further adventures in Jed York being unsuited for his position
- Member for
- 4 years 25 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|2 days 8 hours ago||As long as whatever affected Kap this year||
... doesn't come with Harbaugh. Not that he was bad, exactly, but he was mediocre at best and definitely not the runnin', slingin' QB of old.
|2 days 11 hours ago||We do have to watch the corollary||
Losing has cause more ills than the flu. Put another way, fans who expect that hiring Harbaugh and this staff is all we needed to beat OSU, win the B1G and go to the playoffs next year will be ... Displeased ... at our first loss.
|4 days 6 hours ago||Peter Lynch's One Up On Wall Street||
Had good advice for picking specific companies and how to look at them to maximize the few advantages you have on the professionals.
That said, mostly I'd echo what others have said. Stick to your plan, don't let emotions change your plan, decide on a goal and when you expect to want the money before you put the money somewhere. Don't trust us, do your homework, and most of all be patient.
The dollar cost average into a no-load index fund is the simplest way to go - have a small amount tapped from each paycheck into your investment account and use that fixed amount to buy something with a low/zero transaction cost.
|1 week 12 hours ago||I'm a little surprised it took that many posts for someone||
to call Charles White's fumble by the name it had in the papers for the next week (or so my childhood memory recalls):
The Phantom Touchdown
It's one of the worst calls ever, not just against us. I still get a little angry about that one.
|1 week 6 days ago||May I suggest some reading?||
Or Google "taxpayer funded stadiums" - the top ten results are highly negative, with data from the Marlins and Nationals in baseball, and numerous football examples as well. Hell, the Raiders alone have screwed Oakland for years on the Coliseum deal.
FieldOfSchemes.com is pretty convincing on the subject - Neil DeMausse has written about the real cost for years.
Stripped of the frippery, taxpayers are being asked to give millions of dollars to a private enterprise in return for the emotional benefit of having their municipality associated with a sports team, at a time when those same municipalities are closing schools and cutting services. The only recent stadium deal I can think of where the city feels like it did ok was the San Francisco Giants new park, and that was almost entirely privately financed - not a coincidence, I assure you.
Hopefully San Diego will ask Santa Clara how it feels about that deal now that ownership has what it wants, and give the Chargers a blunt No.
|2 weeks 8 hours ago||Always ask what problem you're solving||
And who benefits.
In the cases of one-and-dones, the NBA is happy because they get a year to weed out some of the high schoolers who can't cut it in college, while still preserving the youth and potential they prize. The NCAA is ok because they get a year of these guys rather than not, although they'd rather have more. The players are mostly happy because they can get a college education and a showcase for their skills before moving on to their "inevitable" destiny in the NBA.
The trick is finding a stakeholder who has something to gain without getting sued in return. The NCAA has already been sued several times over issues like freshman eligibility, and is not on particularly solid ground as it is; even if they managed to drive freshman eligibility into dust, they wouldn't actually get what they want, which is more lucrative years of play from young talent. The NBA could raise the minimum age one year if they were persuaded that the gain of additional development and weeding was worth the loss of potential and the loss of marketable players and chance of getting sued again. The players don't have a vote other than a group veto.
Mostly I see this as just talk by the NCAA hoping the NBA throws them a bone.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||The devil is in the details||
When will we enter the OSU game with a shot at the B1G title game? Within the next two years, three with a little bad luck.
When will we be winning half our games against OSU? Five years is achievable, but I don't think the next three look good considering the OSU QB situation.
When will we enter the OSU game undefeated or with one loss and a shot at the playoff? Ask again later - we need a top QB for that, and I don't see anyone on the roster I'm bullish on until I see what Harbaugh can do with Morris and co.
Basically, I am optimistic about our program. We hired pretty much the best staff we could hope for, but OSU has a staff that is its equal and one of two coaches who rival Harbaugh for best in the game. They have far more talent at the most important position and are at the top of their game. We have our work cut out for us.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||BB is a genius||
But he isn't perfect, and it is tough to quantify benefits gained from flow-of-the-game versus the benefit of an extra 20 seconds for your offense in the very likely event you need it. Not calling TO was the first mistake.
The second mistake was when Seattle didn't take advantage of the clock. They have three plays to score a TD. If they don't score, nothing else matters, so optimize for your three best plays. That has to be run, hurry up and run, TO, and then whatever your best play is. That means that, regardless of whether or not a TO was called, Seattle should have been hurrying to the line for the next run play. Instead, they overthought things and optimized for after they scored the TD they never did.
|3 weeks 9 hours ago||this||
Why is it OK to be a douchebag to a teenager because he's wearing the wrong colors?
Cheer for your team. Don't be a dick to some kid just because he wears rival colors.
|3 weeks 9 hours ago||John Wangler||
But yes, It took Anthony Carter to get Bo to grudgingly acknowledge that passes could be the focus of an offense.
|3 weeks 9 hours ago||Weird Al has your back||
|3 weeks 1 day ago||It is hard to discuss the OP point without verboten topics||
Since it is largely tied up in "what do we, as a society, choose to spend money on?", and that's a fundamental political question.
