at least it's not just us?
- Member for
- 4 years 47 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|4 days 21 hours ago||not in a competitive real estate market||
often a landlord will provide some level of tenant improvements to get tenenats and that fluctuates from nothing per square foot to a lot, depending on how badly a tenant is needed and how much rent they are willing to pay, etc. etc.
A retail space/location in Ann Arbor I will assume does not have much trouble finding tenanats (I live in Cali now, so I'm not sure how much vacant space there is in A2 these days) and geting a decent rent for it, so they aren't likely to be dropping a ton of $ for T.I.s for anyone beyond paing and flooring or something like that. If Blimpy's needs to outfir it as a restaurant there is a bunch of equipment and perhaps some mods required to the actual space, so I would assume the money would go toward that.
If you have no attachment to the place, i can see why you would find the idea of funding it odd, but I grew up going there with my parents who graduated from M and ate there when i attended and I brought my son there last year when we came back for the NW game, his first. I would like to see it continue in some form so I can continue to go ther when i come back, so I'll chip in. If you just see it as b ad service and greasy burgers, by all means don't. Not really sure how someone gets offended by that.
I used to go to other places on game days with my parents that were their hangouts in college (Preztel Bell, Cottage Inn, Drake's Sandwich Shop) and hang with their alumnae friends after games and hear them talk about the old days, cooler still to eat hang there when i was in school. They were heartbroken when it closed, as was I.
Cottage Inn and Blimpy's are all that was left and Cottage Inn isn't at all the same.
Not sure what i would do if Rick's closed...maybe try to buy that sticky/scummy section of carpet back by the pool table where i puked once?
|4 days 21 hours ago||Ford kickstarter here|
|1 week 1 day ago||ha||
or for that matter, that a good solution would be to parachute a small team of lightly armed soldiers into the center of the city, loudly announced by leg flares and smoke trails, to deal with the creature, rather than a less conspicuous landing of some kind of large, armored craft from the bay or somewhere else on a beach....well, what do I know about military tactics?
If you use idiotic assumptions as criteria, then the assumption that bad guys can fire machine guns at point blank range for extended periods and not hit good guys that are somersaulting across an open space in front of them (or any of the billions of variations on that type of sequence), would mean that about in X million movies are not worth watching.
Some suspension of disbelief is required for most films or you are left with a bunch of realist/neorealist/cinema verite type things that get old pretty quick.
|1 week 1 day ago||Is that||
Bruce Jenner or Julie Andrews? Hard to tell.
He should be in a horror movie...THAT would scare me.
|1 week 1 day ago||looks awesome||
I normally don't go in much for blockbuster studio stuff, but I live in San Francisco and my 8 year old son watched this and thought it was real for a second and his eyes were as big as saucers at the scene showing downtown SF in ruins (I didn't show him the lead in stuff, just a'hey look at this' after the trailer started).
He says to me 'Daddy don't go to work!' (my office is smack dab in the center of that shot on the water behind the Ferry Building).
Because I am a terrible parent, I messed with him a bit and said, 'don't worry, I will be really careful.'
It took him another second and glance at the screen to realize it wasn't real, but for that second he thought I was either the bravest or dumbest person on Earth, most likely the latter.
|1 week 1 day ago||apparently||
that is also true if you toss a few fluffy/light/powdery snowballs at a vehicle
|1 week 1 day ago||or Pier 39 Chowder/Bread Bowl?||
can they play on Alcatraz?
|1 week 2 days ago||lulz||
|1 week 2 days ago||not me....commence firing squad..handing you a blindfold||
and a cigarette
[pack, pack, pack, shape, shape, pack, shape] aaaaaand FIRE!
BOOM!, consider yourself snowballed byatch ;)
|1 week 2 days ago||totally hear you in that respect, see your point||
We just have a different definition of 'wronged'.......fluffy, kitty-balls lofted at my car on a snowy day doesn't equal 'wronged' to me. When I get older, I'm more of a 'hey kids, feel free to play on my lawn because it is just grass and that is what it is there for anyway' type of person. You will never catch me yelling at kids in general, much less to save a lawn, speaking metaphorically. This feels a lot like 'get off my lawn!'
I think a lot of people ARE 'that way'...I am. I don't take offense at every little thing in the world and try to live and let live and if there is some sort of situation that needs to be dealt with, you do so simply and without escalating out of proportion with whatever the grievance might have been. Of course, not everyone is like that, hence attributing 50% of the blame on the students for not being more selective and responding poorly to an older guy exiting his car.
