Rawls if he can hang onto it, I'd guesss
joegeo
History
- Member for
- 2 years 23 weeks
- Blog
- View recent blog entries
Karma
- Current value
- 1
Recent Comments
| Date | Title | Body |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week 6 days ago | Playoffs please |
I grew up in Ann Arbor, schooled in the tradition of the rose bowl (and every other Michigan tradition), going to every home game and an away game or two each year since the early 91. I've been to the Rose Bowl twice (1998 and 2004). Both were great experiences and the Rose Bowl definitely sets itself apart with its college atmosphere. I graduated from Colgate, a IAA football school. At the time, IAA ran a 16 team playoff... home teams hosting until the final, which was at a neutral site. My senior year, Colgate had a run to the finals, with two home games on the way there. In as few words as possible... I've never enjoyed football as much as I did during those playoffs. Do we lose something special by giving up the Rose Bowl? Yes. Do we get something much much more by switching to a playoff (hopefully a 16 team one eventually that will include all conference champions, thus giving every team in IA an objective shot at the playoffs)? Yes. |
| 9 weeks 5 days ago | Big ten |
He also became the first UM wrestler to win 4 Big Ten championships. |
| 15 weeks 3 days ago | Objectivity |
College post season is a farce. As long as it's determined by voting, it's not a real competition. Every real competiton must have objective ways of determining its champions. I'm a fan of Wetzel's plan... all conference champions are qualifiers for the playoffs. Conference championships are determined objectively. Teams won't be afraid to schedule great non-conference matchups, and conference play becomes that much more important. Every team can play its way to a national title without worry about strange computer formulas and human voting systems. |
| 16 weeks 1 day ago | Majority weren't sleepers? |
Sure 7/11 weren't sleepers, but you defined sleepers as being as being ranked in the bottom quarter of their recruiting class (or unranked). That means you've got a group comprising 25% of the team... the least talented 1/4 by scout rankings... taking 36% of the starting spots. Yes, the substantial majority of starters aren't sleepers, but that's only because by your definition, the substantial majority of the players aren't sleeprs. |
| 16 weeks 2 days ago | This man is right! |
Check this out: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news;_ylt=Ai4a_Ifqj0wnzdHwOPw1fkIcvrYF?slug=mh-huguenin_how_top_teams_fared_recruiting_012912 Recruiting is fun to follow, and clearly it can give a general sense of the future. However, judging from this, it seems to have a fairly low correlation with wins. If even a 5 year recruiting average doesn't seem to correlate much, how much can the difference in a couple of stars on a couple of players make as far as predicting the future? When OSU beats UM for a recruit, it sucks, but only because losing to OSU in anything anywhere sucks. If you think it sucks because it has increased their chances of beating us down the road, you're out of line. Their chances of success of increased so infinitesmally, it's not worth worrying about. All this is true when UM snags a recruit over OSU as well. However, nieve negativity seems more important to stamp out than nieve wishfulness. |
| 18 weeks 3 days ago | Wetzel |
I'm sold on Wetzel's 16 team format. Mainly because I agree with the principle that every FBS team should be able to win its way to a national championship. Conference championships are objective, so if you win your conference you're in. That leaves a few at large pics. Certainly there would still be debate about who deserves the at larges, but debate is okay. Those teams had a chance to objectively make the playoffs by winning their conferences. Until every team has objective access to the national title, it's not a real national title. |
| 26 weeks 17 hours ago | Back in the day |
Every win over OSU at home featured fans taking the field. Then they lowered the field and I've only seen it in 1997 since then. |
| 28 weeks 3 days ago | Remember this one? |
Go to the 2:45 mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkqPT5Vv7zw
|
| 34 weeks 1 day ago | I agree |
Fitz has that rare quality: the ability to have a little shake and a dance, yet somehow always be getting upfield well doing it. It forces the defense to react to you, rather than vice-versa (as seen with the NT in the play you highlighted). It's the Biakabatuka quality, and if the guy can stay health and get some traction, I see him doing great things for Michigan. |
| 39 weeks 4 days ago | East |
Walk east of the zoo to mt pleasant st between irving and park. Pick a place, all great for brunch. Do not eat jumbo slice. |
