He kind of already did receive a scholarship. His older brother, who was also a walk-on, was given a scholarship just a couple days ago. I don't expect the elder Annexstad to see any meaningful snaps this year.
So Zach may not be receiving the full benefit of being on scholarship this year, but it all balances the same in the family checkbook.
If you add a second vocalist to a list of best rock vocalists, you are implying that they are on a similar level, as they are both worthy of inclusion on a list of best rock vocalists.
If you don't think they are on the same level, then why would you write them both in for a list of best rock vocalists? You didn't need to explicitly say you view them as equals, your decision to add them both to the list of best rock vocalists says that...unless you don't know what best means.
That's not accurate. According to the NCAA's most recent Division 1 manual, football teams can bring in 56 official visitors between August 1 and July 31.
13.6.2.6 Number of Official Visits—Institutional Limitation. The total number of official visits a member institution may provide prospective student-athletes in the following sports on an annual basis (August 1 through July 31) shall be limited to: [D] (Revised: 1/11/89, 1/10/91 effective 8/1/91, 1/11/94 effective 8/1/94, 11/12/97, 1/12/99 effective 8/1/99, 10/29/09, 4/28/16 effective 8/1/16)
Gaining a commitment from Norfleet on signing day as a result of having enough open spaces is significantly different than telling a kid who has been committed for many months that there is a 50/50 chance that there will not be a spot for him on signing day...I'm not saying there is anything wrong with how the Weaver situation was handled, but to act like this parallels the Norfleet situation, or that pushing guys out of the class is happening at all schools seems pretty innacurate.
If it makes you feel better about the "dregs of the big ten," the Gophers currently have 3 former TE's currently in the NFL. That's more than Ohio State, Nebraska, and Penn State. Harbaugh knows TE's, and Minnesota's success at TE might suggest they do too. I expect either team will be happy with Allen.
Is Chase Allen a backup plan to other highly touted recruits? Allen is a guy that the Gophers really want, and we were in good position to make that happen, until tonight...
Minnesota was 18th nationally in pass defense last year, and Dienhart has the Gophers' secondary ranked as #1 in the Big 10 West this coming year. The Gophers have had a DB drafted in both of the last two drafts, and ESPN ranks Eric Murray as the #2 senior CB in the country this coming year. I'd put the over/under at 2.5 DB's drafted from Minnesota this coming year, and over wouldn't be a shock.
Of the areas that Gopher fans feel really good about their coaches' ability to evaluate and develop talent, DB is at the top of the list.
I hope Dior's a good player, and I love that it helps Minnesota's recruiting rankings, as I like the idea of selling kids on the idea that we're on the way up. Having said that, I don't have 4* expectations for him. He wasn't likely to get a Gopher offer until Notre Dame swooped in on Mykelti Williams just days before we thought he was going to give us his commitment. Given that we'd had his teammate, Ray Buford, committed for months, I don't think there was a lack of awareness of him, just other guys higher on the board. I'd guess that was at the case at Michigan and MSU as well. We'll see how it turns out in a few years.
I don't have enough mgopoints to create a new thread, but Maxx Williams from Minnesota declared as well. His loss will certainly hurt Minnesota in next year's battle for the jug.
Without looking through this year's winners, I'd guess that most are athletes of some kind. Being involved in sports is one of the primary components of a successful Rhodes' application.
Unless there is a quota on the number of 4-stars, and the number of people ranked "85," I think it is more than people moving ahead of him. I'd guess it was based on his performance at the Jersey Nike camp.
The problem that I have with the more OL to the pros statement is that Michigan is generally starting with players who have a higher ceiling and are more athletically gifted than most other schools are getting. If a school has a bunch of 2* lineman and none go to the NFL, I'm not sure that you can say that school is developing their lineman worse than a school who has 5* lineman and puts some of them in the NFL. The lineman just have different ceilings, but both schools might be developing their players quite well and helping them reach their potential.
Sorry to rant, it is just something that bothers me, as I hear it towards Minnesota often. We don't put many players in the league, but give us some 4* and 5* players and that would likely change. Would that mean we are suddenly developing them better, or it is just easier to meet that specific metric of development with a "better" starting product?
That picture might make it appear a little more egregious than it really was. Linked is a video from the game. The angle isn't the greatest, but it certainly isn't him walking off the court Marcus Hall style.
I'm curious where the Michigan confidence is coming from, beyond assuming an automatic W when recruiting against Minnesota.
Most Minnesota fans were more worried about Florida because we had heard that the fact that your staff had seen Jones multiple times in person and never pulled the trigger on an offer may have hurt your position a bit.
It's true that Minnesota will probably be the last Big 10 team taken due to our traveling reputation. The disappointing thing about that is that we don't draw well because most Gopher fans don't care to travel to a bowl that nobody cares about. Unfortunately, those are the only bowls we ever end up in. So as long as we go to those, no one shows up. As long as no one shows up, we keep our same traveling reputation. It seems very circular and difficult to break out of.
