this may be of some local interest
|40 weeks 6 days ago||Brandt played in the NFL the next year||
Started too, for the Redskins I believe. He was undrafted, made a name for himself as a rookie, and retired after a year or two to teach kids with learning disabilities if I remember correctly. The only one of those 5 starters who didn't start in the NFL the very next year was Goodwin, because he was a junior and came back to Michigan for his last season. Greatest collegiate offensive line ever assembled, no question.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||That example isn't 100% applicable here||
The rule application you cite here has been cited in many other places as well as justification for this call. It irks me a bit that there is a very important piece to this example application that does not apply to Michigan's situation that generally goes without comment.
In the example, player A1 leaves the field of play during the previous down. Therefore, when player A12 comes on and player A2 simulates leaving, the team appears to be doing a 1-for-1 substitution. It's an added level of "deception," and the fact that it's specifically included in the rulebook example suggests that it's a necessary level of deception in order to invoke the rule. If the ruling is valid even without player A1 leaving the field, why is he included in the explanation?
Michigan didn't simulate an even number substitution. They had 3 guys run on and 4 guys appear to run off. Couple that with Butt significantly lagging behind the other exiting players and I think you could make a decent case that the rule shouldn't apply here. It's defintely not a case of the refs getting something 100% wrong, but I don't think it's clear they got it right either. Seems like a judgement call to me, which is fine, since so many rules in football are.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||I'm not sure what point you're trying to make||
That's the whole point. Despite these conditions existing for decades at Mizzou, the university administration has never made any serious attempts to address them, instead preferring to pretend that the outbursts of overt racism are totally isolated and not a result of the environment that the university is fostering.
When I say the movement isn't about "fix these issues," the point I'm trying to make is that we're not seeing protests because racism exists in Columbia. Under different circumstances, a few shouted racial slurs would not have incited this reaction. The Mizzou administration doesn't seem to consider the racial issues the university is facing as a problem it can/should deal with directly, and that's the root of the whole issue here.
The list of demands is a poor representation of the environment surrounding the protest. It makes the protesters look like irrational idealists demanding that the university solve racism with the stroke of a pen. In actuality, the thing these protesters are fighting for is acknowledgement from the university. Acknowledgement that there is work to do on racial issues at Mizzou and that the university can and should play a direct role in that process.
And yes, it definitely seems like many of the elements of the protest have been engineered to capture outside attention, and they probably were. But again, remember that this isn't a sudden reaction to recent issues. Race has been a problem at Mizzou forever, and even when white students covered the lawn of the Black Cultural Center in cotton balls a few years ago nothing was done to address the root issue. The courting of outside attention here is tactic to finally force the university into action. It would have been great if such a tactic weren't necessary, but the university has had plenty of chances to act on its own and has consistently refused to do so.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||Mizzou grad here||
I'm going to try to add some context to this, since I don't think this development is purely a result of the events of recent weeks and months.
First, Mizzou absolutely has an issue with systemic racial segregation and discrimination. There are black areas of campus, black tables at dining halls, black apartment complexes for off campus housing, etc. Of course, none of these things are official or enforced in any way, but they are a reality of life in Columbia. Overt expressions of racism aren't constant, but are common enough that it's not really surprising to hear about the ones that are being reported with this story. The Confederate flag hangs in many a dorm room, and the attitude that accompanies it isn't one of states' rights.
Second, and very importantly to this story, the power structures of the city and the university refuse to acknowledge race as a serious issue, instead treating incidents of aggressive racism as isolated instead of indicative of a pervasive cultural issue. With no active steps taken to end the physical segregation of black and white students on campus, the "us-vs-them" mentality that leads to racial tensions has continued to thrive.
The protests on campus and threatened non-participation of the football team are not the result of a couple of racial slurs and one instance of the university president dismissing the complaints of the protesters without serious consideration. This is a boiling over of years of racial slurs that black students can expect if they're walking through unfriendly territory, and repeated insistence from the office of the university president that these issues aren't deserving of a response beyond the typical hand-waving "racism is bad and we don't condone it."
The movement isn't about "fix these problems," it's about "acknowledge that these are in fact problems and start taking steps, any steps, to address them." The fact that one of the things that spurred it is a group releasing a list of demands that makes them seem more like hostage takers than concerned students is unfortunate, but it doesn't invalidate the issue at hand that has been plaguing Mizzou for decades now.
|50 weeks 6 days ago||I feel ya on PHP||
I mostly work with Python now, for many (mostly obvious) reasons. BUT! I will come to the defense of PHP a little. Well written PHP is just as robust and maintainable as any other language, it's just that it doesn't enforce any best-practices, and in fact makes it very easy to write terrible code (see: the server side component of the project linked above).
Anyway, like I said, don't take this project as an indicator of the type of code I write now, and let me know if I can contribute to development. You've got my GitHub and website, so feel free to contact me from either.
|50 weeks 6 days ago||I actually started one of these a while ago||
I was moving and trying to beef up my resume for the job hunt, and I actually talked with Brian a bit and started in on one of these. The UI is pretty good, it handles automatic YouTube and Image embeds, and sanitizes any other possibly harmful input. Unfortunately the server side is just a giant mess, I got it working as a proof of concept but never went back and put any architectural thought into it. Once I finished the move and got a job, I kind of forgot the whole thing. It's on GitHub, and it's functional as-is if you want to check it out: https://github.com/bendemeyer/moderated-chat, and I've got a longer post on my website explaining how its supposed to work: http://www.bendemeyer.com/2013/06/04/self-hosted-moderated-chat-room-and...
It's in PHP server-side, everything client-side is done through jQuery. I think the data architecture of the project is great, but the server side needs to be completely rewritten as a proper API. Also the frontend of a project like this should almost certainly be written in React (which didn't exist when I first built it, so I have that excuse). All in all, there might be enough wrong with it that you may be better off writing yours from scratch, but maybe this will provide you a useful starting point.
Also I'd be happy to contribute to development. I don't have tons of free time, but it's an interesting problem I'd like to revisit now that I'm considerably better at programming than I was a few years ago when I first attempted this.
|1 year 3 days ago||I agree on that part wholeheartedly||
There was an organizational failure that put a student athlete into a disturbingly dangerous position that could have ended significantly worse than it did. Hoke was responsible for the organization, so Hoke was responsible for that failure. I'm not trying to absolve him of all guilt, I just think there's been way too much focus on "his decision" to send Morris back into the game. While he clearly deserves some of the blame for this fiasco (and there's plenty to go around), I don't think much, if any, of it stems from his in-game actions.
|1 year 3 days ago||I really do not like this viewpoint||
I pretty strongly disagree with the idea that Hoke is at fault explicitly for sending Morris back into the game. As was pointed out in this excerpt several times, the coaching staff has no authority over the decisions of the medical staff, and if Hoke had ever tried to overrule said staff, they would have made no effort to protect him. In short, this verifies what we already pretty much knew: the medical staff on the sidelines green-lighted Morris to go back into the game.
I get that the knee-jerk follow up to this is, "Yeah, well Hoke still should have known that he wasn't right and kept him out anyway." To me, this is a terribly misguided and ultimately dangerous idea. When a medical staffer tells a football coach anything about a player's medical condition, the coach should treat that statement as unassailable gospel, and should never, in any way, consider his own judgement to be superior.
Hoke is certainly at fault for failing to make sure that a foolproof procedure was in place to prevent this entire ordeal. He was in change of the program, so he's ultimately on the hook for program's failure to have a fully operational concussion protocol in place when they needed it. But I absolutely do not fault him for his specific sideline actions during the game.
|1 year 4 weeks ago||Something very similar to this appeared on the board years ago||
How do I sign up to collect my royalties?
|1 year 9 weeks ago||Yeah, and music these days is terrible!||
Back in my day, we had real journalists like William Randolph Hearst who reported FACTS and didn't do things like goad the entire country into a meaningless war solely for the purpose of selling newspapers.
Look, I get it. There are a lot of things about right now that seem shitty, but the problem is those things have ALWAYS been shitty. There never was a golden age of journalism, Woodward and Bernstein were an aberration in a murky and generally distasteful history. We just like to look back on those times and remember them with a wholly undeserved fondness. It's the exact same phenomenon behind how "pop music today" always seems to be so terrible. We remember the 40 best songs from any given decade and compare them 1-to-1 with the current top-40. Of course "music today" is going to lose, we're subconsciously comparing 6 months to 10 years.
Stop fearing for the future of the country, stop worrying that human interaction is disappearing. Every generation ever, since the dawn of the modern age, has looked at the generation that came after it and had the exact same compaints you're making here. Everyone thinks the people who come after them suck, and maybe they do, but not any more than those that they're supplanting.
|1 year 9 weeks ago||Dude.||
|1 year 15 weeks ago||Sounds like you're doing everything right||
I've found ADHD to be super manageable, with medication or without. The biggest hurdle is recognizing the potential signs and taking the steps to do something about it, which you've already done. Kudos!
All the other behavioral things you've mentioned hit pretty close to home for me too, so I'm going to mention some things that I've found very helpful in my journey through this stuff. Of course, I am not a doctor and all of this is anecdotal, so if you get any real medical advice that contradicts this I would suggest that you ignore me. Anyway.
Structured schedules. This is the one thing that's helped me more than anything else, and it's the reason that the biggest problems I had were in college and at a very un-structured work-from-home job. Try setting and maintaining a daily homework/study time, and stick too it even if there isn't much homework or studying necessary that day.
Take breaks. Instead of trying to focus on the same thing for a long period of time, take somewhat frequent 5-15 minute breaks and come back to it. This is a big reason that tons of tech companies have ping-pong or foosball in the office. ADHD: super common in programmers.
Read books. I've found that if my leisure time is spent reading books (pretty much any books) instead of watching TV or playing video games, I'm better able to concentrate on important tasks during the times of day when I need to be productive.
Lastly, I want to touch on depression again. Depression is a pretty scary concept, but if you're prepared then it doesn't need to be. By addressing mental and behavioral health issues in an up-front and non-stigmatized manner, I think you significantly reduce that chances that your son will ever have to deal with more serious issues like depression. However, just in case, I'd strongly recommend reading the descriptions of depression by Allie Brosch of Hyperbole and a Half. You can find them here and here.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||Coming late to this thread||
I don't know if you'll actually see this, and maybe someone above has already mentioned something similar (but I don't have time to check because I have to leave for work in a few minutes).
The issues you describe your son having sound very similar to how things went for me in high school and college. I'd always managed to be an A/B student without really trying that hard, never took notes, never studied, skipped doing my homework if I knew I was doing well enough in the class to get away with it. I had a few classes in high school that were a real struggle to make it through this way, and in college it got a lot worse.
I still managed to graduate, worked productively for a few years, and then I took a work-from-home job and noticed that all of the problems I had in high school and college came storming back into my life. Turns out, I have ADHD. For me, it's much more attention deficit than hyperactivity, but because I never had any over the top problems in school, no one ever noticed or figured it out.
The thing with ADHD is it can make focusing on specific tasks a huge, energy consuming undertaking. A smart, well driven person can overcome this to some degree, but it still makes things harder. If you think this might be the case with your son, I would strongly recommend taking him to see a psychologist. The reason I recommend that goes well beyond his potential performance in school, ADHD left unrecognized and untreated can (and did in my case) lead to depression.
I know the depression reaction is fairly common, though I don't know the details of how it tends to manifest. I can tell you that for me, it was seeing all these people I knew do things that I couldn't (like start writing a paper more than 24 hours before it was due). I built up a combination of inferiority complex and fear of failure, and the pressures of college coursework put me into fairly serious depression a couple of times. It was not fun, do not recommend.
Mental health is still very socially stigmatized, so I don't generally talk about this stuff, but I hope it's been of some value to you. It's of course possible that none of the things I described apply to your son, but if they do I hope that you'll be better able to handle them than I was.
|1 year 22 weeks ago||Wholeheartedly concur with the Pratchett praise.||
And thanks for the explanation of Pratchett as an inspiration. I've found myself sort of subconsciously associating the writing on this site with Pratchett's for a few years now, and I'm glad to find out that those associations are actually rooted in something substantive.
