- Member for
- 8 years 28 weeks
- View recent blog entries
They can't get together on this without subjecting themselves to anti-trust laws. If you've ever streamed something you didn't buy you probably already know things like your father-in-law's Wow account works on your Comcast internet, but your brother's Comcast account with HBO on it doesn't. That's because it's super hard for these companies to monitor who's using whose account from a competitor, even if they all would like to. If you're logging into a UVerse account at your Time Warner home, Time Warner can't ask UVerse "Hey, does this subscriber live at this address?" like it can ask itself. And finding a way around that function would mean a level of collusion that could get their whole industry Bell'd. Or they could make it so you can only use your streaming service at your own address, but then their competitors will hammer you with that.
- There are huge downsides to deploying security. Like all DRM, the more effort you put into protecting yourself from any theft, the less people want to be there. You could theoretically end all shoplifting if you had armed police officers stationed in all dressing rooms, but who the hell would want to shop there? The demographic of people who steal cable leans toward Young people who Don't Yet Pay for Cable. If their first interaction with Comcast is Comcast threatening legal action for something that costs you nothing, you probably just cost yourself a ton of money in the future. It takes a very special set of circumstances to be able to threaten consumers into buying your product, and those circumstances are the kind that don't tend to last in a free society.
- A well-known political figure tweets something about Title IX: Thread deleted, poster docked points ONLY if it got political. This topic has been hashed so much it's not worth the flamewar except when it involves Michigan specifically, which is bound to happen often enough.
- Poster uses a political buzzword in reply: If a new-ish user, delete the thread after their post if it got political and replace with a warning by moderator in that thread. If an older user or a repeat offender, treat like it was an overt attempt to political up the thread.
- Harbaugh wades into politics: Original post should include JUST THE FACTS and a link to a reputable* source, discussion allowed to survive until someone takes it ugly, at which point the thread will be locked and the offender moderated.
- Well-known political figure says something about Michigan/Harbaugh: Original post may be moderated to just the facts, all comments will be disabled.
- Something political happens at Michigan and even though we don’t want it on the site, it’s the kind of thing that will just keep getting reposted if we delete the thread: Original post moderated to the simplest just the facts, comments disabled.
- Sports figure well known to us runs for Political Office: Thread allowed, discussion of the sports figure in the same terms we normally discuss them allowed, thread watched closely for a turn to POLITICS and if it gets out of hand the thread gets locked.
- Something political happens in sports, like when Kaepernick kneeled. Original post should include JUST THE FACTS and a link to a reputable* source. Discussion allowed to survive until someone takes it ugly, at which point the thread will be locked and the offender moderated.
- Just once can we have one thread to get it all out? No. Those don’t help at all.
- HAPPY [religious holiday]! And by the way sorry not sorry that I put religion on here I know SOME PEOPLE find this political! Delete the part after “Happy Easter!” that is just unnecessary trolling for victimhood, which is a political thing.
"Bunch": CB has Outside, VIPER will play declared #2 (after they break up of course) to the alley, Rover playes 1/3rd and has outer crease and Mike #3 and the crease. So say they run a quick screen to #1 out of a Z-Y-H bunch to the Z: The CB will be coming hard to cut off the outside and the VIPER, lined up closes to the LOS, is keeping the CB clean and staying outside the Y receiver. The Mike is closing in on the H receiver. So now the only escape is into whatever crease is left between the Y and H before the Rover arrives.
- "Cloud" If the WRs are spread out it's simple m2m rules with outside lane protection. So CB has the outside, Viper has Alley, Rover has the outer crease, and a linebacker has the inner one.
|6 hours 47 min ago||I don't really loathe any NFL||
I don't really loathe any NFL teams. I'm a Lions fan because I grew up watching them, but I have a sense of humor more than a sense of caring, and none of the Lions rivals really hate the Lions enough to be hateful. I guess the Browns count because so many Buckeye fans, but it's hard to hate on the Browns for the same reason it's hard for them to hate the Lions.
The pick I really wish hadn't been made was Chris Perry to Cincinnatti in 2004. The Bengals already had Rudi Johnson, and were a year removed from the 1st overall pick, i.e. a total mess inside the locker room and on the field. Moreover they ran a quick WCO that didn't at all fit Perry's running style. I don't know what they were thinking but I was instantly like "well congrats on going in the 1st round but that's gonna suck."
Lions took Kevin Jones a few picks later, and Denver got Tatum Bell early in the 2nd round.
|16 hours 3 min ago||The Terp numbers have to do||
The Terp numbers have to do with those backs being good, and also a lot to do with the nature of Maryland's offense. They spread 3 or 4 receivers (usually 4) WAAAAAAY outside where the only possible passing game is a WR screen.
