- Member for
- 7 years 8 weeks
|6 years 49 weeks ago||The sea wants to take me...||
"And I know it's over - still I cling
We'll always have the Notre Dame game.
|7 years 3 weeks ago||Question of protocol||
I'm probably just out-of-touch here, but is it common practice for college athletes to send text messages to corporate media outlets "less than 90 minutes" after a game? Is this just how some people do interviews now, and Tate's text was a response to Forde's?
|7 years 5 weeks ago||I also like how he thinks||
I also like how he thinks kicking a dog is a complementary analogy.
|7 years 5 weeks ago||Not to be contrary, but the||
Not to be contrary, but the reason they play that song over and over again is because they score a lot of touchdowns. Here's hoping people accuse the M band of a limited repertoire after this season.
|7 years 6 weeks ago||Definitely||
Yeah, that's true. These kids are hungry. It's exactly what was missing during the end of the Carr administration. They want to win, and they are going to make it happen for themselves.
Man. What a game!
|7 years 7 weeks ago||Well||
This is the first time I've noticed that tag, and gave it the literal lol. I'm thinking a home-brew rendition of that song would be a great replacement for the tripe that ABC/ESPN play at the breaks.
|7 years 7 weeks ago||Well…||
Of course, much of this whole to-do was generated by discrepancies between "unadulterated" facts (quotes, what they said) and actual truths. The former are often convincing when deployed, but can be shaped and fit into infinite narratives serving infinite purposes.
As this whole thing has illustrated, context is key, and hiding behind some BS proclaimed journalistic objectivity, saying that you're just "presenting the facts" is disingenuous and deeply unethical.
I am finding no small amount of personal glee in watching this crap blow up in the Freep's face. This editorial is obviously on its heels, and the current of popular opinion is decisively against their hatchet-work. Scoreboard!
|7 years 7 weeks ago||Wow||
Even in the illustrious tradition of inane athlete-speak, that is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard someone say. Did the sentence just get away from him?
|7 years 7 weeks ago||Three QBs||
Well, RR just said that three QBs will play. Maybe it will be Forcier, Robinson, and Coner!
|7 years 7 weeks ago||I'm "stoked"||
Firstly, impeccable week of writing and analysis, guys. This site has become the evidence nonpareil that independent bloggers are the best thing that have happened to sports since whatever the last really great, paradigm-shifting thing was in sports. Absolutely top-notch and a true service to the fan-base.
Secondly, I think that the players want to win this really bad, badder than any time last year even. The Michigan players, I mean. Now I'm veteran enough of a fan to know self-doubt and looming despair as cordially as any of us, but I think they're going to come out and put a hurt down. I'm thinking something along the lines of Michigan 35 - Western 14, with a few bonuses: 1.) Nick Sheridan sees one or fewer possessions of action; 2.) Tate Forcier turns out to, indeed, equal accuracy, completes an impressive percentage of his passes for a true freshman, and makes a compelling case for defenses to respect the passing game in the coming weeks; 3.) Denard Robinson melts at least 75% of the faces in the front row of Michigan Stadium as he torches Western's secondary en route to a 60+ yard score.
I'm excited like I haven't been in a long time. I think the first steps toward redemption are taken tomorrow, and I for one plan to revel. Go Blue!