The recognition of Pratchett's work suffered at the hands of critics who, in Neil Gaiman's words "think serious is the opposite of funny." They're works of breathtaking beauty and literary brilliance, and almost totally overlooked by the critical community because of their genre. I don't think the parallels to the astounding level of writing we find on this sports blog need to be spelled out too much more than that.
|1 year 27 weeks ago||I'm going to go off on a mostly-related rant here||
While I generally agree that destroying a person's future is a bad idea, Brian isn't threatening to start vicious rumours, undermine this kid with lies, or use personal contacts to freeze him out of job prospects. He's threatening to find pictures and posts that the kid himself WILLINGLY PUT ON THE INTERNET FOR ANYONE TO FIND.
We are not talking about hacking, we are not talking about hiring a private investigator or a PR firm to ruin someone. The Internet is not a private place. Anything that you post publicly online can and will be used against you in the court of public opinion. Calling the screencapping of this guy's twitter account "bullying" is like saying SNL "bullied" Sarah Palin by using the exact transcript of her Couric interview for a sketch. It sure as hell isn't flattering but they did it to themselves.
The lesson here for how to avoid embarrassing pictures of you showing up on a Google search isn't "don't piss off Brian," it's "Don't post those pictures in the first place! Why the hell would you do that? Are you even vaguely aware of what's going on in the world around you?"
|1 year 32 weeks ago||What you've got to look for||
Is the generic version of Viva. Not all stores have one, but often they'll have several generic brands each made to look/act like particular name brand. If you find a generic that's copying Viva, it's usually about as good, maybe a little less good, but significantly cheaper.
|1 year 33 weeks ago||Quoting Seth||
From the comments of one of the many, many earlier posts about what an amazing reporter Gregg Henson apparently is:
So yeah, he was technically correct about this, but he just got there by throwing a dart at a board, and then events happened to traspire in the manner that he had projected. Based on Brian's info, and the info of others who seem pretty trustworthy, at the time that Henson "called" Harbaugh to Michigan, Harbaugh himself was far from sure that this was where he was going to end up. That's not reporting, that's conjecture. So maybe he's got good instincts, a good feel for how things are going to play out, maybe he's just really good at conjecture. But not so much with reporting.
|1 year 36 weeks ago||I know Brian would probably balk at the label "Journalist"||
But the transparency he's displayed in these posts is a fantastic example of what journalism should look like in the modern world.
This is a perfect and concise expression of what Brian's getting right and so many others are getting wrong. The role of the journalist used to be to filter out important data from the crap, and only pass on the important stuff to the public. In the age of the Internet, people are going to find a way to access all available information, crap and otherwise. Far too many "journalists" have used this as an excuse to report everything all the time always, when what they really should do is present the information in the context that it was received and indicate the level of faith they have in the accuracy of that information.
The WD email thing is a fantastic example of this, and Brian's handling of any seemingly-insider info he gets is also superb. As a former journalism student who switched majors partly because of how shitty the journalism landscape looked when I started working in it, kudos to the MGoBlog staff for doing such a great job.
|1 year 36 weeks ago||Dude||
This has been covered, extensively, by this very site.
Skip to the "Recruiting" section. All evidence suggests that oversigning is way less of an issue with Mullen than it is with Miles.
|1 year 36 weeks ago||(No subject)|
|1 year 37 weeks ago||Careful with this||
It's against the Google Ads terms of service to have people click on ads exclusively to generate revenue. They track this stuff pretty thoroughly, so if you just go around clicking a bunch of ads it can mean bad things for the site. Now, if you see an ad for a thing you find interesting, click on it and check it out, but you should avoid clicking ads haphazardly.
|1 year 42 weeks ago||Sort of||
I agree that the other person in that conversation comes off way worse than DB, especially considering they looked at it afterward and decided to send it to Brian as evidence of DB being a douche. "Haha, I just acted like a total jackass and trolled DB into sending me less-than-respectful responses! I'd better exhibit a total lack of self-awareness and share this with as many people as possible."
Even so, one of these people represents the Michigan Athletic Department and one does not. If all was rosy in the world of Michigan Athletics and DB was a beloved figure, we probably look at these emails and think "Wow, how awesome is it the we have such a no-nonsense AD." But all is not rosy, and DB should be able to understand that and adjust his behaviour accordingly. You don't gloat when you're losing.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||The worst part is||
He overwrote the whole Brian object. He could have just adjusted one property, maybe Brian.politicalLeanings = Leftist, but no, he did the whole damn thing. Now Brian's entire entity is just Leftist. I knew they shouldn't have made life in a weakly-typed language.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||You fool! What have you done?||
Don't you know that '=' is the assignment operator and '==' is the equality operator? You've just set Brian equal to leftist! And you didn't even bother storing his initial value in a temp variable! Now we have no way of knowing what Brian was before you got involved! How can you toy with people's lives like this?
|1 year 44 weeks ago||If it were actually 3-5 points/game, sure.||
Last year Gostowski had the 3rd best fantasy year for all kickers since 1960. He was the #1 kicker in fantasy. He was worth 1.85 points/game more than the #10 kicker for the year. But hey, 1.85 points is still points, right? Well, only if you can actually accurately predict which kickers are going to be better than others, which is a nearly impossible task.
It's a little different in an auction draft, where depending on who you're targeting you may not end up spending your whole budget anyway, so dropping a couple extra bucks on a kicker may not be a terrible idea if you've got extra cash near the end. But in a regular draft league you're pretty much always better off taking an extra lottery ticket at RB or WR than taking your kicker even one round early.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Obligatory|
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Lot of people recommending AdBlock||
To reiterate what other above have said, using AdBlock on sites like this that you frequently visit and want to support is a BAD idea. MGoBlog needs money, and they get money from you being slightly inconvenienced by looking at ads.
As for your popups, it's unlikely that the site itself is the cause. All the ads on here are Google Ads, and if Google Ads are suddenly causing malware issues, the whole Internet is in serious trouble. I see Brian has already responded that he'll look into it, but I doubt there's anything wrong with the site.
If your virus/malware detectors aren't turning up anything, there's another possibility: bloatware bundled with installers for other programs that you unintentionally installed by not unchecking the "include blah blah" checkbox. These are getting really super common, and since technically they're just regularly installed programs, they don't show as viruses or malware. Go into Control Panel > Programs and Features, sort by install date, and start going through them for anything you don't recognize. Uninstall from there.
|1 year 45 weeks ago||No||
ESPN 3 is available to anyone with an internet connection. Other WatchESPN programming requires a TV subscription, but the ESPN 3 stuff does not.
|1 year 46 weeks ago||I'm as pessimisstic as the next guy||
But I think it's silly to say 2-10 is "probable" or even the "most likely" outcome. Clearly this team is terrible, but the very nature of college football makes it rather unlikely that we actually finish the season 2-10. Yes, this team is bad enough that they could lose every game on left on the schedule, but it's very rare that a team actually loses every game they could, or in reverse actually wins every game they're capable of winning.
I'd be surprised if Michigan doesn't pick up a win or two out of PSU, Indiana, Northwestern, and Maryland. We're almost certainly not better than those teams, but the Random Number Generator tends to play a pretty large role in college football. If I had to bet on an overall record at the end of the season, I'd say 4-8. Still terrible, still fire everyone.
|1 year 49 weeks ago||Fair||
I'm by no means a zealot for the points I made above. I know I personally was stunned when I saw the second video, I had not originally thought that it was going to be that bad. And since I was taken aback by the content of the second video, I don't think it's fair for me to criticize the Ravens or the NFL for taking harsher action after the video came out. The original 2 game suspension was ridiculous, sure, but I probably would have been OK with 6-8 games in the aftermath of the first video. After the second I think it's clear that he can't play in the NFL again this year, if ever.
An interesting question in my mind is why some people (such as yourself) seemed to be ready for the content of the second video, whereas others (such as myself) were taken by surprise. I readily admit that I have no personal experience in witnessing/experiencing domestic violence, so maybe I'm not very good at identifying it. This is a disturbing idea to me, because now I'm forced to wonder if I've ever encountered domestic violence in my personal life and simply didn't recognize it. It's a chilling thought, but if it is the case then I can only hope that this incident will make me a little more aware of the warning signs in the future.
|1 year 49 weeks ago||Because its his job||
Goodell appointed himself judge, jury, and executioner when he first took over the job. He's essentially been an autocrat when it comes to parceling out league discipline. Now we find out that everyone involved in this assault knew that there was a video of the event but Goodell somehow didn't? That is raging incompetence! Not an "Oops, my bad" mistake, but "I have no earthly idea how to do my job" type stuff. And he sure as hell can't continue being the NFL's disciplinary despot because he has no more credibility in that regard. So what use is he really as a commissioner?
|1 year 49 weeks ago||I think it makes a difference||
Even though we knew he had "hit" her, that can still mean a lot of different things. Before the newest video, there was a sort of spectrum of things that could have happened inside that elevator. Maybe he doesn't use much force, but she falls and hits her head on something. Maybe he immediately rushes to her side to make sure she's OK. These wouldn't come close to justifying what happened, but they would have been one hell of a lot better than what we saw.
What we saw in the video is an absolute worst case scenario. After watching the original video, if you had tried to picture the single worst set of events that could have happened in that elevator it would have been pretty close to reality. The video proved that it wasn't an accident, that it wasn't an misjudged use of force, and that there was no remorse.
|1 year 49 weeks ago||Goodell getting fired would not ruin his life||
And there is just no way in hell that he didn't know that video existed. Months ago Chris Mortensen accurately reported some very specific details from that video. At least 20 casino employees saw it. All major law enforcement agencies involved saw it. If Goodell honestly didn't realize the video existed, then he should be out of a job anyway for absurd incompetence.
There is just no possible way that these events could have unfolded in which Goodell doesn't end up looking like a guy who isn't fit to be commissioner of the NFL. If he saw the video, he should go. If he knew the video existed and opted to interview Ray Rice and his fiance instead of watching the video, he should go. And if he was seriously dumb enough to not even realize that the video existed when it's becoming increasingly clear that everyone around him did, he needs to go.
|1 year 49 weeks ago||That doesn't matter||
Either he saw the video, or he knew of the video's existence and went out of his way to avoid seeing it. Whichever way it happened, it's totally inexcusable. Not to mention how horrifically the league has handled this entire situation from day one, and as the man in charge Goodell is ultimately responsible for that.
|1 year 49 weeks ago||I read it||
And I wouldn't classify that guy as a troll. He's just as delusional in his ND arrogance as some people are in their Michigan arrogance, but he's attempting to engage in productive conversation. It's just that his inflated sense of ND's value in the college football world makes him come off as a bit of a douche.
A true troll makes no attempt at valuable conversation, and just runs around saying inflammatory things to provoke a reaction and laugh at it. A troll would never write as much as that guy did, he would just say "Michigan's no longer relevant on the national stage, unlike ND" and scamper off.
I get that rival fans who don't have the best grip on reality are annoying, even if they're not outright trolls, but I find that to be just as annoying in Michigan fans as well. And we do have plenty of them.
|1 year 50 weeks ago||Question||
Why do Hoke's pressers get a "bullets" section but the coordinators do not?
|2 years 2 days ago||Space Coyote||
Has helped me understand a few of the finer points of the game.
Don't know if BiSB is eligible, but his board presence is great.
For some reason that I can't quite put my finger on, Erik_in_Dayton's posts always seem to catch my attention in a good way.
|2 years 4 days ago||DAMMIT||
I used a keeper spot on him!
|2 years 4 days ago||I don't know man.||
My level of concern is informed much more by last year's Akron game than 2007's App State game, which puts it at a fairly high level. I'd love to see an old school non-conference beatdown of an inferior opponent, but I no longer expect those games, and hardly dare to let myself hope for them.
|2 years 1 week ago||This reminded me of something||
I was just giving this thread a once-over at the end of the day to catch up on everything, and your post reminded me of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," in which he responds to criticisms that his methods were too confrontational, and that his best course of action would be to wait things out. It's one of my favorite pieces of writing ever, and if anyone makes a late perusal of this thread like I did and sees this, I highly recommend reading it. Link.
