so much for that
- Member for
- 18 weeks 4 days
- View recent blog entries
- Current value
|52 min 50 sec ago||Yes we're overachieving||
How often does a program coming off an 8-5 season, 9 years removed from its last conference title and with a 2-8 record in the most recent decade against its chief rival manage to pull off a class like what Hoke and Co. are in the midst of assembling? Notre Dame is the only recent example I can think of that would fall into this type of category.
Michigan is absolutely overachieving right now on the recruiting front. Hopefully we'll improve our record over the next couple of years so that these type of recruiting classes won't seem like such an overachievement relative to our on-the-field performance.
|22 hours 58 min ago||I didn't say it devastated the Bulls||
But it was still an FU nonetheless. And I would dispute whether the 89 and 90 Bulls were more talented than the Pistons of those years. When you look at the careers of the players on each of those teams, who really stands out from the Bulls besides Jordan and Pippen?
Jordan - greatest player of all time
Pippen - Top 50 player of all time (and one of the 10 biggest man-ginas in NBA history but I digress)
After that though, who was so staunch on that Bulls team from a talent perspective? Horace Grant was pretty solid, and they had some good bench support that evolved in 1991-92 (Livingston, Armstrong) to sub in for guys like Cartwright and Paxon. But they didn't yet have the likes of Ron Harper, Steve Kerr, Rodman or Brian Williams - those guys all came later on in the 90s.
The Pistons of 89-90, by contrast, had 3 Hall of Famers (Isiah, Joe D, Rodman) and a much stronger supporting cast at the time (multiple All Star appearances for Laimbeer and Aguire plus a solid bench of Edwards, Salley and Vinnie Johnson).
I'd say Chicago had the best player on either team (Jordan) and the third best (Pippen). Isiah was the 2nd best player on either team, but after Pippen the next 4 guys in terms of talent and performance were probably all Detroit (I'd take Joe D, Rodman and Laimbeer for sure over Grant, and probably Vinnie as well).
The Bulls absolutely shellacked the Pistons in 1991, but if it was just a matter of them figuring the Pistons out, then why did the Pistons never again get out of the first round of the playoffs with that core? The truth is that the Pistons aged and began to regress just as the Bulls hit their apex. We'll never know which team was truly "better" at its peak because they missed each other by at least one year.
The best Pistons team was the 1988-89 outfit and the best Bulls team prior to Jordan's first retirement was the 1991-92 team. The closest we saw to both teams meeting at the peak of their respective powers was the 1990 Eastern Conference Finals - the last strong Pistons team of that era and Phil Jackson's first year coaching the Bulls. And in that series, the Pistons won in 7. The Bulls "never looked back" after 1991 because the Pistons got old and no other super team rose up to replace them.
The league the Bulls came to dominate was severely diluted compared to the prior decade. Unlike the great teams they followed (Lakers, Celtics, 76ers and Pistons of the 80's), the Bulls had no equal rival to keep them in line (the closest was probably the Knicks). If the Showtime Lakers or Bad Boy Pistons had existed in the early-mid 90's at their peak, Chicago would have won their fair share but they certainly wouldn't have won 6 NBA titles. Probably would have been more like 3.
One more comment about "ugly" basketball - that was the knock on the Pistons at the time, but go back and watch their old games sometime. Sure, they were tough and physical defensively, but they were beautiful to watch offensively. They had multiple guys who could shoot from anywhere on the floor, their passing was crisp and they didn't run their entire offense predicated on the boring One on One Isolation bullshit that has come to dominate basketball over the last 20 years.
A lot of that crap started as Jordan became the best player in the NBA. Other players began to emulate doing what Jordan did - hold on to the ball until late in the shot clock, ignore the other 4 guys and then jack a late shot or try to draw a bogus foul. Jordan could get away with this because he was the best player ever. This was merely one component to his game, but he would also go 2-3 quarters at a time acting as a facilitator and letting the offense flow through others. The guys who tried to mimic Jordan didn't have that kind of complete game, but unfortunately they took after the worst parts of his game and brought down the NBA for several years as a result.
The entire concept of not letting guys play "D" and having the refs bail out complete bullshit drives to the basket by superstars started with the Jordan Bulls. It built to a crescendo of Complete Suck in the 2006 NBA playoffs courtesy of Dwayne Wade. So if you hate the ugliness of what NBA offenses have turned into over the last 2 decades, that's ironically more due to the influence of the 90's Bulls than anything the Bad Boy Pistons ever did.
