B1G, if true
- Member for
- 2 years 5 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|5 days 15 hours ago||Pavel. Goodness gracious that||
Pavel. Goodness gracious that was amazing.
|5 days 23 hours ago||I suspect there are a fair||
I suspect there are a fair number of fans who, for whatever reason, don't buy. Of course, some who buy aren't really dedicated fans of the sport, either. One's fanhood is not dependent upon how much they are able to spend or how much they measure up to someone else's ideal of fandom.
I just wouldn't be quick to blame this on the students or to attack their fanhood. The part of your post where you worried about the future of the athletic program was actually something I agreed with, but it was hard to get past the beginning.
|5 days 23 hours ago||Can an aspiring neo-LSUFreek||
Can an aspiring neo-LSUFreek graft Brandon's head onto that gif?
Actually, it would be funnier if it were Hoke's head. Let's go with that.
|5 days 23 hours ago||You can't be a fan if you||
You can't be a fan if you don't cheerfully plunk down $300 for a single student ticket, or much more if you're not a student?
Am I disqualified from being a fan now that I can no longer pay big money to attend all of the games because I live in Minnesota? This will come as a great surprise to my wife, daughters, and friends, who have actually seen the attention I give to Michigan teams.
|5 days 23 hours ago||Maybe they're just a bit||
Maybe they're just a bit below their expected totals and want to bring a few more into the fold. This could be a minor issue, and a courtesy to the "most loyal" fans whom they would expect to renew.
Or this could be a symptom of a serious problem that combines general apathy regarding the state of the team, rapidly growing costs of attendance, and a pitiful schedule against a struggling football conference.
I'm starting to wonder if it's the latter. This will only amplify the pressure on Hoke to produce this season; I actually think a scenario where the team struggled early, but pulls things together late and wins some big games is a real possibility--but it's going to be hard to survive serious attendance revolt and a mediocre September.
Months ago, Alton predicted that the 100,000 attendance streak would be broken this year. I thought that his prediction was premature... but now I'm not so sure.
|6 days 23 hours ago||I'm not surprised. Youth||
I'm not surprised. Youth soccer participation does not necessarily result in an increase of interested soccer spectators. And while Michigan is multi-ethnic, it is hardly high on that list.
Detroit Metro is not a growth area right now, and while it is a great sports city the fans are fans of some of the longest-tenured franchises in their respective sports, franchises that are part of the long-term fabric of the community. A soccer team will neither have that nor a hungry sport fanbase eagerly awaiting a soccer team to cheer.
Now, years ago I liked this idea, and I thought they could repurpose Tiger Stadium for Soccer, but there just isn't the demand. Detroit is the wrong profile.
|6 days 23 hours ago||Yes. A lot of detail in a||
Yes. A lot of detail in a small amount of time, without getting garbled or rushed.
There is a plus in radio, though--you can lag the action a bit if you need to. Beckman used to do that, and Baseball guys do it all the time, and it works fine. Without the picture on the television it blends without issue.
|1 week 29 sec ago||Not exactly full-time. The||
Not exactly full-time. The time and travel commitments are much lower than they are for the NFL. Travel is a lot less, and he needs to spend less time per game. I believe he lives in St. Louis, so trips to Ann Arbor and throughout Big Ten country are not a burden. There won't be the same requirements for production meetings and prep.
I would guess that he would be obligated to put in, at most, half the time that he put in for his CBS job.
|1 week 11 min ago||The title should probably be||
The title should probably be editted to reflect that Brandstatter is PBP and Dierdorf is color. Just a suggestion.
I like, but don't love, this move. I have quite a bit more attachment to Dierdorf than average sports fans, partly because he's a thorough Michigan partisan, and partly because I think he is actually fun to listen to. Granted, he has lost some of his sharpness, but this seems like a good step down for him--a couple of years covering a team he loves, much lower work and travel requirements, a fanbase that loves to have him.
I like Brandstatter quite a bit, too. I'm glad he continues to be a major media voice for Michigan. I am not sold on him as a PBP guy--he has always been color on the radio and been a host on tv, without doing anything even as intense as narrating highlights.
