that is nice bonus change
- Member for
- 5 years 40 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|20 weeks 3 days ago||Student||
I teach at bama and I've had Chad. Bright kid but he is not interested in being a student. Let's just say his intelligence is what allows him to pass and not his work ethic or enthusiasm for education. He'd be coming to Michigan to be a player and that's it. Nothing wrong with that but it does mean rankings of schools won't move the needle.
|29 weeks 6 days ago||Alabama 1973||
Considering their biggest rival claims the 1973 title, I don't blame them.
A little history. Alabama went 11-0 in the regular season, were voted national champions and then promptly lost (in a classic) to undefeated Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl.
This is clearly a case where Notre Dame should be the only title holder, yet Alabama still claims it too...
|30 weeks 1 day ago||You'll probably get in...||
You'll probably get in. However, if you can get 2 points higher on your ACT, you'll almost certainly get in. That might be enough for one of those "Michigan" scholarships, which cuts the out-of-state tuition down to in-state levels. At least, that's what I got when I went there (2000-2004).
|41 weeks 2 days ago||Not really||
As someone with degrees from both schools, I have to say that this type of thinking is BS. I mean, sure, Michigan is the better academic institution. But at the undergraduate level, the differences are not that big (Alabama is a flagship, in the top 100, has money to burn as the flagship, etc.). Also, the engineering school at Alabama (while it's not well ranked) is king of the hill on campus and therefore gets a ton of extra resources.
If we were talking graduate school, sure, the differences are a bit more pronounced. But as a football player pursuing an undergraduate degree, he can do just fine at either place (I mean, AJ McCarron was a Rhodes finalist last year).
|49 weeks 3 days ago||Issues||
The problem at Alabama, more so than a place like Michigan (I'm an Alumni of both), is that the Greek system gets prime land, on campus, and therefore is front and center. This is why this is a University issue and not just a: "Hey, look at those racist organizations... It's their organization though."
The houses these kids have are crazy and they have been knocking over academic buildings for them. They need to change.
|1 year 13 weeks ago||Alabama||
That doesn't really explain the issue at Alabama. Student tickets this year were $35 for the season. That's the one thing they do really well here. Unfortunately, they sold out in about 20 minutes. So you get a bunch of students who just want to sell them and can't (the process to make them non-student tickets is a pain and includes the $70ish upgrade fee).
|1 year 28 weeks ago||A lot of places...||
do this. Alabama does this. But not just for athletes, for all faculty and staff too. IPADS allow for a more efficient campus in Tuscaloosa. They are not paying rack rate for this, and some of the cost is offset through deals with textbook companies that allow rental digital textbooks (which is cheaper for the students too).
File this one under: no big deal.
|2 years 30 weeks ago||Wrong way||
7 am in Michigan is 6 am central...
|2 years 38 weeks ago||Wrong||
If LSU and Bama remain 1 and 2, then they go to the NC and Georgia goes to the Sugar.
|2 years 49 weeks ago||Denard Fumble||
I know it doesn't matter since we recovered but I think Denard was down when he fumbled. Clearly, it is an official fumble, but I wanted to see if others thought the same.
|3 years 16 hours ago||Good way to start this thread...||
Tune in folks.
|3 years 5 days ago||Dumb assumption....||
I'd assume some of the shoes are legally provided via LSU. Don't players get some gear? Shoes, t-shirts, sweats, etc?
I mean, 49 is insane, but he'd have 11 from LSU if they gave him a new pair for the weight room each semester (summers included).
|3 years 1 week ago||Early commits||
The problem with a system like this is that 1. Offers aren't verifiable (a kid could claim offers when it's only interest) 2. Early commits who are solid typically don't get as many offers as kids who wait.
|3 years 1 week ago||Blimpy Burger||
I've got Blimpy Burger as my first stop back (well, Zola's, but that's my wife's doing, I get BB as restitution)
|3 years 1 week ago||Love them both...||
But if I'm not paying, it's Zingerman's without hesitation.
|3 years 2 weeks ago||Sandbridge||
If you want a little less commercial spot, stay about 10 miles south at Sandbridge. Mostly beach houses. Good for families and for beaches (not so crowded).
|3 years 8 weeks ago||Malware Warning||
This is awful news and his family is in my thoughts.
BUT do NOT go to the linked website. I got malware as soon as I clicked it and my computer went into lock down mode.
|3 years 11 weeks ago||Come on man!||
The appropriate thread title would have been: "You might want to turn on the Tiger's game" with the body: "Just sayin'. "
|3 years 19 weeks ago||Yeah||
Yeah, audit findings suck, and central administration is going to be POed, but this isn't like the Yale or Richmond findings. Their OSP will put in some new policies and will have to be a bit more diligent in the future, but that's it. The recommendations make it clear that they are not going to take money back from OSU.
On the other hand, yes, point and laugh. I did.
|3 years 19 weeks ago||Really?||
I work in research administration too, and this seems pretty minor. I mean, the recommendations are standard and OSU will comply and this will amount to nothing more than OSU clicking the "findings" box next to most recent audit, and then attaching the audit and the counteractive measures. I mean, the subaward monitoring issue is one popping up all over the country right now and a focus of NCURA.