Speaking only to my own experience, I opted for the best school I could get into for college, and my parents had planned wisely and we were able to afford the (at-the-time-most-expensive-in-the-US) staggering tuition without back-breaking debt. It was worth every penny subjectively - I made great friends, had many deeply life-shaping experiences, I learned a lot about how to think, how to approach a problem, and most critically for my career, how to program into a language instead of how to use the syntax of a given language and let that shape my thinking - and objectively; my first employer found my resume by searching a database of top school graduates and approached me. That employer got me out to CA and into the industry, and when I left that job I was in position to join a dream company for me and turn that into a 20+ year career in software development. That high-cost experience made it all happen.
Now, it is certainly possible to have a good career without going to college; I can't speak to most career options. It is absolutely possible to learn to write code well enough to do it for a living without a college degree. There are plenty of smart, dedicated people who didn't go to school. That said, those people won't get the opportunities in my field that college graduates will, and not all colleges turn out equal products. When we hire new people (as opposed to hiring people with a relevant work history) we definitely start interviewing the candidates from the top schools first - we are simply more likely to find someone good that way.
The trick is to balance that mountain of debt with the opportunities it brings you. Just as Michigan isn't for everyone, massive debt isn't either. Some people will do just fine without college or at community college.
But if you want to work for, say, Apple, that probably won't cut it. A degree from Michigan gives you a much better chance at that goal.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||In that case, Tennessee has a problem||
They can deny another player a scholarship, or tell Smith he's not on the team his first year (while he gets financial assistance from the U but not an athletic scholarship), or encourage someone to leave the program.
That's really not Smith's problem, although I imiagine he'd like to start his career without pissing off his coaches.
In practice, I suspect this is a non-issue. Smith says I'd like to go to Tennessee, is that a problem Coach? Jones says Nope, and balances the numbers later. Harbaugh says, Yes, depending on our numbers you might not be on the team, but you will get a scholarship.
I don't think this would be a big issue even if every five star did it.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||RIP Coach Smith||
The greatest coach of his era if it wasn't for Wooden. A true master and innovator.
|4 weeks 10 hours ago||It's not the medical exemption that concerns me here||
It's that a guy who reportedly was knocked out in the B1G championship was playing in the title game, made a tackle, and is now retiring from football due to persistent concussion issues. It is possible that he went through the right protocol, was cleared for the game, and then reinjured himself; it's possible he wanted to play so bad he cheated on the protoco (which shouldn't be possible); it's possible he didn't injure himself in the title game, but decided he wasn't going to have an NFL career and bowed out while he could still make the call himself.
The problem is, those are the "good" scenarios, and they still smell like someone's being negligent with student health.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Cinnamon Toast Crunch is the bomb||
But there are good things to be said about Crackling Oat Bran and various almond-cluster cereals as well.
As far as the Super Bowl, as others have noted the Seahawks had time for one run and two passes, or an incomplete pass, a run and timeout, and one last play. This play pretty much has to be a pass, but calling the inside play rather than the fade (maybe to the guy covered by Arrington giving up a foot?) seems like overthinking it. The Pats DB made possibly the play of his career to burn them, but not calling a Lynch run doesn't seem like a hideous mistake. Calling a play that means you never get to the Lynch run seems like the mistake.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||It does taint their legacy||
Deflated footballs aren't anything serious by itself, nor do I expect any serious punishment for the incident.
However, add the perception that the Patriots are constantly pushing and breaking any rule they think they can get away with, and any incident which can be spun to their disadvantage will be. Coupled with Spygate and the numerous other bad PR incidents, it gives the people who define legacies - the media - the power to downplay their achievements.
Finally, the most damning is that the Patriots have lost twice to Giants teams which were much, much worse during the regular season. Once can happen to anyone, but twice makes people think they just weren't as good as we thought.
None of this says that I agree - as I said, I regard the recent incident as non-serious. But these Patriots legacy will be diminished because of the accusations of cheating, because in the Age of Twitter you won't be able to discuss them without those things coming up.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||That misses the point of the study||
Which, as I read it, is that subcritical contact *which is not immediately diagnosable as injury* is a leading indicator for later irreversible brain injury, and this begins in youth football, as soon as they start blocking.
No other sport except boxing has that level of contact in the youth leagues. It is potentially more dangerous for that because the contact doesn't lead to signs of immediate injury, so the rate of injury doesn't reflect it.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||In addition to the '85 Bears and the Young 49ers||
I would add the 67 Packers utterly destroying the upstart AFL champs, the Steelers absolutely throttling the Tarkenton-led Vikings in SB IX, and the Doomsday II Cowboys grinding the Orange Crush Broncos into paste in SB XII.
|5 weeks 9 hours ago||Boxing, certainly||
I should have said the other sports he mentioned.
