"You can't make me," Hoke said. "You're not my father."
- Member for
- 3 years 50 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|21 hours 59 min ago||I'm continually amused||
by these yahoos who don't buy tickets to Michigan games telling us what should be happening inside the stadium. Michigan Stadium is for Michigan fans to celebrate their team any way they want. If we're stuck in the '40s or any other decade, it's our own business.
When these clowns and 100,000 of their friends start buying tickets to Michigan games regularly, they can be the ones to decide what "fun" is. Until then, nobody cares what they think.
|1 day 57 min ago||Other than all the stuff that everybody's really mad about,||
what's your problem with Dave Brandon, anyway?
|3 days 2 hours ago||Butch Jones would be great.||
I've admired him as a coach for a long time, and complimented my Tennessee fan friends on their excellent hire. They seem to be quite pleased with him.
I don't think he's going to want to leave Tennessee, though, and I don't think Tennessee would let him leave.
A guy can dream, though.
|3 days 22 hours ago||Hoke obviously knew he was hurt.||
He greeted and consoled Shane as he came off the field.
|3 days 23 hours ago||Here's Hoke||
greeting and consoling Shane as he finally came off the field. He very obviously knew he was hurt.
|4 days 1 hour ago||Internet petitions||
have an amazing track record for fomenting change. It's the obvious way to go here.
|1 week 23 hours ago||I had the impression at the time||
(probably mistaken) that Brandon thought he had Harbaugh lined up when he finally pulled the trigger on Rodriguez. Then Harbaugh stiffed him for the 49ers, and Brandon went all in on Hoke because he was the only option at that point.
Harbaugh was named the coach of the 49ers on January 7, Hoke was named as the coach coach of Michigan on January 11. The timing fits, anyway, and Harbaugh certainly has the personality to have done it. I thought it was pretty obvious through the whole fall that Harbaugh was gunning for the 49ers and that any interest he had in Michigan was simply to play one off the other.
No evidence for it, but at the time his praise for Hoke seemed artificial, like he didn't want to give away that Hoke was his 2nd (or 3rd) choice. Somebody will write a book eventually and we'll know the truth.
|1 week 1 day ago||I will quibble||
with your characterization of the Western Conference a bit. The West in general was pretty wild and wooly with lots of college players that qualified as 'students' in only most abstract sense. However, the Western Conference itself was created specifically to establish eligility standards that were even stricter than those out East and eliminate professionalism among college players.
In the wake of the 1905 Crisis, the Big Nine adopted eligibility rules even stricter than are in place today (no freshmen or grad students, three years total participation by undergrads only). Michigan balked at that and quit the conference for a decade, trying to get in with some of the Eastern associations in the interim (Iowa also semi-quit, playing in the Missouri Valley conference for a couple years before coming back).
Of course, everyone did their best to circumvent the rules and as there was no NCAA (until 1905) it was entirely up to the individual schools to police themselves. This went about as well as you would expect.
So the formation of the Western Conference was not about sticking it to the Old Guard out East and their artificial rules, but creating a bubble of amateurism and fair play in the otherwise wild West.
|1 week 4 days ago||We have no one better.||
So whatever you think of Gardner, he's the best we've got.
Deal with it.
|1 week 4 days ago||I believe||
I'll go to bed.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||This is a very old argument||
that goes back to the 1880s when colleges discovered that the general public would pay good money to watch college football. We're not going to settle it here.The fight against professionalism and commercialism in college football existed long before the NCAA did. My point was that we've been here before, and allowing player endorsement of commercial products resulted in lots of problems that colleges found objectionable. We don't need to reinvent the wheel.
At the heart of it was that long ago colleges decided they weren't in the entertainment business, and paid athletes had no place in the college world. The reality has rarely matched the ideal, but that doesn't mean the ideal should be abandoned. It is difficult to reconcile professional athletics with the educational mission of a university.
The irony is that while college football's commerciallism is at unprecedented levels, college athletics currently comes closer to the amateur ideal than at any point in its previous history. My personal preference would be to get rid of the commercialism rather than abandoning amateurism.
|13 weeks 1 hour ago||It's currently prohibited for good reasons.||
Player endorsements were a major source of corruption in the past. College athletes as pitchmen for commercial products is a bad idea if you're serious about amatuerism and fairness. At one time, the Michigan football captain had a wardrobe supplied by a Detroit clothier so that his fans would all shop there and dress like him. Another Michgan captain had a brand of cigars from which he got a cut of the sales. Yale's captain had his own brand of cigarettes, conveniently displayed on the counters of all the businesses frequented by Yale fans.
The players become professional athletes, but with compensation coming from businesses rather than the university. It's a distinction without a difference.
It's not about players signing autographs for money, it's about Phil Knight offering blue-chippers a million dollars a year for endorsing Nike products if they'll attend Oregon.
