in town for free camps
- Member for
- 6 years 45 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|1 week 23 hours ago||Buddy, there are more whores||
Buddy, there are more whores inside the marble walls of Wall Street than there are in the five boroughs combined. Prostituting yourself is simply a commitment to vice instead of virtue. It stems from idolotry - and once idolotry gains traction in the cultural fabric - it becomes an endemic that can seriously screw up how an entire population perceives reality.
I said it before, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. So be mindful that your eyes are open.
|1 week 1 day ago||Yeah, I carried that chip on||
Yeah, I carried that chip on my shoulder for a long time. It's a fallacy.
Having money makes paying for things easier. While the ability to pay for services that enrich and simplify your life is arguably a benefit of those with money (as opposed to those without), enrichment and simplification can be obtained for free. At the end of the day, we're all just shitty human beings. How "easy" our lives are is completely dependent on choices, not on money.
In any event, there are beautiful women in every socio-economic bracket all around the world; all you have to do is look around. With respect to money buying beauty - or making it "easier" to access beautiful women - consider that money doesn't pay for genetics, but for better cosmetics. Are naturally beautiful women more attracted to men with money than without? It obviously depends on the guy; and whether the woman is convinced a relationship with that man is worth compromising whatever faults the guy has. Again, we're all just shitty human beings. Plus, beauty will always be in the eye of the beholder, anyway.
Your comment makes me think you put a price-tag on relationships; but I doubt that you legitimately feel that way. Good relationships are borne from generosity of self and one's time; and being genuine. Generosity with money fits into the equation, but only so long as the Spender is genuinely generous, and not "paying" for something in return. You'll never buy a Beautiful mate, no matter how much money you spend.
|3 weeks 2 hours ago||For every problem, there's a||
For every problem, there's a solution. The solution may not be ideal, but it'll be better than an "oh well".
If you're an impacted person, the government will have to mark your file with each federal and state department reliant on any disclosed information for greater scrutiny re: record changes. With respect to personal usage of private information, such as obtaining a loan, credit reports will determine whether you're compromised; and while annoying, you would simply go through the process of disputing charges. If the government has your file marked, it's a bullet in the chamber for a faster review process.
I'm over-simplifying, but isn't this more or less where the conversation would have to start?
Ultimately, I think this report just confirms what we all kind of anticipated, unless our heads were buried in the sand. The internet and electronic filing systems are not Fort Knox. Everything stored online is as good as public, because smart a**holes growing up on computers are going to find a way to hack into stuff.
What really changes? Be as careful as you can with your personal information; and don't knowingly post compromising material online or in electronic storage. For everything else, there's a solution. If anything, it gives you greater leverage to dispute stuff; and disputing stuff often leads to being in a better position than you were before. Lawyer up and be careful out there.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||1982 Honda Accord Hatchback||
The year was 1998, and both the car and I were 16 years old. Inherited for free when my great-grandmother stopped driving. Had been sitting for three years at that point. Selling points: low mileage and free.
Car was s*** brown and rusted, interior canopy fabric had detached and ballooned down, speakers were shot, so I replaced them with a free set I picked up from a friend. A real hatchet-job cutting the replacements into the door-panel to fit.
Best Car? It got me an A+ in Physics, when our teacher asked who in the class had the least valuable car for a momentum experiment, gauging force required to push car in neutral from a dead stop. EVERY hand in the room went up and pointed at me.
Worst Car! Would stall in the middle of intersections. It was automatic transmission, but I'd have to constantly put in neutral when stopped with foot on gas, because it would stall. Totalled it in a rainstorm when the brakes gave out, I spun out, and cracked the axle and suspension against the curb. No cars or pedestrians were nearby, thankfully.
My brother and I pooled our money together and bought a 1992 Audi 100. Was a comfortable car, but all the lux computerized dashboard detail either went to shit or never worked properly. Friends and girlfriends would actually get in it. The stereo went, but it got us from point A to B.
First car I got for myself was a 2004 Honda Civic EX. BEST CAR. 200K miles later, I'm still holding on. LOTS of good memories in Black Betty.
|4 weeks 2 days ago||This is a perfect landing||
This is a perfect landing spot for DB.
Quality control is handled predominantly by the manufacturer, not the retailer; so he won't be responsible for a product. He just has to sell the seller.
There are virtually no brick and mortar toy stores competing in the US anymore, so he can just brand away and reap the benefits. Nostalgia and gimickry are both in his favor, to appeal to the Toys'R'Us Kids generation - parents now - and their children.
