"What (Michigan coaches) told me is that they're focusing on point guards right now, but if anything opens up, they'll definitely come back on and recruit me as hard as they were," said Towns
- Member for
- 6 years 44 weeks
- I seem to get signed out every time I close the app.
- I'd like a "my account" page at the highest menu level.
- I love me some maize, but this is an awful lot of it.
|4 years 33 weeks ago||I'm one of the original beta||
I'm one of the original beta testers. I'll continue my comments here rather than the original thread: The app crashes when I open this board topic, but not others.
Also, and this will probably be a biggie for Brian, the UFR tables display all wonky. I meant to address this last week but didn't get around to it.
|4 years 34 weeks ago||Allowing Boise State into the||
Allowing Boise State into the national title game would destroy almost any hopes we have that programs will schedule more competitive nonconference games going forward. At the very least, removing strength of schedule as a factor definitely eliminates one of the major incentives to play games that will improve it.
EDIT: I agree that polls are pointless right now and I don't care where Boise State or anyone else is ranked. My post is only for the sake of conversation in case it's relevant in early December.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||Yeah, my position is that all||
Yeah, my position is that all nicknames for rivalries are cheesy (the two that were vaguely cool--Florida/Georgia and Oklahoma/Texas--have officially changed) but I never thought to care about it until I realized that Michigan/OSU now has one. Still, you and bigmc6000 have persuaded me that it's not so bad.
And yes, I also realize that clucking about capitalization makes me a schoolmarm, and the gnrgoblue of 10 years ago hangs his head in shame. I promise my posts will be more relevant to, you know, football, in 11 days.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||Good point. In retrospect, I||
Good point. In retrospect, I shouldn't have mentioned the marketing part because that definitely muddles my position. Still, I definitely didn't mean to imply that it's done for greedy marketing purposes, just that it's kind of goofy.
This board is turning into the RCMB with all the snark, but I suppose I am being a bit "down in front." My defense is that it's the offseason and I can't take any more idle Freep/secondary/QB/hot-seat chatter. If this board can handle another post about Xbox/PS3 online dynasties, I figured I'd be on safe ground with this.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||I'm glad someone noticed,||
I'm glad someone noticed, actually.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||The Ivy League didn't want to||
The Ivy League didn't want to stay relevant as football behemoths. Those schools chose their path.
Anyway, I get your point but I think, if nicknames are progress, so is corporate sponsorship, and I don't remember too many around here being fans of the proposed AT&T (?) sponsorship.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||No, I don' t think I did.||
No, I don' t think I did.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||Your second option assumes||
Your second option assumes that both Brandon and Gene Smith are willfully complicit in lessening the profile of the rivalry. Seems unlikely to me, so I'll go with the "good soldier" option.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||Whether I'm "willing" to or||
Whether I'm "willing" to or not doesn't matter. I have no say. If it was my decision to make, I'd explain why it's a stupid move and veto it.
All I'm doing is trying to figure out what I might look forward to in what appears to be our new reality. Looking forward to Nebraska = OK, I guess. Looking forward to MSU = not.
And, just to be clear, I'll say again that I don't like this at all, and I also think it's a bad business decision.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||I'm working my way up through||
I'm working my way up through the thread and you're the second person to blame Brandon for this. How did you get it in your head that he's masterminded this plot? I can't imagine it's something he wants.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||What possessed you to think||
What possessed you to think this is Brandon's doing?
|4 years 36 weeks ago||I don't like this but could||
I don't like this but could live with it ... as long as Michigan is matched up with PSU or Nebraska at the end of the season. Ending the year with MSU or another perpetual also-ran would be pretty anticlimactic.
Bill Martin was always very responsive to polite e-mails. Anyone know the best way to express the sentiment of the fan base here? I sincerely doubt Brandon has much sway in this matter, and it's extremely likely he's fighting this as much as he can, but it's still probably a good idea to pass along our polite, considered feedback.
