Mason NEEDS this, Pistons, after all you've put him through
- Member for
- 5 years 42 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|4 days 22 hours ago||I disagree. I think the most||
I disagree. I think the most popular posts should almost never have jumps. Jumps should be reserved for the dense statistical analyses, GIFathons, and dear diaries.
The primary advantage of the above: If you are a frequent reader and the material you most care about is jumpless, the only link you have to click is the one to mgoblog.com
|6 days 11 hours ago||The O.P. got close to||
The O.P. got close to constructing a coherent argument but couldn't finish.
His anecdotes are certainly not evidence that the OL will be good...but they bring further good reason to believe it is too soon to judge the badness we've seen. And that it is *certainly* too soon to say data from 2013 and the spring game conspire to predict with certainty a poor 2014. Which is just another way of saying "maybe." Which is fair.
So yes: This is what it's come to: Cop outs, technicalities, and "optimism" that--depending on your shade of glasses--is painted in such broad strokes as to be concurrently pessimistic.
|6 days 20 hours ago||Deepest sympathies.||
|1 week 1 day ago||It's the benefit of the||
It's the benefit of the honeymoon phase. Penn State is going through the same thing now with Franklin. A 10-win season would change so many things around here, our recruiting and collective mood ain't the least of it, either.
|1 week 2 days ago||Weird getting so much more||
Weird getting so much more posting for prelims than the real thing. It's finishing up on BTN now. Michigan leads Oklahoma by just over 2.3 points going into the final round. The announcer has me believing this is a small lead. (...) But I know 0.001 things about gymnastics, so don't trust anything I say.
Meanwhile, Sam Mikulak, chasing a third straight NC in the all-around, leads the TrFr from Stanford by a mere 0.100 points.
|1 week 3 days ago||I imagine Mikulak usually||
I imagine Mikulak usually participates in all 6 events. Why no Rings today? Simply because he had the luxury not to bother?
EDIT: I'm assuming the lack of a score for Sam in that event (on the linked page) denotes that he did not participate...though I now see how this assumption might be wrong.
|1 week 3 days ago||Gymnastics NCAAs||
I don't know about the process. How does a "preliminary" round differ from the rest? I can guess** but I'd rather some nice person give me the outline.
**(Assuming: this round allows passage of the best participants into the next rounds but only the participants, not the scores, carry on...meaning it doesn't matter much in the ultimate scheme whether Michigan is "in the lead" right now?)
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Do you consider everyone who||
Do you consider everyone who isn't fat a suspect in a PED conspiracy? Because Lebron isn't exactly "jacked"; he's just what it looks like when a skinny athletic boy grows up.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||On another board I frequent||
On another board I frequent (a mixed Big Ten board), a longtime Alabama poster claimed ("for what it's worth") the UA OL performed much better when Lindsay was starting than when he wasn't.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||Weird guy here||
As a guy five-sixths through a really weird Big Ten adventure (Michigan, B.S. [CMB, PolSci, 2006]; PSU, M.D. ; Indiana, Ph.D. [Biochemistry, In progress]), I appreciate the melding of allegiances so long as Michigan always remains #1. I look forward to seeing a copy.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||"Definite?" I love the||
I love the optimism, but it surprises me slightly. I was under the impression that Michigan (#4) wasn't even the highest (nationally) ranked team entering the Big Ten championships as it ranked behind OSU (#2).
Now I don't at all deny the silliness of ranking a still-undefeated returning national champ anything but #1, but the 2-3 teams ranked above us this week are bound to give us a run for our money.
Right? What am I missing?
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Reading that, I let myself imagine you also saying this:||
"I generally like knowing things, but science is starting wear thin with me. Analyzing every aspect of the universe takes some of the magic out of life."
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Can't say I've paid much||
Can't say I've paid much attention to Brian's opinion of this guy. What is it?
Does it specifically regard him by name or more generally regard the corporateness and social-medianess of everything and -one under DB's reign?
|5 weeks 6 days ago||No way! Though he is||
No way! Though he is misguidedly lauded as one of the best science speakers of this generation, he's actually one of the worst. He dumbs his material down to incomprehensible levels. One time, I watched as he discussed subatomic particles by comparing them to various fat, skinny, purple, green, and polka-dotted monsters he had just made up.
That helps no one understand anything and is unforgivable. It was condescending at worst and an example of quitting because "making the esoteric accessible" was too hard at best.
Neil may not be Carl, but Michio is almost no one. Unlike the other guys, if kids aspire to be Kaku, they aren't shooting for the moon but for the top of the telephone pole.
|5 weeks 6 days ago||Mixed...but trending quite positively||
My expectations were unfairly high, but I was disappointed by how much better Carl was at this than Neil. Tyson's prosody seems a few increments more awkward, less genuine and more forced than Sagan's. And the content of Tyson's speech is slightly condescending, whereas Carl *truly* may have been the best public speaker of in the history of scientific education.
To me, Sagan remains unparalleled in his ability to dissolve esotericism and make even the most distant, infinitesimal and convoluted thing immediately accessible. Most importantly, he did it without a mote of evidence against him of "dumbing it down." A sensationally uncommon gift, that one. Maybe I shouldn't be too hard on Tyson for falling short there. Yeah. I know that's true.
[Exception: I adored the personal anecdote of the elderly Sagan inviting the 17yo Tyson to Ithaca.]
So OK, despite my mild criticism, I liked the Cosmos reboot very much. A feast for the eyes. The storytelling was eminently worthwhile. And the prose was not bad--it just never had any hope to meet Sagan's.
I think shows like this serve the most noble and vital roles for humanity. Especially given the quality disintegration viewers have witnessed on the History, Discovery, and Science Channels in the last decade--where "lowering the bar" has welcomed Pawn Stars, Punkin' Chunkin', and so much other hollow dimness in place of the depth on which those channels built their reputations.