That backward 'R' is going to be everywhere. Jeffrey at every location. Facility upgrades. And if there's any way to charge parents and kids just to enter the store, DB will sniff it out to provide an emersive 'toy-day' purchasing experience.
|7 weeks 1 hour ago||I'm not Peruvian, but I'm a||
I'm not Peruvian, but I'm a big fan of all things Peru, and have always wanted to visit the country.
Ughhh, now I'm jonzing for a Lomo Saltado.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||I wish people would stop||
I wish people would stop focusing so heavily on the Fab 5. Had there never been the fiasco, the best case scenario would have been an elevation of the program, not of 5 individuals. Possibly a sustained legacy of tournament appearances; or it may have been very short-lived. But the Fab 5 would have been remembered as nothing more and nothing short of a great team of young stars who made it to the Final Four and came real close. Period.
Unfortunately, it's just not a legacy that should be prominently elevated under the circumstances. Just my opinion, but it's too muddy. You can't crystalize it. It's marred by contraversy. It's marketable only to a select group; a documentary legend, but not a triumph. It creates polarity, which isn't good for Michigan. Ergo, it should not be a focus.
To some, it will simply prompt the same response as when someone offers a conversation about the Bonds/McGuire/Sosa HR record march; or whether Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame; or whether Joe Paterno's statue should be returned to a place of prominence; or whether USC's 2003 football program deserves more recognition.
Do these conversations invoke a sense of nostalgia? Sure. But in much the same way a married man or woman recalls a girl or guy (s)he once dated, had some fun with, and then moved on from. Right? You're either with someone for a season, for a reason, or for life. The Fab 5 was that truly hot mate you dated for a season.
"Yea, we dated for a few years in the 90s. It was cool; we started a few trends, did some great things together, some things we regretted later. I'm better for it, and I hope they can say the same. If you see them, tell them I say hi. And Go Blue".
|7 weeks 2 days ago||upvotes for everybody||
Nike vs. Adidas (or UA), Hydrox vs. Oreos; debates that are sentimental in some respects, quality control in others; and granted, not entirely parallel.
But whether you still look at Nike as the relatively new upstart compared to tried and true Adidas (est. 1971 vs. 1926); or compare the two based on branding sentiment alone; or you're looking at product quality; one of these two (most likely) will be selling Michigan to fans and gear to our athletes, and so I thought it was interesting just how much brand cache and cultural identity is worth.
Personally, I don't want a company that only offers money. I want a company that can take and preserve my brand and perfect it over time, sell it, and make it more valuable.
There are always competitors, and there are always victors. Myspace/Friendster vs. Facebook? Hydrox vs. Oreos? Adidas/UA vs. Nike?
Nike, Oreos and Facebook, all day. Go with the victors. Hail to the Victors.
|12 weeks 4 days ago||Well, he IS a hugger.||
Well, he IS a hugger.
|12 weeks 4 days ago||Just watched some film on||
Just watched some film on him. Nice bruising recruit. Seems equally sound running laterally out of the option, or downhill from pistol or QB under center. He looks for his assigned gap, gets low, and makes the right decision. He keeps his legs moving on contact. First contact bounces off him. Just doesn't have top end speed. As Fred Jackson would say, "like Mike Hart, but with better fundamentals and vision".
|13 weeks 21 hours ago||premature ejaculation is the||
premature ejaculation is the definitive answer to this thread.
|13 weeks 21 hours ago||I grew up in an urban area,||
I grew up in an urban area, so noise doesn't bother me. My wife, OTOH, can't sleep if a pin drops next to her. When we moved in together into our current apartment, the noise level of the neighbors was (and remains) her biggest issue. To an extent, there are legitimate problems: the downstairs neighbors have seriously loud arguments late at night, and we also had an upstairs neighbor who would come home late and pace her apartment in heavy soled shoes.
But to the greater extent, I'm perfectly capable of ignoring all of this and couldn't care less. In any event - happy wife happy life - so we're doing our best to find a new home ASAP. Time to buy.
|14 weeks 21 hours ago||John Nash game theory tends||
John Nash game theory tends to agree. Interestingly, considering this I was prompted to look up the "Beautiful Mind" economist/mathematician, to see how he's doing. It appears he's doing quite well, and coincidentally, married to a brunette.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||Superimpose a 1989 Mens'||
Superimpose a 1989 Mens' Basketball away jersey over last year's whites. That would be cool. Distinctive "Michigan" over bold monitone blue number, no piping, thin blue/maize/blue stripes around collar and sleeves.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||I'd like either of these Tech unis...||
|16 weeks 6 days ago||Ugly game so far...||
Ugly game so far...
|17 weeks 6 days ago||You trolled me bro. I'm no||
You trolled me bro. I'm no Paul Revere. Drevno is not your ordinary line coach; he's been a coordinator before, and he's coached at the professional level. And it's also clear the entire offensive coaching staff will be working together on game plans. It seems like Harbaugh likes a lot of fluidity among his coaching ranks, as opposed to firm coaching distinctions and rigidity.
