here's one vote for "John Beilein's head in a Futurama jar"
|1 day 11 hours ago||Of course, if we were any||
Of course, if we were any good at tempo / 2 minute drill, that sequence would not have been necessary. And we may have beaten PSU.
|2 days 12 hours ago||And our primary point is that||
And our primary point is that Brandon's objectives and deliverables don't seem to align very well with the fanbase.
|2 days 12 hours ago||Seriously. Is it good pizza?||
Seriously. Is it good pizza? No. But it's gourmet compared to dominoes. And now I have a craving for their bacon cheesebread.
|5 days 11 hours ago||Whoa, whoa, whoa. You mean||
Whoa, whoa, whoa. You mean facilities and labor aren't free? I'm both amused and annoyed by the number of people who simultaneously 1) praise Zingerman's for its labor practices and advocate for more businesses to do the same (or be legally forced to) and 2) bitch about the prices, as if the two were totally unrelated.
|5 days 11 hours ago||I love Zingerman's, but last||
I love Zingerman's, but last time I was there they put way too much hot mustard on my Montreal smoked meat, and the horseradish overpowered the rest of the sandwich. I really don't think this was a matter of personal taste, as it was literally causing my eyes to water, and I normally like spicy food and horseradish. Actually had to scrape some off to make it edible, and even then there was enough lodged in the bread to be too much. Meat and bread were, of course, fantastic, and the old pickle and magic brownie were still awesome.
|5 days 13 hours ago||I get more thrill out of a||
I get more thrill out of a victory over OSU, but more agony over a loss to MSU. Gun to my head, I guess I'd rather see the Buckeyes in the Rose Bowl than Sparty if it came to it. It was an easier decision when Tressell was the coach - while slimy, he was never near as loathsome as Dantonio. Meyer has caught up to Mark in that department though.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||Seriously. I get where the||
Seriously. I get where the cable / cab companies are coming from: "Hey, it's not fair that we have to pay these fees / follow these ruless and these other guys don't" (of course, my sympathy is somewhat lessened when the companies involved often actively lobbied for the fees and regulations precisely to stifle competition).
But it's unfortunate that the two sides are usually "Screw the greedy old companies!" or "Down with Uber!" instead of what would really be a better answer for both: why not nix some of the regulations that Uber, AirBnB, etc. have proven aren't really necessary in the new information age? That would allow all the companies to coexist and compete fairly against each other, with a net benefit to the consumer. The only people that would hurt would be the regulatory bureaucrats living off tax dollars without really providing a service (which is why it will never change).
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Given JFK's personal||
Given JFK's personal indiscretions, health issues, etc, the modern media would have a field day with him. Probably wouldn't be a great president in this era. Some questions as to whether he really was all that great in his own (got us started in Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, and the Cuban Missile Crisis, while often considered his finest hour, occurred at least in part because Khrushchev perceived Kennedy as weak).
|2 weeks 4 days ago||A thousand times this.||
A thousand times this. Brandon's end-all, be-all fpr the athletic department seems to be "make as much money as possible". If he happens to improve the brand along the way it's only because that's the easiest way to achieve the goal. I don't get why he gets so much of a pass on that. If "winning will fix everything", why is it okay that he so focused on monetizing seat cushions and water bottles and marketing in and around the stadium, instead of on making the program better? Instead of making the fans more passionate (maybe by treating them like fans and not ATMs)?
At some point, dumping more money into facilities and salaries is just getting rich and gilding the lilly for the sake of doing it (and stroking DB's ego). The AD makes plenty of money. Yes, Michigan's teams should have everything they need - quality coaching, quality (not opulent) facilities, etc. But if it's a choice between fat bonuses, waterfalls in the locker room, and 2 million dollar glowing billboards for field hockey ads, or making things a bit more affordable for the common fan... That's apparently where we are now. I'd choose the fans, and any good AD should too. Brandon chooses the signs and paying himself.
If Brandon wants to run the AD as a for-profit corporation, then fine. Spin it off from the University, let it pay corporate taxes, and see how long it survives. If he wants it to be part of Michigan, he needs to recognize he's the steward of a public good and a century long tradition. The "shareholders" want great memories of fall weekends with their classmates and families, not a fatter bottom line.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Your A) and B) are unique to||
Your A) and B) are unique to Michigan. The problem of declining attendance is not.
|2 weeks 5 days ago||Generally, I think a good AD||
Generally, I think a good AD is one who you DON'T have a strong opinion on one way or the other. More often than not, when an AD (who's not a famous former coach) is the "face" of the program, it's a negative thing. A good AD should be friendly to donors, not rock the boat unless necessary, and let the coaches and players represent the brand. Most of the students shouldn't even know the AD's name without looking it up.
Honestly, that's what bothers me more than anything about DB - his seeming need to leave his mark on everything, whether it's okay as is or not. And generally the mark is neutral or negative. Don't fix what ain't broke. Make as much money as you need, but don't nickel and dime just because you can get away with it. And don't interject yourself into everything. The AD shouldn't be famous.
Anyway anyone who thinks we wouldn't be having this conversation if we were winning more is a fool - if we were winning, Brandon would be the ONLY thing to complain about. And we do love complaining.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||All I know is if my corn||
All I know is if my corn turns that orange color, it's deer bait. "Maize" IS bright yellow.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||As opposed to our great||
As opposed to our great success against good defenses last year? Good defenses are good because they are good against good offenses. Of course we did worse against them.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||The "rowdy" fans in the non||
The "rowdy" fans in the non student section tend to be pretty fucking irritating. I think that's where the people who call into sports radio come from.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||OSUs is objectively pretty||
OSUs is objectively pretty lame.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||The original letters are in||
The original letters are in the concourse. They'd look pretty small on the new boxes, but I'd be down for an enlarged version.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Confession: I think helmet||
Confession: I think helmet stickers were A major error by Bo. Tacky as hell.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||And I hate that people in||
And I hate that people in expensive exclusionary drinking clubs call themselves "Greeks".
|3 weeks 2 days ago||When I was a kid, I preferred||
When I was a kid, I preferred MSU because green was my favorite color.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Irish immigrants have been||
Irish immigrants have been historically subjected to a great deal of racist and anti-Catholic sentiment, so it hasn't always been used in "good humor". You can't lump all "Northern European assimilants" into the same bucket.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Most NFL teams average 30-40||
Most NFL teams average 30-40 pass plays per game. So a 5% drop in accuracy amounts to < 2 fewer completions per game. At the NFL average of 10-12 yards/completion, that's not much impact.
What other effects were considered? Quality of defense affecting hits/game at the edges seems to matter. Plus, it usually takes most of a game to get to 8+ hits on a QB - what's the plot of accuracy per quarter look like? At some point you'd think fatigue / end of game heroic attempts would drive down accuracy at the end of games anyway, regardless of hits.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||Says the guy with a Voltron||
Says the guy with a Voltron avatar.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||Failing to offer backwards||
Failing to offer backwards compatibility seems like a huge miss for both companies. Most gamers have a significant investment in legacy games, and offering backwards compatibility would lock you into a system. Instead, basically everyone I know who is buying a new system is giving serious thought to both systems regardless of which one they used previously.
And I'd by a PS4 today if I could play my PS3 library on it. Instead I'll hang on to my PS3 till it dies or I run out of interesting titles, and see what's out there at that time.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||I used to feel similarly||
I used to feel similarly regarding PC games, but unless you have the need for a pretty high-end computer at home, the delta cost between an "office and internet" PC and a gaming rig capable of playing the latest games (and maintaining that systerm) is pretty high. Plus given the myriad of hardware available, there are always compatibility issues. As someone who enjoys games but is by no means hard core (I max out at about 10 hrs / wk, and probably average 2-3), it's nice to know that I can buy a console, drop in a disk, and play, for any game for the next several years. They are still releasing games for 360 and PS3 - try playing a new PC game on your unmodified rig from late 2006, and it probably won't work without a lot of tweaking. Incidently, the Steam Box approach might help but won't fix this, since there's still a lot of variety.
Besides, while it's certainly possible to hook up your PC to your living room home theater with big screen and great sound, most people don't. So that plus the boot up and go convenience keep the console a good choice for a lot of people.
|7 weeks 1 day ago||Pretty sure that's a jaguar||
Pretty sure that's a jaguar (which are even tougher).
|7 weeks 1 day ago||1. Could? Yes. Would?||
1. Could? Yes. Would? Probably not
2. Neither. But the lightly toothed farmer is usually more fun to sit next to at the game.
4. Brady Hoke poops maize. Lots and lots of maize.
5. I reject the premise. Take money out of the palatial facilities and coach/admin salaries and you could have both. Or just let the players sell their image, which costs you nothing.
6. What the hell is catty corner?
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Gardner was a great get, but,||
Gardner was a great get, but, as you mentioned, he was not anymore of a "sure thing" to the recruiters than Morris.
