I live in CT near the NewYork border. My area is considered as Yankee territory by Direct TV. DISH, however, still considers my town as a part of New England (which it is), hence I get NESN.
I have DISH for two reasons: 1. I can get NESN (long-time Red Sox fan) and 2. BTN (UMichigan dad). I just called DISH and was informed there have been zero discussions with BTN regarding a change in their status with DISH, and they do not foresee any changes. Also, I must say, I have not had any of the reception problems discussed. Of course, I have lost the signal occasionally, but other than that, I am satisfied with my service.
Severla years ago, Michigan played Boston College at Alumni Stadium in Chestnut Hill. I believe the stadium sat about 38,000-40,000 at that time, and yet there was no dissent about our playing there. I don't recall who the AD was back then. I guess the times have changed and perhaps not for the better.
are not useful and inappropriate. I am not sad and not bitter. I just find the duality of this love fest for Mr. Jeter and his actual actions a bit odd. When others leave early, they are gnerally excoriated, but not here. Perhaps because he had not played, fans have not had an opportunity to cultivate an attachment is the reason. The reality is that what Mr. Jeter did created problems for the team and and, by extension, the University of Michigan. Jeter does appear to be a level-headed, likeable fellow. Does this excuse him from what occurred in the past? I guess in many eyes it does. In many respects, it is a clear indication of the gray area between professional and collegiate sports. Using college as a backup or insurance policy is giving short shrift to our academic institutiion and its stated mission, to educate the Leaders and Best. Perhaps the time is nearing when colleges will reconsider the athletic scholarship and its current configuration and consequences.
My son was a dorm mate and intramural teammate of Derek Jeter when he was at Michigan. The information I have is not from the coach but from my son. I do not believe Coach Freeman would give a scholarship to an athlete and then a few months later, before that athlete had played one game, advise him to leave, which, in fact, would leave him without a strong player for a key position. Those who find this pattern of behavior acceptable tend to use the financial factor as a validation for the action. I disagree. I view the role of the university in a different light.
Why would a coach give a scholarship to a player and then a few months later tell him to walk out on the scholarship, thus leaving his team without a shortstop? I find it very hard to believe a Michigan coach would tell a scholarship player he was too good for Michigan, and he should go pro after the coach had given him a scholarship. Jeter had not player an inning for Michigan and yet we are expected to believe the coach felt he was simply too good for UM and should leave for the welfare of himself, Michigan, and the world. Please. Jeter got a call from Steinbrenner, the late and notorious Michigan hater, jacking up the payoff, thus screwing Michigan as he would do with Drew Hensen as well,
Yes, Jeter left Michigan and the baseball team without a shortstop. He got his Yankee offer in February of 1992 and was history. He does like the school and has attended games, but he did choose money over Michigan, money that could have been made later without screwing the baseball team. Perhaps he should endow the shortstop position with some of his millions to atone for his knife in the back to the University's baseball team.
Yes, Jeter left Michigan and the baseball team without a shortstop. He got his Yankee offer in February of 1992 and was history. He does like the school and has attended games, but he did choose money over Michigan, money that could have been made later without screwing the baseball team. Perhaps he should endow the shortstop position with some of his millions to atone for his knife in the back to the University's baseball team.
In commenting on Michigan, I erred in discussing the North Campus. I inadvertantly typed in "Central Campus" instead of "North Campus." The North Campus does have more aluminum than Central Campus and thus disappoints but does not drop Michgian out of the top spot.
In an unrelated note, Miami of Ohio may not lead in aluminum, but they do have a serious aesthetic flaw: the architecture is all the same. It is painfully boring and actually somewhat confusing in that all the building look the same, with their red brick colonial tedium.
I give any campus I visit the aluminum rail/door test: the more aluminum railing and doors a campus has, the more its aesthetic appeal drops. I have applied this test to the following Big
Ten schools I have seen: Michigan, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Penn State, Wisconsin, Ohio State,and Northwestern. I have not seen Iowa or MSU.