My point remains that for a new staff coming into a situation where the o-line needs some work - and you have Drevno and his pedigree - it's a smart football move to make him the mechanic of your offense. If even for just next year, let the guy who knows how much push his group can get build the offense's engine every given week. Of course every position coach is going to have a say about how to make their guys best stand out and separate. All well and good; but you still need the line to give them time.
In year one, you want to establish a rythym and a pace. You want your coordinator to feel out whether your line is athletic and mobile, strong and stout, or something else. You want the guy dictating where the holes, creases, and seems are going to open up re-enforcing that to the other position groups. That's what you build your offense around. Drevno is best equipped to do that.
|17 weeks 6 days ago||SAM was on probation but||
SAM was on probation but feeling out a new chapter while I was in school from 2000-2004. A few of my friends were in the initial class - I think it was 2002 - when SAM officially came back. I'm surprised they took off and expanded that quickly; must have a nice house?
|17 weeks 6 days ago||ver·bi·age ˈvərbē-ij/||
|17 weeks 6 days ago||No, that's not what I'm||
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. If the RBs have a down year, you can just as easily blame poor line play as the RBs themselves for that.
Here's the logic:
Fact 1: The offensive line - more than any other position group on offense - dictates the rythym, tempo, and ability of the offense as a whole to execute, gain momentum, and move the ball forward.
Presumption: the offensive line coach is responsible to mold the line into a group capable of sustaining the offense, and is therefore an important dude.
If you can follow this logic, then...
Fact 2: O-Line play was weak last year.
Presumption: As a group, the offense line needs to come together and be coached up.
If you can follow this logic, then...
Resolution 1: if the new coaching staff wants to get the most out of the offense, then it will focus on the offensive line.
Resolution 2: if the offense is coordinated through the offensive line, then it has the best shot at molding the offensive into a capable unit; giving the receivers time to execute routes, running backs holes to target and hit, and the QB time to read and react.
Q.E.D. it makes perfect sense that the o-line coach would be tapped as o-coordinator, to establish the offensive plan week after week.
|17 weeks 6 days ago||I'm sorry if I lost you. I||
I'm sorry if I lost you. I understand Drevno is the coordinator; I guess I should have specifically acknowledged that. I was just focusing on the fact he's also assigned to the o-line as position group coach.
My point being: it makes sense that the coach assigned to rebuilding the line into a strength (from where it was last year) should dictate the offense week in and week out; so that these guys can play their best games week in an week out; and that we should have every confidence in Drevno to do that (based on pedigree, etc.).
Harbaugh will obviously be involved, but he doesn't have to build the engine and drive the car week after week. He can be the crew chief in Drevno's ear.
|18 weeks 11 min ago||O-Line play dictates||
O-Line play dictates everything. It was Michigan's Achilles' Heel last year; and Drevno will obviously be coaching that group. It makes perfect sense for the O-Line coach to call plays next year, being fully immersed with them and knowing exactly what they can - and need - to do to win.
Drevno is an experienced NFL and college coach; he knows how to play to strengths; he can be multiple; and he's proven capable of not reverting to running the same stupid thing over and over, if only because it's all he knows how to do. He'll know - based on his line's strengths and weaknesses - exactly what it needs to do to win, going into every game.
I think I'd do the same thing as head coach. Harbaugh knows what it's like in the pocket, and no doubt he'll be paying close attention to how much time his team has to develop plays, etc. With Captain Comeback, you want his talents - especially next year - to go into gut check audibles, feel calls, etc., and not dictating the entire offense. You want the coach of the position group that needs the most help to dictate the offense.
|18 weeks 6 days ago||So is anyone best served by||
So is anyone best served by restricting D-League salaries to $25K, other than frugal NBA owners? I appreciate your explanation, but it begs the question; why not just bump D-League salaries to match the financial equivalent of a university scholarship over four years? Is it really a question of whether they simply don't have to?
In a certain light, one might expect the NBA to view the NCAA as a trust deserving to be busted apart.
POINT: The NCAA essentially owns the sole means of producing talent, and exclusive rights to the product in its raw and quasi-professionalized forms. There's an ongoing lawsuit all but proving that NCAA basketball players are indeed "professional", and you arguably have the NCAA locking these players down without due compensation; meanwhile making millions hand over fist!
