- Member for
- 7 years 8 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|2 days 16 hours ago||Rice-Eccles||
Elevation 4,657 feet, per Wikipedia.
So not quite like playing in Denver...or in La Paz.
|2 days 16 hours ago||Yes it is||
And it seems to come in clearly just about everywhere in southeast Michigan. They have a sister station in Flint, WFUM 91.1, and one in Grand Rapids (WVGR 104.1).
|3 days 8 hours ago||Speaking of...||
Speaking of college football intros, anybody remember the ABC Sunday Morning show "College football '76", "College football '77", etc.? They would show it at about 11 am on Sunday; it was a half hour show with highlight packages from about 6-8 games from the previous day. Typically 1-2 games from each major conference (Big Ten, Big Eight, SEC, SWC, Pac 8) plus another game or two.
I recall the opening music was Copland's Fanfare for the Common Man. I can't find it anywhere, but I'm sure I'm not making this up.
|4 days 11 hours ago||Morris||
Right, I always thought that the Shane Morris start against Minnesota had Brandon's fingerprints all over it.
I also think that the style of football that Michigan played for the last few years was more David Brandon's idea of how Schembechler and Carr would have played rather than something developed by Hoke and his assistants. Brady Hoke didn't play football like that at Ball State or San Diego State, why did his team suddenly become the slowest offense in FBS? Do you think Hoke suddenly got less creative at Michigan, or did something else happen that constrained Hoke? I think the answer is obvious.
|4 days 15 hours ago||Yep.||
All of that is right. I think David Brandon at some point might have said that Michigan doesn't have to play Ohio State every year. If his weird Swiss-system football season idea, or whatever it was, didn't have us in the same cluster as OSU, it would have resulted in us not playing them sometimes.
And yes, we are stuck with this awful MSU/OSU pairing for the rest of history or until the conference expands or contracts, and that's entirely Mr. Brandon's fault. I do have a hard time understanding people who, given everything they know about Mr. Brandon, don't believe this.
|4 days 15 hours ago||FOX Pac-12 prime time?||
Yes, but not completely; ABC is also allowed to show Pac-12 games in prime time. They are already showing Stanford at USC at 8:00 on September 19. ABC showed USC-UCLA and Oregon-Oregon State in prime time last year, and there were also several other weeks where FOX did not show a prime time Pac 12 game.
But yes, it's unlikely that Michigan will schedule a night game on 13 days' notice. Ann Arbor doesn't really have the night game infrastructure that other places have; it takes a little more planning here.
|4 days 16 hours ago||Also||
Let's remember that this allegation is filtered through somebody that I don't necessarily know that I should trust--this OSU blog.
Perhaps the "not play every year" is what would have happened if his weird mid-season relegation plan had been implemented. Not a separate proposal. I can see how that would result.
|4 days 17 hours ago||Announcement||
Per conference rule, the game time will not be announced before September 14. So no need to even check again for 3 weeks. It might be announced as late as September 20.
It appears to have the inside track for the ABC selection (a lot of terrible Big Ten games that week), but obviously Michigan will have to have 2 wins before the game gets picked. Even given that it is an ABC selection, though, it's still too soon to guess when the game will be. Probably 3:30, but there are not many potential prime time games for ABC that night.
Both UCLA at Arizona and USC at Arizona State take place that day; I figure one of them gets picked up as the prime time ABC game. So that leaves noon or 3:30 on ABC for BYU-Michigan. Don't count out noon on ABC (that's when the Oregon State game takes place), but 3:30 is more likely.
|1 week 1 day ago||We?||
Really? I learned about 15 different things that I didn't know previously.
I thought the fact that the B1G office actually called Michigan on Sunday was new information. The whole "not ordering lunch in order to speed up the meeting" thing was new to me. The fact that Hoke had met with the medical staff 5 times before his Monday press conference was new to me. The perspective from Regent Deitch was all new to me. The drama surrounding Shane Morris and the HIPAA waiver was certainly new to me.
And dismissing the perspective from inside the meeting as simply "one anonymous staffer's quote," is about the least charitable description of that riveting passage as can be constructed.
As far as the concussion is concerned, that's probably going to remain between Mr. Morris and his doctors; the doctors are (reasonably) not speaking to the press about the event, as Mr. Bacon describes, and I can certainly understand if Mr. Morris wants to remain silent.
I guess your question can only be answered by calling it a "probable, mild concussion," which, before you criticise me, I am willing to admit is shit that we knew already.
|1 week 1 day ago||Yes.||
This happened to me yesterday--also Android. It was redirected to the page for some sketchy-looking casino app on the appstore.
|1 week 3 days ago||Interesting.||
I thought of doing this many years ago for basketball--I didn't realize anybody actually implemented it. So has advanced football analytics determined that there is no predictive value to it? That's disappointing; I would have thought that it might--just on the concept that a 21-point win where the winner builds up a quick 35-point first half lead and coasts in the second half is more impressive than a 21-point win where the winner scores a last-minute touchdown after the game has been decided.
My idea for basketball was to tie it to an idea of "momentum": Momentum = Points Scored - Game Script - Points Allowed. So a team with a 10-point lead but a Game Script of +6.3 has a "Momentum" of 3.7. I had the idea that as the momentum approaches zero, even if the game is not all that close at the time, we are looking at an important point in the game where things could end up going either direction. But basketball is much more a game of momentum than football is.
|1 week 4 days ago||Interesting question...||
It has an answer much more complicated than you would expect!
In 1858, umpires were permitted but not required to call strikes.
In 1864, the "ball" was introduced, and umpires were permitted but not required to call balls.
By 1866, the standard practice at the top level of the game was that most (but not all) pitches would be called either a ball or a strike.
There are recorded instances in National Association games as late as 1872 of an umpire not calling a pitch either a strike or a ball.