This is a non-story.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||Apparently||
Apparently you think less of people than I do. We've had plenty of intelligent, non-football references on this board (including Foucault, who you seem to hate), so, yes I can say I expected this to be a fruitful post that others would both understand and want to engage with.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||STW||
Wow! Didn’t mean to stir up your negative feelings toward your pretentious colleagues. I, in no way was trying to dazzle or claim those thoughts as my own, hence the Judith Butler subject line. I also didn’t want to cite like it was a paper, this is a message board after all.
As to the job comment, I’m a full-time doctoral student, like you. I will though (thanks to you) try to come up with original, dissertation-worthy, thoughts for commenting on this blog! Thanks for that! /s
Give me a break; to imply that I don’t have my own, original thoughts in my scholarship because of one relevant comment on a blog (and a subsequent reply to a question) is crazy. I think, perhaps, you shouldn’t co-mingle me with the people you hate at your school when you know nothing about what I’m studying and researching.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||Ack!||
Don't legitimize such ridiculous thoughts. With any major there are easy and difficult roads, and communication is no exception.
I mean, communication is probably one of the broadest fields out there. I'm a doctorial student in communication and all I do is read Foucault -- which is pretty difficult. I have colleagues who have never, and probably will never read him, and watch a lot of films (their still rigorous scholars though).
|3 years 22 weeks ago||Not snarky||
Not meant to be snarky.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||Judith Butler||
I fall in line with Judith Butler's theory of identity performance which posits that every behavior we have is somehow influenced by a social script and therefore we are acting out our roles within those scripts. Whether or not someone is conscious of said performance is inconsequential since they have the ability to act a different way.
Hoke is enacting hegemonic masculinity because his rhetoric is wrapped up in the norms of a patriarchal society - one of control and authority. It’s not like Hoke is doing this on purpose, he’s just been enculturated in football, which is the ultimate expression of said masculinity. His public appearances (and probably private too) are wrapped up in the idea that he has to conquer, that he is the leader, that he needs complete control for things to go right.
Of course, no one has a self without fissures, so I don’t really think that Hoke is that one dimensional, but that is what he is displaying to us and probably his players. In the paradigm of football, it's easy to follow hegemonic masculinity to a tee. There are five basic tenants of said identity: (1) psychical force and control, (2) occupational achievement, (3) familial patriarchy, (4) frontiersmanship, and (5) heterosexuality. So, in the case of Hoke, his rhetoric so far has focused on psychical force and control (ie manball, where the fullback literally becomes the phallus and is used to control and conquer the rushing lanes... I mean, we (academics) can make anything into a text to analyze... When presenting this in contrast to zone blocking, then zone blocking becomes about defensiveness, instead of force. You protect your zone, you don't take another's position on the field, and therefore you are feminine (I realize that you could switch the paradigm to make zone blocking masculine, ie controlling one's zone, but Hoke and co. are using this as a talking point)). This manball and phallic battering ram type of football also folds into frontiersmanship.
In Hoke's (or any coach for that matter) hiring press conference we also heard the athletic department praise his occupational achievement and heterosexuality (talking about his wife and kid) and his familial patriarchy, as head of said family. Hoke has continued to intone the themes of familial patriarchy when referencing the players (of course RichRod did this too).
Finally, I think one of the reasons RichRod caught the ire of the local media was because his communication style could be described as feminine (this is not an insult, it’s just a moniker, which was unfortunately coined in the 70s without regard to its automatic lesser positioning it would earn in a patriarchic society just because of its naming) This is his style because many times his logic was inductive and his delivery involved anecdotal evidence instead of a more authoritarian style which is deductive and involves a clearly laid dictum. This can be very effective, especially when things are going well (Bill Clinton is the best example of this) but when things go wrong then you allow for those who are more used to a traditional (masculine) style of discourse to take control of the dialogue.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||They're both right...||
My interpretation of Brain's post was that Hoke is simply framing his language in a way that will appease the fan base. He's basically enacting hegemonic masculinity, while emasculating RichRod's offense. By doing this, he is taking control of the dialogue and therefore garnering support.
This doesn't really change what he'll do on the field. As both Mangus and Brian pointed out, Denard wasn't running out of the Zone Read anyway.
|3 years 25 weeks ago||Charlie Sheen||
The softball team Is Charlie Sheen, that much is obvious
|3 years 26 weeks ago||B- for unc?||
A b- for unc? Really? I love that campus, easily my favorite outside of Ann Arbor. Brick side walks, arboretum on campus, gardens everywhere, sculpture, old buildings, then the modern stuff on the medical side. It's like William and Mary but bigger.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||University vs. Junior College...||
Hampton is a University, so he won't have the same credit transfer issues that junior/community college transfers do.
He might drop a few credits, but my guess is most transfer no problem.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||This is not appropriate content for this blog...||
This is why politics should not even be touched on at all... This response is the whole reason Brian does NOT want politics on his blog. It doesn't matter what the original intent of the diary was, it will clearly devolve in the comments.