that is nice bonus change
- Member for
- 3 years 46 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|1 week 1 day ago||Thanks!||
I get emotional every time watching that video. It was the beauty of those times. It reminds that then, as well as now, this is Michigan.
|1 week 1 day ago||Looking for a hype video||
Anybody remember the black and white hype video that was really sad about the rich rod years that turned to color half way? That one was so emotional for me. I'd love to see it again if anyone knows which I'm talking about. It was from a few years ago.
|1 week 3 days ago||Denver/Pittsburgh playoff game||
I watched that playoff game against Pittsburgh where Denver scored 29 points with a wow offensive finish by the quarterback, and Tebow won it. That much was clear.
|1 week 4 days ago||Wasn't that a quote from here?||
Wasn't that a direct quote from Brian or a commenter on here? I swear I read someone say that exact sentiment, even with the same syntax.
|3 weeks 10 hours ago||B||
I don't like highlighter yellow. I do love this sweet looking alternate. 34 years old. I like a consistent O-line and winning.
|3 weeks 11 hours ago||OL coach||
OL coach is the one who decides who starts, evaluates the talent, and determines the rotation.
That might not be a bad place to consider.
|3 weeks 12 hours ago||I can't forget||
how when I shared with my brother my excitement that we have Nuss as our new OC he said we'll see the same erratic line changes and lack of development of OL cohesion as last year because that's the OL coach's job.
Still expecting good things, but man, I hope we don't see three different starting O lines in the first three games.
|3 weeks 12 hours ago||Shocked to ever say this,||
But I love it.
|3 weeks 15 hours ago||I like to think you're crying||
Not imitating sheep. It makes this funnier.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Good for BB||
So does this mean M-Wolverine can come back?
|5 weeks 16 hours ago||I'll tell you my opinion||
And I don't claim to represent anyone beyond myself. I don't like professional football. It's too ego-centric, too mercenary. I honestly don't ever watch it, and if college football didn't exist, I'd probably lose touch with watching football altogether.
But I love college football. To me, it's the age-old college rivalries, the traditions, the team, team, team. The camaraderie of players past and present who believe in something beyond themselves. It's Tom Harmon and Denard Robinson.
And to me, an ego-centric grab for dinero is antithetical to all that. I don't see them as able to coexist. I lose some of that when players are no longer amateurs making their way together, as I probably see myself in life, with others in some great challenge toward a greater purpose, but mercenaries with a contract doing all their own deals behind the sidelines and maximizing their personal profit in competition with their teammates, individual opponents' contracts, and institutions' profit margins. I don't like that focus. It ruins what I personally like about college football. I can't nor won't project that onto anyone else, since many probably love pro football anyway, but when I think about it, there's a romance to amateurism that makes college football worth spending a little time of my day. It's a lot less like the real world of greed, personal interests and lawsuits, and a lot more like a place I want to spend my Saturdays, where everyone past and present is connected equally and unequivocally for the same cause, one greater than each of us, and a little more transcendent: the team.
That's what I love most about college football. And that's why I think amateurism is one of the best parts.
|5 weeks 17 hours ago||The difference||
I think the difference is no one ignores a university education to be an Admissions intern. Plenty of athletes with pro avenue potential have only professional athletics on their minds (see many of our rivals' statements on academics). So there is much more possibility of seeing athletics as a job that makes education irrelevant than having a part time position as an Admissions intern would. No one is going to value that over a Michigan degree. And for those of you who are athletes, you know how consuming that is anyway. I think it's a fair distinction, though not the definitive point against paying athletes.
|5 weeks 17 hours ago||I agree with Shaw||
I think Shaw's statement is totally reasonable. Education is preparing students to make a living, not making one. I've always liked amateurism, and regardless of how much money is made by institutions, the amateurism in college football is one of its most attractive parts.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Can anyone||
Embed the pic or link to the picture? Not showing up on my phone.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||This brings back memories||
My wedding was the day of the Notre Dame/ U of M 2011 night game. I know what you'll all say, but honestly I put my wife's desire for the date over my football. I walked into our hotel room and turned on the TV to the final two minutes of the game where Denard won it all. Then we consummated. It was incredible.