I assume that at lower levels of the game, like Michigan vs Detroit in 1866, umpires would have been more reluctant to call strikes & balls, and more willing to let the batters hit and the fielders field.
A newspaper writeup of an 1870 Harvard game indicates that umpires were still reluctant to call balls & strikes: "Mr. Hatfield was elected umpire, and although he gave general satisfaction, he seems to suffer, like many others in a similar position, from a disinclination to call “balls” or “strikes,” as the rules direct. It is only fair to a good pitcher, that the rule should be strictly enforced, otherwise an immediate and decided advantage is given to the side whose pitcher is not so careful or effective. ... [The umpire] is not there to give his idea on the subject, but to fulfill his duties as prescribed by the rules of the convention."
|1 week 4 days ago||Zion||
Zion is nice, but if you're going that direction I would strongly recommend Bryce Canyon instead (if you only plan to hit one of them). Camping is about the same in both, but the hikes in Bryce are much more enjoyable and less crowded.
|1 week 6 days ago||September 1||
Two days before the opener.
|2 weeks 5 hours ago||Hackett wore these?||
I would be surprised if Hackett made any travel roster for Michigan. He probably only wore home uniforms.
Hackett did not play at all in 1974 and 1975, and played 5 games in 1976 as the third string center, all 5 of those games at Michigan Stadium (Stanford, Navy, Wake Forest, Michigan State and Illinois).
Ah, for the days when the third string center would see the field 5 times in a season.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Probably...||
I guess it means that he wanted to sign a pdf document, but the hotel business center computer only had Acrobat Reader. That's the only interpretation that makes sense to me.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Yeah...||
"Hackett went to the Westin’s business office, but it couldn’t handle PDF software. He couldn’t fax it from the hotel, because he knew news of that would get out and hit the Internet almost instantly. He decided to take a picture of the agreement with his iPhone, but then the battery died."
Wow, can you imagine wanting a coach for your team but you don't get him because you can't work your phone? Wouldn't that be awful? I'm glad nothing like that ever actually happened to Michigan!
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Right on Point B as well.||
I think if you were to look at the highlights, if there are any, you would find that Calvin O'Neil's touchdown against Navy in 1976 was actually not an interception, but an intercepted lateral, one that should count as a fumble return than an interception return. Obviously, the statistician recorded it as an INT, but I recall a lateral that was grabbed before the Navy halfback could catch it.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Northwestern 1971||
That's 100 percent correct, at least in the case of Northwestern 1971. My recollection is that Michigan attempted a long FG and Northwestern had a player back in the end zone--like Auburn did against Alabama leading up to their "kick 6" return.
The Northwestern player in the end zone jumped and blocked Michigan's FG attempt at the cross bar, as was legal at the time, but an alert Michigan player (Bo Rather) was sprinting downfield and jumped on the ball right there in the end zone before the Northwestern player could get to it.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||Opposing fan "concern troll"||
The first of many this season, I'm sure:
|2 weeks 6 days ago||Correct.||
Noon starts are no more "traditional" than 3:30 starts--both are a product of television, and only date back 25 years or so. Before weekly television broadcasts, all kickoffs were 1:00, 1:30 or 2:00.
Also note that Michigan was not on daylight saving time in 1969, so a 1:30 start in September or October is exactly like a 2:30 EDT start in terms of sun position.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||A first||
St. Cyr is the first Michigan recruit ever, and I assume the first person ever, to have both parents play professional (minor league) hockey.
Gerry St. Cyr: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=6015
Manon Rheaume: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=4537
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Stud RB Withdrawls?||
I know how BYU feels; a lot of Michigan fans are having Stud RB Withdrawls too.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Don't worry||
Oh, I have a yellow shirt, and I wear it to the games. I'm proud to say that I "create atmosphere" for you, at least when I'm not wearing a jacket over my yellow shirt.
I just hate lazy arguments (It will help recruiting! It will intimidate the other team!). None of that is true. It has no effect on the game being played, or on future games down the road. Let's get a grip, and let's stop telling our fellow fans that a certain way of rooting for the team is correct and others are wrong. Your clothing choices or mine shouldn't affect anybody else's enjoyment of the game.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Intimidating? Recruits?||
Are you actually saying that a recruit would be more likely to decide to attend Michigan if I wear a maize shirt to the game than they would if I wear a blue shirt? Do you have any evidence of this, such as quotes from players upon picking a school?
Also, I would be curious to see any evidence that fans wearing same color shirts would be more intimidating to the other team than fans wearing different colored shirts. I can't imagine that once the game starts the other team is intimidated by much other than the quality of the team that they are facing.
Note, too, that your top photograph is a picture of pompons, not of clothing.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Wow.||
This is...impressive, but allow me to gently suggest that #98 is retired as well.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Ilitch has gone off the rails?||
Probably, but which Ilitch?
It's no secret that Mike Ilitch is not very healthy right now--he hasn't been seen in public more than once or twice in 2015. So the question is who is in charge right now making these decisions? Is it still Mike, or is it Christopher, who might care a little less about winning and a little more about keeping his money?
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Right.||
It's the GM's job to get to the team to the playoffs. It's the coach's job to win in the playoffs.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Bollinger||
It's not a question of when the plans were finalized. The version that I have heard, from more than one source (also available on the internet), is that the design plans were important enough that ultimate approval had to come from the President's office, not the Athletic Director's office.
It was Lee Bollnger who approved the design incorporating the halo, not Tom Goss.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||MSC & Brandon||
So what happened there that she (a) gave him the job that nobody wanted her to give to him and (b) gave him a lucrative contract extension as she was walking out the door?
Did it have something to do with the fact that he was a Regent when she was hired? I have heard speculation that it might, but only that--speculation.