I know you have to rank them, but Gardner and Morris, to me, are on an equal plane. Not only in terms of their recruiting stars, but also in the sense that a new-ish head coach had finally snagged "His guy" for the future of the team. Gardner as a highly ranked dual threat when all we had was Tate and the unknown quantity of Denard, and Morris as a highly ranked pocket cannon when all we had were dual threat guys making mediocre fusion cuisine with Borges.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Also, we made the mistake of||
Also, we made the mistake of not running the heck out of true freshman Mike Hart from the get-go. That ND game (my first as a student) was really, really painful (sooo many field goals) but it helps that it was Mike's coming out party.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||I was thinking the same||
I was thinking the same thing. Shane's profile cooled a bit during his mono-troubled senior season, but he seems to be a definite hey-o in terms of his ranking and the sense of "THIS is the guy of the future!" that's always been around him.
Are we just discounting him because he was a lifelong fan and his recruitment was a foregone conclusion? Had he been from California, a guy of his profile would be considered a major coup.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||I'd add a thrilling spoiler||
I'd add a thrilling spoiler from another popular fantasy novel that came out five years before Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, but people are remarkably sensitive about that for some reason.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Who actually thought we||
Who actually thought we weren't making a play for the NYC cable market? Most of the bitching was because that was the ONLY reason the expansion made any sense, plus people positing that no one will actually watch Rutgers, B1G member or not.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Of course, when we're playing||
Of course, when we're playing Rutgers instead of Wisconsin, the non-cheering section will extend to at least the 20s. But hey, at least Jim Delaney can expense a few more NYC business trips.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||P values still have a lot of||
P values still have a lot of assumptions built in. In this case your null hypothesis is something like "average hippocampal volume is equal in both football players and non football players". But in calculating the p value, they still have to assume their sample is an unbiased selection from whatever population they are applying it to (All football players? D1 football players? Tulsa football players? Did they run it as single tailed or two tailed?).
|8 weeks 3 days ago||It's not indicting the||
It's not indicting the thoughtfulness of the researchers to note that the study was limited in scope, limiting the broad conclusions that can be reasonably drawn. Even the researchers would acknowledge that - given unlimited time and funding I'm sure they would have done much more.
|8 weeks 5 days ago||Suny is amazing. Took 3||
Suny is amazing. Took 3 classes from him. He's great to listen to and the classes were very small, so we had some great discussions. He's the only prof whose total lack of technology skills I found endearing. (There was a girl who always had a laptop - Suny would be going on about some statue in St Petersburg, and wishing he had a picture to show us. Girl pulls up statue on Google image search. Suny is flabbergasted.)
|8 weeks 5 days ago||Had him for Warfare in the||
Had him for Warfare in the Ancient World. Great lectures, pretty easy class if you can write at all, and one time while taking the class I saw him on the History Channel talking about Alexander the Great.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||The way TEs are starting to||
The way TEs are starting to be used in the NFL (see Gronkowski, Rob) and in college makes preceding history about where they get picked invalid. And the Lions didn't have a pick at 20 anyway. If he's a great player for them, no one will care in a couple years. If he's a bust, he's still a bust even if you pick him 10 spots later.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I never really got the "he's||
I never really got the "he's a stretch at that pick" complaint. You need your first round picks to be hits, and generally expect them to play quickly, so you take the guy who will help you the most. So what if a draft wonk had the guy going off the board 10 picks later? Unless that pick belongs to you or you can trade down for it, that's worthless to you. It would be stupid to take a guy that won't offer short term help for your team just because Mel Kiper ranks him higher. I guess there's a possible exception for when a guy is so good it will be valuable to trade him or whatever good veteran you have at the position of non-need.
I think concerns that the Lions could have traded down and either still gotten Ebron or taken one of the defensive backs. And that's valid, but it takes two to make a trade and the whole problem with the Lions spot at 10 was that there was no one available that anyone was desparate to grab at that spot.
Ebron is an instant upgrade at a spot (receiving TE) that will get extra emphasis in the pass-happy Lions offense. The DB draft is a lot deeper, so the Lions have plenty of time to upgrade there too.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||And you missed my point||
And you missed my point completely. Even though the punishment is similar, that's probably the least relevant factor in whether universities can fairly adjudicate sexual assault.
|9 weeks 2 days ago||Not necessarily a left right||
Not necessarily a left right thing, but mandated changes to the way sexual assault cases are handled by universities have been put in place by the current administration and their appointed officials. This is a statement of fact, not partisanship.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||And while the focus here is||
And while the focus here is on the rights of the accused, I think the process is equally fraught for the victims - how are college professors and administrators qualified to speak with or advocate for victims on these issues? There's a general understanding that the process of perusing a sexual assault case can be traumatizing for the victim - but apparently we're okay with totally untrained campus councils hearing victims talk about their rape?
|9 weeks 3 days ago||Plagiarism, while a serious||
Plagiarism, while a serious academic offense, is not a felony, is often easier to prove, does not have the same level of trauma for the victim, and does not carry the same stigma for the perpetrator. Other than that they are exactly the same.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||There is, or ought to be, a||
There is, or ought to be, a distinction between "intoxicated" and "mentally incapacitated". Either that or there should be a lot more cases where both parties are expelled for rape. Or at the very least the genders of the plaintiffs should be more even.
That's the problem with your "period" - it's not really enforced that way, and realistically never will be. Even your comment assumes that only males need to know that a drunk person can't consent.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||Of course, unreported||
Of course, unreported assualts being more common than false accusations is a product of the difficulty of getting a case through the current legal system. It's a tough, painful process, and only an extremely motivated plaintiff (either a real victim or a real sociopath) will go through that. But if you make it easier to file a report and get someone punished, and if you codify the assumption that no one makes false accusations, more people will probably make false accusations - the risk reward calculus changes. Many have made the argument "it's fine to remove due process, because so few women make false charges", but that fallaciously assumes that the existing due process isn't part of the reason that so few false charges are filed.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||Which is a fine concept and||
Which is a fine concept and something that ought to be encouraged. But when you start handing out expulsions, I think there needs to be some reasonable mens rea on the part of the perpetrator.
I think we have a culture that encourages bad sex that people often regret and/or makes people feel that there's something wrong with them if they want to say no. But I think education is the solution, not legal action against people who honestly thought they were just taking yes for an answer.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||There's definitely a||
There's definitely a disconnect. Male on female rape is a serious crime, something that most people are rightly horrified by. Male on male rape in prison is a punchline, or worse, considered a justified punishment.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||Of course, the assumptions||
Of course, the assumptions that only men want sex, only men initiate sex, only men lie about sex, and only men use force, coercion, or chemically-impaired judgement to obtain sex should also be changed - and all of these assumptions appear to underlie the proceedings currently being used by OSCR and its counterparts at other universities (not to mention apparent assumption that sexual assault only occurs in heterosexual relations).
|9 weeks 3 days ago||"Bad for you" in what way,||
"Bad for you" in what way, and compared to what? Since the initial parameters were "obesity and diabetes" and "compared to other fast food places", I stand by my assertion that Chick-fil-A ain't that bad.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||Well, unless you're bringing||
Well, unless you're bringing a homemade lunch, you could do a lot worse. Chick-fil-A scores pretty high in the "Eat This, Not That" series, and a grilled chicken sandwich with a side salad and ice tea is a damn satisfying lunch well under 500 calories. Since the portions are reasonable, even the fried sandwiches aren't god awful for you every now and then.
|9 weeks 3 days ago||I patronize them for entirely||
I patronize them for entirely savory (sometimes spicy) reasons.
|9 weeks 4 days ago||Are spread option teams||
Are spread option teams evenly distributed among the conferences? If spread option offenses are much more common among mid-majors, that would skew the results. Might be interesting to confine the analysis to the top 25, or to the BCS AQ conferences.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||I think the argument against||
I think the argument against The Process is that Brandon should not have made a situation where it was "win the bowl game and you're gone". If one game is going to change your decision, you're too indecisive to be a Michigan AD. Either can him, or give him your confidence. Don't create a month of limbo.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||It's not, but it's also not||
It's not, but it's also not exactly a low stress gig.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||I'm not assuming you're a||
I'm not assuming you're a bandwagoner. Even if I were, I'd care little since you're not in a position of authority in regards to Sterling, nor are you (that I know of) a media person stoking the fires.
But the people meting the punishment to Sterling DO come off on bandwagoners precisely because they ignored all the stuff you were apparently aware of.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||Nobody is crying too many||
Nobody is crying too many tears over Sterling. But in a way it's like the McGary situation (not that smoking pot is equivalent to being racist).
"Everybody" is breaking the rule, and the vast majority are either getting away with it or getting wrist slaps. Suddenly one person gets publicly caught, and gets utterly hammered.