1. PSU- looked like a test center for aluminum railings and doors.The glare is blinding.
2. Purdue- battle between aluminum and concrete. Concrete won out. It's an unreal place.
3. Illinois- I could not believe the size of their campus walks. Utilitarian buildings of massive proportions with bizzare architecture abound, all surrounded by corn. Underground library cut down on aluminum use.
4. Ohio State- People actually live in their stadium. The river is filthy and separates the stadium from the ag school. Bars everywhere. Above average aluminum and many thirsty and hostile students. Buildings tend to be grubby. I was too nervous to carry out a proper assessment.
5.Northwestern- On the Lake. Intereasting architecre made up for more aluminum than I had anticipated. They could be ranked higher (lower) but for that.
5. Wisconsin- Large buildings with average aluminum ranking. Lake is big deal there as well.
6.Indiana- Interesting buildings with pleasant greenery and less than average aluminum. This score was aided by massive student union with wrought iron all over the place.
7. Michigan- The gothic style dramatically reduces UM aluminum usage. The campus is the best i have seen. Markley does have an excess of aluminum glare, but other than that, I found the campus to be a very enjoyable one. Central Campusdoes use more aluminum than i would recommned, but Central Campus more than off sets that archtiectural gaff. Overall, the Michigan campus is the most attractive campus when applying the aluminum factor. I would say UM achieved their top standing because they built fewer buildings during the fifties when aluminum railings and doors were all the rage. Remember the UGLI?
"Amazing the amount of students who avoid hitting spell check." Rather than "amount," the correct word should be "number." This is a common error. If the referenced items are equally divisible, use "number," if not, "amount," is appropriate, e.g., "...a large amount of money..."
There will always be people who lose perspective. Do not let it bother you.The fact becomes apparent in a public forum when certain participants attempt to use this platform as an opportunity to elevate their fragile egos. You did nothing wrong. You love the Wolverines. You are a good guy. Continue posting and ignore the nitpickers who fail to see the reason for this forum,i.e., to discuss the Big Blue and enjoy one another's insights, humor, and comeraderie.
Once colleges and universities began lowering their standards even more dramatically than previously, the ability to have a good team became more available. All of this was, of course, tied into TV money: a good team equals more exposure, which means more money. Now there is a trickle down effect to all this. The schools once relegated to a lower classification now have two avenues available that were previously non-existent. They can choose athletes from a much, much larger pool because of significantly lower admission standards for athletes and they can pick up the transfers from higher classification schools. UMass and UConn have both done this and benefited. Fifty years ago, this could not happen with the rules, standards, media control that were in place. Today we have a different ball game. UMass may be classified a as 1_AA (or that ever it is called) but they really are a team populated with hungry, previously 1-A players who are trying to show they can play at that level. The players know this, but apparently the fans don't see what has happened and freak out when one of these disguised 1_A's beats a designated 1-A team. This will continue until the admission standards remain lower for athletes and the media money continues to flow.
Two of my journalistic concerns are clear and accurate editing. I do not like seeing the "'Leaders and Best" exhibiting sloppy/careless journalism. Was it a typo, laziness, or ignorance that caused the error? It matters to me. Standards must be maintained if one wishes to remain at the top. I will try to contact the office you suggest.
I have not been able to find where Dan Madwell went to high school. I read he swan in Maryland prior to enrolling at UM, but I have not seen any mention of his high school on the Internet. The city of Stamford is mentioned, but it has a few high schools. If he went to high school outside a state should he be considered a native of that state? I guess he could be, but since athlete's generally go from high school to college, it would seem the college would categorize the origin of a student by where he went to high school. This is confusing. I guess the criteria for residency would have to be clarified. So where did he go to high school?
