Recent Comments

The Darko mistake is overrated. There were three top guys that year, and while the Pistons got the bust, they are also the only team of the three to win a championship since that draft.



In retrospect they should've taken Wade, but hindsight is 20/20 and they were in good shape at the 2 at the time. I don't think they'd have won the title with Melo.

The thread is very much worth viewing. I made it through about 10 pages. So far, it features one sharp guy uncovering records of the divorce and felony fraud convictions of someone who is probably the same guy, lots of handwringing about how dumb the Charlotte Buckeye chapter must be, and a mysterious appearance by a brand new user--"coincidently" from a Charlotte IP--named "alwaysthere" trying to quash the controversy with hilariously disastrous results.



Classic. Even for the rival team I admire a couple of the posters there.

I like this. All conference games, except for a cool football weekend OSU series, are backloaded. The most important games at the most important time of year--not like those lousy early-October series against, say, Miami that were impossible to get excited for on a football weekend.



FWIW it wouldn't surprise me if there were a series on the Jan 17/18 weekend. Certainly space there for one.



I'm just excited that Michigan is coming to Minnesota!

The great lakes seaway has a minimum draft of 27 feet, which lakers use every inch of when full. 32 isn't enough for the largest tankers or container ships, but even the 1000-footers (with a capacity of 50,000+ tons) on the lakes here could take that tunnel without issue.

How long is this supposed to be? That would be the biggest issue, I would think.

I don't know if Morgan was involved, or if the statement was for GRIII and McGary. Remember, Beilein is consulting with them about their pro decision. They want to play in the NBA. As part of the consultation, it is entirely reasonable for Beilein to tell them, "You will be well-prepared for your NBA career if you stay; in fact, you will be playing your natural NBA positions and have opportunities to demonstrate your skills next year."

Makes total sense.

Plus, keep in mind that the lineup this past season was based on the team's backcourt and wing strength, and that at the beginning of the year GRIII was much more ready to contribute than McGary was. McGary was only capable of producing 10-15 quality minutes at the beginning of the season; running a two-big offense, with Burke, THJ, Stauskas, and GR3 all on the roster, would have been insane.

And when McGary emerged in the tourney there was no reason to change a good thing.

I was wondering why people weren't talking about this. Mitch seems like a natural 4 in the Association and has the mobility to keep Michigan's offense quick and aggressive. Gr3 is built for the wing. Using him as a 4 this year seemed more like a concession to having ridiculous backcourt talent.

With Hardaway gone, we'll need GR3 and Irvin to pick up wing scoring slack. I would expect them to be the focus of the perimeter offense.

Not that odd. Those guys have had a lot more time to think than Trey, who was busy playing basketball.

#6 is a bigger deal than you think. Lville started a fast transition play off of that "block" that resulted in Trey committing his first foul. Call the goaltend, Trey doesn't foul. For those counting,negate 3 of his fouls that shouldn't have occurred.

My Dad always took me to games, up to the fall before he died. They remain cherished memories. Now I am building memories with my daughters.



Sports, because they are actually just a recreational diversion, are a great way for family to connect with similar interests, without the high stakes that conflict of interests and politics and life can bring.



My Mum and sisters and I will still call each other from thousands of miles away to talk about a game. It brings us together. What greater purpose can there be?

Not fouling for that long was definitely a mistake, no matter who made it. I don't think it changed the result, but you never know.

I don't mind Trey not committing the foul-we needed him on the floor. I haven't been griping about the officiating, but since three of his four fouls should never have been called (we know about the block and the bogus three-point foul, but nobody seems to mention that his first foul came in the transition play after the uncalled goaltend early in the game and wouldn't have happened if the goaltend was called correctly) and without those he fouls quickly and we see the game play out differently, for good or ill.

Of those, this is by far the disappointment that is the least soul-crushing; we have it pretty good for a football-first school that could barely field a competent basketball team for years. Schools with larger, more rabid basketball fan bases have endured much greater proportional heartbreak, especially if you look at the whole of the last 25 years. I'm thankful they got so good so quick.

You don't think that promulgating an elaborate, everybody-is-against-us conspiracy theory that is prefaced by protestations of sobriety is a bit too similar to the way MSU fans react to life to be considered quality Mgoblog material? This thread is one of the worst I've ever seen on Mgoblog. What's wrong with suggesting that it might not be well-suited for it?