What goes around comes around though. You now root for a team (the Bulls) who needed to play Bad Boys-style basketball in order to have a chance to take down the Heat (who of course, have assumed the mantle as the modern day Jordan-era Bulls). Ironically, if the game was still played and officiated the way it was in the late 80's, the Bulls with a healthy Derrick Rose would have a decent shot at beating the Heat in a 7-game playoff series.
|1 day 1 min ago||You're right about McHale||
And don't forget, it was either in 87 or 88 that he played against the Pistons with a bum foot. I don't remember the exact injury, but I thought he had some kind of broken bone in his foot if memory serves, yet he still played like a BOSS. Witness the controversial ending of regulation in Game 2 of the 88 Conference Finals, where McHale hit a disputed 3 (Pistons fans claim his toe was on the line) to send the game into OT, ultimately leading to a Celtics win.
The poster who made the comment about Len Bias is correct - had the 87 Celtics team been able to play Bias from the get-go, they would have probably won at least one more championship before the bodies of McHale and Bird completely wore out.
|1 day 5 hours ago||They shoud have won in 88 for sure||
Up 3 in Game 6 with less than a minute to play......phantom foul called on Laimbeer against Kareem with 14 seconds left.....Joe D rushes a shot when he had a pretty good look right before the final buzzer.....Isiah's 43 point game on a bum ankle ruined......AAAARRRGGGHHHHHH!!!!
|1 day 6 hours ago||Yes, agreed on Malone||
and now that you mention it, I forgot to add Mark Aguire as well. Considering his role in a couple of Zeke's weird triangles (the Dantley-Aguire trade allegedly orchestrated by Zeke and the long-time friendship of Magic-Isiah-Aguire) it would be interesting to get his take. Plus, we could get to hear Salley bust out his old nickname for Aguire - "Pumpkin Head"
|1 day 6 hours ago||Game 6 - 1988 Eastern Conference Finals||
Although in fairness, there are plenty of highlights from the end of that game clearly showing McHale shaking Isiah's hand and wishing him good luck against the Lakers in the next series.
|1 day 6 hours ago||You conveniently forget the fact||
that the 1991 Bulls were among the biggest "Sore Winners" in the history of basketball. They spent a good 2 years complaining in the media about the Pistons leading up to that series because they kept getting their asses handed to them in the Eastern Conference Finals. And even in 1991, when it was clear that the Bulls had the better team, Jordan, Pippen and Jackson kept bitching about the Pistons to the press, during the series. They refused to acknowledge them as a great team or worthy champions.
Basically, they kept trashing them in the press even as they were building up a 3-0 series lead, showing ZERO class whatsoever. The Pistons should have been the bigger team and stayed on the court at the end of Game 4, but make no mistake - the Bulls deserved the snub because they spent the entire series acting like spoiled little children. I was personally glad to see the Pistons give the Bulls one final FU on the way out. Had the Bulls been the least bit gracious prior to Game 4, there's no way that walk-off takes place.
|1 day 6 hours ago||This will be one of the best 30 for 30's ever||
Which is saying something because 30 for 30 is generally an outstanding series. The key will be who they are able to line up interviews with. I'm not sure all of these guys will be willing to talk, but to get a true look at the good AND the bad, it would be best if they could interview the following folks:
Dantley, Vinnie, Rodman, Salley, Mahorn, Laimbeer, Isiah, Joe D, Jordan, Pippen, Horace Grant, Phil Jackson, Magic, Worthy, Kareem, Pat Riley, Bird, McHale, Parish, Ainge, Barkley, Dominique Wilkins, Doug Collins, Kevin Duckworth, Rick Adelman, Cliff Robinson, Clyde Drexler, AC Green and AC Green's jehri curls from 1988
It's too bad Chuck Daly passed away, because his insight would have been fantastic. So many characters on that team, so much talent. Hopefully the episode will be a good two hours because they'll have so much potential content to choose from.
In terms of classic Bad Boys series, one of the things that made that team so endearing weren't just the wins, but the losses against some of the finest teams in NBA history. You knew the Bad Boys were legit because they climbed the ladder during the Golden Age of the NBA and then managed to stay on top for awhile. Their losses were usually more classic than their wins, mainly because once they got to the top they dominated most of their series. But if you had to go back and watch 5 series from that era, here are the 5 I'd recommend:
- 87 Eastern Conference Finals vs. Boston (this should be mandatory viewing for any basketball fan, regardless of team)
- 88 NBA Finals vs. LA (Game 6 is every bit of classic a game as Game 5 of the 87 Celtics series)
- 90 Eastern Conference Finals vs. Chicago (A 7 game war and the extra joy of seeing Pippen sitting miserably on the bench with a migraine in Game 7)
- 88 Eastern Conference Finals vs. Boston (FINALLY beating Boston in the Garden not once, but twice)
- 90 NBA Finals vs. Portland (Pistons won in 5, but aside from Game 3 every game was right down to the wire, including the Microwave's series clinching jumper in Game 5. Plus you get to see Laimbeer getting into Duckworth's head and pissing him off all series.)
|1 week 3 days ago||I was just on there||
To read all the fall out. Holy crap is that place a shit show, I have been frequenting 11W for the last few months and must say that the difference between 11W and RCMB is like night and day. Most of the posters on 11W are pretty friendly in their treatment of Michigan fans as long as they're not overtly trolling. Different story up on RCMB. They have some reasonable Sparty fans but also a bunch of 10 year old retards whose sole mission in life is to be as whiny of a douche as possible.
|1 week 5 days ago||Agreed to some extent||
As I can think of two other great Michigan teams - the 1985 and 1997 squads - that started the season ranked outside of the Top 10. But I can also think of a number of Michigan teams that started the season ranked pretty high up and ended up having good years. Off the top of my head that list would include 1986, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1999, 2003 and 2004. I'm sure there were plenty of others as well.