I guess I responded to the Dorsey, admissions office reference. I have two perspectives on admission of marginal students for athletic purposes: 1. I fear it sends a self-defeating message to high school athletes ( I taught in a high school for 35 years) and 2. My son was a varsity letter winner at Michigan in cross country. Most of the athletes on his teams were fine student- athletes who often excelled in the classroom. I would much rather see UM recruit athletes who will graduate and make a substantive contribution to our society; I do not consider professional sports as substantive. It is nothing more than another form of light entertainment. Pouring in money to qualify or keep a marginal athlete in school is not the way to go. The reality is that it is often being done so the teams will win, not for the intellectual advancement of the athlete. A number of these borderline cases were often (not always) pampered prima donnas pandered to by self-serving trainers/counselors/guardians who had little or no concern about education and the intellectual and moral advancement of our society. The recent goldmine of conference TV networks and subsequent bandwagon-like league expansion does nothing to advance academic excellence. It is just another way to raise money to pay for greater salaries for coaches. All of this self-serving does little to elevate the financial and academic development of a university. If it did, Harvard, MIT, and Cal Tech would be in the top 10 every year.
To play upon Newman's essay title, what is the role of a university? Is it to win football games and entertain the public, or is it to educate? Should a university seek the brightest or the fastest? I sometimes feel many on this board have forgotten that the name of this institution includes the word "university." Should an athlete with admission test scores that fall below the UM parameters for acceptance be granted entry? What if this means an academically capable and motivated student is rejected as a result of an ill-prepared athlete's admission?Is that what the university should do? Do you give the poorly prepared athlete a break because he is fast? What about the non-athlete? Does he get a break as well? What message does this send to all those high school students who want to participate in collegiate sports? forget the books and hit the weights? Is television, entertainment, and money behind all of this? is this your idea of a university? is Harvard really the Michigan of the East? Does Harvard admissions (or any other Michigan peer institution) conduct itself as some would have UM act? Are our standards equal to theirs? What do you want Michigan to be: a university for the leaders and best or a source of entertainment?
What about the standarized test scores? I remember when my son entered the engineering school the vast majority of students in his class had 700+ on the math while 550+ on the verbal was considered a cut off. An "A" in one school is not necessariky commensurate with an "A" from another. SAT/ACT scores are the great levelers for national evalution of studenrts and the schools they attend. I thinks it's interesteing no mention is made of these tests in the article.
Texas makes sense and obviously stands out in academics and sports. the school mirrors Michigan in many ways, i.e., great undergrad and grad programs, highly competitive sports, rapid fan base, and, last, but not least, money. I am not sure about the distance factor, but wow, Texas would bring a boatload to the table.
Mr. Sullivan,
I can most certainly understand why you are proud of your son. I am sure your pride goes far beyond the football field, into the classroom and the home. My son attended Michigan and received a varsity letter, a Bit Ten Championship ring, and Big Ten Academic recognition. He went to Michigan to get an education and did most definitely. My son was a walkon for the cross country team, met some wonderful people and had a great time. Cross country gave him options that football currently does not at Michigan. A number of his friends walked on the team. They were not superstars, just good athletes wanting to run for the Maize and Blue. RR has a walkon program, and i commend him for it. Your son could develop into a Michigan football player. I hope he does.i saw great potential in that video. More importantly, I hope he come to Michigan and is a great student. I hope he does come here. It is a wonderful place for young people to grow. See what happens. Is he interested in Michigan? One last note: The hostile and demeaning comments I read on this board in response to your video are probably not from fathers with teenage sons, never graduated from Michigan (and thus lack social graces), or simply do not understand that football is a game and only a game. In the real world and not the world of football fantasy that television has created, we would choose the better student to attend a university and not the better football player, whoever it may be. I am all in favor of the student athlete, not in name only, but in reality. My son was one and I am very proud of him as your are of your boy, Mr. Sullivan. Let's hope your boy turns out to be a fine student and a fine athlete. If he does, he could turn into a Michigan man before you know it.
Best of luck to him and to you. Enjoy these moments with your son while they are here and he has his life in front of him.
Dan, Sr. of Connecticut
My daughter was in the Michigan Band in the late '80s. She said that every time the UM band took the field at OSU, the fans would boo so loudly, it was virtually impossible for the band to be heard. Do they have a music appreciation course at that institution?