In sum: The show didn't reach my theoretical dreams, but it's in reach of my pragmatic ones.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||I am not a hoarder||
(and probably have no business sharing my opinion, but this is the internet so...)
I would probably save them. Probably would store them alongside a VCR in some large, hermetically sealed Rubbermaid bin in a garage, attic, crawl space, whatever. They meant something to your dad, I bet. And they already belong to the class of things that are underground in a time capsule and have been for 20-30 years.
It'll probably take another 20-30 years until you want to look at them to either have an old-timey moment (it won't be long before VHS technology feels identical to film reels and projectors) or connect with how you and your dad shared common hobbies/sports-passion, but I bet that day will come.
/Even moreso: Sorry for your loss
|8 weeks 3 days ago||FTR: I didn't say it was||
FTR: I didn't say it was going to be nefarious. I never came close to those thoughts.
I am just saying it's pretty clear this would be perfectly unlike any union ever. I mean they are stretching the semantic bounds of "employee" just to approve the **IDEA** of unionship. And it being so different from more recognizable unions has me entering the subject without any predisposed notions of what shape it will take. I only know it will be different, somehow.
The players haven't been particularly explicit about their visions for organizing. It remains to be seen whether they can acquire certain static benefits under the guise of the idea of being a "union" without actually acting like a union (with meetings and bargaining and dues and strikes and union presidents).
Because it's never been done before. Which is also my point: Doing all of this without a due-collecting, bargaining body remains an extant possibility, particularly because, if approved (to reiterate), this will be the most peculiar worker union in history.
IE: Could they (1) become a union, (2) acquire health insurance and guaranteed scholarships, and then (3) never do anything uniony again so long as "(1)" and "(2)" aren't taken from them? Well that'd be weird. But I think it's still possible. And more than that, it might be the best option.
Meanwhile, while I applaud their innovation and leadership, many of these student-athletes seem weakly-versed on the nature of the task before them. I bet many individuals in their group have very different ideas of what their dream union would look like and are only now realizing it...or maybe are not realizing it even yet.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Oy.||
Sometimes the MGoLogicMachine is astoundingly broken.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Why would they be "surely" doing these things?||
If they become a union, they'd be rather unlike any union ever. I am not yet convinced they'd have a central office and administrative (union) body. If not, then certain union expectations like dues and strikes aren't strictly necessary.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||I severely dislike the tendency to call this weather "the worst"||
Calling the "worst" is a self-fulfilling prophecy for being unhappy about 1/4 of this year. I'd rather call it prodigious or historic.
|9 weeks 4 days ago||BTN growth||
I wonder how this will impact the next contract cycle, specifically as it relates to the New York-area acquisition that still seemed so certain (for 2017) when we went to sleep last night. Must anything change?
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Portmanteaus are pun-damental||
As far as the Big Ten is concerned, this win puts Michigan in an excellent posi-chigan.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||PoA does not concur||
Were the Pussification of America not distracted by its own weeping/caviling over some doubtlessly banal politically correct trivia, it would deliver a dissenting opinion.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Math||
Regarding the commentary below MSU: 12/20 is not 3/4. It is 3/5. Unless I misunderstood what you meant by "3 every 4."
/hopes tone isn't miscommunicated
/not actively trying to be a dick
|11 weeks 1 day ago||More like...||
More like the Weird Al version of a famous Elton John number.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||If Nebraska really is #9||
If Nebraska really is #9 material, I think that's the bigger story. Michigan has been here before and quite recently, but I for some reason doubt we've had a Top 10 Big Ten mate for a while. I don't think Northwestern's been at that level in ~a half-decade.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||You made my head spin||
I don't understand what you are talking about or why you are talking about it. But if I were to accept your invitation for mammothly confusing thread tangent, I'd begin by correcting you: The Michigan AD is technically autonomous.
The preciously small amount of money the AD gets from the state goes to the salaries for a couple employees who, for bureaucratic reasons, aren't allowed payment from the AD itself. Make no mistake that the percentage of money spent on those salaries versus the entire AD annual budget is nigh infinitesimal. Therefore, claiming the AD isn't self-sustained is a misleading technicality.
|14 weeks 6 days ago||These pictures aren't from||
These pictures aren't from this storm. I've seen these very ones of these very lighthouses floating around in email attachments and Michigan-landscape-related clickwhore sites for a few years now.
That doesn't affect how incredible the images are. They are. But I don't like the dishonesty of claiming the photos are dated to 2014 and the result of recent storms. Lame.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||Of course things can always||
Of course things can always get worse. Aside from the fact that it exists in words "It can't get any worse" doesn't exist. Is impossible. Thinking being 123rd out of 123 is proof of something is borderline lazy. That Michigan is 123rd out of 123 can never act as proof that it can't get any worse because being last isn't like standing on the basement floor with everyone else standing on top of you. It's more like being suspended somewhere in the middle of an infinitely deep sink hole, unfathomable emptyness below you, with everyone else suspended above you.
No matter what, seriously no matter what, it can always get worse.
NOTE: I think we can and will improve next year at OL, but that's because my favored theory favors interior-OL experience/talent as more valuable than exterior-OL experience/talent. I typed this because believing things can't get worse is logical fallacious and also one of my pet peeves.
|15 weeks 6 days ago||Senselessness to the max||
I cannot imagine investing the activation energy necessary to (1) recognize sports fandom seldom yields returns large enough to be worth it and (2) step away from the unhealthy aspects of being a tireless fan...only to swap teams and do it all over again except in different colors. Why not stop tirelessly following the sport altogether?