- Member for
- 4 years 19 weeks
|20 weeks 4 days ago||MLCs||
You mentioned you and your son ruled out MLCs and several folks still mentioned them, as they are one of your few options to guarantee placement on Central.
Not sure of your reasons, but I wouldn't be quick to rule the MLCs out. If he's completely disinterested in all of them, then sure don't bother. But if it's more about a lack of motivation for them, they may not be some huge commitment.
I did HSSP in 2007-08. Commitment was an easy seminar class, attending a few lectures throughout the year and doing some simple write-ups, and getting to job shadow a few people at the UM hospital (which was pretty cool). Upside of living on central was nice, and the other students in the program were cool. It also had the added benefit of convincing me pre-med was not for me (since I saw where I was in terms of motivation and capacity for organic chemistry vs. my peers), but maybe it would have a reverse effect for your son of exposing to a few career options.
So, I'd suggest taking another look at the MLCs and understanding the extent of commitment required for any he might be marginally interested in. I'm sure you could even ask the people running the program about it from the angle of "wanting to make sure my son isn't overwhelmed with work his freshman year."
|39 weeks 12 hours ago||Class space||
I don't think this will be too much of an issue. Currently Michigan is one over.
Donnal having his redshirt taken off and being passed by Wagner & Wilson makes it likely he will exit.
It looks like Chatman will get buried; he does not seem to have progressed much. He may want to transfer.
Irvin could potentially go pro after this year.
Just need 2/3 of the above to happen for there to be a spot for Spike. Likelihood of the above should come into focus by the time he's back to 100% or close to it; has to be a ways off if he's not even practicing yet.
Would be nice to have him next year as the back-up PG and playing a few min w/ Walton (taking LeVert's min and possibly Irvin's) rather than rely on a true freshman.
|40 weeks 6 days ago||He did...||
He did. Got dismissed, then transferred to Maryland.
Yeah, nice job Ace.
|41 weeks 4 days ago||34-16 M||
|42 weeks 17 hours ago||App||
I don't have a Smart TV so I'm not sure. But the app for Sling TV itself is free - you just need a subscription to actually use it (just like how you could download Netflix to your phone, tablet, Roku even if you haven't subscribed).
So, however you go about installing apps on your Smart TV, I think your best bet is to see if you can get Sling TV that way.
And I'll echo everyone else -- I got MNF on Sling, so it must be a local market thing. I did notice that the ESPN feed was pretty patchy (as it was with MSU-Neb on Sat). Not sure if that was an ESPN issue or a local internet issue.
|45 weeks 1 day ago||Snowflake thread||
Could at least have 1 dedicated thread each day about the game, similar to the day-of snowflake threads, to minimize all the new things that pop up.
I'd also support the OT hold given it's a bye week
|45 weeks 2 days ago||2 cents/own question||
I'd go with Luck and Manning, but see your case for Bortles. Both the Texans and Browns have been rather bad against the pass this year. I think Luck will start picking back up.
I also have Beckham; I think he'll play and be fine and also don't have a great back-up option, so I'm going with him.
My QB situation is not ideal -- choosing 1 of 3 between Newton (@Sea), Stafford (vs.Chi), and Mariota (vs.Mia). Currently leaning toward Mariota; no trust in Stafford at this point, and QB @Sea is asking for trouble. Could be talked out of it, though.
|47 weeks 6 days ago||Michigan over Maryland 27-6||
Michigan over Maryland 27-6 (missed XP on both sides)
Michigan over Northwestern 24-3 (Peppers with first career TO)
|2 years 18 weeks ago||Yup||
Right, that's what I meant. I referred to the spots as Stauskas'/GRIII's because I was thinking in terms of a spot for a G and a spot for a F...wouldn't expect either MAAR or Dawkins' minutes to be too high in 2014-15.
|2 years 18 weeks ago||Exactly||
Right -- essentially MAAR is taking Stauskas' spot, and Dawkins is (hopefully) taking GRIII's spot. No plans to medical Hatch just yet, so there's only an open transfer spot if McGary leaves. Will be interesting to see if this evolves differently if Dawkins ends up elsewhere and either of the transfers are still in the mix.
|2 years 26 weeks ago||SAM||
I can buy Ryan at MLB as an upgrade, particularly against these spread-y teams. The major concern is the gaping hole that leaves at SAM. Even if the "SAM" is really the Nickel DE for ~60% of downs (which Beyer could hld down), for the other ~40% of downs that's a huge hole on the edge.