A particularly relevant passage, describing Kings frustration with the "white moderate":
|2 years 1 week ago||This is a relief||
With Braden in the thick of things for a guard spot going into last year, only to drop out of the conversation completely and never be heard from again, I was really starting to get worried we were headed into a "unending practice hype that never actually materializes on the field" situation. Announcing him as a starter this early really signals that the coaching staff is comfortable with his development, both physically and with his technique.
Let's hope he can lock down that spot for the next 3 years, and we never have to build an OL out of so many question marks again.
|2 years 1 week ago||Nice to see people on the Internet still capable of empathy||
I join you in being disappointed by the reactions here, and the judgements being made about York as a person. We only know about this one incident, and that certainly doesn't make him some sort of incurable criminal who will never contribute to a civilized society. He's made one terrible mistake, and I sincerely hope that it doesn't send his life on an inescapable downward spiral.
That said, I do think he should be dismissed from the team for this. The total lack of escalation here is what's really jarring, and I don't think it's something the coaching staff can tolerate.
I do hope that he gets another chance at a scholarship at a MAC or similar level school, a chance to earn a college degree and build a life that isn't defined by moments like this.
|2 years 1 week ago||Indefinite suspension||
York is currently on indefinite suspension and for all intents and purposes is not a part of the team right now. Based on Hoke's track record of handling players who are embroiled in legal criminal proceedings, I would not be surprised if no further action was taken until the criminal aspect is sorted out. If I recall correctly, that's how virtually every criminal investigation into a Michigan football player under Hoke has gone. Indefinite suspension while the criminal charges are open, specific discipline afterward.
I understand your reaction that this is something that requires more immediate decisive action, but I generally like this method of handling legal situations. I think it makes the important point that legal proceedings take precedence over football. Either way, I expect York will be officially dismissed from the team at some point, it may just be after a trial/plea is concluded and the charges are closed.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||I don't think the "whereas" is technically inaccurate||
It's a less common usage of the word, but it can be used to mean essentially "because" or "since." I actually think the second half of that thing (starting with "For if you want what is ours") is pretty cool, it has kind of a Medieval battle motivational thing going on. The first half, on the other hand, is extremely clumsy. "With every accurate pass" is maybe the least threatening line I've ever read.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||I believe:||
ESPN 3 programming is available to anyone. It's viewable via "WatchESPN," which is a service that requires you to sign in with your cable account in order to view ESPN, ESPN 2, and ESPNU programming. But programming designated ESPN 3 shouldn't require a sign-in. I think.
|2 years 7 weeks ago||I knew we could have a reasonable conversation about this||
I think it's a fine line between making a direct comparison and using a hyperbolic example. You don't get to invoke Hitler every time a government oversteps its authority, and you don't get to invoke Aaron Hernandez every time an athlete has character issues. Doing so drastically lowers the level of discourse and pulls the conversation immediately toward the extremes, and away from the gray area where all the stuff that matters is.
That said, I don't really think we have super different feelings on this particular case. Maybe I'm a bit more bleeding heart, but I don't think by a whole lot. I just really did not like the tone that this thread was taking, it seemed to be a lot of angry people pushing each other to say angrier and angrier things, and straying very far from the matter at hand.
I like to think that this turn of events will be good for him, regardless of whether he has to sit out a year (and I think he probably will). He came to Mizzou as a symbol of newfound football greatness, their first true blue-chip recruit in the Gary Pinkel era. He will enter OU as a troubled transfer with nothing guaranteed and a lot still to prove. I hope that he adjusts well to being the low man on the totem pole for the first time in quite a while, and if he does I fully expect him to grow into a better adult and learn from his past mistakes.
|2 years 7 weeks ago||Holy fuck this thread is awful||
This kid has exactly one incident in his past that is actually disturbing (the forced entry), and as much as we can speculate terrible and awful things about that, no one here has any real idea of what really happened. It was probably bad, he probably should have faced legal consequences, but for a variety of reasons he didn't.
Other than that, he was arrested twice on possession of marijuana charges. Big. Fucking. Deal.
He faced legal and personal consequences from the pot incidents, and personal consequences from the violent one (again, I'm not arguing that he didn't get off a little light on that one), and yet I hear you all shout down to me from way up on your high horses that this kid is some sort of horrendous criminal who's never faced a consequence in his life. Seriously, someone above actually compared this situation to AARON FUCKING HERNANDEZ and got commended for it!
Get some perspective people. This kid had a horrific childhood, and suddenly became a major celebrity at the age of 16. Gary Pinkel actually flew a helicopter to his high school on a recruiting visit. Of course he's got entitlement issues, every single person in the world would if they were put in the same position.
DGB is a tremendously talented individual, and there's no reason to think that he can't grow to be a tremendous person as well. I wish him nothing but the best, both on the football field and off of it.
|2 years 7 weeks ago||It's in Lafayette Square||
Very good food to go along with an excellent beer selection. They also distil some spirits I believe. It's a cool place.
What I actually miss the most is Vietnamese row on South Grand. So much delicious Vietnamese food, and so cheap! Oh, Pho Grand, how I long for you. But yes, BBQ too. We lived a block and a half from The Shaved Duck (if you haven't been, go), which is a fantastic slightly-upscale BBQ and craft beer place.
|2 years 7 weeks ago||Oh man, you're tempting me so bad||
I just moved out of St. Louis last year, and I miss it. Four Hands is one of my favorite things ever, though I never liked Urban Chestnut that much. I think it's because I'm not a huge fan of German/Bavarian beers, and that's what they do best. I also recommend Square One if you haven't tried it, it's my favorite St. Louis brewpub.
|2 years 7 weeks ago||Bud Light is shitty||
Budweiser is actually pretty good for its price range and style. Especially if you get it on tap, and especially if it's super fresh. If you're ever in St. Louis or one if the other 5 or so cities where they brew it, go to a local bar and get a Budweiser draught. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
|2 years 14 weeks ago||These estimations are meaningless||
The estimated price of unbundled channels comes from the cable companies themselves, who have an obvious interest in maintaining the status quo as long as possible. So obviously they're going to put out numbers that make it sound like unbundling will drastically increase prices.
See, the numbers they come up with are essentially "How much would we have to charge in order to make the same amount of money?" In actuality, when unbundling does happen out of necessity, the question will be "How much can we charge so that people will still use us at all?" The current structure of TV providers is unmaintainable in the internet age, and cable companies are going to make WAY less money when it does eventually come crashing down.
|2 years 22 weeks ago||Thanks for talking about this||
I'm sure it's an intense and personal issue for you, and I'm glad you're comfortable enough to come on this board and talk about it.
The thing that I and many others are concerned about is that vaccines are essentially being propped up as a scapegoat for parents of autistic children looking for someone/something to blame. A significant amount of research has been done on this issue, and without exception, every last bit of it has failed to find any link between vaccines and autism. The only thing keeping this concern alive is public panic, which is even more infectious than the diseases these vaccines prevent.
There's certainly still a lot we don't know about autism, and there's a lot of work to be done to bring autism and spectrum disorders into the public eye, but prolonging the vaccine "argument" will not help accomplish either of those goals. If there is an environmental link to autism, it almost certainly isn't related to vaccines. On top of that, all the time and energy we spend continuing to debunk any vaccine-autism link is time and energy that could be spent looking for an environmental condition that does have some sort of link to autism.
Anyway, thanks again for weighing in. I know I speak for many people here in wishing you and your family the best.
|2 years 22 weeks ago||Thank you for this||
The most satisfying part of listening to people who buy into the anti-vaccine nonsense is the inevitable "It's not like people are dying of these diseases anymore anyway."
Do you know why people don't die of these diseases anymore? VACCINES!
|2 years 26 weeks ago||This is completely subjective and pointless to argue about||
Define "sport," go. This thread is basically one long boring argument about semantics. Do judges matter? If something is physically challenging and requires lots of hard work and dedication is it automatically a sport? These questions are pointless. Define "sport" however you want to, it has no impact on the people actually doing it.
As far as this article is concerned, I don't have too much of a problem with it. It seems to me that the authors is less trying to make a semantic point about what is and is not a sport, and rather point out that in the ever more exciting and X-Games-y Winter Olympics, ice dancing is seeming more and more out of place. And I have to say I broadly agree with that point.
Ice Dancing is challenging, physical, requires a lifetime of training, and is excruciatingly boring to watch. I realize that many people will disagree with me on that point, because it is a completely subjective personal opinion, which is exactly what this author was trying to convey. Her personal opinion of ice dancing is that it's boring and anachronistic, and I think that's a perfectly reasonable opinion to have.
|2 years 27 weeks ago||Sure||
I guess my point is that there's really nothing stopping Comcast or TWC from doing all of that right now. The merger/takeover will put them in a better bargaining position when they're trying to squeeze money out of Netflix and Google for better bandwidth treatment, but from the consumer perspective it doesn't change much.
Comcast currently has just as much of a stranglehold over its internet-only customers as they will if/when this merger goes through. If they wanted to implement bandwidth caps and block content and all sorts of other terrible things, they could start doing it right now. This merger just takes two smaller regional monopolies and makes one larger regional monopoly. But all of the problems that come with a monopoly are present either way.
And I could be wrong on this, but in the wake of the federal net neutrality ruling I remember some analysts saying that Comcast was on something like a 3 year probationary period after purchasing NBC that would prevent them from violating net neutrality anyway. So maybe it's best that Comcast be as big as possible right now, since they're basically the only ISP that's actually beholden to net neutrality at the moment.
|2 years 27 weeks ago||I like where your head's at||
But I think a better solution is closer to something we already have: the wireless coverage market. Now, not everyone likes their plan with AT&T or Verizon, but if you look at the price of wireless service over the past 10-15 years (very little change, maybe increasing a little) and the level of service offered with each plan (huge, monumental, unbelievable improvement) in that same span, it's impressive. Do the same comparison to cable companies and you'll see rates go up while service provided stays basically the same.
I guess the point here is that in quite a few markets, the best possible thing for consumers is just some good old-fashioned capitalist competition. The issue in the cable world is that there's no real competition for these companies, so they can just do whatever they want. End regional telecom monopolies!
|2 years 27 weeks ago||My initial reaction was similar to the OP's||
But the more I think about it, the less concerned I am that this will have any actual impact on cable and internet service provided by Comcast or TWC.
The AT&T/T-Mobile merger was problematic because those two companies are in direct competition for customer business. If you don't like your cell phone provider, you can switch to a different provider which (a) gives your current provider an incentive to try to keep you and (b) gives all other providers an incentive to try and lure you away.
This is VERY different from how the cable world works, where every cable provider is a government-protected regional monopoly. There is nowhere in this country where a consumer actually has a choice between multiple cable companies, the only choice is cable from the one available provider or not-cable. It's basically what national telephone providers looked like when Bell was first split up. "Oh, we're totally independent companies working for our consumers and fostering competition. This isn't a front for a well-organized oligopoly at all!"
With any luck, the court's recent ruling invalidating the FCC net neutrality rules will actually have a positive impact. It will (hopefully) force the FCC to either re-classify cable broadband providers as the monopolies they are, or even better put an end to the practice of regional cable monopolies all together. I'm not holding my breath for the latter, but the former at least seems likely at this juncture.
And I haven't even gotten into what a ridiculous ripoff channel bundling is yet. As you may have guessed, the shittiness of cable companies is one of my favorite rants. This and how crappy Christopher Columbus was.
|2 years 29 weeks ago||Yeah||
Their explanation of their methodology is vague at best. Seems like it's just a completely subjective blend between past recruiting hype and actual performance.
I think a much more interesting list would be underrated recruits who outperformed expectations. But that list would only serve to highlight ESPN recruiting's inaccuracies, so I doubt they'll make it. I'll just chalk this one up to off-season click-bait.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||As a veteran of internet-only entertainment||
The biggest drawback is sports. The only way to get reliable (legal) sports coverage without paying for cable/dish is to have someone give you their login credentials for WatchESPN (only available if you are already paying for a TV package) and also have solid access to the major broadcast networks over-the-air. When I lived in St. Louis this was great, I got tons of broadcast channels and they all came in crystal clear. Now that I'm in Ann Arbor, I get ABC sometimes at best.