No regrets. They played great and lost to a better team. Disappointed? You bet, but not in them. We were right there.

We'll always have the shot. And the ride. I'm glad I got to watch it.

What if I live 12 hours away in Minnesota? That's a bit of a hike.

Anyone else worried that Burke may be feeling the effects of that back injury and flu virus? Sure, tonight's game wasn't a good matchup... but he still missed shots and didn't seem to have the "spark" he often does. 

Of course he was suffering from the flu last Friday night, so there you go.

Good answer. I hope that's all, and that he's ready to go later. It is true that Levert seemed to be well-suited to handling the zone, and you don't keep THJ or GRIII on the bench either; Stauskas probably just the odd guy out here.

Good point, partly. He also asked about the NC game, though.

In fairness, I really don't think that he was trying to scrape McGary in the face; he was going for the ball as he was in the air, missed, and nailed McGary instead. Pretty obvious foul, but not something that is being actively discouraged by the rules.

Live, use the March Madness App. Works pretty well, will stream anything broadcast in the tourney by CBS free. I'm not sure about replays.

I know he's five. I have a five-year-old who was in bed. But she's a girl and my girls don't understand basketball. I honestly would consider trying to manage his sleep schedule to get him to stay up to watch. If he falls asleep on the couch, no biggie, but there's a chance at a great memory.

I was four when Kirk Gibson hit his eighth-inning home run to clinch the '84 series, and it is my earliest datable memory and earliest sports memory of any kind. Might be worth a shot.

I would feel awful if I got taken like this. Takes guts to post it on the blog for the benefit of others. Your tone is good, too. I applaud you for how you've responded.

Okay, in fairness, I see why this is done. But it could have been relabeled--either hold it in case Michigan wins, or rename it as a "Final Four Preview" that runs down all the teams and coincidently includes all the information regarding a hypothetical matchup with Michigan.

This isn't really a surprise at all. He's a fantastic player, and it's not like Michigan appears primed for a championship run or anything (they could have surprised with him, of course, but this roster won't be mistaken for '96-'97). He's pro-ready, he played a solid year, he's about to get seriously paid.

I'm glad we got him for a year. I'm sorry it had to be this year.

I can think of 79 reasons why you are absolutely right and I was wrong.

When we beat Kansas, I told myself that we could be anybody, but... like this? Against Kenpom #1/bad matchup Florida?

Season is unquestionably a success. The dream that Michigan could perform better in the tournament than the B1G season isn't a fantasy anymore. We have an all-time great Michigan moment in our back pocket.

And we can beat anybody. Cuse, Duke, Louisville, Wichita. Bring it. 

Actually, the NCAA instituted a "recommendation" of 200x100, olympic size, for college ice rinks. However, it was not a requirement. There was a period of time that a number of new rinks were built to the 200x100 spec, but without the NHL making the same move the experiment was doomed to fail. While several teams still have the larger sheets, newer rinks (such as the Ralph in Grand Forks) have gone back to the 200x85 standard. Just not worth the hassle. 

I don't know that this is the best first post ever. But it's up there.

We all knew this would happen. Completely different teams.

I'm worried about stopping them when it counts. KU can be frustrated by strong D, but that's not a specialty.

Interesting that you should bring that up.

"But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss."

What life could have been if he had not chosen to live a life of criminal, vile dishonesty and fraud. He didn't just get a bit caught up in the wrong event; he willfully defrauded, stole, and conned people. He destroyed his own mother's well-being. It doesn't get much lower than that. The bars are just a consequence of evil choices.

Basketball is a different sport than football. In some respects it makes it easier for a guy like Stevens to stay put, because you don't need to be at a big school in one of three or four conferences to reach the highest levels of success in the sport. There's no reason that he can't win national championships at Butler and make tournament runs every year, and what else do you need?

On the other hand, he is a perfect target for UCLA, even more so than Smart, in my opinion. The optics don't hurt--the last time they hired a young, energetic coach from Indiana it worked pretty well--and he knows how to run a program in a city that may lack some of the best resources. He'll also be able to re-win Los Angeles, and in a city that loves a winner he can become Pete Carroll-level popular. And UCLA is one of the top five iconic programs in basketball.

