Mike Lantry, 1972
|11 hours 5 sec ago||But let's even say that Groce||
But let's even say that Groce hadn't left Ohio. If you're Caris LeVert and you committed to Ohio thinking that it'd probably be your best option, then you suddenly catch the eye of Michigan, are you really better off being locked in to Ohio? I don't think so. This policy change puts recruits in a really hard position. Many non-5-star recruits will get pressured by smaller schools to sign early, since those schools know that if the recruit blows up he won't be able to take advantage of any of his new options. If you're the recruit, you can hold off, but it's really risky if that smaller school then fills your spot.
I know I'm in the minority (and I wrote more about it below), but I really dislike this. Maybe there's a way to do it that locks in the school but not the player - to kill the "uncommitable offers" or whatever they're called - but I don't like the idea of locking kids in so early.
|11 hours 16 min ago||To me, the most obvious||
To me, the most obvious change that needs to be made is that kids should be able to use some of their official visits before the fall of their senior seasons. With kids committing earlier and earlier, classes get filled by local kids who can afford to come visit schools within driving distance. In many cases, a kid from California would have to wait until the fall of his senior year to even see Michigan or any other non-Western school. That's much too late given that signing day is just a few months later.
I don't like the early signing period policy idea. I think it just shifts the whole calendar earlier, which in the long run will be bad for both recruits and (top) programs. If I were a recruit, I wouldn't want the earlier pressure to sign somewhere, especially if I thought I might get better offers later but didn't know. If I were a top program, I'd want to be able to watch kids develop as long as possible before having to choose my targets.
It's a confusing argument, but I actually think the one group this helps is non-top programs. Earlier recruiting means more messiness in who gets offered and commits, and that hurts programs like Michigan, Notre Dame, Alabama, etc. If you're Michigan, you can wait to see who emerges later in high school and pursue those kids - or try to flip them if they are committed elsewhere. If you're a less recruit-desirable program and you luck into grabbing one of those kids early (or scout him well), you're getting a recruit you probably couldn't hang onto with the current rules. For the recruit, that sucks, since he made a decision at a time when he didn't realize he'd have better options later.
TL; DR version: I don't like it. I think there's an obvious policy to change - that recruits have to wait until their senior years to take official visits - and they're talking about changing the wrong one.
|2 days 12 hours ago||It's PR (and a funny joke),||
It's PR (and a funny joke), and that's all there is to it. At most, they're losing some potential users from OSU... who probably never would have heard of this app but for the free publicity they're getting for the "everyone but OSU" thing.
I think it's a funny, smart idea.
|2 days 14 hours ago||According to CBS, Morgan has||
According to CBS, Morgan has played in 134 games. It looks like Stu Douglass has the Michigan record at 136. With the Indiana game, the BTT, and the NCAA tournament left, Morgan is basically guaranteed to walk out of Ann Arbor with a pretty cool, well deserved school record.
|2 days 14 hours ago||Literally. It's weird. The||
Literally. It's weird. The guy's always walking around saying things like, "The past 5 years of Michigan Basketball refers to what the University of Michigan Men's Basketball program has done from the 2009-10 through 2013-14 seasons."
|2 days 22 hours ago||It blows my mind how many NBA||
It blows my mind how many NBA players Beilein and his staff are developing right now. Just from the last two seasons, it looks to me like we'll have at least eight guys who will eventually make it to the NBA (Burke, Hardaway, McGary, Robinson, Stauskas, LeVert, Walton, and Irvin). Some of the guys have some maturing to do as players - especially Walton and Irvin - but if they're anything like the other guys on that list they should develop more than enough to find themselves on an NBA roster at some point.
Last year, I figured that Stauskas would be an eventual NBA player as a three-point specialist who would serve a valuable role on the bench (and generate some other offense). At this point I think he's a potential NBA starter someday and the type of player and personality who will attract other top talent to Michigan over the next few years as guys who want to follow his lead (shooters who see what Beilein can do with them, Canadians who want to play real basketball, etc.).