Because of all this, I've been resorting to... unauthorized... streaming of football games most of the time. It's a pain in the ass, the picture quality usually isn't the best, the streams sometimes die for no reason in the middle of a game, generally it's not great. But it's a workable solution for times when I can't/don't want to go to a sports bar or something. Also worth noting, you would not be able to access such streams via Roku, you'd need a regular internet browser for that.
My setup is a media PC connected to our living room TV acting as a media server across our home network. I also have a Roku in the bedroom that connects to the media PC to stream content from it (look into Plex Media Server if anyone is interested in setting up something like this, it's awesome). I love this setup, and despite all its faults I will never go back to regular cable. Once I can pay a flat monthly fee for WatchESPN and HBOGO and the like, I will do that immediately, but that could still be quite a ways away.
Good luck, and I hope you join us in internet-only land. The more people who cancel their TV packages, the sooner cable companies and content providers will have to rethink the current model that really has no place in our modern internet-driven society.
|2 years 36 weeks ago||I've always been annoyed by the Hamburgler's timing here||
It feels like that bag is hanging there forever before he grabs it and runs. The guy in the car has to make an effort not to hold his hand out all the way. YOU HAVE ONE JOB HAMBURGLER! GET BETTER.
|2 years 36 weeks ago||Question||
I wasn't very active in the days of the old voting system. Would someone care to explain how it worked so we'll be prepared since it's apparently coming back?
|2 years 36 weeks ago||Rose Tyler is the worst||
Rose Tyler is the worst companion of the Doctor ever.
I also can't stand Judd Apatow, anything he's made, and anything that's made in his style.
|2 years 36 weeks ago||What if||
They both suck?
|2 years 37 weeks ago||I wouldn't be surprised if he went in the 1st round this year||
Tim Tebow went in the first round, and he was and is just as unpolished a passer as Miller. And with more and more NFL teams looking for a QB who can run, I bet someone would take a chance on him in the first round. I don't know if he'll ever turn into a great or even solid NFL QB, but with all his athleticism I really think someone's going to take the risk.
|2 years 37 weeks ago||Just came here to make the same request||
His history makes it seem like he's not always awful, but he at least needs a temporary ban until he can get his shit together. He's totally lost it tonight.
|2 years 37 weeks ago||All four of you are assholes.||
This is a thread where those of us still feeling the sting of Michigan's disappointing season can come and take solace in the end of OSU's chances at a national title, and pass on some begrudging respect to a team that deserves it. You are the reason the "state of the site" post was necessary. Feel bad about yourselves.
|2 years 37 weeks ago||I don't think you and I actually disagree about any of this||
As someone below said, the SEC can be both the best conference in the country and simultaneously overrated. I think you said it perfectly with "... teams that are successful in other conferences would probably be successful if transplanted into the SEC." The difference I see between the SEC and other conferences is that they simply have more of those teams.
The SEC's run of dominance will end at some point, maybe it starts this year with Alabama's loss and the possibility of an ACC/B1G championship game (oh god no please not OSU nonononono), but there is a reason it's gone on so long. The SEC has a really high number of teams that have the talent, history, and prestige to win football games and recruit on a high level. This means that in any given year they have maybe 7 teams with a chance to put it all together and be national championship competetive, while other conferences have maybe 3 or 5. It certainly doesn't mean that all SEC teams are better than all other conference teams, or even anything close to it. They just have more teams playing at a high level than any other conference, at least for the moment.
|2 years 37 weeks ago||The point of the Broyles/Johnson example||
I chose these guys in particular because they fit the point very well and hopefully they're players that people on this board are familiar with, what with the Lions and all. Between those two players, one is clearly a Pro Bowl caliber receiver, and the other is just a guy in the NFL. In the league, the difference in talent between those two guys is super obvious, because they're playing at a really high level of competition.
Any player good enough to make it to the NFL is likely to be some level of star in college. At least all-conference level, possibly all-American. So the upgrade from "guy who can play in the NFL" and "guy who can star in the NFL" is minimized at the college level, because both of those guys are better than most of the players they'll face.
The point of all this, if you haven't gotten there already, is that a team with 10 future NFL players in its starting lineup is going to be better than a team with 5 future all-pros and no other NFL caliber players. At least in most instances. The best thing you can have in college football is a large number of good to great players. The number of elite players you have doesn't really matter if the supporting cast isn't there. And you don't measure the supporting cast in pro-bowl appearances, you measure them in the draft.
Another point, all-pro caliber players are exceedingly rare, so small sample sizes make their usefulness as a metric even worse.
|2 years 37 weeks ago||I'll toss this in here||
As a Mizzou fan (and therefore a former follower of the Big 12 and Texas A&M to some degree), I feel like I can provide a bit of insight.
In A&M's last few years in the Big 12, they were always talented and threatening but couldn't quite put things together. It reminded me a bit of the 49ers before Harbaugh got there. I would contribute their sudden success in the SEC more to the rise of Sumlin and Manziel than to lack of competition in the SEC.
As for Mizzou, they had a good 5 year run at the end of their Big 12 life, but they've been the very definition of a program on the rise. They started with an innovative and exciting offense, used that to build a pretty good team, and used that to start recruiting defense generally and offensive linemen. Last year was the first year they had all the pieces in place with no gaping hole in their game, and then all of the offensive playmakers got hurt.
This year they got all those guys back and it shows. This Mizzou team is much, much better than the Chase Daniel team that ranked #1 in the nation going into the conference championship or the Blaine Gabbert team that beat Oklahoma and Texas. For the first time ever, they have an offensive line good enough that they can run the ball in the red zone, which has made a huge difference. I remember watching Mizzou games past and it was a forgone conclusion that if they didn't score from more than 20 yards out they'd have to settle for a field goal.
So while the SEC is probably overrated in the media, I don't think the performance of Mizzou and A&M is necessarily a sign of that so much as those teams reaching the potential that was there already. And really, the SEC is still probably the best conference in college football, and the addition of Mizzou and A&M has only made it stronger. Subjectively, there are probably 3-5 really good teams in the SEC, and the other conferences have 2-3 each.
|2 years 37 weeks ago||I disagree very strongly here||
The difference between (for example) a Ryan Broyles and a Calvin Johnson is minimized in college, because they're both substantially better than the average competition they're going to face.
I don't know that "players drafted" is a great metric of conference strenth, but I think pro-bowlers is a terrible one.
|2 years 38 weeks ago||I have a lot of begrudging respect for MSU this year||
Of course I want them to resume their eternal place in line behind Michigan in the future, but I think they have a legit top ten team this year. I don't have too much of a problem with them going to the Rose Bowl, because I think they'll represent the B1G at least as well as any other school would (at least from a football standpoint, although their general goonishness seems to be down this year as well).
Given the choice between OSU prolonging their winning streak, winning the Big Ten title and appearing in the national championship game, or MSU taking the Big Ten and going to the Rose Bowl, I think the choice it obvious. I hope MSU's defense crushes the Buckeyes.
|2 years 41 weeks ago||Like most things in football||
There's a lot of reasons behind it. If DBs and LBs "bite" on a run fake it might help receivers get open. Also if they get so used to run fakes, then might react more slowly the next time you actually run the football. Also, all the stuff Space Coyote (who is way more knowledgeable than me about this kind of thing) said, and some of the things I listed above. That's a whole lot of potential reasons to run play action, and if it succeeds in accomplishing any of those objectives it might be considered a wise move.
The reason I brought this up though was not discuss the merits of PA, how effectively Michigan runs it, or whether they should stop doing it. I just noticed that a lot of people here including, somewhat surprisingly, the actual employed writers for this site have been totally condemning PA calls simply because they didn't accomplish one of the many many thing a PA call can accomplish.
We all agree, no one was "fooled," safties didn't take the "bait," and whatever other phrases have been tossed around about how PA was unhelpful. I'm just surprised that very few of the very knowledgeable people around this blog have even acknowledged that PA can have a purpose other than helping receivers get open.
|2 years 41 weeks ago||Man, everyone's harping on play action.||
It's not my favorite playcall in the world, but this makes 3/3 of Ace, Brian and Seth criticizing the PA playcalls for reasons that aren't necessarily related to why those calls are made in the first place. The way it's been talked about on the front page and on the board makes me think that everyone here expects PA in real life to work like it does in a game of Madden, where the entire defense runs balls-out toward the line of scrimmage and then you can loft an easy TD to an outside receiver.
While this would certainly be a nice result, it's not really what PA is designed to do. Especially in a game like this past one, PA is used to slow down the pass rush from the D-line by making them more conscious of staying in their running lanes. It is also expected to alter the path of blitzing linebackers to bring them closer to the RB, thereby giving the RB a better shot at blocking them.
Now, whether or not PA actually succeeded in doing any of this against MSU is certainly up for debate (it's also usually supposed to have an impact on LBs dropping into coverage, but that very clearly did not happen), and the negative of turning DG's back to the line is a real argument against it. But with all the pretty advanced football knowledge we usually get out of the three gentlemen mentioned above, I kind of expected more relevant criticisms of the PA calls as opposed to the "Nobody was fooled! Safeties didn't bite!" stuff.
|2 years 41 weeks ago||A little too much star gazing in here||
Most of these offerings put Glasgow in an either/or with Kugler, and unmentioned at guard. This leads me to believe that these proposed lineups have been put together based entirely on recruiting profiles as opposed to performance. Yes, Glasgow is a former walk-on, but he's also been the closest thing Michigan has had to a decent interior lineman this year, and by a pretty wide margin. I'd be shocked if he doesn't start until he graduates.
|2 years 41 weeks ago||Remember David Brandt?||
Michigan's center on the Single Greatest Collegiate Offensive Line Ever Assembled.
Went undrafted but still started most of his rookie season with Washington, and was in line to be the starter the next year as well before he abruptly retired to return to his hometown and teach. If I remember correctly, he did it because he had a learning disability that he'd managed to overcome and wanted to help other kids through the same process.
Here's an interview Michael Rothstein did with him a while back: http://www.annarbor.com/sports/catching-up-with-former-michigan-offensiv...
|2 years 42 weeks ago||I'm just going to put this here||
I need to say this otherwise it will just keep eating at me. Funk is the Tony Gibson of this staff.
Many excuses were made for the poor play of the secondary under Tony Gibson, but the fact is not one single player on those teams improved under his coaching. Poor play from upperclassmen forced them to put highly-touted (or even not-so-highly-touted) underclassmen on the field who were clearly overwhelmed. This wouldn't have been too big of an issue, if not for the fact that those underclassmen never got any better as they accumulated experience.
That is almost exactly the state of the offensive line today. I don't think there's a single lineman from the past three seasons that we can honestly say has "improved." Lewan, Molk, and Schofield all maintained the same relatively high skill level they came in with. Barnum and Omameh regressed if anything. Mealer never grew into a reliable player, nor have Miller or Bryant. We're in a position right now where highly touted and physically gifted Chris Bryant, with 2 years learning the system under his belt, is basically indistinguishable from highly touted and physically gifted Kyle Bosch, with 6 months of learning the system under his belt.
This is a problem with the coaching staff, and if Hoke does nothing to address the issue, then he is as much at fault as RichRod was for Gibson's shortcomings. It's clear that, for whatever reason, this staff can't develop offensive linemen. It might be a strength and conditioning issue, it might be an offensive scheme issue, but most likely it's a position coach issue. Hoke is the man in charge, and he bears the ultimate responsibility for these failings. If he doesn't take any action and these OL problems persist, drastic measures will be called for.
|2 years 43 weeks ago||I think you're reaching a bit here||
The only point he appears to be making is that he doesn't understand why "swear words" by their general definition are offensive. There was nothing in there about free speech or first amendment rights. Just a guy noting that a particular aspect of this "controversy" doesn't make sense to him (a point which I agree on, by the way). If you want this to turn into a First Amendment debate (and I think it would be a fun and interesting one), you should probably pick a different comment to respond to, otherwise you're just constructing a big-ole straw man.
|2 years 43 weeks ago||I'm with him on this||
I don't get why swearwords are offensive either. I think that's what makes it an interesting point. disagreements happen all the time, but I just really do not understand why people are offended by standard swear words.