You have to think in terms of how the process could be abused, because it will be. Most NCAA regulations exist to restrict alumni from abusing the system to the benefit of their alma mater rather than the actions of the players.
|13 weeks 2 hours ago||I agree with you here.||
For 99% of college athletes, a college scholarship is the only compensation their athletic abilities will ever get them. Their market value is actually negative.
The idea of destroying the system and screwing that 99% so that the top 1% can get wealthy a couple years sooner seems outrageously wrong.
College athletics has plenty of problems that need to be fixed, but overt professionalism doesn't fix any of them.
|13 weeks 22 hours ago||Commercialism has plagued college football from the beginning.||
Colleges exist to educate, not entertain, but football proved so wildly popular that the temptation to maximize revenues has been a constant problem.
College football history is littered with reform movements seeking to rein in its commercial aspects. Unfortunately, it is a problem that can only be contained for a while, without ever being solved. The only things we can do as fans is vote with our feet and wallets: turning off the TV, refusing to pay excessive prices for game tickets, and not buying overpriced souvenirs.
|27 weeks 21 hours ago||Minor league football has been tried many times||
and has proved repeatedly to be a financial failure. The expenses of football are too high and the season is too short. You can get away with 5,000 fans per game in minor league baseball because they play roughly 70 home games, but with football you can't.
Unless you've got some prominent stars to draw fans (and thus compete with the NFL for talent), you're not going to make a go of it.
|37 weeks 6 days ago||That's wrong, actually.||
There were only two games in the entire 2010 season that Michigan's offense (measured in yards per play) was below what their opponents gave up on average: Purdue and Mississippi State. Even in those, the ratio was about 0.98. Even against Ohio State, the YPP was higher than what OSU's defense allowed on average.
Not really interested in getting into a slap fight about it, but Rodriguez's offenses were pretty damn good. The defenses sucked, but give credit where it's due. Your assertion does not stand up to close analysis. Yes, his offense ran up big numbers against bad defenses. Good defenses certainly slowed it down, but it still outperformed most other teams.
|37 weeks 6 days ago||That's pretty much the definition of a good defense, though.||
It's not an indictment of Rodriguez's offense specifically. Every offense has trouble scoring against a good defense. That's why it's a good defense.
Even against good defenses, Rod's offenses did better than most others did.
|44 weeks 1 day ago||Even up two touchdowns at the half,||
I knew we were going to lose. I watched the second half out of curiosity as to just how they would give the game away more than anything else. Then I was depressed that they did exactly what I expected them to. I wanted to be surprised. I wanted them to shock me back into caring.
Alas, it was not to be.
|44 weeks 1 day ago||One more comparison:||
Al Borges at Auburn:
Looks painfully familiar.
OK, I'm done. I promise. :)
|44 weeks 1 day ago||Another comparison:||
Minnesota is another Big 10 team that started with a new coaching staff in 2011.
Their offensive YPP compared to their opponents' average YPP has remained fairly constant, on average.
|44 weeks 1 day ago||I ran the Rodriguez years as a comparison:|
|44 weeks 2 days ago||(No subject)|
|44 weeks 2 days ago||Film.||
We were strong when we were unknown. Once oppenents' DCs saw us, they learned how to defend us. Shockingly, Borges was then unable to adapt.
|44 weeks 3 days ago||Two wrongs don't make a right, as my mother taught me.||
Rodriguez should have gotten four years at least, maybe five. He deserved a chance to get his recruits into place and show us what they could do. Firing him after only three years was a mistake and the wrong thing to do. He's gone, however, and I'm not crying over spilled milk.
What was wrong for Rodriguez is wrong for Hoke. He deserves at least 4 years, maybe 5, to get his recruits into place and show us what they can do. I'm not impressed with him as a coach thus far, but I'm willing to be convinced.
If Hoke thinks Borges is still the man to run the offense, fine. He's the guy in charge, he lives with the results.
|44 weeks 3 days ago||I thought we had the talent for 10 wins.||
I fully expected the coaching staff to cost us at least two games, however. I thought 8-4 was likely. We're lucky to have a shot at 7-5 as it turned out.
|44 weeks 3 days ago||Hoke did not win a conference championship at Ball State.||
They lost to Buffalo in the conference championship game in 2008. They then lost the GMAC bowl after Hoke left to finish 12-2.
|44 weeks 4 days ago||Yet.||
Give Hoke another year or two. We can lose to Appy State again.
|44 weeks 4 days ago||Indeed.||
We're now Michigan under Brady Hoke.
|44 weeks 6 days ago||Sad to see us gradually drifting downward.||
Defense has stayed about the same, but offense was up around 10 in the first of these. The rest of the conference is catching up to us. :-(
Also, I think this should be Week 12, as your last one was Week 11.
|45 weeks 11 hours ago||The numbers||
in the receivers chart below it don't add up right, either. Good eye.