The other good news in all of this is that the NBA might get a little more watchable for Michigan fans. We're about to have a lot of guys in there to cheer for.
|3 days 10 hours ago||Section 1 made a similar "I||
Section 1 made a similar "I haven't been a Beilein fan but I'm coming around" point, so it's possible for a serious-seeming likely-human to say that kind of thing. It's damn crazy, but it's definitely possible he's serious.
|3 days 10 hours ago||Agreed. Personally, I||
Agreed. Personally, I haven't been a big fan of water, but I have to give it its due. It is sustaining life on earth after all. That's huge! Go water!
|3 days 10 hours ago||Oh, so they're different||
Oh, so they're different guys. That makes much more sense. Based on the picture, I assumed that Brian is three years old and dead.
|4 days 10 min ago||I'd coach-speak it. I'd like||
I'd coach-speak it. I'd like to see Meyer have a great, long life and a terrible, miserable coaching career from this point forward.
|4 days 13 hours ago||Yeah, I don't think I buy the||
Yeah, I don't think I buy the claim that demographic changes are fundamentally reshaping college sports over such a short period.
At the very least, it's an extremely complicated question. For example, much of the demographic change has to do with Hispanic and Asian immigration. But are those kids playing high school football at high rates (and shortly after getting to the country, in many cases)?
I think it's a "sounds good" argument that's easy to throw out there but requires a lot more thinking/explanation before I'll really believe it. Geography-based recruiting advantages might be shifting, but I'm much more inclined to believe it's because of things like:
The demography argument feels like more correlation than causation to me.
|5 days 5 hours ago||The point is that he failed.||
The point is that he failed. That's apparently impossible at OSU.
(I'm assuming that's actually what happened with Tate, but I don't know.)
|5 days 6 hours ago||I hate to be this guy, partly||
I hate to be this guy, partly because there's little I enjoy more than shitting on OSU, but mocking players' Wonderlic scores always seems a little harsh and unfair to me. It's basically just calling them stupid without any context (for how hard they try to learn, whether they grew up with good educational opportunities, what happened on the test, etc.).
On the other hand, ...
Adolphus Washington saying, "The academic support at Ohio State, there is no way you can fail. Even if you're giving minimal effort there is no way you can fail."
... and Cardale Jones saying, "We ain't come to play school, classes are pointless."
... and Terrelle Pryor saying, "Not everybody's the perfect person in the world. I mean everyone kills people, murders people, steals from you, steals from me, whatever."
That shit's just funny.
|5 days 10 hours ago||Question...||
If you had to guess which conference the 2013-2014 national champion will come from, which conference would you guess?
I'd go with the ACC (mainly because of Duke, Syracuse, and Virginia), but the Big Ten is right up there for me. I just don't see a huge drop-off between the top-ranked teams and the place where a bunch of top Big Ten teams sit.
A Michigan, Wisconsin, or MSU could easily make a run this year, in my opinion, and Iowa or OSU are firmly in the "it's possible" camp.
|5 days 13 hours ago||In terms of records, there||
In terms of records, there are four tiers in the Big Ten right now (before the Sunday games are in).
Tier 1: Michigan (13-3)
Tier 2: MSU (11-5) & Wisconsin (10-5)
Tier 3: OSU (9-7), Nebraska (9-7), & Iowa (8-7)
Tier 4: Minnesota (7-10), Indiana (6-9), Illinois (6-10), Purdue (5-10), Penn State (5-10), Northwestern (5-11)
We'll probably have to wait until next weekend to really have a good feel for how this shakes out. These teams are really clumped together (except for maybe the top 3).
|6 days 3 hours ago||Something tells me that the||
Something tells me that the PEOPLE doing this well are using COMPUTERS along with their judgment. Both extremes on this argument are wrong. People can see things that computers can't see, and computers can see things that people can't see.
|6 days 3 hours ago||Fine, rankings don't matter,||
Fine, rankings don't matter, but what does matter is seeing teams competing for the same seeds as us lose. A lot of those teams are ranked right around us. So, no, rankings don't technically matter, but they're pretty informative.
|6 days 3 hours ago||They've lost their last two||
They've lost their last two games, but the last one before today was last Saturday. Their only loss since the most recent rankings were released came in today's game against UConn.
|6 days 3 hours ago||This was a brutal week for||
This was a brutal week for top25 teams. ESPN's AP poll is outdated for some reason, but here's what they're showing for the coaches' poll from the week...
#4 Louisville lost
By my count, the non-Michigan top 25 teams are 21-16 this week.
|6 days 4 hours ago||Izzo has had a ton of success||
Izzo has had a ton of success being the whiny clown he is, so I don't want to over-interpret based on one year, but it seems to me that Izzo's demeanor rubs off on MSU's players and Beilein's demeanor rubs off on Michigan's players. Partly for that reason, I'm skeptical of this idea that MSU is going to get it together and roll through the tournament while we're an obvious upset candidate.
|6 days 4 hours ago||That was absolutely an A+||
That was absolutely an A+ hire. The guy is a brilliant coach, his teams are fun to watch, he brings in kids who are easy to cheer for, he's a good spokesman for the program, and as the guy who leads the ethics coalition, he leaves absolutely no doubt that the past problems are long gone.