An informal poll on the Minnesota rivals site had about 3 times as many posters who said they would buy tickets to the Gator Bowl than the Texas Bowl, but there is no chance we end up at the Gator Bowl. I hope Michigan takes care of business there. I think there are some definitie positives from the OSU game that you can build on over the next few weeks.
The only difference I see between Urban going after Crawford and Hoke going after Williams and Elmore, is that Michigan would have over a year to find a replacement, as opposed to the ~2 months Mizzou and Minnesota would have if these flips were to happen.
Other than this loss possibly dropping Michigan below Nebraska in the bowl selection order, I still think that if Michigan gets at least one more win, they will be picked over Minnesota and Iowa by the bowl selection committies. Perhaps this is the jaded Gopher fan perspective, but bowls are about money, and the Michigan name definitely brings the fans and interest. My guess is Michigan gets the bowl slotted for the #5 Big 10 team, whatever that is.
Eh, not sure if it's done. If you look at the history of my posts, I pretty much keep arguing as long as someone wants to argue.
I did use the words "awful," "terrible," and "two of the worst teams in college football" to describe those teams, though I certainly wasn't the first in this thread to describe them in such a manner. There are definitely differing levels of quality throughout college football, I never argued that there wasn't. My argument was solely about what I consider to be an overly inflated perspective about Michigan's superiority over UConn and Akron in the 2013 football season, at least at this particular moment in time.
And to be clear, Michigan fans aren't arrogant and condescending because someone expressed their frustration about not getting players on the field against inferior opponents, they are arrogant and condescending because they choose to describe these teams who almost beat them as inferior.
And to be clear, I don't actually think all, or even most, Michigan fans are that way, probably not even the poster I called out, but there are a healthy number of them who look down on other programs, even during seasons where it is not justified. As you may have gathered, I'm not a fan of that.
I would have to imagine that if at least some of the people I am arguing with went on a Texas message board, and heard them referring to other teams as inferior, some would find that laughable right now. I'm not saying Michigan is playing like Texas, but hopefully you get my comparison.
So to summarize my main point, I still don't think this team's current performance warrants viewing any team as inferior right now.
I have a posting history that goes beyond this discussion. It was only like 11 posts I think, but I'm almost certain that those had nothing to do with bitching about Michigan people.
Everyone who has read this thread knows what school I root for. The poster I was responding to decided to take more shots at Minnesota, as opposed to actually posting anything related to discussing the discription Akron and UConn as inferior relative to Michigan, so I responded. I suppose it is a tactic similar to what you are using in your response by pointing out that Minnesota hasn't done anything for 50 years. I freely acknowledged my irritation of seeing Minnesota regularly put down here, but I would say I have based 90% of my argument on things having nothing to do with Minnesota. The only time it comes is when people decide to use that as their counter to what I'm saying, as opposed to making their argument with numbers that a couple posters have said are out there to prove this superiority. And this has happened to me on campus too. I asked why students would rush the field after beating a bad Ohio State team, pointing out that they are Michigan, a team that wins national championships and should be in the top 10 every year. I was told in response, we beat you 55-0. It's aggravating to say the least.
I don't know how your paragraph concludes with you not believing I read this blog daily, though I get where you think I don't root for Michigan. I'm not sure how to prove otherwise, and I definitely shouldn't care enough. Unfortunately, I do care a bit. I can tell you that I started checking this site occasionally when TomVH was giving recruiting information. I was on this site a year and a half ago in February when there was a day full of commitments. It definitely made me jealous as a Gopher fan. I know that this site has crashed a few different times when a big time recruit is expected to commit. I saw Brian say he was done writing about the hockey team last year. I know that a lot of people on this board did not like Three and Out, and I think there was a recruting person named aquaman at some point, but that one might be completely made up. Not sure if that gives me the e-cred for you to believe I read this blog, but I do.
Michigan really is my second favorite team, but I do view things differently than posters on this board. I see the way Gopher fans talk about the Gophers and their opponents, and I see the way this board talks about Michigan and their opponents. There is a huge difference, and for the most part, Michigan has earned that. But sometimes, I just think reality becomes a little skewed, depending on which set of glasses you are looking through. As a Minnesota fan, I don't see Michigan as being a great team this year if Gardner keeps turning it over and if the run game can't be a little more productive. I saw two teams that are awful stay right with Michigan, and I chose to call into question posters who wanted to talk about Michigan's superiority over those teams. That's all, it really has nothing to do with whether I cheer for Michigan.
We'll see about the short-term. I feel like only fans of Michigan and a handful of other blueblood schools would be able to maintain the ability to feel superior to other teams after squeaking by two of the worst teams in college football. I know that after Minnesota struggled with Western Illinois and only won by 16, a good portion of our fans simply conceded the Big 10 season. Must be nice to have that history and recruiting stars to rest on so you can keep that positive attitude of being better than everyone.