I really like him, actually, but he has clearly lost a step. And it's more obvious in basketball.

Remember how Gtown lost to FGCU? They totally worked Cuse twice this year. It's a weird game, and so much depends upon matchups.



And Crean doesn't match up well here.

Why were we the ones missing free throws against these guys, while they couldn't miss any?

I was wondering about this. They had a great season, no basketball tradition, nothing expected... But they were good and could have gone further. No hardware at all. It's a lot like Michigan, really. And I'll be very disappointed with a loss tomorrow.

Looks like my contention early in the thread that Miami would look fine later is torched. They're running low on time.

Are we allowed to consider what matchups we would want should we advance? I'm kind of agnostic about this, but then I think that two of the hardest three teams left in the tourney are in our bracket.

Fair. This looks uncomfortably similar to games where Michigan just wasn't getting shots to fall.

Nothing. Basketball jerseys don't look good, except on basketball players. I guess some guys can pull off the jersey-over-huge-tshirt look, but not me. In my lifetime of buying 50+ jerseys from major sports, I've never even been tempted by a basketball jersey.



Now, the shorts are another matter.

To be fair, Devin took a full step into the throw to heave it that far (I was in that corner, I practically had time to eat a sandwich before Dileo caught it). In intermediate routes where you need zip to get the ball to the right place his arm strength is only so-so.

I'm of two minds about this. There were definitely people in the Minnesota program who thought they could get Smart, but it wasn't such a sure thing that they hung everything on it. I just think they believe they can do better than Tubby, and given how the B1G is this year, maybe they're right. There is no reason Minnesota shouldn't compete with the top of the conference, not when teams like Marquette can perennially compete in the Big Easy, and Butler can push the Sweet Sixteen every year.



Anyway, I don't think this is idiocy on anywhere near the same scale as the trade of Glen Mason for Tim Brewster.



Flip Saunders is an option. Watch for more talk like that.

If you want to take the class, go for it, but be prepared for the possibility that he really isn't interested in talking about his football career or Michigan. If you can enjoy taking a class from him without talking football or even much personal talk at all, go for it.

Then, with that in mind, it won't hurt for you (preferably after the first week or so, when any odd class questions have died down) to approach him once and politely mention that you remember his playing days and you really enjoyed them. Put out a feeler, see how he responds. If he doesn't mind talking about it, great. If not, give him a wide berth. And try not to be too Chris Farley about it.

Personal anecdote: Mark Hughes, from the '89 basketball team, lived across the street from my grandparents when he coached in Grand Rapids, and attended my grandmother's visitation when she passed away. There were roughly 100 old, short, white people milling around chatting and remembering my grandmother, and one 6'10 African American basketball coach.

So my Dad went up to him and began talking about how much he loved that team. Being my dad, I was a bit embarassed, but Mark didn't seem to mind (more importantly, neither did my mother who was grieving the loss of her mom) and they had a pleasant conversation. Later I introduced myself, but rather than talk basketball I just shook hands and said I was glad to meet him.

I feel like "known" people appreciate just being talked to as regular people. But when one is an instructor and you have regular interaction, he might enjoy the conversation.

Kinda disappointed I missed out on the front end of the debate. I might have some things to say about the actual hockey team later, but this thread appears to be a referendum on Brian's commentary. So, first, a couple of clarifications:

1. Brian never said he would stop being a fan of the team. He said he would stop covering them on the blog, for reasons he has elaborated on. If you follow his twitter feed you will remember that he periodically would comment on a hockey game that he was attending as he continued to show up at games he felt it not worthwhile to write about. (Do you have any idea how hard it is to write about disappointment and heartbreak all the time? I got tired to commenting on the hockey team too; I continued to follow them, but rarely appeared on the USCHO thread I lurk in or mentioned anything here. No criticism for me because I don't labor to produce a top-of-the-line sports blog, though).

2. Brian's basic point in the OP is strongly worded, but all he says is that the season is an unquestionable failure. Perhaps you disagree, but he establishes his criteria and defends his position. What's wrong with that? By the standards of one of the top five programs in the sport (all-time and today) his position is entirely defensible. I do understand that it rankles people that he is being harsh on the reactions of fans and writers looking at the "bright side." I think he stepped over the line there, but it's hardly a mortal sin.