COUNTERPOINT: But NBA teams know they don't have to spend any money to assess an 18 year old's talent, and Kobe, LeBron and Kevin come around only so often. To the NBA, the NCAA's season and tournament is an exhibition; a glorified try-out.
...OK, but that line of thinking literally leaves BILLIONS of dollars on the table in broadcast rights! In April 2010, the NCAA inked a deal with CBS that made the network its exclusive March Madness outlet. The contract lasts for 14 years and is worth a whopping $10.8 billion. This contract alone is projected to generate $771 million per year for the NCAA.
As the NBA, you just give that money to the NCAA by ignoring its talent? Seems stupid to me.
Meanwhile, we're learning that NBA assessments can be pretty much locked up after one year of a blue-chip's play in the NCAA, which could just as easily be assessed in an NBA D-League. And one might suspect the same fans who follow AAU and HS recruiting sites as college fans would just as enthusiastically follow their favorite NBA team's recruiting sites. So that makes me wonder, isn't that a honeyhole worth dipping the NBA's hand into?
Why not have TWO Drafts, an AAU Draft and an NCAA Draft? Make the AAU what it's already geared to be: a place where young talent can be brokered into contracts with professional teams, without the constraint of restricting players from talking to agents. The NCAA can then just be what the law is recognizing it is, a quasi-professional association where players are in fact professionally compensated with scholarships and an opportunity to double-major in Sports, before being ushered towards the expectation of a higher payday through the NCAA Draft (in the same fashion that a college degree all but assures its holder a higher payday in any profession).
Briefly, if my goal is the NBA and not an education, I'm taking a hard look at any alternative the NBA provides to get my foot in the door. A competitive D-League contract would provide the opportunity to be in the gym with my potential employer every day; while a scholarship requires me to be on a college campus, just hoping to get a start in a televised game.
Assuming the NCAA is eventually outed as a professional athletics/marketing association, any athlete initially choosing the D-League route can still theoretically accept a college scholarship/contract, so long as the player meets age restrictions.
As a result, (i) universities would only provide scholarships to student-athletes intent on finishing their degrees, (ii) athletes who want to make the NBA leap early have an opportunity and forum to do, with a demand and viewership for their talent, and (iii) neither choice - NBA or NCAA - would operate to nullify a fall back into the other, insofar as talent and conditions merit.
|19 weeks 22 hours ago||There's got to be an angle.||
There's got to be an angle. Young studs have HS and AAU to get their talent noticed; and if they sign with an NBA affiliate, they're already in the door.
Keep playing hard and your talent will certainly take you to your goal in the NBA. Absent considering a player's ego or desire to actually be a One-and-Done, that's a quid pro quo.
So what does the NCAA truly have that a foot already in the door doesn't? My sense is it can't just be an opportunity for hollow egos. If all One-and-Dones were signed to D-League instead of the NBA, those games would certainly be competitive, and NBA teams could assess talent on their own courts. They could quickly see if a blue chip is a system player. They could make the right trades early on, even possibly guarantee a franchise player that fits the team agenda.
|19 weeks 23 hours ago||I have a hard time with the||
I have a hard time with the "one-and-done" student-athletes, especially in basketball, when there's obviously a viable professional alternative to the NCAA. If you're talented enough, why can't you just make that leap from HS to the NBA without diluting a university's diploma? LeBron, Kobe, KG, etc. did it; or were they all a year ahead of their classmates? If you're not big or strong enough yet for the NBA, can't a team sign you to its D-League affiliate, where you can make about as much in salary as any school would give you in grant and aid?
My sense is if any blue-chip athlete chose an NBA affiliate's D-League team over the NCAA, that guy could probably negotiate a pretty good contract that would guarantee top-10 draft pick bucks if his play justified it.
Football, being a contact sport, is inherently different. I accept that those athletes need time to grow, and there's not a truly viable secondary path to professional football outside of college. But basketball, hockey, baseball...they all have viable farm, secondary and tertiary leagues for young athletes to come up through, and get paid about as much as a college scholarship is worth to do it.
It should be: if you want an education, go to college; and if you don't, don't. But my sense is putting any ink to paper on the subject - in either the NCAA or NBA rules and regulations handbook - would spell lost money and headaches for both.