I think MSU will be better than last year, but there is no way in hell they're winning the Legends division this year. I think they'll go 8-4 overall and may beat us in EL (that game seems like a 50/50 toss up), but they'll fall short in a couple of games elsewhere along the way.
|3 weeks 22 hours ago||Totally hear you but||
TVH couldn't have been more clear. He specifically asked his readers not to blurt the message all over town. And not 2 hours later, here it is on MGoBlog. Forget how the business works for a second and just apply some basic common sense.
If someone gives you some information in a relatively limited setting and asks you to keep it confidential for some period of time, why is this such an unreasonable request? I get that WN can't really do much to its subscribers to stop this from happening, it's really more of a self-policing thing and just some basic respect for another individual's request.
It's not like TVH asked us to stash 20 kilos in our garage or lie to the cops for him. All the guy asked was for a handful of people to not leak a tidbit about a recruit. Clearly for some people, that was too much to ask for.
|3 weeks 23 hours ago||Maybe so||
But if TVH specifically asks people NOT to post a piece of info onto another site (which is exactly what happened in this case), how hard is it to respect the guy's request? Obviously the whole situation is still very fluid and there are no guarantees, but it's still nice to get some good tidbits throughout the process that you can't access on most other sites. If the tradeoff for getting that information is abstaining from running to other sites to share the news, I don't think that's asking for too much.
The guy just had a baby 12 hours ago and is still on top of all this stuff, fergodsakes. Cut him a little slack!
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Simple solution||
Do what I did when I was a senior - get to the games 2 hours early with some friends and you can have any seat in the house. Sorry you don't like the policy, but I've been to too many games in the student section over the years where fair weather fans ended up kicking out hard core fans like yourself from the good seats halfway into the first quarter. F that.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||I don't get it||
When I was a student, I hated....H-A-T-E-D having to deal with any form of assigned seats. Like many die hard fans, I got to a number of the games 1-2 hours early and did the de facto GA thing so I could get seats in or around the front row on the 10 yard line. As the years went by, it became tougher to do this because too many whiny, fair weather students who couldn't be bothered to show up in time for the kickoff would start bitching to the ushers that people were in their seats. They would then proceed to take the seats in question and barely pay attention to large portions of the game.
I think this GA idea is great. Put simply, it rewards the students who actually give a shit about the team. Almost all of the students who go to the games live on campus and don't have classes on Saturday. There's really no reason to show up late, unless there are more important things for you to do on your college Saturdays besides watching football. And if that's the case, good for you - you're probably a more well rounded person than I am. But if you don't care enough to be there on time, then it shouldn't bother you if you have to sit in row 73 instead of row 2.
This petition is a joke. The people who are bitching about this could solve the problem by setting an alarm clock 30 minutes earlier on Game Day Saturdays. I will never ever EVER support a petition that justifies preferential treatment for fair weather fans who go to the games just because it's the cool thing to do.
You're in the STUDENT section fergodsakes......you're supposed to be the craziest fans in the building, not the younger clones of the apathetic, snobbish alumni in Section 20!
|4 weeks 1 day ago||You are correct||
I asked a follow up question to TVH on the "dark horse" comment on an ESPN Insider message board because he's the one who wrote that piece on Hand. He basically clarified that VT's not so much a dark horse as they are (in TVH's opinion) the next team besides Michigan most likely to land Hand. In other words, VT is very much in the mix at this point as you would expect, just like every other recruiting service is reporting.
I think the "dark horse" thing was just bad terminology on TVH's part, and that while we're sitting in a good position with Hand we are not leading by a mile, if we're even leading at all.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||A word of caution||
I posted something similar at The Den on Wolverine Nation a short while ago - I don't believe we're in the driver's seat for Hand. A number of other services outside of ESPN have him going to VT. TVH usually has great stuff and I have no doubt that Hand is legitimately interested, but I think if he had to make a decision tomorrow it would still be VT. At best we'd have a 50/50 shot. From reading his comments, it clearly sounds like Michigan and VT are his top two choices at the moment, but it's to say that either is truly in the "driver's seat" at this point in time.