I just viewed the RR press conference, which I followed up with listening to comments by the players, both UM and OSU. RR's body language really made me feel for this guy. He seems exhausted,drained, and frustrated. He is confident he can do the job but has to deal with people who want instant gratification and scream if they don't get it. Anyway, I followed up RR's PC with an interview with Zoltan. His words should be sent to all recruits and naysayers. He said he loved his team and loved the program. Those words. He also came across as a thoughtful, articulate young man. His words lifted my spirits and spoke volumes about the program RR is running. I am beginning to feel there is a large disconnect between what we read in the papers and what is the reality.
well, i am not sure whee to begin, but I will say first that Michigan has not always won and has not always had sellouts. That, however, is not why I am writing this. I am simply tired of the attacks on RR. When he first got this position, I looked upon him as a rather unpolished individual without the saving grace or rough charm of a Bo. I had grave reservations about him. I no longer do. When he says he loves his players, I believe him. I am seeing him in a different light. I first thought he was a huckster, but no more. He appears genuine and approachable and will survive this year and the team will improve. Integrity is very important to me. I feel he has it. I will never forget Bo firing a basketball coach because he was not a Michigan Man. Actually, the guy had gone to UM (I think grad school), but he did not have a love for the place. I think RR does. I hope he comes through all this. Moving from WV to AA is a cultural shock to the system. Imagine reversing it and you were sent to WV from AA. I think RR wants to be a Michigan Man very badly. I hope that moment will arrive. It does not have to be accompanied by a given number of wins, just integrity and a love for the Maize and Blue. I did not go to Michigan, but was wise enough to send both of my children there.
Go Blue
Recent Comments
I live in CT near the NewYork border. My area is considered as Yankee territory by Direct TV. DISH, however, still considers my town as a part of New England (which it is), hence I get NESN.
I have DISH for two reasons: 1. I can get NESN (long-time Red Sox fan) and 2. BTN (UMichigan dad). I just called DISH and was informed there have been zero discussions with BTN regarding a change in their status with DISH, and they do not foresee any changes. Also, I must say, I have not had any of the reception problems discussed. Of course, I have lost the signal occasionally, but other than that, I am satisfied with my service.
Severla years ago, Michigan played Boston College at Alumni Stadium in Chestnut Hill. I believe the stadium sat about 38,000-40,000 at that time, and yet there was no dissent about our playing there. I don't recall who the AD was back then. I guess the times have changed and perhaps not for the better.
are not useful and inappropriate. I am not sad and not bitter. I just find the duality of this love fest for Mr. Jeter and his actual actions a bit odd. When others leave early, they are gnerally excoriated, but not here. Perhaps because he had not played, fans have not had an opportunity to cultivate an attachment is the reason. The reality is that what Mr. Jeter did created problems for the team and and, by extension, the University of Michigan. Jeter does appear to be a level-headed, likeable fellow. Does this excuse him from what occurred in the past? I guess in many eyes it does. In many respects, it is a clear indication of the gray area between professional and collegiate sports. Using college as a backup or insurance policy is giving short shrift to our academic institutiion and its stated mission, to educate the Leaders and Best. Perhaps the time is nearing when colleges will reconsider the athletic scholarship and its current configuration and consequences.
My son was a dorm mate and intramural teammate of Derek Jeter when he was at Michigan. The information I have is not from the coach but from my son. I do not believe Coach Freeman would give a scholarship to an athlete and then a few months later, before that athlete had played one game, advise him to leave, which, in fact, would leave him without a strong player for a key position. Those who find this pattern of behavior acceptable tend to use the financial factor as a validation for the action. I disagree. I view the role of the university in a different light.