We're incredibly lucky to have Beilein.
|6 days 5 hours ago||* third banner in three||
* third banner in three years.
|6 days 8 hours ago||Totally agree, and just||
Totally agree, and just because it's worth stating, this is a big part of what makes following sports fun. If outcomes were predictable enough that these models could predict 99% of the winners, the games really wouldn't be much fun to watch.
|6 days 8 hours ago||My understanding is that no,||
My understanding is that no, Vegas isn't just trying to balance the money on each side of a line. They're likely smart enough to take advantage of inefficiencies in these public betting markets.
|6 days 8 hours ago||Thanks for posting this. I||
Thanks for posting this. I had this on my mind, figuring that Vegas is probably a couple steps ahead of everyone.
If one of these algorithms started beating Vegas odds with any regularity, the Vegas oddsmakers would just incorporate information from those algorithms into how they set their lines. So if the creator of one of these widely known algorithms (or widely known site with an algorithm) might get ahead early, but I'd be shocked to see him stay ahead.
|6 days 10 hours ago||For perspective, he basically||
For perspective, he basically lost the equivalent of a Terry Richardson.
|1 week 37 min ago||KenPom actually has Ohio||
KenPom actually has Ohio State at #13 right now (ahead of Michigan and Michigan State). I'm having a hard time with that one.
|1 week 1 hour ago||Respectfully, this is a||
Respectfully, this is a really weird, arbitrary, bad way of doing this.
First, my understanding of KenPom rankings is that they already incorporate strength of schedule.
Second, it's not clear at all why multiplying those two numbers makes sense (even if we for some reason wanted to increase the weight on schedule strength). In fact, it probably makes strength of schedule much, much too influential. As evidence of this, look at Wichita State. Even if someone questions whether they should be a 1-seed, no credible ranking system would have them at #48 right now.
I appreciate the effort and the way that these threads get conversations going, but I think the execution is a little off.
|1 week 14 hours ago||I mean, we have a coach who||
I mean, we have a coach who has proven masterful with identifying and/or developing talent. Beilein has gotten in on guys like Burke, Hardaway, LeVert, Stauskas, and Robinson long before other experts and schools were excited about them.
If there is one thing I'm not worried about, it's the future of our basketball program. If there's another thing I'm not worried about, it's the present of our basketball program.
I wouldn't be concerned.
|1 week 1 day ago||Ranked teams went 1-5||
Ranked teams went 1-5 tonight.
#10 St. Louis, #17 Kentucky, #20 Iowa, #21 Memphis, and #22 Ohio State all lost to unranked opponents. Only #7 Louisville survived the night.
|1 week 1 day ago||And then there were three.||
And then there were three. With OSU and Iowa losing, it's down to Michigan, MSU, and Wisconsin.
I'd imagine that our KenPom probabilities actually got worse tonight, though, now that some of MSU's remaining schedule looks easier (Iowa & OSU) and ours looks harder (Indiana).
|1 week 1 day ago||Yeah, I'm confused. Is this||
Yeah, I'm confused. Is this really one of the best 10 schedules? If so, this non-conference season will be awful.
Missouri: South Dakota State, at Toledo, UCF, Indiana
Edit: Or this, for that matter...
Minnesota: Eastern Illinois, Middle Tennessee, at TCU, San Jose State
|1 week 1 day ago||Recent winners, for||
Recent winners, for context:
2013 Jim Larranaga, Miami (Fla.)
|1 week 1 day ago||I'd start here||
I'd start here -
|1 week 1 day ago||I also have a math/analytics||
I also have a math/analytics background and it's interesting to me that there seem to be two personality types who are wary of stats-based predictions. The first are people who hate numbers and/or don't get them at all. The second are people who love numbers and/or spend a lot of time thinking about them. From my experience, it's the group in the middle - some training in statistics, a sense that stats are valuable - that tends to put the most faith in these kinds of analyses.
I'm in 100% agreement with you (and danross) about the limitations. I think there's a serious role for human eyes and context in all of this. I also think there's a role for KenPom-style analysis, so I'm glad that's out there, too.
|1 week 1 day ago||I think it's a question of||
I think it's a question of what you expect/want from the numbers.
