I Like Burgers
- Member for
- 2 years 29 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|4 days 15 hours ago||Honestly tough to tell sometimes||
I really have no idea if he was being sarcastic or not. The fact of the matter is that there are enough delusional people on this site that its tough to tell whether someone is being sarcastic, or if they are just fucking stupid.
|4 days 15 hours ago||Yeah, borderline||
Considering they'll start the season unranked, if Michigan wins their first three games, they *might* sneak into the top 25. Or they might be just outside of it. So, you know...borderline top 25.
|4 days 21 hours ago||Lol||
C'mon man...Purdue and BC rarely host a prime time game where they are the marquee team in the game. Sure, Purdue played a prime time night game last season, but that was only because they were hosting #11 Notre Dame. And BC did it because they were hosting #9 USC. They are on prime time because they just so happen to be hosting a top 10'ish team.
If Michigan looked like they were going to be a top-10'ish team by week 4, then sure, the odds of the BYU game being a prime time night game go way up. But the reality is, they will probably be a borderline top 25 team that's playing a team whose season is already over.
|4 days 22 hours ago||Know what else impresses||
Know what else impresses recruits and showcases your program? Winning. Night games are tricks you use to impress recruits when your program is a dumpster fire.
|4 days 22 hours ago||BYU might be 0-3 going in to that game||
BYU opens at Nebraska, home v Boise State, and then at UCLA. They will likely be underdogs in all of those games and could be heading to Ann Arbor at 0-3. No one wants to watch a borderline top 25 team play an 0-3/1-2 team in primetime.
|4 days 22 hours ago||No way||
I said this in another post, but there's a good chance BYU will be 0-3 heading in to that game. There will be several ranked v ranked games happening that week that would be much better primetime options.
|4 days 22 hours ago||BYU might be 0-3 going in to that game||
They do, but BYU could possibly be winless going in to that game (they open at Nebraska, home v Boise State, and at UCLA). Michigan is likely to be unranked going in to that game, or at the very best around #20. And #20 Michigan vs. 1-2 or 0-3 BYU sounds like a ratings black hole.
|4 days 22 hours ago||I would think so||
The network is partially controlled by the Big Ten, so I don't see why they wouldn't be able to say no to them.
Personally, I'm fine with this. Night games should be special. Two unranked teams with no history (and therefore good storylines) playing each other doesn't feel special. Which is probably why the national networks passed on it.
|4 days 23 hours ago||In years past maybe||
My guess is that Michigan only wants to do primetime if its going to be a national ABC/ESPN type of game. BYU v Michigan feels more like a BTN game. And there are better options for national prime time games that week like UCLA at Arizona, USC at Arizona State, Utah at Oregon, A&M at Arkansas, and Tenn at Florida.
|4 days 23 hours ago||I don't think its Hackett||
Michigan really only had two options for a prime time game -- MSU and OSU. And from what I remember reading in the past, they just don't want either of those two games to be held at night. The rest of it is up to the networks, Michigan is likely to be unranked for a while, and the rest of Michigan's home schedule is poop. Michigan v. BYU doesn't really scream PRIME TIME when there's better options on the table.
|4 days 23 hours ago||Not too surprising||
The options for Michigan hosting a prime time game suitable for a national audience are slim to non-existent. As good of a draw as Michigan is, its tough to commit to a likely unranked v unranked matchup this far out. Especially when they already have Michigan v Minnesota on the schedule.
The only real option is vs. MSU, but I'm guessing Michigan/Ann Arbor said no to that one.
|5 days 20 hours ago||Over 65 years||
Its $1B spread out over 65 years.
So the headline should really be "Judge approves plan for NFL to pay $15M for the next 65 years. NFL execs and lawyers sprain wrists from excess high-fiving."
|5 days 20 hours ago||This is absolutely nothing for the NFL||
The $1 billion dollar settlement sounds big and splashy, but it is going to wind up being a tiny, tiny drop in the NFL's bucket because this is going to be spread out over 65 YEARS. That's only $15M a year for the NFL, which considering Goodell has a base salary of around $35M, and they generate billions and billions a year, this is absolutely couch change material for them.