Why is "fuck" really bad and "screw" only kind of bad? Why is "shit" really bad and "crap" only kind of bad? Those pairs of words are basically completely interchangeable in virtually all contexts, yet one of them is universally recognized as inappropriate and one of them is not. Why?
Now I'm not saying we should immediately do away with the idea of swearwords just because I don't understand it, but I am honestly curious if anyone here has actual reasoning as to why some seemingly random words are more offensive than others, outside of "that's just the way it is."
|2 years 44 weeks ago||Meh||
Honestly this is way less egregious to me than if it had been an intentional play with 11 men, 3 WRs trips left. I mean most of the OPs arguments about how it must have been 10 men were something along the lines of "there's no a way marginally intelligent offense would put a play like this on the field!" Which is true.
Allowing a play to run with 10 guys on the field is a mental lapse that's on par with the delay of game penalties we took: it's a bad management mistake, but it's not necessarily indicative of a larger problem. If this formation had been intentional on the other hand, it would mean that at some point Borges crafted a formation in which there was no one to block the left side of the line and Gallon was covered up and ineligible and thought, "Yeah, this will totally work, no need to build in a check to throw the ball outside, I'm certain a run to the right will go just fine here." The second of those two options is way, way less forgivable to me, so I'm actually glad this thread seems to have reached a consensus that there were only 10 guys on the field. That's actually preferable here.
|2 years 44 weeks ago||I said this in another thread yesterday||
But at this point I don't care how he coaches the rest of the way anymore. He's called fantastic games in the past, with brilliant gameplans and playcalls that play off each other beautifully. He's also called absolute stinkers just as often.
At this point, I really believe that Borges comes up with a fresh gameplan every week and simply has no real idea of whether or not it will work until he puts it on the field. This wouldn't be too terrible if it weren't occurring in conjunction with his utter inability to admit when his gameplan is flawed and move on to something else.
I think this past game is the best possible example of this. He came in with a gameplan of how to get the power running game working. Having never really used this gameplan before, the only indication he had of whether or not it would be effective was his own intuition. After it became incredibly obvious to everyone involved that the gameplan was flawed and the power running game was dead in the water, Borges seems to say "Nah, I'm still pretty sure this is going to work."
As for replacements Cam Cameron was not surprisingly my first thought as well, but you're right he's probably not going anywhere. But honestly I don't really care that much who they look to put in there. Changing coordinators is a lot easier than changing head coaches, especially since Borges isn't really involved in recruiting. They just need to dump him and find a new guy to try out. Maybe an up-and-coming NFL position coach, maybe a lower-level college coordinator, really just someone else.
Borges is clearly not the answer at this point, so the longer we spend with him at the helm, the longer we have to wait until we find a guy that is. Maybe we have to run through a couple OCs before we get there, that's fine. As long as we are trying to get there, and not just settling for good enough.
|2 years 44 weeks ago||Fine, if we're going to be serious||
This post in SmartFootball mentions how the ineligible receiver things works on bubble screens:
But as has been mentioned on this site and in a few other places, as long as the linemen stay within a few yards of the LOS, the refs won't call it. I think this was covered extensively in a post by Chris Brown on Grantland regarding Dana Holgorsen's offense, but I can't find it at the moment.
|2 years 44 weeks ago||Did you see the pictures above?||
The line getting too far downfield is not exactly a concern at the moment...
|2 years 44 weeks ago||Guh||
I spent most of the last 2 years deep in Borges-apologist mode. That ended after OSU last year, when the parade of excuses I kept trotting out just no longer held enough weight to excuse what I had seen. Since then I have been mostly neutral and undecided, taking the good games (still love the gameplan and playcalling in the bowl last year) for what they're worth and hoping for better things to come once the right pieces were in the right places.
I think this game has pushed me over the edge. I don't necessarily disagree with the larger strategy. As others have said the punt at the end of regulation was probably the right call, and playing conservative for the FG in OTs 1 and 3 was the right move and probably works 9 times out of 10, we just got unlucky with Gibbons' misses/blocks.
But saying the conservative strategy makes sense is a completely different thing than saying repeatedly running the same utterly futile HB power runs makes sense. This post is the nail in the coffin for me. The only reason you can possibly present to continue running your HB into a never ending wall of bodies is to set the defense up for a counter of some kind. The play highlighted above is THE time to run said counter if you're ever going to do it. Including the safety overhanging the formation, there are 9 guys lined up over 8 guys. The other safety is shaded toward the formation as well, leaving ONE defender lined up over THREE WRs, with only one other defender in position to provide any kind of help.
If you have a counter for this play, if you have the thing that you're "setting the defense up for" by running these futile tackle over HB powers over and over and over again, RIGHT THERE is the time that you run it. By simply pounding pointlessly into the line yet again here, Borges basically admitted that there was no greater purpose to this running scheme and he was just doing it because he thought it would gain yards on its own. And after he received definitive proof that it was not going to gain yards, he assumed that the evidence was wrong, his original plans were infallible, and if he just kept calling this play over and over and over again he'd finally get the fantastic results he'd been so sure would be there from play #1.
In summary, I still don't have much of a qualm with the overall conservative offensive strategy in this game. The problem comes from the plays that were called in an attempt to implement said strategy. I think Borges has a well deserved reputation as a tinkerer, mad scientist, evil genius, whatever you want to call it. However, in the greatest tradition of all of the above descriptions, he has no real idea of whether or not his plans will succeed until he puts them into practice. That's how we end up with OSU 2011, Iowa 2012, and South Carolina 2013, yet still get stuck with MSU 2011, OSU 2012, and PSU 2013.
To me, this is an unacceptable tradeoff. It's taken me a while, but I'm ready to say it: Fire Al Borges.
|2 years 45 weeks ago||I hope you're right,||
But we've though that James Franklin's "lightbulb" turned on after the first few games of every season he's played so far. It's basically impossible to judge Mizzou by their non-conference slate. They play an annual group of cupcakes that would make Wisconsin blush.
|2 years 45 weeks ago||David Moorman||
By bringing up David Moorman, you've just helped me pinpoint exactly what the problem is with Michigan's interior offensive line this year (and last year): Not enough guys named Dave!
Hopefully David Dawson will step up and fix this problem next year, and maybe this David Moorman fellow can help in the same regard a little down the line.
|2 years 50 weeks ago||I can't take personal credit for these||
They're my team names, but I had a much cleverer friend come up with them. Last year: Does Brady have to Hoke a bitch. This year: The Chronicles of Denardia.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||See my post below||
I apologize for flying off the handle there, I try to avoid personal attacks for the most part, and while I still think your comment above was reaching it didn't deserve a comparison to Wolverines Dominate, who I'm still fairly certain is just a troll.
I agree with you to some extent, I think Green showed pretty conclusively that he's going to be a better back than Rawls, but I think based an a super limited sample size Rawls is playing better right now. Green has a burst that is really impressive for his size, he just needs to learn how to use that power to break tackles.
I think Rawls had a very similar thing going on last year. He had size and power, but went down way earlier than he should have because he didn't know how to use them. What I saw from him yesterday suggested to me that maybe the light went on for him. What I saw from Green suggests that he still needs to learn those same skills, but when he does he'll be an outstanding player.
Anyway, I'm gonna head out for a bit and maybe come back to the board in a few days. I think that would be best, both for everyone here and for my own sanity. Gotta keep myself from taking these things too seriously.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||You're probably right||
I participated in a couple of conversations about this in other threads on the board yesterday, but for some reason seeing it get its own thread after all that just made me feel like some combination of this guy:
And this guy:
I think I'm going to take a few days off from reading and commenting on the board, at least until the UFRs go up. I think the lack of game film (other than MGoBlue.com's ridiculously zoomed-in highlights) has made me just get angry in places where I would have previously pointed to video evidence. Damn T3 Media.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||Touting?||
Note how at no point did I insinuate that Rawls should start, or even get any more carries than he got yesterday. But he ran through an arm tackle, which is more than anyone other than Fitz did.
And Norfleet, but I'm assuming he doesn't count.
Also I don't know why I'm arguing with you, you're almost as bad as Wolverines Dominate.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||I just saw this thread on the Android app||
And went and got my computer specifically so I could downvote this thread. This is seriously the stupidest opinion I can recall reading on this board. There is no way in all the world that you reached this conclusion by actually watching people play football yesterday. You're clearly just enamored with recruiting rankings and the stat sheet at the end of the day.
There were two running backs yesterday that showed the ability to either make people miss or run through contact, and they were Fitz Toussaint and (shockingly enough) Thomas Rawls. Derrick Green showed off a ton of potential, but very little actual skill. To call for a major depth chart overhaul (Green seems to be 4th or 5th, based on how the coaches were playing guys) based on 11 garbage time carries against a MAC team is asinine.
I hope for your sake you're drunk or high or have some other excuse for this shameful thread.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||Really?||
I don't know how you reached that conclusion. He was the beneficiary of some of the best blocking the OL managed on the day, misread a few blocks and bounced outside when he should't have, and went down on first contact almost every time.
I think he's going to be a great player when he learns to convert his fantastic size and speed into collegiate-level power running and learns to read and react a little better (no surprise, he's a true freshman after all), but he's not there yet.
Fitz showed me that he's the unquestionable #1 today, and I'm happy about that. Green showed me that he has a ton of potential, and I'm happy about that too. Rawls (!) and Smith both showed that they're no slouches either, so I'd say the RB situation for the next few years is looking pretty good, but anointing Green now is premature.
|2 years 51 weeks ago||Disagree on Green||
While I still think he has a ton of potential, he looked like the #4 option to me today. When he got yards it was because the O-line was opening gaping holes for him, and he got brought down on first contact on every one of his runs, and he usually went down right where he was hit (except for the TD, where he got a little extra push).
I liked what I saw from Smith as a runner better, although he had a bit of "Poor Damn Toussaint" syndrome going on, with guys hitting him in the backfield before he had a chance to get going. But he made some nice cuts and kept his legs driving for a few extra yards on every one of his touches.
The guy who surprised me was Rawls. He didn't touch it much, but he showed a quickness to the hole and a little bit of wiggle that had been completely absent in his game up until now. He also ran through an arm tackle or two, which is something he was always supposed to do but never seemed to get down in the past.
Drake Johnson didn't really get a chance to impress, going down with an injury right before what would have likely been his first featured drive, so maybe he deserves to be in the conversation too. But after this game, based on a very small sample size, the "feature back" depth chart looks to me like:
|3 years 10 hours ago||Nice try, you almost had me convinced||
For a second there I really considered giving you some honest advise, from one human being to another, on how to be less standoffish and thus actually make a contribution to this board instead of just running around raining on various parades.
|3 years 11 hours ago||The troll that keeps on trolling||
Every time I see one of your posts it rekindles my internal debate over whether you're a troll or just that big of a douche.
|3 years 2 weeks ago||Perhaps that was poorly worded||
I'm a programmer, not a writer, so I'm going to use parentheses in an attempt to clarify:
Use (Firefox with Greasemonkey) or (Chrome).
Greasemonkey is an addon for Firefox that allows you to install scripts like the one linked above as mini-addons. Chrome will do this on it's own, but the process is a bit trickier. Link!
Once installed, scripts will run every time you visit a page within one of their "included" domains. The script in question here runs on mgoblog.com, so every time you visit any url in the mgoblog.com domain, it will run. And it will not run on any other sites.
|3 years 2 weeks ago||I'm very late to the party on this||
But if you use Firefox with Greasemonkey or Chrome, you can install this script:
Which fixes pagination on the various sidebar aggregation areas and does a few other things to streamline the site experience.
|3 years 5 weeks ago||I know this probably won't help...||
But I'll try at least:
|3 years 6 weeks ago||2009 Illinois||
I don't think that one yard would have made as much of a difference as we all hope.
2009/2010 Michigan reminded me a lot of some of the 2000s Mizzou teams I had the misfortune of rooting for. Those teams displayed a tendency that we dubbed "The Mizzou Fade," in which Mizzou would shoot out to an early lead, appear to have everything in hand, and then completely blow it in the second half. This came in microcosm and macrocosm versions, as the "good start, terrible finish" tendency was often duplicated across the course of a season as 5 - 1 starts turned into 6 - 6 finishes.