Incidentally, my friends had a blast watching the end of the game in a bar with some of the best Michigan people all in the same place together. Thanks for bringing that back. Sorry about your loss, though.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||Yeah||
This is pretty much right on, in my opinion. The only thing is, I think you're putting too much faith in Nuss's control to improve the OL. He has to depend on his OL coach in many ways for that, and we've seen no change in that or reason to believe it will be different. Sure, he'll give a base scheme which will hopefully help them know what the heck is going on, but the arbitrary starter switches and inability to determine talent/preparedness before game 1 and early in the season -- I think that'll only change with the OL coach. Still, I think Nuss will make strides forward.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||I'd be a lot more confident||
if we had done what Florida did, and replaced OC and OL coach. There's little to indicate we'll see a change in OL rotation (who never found a way to gel together amidst constant starter changes), even with simplified scheme by the OC. So, my prediction is similarly erratic shifts in OL combinations, as though someone is spinning a wheel on who starts.
Other than that, I see good things for us in the future, with a maturing QB, simplified scheme, restocked RB field, and a sharpening defense. But 9-3 is the top of what I can see, and it may well be 8-4 or worse. I just can't see our OL making huge improvements under the same coaching and still being very young. Still, 2015 could be an excellent year as our young OL improves.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||FSU is SEC ready?||
FSU is SEC ready? I'm so sick of this crock. FSU just won the national championship. The SEC isn't FSU ready.
|7 weeks 5 days ago||Two bites?||
Whoa, whoa, whoa, delis aside, a two bite brownie is not a brownie.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||This is a good comment.||
I'm not sure why someone's running through and negging everyone. I too hope we keep Wolverines a very long time. Nice to dodge the political bullet.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Great point.||
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Thank you for not blaming me||
I wasn't aware. And I'm not against changing it. Just trying to identify the feelings behind that perspective. I can't imagine someone picking that name, but I've been slightly put off by how quickly and aggressively political black balling sweeps across society. It almost becomes violent, when no one noticed before.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Don't you think||
it would be men who would name it "slut bags," not women?
|9 weeks 2 days ago||My thoughts||
Why has this not been an issue before? For decades of political correctness? I think the most educated argument for keeping it is idiom. I don't really see the term as holding any weight anymore (despite historical implications). For the football team, it's been around so long in only that context that it is accepted into society as idiom and no longer holds any negative power it did in the distant past. Idiom is a pretty powerful linguistic argument; it has allowed many terms or phrases into common use that I grate me teeth at.
I think what you're seeing is not an insensitivity to Native Americans, because I think those who want to keep the name would feel differently if they were aware of Native Americans who are offended, such as having personal friends who are. I think it's a backlash against a society that many intuit is picking battles based on political agendas and personal gain (of those who want to lead the witch hunt) and then the group effect that runs differing opinions out of town. I think people are getting fed up with that, with a healthy dosage of desiring the status quo, more than anything specific about Native American insensitivity.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||I don't have a problem||
With Redskins, because I think it's been ingratiated into society as idiom. But if a significant percentage of Native Americans are offended by it, change may be worth considering. Personally, I think "Fighting Indians" is much worse.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Watch your acronyms||
Mrs. Stephen R Krass. I'm shocked.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||My point||
My point is you asked a hypothetical question to use his acquiescence as proof of your point. He turned it around, and while you can rail all you want against his answer, you can't say his choice proves your point. By that reasoning everything proves your point.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||You don't get to||
You don't get to ask a leading question and then act like he made your point when he doesn't take the bait.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Surely you meant a /s||
That is way more offensive than Redskins. You may as well call them the Bloody Savages and give them a scalp in the other hand, for what it will be taken as.
|11 weeks 19 hours ago||Unfortunately||
OP chose Friday afternoon, and we know how content zips off the board over the weekends.