I used the word vastly due to the poster above my previous response stating that the opponents are inferior because they lost. To me, the term inferior involves some significant degree of quality difference. While the scoreboard says Michigan is better, and I'm not going to argue that point, I would say these two scores are probably close enough to indicate the game could have gone either way. To me, that isn't a significant enough difference in quality to use the term inferior. So, I added vastly to indicate that while I guess you can argue that the scoreboard says you are superior, I think there needs to be a bit more of a beatdown before terms like superior and inferior are used. Perhaps my understanding of superiority is outside of the simple definition of just being better than something else. But if I'm going to be calling Michigan superior, I want to see a beatdown that leaves Akron not crossing the 50 yard line all game, not a game where Akron is one yard away of winning. So, the term vastly was just a lazy way around explaining this whole paragraph, and acknowleding that while the poster I was responding to took a cute way out of the argument, his definition of inferiority lacked what I viewed as a necessary magnitude of quality difference.
I'm sure I won't get far on a Michigan board calling into question your arrogance. That would be quite the uphill battle.
I would say that I did acknowledge in another post that sometimes there are upsets. But as I stated above, one game is a fluke, two in a row, you might start to worry that you aren't as good as you thought you were. Historically, trends tend to be indicative of things as well.
I'm not sure where these wealth of statistics that you mention comes from that support your superiority over these teams. Per the front page, Michigan is 118 out of 123 FBS team in tackles for loss allowed. Michigan is also 112 out of 123 in terms of turnover margin, largely due to being tied for 10th in interceptions thrown. And they are generally kind of middle of the pack in other offensive categories. I'm not going to take the time to find Akron and UConn in these, I'm sure they are terrible, and I didn't intend to spend my whole afternoon typing out responses that are longer than most everyone cares to read. However, it seems to me that the numbers you want to point to don't show a team that is being dominant in any way, nor does the scoreboard. Consequently, I don't think claim of other team's inferiority is beyond question.
Minnesota and Michigan have zero common opponents, which makes it tough for me to use my scoreboard definition. I have no idea how Minnesota would fare against UConn or Akron. It's not like UNLV, Western Illinois, or New Mexico State are setting the world on fire. We haven't beaten anyone as good as Notre Dame, I am pretty sure about that.
As for why I wouldn't pick the Gophers, I think Minnesota is too one-dimensional right now to beat Michigan. We've thrown 28 passes in 4 games. I imagine that will be easy enough for Mattison to scheme against. Even if Gardner gives us the ball three times during the game, I'm not convinced we can score enough points to win.
I'm really not just a troll though, I read this blog daily throughout the year, and believe it or not, do root for Michigan. There are just certain things about this blog, and maybe about many of the people at the University of Michigan, that irk me, such as the condescension towards "inferior" schools. When I saw that same condescension being placed on teams that Michigan barely beat, I decided it was a nice opportunity to call into question these beliefs of superiority.
No way would I wager on the Gophers in that game. I know what Gardner is capable of, or at least I think I do. The Gophers will probably lose again. I was just amused that a fan of a team who has barely escaped two of the worst teams in college football is referring to these teams as inferior. Scoreboard says you are about as close to even as you can get.
If the Gophers do miraculously win, it would be interesting to see how many people say they got beat by a superior team. I'm pretty sure I know the answer though, which makes me think these definitions of inferiority are rooted somewhere beyond on-field play in 2013.
I suppose in a sense you are right, though I would contend that anyone who watched either game knows that the outcome could have gone either way. If the game is essentially a toss-up, I'd have a hard time calling myself vastly superior to my opponent.
If you are basing the use of inferior on your recognition of these team's standing among all FBS teams, then you must also be assuming a higher standing for your own team. The polls suggest that is correct, but as I stated in one of my other replies above, after two straight close calls with terrible teams, I'm not sure that current on-field performance would give any indication that Michigan is performing at a level that puts them in a realm where they can feel superior to these teams.
If you want to base claims of inferiority on size, athleticism, skills, and stars, I suppose I can't argue that one much, and Michigan will have that on most teams. However, it seems like that metric kind of minimizes the importance of on-field performance, which I would say matters. UConn didn't really look inferior out there.
And if you want to base it on prior results, well that seems a bit silly. Michigan may have the most wins ever, but this current group of players was in on less than 5% of those. Historically, I agree, almost every program in the country is inferior to Michigan, but that seems like a pretty shaky way to compare your current team against your opponents. But hey, at least the Gophers seem a bit less inferior if we want to use that measure.
If by prior results you mean results from this season, UConn was probably licking their chops after that Akron game. They probably thought even they could beat Akron by a couple touchdwons.