3. Brian and several other people (including @yostbuilt and @michiganhockey) have been faithfully blogging about and writing about the hockey team for years. The three I just mentioned are guys I know from the young days of the USCHO forum, back when it was practically the only place to get real college hockey information. We've all posted there and we are passionate about the team and have lived and died through many triumphs and heartbreaks.

But Brian, Tim, Jason and others deserve a lot of respect and leeway. I enjoy writing, enjoy the hockey team, and enjoy combining the two--but those three (and others who I know less well, like center ice) actually put themselves on the line and devote the energy, time, and risk that is involved in publishing blogs that have, for years, toiled to cover a relatively small corner of the sporting universe that they happen to care about.

There are times that it is easy, and there are times that it is brutally difficult. And they do it anyway. Commenters like me are free to say what we want with little accountability, and to clam up and say nothing for long stretches where we don't feel like it. They don't have that luxury. So, if one of them wants to be a bit harsh on a team that saw a season end far short of expectations, I think they have the right to do so without their fandom being called into question. 

It's one thing to disagree. It's quite another to dismiss someone entirely as a source of thought because you disagree about a conclusion about a sport.

False. Seeding "bands" are mathematically set in stone. If you are in the 3-seed band (9-12th ranked by pairwise) that will not and has never changed. What they can do is change matchups within bands to avoid intra-conference rematches and to help attendance. A 3 seed will always be a 3 seed, though, and a 4 will always remain a 4.

We were a three because, combined with our better record, our win streak that launched us to the CCHA title raised our Pairwise rating into the 3-seed range. If we had lost to Northern we would have dropped out of the tourney. It's all math. This weekend we have zero chance at a three seed, because mathematically we cannot jump over the teams ahead of us.

No especially about it. We've been mathematically out of the tournament for a long time; winning the CCHA is the only way to get in, and even then our Pairwise number wouldn't be close. At least in '10 our wins actually moved us up into the PWR range (a loss would still have eliminated us). This year Michigan is barely even a "Team Under Consideration," and only crossed that barrier last week. 

Michigan hockey fans basically haven't even needed to look at the Pairwise numbers in months; since January the situation has basically been that either Michigan will win the CCHA tournament or be eliminated. And the former seemed awfully improbable back when Michigan couldn't even assemble a two-game winning streak.

I might be overstating this, but I honestly think there's a better chance for the B1G to get 3 or 4 teams in the Final Four than to get zero.

Nice time to be peaking. Too bad we're up against a hot ND team, led by Mr. Kryptonite himself, Jeff Jackson. Still, one win and the streak lives.



Michigan could still lose quite easily; nothing is guaranteed. But to be in this position at all is a total shock. And if they win, they are a red-hot #4 seed nightmare for someone like Minnesota, who is not playing their best hockey right now.

That would almost certainly be Minnesota. And it would be an awful draw for them. Still quite winnable, but a hot team loaded with NHL talent is not a typical #4 seed.



Don Lucia roots for ND anyway, but he'll be yelling extra hard tomorrow.

Time to get nervous about Notre Dame tomorrow.



EDIT: time for Notre Dame to get nervous about us.

Jeff Jackson is twitching right now.

Good time to be playing, by far, the best hockey of the year.

It is true, but we are one of those teams and that is huge. When hoping for an improbable sports result, I've found that it is much more likely when the improbable team has shown at some point that they are capable of playing the game at the level required for success. It is much more futile when you are hoping to see a level of play that has not yet occurred.



Michigan has shown that it is capable of playing with and beating the best. There is reasonable hope that they can produce and sustain that level of play again. Contrast this with Michigan's hope to compete with Alabama in football last year.

This thread need a "Not Safe For Work" tag. Many jobs frown upon such greusome depictions of wanton violence.

I understand where you're coming from, but I was so impressed with what they did that I figured it's not worth addressing. It was a rare situation and they took advantage. OTOH, if you were to give every team the option of a re-play with the same clock after a penalty by the leading team in any circumstance...

The NFL needs to fix pass interference. There are times a defender totally mauls a guy that would otherwise make an easy catch, but just as often (or more often) a mild bit of contact on a barely catchable ball results in a PI call that advances the football 20-30 yards on a play that may well have been incomplete anyway. I much prefer the college 15-yard rule, with only the narrow exception that a flagrant takedown in the end zone should get a spot on the two.

