Recent Comments

I don't see how this can inspire strong feelings either way.

So you're saying that Zeller and Oladipo have ruined their program?

Yeah, it's a real shame we won't get to read what surely would have been a thoughtful, well-researched look into the season, definitely not a slapdash, opportunisitic hack-job.

If you're going to keep the French thing going, "Jacques, the otter of elan" would have been nice.

You know, now that I think about it, I'm not sure that leprechaun is real either.

*Serve* (vocative)

It's a bit dubious to appoint yourself to a job that comes with a substantial cash bonus. In other words, it's a big deal if you suspect the decision is not in the interests of Wisconsin football but rather of Barry's bank account.

I don't really have a problem with it (not that I care at all), but it's conceivable that some would.

Aren't those elephant seals? Totally different proclivities, man.

Agreed. I don't see how more $ improves the "product" for the fan, or for the student-athlete. I don't see schools like Purdue or Minn forking over more cash for better coaches, though it's possible. Michigan already has just about everything money can buy. You know they won't lover ticket prices.

I hope they get the stipend/compensation thing for the players going. That's the only legitimate place for more money to go.

For a moment, I'll entertain the notion that academic considerations played a significant role in this move.

Now, will someone explain to me how exactly current institutions benefit from adding additional members, even one with large research budgets? Does the CIC or some other entity pool that money and share it out? I doubt that, but I'm not sure. And if that were true it would hurt schools like UM that bring in much more than the others. Don't individual researchers (read, faculty) have to propose projects and fight for funding anyway?

So how do UM, OSU, Wisconsin, etc. benefit, in terms of research or academics, from having this new association with Rutgers and Maryland? I don't think they're all sharing the wealth, but if someone knows, please fill me in. Perhaps it encourages cooperation, but there was nothing really hindering that before. When looking for collaborators, academics tend to go to their discipline, their professional associations - not to Big Ten media days.

If it's more general than that, I'll just say that prestige is not concrete, it's not something you can add up. Adding ND or Duke might conceivably add prestige that wasn't there, since those schools have a lot of cachet, but adding a merely respectable institution like Mayland can't do anything but water down the overal academic standing of the conference - as though anyone cares about the average ranking or endowment of the Big Ten institutions. Seriously, to whom and in what circustances could the academic standing of a conference matter? Students don't apply to conferences. Professors don't accept positions from conferences. And, unless I'm mistaken, research grants are not awarded to conferences - they're awarded to researchers.

Ultimately, as a fan I'm disgusted because I don't see that this adds anything of value to me (or to the players, for that matter). I hope we start paying them - that's the only legitimate use of all this extra cash.

Any tips for Oakland/Berkeley?

(also new to area)

Aren't coaches responsible for doing their own scouting? Or should they just rely on Rivals and Scout?

It would have been nice if our coaches had spotted Hankins's potential.

Someone get it in the Hall of Fame, NOW.

Notice also that they play in Ohio stadium. And the script Ohio (no state) is one of their major traditions. And their dumbass fans love doing that "O-H" ... "I-O" thing.

So they call themselves "Ohio" much of the time.

Who's "they"?

Yes, because one comparison was actually made and the other was not. If anyone had actually compared the scandal to the holocaust, I agree that would be absurd. What we are talking about is strategies for responding to disagreeable history, not the history itself.

co-signed.

-John Navarre

Brady Hoke, master of praeterition. He's just full of surprises.

Right. All the deep musings aside, a Mich degree is worth more than an OSU degree because people think that a Mich degree is worth more than an OSU degree.

More could be said, but that's the essence of it: there's a high degree of overlap between perception and reality when it comes to what an education is worth.

Yeah. The implosion at Penn State is kind of screwing us as far as the balance of power in the divisions goes. We deal with Neb and MSU, which is pretty strong right now. Ohio only really has to worry about Wisco.

Has anyone pointed out to OSU fans that they call themselves "Ohio" pretty often? They play in Ohio Stadium, they do the "script Ohio" and that goddamn "O-H-I-O" thing ... if anything, they should welcome it.

Damn. Now Hoke's relationship with the Harmon mafia will deterioriate. Hello chaos.

Spartan tears taste ...

you know the rest

Doesn't have to be Rose Bowl with new B1G-Pac12 scheduling arrangement.

Right on. Props to Gibbons to earning his scholly in a big way this year: he was a major asset to the team.

My point was not in favor of casual use of the word "nazi." My point was that you were being a prig, and we don't need you to tell us that the Nazis were evil.

Chitown is right. Even if Bacon's book is the God's honest truth, the Club is not obligated to hear him talk about it. Nor does deciding not to listen to him constitute a denial of the book's credibility. So all of Sec 1's bloviating about veritas is just empty rhetoric. 

Before they hired Kill there was talk of Hoke as a candidate for Minny - I think that's what the post is about, the "might-have-beens."

While some of the flak you're getting is deserved, I think you have a reasonable point: there is something recognizably human in the colossal, protracted, catastrophic "mistake" Paterno made. Perhaps he found it difficult to believe such terrrible things of a man he knew and trusted. He may have deceived himself into thinking that he had done his duty, that it was up to the University to go further, that he was too closely involved. He may have been afraid for himself and the institutions he had built up.