I'm not sure I follow your logic when you are sarcastically talking about good teams losing to Towson or going 1-11. I never said Akron or UConn were good. In fact, I would agree that the two teams Michigan just beat are not very good at all, I was simply asking how we came to the conclusion that they were inferior to Michigan. It definitely wasn't from the final score. So is this feeling of superiority from dominating CMU, beating an ND team that is not looking all that great, the potential that I think everyone can see for the future, or just because we are Michigan fergodsakes?
One game is a fluke, two straight games of going down to the wire with supposedly inferior teams may make you start wondering if you are really that much better than your scores suggest.
Ya, I'm a Minnesota fan and alum, and a current Michigan student. As long as Minnesota and Michigan aren't playing, I always root for Michigan. However, in every opponent recap, or afternoon game thread, there is always plenty of condescension towards the Gophers. See the post above as evidence of the comments I refer to.
So as I sit here getting pumped up for Minnesota and Michigan to play, it is difficult to not take the opportunity to call out Michigan fans a little bit about them calling other teams inferior when the last two games have been just abysmal performances offensively. I've been in Ann Arbor long enough to mostly accept the, "We're Michigan, we are better than everyone else" mantra, but right now, I don't think there is a whole lot of on field performance to back that up. But hey, as long as you keep thinking so highly about the program, you can laugh at the idea of a Minnesota fan talking smack and can call teams giving you all you can handle inferior.
Current on-field performance doesn't matter when mocking opponents, history does, we're Michigan!
For the record, Sid Hartman is a senile old man that has spent the last bunch of years making an ass of himself and ruining the legacy that he had. I don't think he represents the thoughts of any Gopher fans.
A twitter search for Sid Hartman will give you a sense of how he represented himself at the press conference today. Apparently he asked something along the lines of, "Mr. AD, you're suppose to be a basketball genius, why did it take you so long?" (Note: The search took 9 days)
I don't like the hire, but I think some clarity needs to be given to Teague's background with basketball coaches. At VCU he started the Villa 7 program, which helps assistant coaches transition to head coaching positions. There are some interesting names who have gone through the program, including Andy Enfield, Buzz Williams, Anthony Grant, Shaka Smart, Josh Pastner, Kevin Borseth, etc. A full list of successful transitions is here.
I think the fact that he was one of the founders of the Villa 7 program, and the fact that he has made a lot of connections as a result of it, would lead him to evaluate young coaches with a little more insight than is suggested by calling it "luck." It's not as though he is throwing darts at pictures of 30 year old coaches. So in that sense, I think the process does deserve a little credence, even with a sample size of two.
Having said all of that, I would have preferred a guy with more head coaching experience and stronger ties to Minnesota. Nevertheless, I'm trying to take on the optimism that my fellow fans are embracing this hire with.
A lot of Gopher fans have been hoping the axe would come this year. We really struggled at the end of the season, and it seemed we had no idea how to attack a zone defense or successfully inbound the basketball on the baseline.
Tubby has not done a great job at keeping or developing talent.
Justin Cobbs (Cal's leading assist man and second leading scorer this year) - transfer
Colton Iverson (Colorado State's leading scorer and rebounder) - transfer
Royce White - transfer
Rodney Williams - came in a 5* athlete, will leave as a a 5*athlete
To those who say that they should realize they are Minnesota, besides sounding incredibly arrogant, it ignores the talent that Minnesota high school basketball has produced recently. Tubby didn't offer in-state players like Nate Wolters (SDSU), Mike Bruesewitz (Wisconsin), Trent Lockett (Marquette), and it was looking like next year he was going to miss on 2 5* in-state players, Tyus Jones and Rashad Vaughn, as well as an in-state 4*, Reid Travis. I understand that some of these players don't fit his system, but to say he recruited well is not entirely accurate.
We don't have many young guys on the team to give us reason to think the future is bright with Tubby. I think it was the right move, and really hope we come up with a good replacement.
While your offer to put money on Gregory is likely just your way of expressing confidence, if you are serious, I will take that bet. You can have Arkansas, I have the field.
Word on the Gopher recruiting sites is that Gregory is likely headed to Purdue, though of course nothing is ever for sure. However, as others have said, I wouldn't worry about this being an opportunity for them to both commit to Arkansas.
Recent Comments
Minnesota had used their 25 initial counters, so they couldn't bring in a grad transfer.
He kind of already did receive a scholarship. His older brother, who was also a walk-on, was given a scholarship just a couple days ago. I don't expect the elder Annexstad to see any meaningful snaps this year.
So Zach may not be receiving the full benefit of being on scholarship this year, but it all balances the same in the family checkbook.
I don't believe that's true. From the 247 description:
If you add a second vocalist to a list of best rock vocalists, you are implying that they are on a similar level, as they are both worthy of inclusion on a list of best rock vocalists.
If you don't think they are on the same level, then why would you write them both in for a list of best rock vocalists? You didn't need to explicitly say you view them as equals, your decision to add them both to the list of best rock vocalists says that...unless you don't know what best means.
English is hard.