Clearly there should have been better judgement on the part of the kids, but they are 19...kids. They do stuff like that sometimes. Some older people lose sight of the fact that these are kids and I think have a very different threshold for these kinds of hijinx, but they should also remember what it was like to be young....snowballs and poor judgement often ensue on a snowy day.
Suspensions? Seriousness and furrowed brows and calling it a 'mob', or assault, or an attack? I just disagree wholeheartedly with going there and making poor judgement in some way criminal necessitating missing a bowl game. I think a private apology to the professor, and a whole lot of private running of steps better serves the situation.
|1 week 2 days ago||hardly..||
As part of the 'lighten up' crowd, I am 46 and am a fully fledged working adult that runs a company in silicon valley.
if that professor just chills and smiles at the harmless, fluffy snow and waits a bit and drives on past....you have a congenial, fun, collegte prank-type situation where even a tiny bit of a sense of humor would serve people well in that situation. Absent that, even a small amount of tolerance and a shake of the head while you drive on through will get you past that whole situation.
I would totally be okay with that happening to my grandparents, mother, sister, etc. Most of the people in my family would have either laughyed and drove on through, or more likely exited the car wearing a huge smile and returning fire, so to speak, in a good natured way. Good snowball fights don't grow on trees, don't miss a one.
Mob? IMHO, a group of college students milling about just does not constitute a mob. No one is pegging cars with footballs, no one in that video is acting in a threatening manner nor are they intending to intimidate anyone. Jesus, people are acting like it is Watts during the riots and there are fires burning and gangs of violent looters roaming about trying to hurt people. It is a college campus on a snowy day where class was canceled....who gets all terrified in that situation of some harmless/fluffy snowballs? I'm willing to bet several other drivers laughed and went with the joke prior to this part of the incident.
Are the students blameless? No. They are old enough to be able to read people's cues and if someone driving through is not responding inj a humerous way, hold off for the next driver who gets it and let those that don't just pass on by. The bucket of snow into the car was a bit much also, that goes beyond common sense. 50% blame on the students for not being cognizant that not everyone shares the 19 year world view that everything is funny to everyone.
Is the professor blameless? No. He should be able to display even a small amount of tolerance and perhaps even a sense of humor and just let college kids be college kids and drive on through. If he really feels the need to throw a wet blanket on things, probably wiser not to immediately exit the car to do so. Were it me, I would proceed out of range, park the car and walk back 100 feet or so and then perhaps try to tell the kids to perhapps cool it or at least be a little selective in their targeting to not get people who don't seem receptive to being pegged by little fluffy bunny snowballs. Getting out of the car to do a 'get off my snow' thing is a 100% invitation to get a face full of fluffy snow. I laughed, especially when he goes up to the smallest, non-involved girl there and starts in on her, very brave. 50% on the professor.
The 'seriousness' being ascribed to the whole thing where we are reading about it/watching it on a Michigan football blog, with names attached to it and player suspensions being handed down, I think is wholly out of proportion to what actually occured. If I were king of the world, a simple, old-fashioned apology might be in order, where whatever students and the professor meet up, shake hands and the students/players say 'Hey, sorry, we got a little out of hand and didn't realize you were upset and took it too far.' The professor says try to think a little bit next time. Professor gets some sideline passes to a game or some other desirable something or other and all is good.
|1 week 3 days ago||Seriously?||
A few college students throwing snowballs in a fairly benevolent manner now passes as bullying? I guess bullying is on the eye of the beholder then, because to me that was actually pretty funny.
It seemed to me pretty good-natured and not at all malicious. If you don't like it, just slowly drive through and put it behind you. That was super-soft, fluffy snow and it wasn't hurting anybody or anything. What I would NOT do is go straight up to confront a random girl who seemingly wasn't involved anyway....if you ask me, that guy was kind of a wussy for doing that and deserved a few shots. In that situation, if you step out of the car, you should expect to get pelted.
I'm 46 and maybe I just haven't reached the 'get off my lawn' stage yet (hopefully never will), but I would have laughed and smiled and joined in the joke as I drove through and maybe waved a bit. If I got out of the car, it would have been 'GAME ON' for a snowball fight and some laughs.