Point is, Paterno is and remains human, that is, his actions are intelligible, and I think most of us can imagine making mistakes of a similar type.

However, the particulars matter. In this case, the consequences are among the most heinous imaginable. And the power and respect Paterno enjoyed mean he could have easily averted much of it. Life is a "results-based charting service," so to speak. The punishment, in the form of lost admiration and respect if nothing else, have to match the gravity of the specifics of Paterno's offenses. I myself am not prepared, though, to say that Paterno is now or ever was a  monster. I know he has done and still has the capacity to do good, which makes what has transpired all the more tragic and baffling.

I too love a good rye grin: welcome change from your everyday wheat or corn grins. 

Thanks. But now you're resorting to demeaning me to imply that you've won the argument ... that that it was an argument that anyone was really going to win - we're all special, really.

Who you got in a beauty contest between Al and Winston?

Note that he's not a professor and not technically protected by tenure or anything like that. In my understanding, lecturers are hired on a class-by-class basis (at least I was when I was one).

If only "smug" were an option under the 'moderate' tab: then we could let you know how you're doing.

Yeah, that's bizzare. I don't know what the hell he means.

It's clear that Dantonio has whipped that entire program into foaming-at-the mouth hatred for Michigan ... which seems to be pretty effective. Perhaps it demands respect, but not admiration.

As reading that shows, their inferiority complex has a large dash of persecution complex to go with it.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!

That is all.

Well, according to your numbers Notre Dame draws less money than any existing member. If they join, I don't think it would hurt Michigan and other schools, since I'm pretty sure there's no research funding being shuffled around. ND is relatively small and therefore not drawing megabucks, but they have prestigious faculty, so I think the 'networking' aspect of things would be enhanced.

I guess my point is that I'm not sure the raw total of research $ is highly relevant to expansion.

I think Brian and others only dislike Hoke's talk because they fear it might translate into bad tactics (i.e., play-calling). If that's not true (as this post suggests), I doubt many people will have any problem with the way Hoke talks - the recruits sure like it.

You have a point, but there's no need to be an a$$hole about it.

But it does seem as though Brian is trying to prove or disprove the existence of something he invented, or inferred from Hoke's comments, personality, etc.

If Manball is anything, it's just Hoke's attitude, philosophy, strategy in broad terms. We shouldn't confuse that with game-time tactics, which are mostly under Borges' control anyway.

Way to fight the good fight, bro.

Well, we're talkng about football players who get a full-ride. Maybe they could add a minor, a second major, graduate credits, or just take classes they like, or just worry about playing and nailing co-eds. I don't see how anyone could object to having the option of a free year of college.

Well, he wasn't asked why whites defeated the natives. He was asked if he used a bow or gun for hunting deer. There was no reason to bring up the whole whites-indians conflict, which is a pretty ugly, painful part of the country's history - it's best to not to bring it up frivolously, as opposed to having a serious discussion about it.

Just poor judgment on his part, not necessarily racism or malice.

That raises an interesting question: which is the best team on our schedule? I think it's tough to say. Maybe OSU if they get everything straightened out, maybe ND, maybe even MSU. Nebraska on paper looks best to me, though, yet they could have issues.

I don't see an elite, unbeatable team there. Several with good potential and likely to be better than Mich, but it's hard to say.

I suspect that the Plain Dealer is in error here. I know, it's shocking to think that a professional newspaper could have screwed up.

I think the loss counts, and no other team's records are affected.

Dork? The man's personal style is questionable, but he's hardly a dork. I love his radio show, btw.

Jejune ... yet ... still winning. Kudos.

I think the implication is possibly quite different. A lack of values implicates the entire OSU community, not just a few individuals, unless you think he meant a few players or employees who had their own, faulty values. But he could have meant that those who broke rules or violated procedures reflect the values of a broader community that has come to prize winning above all else and at any cost, and thinks the rules shouldn't get in the way.

If that's what he meant, it is significant, even if it doesn't have any bearing on their case with the NCAA.

Cool.

[how's that for dry wit?]

For something concocted by a shoe company for the sake of squeezing more money out of a one-off event, these are about as good as you could hope for.

A part of me still wishes we were above that, though. Oh well ...

Horace Prettyman doesn't approve.

Do you exclude the use of pronouns from syntax? Me do not agree.

I think 'ringers' is the term we're looking for. The eligibility rules weren't too strict back then, I believe.

Speaking of Pistons, we had the Worm, the Spider, the Microwave.

If he can't kick here, he can't kick anywhere else. He should stay and get a UM degree.

Yeah, the story in its bare essentials could have made for a good read. But making your novel 5 times longer than it ought to have been counts as shitty writing in my view.

Dicey. But in his defense, in doing research for my PhD I've found that figuring out which parts of a book are important and skipping the rest is a very valuable skill.