I guess the point I'm trying to make here is that even with a touchdown to go up 20 - 7, the "Michigan Fade" that was on display pretty consistently in 2009 and 2010 would very likely have still dragged Michigan to a loss in that game.
|3 years 8 weeks ago||Do it for the good of the country||
Seriously, cable companies have been operating for years based on the assumption that regardless of how terrible they are people will still pay them because they have no real alternative.
Cut your TV package, get rid of your landline, and if you live in an apartment or an area where the houses are close together, share a WiFi network with a neighbor. Get one or two subscriptions to online entertainment (Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, etc) and stream sports from wherever you can find them.
The more that people like you do this, the faster the model of government-sanctioned telecom monopolies will come crashing down, which is the single best thing that can happen in entertainment consumption.
|3 years 8 weeks ago||Wow||
I don't know if I've ever seen anyone completely fail to miss a point by such an incredible degree. Well done.
|3 years 8 weeks ago||An additional point you could make||
There's very little "choice" involved with cable companies. They're government-sanctioned monopolies, so there's no competition and they have no incentive to provide customers with a better product or a lower price. They generally offer very little in the way of graduated pricing in order to force people to pay for everything instead of only paying for the things they want.
The only choice you really have is to use them or not use them. If you want to use them, then you have to pay them a ridiculous amount of money. You've chosen not to use them. Excellent choice.
|3 years 9 weeks ago||I have one problem with the Carr approach||
Namely, taking your starters out of the game when the opponent still has time to came back and win... and then they do. Of course the starters would go back in if it got close again, but sometimes (looking at you 1999 Illinois game) that wasn't enough.
|3 years 10 weeks ago||Most interesting quarterback in the world||
|3 years 10 weeks ago||Got it.||
Thank you. That would have bothered me otherwise.
|3 years 10 weeks ago||I'm so close to this one||
Can you give me a hint? What does the "s" stand for? That's where I lose it. Can you at least tell me what part of speech it is?
|3 years 10 weeks ago||Pride from strange places||
I am surprisingly proud that I figured this out.
|3 years 10 weeks ago||I can relate||
I've lost respect for so many open source projects when I see they've bundled some stupid fucking bloatware into their installer. I know you need to raise money and stuff, but seriously find another fucking way.
Along those lines, bloatware in general. It's not as bad on desktop PCs anymore, but remember back in the day when every PC manufacturer would bundle all sorts of worthess shit into their operating systems? That was terrible. And now Android manufacturers seem to be doing the same goddamned thing. HAVE YOU LEARNED NOTHING?
I feel like I'm on a roll now so I'm going to keep going. Companies that refuse to learn from the mistakes of companies that came before them. Watching the movie industry follow the same fruitless path of the music industry in their attempts to stop piracy/sharing, and now the book industry is starting in on it the exact same way. DRM DOES NOT WORK! IT HAS NEVER WORKED! There are better ways to go about this.
This has gone a little more off-base than I'd originally planned, but switching back toward the original point, people who think that computers are magical, indecipherable back boxes and that because I do something related to computers for a job I must be able to solve all the problems they're having. Seriously, all I do is this: http://xkcd.com/627/. If you can't do that yourself, it's not because you're "computer illiterate," it's because you're dumb.
|3 years 13 weeks ago||Bonus in that 2003 Purdue Michigan Replay||
At around 5:25, freshman Lamarr Woodley flies into the backfield and forces Kyle Orton to dodge and make a hurried pass that is intercepted just outside the endzone by freshman Leon Hall.
|3 years 13 weeks ago||This is awesome||
We couldn't possibly heap enough praise onto this piece. A one-on-one with Michigan's offensive coordinator to discuss the detailed minutia of how this football team works. I hope there are many more parts to this series. And maybe this series could lead to similar ones with other assistant coaches? Man, this is just such good stuff, I don't want it to ever end.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||I looked through the website||
Can't really tell exactly what it is they do... Could one of you maybe provide a little insight there? What role might there be for a web developer?
|3 years 14 weeks ago||We're trying to avoid this||
Because we're a one-car-household right now and we'd like to stay that way. the hope is to get somewhere near an AATA bus line so she can take the bus to campus.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||Lots||
I'm getting my website put back together, it's been in a little bit of disrepair over the last few years because I haven't needed it. The blog is still a pretty good representation of what I can do (even though there's probably only a dozen or so posts), but the home page and work experience sections are basically empty right now. It should be running full steam within a week or two:
Like I said above, I really love writing code and solving complex problems, and I don't want to end up in a glorified data entry position which has happened before.
Thanks for taking an interest, I appreciate it.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||Yup, tried that||
It was the first choice. There's still a small chance it will work out, but unlikely. My boss's boss's boss's boss is talking to HR about it today, but the word that's trickled back to me is that there would be some tax issues that will likely prevent it from happening.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||Thanks||
I actually work for a University now, on the team responsible for primary development of hundreds of the University's public-facing websites. It sounds like this "central web development service" might be something similar? Do you have any more information about this? A quick Googling didn't turn up much.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||Thanks||
Do you know of any companies that rent said duplexes?
|3 years 14 weeks ago||I don't have a set number in mind||
But one problem is I'm a little spoiled by the extemely low cost of living in St. Louis. Right now we have a 650ft2 one-bedroom in a fantastic area of St. Louis City and we pay $600/month, which I'm aware is not something we'll be able to even approach in Ann Arbor if we want to be close to campus/downtown.
I've seen a couple outliers with pretty good location for $700 - $750, but they of course have their drawbacks as well (usually size). I'd like to stay under $800 if possible.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||Thank you||
This is a ton of useful information. That property company is one I haven't seen yet, so I'll look through their stuff and see if I can find something.
Mostly I just want to do development. I love writing code and solving complex problems. I've had jobs before that look promising and then turn out to be glorified content entry, and I want to make sure I don't end up in that situation again.
One of the first things I did when we decided on the move to Ann Arbor was read that "where to eat" piece. There is one apartment we're looking at right now that is absurdly tiny but also 2 blocks from Frita Batidos, so that's one for the "pro" column.
We don't know our exact move-in date yet, it kind of depends on where/when I find a job. Latest will probably be mid-August. When is student move-in?
|3 years 14 weeks ago||Hmm...||
Interesting idea, and while that certainly is a simple fix, I have a feeling it would just turn out as exchanging one form of stress for another.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||Thanks||
I've never heard of this site before. I already see a couple things that look promising.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||I know||
But it's an admin/sales office. Unless that changed really recently, there's either no or very few actual development jobs there.
|3 years 14 weeks ago||I think we'll be back eventually||
The fiancé grew up in St. Louis, and she's much more attached to it than I am to Michigan (the state, that is). Also I've really enjoyed my time in this city, so I wouldn't be surprised if we came back here and settled down after the grad school thing is done.
I am excited to have more options than Buffalo Wild Wings when a game is on BTN though...
|3 years 15 weeks ago||This was my initial reaction||
But reading more of the stories which make references to lots of false reports in the past that would get the families' hopes up, I imagine frantic calls to 911 claiming to be one of these 3 girls might not have been that uncommon of an event. You can't expect a person to instantly realize that this one is the real thing when there have been a bunch of false positives in the past.
The dispatcher comes off as a little bit of a douche, but as long as they (he? she? I can't really tell from the voice) did their job and made sure the police got there as quickly as possible I don't think they should lose their job.
|3 years 16 weeks ago||I use a few||
I've actually done some relatively recent research into this, because my fiancé and I decided that we should start doing finances like grown-ups and stop putting everything on our debit cards. We got a few rewards cards between us that we use for different things. A lot of cards are doing targeted rewards now, so you can get more back by using certain cards for specific things instead of one card for everything.
AmEx Blue Cash Preferred
This is my favorite, because its returns are highest on gas and groceries, which are huge recurring purchases. It does 6% back on groceries and 3% back on gas.
Chase Amazon Visa
Pretty much any "stuff" I buy is online, and usually through Amazon. This card does 3% back on any Amazon purchases, and rewards can be applied directly to future Amazon purchases.
The drawback with this one is it uses Citi's "Thank You Points" system, which kind of sucks, but if you always redeem for gift cards or loan payments they work out to the same '1 point == 1 cent' that makes for good return value. That said, this card does 5 points/dollar on restaurant purchases, so if you eat out a lot, this is a good one.
Capital One Venture
The one in all the commercials! This is our fallback card for buying things that don't fall into any of the above categories. It doesn't do any targeted rewards that I'm aware of, but it does 2% back on everything. Most rewards cards do 1% back as their catch-all, so this card basically doubles that.
|3 years 16 weeks ago||Well played sir.||
Reminds me of a friend of mine who once responded to being called immature with "I know you are, but what am I?"
|3 years 16 weeks ago||This is wildly inaccurate||
If YouTube was still a startup they would have no resources to fight copyright claims, and would have to pull videos even more often than they do now. As it is, Google has used its clout to get some copyright holders to allow videos to stay up in exchange for a percentage of ad revenues. This DOES NOT happen if YouTube is still a small company.
Also remember that before Google bought YouTube there was very little copyrighted content on it. Back in those days it was still serving its original purpose, which was essentially a dump for home videos and the like.
|3 years 16 weeks ago||I'm suppressing a Journalism rant here||
Showing "both sides" of an issue (any issue) in no way makes coverage fair, balanced, acceptable, appropriate, or any other adjective you might want to use. Usually issues have way more than two sides. Having some guy spout his opinion, and then having some second guy spout a disagreeing opinion does not make everything OK. Two wrongs don't make a right.
This is not personally directed at you, I just quiver every time I see Crossfire-style "debate" treated as news and/or journalism.
|3 years 16 weeks ago||If that's worth noting||
Then I have to come at you from the other end of the cynicism spectrum and suggest that maybe this is increasing his chances of staying in the NBA.
34-year-old career backups aren't exactly a hot commodity, and now he's got a name and publicity that some team owners are going to want to attach themselves to.
Let me clarify here that I am NOT suggesting that this was a factor in his decision to come out, just that if we're considering the implications on his playing career, we should consider them from both sides.
|3 years 16 weeks ago||Yeah, it's a big deal||
This is the first active professional athlete in one of the four major sports to come out. Retired players have come out in the past, and have often been met with hatred and vitriol by their former teammates and colleagues. Jason Collins is the first person to expose himself to that risk from current teammates and colleagues.
I'm glad that you (and hopefully others) have lived in such a way that this seems like a pretty run-of-the-mill event. But if you need to see some examples of what Collins and any other players considering similar action might be up against, look at the reaction when John Amaehci came out a few years ago.
The most prominent reaction came from a man Michigan fans should know pretty well, Tim Hardaway Sr., who said "I hate gay people" and claimed that if he was aware of a gay teammate he would try to get them fired. He's since apologized and ended up becoming quite involved in the promotion of gay rights, but that's the kind of reaction Collins will be receiving from at least some subset of current NBA players.
|3 years 17 weeks ago||By the way,||
Just found this article about the fallout from the Feminist Wire piece, and it confirms the author is a rape victim.
|3 years 17 weeks ago||Not "should", but certainly will||
This is a serious psychologically damaging event. Obviously it shouldn't prejudice a person against an entire group they identify their assailant as a part of, but it will. Pretty much every time. Logic and reason are notoriously terrible at overcoming visceral fear and emotion in situations like this.
I would also argue that in the mind of a victim, the several cases she cites of unethical behavior going unpunished could easily represent evidence that the university essentially sanctioned her assault. To you and I this may seem like a clear misreading of the facts, but (unless you have something you'd like to share) we're not victims of sexual assault.
The main thing I would try to get across to you is that you shouldn't assume that if you were faced with this situation you would be able to handle it any more reasonably than she did. She's just another human being trying to cope with a terrible situation. She's now the laughingstock of the internet, and I don't think she deserves that.
|3 years 17 weeks ago||You've missed my point entirely.||
Imagine for a second that you're a victim of sexual assault, and because your assailant is a member of a sports team you forever associate that sports team with your experience. Then that sports team redesigns their logo with the purpose of making it more "aggressive." I think its perfectly reasonable to expect a severe emotional reaction in that situation, and that is what we're seeing in this piece.