And to follow up on ChasingRabbits' joke about Rodriguez being blamed for this, I also want to stress that it's extraordinarily unlikely that Brandon has much say here or that he hasn't used whatever influence he does have to attempt to block this. I'm worried about "OMG BRANDON NUKED THE RIVALRY" blossoming from isolated Internet idiocy to perceived fact, and that derailing his tenure as AD. I presume this is being passed down and he has to sell it.
|4 years 37 weeks ago||So I tested out the app's||
So I tested out the app's ability to handle replies and it worked fine. When I viewed it on my PC, though, it appears as though there are display problems with the subject line and my MgoName:
Right now, the offending post is the sixth down. I checked in Chrome and IE8. Hope this info is useful.
|4 years 37 weeks ago||
Testing the MGoApp's worthiness in the reply space.
I don't know how I feel about not shoring up the secondary with someone from offense. I understand that you don't want to make both units worse because of an injury, but I think there's something to be said, at this point, for having warm bodies available (bodies with scholarships). but my guess is the coaches know more than I do.
|4 years 37 weeks ago||How about including "Donate"||
How about including "Donate" and "MGoStore" links and/or functionality, as well? These would serve the proprietors more than the readers, but there's nothing wrong with that, I imagine.
|4 years 37 weeks ago||Last night was the first||
Last night was the first opportunity I had to get to it; I'll play with it more this evening. My initial impressions are favorable. It's stabler than I was expecting and has a nice, clean interface.
Some areas to consider tweaking:
These are just my reactions to the 10 minutes I've spent playing with it. I'll post more when I've spent more tie with it.
|4 years 43 weeks ago||Biggest request: A mobile||
Biggest request: A mobile version of the site. I e-mailed Brian about it in like October and he said he'd have it up and running during the offseason. I'm expecting it any day now ...
Also: This is meant to be both snarky and legit, but I think the site and its community would have been much better served in the past few months with much more conference-realignment coverage and analysis and much less soccer stuff. I think the proprietor missed a major opportunity for a one-time reprieve of the dreaded offseason traffic dip. Brian has the 'net cred, readership base, and resulting network of sources to have been right there with Frank the Tank and Chip Brown at the center of the insight/reaction loop, which would have done a much better job of picking up new regulars than just about anything else that's been printed here since the offseason began. I was surprised at how little attention the topic has received here in the last few months, especially considering there was nearly nothing even nearly as relevant happening and I suspect Brian was, as usual, being fed insider info. Even if he wasn't, I'd have loved vastly expanded versions of his own views on established facts and widely circulated rumors.
Brian's mentioned over the years that much of his time is dedicated to nuts 'n' bolts during the offseason, so I assume that's what kept things so quiet around here. Still, as a reader, I'd have voted for more conference-realignment chatter over just about anything else.
Before anyone leaps to his defense, this is not a criticism of Brian's work or of the blog. It's my favorite place on the Internet, I've been a daily visitor literally since the first week it was live, and Brian does an awesome job. I'm only answering a specific question about what could be changed.
|5 years 1 week ago||I agree that I probably||
I agree that I probably should have. But it was a combination of factors. For one, I kept assuming his party would get him under control; he'd scream for awhile and then quiet down, and I'd think it was all over. It was probably 45 minutes or an hour in before I realized he was just a nut and he was only stopping to catch his breath. For another, this guy didn't give the impression of someone interested in listening to constructive feedback and modifying his behavior accordingly. To the contrary, it seemed to me that anyone who said anything would be treated to a punch to the face (the fact that his family/friends didn't say anything makes me pretty sure about this). I wasn't sure what would have been more destructive to the atmosphere in the area: letting this deranged fan scream himself hoarse or getting into a brawl (because everyone in my party would have piled on, and, it seems reasonable to expect, so would his). Also, though my party was camped there for the duration, I took off a few times for long walks around the stadium (I'd not been inside since the 2003 OSU game, and a lot's changed since then).