Definitely makes it seem like the punishment is much more about image than justice. So the annoyance is not about Sterling getting his karmic due, but rather about the "hear no evil" types suddenly becoming fierce moral crusaders on the issue.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||Sterling gets no sympathy||
Sterling gets no sympathy from me for being a racist ass. But he didn't get sacked for being a racist ass, despite acting out his racism in a way highly detrimental to a lot of people. He got fired for being caught on tape saying some racist crap which, while despicable, had pretty zilch actual impact on anybody. And that's why the bandwagon high horseness is particularly annoying. The NBA will sweep anything under the rug to make a buck, but go all moral crusader when caught.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Of course, rankings don't||
Of course, rankings don't really tell the story of how well you're filling your needs. RR started his tenure with a big hole in defensive talent, particularly in the secondary. This contributed to losing, which contributed to hot seat rumors, which contributed to lousy recruiting. So in that sense you can say there are "ripples" of Lloyd, and there probably will be until the 2011 class departs.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Sure, but asking if Beilein||
Sure, but asking if Beilein is finding a diamond in the rough or just "desperately" seeking bodies, and then opining that he made a suboptimal move, would seem to meet any reasonable definition of "questioning" the coach.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Even if we end up with those||
Even if we end up with those guys wanting to come here, the scenario where we actually have to turn any away is one where we keep LeVert, Irvin, and Walton, Bielfeldt turns into a major contributor, and Hatch can actually play. I'm not worried about 2015.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||I mean, maybe if you don't||
I mean, maybe if you don't consider the title of the OP to be "in the thread".
|10 weeks 4 days ago||1) Bank one scholly for who?||
1) Bank one scholly for who? MAAR and Dawkins may not be world beating talent, but I'd wager that either one will be better, or at least as good, after a year of Beilein development than a fringe top 100 guy as a frosh. And "fringe top 100 guy" is probably an optimistic best case scenario for the third or fourth scholly that we'd be "banking" this year (I believe we only got 2 top 100 2014 guys).
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Banked the scholarships for||
Banked the scholarships for what? Suddenly we're going to have >3 five stars beating down the door and we'll have to turn some of them away? What makes you think that would happen? It certainly didn't with this year's recruiting.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||We missed on the plan A guys||
We missed on the plan A guys much earlier than April.
|11 weeks 12 hours ago||You're not my pal, friend.||
You're not my pal, friend.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||What percentage of season||
What percentage of season ticket holders actually attend every game? I get the impression that a lot of people renews mostly for tradition and to guarantee a spot at the best games, but try to unload a good portion of their tickets on the secondary market. The lousy slate of games and the poor performance of the team would tend to hit these people pretty hard financially. Anyone here in that boat?
|11 weeks 2 days ago||The "real fan" chest beating||
The "real fan" chest beating is almost as tiresome as the posters who continually deploy "I'm not renewing my seats". In both cases it's pointless self-aggrandizement meant to claim unearned moral authority.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||Salary caps, among other||
Salary caps, among other things, would probably violate antitrust law, except that the leagues have successfully argued that level competition enhances their product and is thus essential. Why is "student employees are key to our business model" any more strained?
|11 weeks 3 days ago||Basically, they are already||
Basically, they are already overpaid.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||The NCAA could spin that the||
The NCAA could spin that the eligibility requirements are a bona fide necessity, since "college age players who are students in college" is an important part of the product's appeal. I'm sure they could find a sympathetic jusge willing to buy this logic, and most players probably wouldn't object. I still think we're a long way from the place where a CFL guy would sue over his right to be "employed" by a college football team as a player.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||Jenkins' questions are||
Jenkins' questions are clearly not unanswerable, which is Brian's point - Jenkins is using the "unanswerable question" rhetorical device to act as if the changes would open a Pandora's Box of destructive chaos. She seems to suppose that merely posing a potential difficulty resulting from the change ought to be sufficient to stifle any further discussion on the issue. Which is indeed basically the strategy used by the BCS guys.
|12 weeks 1 day ago||Is there any evidence that||
Is there any evidence that players who spend an extra year in college are more likely to not go bankrupt? Or any evidence that players who stay 2 years vs. 1 are more likely to finish their degree after their pro career?
Do basketball players get "worn out" or do they get "too old"? I really don't have direct evidence, but if I were forced to guess I'd say it's some of both. Meaning that an extra year of college probably doesn't take a full year off your pro career, but it probably takes away some of it.
But even if your pro career length is totally independent of how old you are when you leave college, you still lose out on a year of earnings (at whatever job you take after the NBA) by spending an extra year in college. So the question is whether that college year is worth those lost earnings. It might be, if you finish your degree, if you don't need to retake any classes, and if the earnings potential of "former NBA player with communications degree" are substantially higher than "former NBA player with high school diploma". There are a lot of ifs in there.
|12 weeks 1 day ago||I mean, that's noble and all,||
I mean, that's noble and all, but if college were such a great way to mature you into responsibility, you'd expect much more out of ex-NBA players, most of whom spent at least some time in college. I doubt the after NBA success rate is substantially higher for 2 and dones vs 1 and dones.
|12 weeks 1 day ago||What would be even better:||
What would be even better: You may apply for the draft at age 18. If you are drafted, you may choose to sign a contract or reject a contract. If you reject it, you mainitain NCAA eligibility and may go to college if you choose. However, you may not reapply for the draft for two years.
|12 weeks 1 day ago||I highly doubt that 2 years||
I highly doubt that 2 years of "playing school" with no intention of earning a degree is worth all that much compared to 2 years of pro basketball earnings (or earnings in basically any job for two years).
|12 weeks 1 day ago||Why would Calipari only be||
Why would Calipari only be able to load up every other year? If he's got 5 sophomores leaving for the NBA, he can replace them with 5 recruits. How is that different from 5 freshmen leaving to be replaced by 5 recruits? It won't affect him after the first couple years. If anything, it lets him take more guys because right now, a guy who's not quite a one and done takes up a roster spot for the next season. With 2 and done, he can almost guarantee that every one of his starters would be NBA ready by that point and plan to take 5 guys every year.
Probably the only way this would hurt the Calipari model is that guys who want immediate playing time are probably less likely to join a team where they'll be stuck behind a bunch of NBA ready guys for a season. So it might result in a bit of sharing of the wealth.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||Props to Brian for||
Props to Brian for (hopefully) killing the "Good Ol' Boy" theory for "why we still have Funk". Funk is a relatively recent addition to Hoke's crew, as was Borges, and Hoke has had plenty of turnover on the staff at his previous stops. So the idea that he'd overlook their flaws out of some misplaced loyalty was always odd, or at least unsupportable. For better or worse, Funk is on the staff because Hoke believes him to be better or at least as good as any available alternatives.
|12 weeks 3 days ago||Pure offense? Probably||
Pure offense? Probably Ovechkin, or at least it's damn close. All around player, in terms of pure skill? Possibly Datsyuk. That guy makes magic with the puck on his stick, and actually hustles back on defense too.
Crosby's pretty clearly in the top 5 players in the NHL right now, had a fantastic season, and that's not arguable.
|12 weeks 3 days ago||Well, he was The Captain for||
Well, he was The Captain for 23 seasons, serving longer than any other captain in North American major league sports history.
He actually holds the record for 3rd most points scored in a season (155, bettered only by Lemieux and Gretzky).
He would have likely won many more individual accolades had Scotty Bowman not made him focus on his leadership and defensive game (and had he not been playing with Sergei Federov in his prime).
I don't think there's a player out there that would trade a Cup for a Hart trophy, so those three Stanley's loom large for Yzerman.
Also Sidney's grown up a bit, but he WAS pretty damn whiny (as voted by other players, even), and had a bad habit of laying cheap shots and diving. He's clearly immensely talented. But he stole a gold medal from USA and a cup from the Red Wings, so to hell with the bastard.
|12 weeks 3 days ago||I didn't see a lot of||
I didn't see a lot of complaining about it being simple, although Brian noted that it probably will be. I personally expect the offense to be a little more simple than ideal, and often frustrating because of that, with the understanding that doing a few things pretty well is better than doing too many things not well at all.
The complaints I saw in this post are more geared toward the choice of personnel and formations, which seems valid. It appears that our TEs are well behind the WRs in terms of both raw talent and skill (and, seeing as we're somewhat desperately plugging in Heitzman and Houma, that doesn't seem likely to change in the near future). Even if that's not the long term plan, it seems odd to emphasize the weaker group at the expense of the stronger.
Maybe for the spring game they just wanted to focus on the run, but if we're going to need to operate out of heavy formations just to get a couple yards at a go, the running game is going to be really painful to watch - and pass pro is going to be scary.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||No it won't, not for more||
No it won't, not for more than a couple years anyway. Calipari will still be sending 5 guys to the NBA, they'll just be sophpmores. He'll still have room for 5 new NBA ready guys every year. If anything it would free him up to consider more guys with high potential who need a year of seasoning.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||This strikes me as right. A||
This strikes me as right. A Hoke knowing this was coming, not wanting Gibbons playing, but wanting to keep it quiet would probably have sat him earlier. A "win at all costs" Hoke wouldn't have sat him at all (at least until he was actually expelled). A "wait and let the investigation complete" Hoke would probably do the same.