She's not trying to promote a rational point that logos promote rape, she's drawing an emotional connection between UConn athletics and her own experience and trying to put that connection into words. That is an extraordinarily difficult thing to do, and I don't fault her in the least for turning out a disjointed, unclear series of comments.
Again, IF she was sexually assaulted by a UConn athlete, then I think this piece is part of her personal attempt to cope and come to terms with her experience. And if that's the case, then regardless of its content or how incoherent it seems, I salute her for the bravery it takes to put such a difficult thing into words and post it for the world to see.
|3 years 17 weeks ago||Hmm...||
First, this is a very poorly written piece that does a terrible job of expressing coherent thoughts. As some have mentioned above, I think the author's point is largely that the university should not be spending its resources on re-branding and should instead focus on addressing serious problems in its athletic culture.
However, the reason I felt compelled to post here is that I think there might be a meaning to the last paragraph that we're not picking up on. I think her "real life Husky" line (note the capital "H") is a reference to a specific UConn athlete, and given the context probably one who assaulted/attempted to assault the author.
If that's the case, it changes the whole meaning of the piece (at least in my mind) from misguided rant to coping mechanism. I can't fault a victim of assault/sexual assault for having a knee-jerk reaction to something that reminds them of their experience, and the over-emotional, poorly presented argument in this piece reads exactly like that type of reaction.
In short, I sincerely hope that if the author of this piece IS a victim of sexual assault that she is receiving support and help in response to her letter as opposed to scorn.
|3 years 18 weeks ago||It's possible||
The site is currently using gzip compression to serve files, and I never checked it before today so this could be a fairly recent development, and it's possible that it's the cause of your problem.
My first word of advice, and I say this as a web developer who is forced to spend way more of my time than I should compensating for the shortcomings of outdated browsers, is find a way to use a better browser. If this is a work computer you have no control over, well that sucks for you. If this is a home computer, UPGRADE. This is just the beginning of a whole slew of problems you'll be experiencing as the world stops caring enough to develop for your platform.
Since you're using Tiger, I assume the machine has the old Apple PowerPC processor as opposed to an Intel x86, which already means that no one has created a new piece of software for your system in at least 3 years. Move on. Just get a netbook or something, seriously, anything that runs a modern processor and operating system.
OK, now that I'm done lecturing, this link might be able to help you:
Essentially this process configures your browser so that when it makes a request to a server it specifies that it cannot accept compressed files. Hopefully then the server will send your browser an uncompressed version, and hopefully that will solve your problem (for now, until something worse crops up because of your ancient browser).
|3 years 19 weeks ago||Mark May is probably right about McCoy||
If we assume Sam Bradford is the #1 QB out of the 2010 draft class, who's #2 if not McCoy? Tim Tebow? Jimmy Clausen? John Skelton? Mike Kafka?
|3 years 19 weeks ago||I'm getting the same thing||
But as Schembo said, I don't have to re-log in. As soon as I click on a thread or post, all of my user info is back and I appear to be logged in. Seems to be an issue with the home page specifically.
|3 years 19 weeks ago||Fair enough||
There seems to be a sentiment from a lot of people in this thread (including/especially the OP) that they were drawing too much attention to themselves. I assumed your post was in agreement with that idea, a point on which I appear to have been mistaken. Apologies.
|3 years 19 weeks ago||I don't get this argument||
How exactly were they trying to steal the spotlight for themselves? I noticed two moments in game coverage that featured the Fab 5. One of them was the pregame shot of Chris Webber actively avoiding the spotlight so that he could get into the game just to watch and be a fan. The other was a singe shot of the other four in the crowd, just being there and being fans. Seriously, how do you look at Jalen Rose wearing a giant foam wolverine hat and cheering his heart out as "drawing attention" to himself? What did Juwan, Jimmy, or Ray do to draw attention to themselves? Where is this coming from?
|3 years 19 weeks ago||"Just watch like every other fan"||
You mean like stand with their friends in the stands, wear their team colors, cheer in support, root for their team, and maybe wave if the camera gets pointed at them? Like, exactly what they did?
If you want to get angry about the attention the 5 are getting, don't be mad at them. They just wanted to go to a game and root for their team in the most exciting moment this program has experienced in 20 years. They were not hogging spotlight, and the attention paid to them was the same filler that gets paid to parents and other famous alumni during slow moments in game coverage.
You could make a case that Jalen was putting himself in the spotlight, but I think that's an inaccurate assessment as well. The guy has a job as a sports analyst, of course they're going to ask him about this team. What do you want him to do? He could refuse to answer completely, or maybe quit his job, but I think either of those things would have been much more attention grabbing and distracting. And when he did answer, he was very deferential to the current team, and I think he did a great job of keeping the spotlight pointed in the right direction.
|3 years 19 weeks ago||Yes, but why do you think we||
Yes, but why do you think we consider those the most egregious calls? I would wager that it has an awful lot to do with the fact that those were the ones that went against our team.
McGary's kicked ball was way more obvious than the missed goaltend, and he commited at least two obvious fouls after he picked up his fourth that just weren't called.
The two calls against Burke were bad, but the call that sent Spike to the line for the first time looked like an awfully clean play. And Hardaway spent the whole game shoving Louiville around with his elbow and never got called for it.
The refs were terrible, but they were terrible in the same way the refs at the 2005 Alamo Bowl were terrible. If we had won last night Louisville fans would be claiming that the refs screwed them, and we'd all be saying that it was called badly for everyone so no one gained an advantage.
|3 years 19 weeks ago||Guh.||
I hope everyone in here is aware that there is NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER between posts like this and the ones we use to make fun of the MSU fan base for being obsessed with Michigan. As long as we're all clear on that, I'll just get out of here without further comment.
|3 years 20 weeks ago||WHAT THE HELL MAN!||
Beat Louisville? WE ARE NOT THERE YET!
|3 years 20 weeks ago||I doubt it's a conscious thing||
You're certainly not wrong, the writing style of pretty much everyone on this blog tends toward Brian's to some degree. I just doubt that's a conscious choice on the part of the writers so much as it is being influenced by a respected source. They respect and enjoy Brian's writing (as do I), and they start to subtly emulate it in their own style.
I think Seth even talked about this in a Dear Diary a few weeks ago after there was a full board post accusing him of being a Brian-knock-off. When you find a style that moves you, your own style is going to be affected.
|3 years 20 weeks ago||I think we're mostly on the same page||
I was trying hard to avoid playing the Penn State card too, but in the respect you mention it does lend itself pretty well to this story.
But to play devil's advocate a bit, why does the public backlash matter if not for money? If the whole world got mad at Rutgers for not firing Rice, but then still gave them TV contracts and still went to their school and still watched their games, would Rutgers have made the same move? I think you could make a compelling argument that the most destructive aspect of the public backlash would have been financial loss.
|3 years 20 weeks ago||I have to kind of agree with Rovell||
The Rice thing was brought to the attention of the Rutgers higher-ups in December and all they did was suspend the guy for 3 games. The only think that has changed since then is this video going public instead of just going to the AD.
Rutgers has basically shown they were unwilling to fire a guy for behaving as terribly as Rice did, and only became willing to do so when the public caught wind and they were threatened with public backlash. Classy move there. Big Ten!
|3 years 20 weeks ago||I have to agree here||
The Spike steal and layup felt like it put the game away. Florida was rallying and our offense was stagnant, then McGary gets something going and we're starting to feel OK. Florida tries to keep the tempo up, get the ball in quick, and answer with some offense of their own, when suddenly Spike takes every last breath of wind out of their sails.
It's amazing watching that whole GIF. You see Spike start to trot up the floor with everyone else, and then the moment just takes him and he knows exactly what he's going to do and exactly where he needs to be. If you watch the replay angle you can see just how good of a job he did hiding behind Wilbekin, keeping that guy right between himself and the inbounder until the last moment.
I'm really starting to like Spike. I know there'll be tons of competition the next few years, but I think we'll be seeing a lot more of him.
|3 years 26 weeks ago||I did the homemade alcohol stove too||
I worked at a sign shop at the time, and used them for the materials to make the stand and windscreen. If you've got a Signs By Tomorrow or something similar nearby, you can probably get a 6x18 length of aluminum for the windscreen and a cheap wire stand (usually used for corrogated plastic yard signs) that you can bend into a pot stand for a couple bucks.
If you're looking for another handy, relativly cheap DIY backpacking project, I suggest the walking stick stool:
It doesn't make the sturdiest walking stick in the world, but it's super worth it to have a comfortable stool to sit on at the end of the day. And since you'd probably be carrying walking stick anyway, it doesn't really add any weight.
|3 years 27 weeks ago||Actually||
I believe it's the team's own winning percentage at 25%
Still an unbelievably simple and unreliable metric.
|3 years 28 weeks ago||Agreed||
The arm strength he displays in his highlight videos is less than impressive, but if you watch his feet and hips when he throws the ball, he's not putting anything behind it. If the staff can teach this kid to use his feet properly, he could end up having a very strong arm.
|3 years 29 weeks ago||I actually have to agree, at least in principle.||
Just straight up getting rid of field goals without replacing them with something seems like a bad idea, but I'm generally pro reducing the importance of the kicker as much as possible. I mean really, the fact that so many games come down to what amounts to random chance bouncing off the the foot of some guy who hasn't really done anything up until that point is kind of ridiculous.
I think there needs to be some way for a team to elect a lower scoring option on 4th down, but it should be an offense vs. defense play, not a kicker vs. probability match up. Something along the lines of moving the ball 3/4 of the way from the line of scrimmage to the goal line. You get one play to score a touchdown, if you score you get 3 points, otherwise the opposing teams takes over at the original line of scrimmage. Obviously not perfect, but still better than field goals.
This is how I felt when the idea of replacing the onside kick with what amounted to a long 4th down play run from the kicking team's 30 yard line. Every opportunity to replace one-off unpracticed luck-of-the-draw special teams plays with actual offense vs. defense football is a good thing.
|3 years 29 weeks ago||Want any help?||
I'm a .NET and web developer mostly, but I've been wanting more and more to try Android development. If you're willing to share your source code, I'd love to dig into it a bit.
I've got a couple ideas for the MGoApp that I've implemented in other languages (specifically converting plain text and line breaks to HTML formatting), and I think the same principles could probably be applied to the app relatively simply.
|3 years 30 weeks ago||I know I'm going to get negged for this, but...||
I know I'm going to get negged for this, but...
|3 years 31 weeks ago||It's from Wikipedia||
Which is also the first place I went to check on that highly doubious acronym claim. Some things are just too cool to be true.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||I feel like I'm missing something here||
Outback bowl ...
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Depends on what you want||
The Transformer is going to give you an experience that more closely resembles using a computer, but with a touchscreen. If you plan to use it to write a decent amount, it's got a pretty sizable advantage with a pretty good built in productivity suite and the keyboard attachment.
If you want a cool touchscreen device for fun and recreation, the Nexus is a good way to go, as would a Kindle Fire or iPad. Those are all very similar devices, so I'd recommend going to an electronics store and playing with them all to see which you're more comfortable with.
What may also be worth a look is a Microsoft Surface. The RT is basically like the ones just mentioned except that it has a USB-host port, which is nice. The Surface Pro that's coming out in a few months will essentially be a full fledged Windows computer in a tablet form, which is awesome, and likely to be expensive.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||At CB...||
Avery has shifted outside a couple times this year in response to minor injuries, and instead of moving a new CB in at nickel, they shifted T. Gordon down and brought in Wilson. I'd expect that's what we'll see again, and while not ideal I don't think it's too much of a downgrade.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Norfleet||
Reading Hoke's explanation makes me feel a little better about the Norfleet move. Sounds like they're still going to give him a chance to show that he can contribute on offense, but just want to get him on the field in some capacity as soon/often as possible.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Hey Magnus||
Magnus, if you're out there, was this one of the guys you had heard rumors about transferring as mentioned in an earlier thread?
|3 years 36 weeks ago||I use an ad blocker too, but I||
I use an ad blocker too, but I turn it off for this site because I would like for Brian to get money and keep this thing going. It's pretty easy to set an exception on most ad blockers, you should do it for sites that you want to support (like this one).
|3 years 36 weeks ago||You need to find a way to||
You need to find a way to make your predictions crazy and improbable like Brian does with the football previews. I realize this is not easy given the difference in prediction format, but I'm sure you can come up with something.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Same. I get these all the||
Same. I get these all the time. And I've never search for or purchased a funny t-shirt, so I have no idea where this comes from.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Note: This survey uses||
|3 years 36 weeks ago||I voted for East/West. I||
I voted for East/West. I think inner/outer would be better for Michigan (and everyone else in the "inner" division that never has to travel very far), but I think East/West is a better move from a conference standpoint, avoiding traveling between the East coast and Nebraska as much as possible.