That's not accurate. According to the NCAA's most recent Division 1 manual, football teams can bring in 56 official visitors between August 1 and July 31.
13.6.2.6 Number of Official Visits—Institutional Limitation. The total number of official visits a member institution may provide prospective student-athletes in the following sports on an annual basis (August 1 through July 31) shall be limited to: [D] (Revised: 1/11/89, 1/10/91 effective 8/1/91, 1/11/94 effective 8/1/94, 11/12/97, 1/12/99 effective 8/1/99, 10/29/09, 4/28/16 effective 8/1/16)
(a) Football—56.
(b) Women’s Basketball—12.
(c) Baseball—25.
Gaining a commitment from Norfleet on signing day as a result of having enough open spaces is significantly different than telling a kid who has been committed for many months that there is a 50/50 chance that there will not be a spot for him on signing day...I'm not saying there is anything wrong with how the Weaver situation was handled, but to act like this parallels the Norfleet situation, or that pushing guys out of the class is happening at all schools seems pretty innacurate.
If it makes you feel better about the "dregs of the big ten," the Gophers currently have 3 former TE's currently in the NFL. That's more than Ohio State, Nebraska, and Penn State. Harbaugh knows TE's, and Minnesota's success at TE might suggest they do too. I expect either team will be happy with Allen.
It does. The Gophers immediately put out a new TE offer to a kid committed to NDSU. Seems like we're waving the white flag.
Is Chase Allen a backup plan to other highly touted recruits? Allen is a guy that the Gophers really want, and we were in good position to make that happen, until tonight...
Minnesota was 18th nationally in pass defense last year, and Dienhart has the Gophers' secondary ranked as #1 in the Big 10 West this coming year. The Gophers have had a DB drafted in both of the last two drafts, and ESPN ranks Eric Murray as the #2 senior CB in the country this coming year. I'd put the over/under at 2.5 DB's drafted from Minnesota this coming year, and over wouldn't be a shock.
Of the areas that Gopher fans feel really good about their coaches' ability to evaluate and develop talent, DB is at the top of the list.
Although they didn't close the quotation marks in the paragraph that preceded it, I read it as Austin who calculated that probability.
Criticizing Austin's statistics, ouch...
This doesn't bold well for getting Weber. Since Harbaugh met with him there have been 4 running backs offered. That just doesn't seem promising.
FIFY, Not sure what the problem was.
I hope Dior's a good player, and I love that it helps Minnesota's recruiting rankings, as I like the idea of selling kids on the idea that we're on the way up. Having said that, I don't have 4* expectations for him. He wasn't likely to get a Gopher offer until Notre Dame swooped in on Mykelti Williams just days before we thought he was going to give us his commitment. Given that we'd had his teammate, Ray Buford, committed for months, I don't think there was a lack of awareness of him, just other guys higher on the board. I'd guess that was at the case at Michigan and MSU as well. We'll see how it turns out in a few years.
I don't have enough mgopoints to create a new thread, but Maxx Williams from Minnesota declared as well. His loss will certainly hurt Minnesota in next year's battle for the jug.
https://minnesota.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1721459
Without looking through this year's winners, I'd guess that most are athletes of some kind. Being involved in sports is one of the primary components of a successful Rhodes' application.
Unless there is a quota on the number of 4-stars, and the number of people ranked "85," I think it is more than people moving ahead of him. I'd guess it was based on his performance at the Jersey Nike camp.
The problem that I have with the more OL to the pros statement is that Michigan is generally starting with players who have a higher ceiling and are more athletically gifted than most other schools are getting. If a school has a bunch of 2* lineman and none go to the NFL, I'm not sure that you can say that school is developing their lineman worse than a school who has 5* lineman and puts some of them in the NFL. The lineman just have different ceilings, but both schools might be developing their players quite well and helping them reach their potential.
Sorry to rant, it is just something that bothers me, as I hear it towards Minnesota often. We don't put many players in the league, but give us some 4* and 5* players and that would likely change. Would that mean we are suddenly developing them better, or it is just easier to meet that specific metric of development with a "better" starting product?
That picture might make it appear a little more egregious than it really was. Linked is a video from the game. The angle isn't the greatest, but it certainly isn't him walking off the court Marcus Hall style.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84nkM80mk1w
Also, I think his apology aligns more with the video than an apology for walking off the court, flipping off the fans.
Doesn't sound like a bad kid at all to me, and not something I would hold against him as a recruit.
I'm curious where the Michigan confidence is coming from, beyond assuming an automatic W when recruiting against Minnesota.
Most Minnesota fans were more worried about Florida because we had heard that the fact that your staff had seen Jones multiple times in person and never pulled the trigger on an offer may have hurt your position a bit.