So they're consistently running into 5-man boxes, 6 at most. It's basically selling out everything for the run game, which gets their backs some mondo opportunities in space whenever they can crack the front, but gives the offense a definite ceiling. It was a great idea given Ty Johnson is a bitch to cover in open space (Lorenzo Harrison is Ty Johnson lite) since passing downfield was just an invitation to Perry Hills and PIGGY(!!!) to throw 30 interceptions a season again.
They also used a lot of Ohio State-like power option tricks to make those cracks:
That's 10-15 extra chunk yards because most of the secondary had to line up a mile away from the play.
|21 hours 29 min ago||Longtime reader caved||
I don't know what caused him to lose his shit after 5 years but this was going right to partisan flamewar with no provocation. My guess is he suspected he could get a shot in and live out a boliviation, which means he's liable to do it again. Insta-ban.
|21 hours 34 min ago||These are spam attacks.||
These are spam attacks. Dealing with them as we can. For now I've turned off the comments on TWO.
|23 hours 45 min ago||MSU was one of the very few||
MSU was one of the very few schools addition to Michigan who issues a Title IX policy where they were supposed to. While M's swept up gibbons, theirs nailed two basketball players.
|1 day 15 hours ago||Thanks man. I'm honestly||
Thanks man. I'm honestly loving all the outflow of support for those that my little aside generated but I probably shouldn't have made it seem like I was getting disenchanted with the enterprise because of lack of feedback, or that I didn't understand the long term value of those articles.
The point is that they don't work in a model that isn't emphasizing long-term and non-liquid goals. What Is works for MGoBlog because it builds our knowledge base, and builds our credibility for discussing these topics later, and provides the readers the kind of content that we want them to think of when they think of MGoBlog. However none of those are "measureables" which isn't a word but is a word that drives most free media market decisions. Less discussion looks like less engagement, and fewer comments means fewer page refreshes/ad revenue opportunities.
Then you have to take into account how much time it takes to produce that content, and how much foreknowledge the author needs to have it, and you're talking about a massive investment in content for very little in "deliverables" (another non-word). So it's no wonder that this content is rarely produced in the vast majority of media outlets. Note however that Grantland was willing to pay a living wage to Chris Brown, and Brian will tolerate me, and 11W has an excellent guy on their staff, and Ben Jones doesn't lack for work. Ross Fulton goes behind a paywall, but he's not driving Buckeyegrove's traffic--he's there to give them crediblity, and it works really well.
|1 day 15 hours ago||Basically what the other guys||
Basically what the other guys said. I think there were 10 comments about adjusting scrotums out of the 12 replies to my thread posting sack-adjusted stats for 2016. I don't want to sound high and mighty because I talk that way with friends too. On the other hand my best Michigan buddy is my female cousin who doesn't read MGoBlog because she thinks it's a bunch of men talking about their ballsacks, which is literally correct.
|1 day 15 hours ago||Kosher? Hell man, I co-sign.||
Kosher? Hell man, I co-sign. Dylan and his staff produce awesome content and going to a Patreon model removes any vestigal competition between us that I think neither side ever felt existed in the first place. I'd like to advertise UMHoops here, and I'm sure we plan to link to them even more now to get more people supporting it and keep it going.
|1 day 15 hours ago||The technology certainly||
The technology certainly exists to do a much better job of restricting access to their content. There are a couple of things in the way of deploying it:
|1 day 16 hours ago||I've seen that 2014 NYTimes||
I've seen that 2014 NYTimes article cited before and it's bunk. It and you're making a supply-side argument that completely ignores demand. The cable company supplied all of those numbers, wherein they correctly state that they need to charge X for their ESPN contracts and Y for their Fox contracts, and Z for their Viacom, etc.
But the demand doesn't match that. Michigan fans aren't demanding Illinois Volleyball Coverage or even a new field for Field Hockey. But under the bundled model Michigan fans can put Comcast over a barrell until they agree to make my mom pay a premium for BTN (and then the college model w/ Title IX and amateurism rules pushes that money into weird and silly places). When you ask consumers straight-up what they'd pay to have ESPN channels, they'll say $10. If ESPN demands $35, very few people will pay it, and black markets will proliferate until ESPN comes down. Likely then ESPN has to go into bankruptcy to get out of their contracts. The only way they get people to pay that now is by cheating.
They might also explain that most of their content has to run super-lean (hi reality TV!) unless they're producing something that will either a) Translate to an aftermarket ownership medium (e.g. Planet Earth), or b) Go on a premium network, which are the Hong Kong of the communist cable market. With more choice over what they want to watch, TV viewers are gravitatitng to a few well-produced shows, but it's the internet, aftermarket sales, and Netflix--a la carte media--driving that.
They also have a very large upcharge over operational costs because they're a regulated industry that has to continually buy influence to subvert the wishes of a democratic public to avoid having to operate in a capitalist environment.