I also don't think the competitive balance is too bad in East/West, especially if Penn State and MSU fall off a bit as expected in the coming years, and extra especially if Wisconsin can keep going as a perrenial conference contender.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||I don't know about that. The||
I don't know about that. The Rams really like Rodger Saffold at LT, he's just been hurt for a good portion of the year. That team desperatly needs help at the offensive skill positions, so I'd expect to see them go that route.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Certainly can't blame Garmon||
Certainly can't blame Garmon for this call. He clearly knows the score, and is trying to get out of Iowa before permanent damage is done.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||It's technically pronounced||
It's technically pronounced "jif" because the guy who developed the file format says that's how it should be pronounced.
Personally I don't care what he says, it looks like hard-G GIF to me.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||You're absolutly right, which||
You're absolutly right, which is why when public information regarding the identity of the accused is posted I will not argue. But what we have here is not public information, it is a rumor on a comment board.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||Not at all. In fact, in most||
Not at all. In fact, in most cases like this the victim's identity is also protected, and I don't know enough about this case to know why it's different here. And if a protected victim's identity were revealed in rumormongering on this site, I would fight just as hard to get it removed.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||And the player is only||
And the player is only implicated by a random commenter. And he's disputed by another guy two comments later.
The point is, the accusation is far from official. I'd like to think that this site would not spread unfounded criminal rumors about student athletes. Direct people to go to Google and find it for themselves? Sure. But I'm not comfortable with the name being posted here.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||I would like to request that||
I would like to request that a mod please delete this post. The link he posted only includes speculation, and the player he metions has never been formally implecated.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||Since charges were never||
Since charges were never filed, we do not have names.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||I can't fault the university||
I can't fault the university itself too much for not acting on these accusations, but that's only because the investigation mentioned appears to have been so mis-managed that it didn't turn up evidence where it likely should have.
The thing about this story that really makes my stomach turn is the reported flood of text messages from teammates of the accused to alleged victims warning them not to go to the police. My jaded self is prepared to accept that there are some evil people that will commit rape and sexual assualt, but that there's also a great number of people who would willfully cover up such an act is still sickening.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||While presumption of||
While presumption of innocence is a big deal in a case like this (see: Duke Lacrosse), I don't think it's a problem with this author or article.
The author doesn't name the accused assailants, nor does she name any individuals (investigators, university officials, teammates) who could be associated with these crimes. By not targeting any individual, I think the author is trying to point out some fundamental flaws in the way we think about sports as a culture, rather than trying to assign guilt.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||Going to Georgia...||
The most remarkable thing about you standing in the doorway is that it's you, and that you're standing in the doorway.
Anyone? Anyone? Eh?
|3 years 37 weeks ago||Robert Mays wrote this||
I once carried him home after he did 16 shots in half an hour when he was a freshman at Mizzou. Having successful friends is weird.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||And then he'll get tackled||
And then he'll get tackled after a gain of 7 yards and all of the opposing team's drives will start inside the Ravens 40. This would not be a good strategy.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||This proposal is essentially||
This proposal is essentially the same as an onside kick. The only difference is now you're asking your offense to do something improbable and difficult (or your defense to stop it) as opposed to your kicker and special teams.
I'm all for this idea, but it strikes me as one of those "this is way too good of an idea for it to actually happen" kind of things.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||O$U, M$U, and the NC$$ are||
O$U, M$U, and the NC$$ are all in cahoots with Nick Satan and Urban Liar. They pretend to come down hard on State Penn and the University of Spoiled Children, but we know that they're all just stinky cheaters!
Seriously though: http://mgoblog.com/content/official-mgoblog-pet-peeve-list
As soon as I see "O$U," it is impossible for me to imagine you as anything other than a whiny 13-year-old, and I can't take anything you say seriously.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||This has to be the most||
This has to be the most pining for radio that I've ever seen take place on the Internet. Especially for a site that makes fun of newspapers and bundled cable as much as we do. Radio is dead, it has no money, no audience, and no appeal.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||I read that not as him||
I read that not as him accusing you of being political, but prefacing his stated dislike of that show with a "sorry that this comment borders on politics" disclaimer.
|3 years 37 weeks ago||As was pointed out by some||
As was pointed out by some other posters when Reschke was first offered, it may have something to do with cultivating relationships with HS coaches and programs. Reschke is a better example of this than Finley, but it could hold true nonetheless.
HS coaches could look at the lack of a scholarship offer to a player they consider deserving as an insult or a snub. If you want to get back in with another of their players in a few years, they might be less than inviting.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||This is pretty much the only||
This is pretty much the only desirable option at this point. Then at least we get our Big 10 back.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||This exactly.||
The conference does not care about actual exposure or winning the hearts and minds of fans. They just want money, and there are enough GT fans that they'll probably get it.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||Sure they are||
But that doesn't really matter with the reasoning here. The goal is to introduce BTN to as many major markets as possible. It doesn't matter that GT plays second fiddle to UGA, they still have enough fans to get on TV, and that is really all anyone cares about.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||More Daves!||
This is great news. The Michigan football I know and love is built around interior offensive linemen named Dave. Daves Brandt, Baas, Pearson, Petruziello, Moosman, and Molk would be happy to hear this.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||I'm glad you go out of your||
I'm glad you go out of your way to "nofollow" freep links. It's the little things.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||Seems like a Spencer Brinton||
Seems like a Spencer Brinton type move if the coaches are really pursuing it. Hoping he never has to play, but a good depth addition for a couple years before more fresh recruits show up.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||I'm with you that with Smith||
I'm with you that with Smith already on board Isaac would be a better addition than Green given the different skill set he brings to the table. But as far as big plays and long runs are concerned, I haven't been that impressed with Isaac's tape either. He scores on a whole lot of long runs, but they all follow the same pattern:
He has definitely shown more elusiveness than Green, who seems to freeze up like a block of stone when he tries to juke, but it's hard to tell anything other than top-end speed from Isaac's tape. The offense he plays in just doesn't require him to read many holes or beat many guys at the second level.
Of course, this is all gleaned from highlight videos, which may or may not be of any actual use, but if I had just one RB out of M's targets this year, it would probably be Smith.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||I'd rather Alabama than A&M,||
I'd rather Alabama than A&M, but that's about it. Alabama in the Capitol One Bowl might be suffering from a bit of the same "I wish we were playing for the MNC" hangover that caused them to lose against Utah a couple years ago. That to me makes them less scary than A&M. But that's about the only SEC team they're less scary than.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||I'll second this||
I'm doing my best to internalize my bad mood and not take it out on my fiancé over petty little things that in a rational world would not bother me.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||C'mon man||
With so much ammo to actually bitch about Meyer, we don't need to blatantly fabricate evidence.
Meyer was clearly ignoring the reporter shoving a microphone into his face for as long as he could. He was obviously searching the crowd for the Michigan coaching staff, and broke off the interview mid-sentence when he saw Greg Mattison. Both sides showed excellent sportsmanship at the end of the game. No need to break out that tired old trope here.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||It looked like they were||
It looked like they were trying to find each other, and then Meyer got mobbed by fans rushing the field and Hoke's police escort ushered him out for safety.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||I think this makes even less||
I think this makes even less sense to me now than it did before, and that wasn't much.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||Honestly my only goal with||
Honestly my only goal with this was to get someone to read the "Meanwhile, in the mid-majors" sentance in the Batman scene-change voice.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||This is great news for him.||
This is great news for him. Imagine, he could have ended up playing runningback at Iowa. That is not a good career move.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||If you win, that will be the||
If you win, that will be the saddest t-shirt ever.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||29-24 good guys.||
29-24 good guys.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||Thanks. I do find this||
Thanks. I do find this surprising, and it certainly has an affect on the timeframe of what I was talking about, but I don't think it changes the overall point that much.
Mostly, I have to assume that if ESPN is able to get away with charging so much more than pretty much any other channel, then the percentage of current cable subscribers who would subscribe to ESPN directly is very high. I make this assumption because if it was untrue, cable providers would simply refuse to pay that fee and not carry ESPN. Presumably there would be a major revolt from a high percentage of cable subscribers if this happened.
If the percentage of subscribers who would pay for ESPN directly is as high as 50%, then ESPN would have to charge $10/month to individuals to make up the difference. Doesn't sound as nice as $5-$6/month, but it's still awfully reasonable.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||Does ESPN actually get||
Does ESPN actually get $5/cable subscriber? Where's your source for this? I would be shocked if it was true.
If basic cable costs $60/month and provides 60 channels, that's $1/channel if every last cent of the subscriber fees went directly to the content providers. But of course, a huge chunk of that money goes to support the cable company's infrastructure and profits.
So let's be extremely generous and say that only 50% of subscriber fees go back to the cable company, and the rest gets distributed to the content providers. That leaves an average of $0.50/subscriber for each channel. Of course, some channels may demand more than others, so in this scenario it's possible to assume that ESPN gets upwards of $1/subscriber from cable companies.
If 1 out of 6 people who subscribes to basic cable would be willing to pay for ESPN directly (I used your $5 -> $30 to set this up, but honestly I think the number would be higher than 1 in 6), ESPN would have to charge $6/month to make up the difference if the entire cable/satellite system were to fold altogether.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||I think you're absolutely||
I think you're absolutely correct here. For some reason this idea of 16 team conferences being an inevitable endgame has entered everyone's heads and they're approaching this whole thing with an "adapt or die" mentality that doesn't really make much sense.
There is no discernible reason that a 16 team conference would be any more stable/profitable/successful than 12 teams, 10 teams, or 20 teams. It's just a number, it doesn't make anything any better.
If the Big Ten stayed at 12 teams and everyone else expanded to 16, there is not a single reason in the whole wide world to believe that the Big Ten would have become irrelevant.
|3 years 39 weeks ago||The point you make about||
The point you make about internet streaming is extremely important and almost completely overlooked.
In fact, BTN, the NFL Network, and others are already making money in regard to online streaming subscriptions. Specifically, they're being paid a ton of money by DirecTV and a host of cable companies to NOT offer such subscriptions. The technology is there, the demand is there, but the old guard of gatekeepers knows a threat when they see one and are doing everything in their power to slow the inevitable advance.
You can see this effect on HULU and WatchESPN as well. If you want access to all of the WatchESPN programming, you need to log in with your cable provider account, and essentially prove that you get ESPN anyway. So you're cutting out the market of people who don't want to pay for cable, but still want to watch ESPN.
On HULU, you can still watch their programming without logging in with your cable provider info, but you have to wait a week longer than those who get the channels on TV anyway. Again, the gatekeepers here are trying to keep internet streaming from becoming more convenient than cable, unless you pay for cable anyway.
Obviously this is an unsustainable model. You can't base your revenue strategy on making some third party pay you to not provide a product that your customers want. We are not far from a world where you can pay a monthly fee directly to content providers for complete access to their content online. I would not be surprised to see ESPN implement something like this within the next year or two.
Once that line has been crossed, there will be absolutely no advantage to "expanding the footprint" or "cultivating new markets" for BTN. The only thing that will matter is increasing the total number of Big Ten fans who are individually willing to pay for BTN's content. Maryland and Rutgers come into the Big Ten with two of the smallest fan bases in the conference (according to the Nate Silver post on the board), and will hardly make a dent in BTN revenue once the sift described above occurs.
To sum up, there is nothing about this expansion that is good. Even the one thing that seems like it might be good is not going to be good anymore in 10 years.