the just released schedules were a flat-out statement that the B10 doesn't believe SOS will matter in playoff selection
blue in dc
- Member for
- 2 years 16 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Current value
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Brian was wrong about RR and wrong about Hoke||
I suspect he'll be wrong about this too
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Any chance you'll sell e-versions?||
I'd much rather have an e-version than a hardcopy
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Not sure that is a representative sample||
Is it surprising that people who go listen to Brian are ones that tend to agree with his opinion?
|2 weeks 4 days ago||So it would have been better||
If the big ten didn't do what everyone wanted them to do? And that would have given you more hope they'd get it right the third time around?
|2 weeks 4 days ago||East coast alums - the $ part of the equation hat gets ignored||
Everyone focuses on tv money, but I suspect that this will significantly increase giving by east coast alums. I can't wait to go to College Park to see Michigan play
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Or we could welcome Andrew to the Michigan family||
And just leave his dad out of it all together
|2 weeks 4 days ago||His son on the other hand||
Might be disappointed to find out that a bunch of Michigan fans are kinda dicks
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Great third post (s)||
Way to show support for someone who's just signed up to put in four years to help make our team better
|2 weeks 4 days ago||You make me proud to be a Wolverine (s)||
Is there any reason for your post? Why is it remotely relevant what you think of his daddy? If you really supported Andrew, you wouldn't feel compelled to curse about his dad in a post welcoming him to the University.
The quote in your profile is quite ironic, because your senseless post looks like it was written by a street urchin, not by someone with any character.
I hope that if Andrew decides to check out Mgoblog to see what people think about his decision, he realizes that many Wolverines are much more classy.
Walkons like Andrew are an important part of thebteam and will be a part of our future success. Andrew could have a key role from day 1, when Beilein may take Derrick Walton aside and have Andrew run the second team so that Walton can stand back and see how Spike handles the first team. He may run the second team when Walton or Spike have the flu and can't practice and at some point in his career he could play a key role when a second string PG is injured and the first string point gaurd runs into foul trouble.
I for one am very excited about this addition to the Wolverine family and am excited that he ad parent's who were supportive of his decision to come to the greatest University in the world.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||Bloomberg donated $350 million to Hopkins|
|6 weeks 1 day ago||Agree wholeheartedly on the ebook option||
Would love to get an e-book version rather than a hardcopy
|10 weeks 5 days ago||It would require legislation||
|10 weeks 6 days ago||It requires legislation||
For a Federal Agency to collect money
|10 weeks 6 days ago||How is asking a serious question||
|10 weeks 6 days ago||To whoever moderated this as flamebait||
Was! i not respectful enough in criticizing Brian?
Am I not allowed to critisiize him at all?
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Feel free to neg this one away||
Posed in the wrong place
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Off-topic?||
It answers in the post right above it
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Another really negworthy post?||
Some of you are amazing with your moderation
|10 weeks 6 days ago||How is this flamebait?||
It responds respectfully to the post right above it
|10 weeks 6 days ago||How is this off-topic?||
Love the way people on this blog moderate
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Think it would require legislation||
My understanding is that in general, charging any sort of user fee requires legislation. Furthermore, using any money generated for a specific purpose rather than just having it returned to the general treasury would also require legislation.
Which is not to say it's a bad idea, just a complicated one to implement, when one of the basic arguments is, should the deficit be reduced solely through cuts or through a mix of cuts and revenue increases.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||I may be wrong||
And I've been accused on this very blog of having no sense of humor, but isn't the comment, "hey look an airplane" mocking people who like flyovers? I guess it could be sarcasm, but I don't think the poster you are ridiculing is ridiculous for taking it at its word that the commenter who said both, "flyovers are stupid" and "hey look, an airplane." may in fact actually think that flyovers are stupid.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Thanks for the response||
While the no fly-overs issue itself is sports related, it is clearly only a very small part of a much larger political issue. I personally think zone left made the right call.
With regards to the small flyover part of the issue - how can that be a scare tactic? Is anyone scared that we aren't having flyovers? Flyovers are about PR, not training. By combining it with training, it is a very smart way to get low cost or free PR. In this case, the military has decided that the PR they'd prefer at the moment is that our armed forces are getting less training. Unless one is going to argue that given the rules of the sequester, they don't have to cut any training, this seems to me to be a smart move, not a scare tactic.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Loved the twitter every 5 minutes example||
BSB - so far this column has been well worth it - I'm interested in seeing how long you'll be able to keep it funny and fresh.
On the one hand, it seems like it coild quickly become repetitive, on the other, twitter is the kind of medium where it could be the gift that keeps on giving
So far, I think this column is a good reply to the recent pist critisizing front page content. Good luck with it.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Dreaded double post||
|11 weeks 5 hours ago||Point well taken||
There's plenty of good about this blog and its his baby, so he does get to make the rules. I have been reading it for a long time and its not like this is a recurring issue. Frankly its in large part because of the othe thread that got taken down that I made the point.
|11 weeks 6 hours ago||I actually do care||
As I've noted, choosing to use the term scare tactics moves from reporting to opinion. Its opinion on a politcal topic. If an exception is being made for this particular topic, and it is ok to discuss politics that is one thing. If Brian is allowed to voice a political opinion and no one can disagree that is hypocrocy.
It's Brian's blog, so it's Brian's right - I just feel he should be called on it.
|11 weeks 6 hours ago||Its been designed to make a point||
Making the value judgement that it is a, "scare tactic" is where it becomes political.
The fact that you and I both disagree on that point demonstrates that it is political. The earlier post and ensuing lockdown demonstrates that its political.
All I'm trying to point out is the hypococy of not allowing politcs on the blog unless Brian feels its ok.
|11 weeks 7 hours ago||I agree that it is his blog||
But when he holds himself to a different standard with regards to a pretty badic and strictly enforced rule, that seems to me to be wrong. While I understand you argue that the statement is not political, I do not see how that could be so. Just because USA Today points out reasons it should not happen, that does not mean there are not legitimate counterarguments.
Something has to be cut,. There are choices about what has to be cut. The leaders of the organizations making the decisions are political appointees. That seems to suggest that politics could be involved in the choice.
Characterizing the choice as "scare tactics" seems to imply the coice was made for political purposes. That seems to be bringing politics to the blog. Furthermore, early today, a thread on this very topic was locked down because it became to political.
I happen to also think that the choice to cut this part of the training rather than other training was politically motivated. I just don't think it eas a "scare tactic". I think it was the only way to really bring home to much of the american public that this sequester is impacting the amount of training our military does.
|11 weeks 9 hours ago||I get that its your blog and all, but||
How do you have a rule about no talk of politics, delete a thread about flyovers because it got to political, then on the same day, make political comments on that same topic? Does that make it fair game to comment on your political opinion about the cutting of flyovers being, "scare tactics."?