Maybe I'm interpreting this wrong -- maybe they go Ross/Morgan/Ryan against traditional teams/in run downs and Ryan is a "Nickel MLB." That's still asking a lot of Ryan, and lot of whoever replaces him on the edge.
|2 years 28 weeks ago||Glad it wasn't just me||
The intro music is crazily looping over itself. I almost like it. But almost doesn't cut it.
Please never do it again, unless we beat Ohio tonight, in which case always, always, always do it again.
|2 years 28 weeks ago||Images||
I for one enjoy the images, and the new charts showig the four factors -- I spent a couple minutes on them really taking them in. I only saw them post-opacity update, but I had no issues with readability.
|2 years 29 weeks ago||phone posting noob||
apparently I do not know how to enter line breaks from the phone app. ugh. /noob
|2 years 29 weeks ago||lineup card||
Add me to the list of those who like the new lineup card.
Also agree that Kenpoms algorithms overrate Iowa due to some blowouts. UMs ability to prevent transition opportunities via their strengtus of few TOs and high shooting % are a good foil to Iowa's key strength. The key will be to maintain that and mitigate Iowa going crazy on Oreb. That said, definitely agree with Ace not deviating from the Kenpom prediction.
Mini-feedback: Did the previews formerly show UMs rankings on the four factors along with the opponents or am I misremembering? In any case, I am interested enough to want to see those in the previews but too lazy to look them up. So take that for what little it is worth.
|2 years 30 weeks ago||Was about to say my experience is more recent...||
...but I applied Fall 2006, so not much more so than some of the folks above. I'll draw off my experience as an instater who got in with ~20 classmates. I think you have a strong chance as-is, though a really good essay/teacher rec would certainly help. But I do agree with other posters that increasing your ACT is a wise investment. If you get that up to 31 you shouldn't have an issue getting in. The Mendoza line for my high school classmates seemed to be 27, but I didn't hear about anything with a 30+ getting rejected.
One piece of advice is to explore taking the SAT if you haven't already. When I was applying UM would accept either test score. Some say the ACT is easier, but I think it's highly variable by individual. I ended up doing somewhat better on my SAT than on the ACT as far as overall percentiles go. I'd suggest taking a practice test - there's some content overlap with the ACT so the practice is good, and you could end up finding it easier.
I think UM still gives 'bonus points' to instate applicants, but I remember when I was applying that they were supposedly dialing that down because they love that sweet out of state tuition. That's more hearsay than anything else.
I don't remember AP test record as being particularly important, though taking AP classes should demonstrate you had good rigor in your curriculum. Some unsolicited advice: don't necessarily apply for AP credit for every test you take unless you're going to use it. I ended up having a full semester of AP credit, so I was counted as an upperclassman my second sophomore semester, which meant paying upperclassman tuition for an extra semester. If you're going to "use" that credit to graduate early or take more advanced, interesting classes then go for it; otherwise it can cost you some extra money.
Additional unsolicited advice: I loved my time at UM and agree with a poster above that if you elect a major that translates easily into a well-paying job that the high tuition is worth it. But, if you're undecided about what you want to study and/or think you may go the "softer" route you should strongly consider something more affordable. With the kind of applications you have, you should be able to get in at a number of good schools with scholarships.
|2 years 32 weeks ago||Yes||
Must pad my post count, so I can upvote
|2 years 33 weeks ago||Pythag||
It's a Pythag win %, which means it takes the margin of victory/loss into account. So, even if a team is undefeated they can theoretically improve by increasing their margin of victory over the course of the year.
[Sarcastic Cynicism] Also this is just another way of saying Beilein's teams start slow and don't start playing MICHIGAN BASKETBALL until midseason which is UNACCEPTABLE [/Sarcastic Cynicism]
|2 years 41 weeks ago||Liveblog?||
Has there been any talk of doing Blyve live blogs for basketball games this season? Or are we just sticking with open threads?
|2 years 41 weeks ago||Gator Bowl, then||
I believe the Texas and BW3 Bowl are both late December ones, so your rooting interest would be the Gator Bowl then.
Fishing for a +1 Informative: Michigan has never been to the Texas/Meineke Car Care Bowl or the Buffalo Wild Wings/Insight Bowl, but has been to the Gator Bowl 3x.
|3 years 1 week ago||Suggestion/Request||
Really cool analysis! So cool, I want MOAR:
I'd be interested in seeing a repeat of this analysis, but instead of color-coding by conference, color code by philosophies. That is, are there any trends to where Spread vs. Air Raid vs. Pro-Style teams end up? On defense, maybe it's more about how blitz-happy a team is - do they trend to the lower right? If you could measure average number of DBs on the field per play, do those teams trend to the upper left?