I hope he works out. It could be that he has always had the ability to do it and we've just never seen it. It's also possible that he just won't quite have the knack for it.
That would be no knock on him--there are lots of media guys whom I like, who are smart, who are good on television and/or radio, who aren't good PBP guys. PBP requires a special combination of observation, voice, meter, and timing.
But it's worth a try. None of the other guys connectd to the opening--Karsch, Shepard, etc--are surefire hits either. Shep is who he is, and it seems that he's hit a ceiling. Karsch is a great Michigan guy but in his few PBP opportunities he hasn't been impressive. Might as well give it a shot with Brandstatter. Who knows? It could be great. I occasionally listen to Twins radio up here, and I was struck that one of their guys was just a fantastic baseball announcer. Loved his voice, loved his stories, loved the presence he had calling the game. I figured he was a long-time radio man, one of the classic decade-long anchors on a Baseball broadcast, a lifelong radio professional.
So I looked him up. It was Dan Gladden. Turns out he's a great PBP guy. So maybe Brandstatter can be, too.
|1 week 1 day ago||Fair enough, I stand||
Fair enough, I stand corrected.
|1 week 1 day ago||Just because I typed earlier||
Just because I typed earlier that we shouldn't single out their fans for being worse than an average fanbase doesn't mean that I can't agree that this is totally delusional.
|1 week 1 day ago||You think Tennessee people||
You think Tennessee people are significantly worse than other fanbases? I'd say that's a stretch. And you can't exactly base your opinion on the larger fanbase based on what some of them say on message boards, as even this place (and this is one of the "good" ones) can demonstrate.
Now, there is something to be said for getting out of a situation where you aren't popular and were even thought to be on a hot seat. I don't blame him. But let's not pretend that Tennessee folks are worse than other fans just because we're biased against the South.
|1 week 1 day ago||Congratulations. We've had||
We've had 115 inches so far with more coming tomorrow. It's not bad, though--last year we had 135" and had 50" just in April, plus a few in May. It was absurd.
And until last week almost none of it had melted off. My sidewalk had five foot snowbanks on both sides--it was like Hoth.
But 95" is a lot for Michigan and more than our "average," so it's nothing to sneeze at.
|1 week 2 days ago||That regret shouldn't be read||
That regret shouldn't be read as anything negative about the team, the staff, or the school; it was apparent to anyone closely following the team that GRIII had been passed by both Stauskas and Levert as offensive contributors, and when McGary went down the two-post offense (which I had always taken to be a move by Beilein to keep GRIII happy with his role) went away for good and GRIII had to go back to the 4 spot, which wasn't his best position.
As a consequence his draft stock has dropped; there's no question about it. He struggled a bit. It is not unreasonable for a person in that position to be a good teammate and still think that perhaps they would have been better off making the jump earlier.
So from that standpoint this doesn't surprise me at all.
|1 week 2 days ago||Because he is establishing||
Because he is establishing himself as a long-term rotation player in the NBA with legit scoring touch a portfolio that already includes several special games.
It's not like he was, at any time in his career, ever expected to be a superstar. Most guys that are "NBA ready" aren't the next Lebron James; they're guys who people expect to be able to contribute to a team. And the fact is that not all of them work out--even the high draft picks. Look at the first overall pick for a good example of that.
He is doing quite well in the NBA because he has, in only his first season, proven that he belongs and that he has good things to offer to teams. This is significant. He'll get better, and he'll play in the NBA for quite a while. He is already close to meeting his perceived potential.
|1 week 2 days ago||I can understand it, even if||
I can understand it, even if it's disappointing. He still has "athletic potential" right now. Another year of basically the same performance (and playing the 4, which he is known not to like but is the logical place to put him on a team with a shortage of bigs and a lot of wings) and he's not draftable at all.