It's true that Minnesota will probably be the last Big 10 team taken due to our traveling reputation. The disappointing thing about that is that we don't draw well because most Gopher fans don't care to travel to a bowl that nobody cares about. Unfortunately, those are the only bowls we ever end up in. So as long as we go to those, no one shows up. As long as no one shows up, we keep our same traveling reputation. It seems very circular and difficult to break out of.
An informal poll on the Minnesota rivals site had about 3 times as many posters who said they would buy tickets to the Gator Bowl than the Texas Bowl, but there is no chance we end up at the Gator Bowl. I hope Michigan takes care of business there. I think there are some definitie positives from the OSU game that you can build on over the next few weeks.
The only difference I see between Urban going after Crawford and Hoke going after Williams and Elmore, is that Michigan would have over a year to find a replacement, as opposed to the ~2 months Mizzou and Minnesota would have if these flips were to happen.
Other than this loss possibly dropping Michigan below Nebraska in the bowl selection order, I still think that if Michigan gets at least one more win, they will be picked over Minnesota and Iowa by the bowl selection committies. Perhaps this is the jaded Gopher fan perspective, but bowls are about money, and the Michigan name definitely brings the fans and interest. My guess is Michigan gets the bowl slotted for the #5 Big 10 team, whatever that is.
Not a proud moment in Gopher history. Lots of bad memories in the Metrodome though.
Eh, not sure if it's done. If you look at the history of my posts, I pretty much keep arguing as long as someone wants to argue.
I did use the words "awful," "terrible," and "two of the worst teams in college football" to describe those teams, though I certainly wasn't the first in this thread to describe them in such a manner. There are definitely differing levels of quality throughout college football, I never argued that there wasn't. My argument was solely about what I consider to be an overly inflated perspective about Michigan's superiority over UConn and Akron in the 2013 football season, at least at this particular moment in time.
And to be clear, Michigan fans aren't arrogant and condescending because someone expressed their frustration about not getting players on the field against inferior opponents, they are arrogant and condescending because they choose to describe these teams who almost beat them as inferior.
And to be clear, I don't actually think all, or even most, Michigan fans are that way, probably not even the poster I called out, but there are a healthy number of them who look down on other programs, even during seasons where it is not justified. As you may have gathered, I'm not a fan of that.
I would have to imagine that if at least some of the people I am arguing with went on a Texas message board, and heard them referring to other teams as inferior, some would find that laughable right now. I'm not saying Michigan is playing like Texas, but hopefully you get my comparison.
So to summarize my main point, I still don't think this team's current performance warrants viewing any team as inferior right now.
Every part of your post is wrong.
I have a posting history that goes beyond this discussion. It was only like 11 posts I think, but I'm almost certain that those had nothing to do with bitching about Michigan people.
Everyone who has read this thread knows what school I root for. The poster I was responding to decided to take more shots at Minnesota, as opposed to actually posting anything related to discussing the discription Akron and UConn as inferior relative to Michigan, so I responded. I suppose it is a tactic similar to what you are using in your response by pointing out that Minnesota hasn't done anything for 50 years. I freely acknowledged my irritation of seeing Minnesota regularly put down here, but I would say I have based 90% of my argument on things having nothing to do with Minnesota. The only time it comes is when people decide to use that as their counter to what I'm saying, as opposed to making their argument with numbers that a couple posters have said are out there to prove this superiority. And this has happened to me on campus too. I asked why students would rush the field after beating a bad Ohio State team, pointing out that they are Michigan, a team that wins national championships and should be in the top 10 every year. I was told in response, we beat you 55-0. It's aggravating to say the least.
I don't know how your paragraph concludes with you not believing I read this blog daily, though I get where you think I don't root for Michigan. I'm not sure how to prove otherwise, and I definitely shouldn't care enough. Unfortunately, I do care a bit. I can tell you that I started checking this site occasionally when TomVH was giving recruiting information. I was on this site a year and a half ago in February when there was a day full of commitments. It definitely made me jealous as a Gopher fan. I know that this site has crashed a few different times when a big time recruit is expected to commit. I saw Brian say he was done writing about the hockey team last year. I know that a lot of people on this board did not like Three and Out, and I think there was a recruting person named aquaman at some point, but that one might be completely made up. Not sure if that gives me the e-cred for you to believe I read this blog, but I do.
Michigan really is my second favorite team, but I do view things differently than posters on this board. I see the way Gopher fans talk about the Gophers and their opponents, and I see the way this board talks about Michigan and their opponents. There is a huge difference, and for the most part, Michigan has earned that. But sometimes, I just think reality becomes a little skewed, depending on which set of glasses you are looking through. As a Minnesota fan, I don't see Michigan as being a great team this year if Gardner keeps turning it over and if the run game can't be a little more productive. I saw two teams that are awful stay right with Michigan, and I chose to call into question posters who wanted to talk about Michigan's superiority over those teams. That's all, it really has nothing to do with whether I cheer for Michigan.