But leaving that aside, the other sports you mention, except boxing, do not involve skull-rattling contact during every second of game play the way football does on the lines, from day one of participation. Amateur boxers get headgear, beginner hockey is no-checking, etc.
I do not agree with Space Coyote that we just need to be more vigilant for hurt players and define a few rules to fix this issue. I fear that unless technology/medicine bail us out, the question we will increasingly faced with is "What does football offer that soccer/basketball/baseball do not?" If the only answers are tradition and the visceral thrill of watching people hurt each other, versus the increasing likelihood that we're watching them shred their brains ...
|5 weeks 11 hours ago||There's not safe and then there's football||
None of the other sports carry the same risk of irreversible brain damage.
That is a legitimate and scary difference, to the point where my son won't be playing tackle football despite my love for the game.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||Fair points||
the question sort of becomes "How many great players does Michigan have?" If the answer is "lots", we can scheme in all kinds of ways; if the answer is "Peppers and Willie Henry", then many modern schemes simply won't fly for us.
I completely agree that the ones that look good, given our personnel, feature Peppers at safety, and not lockdown corner.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||I am most interested in the QBs||
And am rooting for Kalis, Morris, and Drake Johnson to come back from their various injuries.
I am really hoping time and physical malady hasn't eliminated the chance for them to benefit from the expertise of the new staff, but I fear that it might; back, head/ankle, and repeated knee injuries to the same spot are all worrisome because they have a tendency to linger and be slower healing than other owies.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Point of Order||
That Steel Curtain D was built on Lambert, Jack Ham, Mean Joe Greene and LC Greenwood. Other notable players include Andy Russell, Mike Wagner, Glen Edwards, Mad Dog White, and Fats Holmes; later incarnations included Woodson and Donnie Shell.
Those Steelers nearly had an entire All-Pro D some years, even with Doomsday II and the last years of the Purple People Eaters around. They were able to scheme in interesting ways because they could get pass rush from three guys, deflections from the 6'8" Greenwood, and cover everyone with someone better than the receiver. They ate running plays for lunch because doubling Greene and Greenwood meant nobody blocked Lambert and Ham.
|6 weeks 8 hours ago||Not outraged at all||
Think the Patriots should be punished for the violation of an equipment rule? Sure.
What's appropriate? Probably something along the lines of a fine for the organization and the HC, and that only because he has demonstrated that he'll bend or break a rule until he gets punished. Maybe a suspension, but even for a preseason game that seems too much.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Oddly enough it does help||
Or rather, it's the quid for the pro quo which does help; the $60M is what PSU gives up to get the wins back.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Minority Opinion||
The people who committed the crimes or took direct action in covering them up are either dead, in jail, or awaiting trial. The victims are being cared for as best we can at this late date. The proposed settlement helps them and potential future victims far more than numbers in a record book.
The football program was the motive for the coverup, but I don't care very much about that. Killing it won't bring justice to the victims or stop a future coverup, so what good do NCAA sanctions do? If anything, the NCAA should have found every staffer above a certain level employed during the years of alleged abuse and hit them with lifetime bans - those people have shown that they cannot be trusted with student-athlete welfare. But telling current players they can't go to a bowl because of things that no current coach, staffer, player, or administrator had anything to do with? Where's the justice in that?
Punishing the program is like saying we should have disbanded the Whigs because Aaron Burr shot Alexander Hamilton over politics.
I do find it distasteful that PSU is negotiating for those numbers back. If they want their reputation back or to put it behind them, then they should be distancing themselves from these acts, not fighting tooth and nail to say that they weren't as bad as all that.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||The line opened holes for Elliot all day||
Reminded me a little of the Wheatley Rose Bowl (mostly because I just watched the highlights again today, and I was at that game and will remember it well for a long time). Great blocking for a superb talent.
If we can actually hold him in check next year that will be quite an achievement, especially with one of those QBs to contend with as well. The key to doing that will be controlling the line of scrimmage - winning the war in the trenches will win The Game.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Butch Woolfolk is in that conversation too||
Another track star with the size to run over people. For a long while I thought that was Michigan's birthright.
I did not see Rob Lytle play (became a fan in 1977), but Wheatley and Woolfolk are my two favorite M players after #1 Anthony Carter. I was also at the Wheatley Rose Bowl and will remember his day for a long long time.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||The picture at the above link tells the story||
Vareen is a covered receiver - he could be wearing any number and still wouldn't be be eligible. Normally if that happens, that means there aren't exactly seven on the line, and hence you'll get an illegal formation flag. The TE lined up at the normal LT spot reported as eligible, so he is the EMOL on the left and can go downfield.
The thing is, if the Ravens had just seen Vareen was covered, they could have had their rush DE coming in untouched on Brady through the nominal LT spot, or running over the receiver you designed the formation around. That's why this is a gimmick play and not something you bust out all day.
Anyway, the Pats did their part, and the Ravens could have turned this into a huge advantage for themselves, but didn't.