I think you can somewhat say that we're in the driver's seat for Peppers, but that's tentative too. He still hasn't visited Stanford yet, which is supposed to be his other presumptive favorite.
I like how things are shaping up so far, but we're still some time away from getting any real clarity on whether Peppers or Hand will be part of Team 135.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||I agree||
If we get a 3 WR class of Harris, Ways and Scott or Holmes, that's legit. But I won't lie - if the offer to Ways or an early commit from Ways ends up costing us a chance with Scott or Holmes, I'll be a little disappointed. I was really warming up to the idea of landing not 1 but 2 high end WRs in this class. With the way Ohio has recruited DB's the last 2 years, we're going to need as many high end WRs as we can find.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||I hope so too||
After all, a WR who doesn't catch passes isn't very useful unless his name is Walter Smith.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||TVH||
and I have been debating this a little on Twitter. Ways is on the outside, so if he commits it likely means no Holmes or Williams - the 3rd WR would ideally be a slot guy. He's not sure how high Michigan is on Holmes' list to begin with. If that's the case, kind of makes sense why they'd offer Ways....I still wish they would have waited. He seems like a lock to commit very soon, maybe too soon.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||Do you have a link on that?||
I literally had never heard about this before, and I've been a die hard fan for over 30 yeras. I just tried googling it but couldn't find anything conclusive. Is this in the same category as Clarrett where everyone knows he took money but it was never proven, or is there more ambiguity surrounding Woodson's situation?
|4 weeks 4 days ago||Preach on BME||
Agree with your comments above 100%.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||I understand||
the reason he'd want to honor/reward the players. The issue for me isn't the overall concept, it's the execution. Making championship rings when no championship was won seems bush league.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||I agree with most of your points||
but ask yourself this question honestly. If any other program besides your own had done this under the exact same circumstances, would you really think this wasn't a lame idea?
|4 weeks 4 days ago||The number of posts on this subject is peanuts||
compared to the Derrick Green threads from December and January. And all of those will pale in comparison to what might happen this year if we find ourselves in some NSD drama for the likes of Hand, Peppers and others.
Commence blood pressure medication.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||What I want to know||
is why 2 people actually downvoted this post. This is great news - we're guaranteed to have a quality basketball team for the 4th year in a row next year. That hasn't happened since the 90's. What is there to possibly down vote about this??
|4 weeks 4 days ago||This is one of those things||
where everyone who supports the program that gives out the rings loves it (there's an entire thread on this at 11W), and everyone else thinks they're tools for doing it. I think it's pretty lame, but I can see why Meyer and crew would do it - it's probably a good motivator for the players and is a nice "thank you" for what turned out to be a better-than-expected season for those guys.
They can make whatever jewelry they want down in Ohio, the only thing that pisses me off is knowing that we lost to those guys last year. If we win The Game in 2013, all will be right in the world and they can make themselves Faux Championship gold teeth for all I care.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||You didn't miss anything||
The phone system was equally as time consuming, and just as bad about ensuring that all the classes you tried to register for were full. I once broke a phone after getting completely frustrated from dealing with that piece of shit system. Even without Darth Vader as its voice, I was still driven to the Dark Side of the Force by CRISP!
|4 weeks 5 days ago||Awesome||
You rule for finding that old link!!
|4 weeks 5 days ago||Yes, but here's what they probably don't tell the kids||
at orientation in the year 2013. Way back in the mid 1990's, UM hadn't yet transitioned to the ability for students to register for the next semester's classes online. As recently as 1994 (my freshman year), students had to actually go register for classes in person which even at the time seemed archaic and ridiculous.
Beginning in 1995, the university implemented a registration by phone service. There was an acronym for this service that was called CRISP - I can't remember now what the acronym stood for but just like any other voice automated service, there was a relatively non-offensive female voice that guided you through the registration of your classes. This voice was referred to as the CRISP lady.
The early days of CRISP sucked. While you could now register for classes from the comforts of your bedroom, the entire system was slow and things took forever to process because everyone was calling into it at the same time to register. Given the long wait times and frequent voice overs you'd hear from the CRISP lady, someone got the bright idea of "hey, wouldn't it be cool if we had someone famous do the voice over for CRISP instead of the CRISP lady?"
That idea turned into a full blown editorial in the Michigan Daily in either 1995 or 1996, when a movement started to get James Earl Jones to be the new voice of CRISP. I don't remember any of the specifics of the article besides the very beginning which went as follows:
"Luke....I....am your father...."
"(If this is not correct, press 1)"
Sadly, the movement died before we ever were able to replace the CRISP lady's voice with the voice of Darth Vader.
On the bright side, I'm glad to see that this stupidly random anecdote that is as off topic as off topic can possibly be just became my 100th point on this site.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||I find your lack of faith disturbing||
(actually, I had no idea who he was but I sadly remember that comically over-acted line).