TBH, I feel bad for football players/athletes in a way becuase there were a ton of students taking part in that and they get singled out anhd have their names posted/shamed for some fairly innocuous behavior. I would hate to have to walk around worried about people judging my every move all the time.
Where do I find that 'Why so serious?' meme graphic anyway? Consider it posted here.
|1 week 5 days ago||Brah-vo||
Thank you. Well played.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||I have to say..||
I am constantly amazed by your ability to not just go on a BANFEST at times and just purge people en masse. I couldn't have exercised nearly the level of restraint you have over the last few years.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||[sound of]||
door hitting you on the ass on your way out
|2 weeks 2 days ago||not to mention that||
I wasn't even attacking Brian...I'm someone who is completely in his corner and you totally miscronstrued what i was trying to say...I was calling out people that boo in the stadium b/c it sucks to do so for the players whether directed at the coached or not.
FWIW - I am pretty much a Brian Cook fanboy and for the most part think he does no wrong, so your spittle-flecked attack was completely at the wrong person/type of person.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||muchos gracias por Brian y todo||
I really enjoy all the content on this site and very much appreciate all the blood, sweat and tears that go into producing it each week.
I read the front page content religiously and am undoubtedly a more informed and better fan for doing so.
during the RR years and all the controversy I got caught up for some time in the forum and trying to debate/fight over what should happen and at the end I just stopped going there at all and did not miss the divisiveness, pettiness and overall feeling of rancor at times from a group that should supposedly all be on the same side. Welcome to the internet. It was disheartening and for the most part I just stopped...although I have jumped in a little bit recently, though already feeling that I'm done with that again. Perhaps 'The Reckoning' will purge it enough to make the comments section once again enjoyable and it sucks that it ever got to the point that people attack one another and the purveyors of this site. Those that create vitriole should be purged.
I found when I restricted myself to just reading Brian & Company's main posts and some small amount of legitimate debate of their assertions from those much more knowledgeable than myself, I went right back to loving this site and checking in on a nearly daily basis.
Guys...thanks so much for everything you do here.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||becaaaaaause...||
he was run out of town too early. I firmly believe he would have had many had he been given more time and supported with a proper DC.
TBD whether Hoke will have another one. Keep in mind his came during a very fortunate year for scheduling and a low point got he Big 10. The team has gotten a lot worse under his watch.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I totally get that, very good point||
While I will always cheer Michigan on, if anything WERE going to dampen my enthusiasm and cause me to detach, it would be the corporate-ish, money grubbing changes to the gameday experience. I grew up going to all the home games throughout the 70s, 80s and early 90s before moving to California and now when i come back for games, hate the RAWK music, the ads, the more homogenous pro-ish feel to the whole thing. Hate it.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||It was okay back then...everyone was doing it||
the same people back then would refute any impact that the level of fanbase vitriole might have, apparently things have changed since then and now it does impact recruits.
Not calling out anyone in particular, but methinks there would be an extremely interesting exercise in juxtaposition should anyone go back through old posts and compare the comments from pro-RR / anti-RR people back then and the same people making anti-HokeBorges / pro-HokeBorges comments now. I'm going to guess a whole lot of crossover on both sides.
As soon as someone who was an RR supporter back in the day says 'inexcusable!' on here, I'll know we have come full circle.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Not to mention that it is a 4-5 year window he is deciding on||
not just next year, so he has to assess what might happen in 2-3 years if the current results persist. Having Hoke stay only 1 more year and then leave would the worst case scenario for him, depending on who replaces him.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Two lines on a graph..||
One RR, trending upwards, with the support of a $600K DC coordinator and a few more recruiting classed, plus a senior Denard and smooth transition to a well prepared DG, who knows how high he would have gone?
Other, Hoke, trending downwards, whether he can arrest that and coach the players he has into a better unit is yet to be seen, next year with Borges could potentially be make or break, a repeat of this year would likely be grounds for making a change at OC, if nothing else.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||right...||
that is why I said '(or another $600K/year DC)' to indicate that if instead of a GERG-level budget RR was working with $600K, my guess is that we would have had many more quality options and ended up in a different place.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||many fans treated him terribly also||
A large contingent of the fanbase jumped on everything he did and said and imbued it with a level of significance completely disproportionate to the actual words or deeds.
Those fans...AND the press worked together in that, to what extent inside or ex staffers did...who knows?
The point is, were the same 'forces' applying the same or even similar criteria in assessing Hoke then the same maelstrom would ensue when he makes statements such as calling fans fickle.