I suppose I could have, as you suggested, found a staffer. Honestly, it didn't even cross my mind.
|5 years 1 week ago||Can't you guys read? I said||
Can't you guys read? I said the psycho was AT the event. It was years ago that Drew Sharp stopped attending sporting events he covers (true).
So we can eliminate Sharp. As for Boren, I kind of doubt it. This guy (obviously) had way too much interest in offseason training and conditioning. Still, both Boren and our mystery person have shared attributes (I don't know them, I don't like them, they hate Michigan football, they're both carbon-based lifeforms), so it's possible they're one and the same.
|5 years 1 week ago||Oh, it was quite a scene. A||
Oh, it was quite a scene. A complete meltdown, the likes of which would have been worthy of Youtube had they taken place during a real game. During a spring practice? Surreal. Full-on purple-faced, spittle-spraying rage.
|5 years 12 weeks ago||I was. By God, that was the||
I was. By God, that was the best damn sports message board in the land. I didn't post often, but I do remember an epic throwdown with someone who wanted Carr fired for losing so often. Of course, I didn't make friends when I said, between the 2003-04 seasons, Braylon Edwards was very overrated.
|5 years 12 weeks ago||It's not that I want new bowl||
It's not that I want new bowl games for mediocre teams and new tournament slots for 10th-place ACC teams, it's that I just don't care. Once it gets to the round of 64, the field will very closely resemble what it would have been, anyway. This is extraordinarily unlikely to alter the champion so the games are simply there for entertainment purposes.
I read Brian's post on the matter. Obviously I disagree with his position. I've always been mystified when people complain about crappy new bowl games when it's much easier to ignore them and I'm wondering if there's something intrinsic about a tournament that makes the comparison invalid. If so, I'll join the opposition. If not, I'll watch or ignore the new games depending on how bored I am when they're being played.
|5 years 12 weeks ago||I think you're 100 percent||
I think you're 100 percent right that none of the 31 new teams will ever win the title, but that's true of any tournament more than around 20 teams. Maybe as many as 32. So why is 64 what's considered acceptable? If you want the field trimmed by half, I guess I can respect that.
Anyway, for me and a lot of others, I expect, the tournament is only partially about determining the champion. The games themselves have a lot of entertainment value.
|5 years 12 weeks ago||I saw it. Hilarious: NCAA||
I saw it. Hilarious:
|5 years 15 weeks ago||I agree Michigan needs to win||
I agree Michigan needs to win a bare minimum of eight of its remaining 13 games to even qualify as "on the bubble" and entertain hopes of squeaking in as a 11, 12 or 13 seed.
I think hope dies for good if they lose any of the following: Iowa, at Northwestern, at Iowa, Penn State. If they sweep those four, we have a 14-7 team looking for four wins in the other nine games. I can't find those wins. I expect a sweep by MSU, so we're looking for four wins in seven games. Purdue is having trouble, so maybe that's one. Maybe they get a win or two out of their home games against Wisconsin, Illinois and Minnesota. But I'm having a hard time seeing it.
EDIT: I meant to conclude by saying that the good news is that, if they make it, there's no question in my mind that they'll have earned it. This schedule is rough going the rest of the way.
|5 years 16 weeks ago||Cosigned. I cringe to think||
Cosigned. I cringe to think this community will divide, like the RCMB in its heyday, into camps of "sunshine blowers" and "demand excellencers," but there does appear to be a frustrating acceptance of crummy performance. See above where I was negged and criticized for characterizing last year's 9-9 Big Ten team as "decent."
Maybe I'm wrong to think U-M has a high top end as a basketball program, but I've always thought it has nearly every advantage the football program enjoys and even some it doesn't (an elite in-state recruiting base, for example).