I should answer my own thread.

I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I see more promising scenarios for a deep run in the NCAA tournament than in the B1G tournament. I'm not trying to go ESSSS EEEE SEEEEE "it's harder to win our conference than the national title" arrogant or anything (though our conference is very good), but for Michigan, there's some truth to it. To win the B1G, we have to beat Wisconsin, almost certainly Indiana, and probably one of MSU or OSU. Those last three games are very loseable; it's our four-game murderer's row compressed into four days. Well-nigh impossible.

On the other hand, the NCAA tournament has all the best teams, but it is also stocked with beatable teams. Upsets inevitably take out some of the threats (don't we know), and Michigan winds up with a path that gives it winnable matchups all the way to the regional final. We'd be dogs against a team like Duke or Kansas, but it's far from a sure thing, right?

I guess I'll be okay, in retrospect, with an Elite Eight bid regardless of how the B1G tourney goes. It would validate Michigan as "one of" the best teams in the country, and with where basketball has been in the past 20 years, that's pretty good.

I honestly think a Final Four bid is technically easier to achieve than the gauntlet Michigan would face to win in Indy; same number of games, more time, more beatable teams.

In actual composition this team bears little resemblance to 1989. Frankly, there aren't many teams anywhere with a Glen Rice on the floor. But then, actual paper comparisons are of little use anyway; Michigan fans endlessly contextualize their hopes for a future football season based on some resemblance the new team bears to the 1997 squad, just as we talk about '89 in basketball. In hockey, everyone is crossing their fingers for a repeat of the '10 playoff run to earn a tournament bid. It is the nature of the sports fan.

Of course it doesn't make sense on paper, because there are always going to be differences. But the experiences are similar, and that's what we talk about.

And sometimes the bigger picture is a better view than the smaller one. In this case, Michigan does not have a similar roster to 1989 (then again, very little about college basketball resembles the 1980s at all). However, it is not unreasonable to think that whatever frustrations we've experienced in the regular season, a one-game postseason rematch can go differently. I think, given the strength of the conference, there is both a good chance of a high-level B1G rematch and a good chance that Michigan will win. And on that basis, I think the 1989 comparison may apply.

Not a NPOY-type game for Burke so far. Oladip hasn't exactly set the world on fire, but Burke is limited with Oladipo defending him.

I thought that when Morgan was injured and people were suggesting that somehow getting him back would substantially improve our defense it was wishful thinking.

Pretty clear that I was wrong.

Pretty annoyed with Kellogg's inconsistency there, but in fairness he complained about a charge called against Burke in the first half, so he's probably just a charge-hater.

Wish we had hung onto our larger lead. 3 points isn't much. But it's nice seeing a lead at all, and very nice that Michigan has gotten here with lock-down defense and good contributions from all over the floor; Burke doesn't have to be in "carry-the-team" mode.

Ugh. Burke never going to do anything other than try it alone there.

Lousy call, IMO. Zeller has drawn fouls on all of our bigs, and McGary and Morgan are both out for the half.

For better or for worse, Michigan is not playing a "characteristic" game. More physical defense, more fouls; also, more turnovers, but also a first-half lead.

Significant mini-run there for Indiana.

We're getting a lot of fouls. But then, we're seeing higher defensive intensity. Perhaps this is not a coincidence.  

Just another B1G barnburner. No way this doesn't go down to the final possession. 

Hoping to see a lot of that from GRIII next year.

Play defense like this and we can win the NCAA tournament.  I don't care what seed we get.

I would love Trouba to come back, but I just don't see it. I'll just be happy if he never, ever plays for Kitchener.

I'm not seeing a playoff run out of this team--the Hunwick run a few years ago featured a team that was very inconsistent but capable of playing great hockey when it put things together, which it did for six games. I don't know that this team has ever put that kind of hockey together, even on weekends like this where things go well.

But then, I didn't expect anything when Michigan went to Munn for a best-of-three, either.

I have renewed confidence in the UM Athletic Department to eschew uniforms that are too far over the line. Yeah, there have been some unis on Michigan teams that I don't like, but they weren't dumb enough to get on this train. 