Why would a coach give a scholarship to a player and then a few months later tell him to walk out on the scholarship, thus leaving his team without a shortstop? I find it very hard to believe a Michigan coach would tell a scholarship player he was too good for Michigan, and he should go pro after the coach had given him a scholarship. Jeter had not player an inning for Michigan and yet we are expected to believe the coach felt he was simply too good for UM and should leave for the welfare of himself, Michigan, and the world. Please. Jeter got a call from Steinbrenner, the late and notorious Michigan hater, jacking up the payoff, thus screwing Michigan as he would do with Drew Hensen as well,
Yes, Jeter left Michigan
Yes, Jeter left Michigan and the baseball team without a shortstop. He got his Yankee offer in February of 1992 and was history. He does like the school and has attended games, but he did choose money over Michigan, money that could have been made later without screwing the baseball team. Perhaps he should endow the shortstop position with some of his millions to atone for his knife in the back to the University's baseball team.
Yes, Jeter left Michigan and the baseball team without a shortstop. He got his Yankee offer in February of 1992 and was history. He does like the school and has attended games, but he did choose money over Michigan, money that could have been made later without screwing the baseball team. Perhaps he should endow the shortstop position with some of his millions to atone for his knife in the back to the University's baseball team.
In commenting on Michigan, I erred in discussing the North Campus. I inadvertantly typed in "Central Campus" instead of "North Campus." The North Campus does have more aluminum than Central Campus and thus disappoints but does not drop Michgian out of the top spot.
In an unrelated note, Miami of Ohio may not lead in aluminum, but they do have a serious aesthetic flaw: the architecture is all the same. It is painfully boring and actually somewhat confusing in that all the building look the same, with their red brick colonial tedium.
I give any campus I visit the aluminum rail/door test: the more aluminum railing and doors a campus has, the more its aesthetic appeal drops. I have applied this test to the following Big
Ten schools I have seen: Michigan, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Penn State, Wisconsin, Ohio State,and Northwestern. I have not seen Iowa or MSU.
1. PSU- looked like a test center for aluminum railings and doors.The glare is blinding.
2. Purdue- battle between aluminum and concrete. Concrete won out. It's an unreal place.
3. Illinois- I could not believe the size of their campus walks. Utilitarian buildings of massive proportions with bizzare architecture abound, all surrounded by corn. Underground library cut down on aluminum use.
4. Ohio State- People actually live in their stadium. The river is filthy and separates the stadium from the ag school. Bars everywhere. Above average aluminum and many thirsty and hostile students. Buildings tend to be grubby. I was too nervous to carry out a proper assessment.
5.Northwestern- On the Lake. Intereasting architecre made up for more aluminum than I had anticipated. They could be ranked higher (lower) but for that.
5. Wisconsin- Large buildings with average aluminum ranking. Lake is big deal there as well.
6.Indiana- Interesting buildings with pleasant greenery and less than average aluminum. This score was aided by massive student union with wrought iron all over the place.
7. Michigan- The gothic style dramatically reduces UM aluminum usage. The campus is the best i have seen. Markley does have an excess of aluminum glare, but other than that, I found the campus to be a very enjoyable one. Central Campusdoes use more aluminum than i would recommned, but Central Campus more than off sets that archtiectural gaff. Overall, the Michigan campus is the most attractive campus when applying the aluminum factor. I would say UM achieved their top standing because they built fewer buildings during the fifties when aluminum railings and doors were all the rage. Remember the UGLI?
"Amazing the amount of students who avoid hitting spell check." Rather than "amount," the correct word should be "number." This is a common error. If the referenced items are equally divisible, use "number," if not, "amount," is appropriate, e.g., "...a large amount of money..."
There will always be people who lose perspective. Do not let it bother you.The fact becomes apparent in a public forum when certain participants attempt to use this platform as an opportunity to elevate their fragile egos. You did nothing wrong. You love the Wolverines. You are a good guy. Continue posting and ignore the nitpickers who fail to see the reason for this forum,i.e., to discuss the Big Blue and enjoy one another's insights, humor, and comeraderie.