Also, clearly the upper right is best and the lower left is worst for both offense and defense. But if a particular style or philsophy takes you into the upper left vs. the lower right, which is 'better?' That is, which correlates with better PPG/wins/TO ratios? To take it a step further graphically, if you collected data on multiple years could you model a series of PPG curves on these graphs?
|3 years 3 weeks ago||Interests?||
Great idea. I just joined the group (WolverineJeff)
Any of you guys play Civ5? Any interest in Portal 2 co-op (that's been on my to-do list for 2 years)?
|3 years 7 weeks ago||I get the same feeling...||
It goes beyond Michigan fandom to other entertainment (TV shows, movies, video games, etc). Hearing "Oh I'm a huge fan, too!" coupled with "Who's Jake Ryan? Uh, Sixteen Candles?" is beyond annoying. I think it's the disappointment of going from thinking you can geek out with someone on a shared interest to maybe being perceived as TOO into something.
|3 years 27 weeks ago||Same here||
I emailed Tae's kickstarter address on Jan 2nd, and he said then that hoodies would mail out in the next two weeks. I'm just hoping I get it before hoodie season is over.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||?||
I think that's responding to my first paragraph? Sorry, that was directed at MGoAlexander's post (but not timely enough). I like your proposal a lot -- was just trying to piggy back on it with a few tweaks.
|3 years 38 weeks ago||Divisions||
The only downside to that is that there are no "divisions" then, just the four "pods." I don't believe that it would fit in with the current NCAA rules for a championship game.
If not for the NCAA rules about divisions, I was thinking along the lines of something similar, but without division distinctions as well. Essentially, mirror the current NFL scheduling -- the four pods play everyone within their pod every year, and rotate the other pod. Then rather than have a floating de jure division, you just pick the two pod champs with the best record. The only difference with this version versus the OD's is that it would allow for a rematch if the two best teams were in the same pod-pairing that year (IMO, that's a better scenario than having a Wisconsin or Georgia Tech type be able to sneak in).
Other thought here is "secondary rivalries." When Michigan's pod is paired with Ohio's, there's an open "rivalry" game. If some of these lesser "rivalries" are a concern, like Indiana-Michigan State or Michigan-Penn State they could be the back-up to that rivalry game, so that it would be played two out of every three years (or four out of six) rather than one out of every three.
But, Brian's thought a way back is probably the best one to adapt. Would you really miss playing Indiana and Illinois?
The Big Ten Division
The Also Kind of Big Ten Division
New Team A
New Team B
|3 years 39 weeks ago||Lewan is probably going pro||
Some dodgy plays yesterday withstanding, Lewan is a consensus projected 1st round pick, potentially in the Top 10 (hopefully not too high for the Lions, but that's another thread). It's rare that players come back when they have a draft grade like that. Being a RS Junior, Lewan can also probably finish up his degree before next season. I wouldn't be shocked, and would be delighted, if he came back to address some unfinished business.
|3 years 41 weeks ago||Internet's a big place||
I didn't see your first post, Blue Blue Blue, so I can only speak generally. But, I know this has come up before from other posters.
There are several places where someone can say whatever their opinion of Michigan sports is, regardless of how substantiated, intelligent, coherent, etc. it is. See: MLive, Detroit Free Press, Facebook, ESPN.com, etc. I think the mods at MGoBlog are trying to make sure this does not become one of those places. Personally, I like it that way. I like knowing that when I click on a thread here, I an expect a certain degree of reason. At least, relative to everything else on the Internet.
To address your post here itself -- the reason that people think it's ridiculous is that Hoke and company show time and time again that they can take lemons, eat them, then poop magic. If he makes mistakes, he's owed a huge deal of slack. See: OSU, MSU, bowl monkeys off of our backs.
Gardner was our second best WR. There was a lot of value putting him in the lineup, and it was a reasonable gamble. I don't think anyone could have reasonably predicted Gardner would have been so competent-to-good at QB right away either, based on previous playing time, Spring performance, etc. Also, @MINN & VS. NW <> @NU with division title on the line.
|3 years 46 weeks ago||There is a numbers "advantage"||
Compare the read option to a standard hand off. In that case the QB accomplishes nothing post-snap, it's 11 defenders vs 9 blockers and a runner. The read option forces a DE (or LB if the defense makes certain adjustments) to take the RB/QB without the ball so it's 10 defenders vs 9 blockers and a runner. Does that clear things up?
|3 years 48 weeks ago||Fuck. Fuckfuckfuckfuck||