So no, high cable bills aren't funding good TV--they're funding a boondoggle and political protection money to keep it running. The idea that they can give you $110 in programming for $90 is an Urban Meyer level sales pitch: they'll sell you as little as they can for as much as they can, and consumers will pay as little as possible for as much of what they want as possible. Right now that market is out of whack because the supply side uses non-market intervention techniques to short-circuit it. They can believe what they're selling is worth $110, but in any economy, the price isn't what you want to sell it for, but what the buyer is willing to pay.
|5 days 10 hours ago||I could do a few. You're||
I could do a few. You're looking at one of them. But I'd really enjoy being a teacher if forces these days didn't conspire to make most of that job not about actually teaching. Maybe a different Paradigm of teaching where you are responsible for a small group of students mastering every subject to a level that prepares them for a really good college. Like one week we would learn about the Industrial Revolution and build an engine, and have a debate out of the gilded age about the shifting economy.
|5 days 10 hours ago||They give it all to the||
They give it all to the Bentley Library. When you're ready I'll make the introduction.
|6 days 22 hours ago||It's our All Big Ten post,||
It's our All Big Ten post, or more accurately our Top 125 players of the big ten. And it's important for us to prepare for the season. We play into the joke of certain readers not liking it but honestly they get good reads and it's great for getting us ready to talk about all of these teams. It's going to happen.
|1 week 7 hours ago||Oh, thanks for the reminder.||
Oh, thanks for the reminder. We needed some content and I'd quite forgotten it's time to get this going.
|1 week 7 hours ago||http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/m||
I literally outlined our policy this week. It included an example addressing just this specific case:
We cover Michigan sports here, with a heavy footbal emphasis. Harbaugh is persona numero uno so long as he's head coach of Michigan Football. When he wades into politics, people are going to come here and see what he said, because as MIchigan fans they're going to have people saying to them "Hey, did you hear what Harbaugh said...?"
I figure in that scenario holding our ears closed doesn't serve the readers. Providing just facts without political bending does serve them, since they know they can come here, get what was said and what context it was said in, and go forth to fight whatever Office Sparty said he said differently or whatever. Discussion is important in such cases because the original story doesn't always contain all the facts or context.
Taking a hard-line "no politics even if it comes from Harbaugh himself" approach just sets us up to constantly be taking down threads and looking like assholes for locking things down when we've got the one thread on the internet discussing this that isn't turning into a flaming hell-hole. Liberty unless there's a very good reason, and then maximum possible liberty, that's my motto.
Also: We put our pants on one leg at a time. This is also my motto.
And the thing about the bird who got up at 6.
And who's got it better than us...
|1 week 15 hours ago||I just want to say for the||
I just want to say for the record before my co-worker finds this thread that if you take a date to the one bar that WE ALWAYS MEET AT AND YOU KNOW I TAKE CLIENTS TO ALL THE TIME you can't act like it's creepy when you go on a date and happen to be sitting on the other side of the window from me and a client.
|1 week 15 hours ago||Hard to say. They can make a||
Hard to say. They can make a full recovery, but it often causes a setback in development. Jake Butt tore his in 2014 and came back to have a Mackey Award-caliber season followed by a Mackey Award-winning season. Drew Singleton (2016) is expected to make a full recovery and MIchigan didn't blink an eye at taking him. Garrett Taylor (2015) tore his ACL and lost his senior year in 2014. At the time he was committed to Hoke but decommitted when that class began to fall apart and Ohio State showed interest. He signed with Penn State, redshirted in 2015, and played on special teams last year.
If it's a repeat thing that might be different. Matt Falcon (2015) was an early M commit but tore his ACL a second time before his senior season and Michigan switched his offer to a medical scholarship. Instead he went to Western, where he's wearing a QB practice jersey in spring practice since he's still healing.
Vladimir Emilien was a bum knee, not an ACL tear, so if he lost his career to that injury it wasn't an ACL injury.
|1 week 2 days ago||It's also fine in board||
This seems pretty straightforwad. A signature is like a bumper sticker: it's an expression of who you are, not a conversation.
Religion should not be THE reason to post something, for the same reason that you shouldn't post something for the purpose of promoting a business. Advertising is for advertisers.
Religious topics are fine. If Jason Avant writes about his religious journey in the Player's Journal (he should, it's a great story), or if the Pope weighs in on the quarterback race next week (he should, it'd be a great story), those are board threads because our interest is in Michigan.
Personal expressions of faith in replies are fine. They're a perspective, if not one most people will appreciate. If we moderated every perspective with no basis in scientific fact we'd never have comments on basketball threads.