I just don't see the line of reasoning that says, "I am worried enough about the outcome of this investigation to suspend Gibbons proactively, but not worried enough about being caught in a lie to tell even a partial truth about it. So I am going to voluntarily sit Gibbons for the biggest game of the year, lie about the reason why, then change to a totally different lie right before the bowl game".
|12 weeks 5 days ago||As far as I'm aware, "public||
As far as I'm aware, "public shaming" is not part of the OSCR dictated punishment. So no, I don't think we necessarily have the right to know. And given the severity of what he was accused of, but the lack of a formal legal investigation, maybe "expel him, but do it quietly" really is the best approach, I don't know.
In any case, Gibbons was not formally informed his expulsion was finalized until at least December 19th, well after the Ohio game. It seems odd that Hoke would punish him, but not tell anyone he was being punished, even vaguely. If he was trying to cover it up, why sit him at all? Why change the story for the bowl game? Wouldn't a coach trying to cover it up just let him keep playing? Or at least maintain the injury story?
Several other players have had serious, potentially embarassing legal issues that caused them to miss games. As far as I know, Hoke has never claimed a fake injury to cover it up. It's always been "violation of team rules" or "he's not playing, that's all I have to say about it". Those taking the "Hoke was bad" line here don't seem to have a plausible reason for why Hoke changed his MO for this one particular case.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Eh, the problem with minimum||
Eh, the problem with minimum age rules are that there definitely are kids who are ready to go. You're doing them (and other kids who could use the scholly) no favors by forcing them to "play school".
I do think the "one and done" age limit is particularly dumb though. If you're going to have a limit, it should be three years a la football. Maybe the best would be "enter the draft or D-league your first year out of high school, or at least three years after". But that seems unworkable and the NBA has no incentive to do it.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Last year, I think they were||
Last year, I think they were more of a package deal. This year, I doubt it. It seemed like Mitch was more of the driver between the two staying last year. If I'm Mitch, how has this year changed the analysis I ran last year? Any reasons he had to stay then are equally valid now. This doesn't mean he stays, I just don't see an obvious reason for him to stay last year, then leave now. If he stays, he's really going to feature next season.
For Glenn, he sees his stock fallen a bit, probably another season playing in a non-ideal position, and no guarantee he gets that stock back next year. Plus he's always seemed more like he's got one foot out the door (nothing wrong with that, the guy's got NBA dreams and he's earned them).
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Four days is a blink of an||
Four days is a blink of an eye in your typical large bureaucracy especially near a holiday, and Dec 19 is just the date the letter was generated. It's entirely plausible that Gibbons got the letter, told Hoke "I can't travel, it's a family thing" and Hoke was not given word through any official channels prior to the press conference.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||I don't believe Gibbons had||
I don't believe Gibbons had been officially expelled by the time Hoke made the "family matters" statement. I just want to make sure we don't entrench a misconception that Hoke not only (may have known) that Gibbons was under investigation, but actually knew he would definitely never be coming back.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||"In contention in November"||
"In contention in November" is kind of a dumb standard anyway, since it is highly dependent on scheduling and which B1G teams happen to be good that year.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||Former players aren't who I||
Former players aren't who I had in mind, it's just an example that was posed to me. I'm more thinking about the guys giving $500 hand shakes. Since their whole purpose is generally to buy access to the program and players, the prospect of being cut off from that access would be a powerful stick. These are rich superfans who want to rub shoulders with the athletes - they aren't going to do something that threatens their ability to keep doing that.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||So your point was more||
So your point was more nuanced. But so was the poster you were responding to so flippantly. You may not see hundreds of drugged out kids on the field, but the football team alone does have multiple drug and alcohol related offenses almost every year, and those are just the ones we know about because the law got involved or the punishment rose to suspension.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||It seems that you are||
It seems that you are defining "compel" too narrowly. You don't think Michigan telling Desmond, "please cooperate with this investigation, or we have to give you the Chris Webber treatment" would be at all compelling?
|13 weeks 2 days ago||I feel the same way about his||
I feel the same way about his character. The best satire is willing to skewer everybody, an it's hard to do that when your whole central character is built as an exaggerated parody of one side. It just doesn't hold up for a long time.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Ferguson is the best||
Ferguson is the best interviewer of the bunch, I'd say. He would have been a good, but not splashy, pick. Haven't seen Colbert do an interview that's not a set up for whatever character Colbert is playing at the time, so it will be interesting to see how he does.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Sudden access to liquid cash||
Sudden access to liquid cash never ends badly.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Yeah, because giving an 18||
Yeah, because giving an 18 year old male sudden access to
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Young adults often do stupid||
Young adults often do stupid shit when they suddenly have no-strings-attached access to large quantities of cash. Often this stupid shit involves drugs and booze, which in turn reduce inhibitions to do other stupid shit, from jumping on car hoods to sexual assault. All of this is known, and equally true regardless of what color you are, and it's understandable that coaches would probably prefer their players to not be carrying big stacks of cash for that reason. Maybe a bit paternalistic, but not racist.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Why, in principle, can't the||
Why, in principle, can't the NCAA compel someone to speak? They can't subpoena them, but they could certainly say, UofX, we have determined this person qualifies as a booster, and we have reason to believe they are breaking the rules. Either the booster shows up to talk to us on date Z, or we punish UofX with Y. If we later find proof that the booster lied to us, punishment is doubled.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||In the QB controversy thread,||
In the QB controversy thread, someone asked why we can't ever have an honest conversation about race. This is why. Inevitably, no matter how good the initial intention, someone shows up to turn "conversation" into "shut up while I lecture you, you racist".
|13 weeks 3 days ago||I definitely see Urban as a||
I definitely see Urban as a #2. At least 80 Courics, I'd reckon.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||I don't think many (some, but||
I don't think many (some, but not that many) people are honestly arguing that Hoke couldn't coach high school or that they could literally jump in and do a better job. But while it's inconceivable that Hoke is stupid and incompetent compared to the average football fan, it's entirely plausible that he's "stupid and incompetent" relative to the average FBS AQ coach (and I think that's what is usually meant).
|13 weeks 4 days ago||So, in your opinion, no coach||
So, in your opinion, no coach should ever do anything for the benefit of the patrons. Guess the Nebraska guys are real schmoes for letting some sick little kid cut into their practice time. And Meyer and Saban are real idiots for putting on more entertaining spring games (and then beating us in the fall despite giving up such a key practice).
|13 weeks 4 days ago||At this point I'm reasonably||
At this point I'm reasonably convinced Brian talks up Norfleet at least in part to provoke a response. He is trolling.
|13 weeks 4 days ago||If a Spring Game is really||
If a Spring Game is really detrimental to the team, don't have it at all. Just say, sorry everybody, we really need to focus on practice, so there will be no public practice.
|13 weeks 4 days ago||Plus it's not like Bellomy||
Plus it's not like Bellomy was a prime option A target the way Morris and Speight were. He was a late addition picked up mostly to plug a body into a hole in the roster. Anything we get out of him is a bonus.
|13 weeks 4 days ago||Yes, non fans would say Final||
Yes, non fans would say Final Four is better, but that's because they ignore the whole season outside the tournament. If you're following your team the whole year, the regular season gains importance.
And it's not like Michigan underachieved in the tournament or anything. Would have loved to see them win 3 more games, but losing in the Elite 8, given our expectations going into the season is still a great outcome.
|13 weeks 4 days ago||I can see your last point,||
I can see your last point, but losing in the Elite 8 is hardly a flameout. To me, two things make Michigan's season better:
1) Regular season banner means beating your rivals throughout the year - that's really fun to watch, and a regular season win over Sparty will be remembered longer than your average tourney win over a team you rarely play.
2) Final 4 is great, but what's so magic about getting bounced in the semi finals vs. quarter finals? You're still not playing on the last day of the season. Not saying it's not a major achievement, but it's not an "automatically trumps everything else" achievement.
3) Wisconsin had a really, really rough stretch in midseason. That had to be tough on a fan. Michigan was pretty rough around the edges to start the season but you got to watch them grow into a really dominant offensive team, and win consistently. There were no stretches of despair once conference play started. As a fan, I'd say Michigan's season was more fun to watch.
|14 weeks 2 days ago||There have been several cases||
There have been several cases where men have used cellphone recordings to escape false rape accusations. So either this guy who destroyed the video is monumentally stupid, suddenly grew a conscience about porn filmed without permission, or the video is incriminating.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||I'm thinking that all the||
I'm thinking that all the people who rip on Brian for "worshipping" Kenpom, along with those that beat their chests boasting about how little they consider the predictions, don't really get the joke.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||The fact that Sparty won't||
The fact that Sparty won't shut up about "Wamart Wolverines" is basically an admission that the only way to love MSU is via Stockholm Syndrome.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Dammit now I want some garlic||
Dammit now I want some garlic knots.
|15 weeks 3 days ago||You'd think guys looking to||
You'd think guys looking to burnish their resumes would be more likely to give 100%. Maybe less interested in team leadership, but just for the sake of the scouting report you'd think effort would be key.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||Don't get the doom and gloom.||
Don't get the doom and gloom. Tennessee is a good, dangerous opponent, but so is everyone else in the Sweet 16. You're not supposed to be sure of victory in the second weekend of the thournament. Would we rather be playing Duke? Or Kentucky? Or Louisville?