We'll see about the short-term. I feel like only fans of Michigan and a handful of other blueblood schools would be able to maintain the ability to feel superior to other teams after squeaking by two of the worst teams in college football. I know that after Minnesota struggled with Western Illinois and only won by 16, a good portion of our fans simply conceded the Big 10 season. Must be nice to have that history and recruiting stars to rest on so you can keep that positive attitude of being better than everyone.
I used the word vastly due to the poster above my previous response stating that the opponents are inferior because they lost. To me, the term inferior involves some significant degree of quality difference. While the scoreboard says Michigan is better, and I'm not going to argue that point, I would say these two scores are probably close enough to indicate the game could have gone either way. To me, that isn't a significant enough difference in quality to use the term inferior. So, I added vastly to indicate that while I guess you can argue that the scoreboard says you are superior, I think there needs to be a bit more of a beatdown before terms like superior and inferior are used. Perhaps my understanding of superiority is outside of the simple definition of just being better than something else. But if I'm going to be calling Michigan superior, I want to see a beatdown that leaves Akron not crossing the 50 yard line all game, not a game where Akron is one yard away of winning. So, the term vastly was just a lazy way around explaining this whole paragraph, and acknowleding that while the poster I was responding to took a cute way out of the argument, his definition of inferiority lacked what I viewed as a necessary magnitude of quality difference.
I'm sure I won't get far on a Michigan board calling into question your arrogance. That would be quite the uphill battle.
I would say that I did acknowledge in another post that sometimes there are upsets. But as I stated above, one game is a fluke, two in a row, you might start to worry that you aren't as good as you thought you were. Historically, trends tend to be indicative of things as well.
I'm not sure where these wealth of statistics that you mention comes from that support your superiority over these teams. Per the front page, Michigan is 118 out of 123 FBS team in tackles for loss allowed. Michigan is also 112 out of 123 in terms of turnover margin, largely due to being tied for 10th in interceptions thrown. And they are generally kind of middle of the pack in other offensive categories. I'm not going to take the time to find Akron and UConn in these, I'm sure they are terrible, and I didn't intend to spend my whole afternoon typing out responses that are longer than most everyone cares to read. However, it seems to me that the numbers you want to point to don't show a team that is being dominant in any way, nor does the scoreboard. Consequently, I don't think claim of other team's inferiority is beyond question.
Minnesota and Michigan have zero common opponents, which makes it tough for me to use my scoreboard definition. I have no idea how Minnesota would fare against UConn or Akron. It's not like UNLV, Western Illinois, or New Mexico State are setting the world on fire. We haven't beaten anyone as good as Notre Dame, I am pretty sure about that.
As for why I wouldn't pick the Gophers, I think Minnesota is too one-dimensional right now to beat Michigan. We've thrown 28 passes in 4 games. I imagine that will be easy enough for Mattison to scheme against. Even if Gardner gives us the ball three times during the game, I'm not convinced we can score enough points to win.
I'm really not just a troll though, I read this blog daily throughout the year, and believe it or not, do root for Michigan. There are just certain things about this blog, and maybe about many of the people at the University of Michigan, that irk me, such as the condescension towards "inferior" schools. When I saw that same condescension being placed on teams that Michigan barely beat, I decided it was a nice opportunity to call into question these beliefs of superiority.
No way would I wager on the Gophers in that game. I know what Gardner is capable of, or at least I think I do. The Gophers will probably lose again. I was just amused that a fan of a team who has barely escaped two of the worst teams in college football is referring to these teams as inferior. Scoreboard says you are about as close to even as you can get.
If the Gophers do miraculously win, it would be interesting to see how many people say they got beat by a superior team. I'm pretty sure I know the answer though, which makes me think these definitions of inferiority are rooted somewhere beyond on-field play in 2013.
I suppose in a sense you are right, though I would contend that anyone who watched either game knows that the outcome could have gone either way. If the game is essentially a toss-up, I'd have a hard time calling myself vastly superior to my opponent.
If you are basing the use of inferior on your recognition of these team's standing among all FBS teams, then you must also be assuming a higher standing for your own team. The polls suggest that is correct, but as I stated in one of my other replies above, after two straight close calls with terrible teams, I'm not sure that current on-field performance would give any indication that Michigan is performing at a level that puts them in a realm where they can feel superior to these teams.
If you want to base claims of inferiority on size, athleticism, skills, and stars, I suppose I can't argue that one much, and Michigan will have that on most teams. However, it seems like that metric kind of minimizes the importance of on-field performance, which I would say matters. UConn didn't really look inferior out there.
And if you want to base it on prior results, well that seems a bit silly. Michigan may have the most wins ever, but this current group of players was in on less than 5% of those. Historically, I agree, almost every program in the country is inferior to Michigan, but that seems like a pretty shaky way to compare your current team against your opponents. But hey, at least the Gophers seem a bit less inferior if we want to use that measure.
If by prior results you mean results from this season, UConn was probably licking their chops after that Akron game. They probably thought even they could beat Akron by a couple touchdwons.