Yeah, this didn't turn out so well. Bonus points for courageous predictions, though.

Regarding posts above (but in an open thread, not wanting to derail things with a response up there), Minnesota is a very talented team.

But people up here have zero confidence in them right now. They are struggling to beat bad teams and getting smoked by good ones. This is a perfect situation for an upset (talented team, at home, mid-week game, Indiana due for a loss) but Minnesota hasn't shown anything remotely close to the form they would need to beat Indiana in recent weeks. They've basically been a disaster since Michigan beat them. A win tonight would be a big shock.

Why not? Devin might not beat Manziel, but it wouldn't shock me at all if someone did. Tim Tebow was the Heisman favorite for two years running after his sophomore-year victory and never won again. 

Manziel is a star and will be great, but he's also a target and if he has some bad games again (he had a couple, especially early last year, but avoided scrutiny because he didn't really emerge as a candidate until he beat Alabama) everyone will know about it. It is quite possible that someone like Marcus Mariotta or Braxton Miller or Devin will have a dynamite season on a team that is undefeated or nearly so and eclipse Manziel. 

This comment debunks a lot of "myths" about the NBA and basketball in general that come from people that are predisposed to dislike it.

And I know, because I am sort of that kind of person now and was quite biased against basketball in the late 90s and early 00s. It was not a coincidence that the Pistons and Wolverines were both bad at the sport at the time, and that the Pistons wore horrible uniforms. But I was (and still am) a hockey fan and I actively resented basketball's attention. So I held many of these arguments, or similar ones of a more appropriate time.

The fact is, the NBA has done an excellent job of branding itself, developing good stars, exciting plotlines, and entertaining basketball. Now, nobody will argue that regular-season basketball can sometimes be a bit of a drag, but that is true of all sports that are not football. 

Complaints about things like officiating are real issues, but when someone uses those complaints to say that the sport is inherently worse or inferior, that is just an excuse. Every sport has its serious warts, and people who like other sports better will delight in pointing those out. Every sport has officiating problems. Every sport has structures built into its fabric that cause spectating headaches, like late-game fouling situations in basketball, or ties that are resolved in random shootouts in hockey, or punitive rules against regular hitting in football. It's everywhere.

Here's the thing: It's okay to like one sport over another. Just to like it. This is not something earth-shaking where you have to have a good reason--you just like it. Often it is just because your teams are successful in the sport you like most. Admit that it's random, and admit that each sport has its problems that outsiders can't stand but insiders just accept, and move on.

The NBA is pretty good right now, and it will be even better in the playoffs, even if we know who is going to win the East already. But if you're not a huge NBA fan, no problem! 

I realize that you have gained a reputation for being jerk-ish to people on this site and that it's something of a feature/bug that's part of the package that includes your excellent video production, but...

Have you ever worked in a team setting with people who divide responsibilities? It sounds like you're bashing Brian for not being involved with every element of the site's day-to-day operation. As if he weren't working hard enough or something.

Do you know how dumb that sounds? This site is what it is because of Brian and no one else. Seth is an asset to it, as are Ace and Heiko; but without Brian this is just another sports blog and it isn't close to the phenomenon that it has become.

Brian provides a viewpoint, writing style, and level of content that are unique and inextricably crucial to the quality of this site. The things you are griping about him not doing are, with no offense intended to Seth, things that multiple people are capable of and qualified to do. If Seth were to get hired by someone else, Brian could replace him with someone who could do a lot of the same things. 

But nobody can provide what Brian does. And, in case you forget, it involves a whole boatload of work, especially during football season. Not to mention many of the technical things that Brian handles himself. 

Seth collaborates, doing things that he is good at, allowing Brian to focus on the things that only he can do. That's how teamwork works.

Disappointed (selfishly, because he's a good recruiter and I like what the line is doing) but not surprised. When this broke some comments in the thread expressed some surprise that this was a lateral move... But it's not.



Not only are his two superiors active D-line coaches who get much of the credit, but they actually do a lot of the work. Montgomery wasn't "the man" for the D-Line. He was one of them, yes, but when the D-Line warmed up for games, Coach Hoke was right there in his old spot yelling and exhorting and directing.



That's not to say that it wasn't a good working situation for Montgomery, but it's not hard to see that the "same" position at Oklahoma really involves more responsibility and accountability with less direct involvement from superiors.