I'm legitimately worried that we'll lose all three.
|1 week 2 days ago||This is disappointing, but I||
This is disappointing, but I can understand the logic: Yes, GRIII could use another year to really refine his game... but if something goes awry and he doesn't improve significantly (including, say, an injury that limits his game for half the season), he won't get drafted at all. And then, even if his game does blossom, he would face a huge uphill battle to ever make an Association roster.
So he may be choosing to get out while there is still a lot of "athletic potential" attached to his name.
And if that's the case, I don't blame him. Even if he does improve quite a bit, he would still probably be the third option behind Levert (for sure) and McGary (if he comes back) next season.
Sometimes you have to make the leap. College will be there.
|1 week 3 days ago||This is a difficult situation||
This is a difficult situation to deal with regardless. No legal charges were filed, and the issue was tabled, and then a laboriously slow University investigation begins...
If Hoke acts early, he looks good if Gibbons is guilty. If Gibbons is not guilty, it's Duke Lacrosse all over again.
I think acting prematurely in this case would have been rash, even if the result eventually warranted action. And I say this as a person whose worldview thinks very poorly of Gibbons' actions even if there was consent involved.
No question that this has been handled poorly, though. All kinds of bad pub for the program.
|1 week 5 days ago||I tend to think that the||
I tend to think that the Gardner-to-WR decision was a staff-wide decision based on cost-benefit analysis. Receiver was a significant position of need, and they had a player as blessed with physical gifts as any on the roster sitting on the bench behind a once-in-a-generation unique talent. The most likely scenario for any backup QB playing would be a play or two when Denard got hurt, something that happened with some frequency, but nothing that a guy like Bellomy couldn't deal with. Meanwhile, receiver was a real need--and Michigan at the time was in a position to gamble, because the thought was that senior Denard had a chance to be special enough to elevate the team to some kind of championship, and having an extra athletic receiver was worth more than having a slightly better backup quarterback.
In the less likely scenario that Denard had to miss games, they could still move Gardner back to QB. And this, it turns out, is exactly what happened; we can debate whether Gardner could have helped Michigan win at Nebraska from the QB spot, but once Denard was out the move worked pretty well.
A position change that significant does not happen without the HC's input; who knows where it originally came from, but it surely made for a lot of discussion. And I think it actually worked out pretty well, post-Denard offense in Lincoln being the glaring exception.
|1 week 5 days ago||Maybe they did. And maybe||
Maybe they did. And maybe Borges made changes that we don't have the breadth of knowledge to remember/notice. Or maybe he said, "I need to have a TE over LT for certain plays/concepts/blocking schemes, and if I don't have him out there some other times it's a tell to the defense." There are lots of defensible reasons, even if the overall effect is insufficient.
That's where meddling is problematic. Suppose (and this is plausible, if not likely) that Hoke demanded certain concepts be used or abandoned prior to the Nebraska debacle. Of course, we all know how it went, and we all remember the NU defenders suggesting that they could tell what Michigan would run.
Then, in this hypothetical scenario, Hoke pointedly asks Borges why they were so predictable. And Borges says, "Because you wouldn't let me run the stuff that keeps them off balance." Or, "The stuff they predicted was the stuff you made me run. I wouldn't call it that way otherwise." Either way, whether accurate or not, this hypothetical HC interference makes improvement much more difficult, and accurate staff evaluation much harder.
If, as I suspect, Borges had free reign to run the offense as he wanted in 2013, then his firing makes complete sense. If Hoke was actually ramrodding new blocking schemes and lineups down his throat ("Al, we need to bench Milker, and I want pulling guards next week. Make it happen,") then much if this season's chaos is on him and the Borges firing looks like a scapegoating. I'm not inclined to believe this, but that is a danger in meddling.
|1 week 5 days ago||I wonder if we're missing||
I wonder if we're missing part of the issue here--he talks about minutes, which it is true he had trouble getting. But Beilein's system doesn't exactly feed post guys for low block iso plays, either, and that appears to have been one of is strengths. He just never had time to show it. If he really thinks that's a strength that he wants to explore, I understand this choice a lot better.
