||
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Nah||
Compare the offensive numbers over time. The NBA is actually in an offensive down period, with this year being a bit of a reversion toward the previous numbers.
|10 weeks 14 hours ago||It's a 4-team draft||
So a lot of it is based on position depth. Seth was right that defensive tackle isn't very deep, so Michael Bennett was more valuable than Joey Bosa. Still, I got him with the 14th pick, which is pretty damn high when we're talking 24 positions in a 14-team league.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||It's an industry term||
It's an industry term
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Yeah||
My board is rather light on Boilermakers.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||I like Hack||
But losing the guy who caught half of his passes is gonna hurt.
But trust me, we're a few rounds beyond this, and I feel confident that I am thoroughly dominating this hypothetical draft with amorphous goals and unclear evaluation criteria. By a LOT.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||...||
/rolls up shirt sleeve, revealing Ricky Stanzi tattoo.
Come at me, bro.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Which is reasonable||
Though I think I made a pretty good statistical case. Thing is, this is an opinion thing, and there's only so much mad you can bring about opinions.
Except for Seth's opinions in next week's edition.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Ah yes||
A Notre Dame fan joking about people not being able to hold onto defensive back recruits. That's totally reasonable.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||It's not your fault||
It's my fault. I suppose I should have led with a disclaimer like "I don't think Gardner is the best player remaining."
|10 weeks 3 days ago||So the pie is larger||
But so is the number of hands reaching into the pie.
So, I guess what I'm saying is USE PLATES AND FORKS YOU DIRTY BASTARDS.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||Yeah...||
because... and... wait, huh?
|10 weeks 4 days ago||But Rutgers got throttled in the Pinstripe Bowl||
Whereas in the BW3 bowl...
|10 weeks 4 days ago||It seems odd||
But Ace reached a similar conclusion when researching Maryland for HTTV. They probably don't suck.
Don't worry. Rutgers still sucks.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||As did||
Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Wisconsin, Penn State, Tennessee, Nebraska, and a couple of dozen other coaching staffs.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Knock it off||
No pedophilia jokes. This should be obvious.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Perhaps...||
but isn't that exactly what Al Borges would WANT you to think?
|11 weeks 3 hours ago||Congratutions, and good luck||
May these million MGoPoints guide your wife and child safely through today and this weekend.
|11 weeks 23 hours ago||Did you try||
|11 weeks 23 hours ago||I even make a cameo||
In which I wax poetic about the dichotomy between the student and the athlete, and whether this is truly a team game or a game of the self played out with many selves.
Or I make "Louis Nix was fat" jokes. I forget.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||"Joke"||
You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||You know what else is one-dimensional?||
A thermonuclear bomb. And yet people insist that they are a big deal.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||wait||
His left, or the hitter's left?
Cause it it's HIS left, that seems like a problem.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||Wait wait wait||
If we're not allowed to talk out of our asses anymore, than what will become of the internet? WHAT, I ASK???
|11 weeks 2 days ago||A couple of things||
"25 samples at one school is hardly a representative sample nor is it large enough to offset a ton of internal variation"
I think you mean it isn't a sufficiently sized sample, though it seems like a pretty good size number to me. But look at those P-numbers. There is a chance, mathematically, that these variations arose by chance... but that chance is like win-the-lotto-sized. Even the best-case scenario side of the 95% confidence interval is well within the "yeah, there's a problem" range.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||Well||
They used a control group who presumably did normal kid things when they were kids.
Besides, is the best argument in the "football causes irreversable brain damage" debate really "well, OTHER things might also cause irreversable brain damage"?
|11 weeks 2 days ago||It's good to question||
It's good to question studies, but it's really hard to look at these numbers:
And have your primary thought be, "well, maybe they just mathed wrong."
They used age-, sex-, and education-comparable individuals as a control group, and produced numbers that are (a) really, REALLY hard to explain away, and (b) are frightening as shit.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||That's the rub||
You really can't. How are two linemen supposed to avoid jarring blows to the head?
You can (and should) teach heads-up techniques that reduce the risks of neck injury and limit the incidence of spearing, but a perfect form tackle still jars the brain against the skull with great force.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||Yep||
And it ignores the HUGE gap between "football players aren't smart" and "football players have significantly different brain structure than non-football players."
The former is insulting and inaccurate, but the latter is just... yeah.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||My coach used to tell us||
There's a difference between "hurt" and "injured." If you're hurt, you can play. If you're injured, you should sit.
We're not talking about "hurt." We're talking about "injured" (and more specifically, "brain damaged")>
|11 weeks 2 days ago||Just my two cents||
But if you find yourself saying that Ohio State's back seven is better than Michigan's, I find myself having a hard time taking the rest of your analysis without a grain of salt..