This is a game that should be close, and Michigan could lose, but I'd consider a blowout by Michigan more likely than a blowout of Michigan.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||Drive to Arizona and pick up||
Drive to Arizona and pick up a couple cases. Apparently Larry Bell likes Spring Training baseball and wanted to make sure he could get his beer here.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||Where is this "biblical"||
Where is this "biblical" reliance on KenPom? The only place I see it is in the "place where I predict what KenPom does", which is just a running joke / acknowledged superstition.
Since so many teams don't play each other, you've either got to go with an algorithm, like KenPom, or "the eyeball test". Of the numerical methods, KenPom's seems to be pretty good, very accessible, and popular/familiar. All of things make it a good starting point for analysis on a blog. But I haven't seen either Ace or Brian say "this is what Kenpom says so it must be true", they generally provide their own analysis if it's a team they've watched at all, and neither picked all Kenpom chalk in their brackets.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||Not only is poor Novak||
Not only is poor Novak getting posterized, he's also getting teabagged and taking a Nike to the nuts, from the same guy, at the same time. Yeesh.
The thing about David vs. Goliath is that sometimes (most of the time) Goliath wins.
|16 weeks 7 hours ago||Because there is absolutely||
Because there is absolutely no gray area between acting like emotionless "stuffy royalty" and flipping a double bird to a gym full of spectators.
|16 weeks 3 days ago||Is there a reason everyone||
Is there a reason everyone other than apparently Seth assumes Texas would be Michigan's round 2 opponent?
I know Texas is chalk, but on paper Texas v. ASU looks really tight. What am I missing?
|16 weeks 4 days ago||Well, as far as homer picks||
Well, as far as homer picks go, Michigan is a coin flip at worst in every game to the final four - so it's not an awful homer pick to make. Would you rather be in a situation where a Michigan win wrecks your bracket (but hey, Michigan won!) or where a Michigan loss is a wash in your pool?
|16 weeks 5 days ago||The people who are currently||
The people who are currently sober at the game are not the ones who would cause problems if the concession stands sold beer.
In other words, selling beer would certainly increase the number of drinkers at the game. I'm not sure how much it would increase the number of drunk assholes, which are the real problem, and already represent a sizable population.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||temperature != heat 1000 suns||
temperature != heat
1000 suns would produce 1000x the amount of heat, in the form of thermal radiation, even though the temperature of each inidividual sun would be no hotter than a single sun (if we ignore for the moment the fact that they'd heat each other). If the 1000 suns were arranged at 1AU such that Earth was in full view of each, then yes, Earth would get really damn hot.
Of course there's not really a stable way for 1000 suns to arrange themselves like that. And if you're talking about a single star with the mass of 1000 suns, then no, the heating at 1AU would probably not be 1000x greater.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||Oversigning won't really||
Oversigning won't really affect this analysis, since he's going by the roster, rather than recruiting classes (IOW he's looking at 85 scholarship men for every school, give or take a couple).
If a school oversigns, either the "overage" never makes the roster, or he gets "cut" at a later year, thus replacing an "experienced" player (using Mathlete's metric) with a frosh. Signing 30 guys doesn't help you here if you can't put them all on the roster.
Oversigning might actually hurt this score - if Saban cuts a bust of a junior 4 star to make room for a new 4 star guy, Bama's score in this metric goes down.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||Huh? This is nothing like||
Huh? This is nothing like last year. This is basically a return to 2012 with a different way of calculating priority for your annually assigned seats. No escorts or ropes required.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||From you, I expect none. From||
From you, I expect none. From a 2013 senior, someone who got at least 3 years of Denard, both UTLs, 2 undefeated home seasons, and the first win against OSU since before I started, maybe a little.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||Since "Superfan" status maxes||
Since "Superfan" status maxes at 36 points, and there are 7 games, you could be "tardy" for two games and still be a Superfan. That will probably alleviate some of the issue.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||Honestly if they're enough of||
Honestly if they're enough of a friend that you want to spend 7 fall Saturdays with them and would actually feel bad kicking them out, them being in your group is more important than the marginal benefit of being a couple rows lower.
Or you could just kick 'em out and try to sneak 'em in.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||The point was that the||
The point was that the griping was in regards to how bad it sucked to have your senior year marred by GA. I'm saying that I would gladly trade reserved seat "senior" tickets (which weren't even that good) to 3-8, Threetsheridammit, and Fan Endurance III (my last game as a student) for GA tickets to the 2013 season.
Obviously, if we're looking at whole student career, I started in '04 (5 year BSE/MSE), so I got to see Braylonfest, Henne to Manningham, 2006, and the whole careers of Henne and Hart. That's better than a 5 year stretch from 2007 to 2010 would have been, no argument there.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||As a student whose senior||
As a student whose senior year was RR's first, you can all go to hell. Count yer damn blessings.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||One thing I haven't seen||
One thing I haven't seen mentioned in the comments so far is that the "hybrid" system applies only for 2014. After that, priority is based entirely on the previous season's points.
On the one hand, that's great that you can have a mixed group and still sit together in "premium" seats without a penalty for having a sophomore in the group. Also, the low rows will be dominated by people who show up, not giant groups of late arriving drunkards who happen to be seniors. And I like that it gives you "one free game" to miss, and doesn't penalize you for not attending non-football events.
On the other hand, it would be nice if class standing added a few points somehow, to prevent someone who, say, takes a semester abroad, from totally losing their priority.
What will be interesting is how points are assigned - by ticket, or by M-Card (that is, do the points go to the original purchaser or the person who actually uses the ticket)? Doing it by ticket would seem to be the way to go, since it would incentivize students to sell or give away tickets they aren't using, and make sure whoever they give it to shows up.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||I didn't get to see much of||
I didn't get to see much of the show - did they ever describe space as "cold"? That's the common misconception that bugs me the most, for whatever reason.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||Setting aside the religious||
Setting aside the religious stuff, you actually touch on something that makes me uncomfortable with Neil deGrasse Tyson and other "rock-star scientists", namely that they get trotted out as the "expert" on anything sciency that comes up, when in reality they are no more experts than any other intelligent and well read person. You would think a scientist would be first to admit that, but sometimes it seems like it takes a backseat to their personal fame.
Now obviously I think it's a good thing to have intelligent, well-spoken people willing and able to communicate science to the masses. We certainly need that when everything else is all Kardashian Swamp Shore Dynasty. And lord knows your average scientist is about as good at public communication as a tranquilized sloth that writes in hieroglyphics.
But I do cringe a little bit when NdGT, an astrophysicist, pontificates on climatology, or when Bill Nye, a mechanical engineer, is chosen as the champion of evolutionary theory. Not that I don't think they should be allowed to state an opinion or attempt to distill science into something more digestible, just that, if they really mean to support science and not a dumbed down version of pop science, they ought to work a bit harder to dispel the myth that "scientist" means "unassailable expert on everything".
|17 weeks 5 days ago||Never tell me the odds.||
Never tell me the odds.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||Well, if your actual goal is||
Well, if your actual goal is to educate (or at least marginalize) the "ignorant" rather than demonstrate your personal superiority, then yes, it is better to de-escalate. Arrogance does not well suit science, which is (or should be) inherently self-questioning and skeptical.
As far as "excising transgressions" where did I even suggest that? I'm merely saying that being explicitly anti-religious feeds into the hands of the religious institutions who wish to see themselves as persecuted, and further entrenches their beliefs. If this is indeed a war, you are fighting it poorly.
Hell, I don't even disagree with you, really, and here I am defending religion because I find your attitude off-putting. What effect do you suppose the "You're just wrong, stop being wrong!" approach has on somebody inclined to disagree with you?
Certainly there are some who will always be unreachable, as there are on every issue, but no sense pushing someone on the fence over to the other side because you feel the need to insult them for retaining any religiousness.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||What "cognitive dissonance"||
What "cognitive dissonance" re: Ken Miller? "Theistic Evolutionism" is the official belief of the Roman Catholic church, to which Miller belongs. Other than professing a belief in a soul created by god, there's not a lot about that position that would require cognitive dissonance on Miller's part.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||A better phrasing might be||
A better phrasing might be this:
Many religious people perceive that science is anti-religion. It of course is not, at least not as it is meant to be practiced. Science is not supposed to be pro- or anti- anything, just a method for finding the most supportable and likely explanations for how things work. Many (most?) of the greatest scientists in history have expressed a faith of one form or another.