Plus, as others have said, the NFL doesn't have to disclose what they knew as a result of the deal. Really, things couldn't have gone much better for the NFL.
|6 days 2 hours ago||With all the cash Google has,||
With all the cash Google has, it may be easier and even cheaper to just buy a smaller wireless company like Sprint or T-Mobile than trying to get a wedge of spectrum on their own.
|6 days 15 hours ago||No. Malzone had on white||
No. Malzone had on white sleeves, but they were tight. The guy in the clip has baggy white sleeves and is pretty tall. Going off the clip before, I'm pretty sure it's #19. The first blurred number is definitely a 1.
|6 days 15 hours ago||Pretty sure that whoever QB||
Pretty sure that whoever QB #19 is (Speight maybe? don't have a roster in front of me...) is the guy on the losing end of the "if you're gonna look at me with the look..." line.
|6 days 22 hours ago||Yeah that's why 8 teams is||
Yeah that's why 8 teams is too many. Scheduling an 8-team playoff would produce an awful lot of repeat matchups I would think.
|6 days 22 hours ago||Consolation games always||
Consolation games always sound good on paper, but are generally just bad. Two dejected teams with nothing to play for.
|6 days 22 hours ago||There would probably be years||
There would probably be years where you'd get a three loss team in there.
|6 days 22 hours ago||I still like the idea of six||
I still like the idea of six teams in a playoff. Top two get a bye and 3v6 and 4v5 kick off the bowl season around Dec 20th or so. That gives the top teams something (a bye) to shoot for, give the 3-6 seed teams enough extra time to rest and prepare for the semis on NYE, and it limits the number of games the players have to play.
|1 week 11 min ago||Fisch||
I liked that Fisch called Jameis out about leaving out the crab legs. I also liked that Harbaugh seemingly had no idea what anyone was talking about. "You did what now?"
I also wonder if there was a discussion amongst the producers and Winston's agent about leaving out the whole rape thing. If someone asks me if I've had any run ins with the cops, you'd think that would be the first thing that comes to mind. Not some BB gun incident.
|1 week 1 hour ago||If basketball at a pro level||
If basketball at a pro level isn't in his future, I'd rather see him get a solid degree and education so he can have a good head start on a future in the working world.
|1 week 1 hour ago||I think it means he's done period||
If he accepts a medical hardship, I believe it means his career is over period. If he wanted to try and play somewhere else, I think he has to turn down the medical hardship scholarship from Michigan and transfer elsewhere. I don't think you can be on a medical hardship scholarship for a year or two, and then transfer and go play somewhere else.
|1 week 5 hours ago||Lewan had a presser to||
Lewan had a presser to announce he was coming back
|1 week 17 hours ago||Can you accept a membership||
Can you accept a membership if you're not a student?
|1 week 17 hours ago||Too soon||
|1 week 1 day ago||Had one for a broken toe||
I wore one last spring for a broken toe. Might be time to updated your medical footware knowledge. And to stop being an ass to recruit's moms.
|1 week 1 day ago||Cockdance||
The bleeped out word is "cockdance."
"If you want to look at me with that look, then go cockdance somewhere else."
Harbaugh creates new swear words with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind.
|1 week 1 day ago||It'll save||
It'll save the people that really only want 10 channels like 20-25% on their bill. Instead of paying $70 for internet and $60 for cable, they'll pay $70 for internet and $25 for cable. And that's only assuming the cable companies don't jack up the price of your internet service for dropping most of the cable channels they offer. Or if they don't introduce some sort of hardware you have to rent to unbuddle for $10/month. None of these companies will go into an unbundled future without finding a way to make more money from it.
|1 week 1 day ago||Those channels don't cost much||
They include those channels because they don't cost much. Whereas ESPN gets around $5.75 per subscriber, they only get $0.74 for ESPN2, and $0.21 for ESPNU. Channels like TNT ($1.28) or Fox Sports 1 ($0.68) don't really cost that much either. TruTV is $0.10. Most of the small channels people hate at are around a quarter per month or less. So unbundling and droppping them doesn't really save much.
This whole thing is a really slippery slope for consumers, and a real case of be careful what you wish for. A la carte is almost always more expensive than bulk shopping.
A real easy way this could go over the next decade or so is ESPN going the route of HBO and offering a stand alone service for like $10-15/month for just ESPN (or $20/month for all the ESPN networks, or $25/month for the entire Disney lineup), and then selling the individual games as a pay per view style option. Think about what a marque event like the Pacquiao-Mayweather event goes for, and what a big college football game would cost to watch. People would be longing for a return to bundling real quick.