Dog willing Hoke plays some Josh Groban at a banquet and we can compare apples to apples.
I'm not saying we should treat Hoke the same way, far from it, but it is interesting to many, myself inluded, to compare notes about the apparent double standard at work.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||actually, it does....however the analogy to fascism doesn't||
really apply here.
Person that pays to see games, even lots of games that goes as long as the team wins, but boos and walks out and stops coming = Person that pays to see games, even lots of games that goes as long as the team wins, but boos and walks out and stops coming
Fan = someone that comes to games and cheers their team/program whether they are good or bad, winning or losing. Perhaps analyzes the games in excruciating detail, perhaps calls out coaches for poor decision making, poor strategy, perhaps assesses player production with perhaps charts and graphs. Never boos. Come back following week, cheers.
Being a fan means you support your team whether it wins or loses. You stop supporting the team when it does not represent what you want am program to be, i.e. Miami (YTM) back in the day. I'd be the first to drop support for the program if became one fraught with off-the-field trouble and low character players. Losing doesn't make me want to walk away. It makes me a sad panda, but not a quitter.
That does not mean you are blind to things and accept everything either...FWIW, I wasn't happy with the hire, certainly not happy with the coaching now, however I'm still going to cheer until they somehow turn M footbal into something it is not.
That is college football, a somewhat enjoyable pastime having little to do with human suffering (yes, okay...some, but not dire) and forcible oppression.
Fascism, on the other hand.....
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I'm not referring to Brian as one that boos||
I'm talking about people that do boo. They suck.
I think you misinterpreted what i wrote and perhaps I wasn't clear enough. Phone, swype keyboard, grumble grumble.
I'm agreeing with Brian, only making the distinction that fans stay behind the program and players, even if the coaches are in line for criticism, which he has every right to do...by all means, I am on exactly the same page with the state of things. I'm not at all happy with the coaching, I wasn't happy with the hire to begin with TBH, all I'm trying to say here is that people should focus their criticism (richly deserved) on well paid coaches, but still back the players......go to games, watch games, etc., b/c the kids, like DG, are out there giving it their all....not quitting.
I DO think it is fickle to abandon a whole program/team just b/c they lose. Analyze, criticize, whatever..all you want, just don't leave the players with an empty quiet stadium...that won't help anything.
As such...I don't hold as much issue with Hoke's regard for people that would quit on the players than i do with the repeated laying of blame on the players....because it either means he is okay with throwing them under a bus, or doesn't really seem to get that they aren't at fault....not sure which is scarier.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||agreed..||
I live in San Francisco and Buckeyes and Spartans are hard to come by here, so being a fan is much less challenging, if for not other reason than b/c Kezar Pub makes an excellent Bloody Mary for 9 a.m. starts.
I brought my son back to A2 for his first game ever last year and went to all the places that I frequented on game days growing up (whole family are alumnae, so parents are big fans and we always had season tickets), luckily I picked the Northwestern game and got a great result in the end.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||exactly||
the DC he did hire was fairly green and middling at best, but with the budget at hand for a DC at Michigan being far below the norm that was what was available.
Now take the DC and hand him an extremely young and inexperienced pool of defensive players with gaping holes at certain positions and voila! You have a mess.
I would totally agree with you that one of RR's major failings as HC was to try and force the 3-3-5 on a DC not familiar with it and a defense not really able to support it. In hindsight, he should have left poor-enough alone and not ended up with GERG, who should always be referred to as death knell.
Do remember that RR was damned if he did and damned if he didn't with respect to meddling with a poorly performing defense. You can fault him for meddling, but try to imagine a beleaguered head coach under an immense amount of pressure to improve/win and were he to do nothing and leave the defense solely to the DC, he would have been roundly crucified for taking that path as well, especially since the defense wasn't actually likely to improve much without recruiting and time being part of the equation. Run on sentences, how I do love thee.
I believe his insistence on the 3-3-5 was simply an attempt to try as much as possible to mitigate the personnel problems in the same way they did at WVU, only it really never worked at M.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||you missed a big /s||
at the end of that......... or maybe a /h for humorous?
|3 weeks 1 day ago||so true....||
it is painful to watch the double-standard at work here....RR would have been crucified 10 times over for doing the same type of things.
almost as painful as watching AZ soundly beat Oregon and wondering what would have become of RR+Mattison (or another $600K/year DC) after a few years....sigh.