This perceived war on religion by science leads to reactionary behavior and an actual war on science (or perhaps co-opting of quasi-scientific language to serve religion, e.g. the creation museum).
It seems to me that the better tactic of science would be to de-escalate rather than cast religion as a villain, thus immediately putting the religious on the defensive and vulnerable to the "see, these are godless heathens trying to end religion!" tactic.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||Wonder if Michigan's 2pt D||
Wonder if Michigan's 2pt D would look as bad if you considered only 2nd half stats? It seems like we let teams come out on fire with disturbing regularity, and take awhile to adjust.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||Better a Walmart Wolverine||
Better a Walmart Wolverine than a Harris Teeter Spartan.
|18 weeks 1 day ago||Actually, doesn't that just||
Actually, doesn't that just prove that the feelings evoked by an image can be more culturally important than the facts behind the image itself? Hence justifying the use of "STAEE"? That is, the picture perfectly captures the sense of larger situation, even if the literal event depicted was not particularly representative.
The flag-raising photo from Iwo Jima and the Eddie Adams picture of Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing a Viet Cong prisoner are other good examples.
|18 weeks 3 days ago||Maybe Tom Crean left the||
Maybe Tom Crean left the trophy sticky last year?
|18 weeks 5 days ago||I think this is definitely a||
I think this is definitely a big piece of the problem - season tickets are the only way to buy student tickets, and a full season of student tickets are still cheaper than attending more than 2 games at general public prices (plus single game seats are effectively impossible to obtain for OSU, MSU at student friendly prices). We probably have a significant part of the student fanbase that would love to go to a game, but not every game. There's also probably a meaningful contingent (a few % per game) that want to go to every game but miss out on one or two a season due to other committments. Both of these groups usually still buy season tickets.
This wouldn't be so bad, except that the AD has also made selling student tickets difficult by first going to the "validation" model (how much are they really making off of those?) and then by going GA, which makes student tickets even more of a hassle compared to other seats on the resale market.
I suspect the issue of unused tickets for general public seats is lower because a) the cost of season tickets is much higher, b) single game seats are generally available, although the cost may be high or you may need to buy a cupcake game "package", and c) it's pretty easy to toss your tickets up on StubHub if you're not going to make it.
One option that might help would be a "student ticket buyback" program. If you buy student tix, you're guaranteed a ticket to every game. However, if you determine you can't make it (say up to a week before game time) you can "release" your ticket for an 80% face value refund (your ticket would become un-scannable and a new one would be "printed"). Students who wish to go to a single game can go on a waiting list and purchase "released" tickets for 110% of student face value. If the number of tickets released exceeds the number of students on the wait list, the tickets would be offerred to the general public for the going rate (you could rope off the top of the student section and offer assigned seating at the top of the bowl, with the number of rows determined by the number of available tix). The difference in cost could pay for the management of the program.
|19 weeks 2 days ago||FWIW I didn't downvote you.||
FWIW I didn't downvote you. My point is I don't really get why you felt the need to write the equivalent of a couple pages of text to basically say "statistics don't tell everything", because I don't think anyone actually disagrees with you on that point.
The OP just wanted to have a little fun playing with the Kenpom numbers, not promoting "slavish devotion" to the predictions, and honestly you seemed to be taking it too seriously. We're not talking about cancer drug trials here. I mean, your points regarding some areas you think Kenpom doesn't handle well are interesting, but I don't think you needed to wrap it in an overall critique of the purpose of statistics in sports, which turned into a pretty major threadjack.
This is supposed to be fun, and while this OP seemed to take your points well, in general I think we ought to encourage more unpaid writers to share their number crunching with the blog, and your critique could be discouraging.
Anyway not trying to be mean or anything, just noting your original couple posts came off as a bit persnickety given the topic.
|19 weeks 2 days ago||It doesn't mean that the||
It doesn't mean that the states without a law on the books are OK with it happening. But it does strongly imply that the state WITH the law on the books is NOT OK with it happening. Something can be common without being socially acceptable or "normal". The implied joke is not that cousin relationships are merely common in WV, but that they are the "norm".
Anyway, if we're going with tasteless stereotypes to make a joke, why not go with Alabama (over WV) since it is both stereotypcially backward AND has legalized first cousin marriages AND has a certifiable ass as its coach?
|19 weeks 2 days ago||At the point where you're||
At the point where you're considering specific limitations in the Kenpom algorithm to justify your belief in a higher level of uncertainty (and backing it up with your own professional statistics credentials), aren't you being just as mathy as the OP? Certainly you're being at least as slavish about the precise application of the statistical method (on an entertainment site) as the OP is to Kenpom's numbers.
In any case, what you really asking for (and are not yourself providing) are not really different numbers, just bigger error bars - the fact that Kenpom can't account for everything means that a margin around the nominal probability would be warranted.
Also, you yourself are abusing statistics a bit by using a single sample to argue for the invalidity of the prediction. After all, Michigan only had a 74% win probability, according to Kenpom, at the start of the Purdue game. A Michigan loss would not have made him 100% wrong, any more than the eventual Michigan win means that he should have predicted a 100% win probability.
|19 weeks 2 days ago||The "joke", such as it is, is||
The "joke", such as it is, is the implication that West Virginia is so backwards that first-cousin relationships are the norm, or at least unusually widely socially accepted. The fact that first-cousin marriages are not legal would imply that there is strong social opposition to the relationships, and the fact that they are legal in many other states suggests that West Virginia is not particularly permissive compared to the rest of the country.
Ergo, if you're attempting to make a joke about "all in the family" sexual relations (which is a bit gross considering the context here), West Virginia is a poor choice for a state stereotype.
|19 weeks 3 days ago||1) Rich Rod's teams had the||
1) Rich Rod's teams had the most immediate needs on defense (particularly the secondary) and at the offensive skill positions, and I think his classes reflected that. Unfortunately that's biting us now because it left a hole at O-Line. So not "forced" necessarily, but definitely "had more pressing concerns than the 2013 O-Line".
2) By the end of his tenure, the atmosphere around the program was clearly affecting recruiting, and since you can't force people to sign on, sometimes you miss out on your preferred guys.
2 was largely driven by the team's on field failure (hence my "depending on how generous" caveat) - but even then the recruiting results say more about RR's record than they do about his ability to identify talent and position needs.
3) For Hoke, you could say he was "forced" into making some late pickups of guys he might not have recruited otherwise due to his hiring date. He was "forced" into not pursuing certain DL recruits as heavily because of Hand and McDowell's late decisions (unless you want to fault him for assuming, or at least preferring, he'd get one or both of them).
Main point was that recruiting is not completely in the control of coaches.
|19 weeks 4 days ago||Seems more like a lazy way to||
Seems more like a lazy way to make Harry the hero. Which, incidentally, is why I could never really get into the books. Too many rules made up on the spot, then later rejected, for the benefit of the protagonist. It's hard to have a relatable "hero's journey" when the hero gets every advantage at the start. Also, all the adults were unbelievably stupid and Dumbledore should have just used the damn time turner to fix everything.
|19 weeks 4 days ago||So, we've beaten the Gardner||
So, we've beaten the Gardner thing to death and beyond.
But the bigger question, "has Hoke done a good job managing his personnel" is still debatable, I think, since that's where "how much should I panic about Jake Ryan moving" comes from. I can think of 3 head scratchers:
1) The O-line shuffle last year. In the end it seemed counterproductive, and if camp and practice were unable to reveal that Miller was not going to be a plausible OL option at any position (and so on and so forth throughout the season with multiple guys playing flavor of the week) then I think the effectiveness of practice has to be questioned.
2) The D-line last year - why did Washington disappear, and why was Jibreel Black deployed at nose tackle against power run teams like OSU despite his inability to keep the LBs clean?
3) I guess this is less of a personnel question and more on Borges, but why did we continue to field TE sets (rather than 3+ receivers) long after it became apparent that none of them could play the blocking TE role effectively?
Now the coaches obviously know more, but they also aren't obviously infallible. I don't think we should panic about Jake moving, but it's not an obvious slam dunk either.
|19 weeks 4 days ago||RR made (or depending on how||
RR made (or depending on how generous you feel, was forced into) some poor recruiting choices that resulted in bad depth. Hoke has been (so far) much better in this regard (though the lack of star DL this year may eventually haunt us).
But I don't think the complaint is leveled at recruiting - it's what's been done with the guys once they get here. Not just with development (although that's a legit concern, especially on the lines) but on where, how, and when players are deployed. And Hoke is not unquestionably perfect in that regard.
|19 weeks 4 days ago||The fact that Gardner was our||
The fact that Gardner was our leading receiver at the start of 2012 does not necessarily make his move to WR a good one. The relevant question is whether he was better enough than the next best option to offset the loss of our clear #2 QB, and production isn't the best metric there. Who's to say that Roundtree, Funchess, or Gallon could not have put up similar numbers in the #1 wideout role? We won't know because they weren't running those routes. On the other hand, hindsight is 20/20, and the Gardner / Bellomy distinction was a little less clear at the start of 2012 than it is now.