Beilein does a lot of things well and should feel a lot of job security, but everyone is eventually evaluated on their performance and not on their background or ethics. Three years in, Beilein is accumulating a lot of data points on the wrong side of the ledger. With Harris and Sims gone next year and a postseason berth extraordinarily unlikely as a result, we're suddenly talking about year FIVE of the Beilein regime without any sense that he's re-established Michigan as even a league power, let alone a national one.
He seems like a really great guy and I hope he works out. Either way, I'll follow and support the team. I'm just much less convinced of his greatness than many on here and don't believe that lowering my expectations to match his output is a reasonable resolution to the current disconnect.
|5 years 16 weeks ago||Fair enough. I do tend toward||
Fair enough. I do tend toward hyperbole from time to time and probably selected my words poorly when I wrote "unmitigated disaster." Something like "extreme disappointment" would have been more appropriate.
Any Michigan fan has heard about Beilein's reputation as a superb tactician and his track record of taking all his previous schools (five, right?) to the tournament. So I'm with you when you say there's reason for optimism. My only issues are with what's happened this season (because, during the season, I care more about the present than I do potential future scenarios) and because, when we talk about what he'll be able to do with Zeigler and Smotrycz, it's worth evaluating what he's done with Harris and Sims (good and bad).
Also, just to be clear, none of my criticism should be read as a verdict and I'm years of sub-.500 records away from suggesting he should be fired (I think, for example, Rodriguez should at least get through 2011 regardless of how 2010 shakes out [barring off-the-field stuff intervening]). This is just me complaining about losses produced by a coach we all agree is much better than this. And complaining about the ways your favorite sports teams disappoint you is, of course, the very reason God invented the Internet.
|5 years 16 weeks ago||So would I.||
So would I.
|5 years 16 weeks ago||My opinion of this year's||
My opinion of this year's team doesn't weigh the preseason ranking and it's not missing the NCAAs that bugs me (there are a lot of reasons teams qualify and many are outside your control). What's disconcerting is the team being so much worse against solid opposition. I thought, before the season, they were significantly overrated, but I thought the team was good for around 9-3 out of conference and maybe 10-8 in the Big 10, which would make Michigan a very safe bet to make the NCAAs. With even the NIT unlikely at this point (I believe they need eight more wins to qualify and can't find eight wins remaining on the schedule), you have to at least understand my disappointment. If your issue is with my expectations, I really did think they were reasonable, but I definitely acknowledge that I was entirely wrong with most of my assumptions.
I don't exactly like being called "ridiculous" for criticizing Beilein's work at Michigan--especially when your counterpoint is Beilein's work at schools other than Michigan--but I actually do appreciate your perspective. Your first paragraph has me wondering whether I'm wrong about Michigan being a program with a very high ceiling.
|5 years 16 weeks ago||To be clear, there's no||
To be clear, there's no debate that last season was Michigan's best in a decade. But squeaking into the tournament in the last two games of the season and getting flushed in the first weekend--that's merely a decent year. Exciting at the time, naturally, and encouraging because we all thought it meant Michigan was "back." As I said in my previous message, it felt, at the time, how I'd expect to feel about a 7-5 season from the football team in 2010. There'd be some exciting moments and I thing it'd bode well for the future so I'd remember it fondly. But only someone with utterly shattered expectations could objectively call it an extraordinary success especially when, in retrospect, it foretold precisely nothing about Michigan's future under Beilein.
So the last decade of U-M hoops has lowered my standards for what I'll consider entertainment but not what I'll consider accomplishment. The only difference between last year and Amaker's better years (the ones where Michigan was among the first two or three out) was how the chips fell; one more upset in a mid-major tourney last year and Michigan was sleepwalking through another NIT. One less upset in a mid-major tourney in one of Amaker's years, and the NCAA-absence streak would have ended earlier and he'd probably still be Michigan's coach.
If you think last year's basketball season was more impressive than a 7-5 record from the football team or you think 7-5 sandwiched by a pair of unmitigated disasters is worthy of a contract extension, that explains the difference in our perspectives.