I'm not sure I follow your logic when you are sarcastically talking about good teams losing to Towson or going 1-11. I never said Akron or UConn were good. In fact, I would agree that the two teams Michigan just beat are not very good at all, I was simply asking how we came to the conclusion that they were inferior to Michigan. It definitely wasn't from the final score. So is this feeling of superiority from dominating CMU, beating an ND team that is not looking all that great, the potential that I think everyone can see for the future, or just because we are Michigan fergodsakes?
One game is a fluke, two straight games of going down to the wire with supposedly inferior teams may make you start wondering if you are really that much better than your scores suggest.
Ya, I'm a Minnesota fan and alum, and a current Michigan student. As long as Minnesota and Michigan aren't playing, I always root for Michigan. However, in every opponent recap, or afternoon game thread, there is always plenty of condescension towards the Gophers. See the post above as evidence of the comments I refer to.
So as I sit here getting pumped up for Minnesota and Michigan to play, it is difficult to not take the opportunity to call out Michigan fans a little bit about them calling other teams inferior when the last two games have been just abysmal performances offensively. I've been in Ann Arbor long enough to mostly accept the, "We're Michigan, we are better than everyone else" mantra, but right now, I don't think there is a whole lot of on field performance to back that up. But hey, as long as you keep thinking so highly about the program, you can laugh at the idea of a Minnesota fan talking smack and can call teams giving you all you can handle inferior.
Current on-field performance doesn't matter when mocking opponents, history does, we're Michigan!
Numbers like 28-24 and 24-20?
Squeaking by teams and then calling them inferior, it's the Michigan difference.
What makes you say they are inferior opponents?
What CREX said is right. The burn is north of northwood, and there are signs along Plymouth Rd. that say prescribed burn in progress.
For the record, Sid Hartman is a senile old man that has spent the last bunch of years making an ass of himself and ruining the legacy that he had. I don't think he represents the thoughts of any Gopher fans.
A twitter search for Sid Hartman will give you a sense of how he represented himself at the press conference today. Apparently he asked something along the lines of, "Mr. AD, you're suppose to be a basketball genius, why did it take you so long?" (Note: The search took 9 days)
I don't like the hire, but I think some clarity needs to be given to Teague's background with basketball coaches. At VCU he started the Villa 7 program, which helps assistant coaches transition to head coaching positions. There are some interesting names who have gone through the program, including Andy Enfield, Buzz Williams, Anthony Grant, Shaka Smart, Josh Pastner, Kevin Borseth, etc. A full list of successful transitions is here.
I think the fact that he was one of the founders of the Villa 7 program, and the fact that he has made a lot of connections as a result of it, would lead him to evaluate young coaches with a little more insight than is suggested by calling it "luck." It's not as though he is throwing darts at pictures of 30 year old coaches. So in that sense, I think the process does deserve a little credence, even with a sample size of two.
Having said all of that, I would have preferred a guy with more head coaching experience and stronger ties to Minnesota. Nevertheless, I'm trying to take on the optimism that my fellow fans are embracing this hire with.
A lot of Gopher fans have been hoping the axe would come this year. We really struggled at the end of the season, and it seemed we had no idea how to attack a zone defense or successfully inbound the basketball on the baseline.
Tubby has not done a great job at keeping or developing talent.
Justin Cobbs (Cal's leading assist man and second leading scorer this year) - transfer
Colton Iverson (Colorado State's leading scorer and rebounder) - transfer
Royce White - transfer
Rodney Williams - came in a 5* athlete, will leave as a a 5*athlete
To those who say that they should realize they are Minnesota, besides sounding incredibly arrogant, it ignores the talent that Minnesota high school basketball has produced recently. Tubby didn't offer in-state players like Nate Wolters (SDSU), Mike Bruesewitz (Wisconsin), Trent Lockett (Marquette), and it was looking like next year he was going to miss on 2 5* in-state players, Tyus Jones and Rashad Vaughn, as well as an in-state 4*, Reid Travis. I understand that some of these players don't fit his system, but to say he recruited well is not entirely accurate.
We don't have many young guys on the team to give us reason to think the future is bright with Tubby. I think it was the right move, and really hope we come up with a good replacement.
Sources like his twitter page?
He does probably need to cut back on the talk of smoking weed though.
He is a WR from Grand Rapids. Below are a link to his stats from this past year. It seems like he must have got hurt early in the season.
http://highschoolsports.mlive.com/player/rodney-davis/
Minnesota beat NDSU 70-57 last week.
While your offer to put money on Gregory is likely just your way of expressing confidence, if you are serious, I will take that bet. You can have Arkansas, I have the field.
Word on the Gopher recruiting sites is that Gregory is likely headed to Purdue, though of course nothing is ever for sure. However, as others have said, I wouldn't worry about this being an opportunity for them to both commit to Arkansas.