Increase the age limit, and a lottery team potentially loses out on LeBron. Decrease the age limit, and the NCAA loses the talent pool that glues everyone to March Madness. Plus, with more young talent demanding contracts over scholarships, NBA teams would have to offer a lot more of them, and accept a lot more risk, just to sign (and keep) their next franchise player.
|19 weeks 6 days ago||I visit the Blog because you||
I visit the Blog because you guys combine super-fandom with a dose of intellectual and statistical analyses in a way that is both unique and definitively "Michigan". I'm a big big fan of your writing style, and Brian's, and of Ace, et al. You do a great job. Even in your response, it's clear that you're considering all things Michigan on a level that exceeds scientific analysis; you're cutting to the philosphical truth of the matter. Bravo, truly.
I trust that you guys are there with "boots on the ground" to use the over-used expression, and that you're closer to the story than I am. If you say these kids are truly egomaniacal Brandon proteges, and not possibly run-of-the-mill up-and-coming superfans trying to find their way - albeit in a less than structured manner - then I believe you.
Devolution into personal attacks is what got Brandon axed, after a series of seemingly well-meaning fans wrote him a series of seemingly well-meaning emails. My point is simply that. Care must be taken in the response.
|19 weeks 6 days ago||I've been following MGoBlog's||
I've been following MGoBlog's coverage of this fight song fiasco with all the contempt and rage of a bored blog-reader. I think maybe it's time to admit the Blog maybe jumped to conclusions, and doth protesteth too quickly?
From what I can determine, these current students NEVER intended to REPLACE the Victors as Michigan's fight song. Their initial proposal was merely to create a separate rally song for current students to take part of, which would be a cheer-song in conjunction with the Victors.
Anyone following this story should note that the University of Michigan's Alma Mater is not the Victors, but the "Yellow and Blue"; and how many of us know the lyrics and tune to that? I think that may be more in line with the point of all this; that these students have a lot of school spirit, and think it'd be nice for everyone to learn a secondary rally song. Not an inherently bad idea, until someone covering it loses its entire premise and hurries to light torch and pitchfork.
Let's maybe cut the kids some slack?
|20 weeks 2 days ago||Definitive Student-Athlete||
Can we please take a second to appreciate what Wayne Lyons is accomplishing here? He currently holds a degree from Stanford in architecture and design, and will soon receive a masters from Michigan. Stanford and Michigan on the young man's resume; while playing football at two marquee programs, and every additional feather in his cap that brings.
Also note that the University of Michigan is ranked #6 in the Top-10 list of Schools offering Architecture and Design graduate programs. Wayne Lyons qualified for that graduate program on his own merit, to be paid for by the merit of his athleticism.
Wayne's education is paid in full. His football playing wrote and will guarantee those checks; done deal. That's a heck of an accomplishment. A heck of an accomplishment.
I'm proud as hell to add Wayne Lyons to Team 136. This kid is THE definitive student-athlete, and will be a major role-model for the team.
|20 weeks 3 days ago||I'll defer to my elder alumni||
I'll defer to my elder alumni (with actual legacy experience at U-M), but suffice it to say that a U-M education should not be a forced goal for your children. Admittedly, I'm a young alum at 32 years old, and my only experience raising kids so far is as uncle to my nieces and nephews (ages 2-7). But I don't think U-M's admissions staff, or anyone, would want me to turn them into clones of myself for the sake of a Michigan diploma.
The world demands self-motivated, hard working, and self-reliant youngsters; not Michigan grads (not to say the two are mutually exclusive). All you need to concern yourself as a parent is with modeling those traits for your kids, so that they can use whatever education (academic or otherwise) they receive to follow their own dreams, add value to society, and among their friends and families.
In any event, I always believed U-M's great strength is that it rewards individuality and embraces diversity, with a mission of honing its student-body's sense of both, in order to develop graduates capable of respecting and leading a diverse society. Perhaps a commitment to the tenets of individuality, diversity and respect, and fostering a home that embraces them, is your best bet to raising a Michigan student one day.
How far your kid will go in academics is a question of his/her own self-motivation and intellect; not how much money you throw at resume-building. Give your children the gift of Faith and model it for them, along with self-motivation, hard work, and a good value system. Ask and reward them for their best efforts, and in time they will demand it of themselves. Don't try to control any more than that. That's how I was parented, and trust it's why I have a Michigan degree.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||another one...||
This one's been a contentious idiom for me with various peers and professionals; does one bury the "lead", or bury the "lede"? It seems to be a case of conventional spelling and nothing more. Why do we insist on conventional spelling in idioms, but not elsewhere?
My sense is if we're not spelling "humor" with a "u" ("humour"), then we can certainly Americanize the spelling of "lede" to "lead". Perhaps I should have led with this argument.