I'm surprised by your second paragraph. It's one thing to give a guy a tryout at a position. It's another to play musical chairs on a critical unit (known for requiring unit cohesion) for an entire season, especially when the musical chairs do not result in a markedly better unit at the end of the season. Not batting 1.000 is one thing, but the OLine last year flat struck out.
|19 weeks 4 days ago||The defensive coaching||
The defensive coaching shuffle doesn't bother me too much - these guys have been together 3 years and I'm fairly confident the coaches know what they can expect out of each coach. The move seems to recognize that some players weren't developing well and need more focused attention. The multi-headed interior line coaching clearly wasn't working all that well.
|19 weeks 4 days ago||So by that analysis, is||
So by that analysis, is RichRod an Ellerbe or a Beilein? /ducks
|20 weeks 1 day ago||I should also add that there||
I should also add that there are a lot of other people holding debt in the city, and they aren't all mustache twirling plutocrats. The more you give to pensioners, the less you give to creditors - and the less likely they'll be to ever invest in Detroit again.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||I think the OP is making an||
I think the OP is making an inherent value judgement, not by calling former employees valuable, but by stating that them keeping 90% of their pensions is definitely a good thing. There are a lot more interests holding debt in the city, not to mention the current residents and employees, who will be affected, possibly negatively, by how much of the pension debt is paid.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||More money for pensions for||
More money for pensions for retirees means less money for the people and infrastructure taking care of Detroit today.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||I think the derivative of||
I think the derivative of living conditions matters a lot in happiness. Generally, things are getting better in the northern plains states, and getting worse in the "Rust Belt".
Not sure how that explains the really low states in the south though, where manufacturers are starting to move.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||Of course, the irony is that||
Of course, the irony is that the majority of players on both teams live and work in the USA...
|20 weeks 3 days ago||Ted Ligety and Bode Miller||
Ted Ligety and Bode Miller use Austrian skis! The curlers use Canadian brooms! Meryl Davis and Charlie White use British skate blades! Rabble! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!
|20 weeks 3 days ago||Throwing the last rock in an||
Throwing the last rock in an end, known as "having the hammer" or "having last rock" is a major advantage, for obvious reasons. It's usually very difficult to score without the hammer (referred to as a "steal"), and it's generally accepted that scoring 1 point with the hammer is "easy" in a well played end. Basically, think of 1 point with the hammer as "par" - the team with the hammer will attempt to score 2 or more, and the team without will try to make them score one or less.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Did Vaultier actually have||
Did Vaultier actually have surgery? With rehab and a brace, competing without an ACL in 2 months seems conceivable. After surgery that would be nuts though.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Sure, but most pro golfers,||
Sure, but most pro golfers, bowlers, and curlers are in a lot better shape than their stereotypes suggest too. And judging their sports by those stereotypes is no more fair than assuming all baseball players look like the Babe.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Actually, football has||
Actually, football has multiple refs, and often they see different things. Hence the ref huddles that occur multiple times per game. Certainly we see cases where the former ref commentator or the replay guy sees the same thing and calls it something else. That's not a straw man, that's a legitimate part of the argument that you want to skip over based on the number of officials involved.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||I should note that the 5 or||
I should note that the 5 or more medals in speed skating are especially impressive given there are only 5 events for each gender.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Fair enough, it just means||
Fair enough, it just means that coverage for that sport tends to dominate.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||I doubt reputation plays zero||
I doubt reputation plays zero role, but the impression I get is that Shaun White attempts much more difficult tricks than most other competitors, and that a wobbly completion of a harder trick is scored more than a perfect completion of an easier trick.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Ice dodgeball? Make the ball||
Ice dodgeball? Make the ball small and hard and give the players lacrosse sticks, and you've got yourself a sport!
|20 weeks 4 days ago||So you're saying that every||
So you're saying that every single umpire calls exactly the same strike zone in every game? Every football ref allows exactly the same amount of grabbing before he calls pass interference, every play, every game?
|20 weeks 4 days ago||I generally feel the same||
I generally feel the same way, but then I watched a whole session of ski jumping and realized they all looked exactly the same with some very minor differences that I don't understand, and then understood why it's easier to keep people glued to figure skating. The personality helps - the winter sliding sports are pretty dehumanizing with everybody zipped up tight in speed suits and trying to follow the exact same line.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Jaggs actually has a point -||
Jaggs actually has a point - the judging system and program for skating have changed numerous times (including quite recently) over the years, so "world record" doesn't have quite the same meaning as it does in "100m dash".
|20 weeks 4 days ago||This is worth||
This is worth reading:
It's damn complicated, and it sounds like "subjectivity" can move the needle a few percent even after all the high/low dropping and averaging, but it's actually a lot closer to your last paragraph than you might think. If you can do a jump no one else can, you get a lot more points.
Some key things:
Everyone is required to do the same number of elements in each category (e.g. certain number of jumps, certain number of spins)
All elements and sequences have a predefined maximum score based on difficulty
Certain errors (e.g. underrotation) have an associated predefined deduction
Many deductions are really subtle to the uninitiated (e.g. landing on wrong edge)
|20 weeks 4 days ago||You not understanding the||
You not understanding the criteria doesn't mean there aren't any. Basically, they have a number of elements, some required, some optional, each with a maximum score. What each element consists of and requires is pretty well defined. And what NOT to do is also fairly well defined, with specific point deductions for each category of failure. Do A with no errors, get X points. There is certainly some subjectivity in that, but it's not like the judges sit back, watch, and say, I liked that a lot, 10 points!
Now that said it does take an expert to decipher all of that (and I am definitely not one at all), so I can see the unapproachability of it being a challenge to enjoying it as a sport (that's part of why I don't tend to watch it myself). But frankly most of the scoring in figure skating / ice dance / gymnastics / freestyle skiing / synchronized diving is less subjective than say, whether or not to call holding in football or a charge in basketball.
Actually those are decent comparisons - a successful triple toe loop is more rigidly defined than what constitutes pass interference, twizzle synchronization or lack thereof no harder to spot than a charge/block call. Yet the latter examples don't automatically make you dismiss their respective sports.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Oregon football would like to||
Oregon football would like to talk to you.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||Eh, why is baseball a sport||
Eh, why is baseball a sport but bowling isn't? Because you can drink beer and be fat while bowling? Clearly you've never seen a corporate softball league (or Babe Ruth). BTW I have no skin in the game here as I regularly watch neither.
Any line you draw for "athleticism" as definition of sport is going to be inherently arbitrary. Is football not a sport because they only go for 10 seconds at a time and sit on the bench half the game or more? Is soccer not a sport because they aren't allowed to hit each other? Is hockey not a sport because they use so much equipment? Are skiing and luge not sports because the athletes don't provide their own propulsion?
Most "is X a sport" arguments are essentially dick measuring contests between participants or fans of sport X vs. sport Y. Which is especially funny because I think one thing we can all agree on is that being a spectator is definitely not a sport - so why do fans get so hung up on whether what they sit in front of is a sport or not?
|20 weeks 4 days ago||I think part of the||
I think part of the difficulty with judged sports is the inability for the layperson viewer to have a good grasp of who is winning and why.
Hockey, bobsledding, biathlon, curling - all have a pretty well-definable goal: go fast, score points, etc. Even if you can't understand the strategy or the physical skills involved, it's still accessible.
Now, judged sports do actually tend to have pretty well defined "scoring": do x, get y points, -z deductions for screwups. But the systems are really complex and inaccessible to the average viewer. This is especially tough for events like ice dancing, where the seeming intent of the sport is to do something aesthetically pleasing - so why does some bald old dude get to decide that skater A was better than skater B just because skater B's foot was an inch out of place? Dammit, I still thought B was prettier and did cooler spin things! RABBLE RABBLE NOT A SPORT!
On the actual topic, differentiating between figure skating and ice dance seems particularly dumb. Both are inherently artistic events requiring both athleticism and aesthetic (and to some degree subjective) grace. Both perform to music and have silly costumes (heck, even the announcers do, on the rare times they show Johnny Weir on camera). So one's a sport and one isn't because "salchow" is slightly less goofy sounding than "twizzle"?
|20 weeks 4 days ago||You have a point. I've always||
You have a point. I've always been mildly irked by how many different events speed skaters and swimmers tend to be competive in. If the same person can be favored to win multiple events, are they really different events? Or just two runs of the same thing?