Go Blue to all of you and
Once colleges and universities began lowering their standards even more dramatically than previously, the ability to have a good team became more available. All of this was, of course, tied into TV money: a good team equals more exposure, which means more money. Now there is a trickle down effect to all this. The schools once relegated to a lower classification now have two avenues available that were previously non-existent. They can choose athletes from a much, much larger pool because of significantly lower admission standards for athletes and they can pick up the transfers from higher classification schools. UMass and UConn have both done this and benefited. Fifty years ago, this could not happen with the rules, standards, media control that were in place. Today we have a different ball game. UMass may be classified a as 1_AA (or that ever it is called) but they really are a team populated with hungry, previously 1-A players who are trying to show they can play at that level. The players know this, but apparently the fans don't see what has happened and freak out when one of these disguised 1_A's beats a designated 1-A team. This will continue until the admission standards remain lower for athletes and the media money continues to flow.
Two of my journalistic concerns are clear and accurate editing. I do not like seeing the "'Leaders and Best" exhibiting sloppy/careless journalism. Was it a typo, laziness, or ignorance that caused the error? It matters to me. Standards must be maintained if one wishes to remain at the top. I will try to contact the office you suggest.
Go Blue
For John Mortimer's home town, it is not "Londonberry," but "Londonderry."
I have not been able to find where Dan Madwell went to high school. I read he swan in Maryland prior to enrolling at UM, but I have not seen any mention of his high school on the Internet. The city of Stamford is mentioned, but it has a few high schools. If he went to high school outside a state should he be considered a native of that state? I guess he could be, but since athlete's generally go from high school to college, it would seem the college would categorize the origin of a student by where he went to high school. This is confusing. I guess the criteria for residency would have to be clarified. So where did he go to high school?
I guess I responded to the Dorsey, admissions office reference. I have two perspectives on admission of marginal students for athletic purposes: 1. I fear it sends a self-defeating message to high school athletes ( I taught in a high school for 35 years) and 2. My son was a varsity letter winner at Michigan in cross country. Most of the athletes on his teams were fine student- athletes who often excelled in the classroom. I would much rather see UM recruit athletes who will graduate and make a substantive contribution to our society; I do not consider professional sports as substantive. It is nothing more than another form of light entertainment. Pouring in money to qualify or keep a marginal athlete in school is not the way to go. The reality is that it is often being done so the teams will win, not for the intellectual advancement of the athlete. A number of these borderline cases were often (not always) pampered prima donnas pandered to by self-serving trainers/counselors/guardians who had little or no concern about education and the intellectual and moral advancement of our society. The recent goldmine of conference TV networks and subsequent bandwagon-like league expansion does nothing to advance academic excellence. It is just another way to raise money to pay for greater salaries for coaches. All of this self-serving does little to elevate the financial and academic development of a university. If it did, Harvard, MIT, and Cal Tech would be in the top 10 every year.
it would generate discussion and be less argumentative. I am sorry if it is bothersome. That was not my intention.
To play upon Newman's essay title, what is the role of a university? Is it to win football games and entertain the public, or is it to educate? Should a university seek the brightest or the fastest? I sometimes feel many on this board have forgotten that the name of this institution includes the word "university." Should an athlete with admission test scores that fall below the UM parameters for acceptance be granted entry? What if this means an academically capable and motivated student is rejected as a result of an ill-prepared athlete's admission?Is that what the university should do? Do you give the poorly prepared athlete a break because he is fast? What about the non-athlete? Does he get a break as well? What message does this send to all those high school students who want to participate in collegiate sports? forget the books and hit the weights? Is television, entertainment, and money behind all of this? is this your idea of a university? is Harvard really the Michigan of the East? Does Harvard admissions (or any other Michigan peer institution) conduct itself as some would have UM act? Are our standards equal to theirs? What do you want Michigan to be: a university for the leaders and best or a source of entertainment?
he would want a superior education? Does that even enter into this equation?
What about the standarized test scores? I remember when my son entered the engineering school the vast majority of students in his class had 700+ on the math while 550+ on the verbal was considered a cut off. An "A" in one school is not necessariky commensurate with an "A" from another. SAT/ACT scores are the great levelers for national evalution of studenrts and the schools they attend. I thinks it's interesteing no mention is made of these tests in the article.