We're not going to ban religion--freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion. But we're also not going to tolerate people actively trying to use this forum to preach something, because that annoys readers and counts as advertising.
|1 week 2 days ago||Peters & Speight: Both Things Can Be True||
Changed title and moved to forums.
|1 week 2 days ago||Frodo and the Two Towers||
Frodo and the Two Towers
|1 week 2 days ago||Lol Brian is leaning towards||
Lol Brian is leaning towards the camera and Demo is really big.
|1 week 2 days ago||I'm collaborating with the||
I'm collaborating with the guys at Operation Sports for this. BossHogsGoingHam (sp?) is the guy doing Michigan's rosters and I'm working with him.
|1 week 2 days ago||Hahah Brian could have used||
Hahah Brian could have used this yesterday. Also 200 mgopoints for making this for us. It would have been 400 if brian had it when he wrote yesterday's post.
|1 week 2 days ago||I think you're taking "it's||
I think you're taking "it's boring" for "it's off-limits" for the purposes of generating a victimization that doesn't exist. That is politics, and off-limits.
|1 week 2 days ago||Thanks. We're not going to||
Thanks. We're not going to moderate bible verses out of signatures unless it violates some other board rule. That would be unnecessarily moderating personal expressions of faith.
|1 week 3 days ago||1. Not understanding what||
1. Not understanding what you're asking here. The plane crash was big news. The reactions of those who were on the plane were covered in news stories. Athletes crediting G-d for things isn't news, just like athletes listening to music isn't news. Starting a thread just for that seems like advertising.
2. Just the facts, and we moderate strongly against ppl whp jump to conclusions that aren't very reasonable. The blog is not the place where justice is served.
|1 week 4 days ago||More thoughts on politics||
MGoBlog strives to be a politics-free zone. We all have plenty of reminders elsewhere, and the consensus among readership is a strong preference for being able to come here knowing there aren’t going to be political triggers over having the freedom to discuss things of a political nature. This of course leaves a lot of gray area, and that gray area fluctuates based on factors like how relevant is it to Michigan and college sports, how well people are behaving in that thread, whether it’s off- or in-season, and, unavoidably, the political biases of whoever’s moderating.
Points will be deducted based on severity and how much trouble it caused us. The typical punishment for a blatantly bad idea is to lose your ability to post new threads until the day after the next election. Whoever initiated a particularly ugly thread will get it as bad as the worst responder. If the moderator determines someone intended to start a political argument the user will most likely be banned unless there’s a good reason not to.
You may get moderated even for accidental politicking, if it’s blatant enough to trigger a political flame war. If your biases are so strong that you can’t tell when you’re needling someone who thinks differently than you, then you don’t have the chops to be posting.
Views expressed by individual authors are those of the author and not representative of the blog. Moderators and people who work for MGoBlog are exempt from the politics rules because we have to answer for it in other ways (loss of job, readership, etc.) and it doesn’t make much sense to dock MGoPoints from people who can adjust them.
Mods and employees are asked to abide by the same political policies as the readers when posting anywhere on mgoblog.com, but are free to be ourselves everywhere else. This includes, notably, our social media accounts, for example @mgoblog is Brian Cook, a cranky internet person who lives in Ann Arbor and runs a Michigan blog, not MGoBlog the website.
Examples from moderation past:
If you celebrate Easter, have a happy one!
*Reputable is of course disputable—this is left up to the moderators. Typically if there’s a better source, the moderator will just change the link, for example if the OP has a HuffPo or FoxNews article linked and that article has some clearly political takes in it that would anger readers from another political viewpoint, maybe that will be changed to a local article that doesn’t. Certain sites [insert your own example] are not considered news sources because the question of whether they’re even news starts a political argument.
|2 weeks 5 hours ago||Great question! Solo side: CB||
Solo side: CB in m2m, will has the crease (simple enough)
Trips side: There's a check:
We saw them play this a lot in '16. Often, unless against JT Barrett or something, they'd instruct the DEs to delay their pass rush to chip the RB if he's coming out of the backfield to give the LB a better shot at covering him and preventing a screen.
If the RB motions out of the backfield for a 0-4-1 look, the WLB takes him in m2m and again, you play outside tech. The general idea is to push everyything back to the inside, where it doesn't matter if there's an extra gap because how the hell are you going to find it against THAT?
|2 weeks 6 hours ago||This is not fair holding me||
This is not fair holding me accountable to things I said in the distant past.
|2 weeks 10 hours ago||Ordinarily I hate the overused "one team wanted it more" cliche||
Saying you don't like a thing "BUT" then saying that thing is called a paralypsis. Or parallipsis. Or something like that. Anyway it's totally a thing that I didn't just make up right now to describe a figure of rhetoric where someone tries to pretend they sympathize with the critical flaw in their argument then makes the argument anyway.
I don't want to pile on Michigan State BUT they DID go 3-9 last year.
Also Notre Dame went 4-8.