Your analogy is not bad. I'm a PhD student in a Humanities field, and it has occurred to me but I drew a different conclusion. NCAA athletes aren't so different from us, they generate $ or provide services but are under-compensated. Grad students accept that because the degree and experience they get are worth the short-term sacrifice. The student-athlete's situation is not unique - grad students, interns, medical residents, etc. all take apprentice-type positions that pay poorly for a deferred benefit. That's life. If they can find a better deal, they should take it. Propose a better, feasible system? We should listen. But I get tired of hearing about the plight of the poor, exploited athletes as if it's some unique injustice.

God, I hope this is a joke.

But the way this diary is flying over people's heads is dismaying.

At first I thought this was a snarky parody of high-falutin, academic jargon. Maybe it is, but it might be right too.

I thought Hill's piece held together well until about half-way through, when it turned into a promotion for Duke Univeristy and a lot of platitudes and fluff about eduction being valuable - true but besides the point. He could have made his point without seeming so sanctimonious.

I was at U-M for a while and I think I remember seeing a few girls through the daily blinding snowsorms.

Sorry. Didn't mean to reply to you specifcally, just a general comment on the thread.

Sorry to break up the hate-fest, but it's not an especially negative article. It's not derogatory or virtriolic. It just finds a (silly, trivial) way of putting a negative spin on a good win. In other words, it's a waste of everyone's time to post crap like this, pretend it's way worse than it is, and get all indignant.

Right behind an unnecessary comma.

Do you think Desmond was maybe being a bit diplomatic? You know, instead of saying that the old facilities and strength coaches sucked balls?

So Pryor made the right decision? Michigan wasn't right for him, nor he for Michigan. Let's just leave it at that. I'm sure there are at least a few guys on our team who are less than exemplary in the character department (not Denard, of course, he's dreamy).

Shannon's not taking a DC job if he can be a head coach - the money is pretty much irrelevant if Minny (or someone else) wants him.

That is a good point. I think a lot of people want RR gone because they're mad about the losses. But there's no sense in firing him to "punish" him for what's happened. Of course, past results should be used in any evaluation, but the key thing is if you (that is, Brandon) think he can make the program successful in the near future.

This is not that hard to understand. Chop blocks, like grabbing the facemask, horsecollar tackles, helmet-to-helmet, etc, are illegal, and thus draw personal fouls, because they present a real and unnecessary risk to the players. Sometimes they happen inadvertently in the course of play, which is regrettable. But it's really dubious for a coach to instruct a player to intentionally commit that kind of penalty. If that's what Bielema did, it's highly unsportsmanlike, dirty, and whatever else you want to call it. I'd be upset if Michigan's coach did that or even implied that he had. 

Princeton is right. The turnovers and special teams gaffes put Iowa on short fields all day; as a result, they didn't have to gain many yards to score. Sadly, there's not much reason to think that our D would have prevented long drives and scores if Iowa's average starting field position has been, say, their 20. So I think the stats are lying here.

'avete, victores' would be better Latin.

Yes, and strength of schedule is pretty much meaningless at this point, as most top teams (teams we know are pretty good regardless) have played a lot of overmatched opponents, so neither ranking nor sos is useful for predicting outcomes - why bother to use one to debunk the other?

You guys don't understand. The great players of other teams succeed merely on the basis of raw athletic prowess; this is unfair, for some reason I can't quite explain. On the other hand, the noble warrior-poets of Notre Dame, despite pedestrian physical abilities, triumph by virtue of ingenious coaching and pure grit. It takes a brilliant coach countless hours of preparation devise great plays, like when Crist hurls it as far down the field as he can and hopes Floyd or Rudolph catches it. Despite being 5-star all-Americans, those guys aren't talented or anything. Kelly has such a tough job, we should really feel for him.

Woo!

To put it another way, Brown has the best coaching job in the country: great natural recruiting base, not so much competition (as in Florida or California). If I were a coach, I think UT would be the most attractive job out there.

Yeah this move could be good. There was no way we'd see the Masturbating Bear on NBC at 11:30. Conan's at his best with wackier, edgier stuff.

I think Scout had Custer as a 5-star coming out of West Point, and look how that turned out. Rankings aren't everything.

Mike Hart disagrees. RR started McGuffie too.

What I mean is, why do you think it's not where it's always been (in the locker room, I guess)?

Race Bannon = Gerg: FTW

I simultaneously felt like crying and tackling the shit out of someone.

I think the point is that this is something more than a team playing some games for most of us. Not sure what exactly. It's not like your first-born or anything, but it's something.

I'd plus if I had the points: Duke of Perth is great.

The criticisms of Duffy's are quite accurate: it might be fun for some, but it's not for everybody. Looks like I'll be trying Mad River.

Using Samuel Johnson to discourage enthusiasm for grammar and flowery prose... odd. Also, the WLA has their own blog, so they're not just critics.

You don't seem too enthused/encouraged about Pryor. Any special reason? He's definitely not a "game manager."

Interesting discussion. As for U of C, land is no problem. The campus may be small, the the university owns half of the south side. And there's lots of land around here that's not being put to any great use.