If you were doing a job you loved, but your boss happened to be really good at what you did and did a fair amount of the work (and deservedly received a lot of the credit), and you liked the boss but wanted to work more independently with less of a net and could make as much or more money, wouldn't you consider a jump?

Not my intent. My Dad was from Canada and called the Summit series win (he watched game 8 in Ann Arbor on tape delay after carefully avoiding anyone telling him the result) his proudest moment as a Canadian. I own a full DVD collection of the series, and we watched the Game 8 DVD together in our family room a week before he died. With my Canadian heritage I consider it an awesome series. It was also very, very close, with the Canadians trailing game 8 in the third and only getting the winning goal from Paul Henderson in the dying moments.

The point is, it was also a bit of a shock to the North American hockey establishment that the Soviets could push the Canadians so close to losing. The same system, the same team, and many of those same players that were every bit the equal of the Canadian all-NHL team came to Lake Placid. My point was that the Soviets were very good, and that the Americans shouldn't have even been on the same ice sheet.

The Miracle was and is the greatest moment in American sports. I don't need to be biased to say this--it regularly receives that rating from multiple media outlets and publications whenever such a question is posed. 

It's impossible to give such a sporting event the justice that is due on a board like this. I wish I had been old enough to enjoy it when it happened. Unless the US Men's Soccer team wins the World Cup (preferably at home) we will never see something like this again. It was exraordinary.

Everyone has already destroyed you for this comment, so I will make it everyone plus one:

You say "if you know hockey," but you apparently don't. This is not a somewhat better team losing to a somewhat lower quality team. This is is not the 2002 Red Wings losing a flukey game to, say, the Coyotes. This was a permanent, nearly flawless all-star team that NEVER LOST and was able to compete with and defeat the very best professionals, playing a bunch of under-skilled American college players. This is the 2002 Detroit Red Wings losing to the 2002 Saint Cloud State Huskies. 

The USSR hockey program was a machine. You must not know about the 1972 Summit Series against the Canadian all-stars, a team that included every great Canadian player except Bobby Orr (including a certain Red-headed college graduate). That USSR team included several players that would still be on the team in 1980; the Canadian team is still a who's-who of hockey greats.

The Canadians barely escaped with a win, after posting a miserable 1-2-1 record in the first four games, all on Canadian ice. They barely escaped with their lives (in one or two situations, that statement is literally true). 

That a bunch of amateurs, playing before the days when college players were regularly capable of playing in the NHL, could stay on the ice with the Soviets was inconceivable.

BIG TENNNNNN

What's worse: Making the game a separate purchase (which you are still able to make at student price) or forcing you to buy tickets for games that you will not be present on campus for?

As long as you had first refusal to purchase the ticket, I would say that this is the best way to do it.

On the one hand, I think that the campaign to be politically correct and totally inoffensive (to certain people) gets carried away. And I can't say I'm thrilled with the idea of the State of Michigan taking legal action about high school nicknames.

On the other hand, if there are legitimately groups of people that are offended by the use of names like this, I think that teams should just change their names. These are just games, why use offensive nicknames?

Obviously, the use of actual tribal names can be tricky, as with the cited examples of North Dakota on one hand and CMU on the other. But a team name like "Redskins" is totally unnecessary. It is a racial slang term, and AT BEST a nickname like that is the equivalent to a nickname of, say, the "Birmingham Negros." And possibly worse than that. Nobody would consider the latter hypothetical name appropriate, so why would we think "Washington Redskins" is? 

I work with underprivileged kids as a part of my ministry, and one of the things we do is pick up kids on a bus. While involved in our activities, abusive language is not acceptable and will be dealt with; I won't tolerate anyone calling our Native American kids a "redskin" or "savage" any more than I tolerate the N-word, B-word, C-word, or anything else. Why do we accept it in team names? As a consequence of this, I try (not always successfully) to refer to the Washington football team only by city. 

One side note: The citation mentions a lot of teams called Warriors. Perhaps those schools use Native American imagery, but the term "Warrior" is not a specific reference to Native Americans, and has a rich history in Biblical, Shakespearian, and historical usage. The wikipedia entry on "warrior" scarcely references Native Americans at all. They are overstepping in that case.