Most Olympians only have one or two shots to medal - it takes a lot of the drama out of it when you hear a competitor is just using an event as a warm up for 3 or 4 more events.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||Honestly to me that's almost||
Honestly to me that's almost as bad, maybe just as bad, as the player who allegedly threatened the victim. Smith is exploiting the victim years later, against her wishes, causing further trauma beyond the original offense. All to satisfy a personal vendetta that has nothing to do with sexual assault.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||Again, I don't think this is||
Again, I don't think this is the right place to get hung up. Michigan changed their disciplinary burden of proof and procedure in 2013. That's a pretty simple explanation for why this didn't result in punishment earlier. And in this case it may be that the new standard corrects a disservice to a victim. In the future it may do a disservice to someone accused. That's the nature of moving the burden of proof.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||Actually, I thought the first||
Actually, I thought the first 2 questions are already answered or pretty reasonably inferred by someone who's been paying attention to the case: the available evidence in 2009 and 2011 did not warrant punishment given the standard procedures and burden of proof at the time.
Question 3 is important and unanswered though, I agree with you there.
|21 weeks 2 days ago||Also, the men in particular||
Also, the men in particular have started emphasizing strength for sweeping and selecting their teams with that in mind - the Canadian men specifically have pretty well developed arms and chests.
|21 weeks 2 days ago||John Shusterdammit?||
|21 weeks 2 days ago||I don't believe that's an||
I don't believe that's an actual "mercy rule". In curling it's fairly common for a team that cannot realistically win to concede the game during or prior to the final end. Conceding in this way is not frowned upon, indeed it is considered poor etiquette to not concede (except in elimination games I believe the losing team cannot concede until the final end, to avoid shenanigans).
|21 weeks 2 days ago||I would not like to be set on||
I would not like to be set on (or sat on) by Pipkins.
|21 weeks 4 days ago||I wish I was as short as||
I wish I was as short as Derrick Walton.
|21 weeks 5 days ago||He wasn't shooting great, but||
He wasn't shooting great, but it wasn't always his fault. For example in the 7th end, he had to attempt a tricky double take-out to attempt to score 2. He missed by a fraction and one of the opponent's rocks stayed in. Basically, he had to hit a yellow rock and knock it into another yellow rock at just the right angle such that both yellow rocks go out. Instead, the first yellow rock hit the second on the nose and stuck, giving Norway 1 instead of the US 2, a 3 point swing in a game decided by 3. The only knock on him there is he picked a bad side to miss on - had he missed a bit to the right his shooter may have rolled in and at least picked up 1.
So that's a tough shot. In the killer 3rd end, when Norway picked up 3, Shuster wrecked his shots on a really clogged up area in front of the house. Again, the shots he was called to make were tough. He did mess up pretty badly on easier shots in ends 1 and 10 though - what's worrisome there is that a couple of those misses were bad issues with draw weight, his bugaboo last Olympics.
In general, it looked like Norway's skip had easier shots all day. And that's set up by the shotmaking of the first 3 players. Norway's 2nd and 3rd outshot their counterparts on the US team, and that tends to put the skip in bad spots.
|21 weeks 5 days ago||In their second game of the||
In their second game of the day, Canada's men's curlers fall to the Swiss! Big upset there.
|21 weeks 5 days ago||If their game this morning is||
If their game this morning is any indication (def. Germany 11-8), Canada's men curlers are going to be fun to watch. They seem to like to have lots of rocks in play, making for high scoring and crazy shots at the end.
|22 weeks 1 day ago||Some? Certainly. Anyone? I||
Some? Certainly. Anyone? I doubt it. My point was that he ought to get to know these guys before running his damn mouth in a way that hurts the team and insults the players on it.
|22 weeks 1 day ago||Of course, when RR was here||
Of course, when RR was here people were bitching about him recruiting marginal guys. Not sure it gets much more "ghetto" than Pahokee. And we weren't playing any better.
|22 weeks 1 day ago||The poster is the one calling||
The poster is the one calling them Little Timmys. So yeah, I do think it's cheap for a non-D1 athlete to call out players as "Little Timmys" if he wouldn't do it to their face.
|22 weeks 1 day ago||Larry comes off as an ass||
Larry comes off as an ass here - super disrespectful to the guys on the team. They aren't tough because they aren't flunking out of school? They can't be tough because they're not from the "ghetto"? They can't be tough because they're white? Screw all that. Why not haul his old ass over to the practice field and try his luck against some of these "soft" guys busting their butts for the block M after they've had a chance to hear his comments.
|22 weeks 1 day ago||I challenge you to go to||
I challenge you to go to anyone on the two deep and refer to them as a "little Timmy".
|22 weeks 1 day ago||The rumor elsewhere on the||
The rumor elsewhere on the board was that it was newly minted Penn State coach Franklin.
|22 weeks 1 day ago||Slot receiver and fullback?||
Slot receiver and fullback?
|22 weeks 2 days ago||Not necessarily - Funk could||
Not necessarily - Funk could be awesome at taking OL from "really good" to "All-American" (and therefore impress Lewan and the Kuglers), but be lousy at taking someone from "raw high schooler" to "pretty good B1G player". The ability to teach the basics and the advanced stuff may not be interchangeable.
|22 weeks 5 days ago||Isn't using their tax status||
Isn't using their tax status begging the question though? Right now, student-athletes are not employees, and are therefore not taxed as such, agreed. But since whether they are employees is the central premise of the suit, shouldn't their tax status be an effect of the ruling and not a determiner of the ruling?
|22 weeks 5 days ago||I don't know, doesn't the||
I don't know, doesn't the voluntary nature of the student-athletes' sports participation, and the fact that most will not matriculate to a higher professional level, make them more like employees and less like educational interns?
To my non-lawyer mind, it's much easier to classify a medical internship, which must be successfully completed for a degree, as an educational experience rather than a job. Wheras the optional participation in sports makes that more like a job, and their scholarships more like employee compensation.
On the other hand, if all it takes to nix the union is to convince the courts that athletics is primarily educational, then it seems a simple argument to declare the coaches as part of the faculty in the School of Professional Athletics.
|23 weeks 1 day ago||If you're responding to me,||
If you're responding to me, I'm going off your scenario of two people who have consensual sex, one of whom decides "in the harsh light of day" that they really wish they hadn't. No illegally coercive behavior was implied - do you still think that's criminal? Do you think it would be fair that your sons life be ruined because of the decision to have sex with a willing partner while mutually intoxicated?
|23 weeks 1 day ago||You should still change it -||
You should still change it - in the context of this case, "accuser" still connects to "alleged victim" in my head, and apparently in others.
|23 weeks 1 day ago||Should it be though? How can||
Should it be though? How can you expect an intoxicated person to predict the future regret or non regret of another equally intoxicated person? Are both parties guilty of raping each other? Is it Schrodinger's sex, simultaneously rape and not rape until either someone regrets it or both parties agree on their deathbeds that they had a great time?
|23 weeks 1 day ago||Apologies for misinterpreting||
Apologies for misinterpreting your reply. And I don't think you're defending assault. My point is that Wendy5k's actual position is a lot more nuanced than you paint it, and that's something I just now learned because she replied to my comment.
Personally I find that enlightening and constructive, and don't like when debates about things this important devolve into snarky pissing matches, which is where I was concerned your comments would eventually lead the discussion. ("Flamebait", but not actual flame, to use the old voting terms).
|23 weeks 1 day ago||I agree with most of this,||
I agree with most of this, and thank you for assembling it, but I think 8 is a bit presumptuous. Even assuming Gibbons et al are fully guilty of everything they are accused of, it doesn't mean the legal system or university "failed". The standards for burden of proof, due process, etc. have been worked out over a long period of time and are always going to be a balancing act between providing justice for victims and protections for the innocent accused. The unfortunate reality in this messed up world is that wherever you draw the line you'll either have acquitted criminals or wrongly convicted or both. This is especially true when you're talking about a criminal act that is (in terms of evidence) often functionally indistinguishable from a totally legal act, except for the consent of both parties. There is no fingerprint dust for consent, sadly.
So I guess what I'm really saying is that the legal and university systems are imperfect, fallible even, but it's not necessarily productive to point to a specific case and say, "You failed here, change the system so that next time this exactly circumstance occurs the outcome is different". That can, and frequently does, make for bad law.
|23 weeks 1 day ago||See, that's the sort of||
See, that's the sort of glibness that gets people defensive and makes a fair discussion on this so damn difficult. Thank you for the upvote, but please don't defend/agree with me like that.
|23 weeks 1 day ago||Do we know for a fact this is||
Do we know for a fact this is the first expulsion? Out of how many accusations? If they really are going to stand behind FERPA, it's unlikely we know what constitutes an expellable offense.
Obviously they believe they have a preponderance of evidence that Gibbons did something pretty bad. It's fair to note though, that we don't (and probably won't) know exactly what that is. It's possible that what they are pretty sure he did would not be criminal, and it's also possible that what they are pretty sure he did would be criminal but for whatever reason would not be something he could be convicted for.
Basically, it's possible that both the University and the police did the best they could with the information and policies that they had. Both have their reasons for those policies - evidentiary standards are not something you change lightly. I just don't see proof of the motive, or the history, that would lead to a vast coverup conspiracy, or even necessarily a major blunder.