Because Mitch or not, Michigan is not going to spend a lot of time pounding the ball to the block and clearing out.
|1 week 5 days ago||HCs delegate to their||
HCs delegate to their coordinators. When they meddle, it's a bigger problem. Now, a head coach who has expertise in an area may be heavily involved in that area, but then he usually leaves the other side of the ball alone. Cf Pete Carroll, Chip Kelly, etc.
I had issues with the Borges hire, but he had a pretty long resume coming in, and in the act if hiring him Hoke needed to give him the leeway to make those choices. To do it "his way." Meddling during the season at random times is probably not wise. Hoke made a mistake leaving things unchanged after 2012, but there wasn't much he could do about it in October.
|1 week 5 days ago||Apparently he says that MM's||
Apparently he says that MM's decision has no bearing on his. Could be troubling, but then it could just mean that he knows he's not stabbing his teammates in the back and that freed him to decide based on other factors.
Also, if he said that MM's decision DID have an effect, it's a dead giveaway, so he has to deny regardless.
|1 week 6 days ago||Holy cow. That's amazing.||
Holy cow. That's amazing.
|1 week 6 days ago||A school cannot compel a||
A school cannot compel a booster to do something, and the NCAA would be unfair to make them. Nor can the NCAA compel former players to talk, or punish their former teams for that.
Can you imagine Michigan getting punished because, say, Desmond Howard thinks that there's a witch hunt and won't cooperate? That would be ridiculous.
It's the heart of many of the NCAA's problems. Remember, the Ed Martin stuff was resolved in part because Chris Webber was legally obligated by the Feds to talk to eligibility investigators.
|1 week 6 days ago||Ouch.||
|1 week 6 days ago||"Drug references are almost||
"Drug references are almost always correlated with minorities, while excused for non-minorities."
This is imflammatory, political, unprovable (or do you have a source for this?), and untrue.
I talk about drugs in my line of work from time to time, but it has nothing to do with the ethnic origin of the people involved. Usually it has to do with me working with addicts or ex-addicts or children of people who are in prison for crimes related to use and/or dealing. Some of them are white, and some of them are not, and it really doesn't make the slightest bit of difference.
So watch it with the blanket statements.
|1 week 6 days ago||1. Today =/= Bo's time, but||
1. Today =/= Bo's time, but today's rules are extensions of rules that have existed since Bo's time, and Bo cared about them. The "Rich guys making the rules" are actually bureaucrats continually tweaking rules meant to uphold rules and principles that have existed for decades. And there certainly was a lot of cheating going on in Bo's time.
2. Me either.
3. I didn't call them unethical. I explicitly stated that I don't care about the people taking the money; it's the system of people giving it (and, specifically, the University Athletic Departments that are letting it continue) that I have a problem with. It is an unethical system. If, in fact, Michigan makes some kind of attempt to not let this go on. I am aware, of course, that some stuff may occur here too.
4. I made my point about you putting your money up becuase your previous post seemed, to me, to imply that not giving these kids a cut of the money they were producing was ethically problematic enough that it required existing rules to be violated. Perhaps it was just a harsh reaction, which is understandable, but that's where my money comment came from.
|1 week 6 days ago||You've been kind of obnoxious||
You've been kind of obnoxious in this thread, but I would actually like to see this. The SEC has effectively done this already; what you propose would be a massive, needed realignment in big-time college sports.
Frankly, the worst that could happen is that the SEC could get expelled from the NCAA. Then they could just play an SEC football season with paid players, crown the conference champion, and declare themselves the best college football team in the country... and they'd be right.
|1 week 6 days ago||Because if you admit it the||
Because if you admit it the NCAA actually CAN do something about it. The reason the NCAA is impotent on this is because they cannot compel people to talk. They could ask a known bag man if he gave money, he could say "no," and that would be that. He is not under oath and they have no way of proving that he's lying.
But if they actually say what's going on, the NCAA has evidence and has proven that it will act on it. Disproportionately, even. The NCAA overreacts to certain things precisely because it cannot react properly to the worse stuff that it knows but cannot prove is going on.