We are one of them, but I think it's a stretch to say that Michigan is THE best and most complete team. The "completeness" is particularly hard to defend, since Michigan has non-trivial issues with defense and free throws.

There are no elite recruits in Minnesota. But on the rare occasions there are (eg Michael Floyd) they go somewhere else.

Chris Ault has retired from Nevada.

Honestly, the way San Francisco used blockers out front of the QB reads sounds like stuff that Michigan was trying with limited success this year with Denard. Remember how perplexed Brian was that Michigan was putting a blocker on the defensive end? San Francisco does that and does it effectively.

SF's use of blockers on read option plays is consistent with the finest MANBALL traditions. One of the reasons I enjoyed watching them so much this year is because they demonstrated that you don't have to be Oregon (which I also enjoy) to run creative, explosive read option plays. 

The Green Bay game was the one that everybody really noticed because of CK's huge runs, but the Atlanta game is actually what Michigan wants--the threat of Gardner removing a defender, while the blockers plow open space for Green to destroy defenses. I expect to see a lot of that this year.

I don't want my comments on GR3's current NBA prospects to be misunderstood as a general knock on his ultimate pro potential; I just don't consider him to be NBA-ready right now. Not even close. 

I think that if he stays he will blossom in several of these key areas next season. The practice time, the playing time, the makeup of the team--it all lines up for him to have a fantastic season. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he spent significant time at the 3 as well, especially if THJ is gone. That will translate to his natural NBA position and involve him heavily in the offense; I think, if he stays, he will be Michigan's best offensive option.

And he will look really good to NBA scouts. Next year.

If GR3 had NBA-class attack the basket skills right now, he'd be doing it a lot more often. As it is, he does it less frequently than not only Burke but also Hardaway and Stauskas. 

Honestly, I had no idea he was that productive. I never liked him getting drafted so high, so perhaps I just put him out of my mind.

If GR3 goes he is a reincarnation of Marvin Williams. 

Dawson is in. The gang's all here.

That's nuts.

Remember how Memphis choked away a championship because they couldn't make free throws? I could see Michigan doing that. Frightening to think about.

Word in the skiing press is that the conditions were awful. There were questions whether the race could even be held.

One of the remarkable things about the last ten years of the Al Davis regime is that, for how crazy everyone believed Davis to be, and how unfair he seemed to be to his coaches, it turned out that the coaches he had trouble with were in fact totally insane. Davis can be held responsible for hiring them, but he turns out to look like the man in the right in his issues with guys like Kiffin.

It's going to be tough. It's a year away, and getting into the right condition and the right groove can take time even after the knee is healed. It's a real shame--Vonn is the best American skier ever, and perhaps the top woman skier ever, and there's a good chance she will not be at full speed for the Olympics. 

Really unfortunate for skiing at the Olympics. It's hard to pick a favorite for the men's speed events because there aren't any transcendant stars (not so much the GS and slalom, which have real strong players) and while the women's events have people like Maze and Hoefl-Reisch still standing, the best woman racer looks like she's out. After last year's complete dominance, this is a real nightmare season.

Vin's good, and still pretty sharp for his age, but he has lost a step. When I lived in LA I found that I did not enjoy his calls of Dodger games as much as I thought I would have. 

Shulman may be the best play-by-play man in sports. He's certainly right there. I actually don't mind the combination of him and Vitale, partly because Shulman is so good at moving the game along.

This is one of the reasons this is a difficult issue. "ESPN Bill Simmons" isn't just someone who is trying to butter up athletes and gain access by being favorable, although that can be a problem; he is a person who is trying to exercise responsible journalism.

Remember how upset everyone was about Rosenberg throwing around unfair accusations of practice time? Multiply that by a million and you have an idea of how a fanbase would feel if someone like Peter King speculated that their favorite athlete was on steroids. With no real evidence. Suppose Bob Costas said, on NBC television, that he felt that Miguel Cabrera's triple crown was empty because he figured (without evidence) that Cabrera was probably juicing. Imagine the justifiable outrage in Michigan. 

I have people in mind who I believe probably dope in several different sports. Even in a diary I wrote on the topic, I decided I couldn't bring myself to actually name them (though I did leave some rather large hints). It is a big, big thing to speculate in official, public forums that a certain person is breaking the law and competing unethically.