You're right that these kinds of probabilities are far from perfect. They don't account for many potentially important variables, some like the ones you mention, and the algorithms could be messy to begin with. (Truthfully, I've been more wary than most about KenPom ever since his Wisconsin problem, and I'm skeptical of his top 5 right now.)
Still, they probably aren't terribly far off. Knowing what I know about Michigan (likely more than KenPom's formula) and Michigan's opponents (likely less than KenPom's formula), I'd come up with win probabilities pretty close to the ones he's estimating. We could both be way off, but at the end of the day, who cares? These numbers are fun to look at and tell us something that's pretty objective even if it's also pretty flawed. As a human observer of my favorite team, I'm flawed and not objective, so I appreciate these kinds of insights.
|1 week 3 days ago||Sure, that and a pair of||
Sure, that and a pair of testicles.
|1 week 3 days ago||Fair point. I'm not sure||
Fair point. I'm not sure whey they'd need to do a Saturday - and I see many games at Crisler this year when SDSU wasn't playing - but that's probably a rough midseason trip. It's also probably hard to justify leaving your team in the middle of a season to be honored by a different program on the other side of the country.
|1 week 3 days ago||It's interesting that this||
It's interesting that this event was scheduled on a night that San Diego State has a game. I'm sure that our athletic department knew that in advance and I think it was probably a smart move to pick a night when both teams play. Honoring Fisher at Crisler would have been awkward - or at least put him in the awkward position where he'd have to decide whether to show up or not.
The "SDSU has a game" excuse probably works out well for everyone.
|1 week 3 days ago||And the defense was basically||
And the defense was basically fine last year until the last two games, when they got ground down by the best rushing offense in the country and blasted off the field by Tyler Lockett.
The defense was terrible against Notre Dame, Akron, Indiana, Ohio State, and Kansas State and less than impressive in a bunch of other games. I guess the offense was basically fine except for the Akron, UConn, Penn State, Michigan State, Nebraska, Northwestern, and Iowa games.
|1 week 4 days ago||Actually, I have no idea what||
Actually, I have no idea what the "Names to Watch" series is, so maybe your way makes sense. And I think I've read that we, as people, are terrible with estimating probabilities anyway.
|1 week 4 days ago||For offered prospects, would||
For offered prospects, would probabilities (%s) make more sense? I mean, Michigan probably has a much better chance of getting a guy who's wide open between five choices than one who lists us second but is basically a lock to go to his #1 school.
|1 week 4 days ago||Whoa.+1, emphatically, to||
+1, emphatically, to you, sir. That's awesome.
|1 week 4 days ago||I neither see it as an issue||
I neither see it as an issue nor as true. If we win our next seven games and are outright regular season champions and tournament champions of arguably the toughest conference in the country, I'd be shocked if we aren't a 2-seed. Many teams in front of us still have losses left in them.
Even if we were somehow a 3-seed in that scenario, I'm not sure it matters much. The difference between being a low 2-seed and high 3-seed is probably really minimal.
|1 week 4 days ago||The guy is such a weasel. He||
The guy is such a weasel. He deserves every one of these losses and then some.
|1 week 5 days ago||FYI, Webbertucky looks to me||
FYI, Webbertucky looks to me like he's either a Sparty troll, useless, or both.
|1 week 6 days ago||I know you aren't asking me,||
I know you aren't asking me, but just so the board doesn't leave your question hanging, I, myself, am just kind of a douche. Definitely not an MSU fan. MSU fans are generally awful.
|1 week 6 days ago||I don't know, I just looked,||
I don't know, I just looked, and I see more signs of asshole and self-loathing Michigan fan (one of my least favorite types around here) than MSU fan who misrepresents himself.
|1 week 6 days ago||You realize that you don't||
You realize that you don't have to take everything so literally and seriously, right? It was a joke about a rival (that their last Rose Bowl trip had its share of PED stories). It's harmless rivalry stuff.
|1 week 6 days ago||I'm kind of surprised we||
I'm kind of surprised we don't see hyper-aggressive reporters asking these guys about worse things to try to get them to admit the truth.
"Max, is it true - as rumored - that you were suspended for bestiality, necrophilia, and the combination of the two?"
Let's see him "no comment" that shit (or give the same answer that he does about drugs/PEDs).
|2 weeks 2 days ago||I like this on one||
I like this on one condition: if Big Ten teams that are scheduled to play once want to schedule a second game (not to be counted in the conference records), they should be allowed to do it.
By doing that, you'd prevent the long-run schedule imbalances caused by protected rivalries while still letting true rivals keep their two games/year. Michigan-MSU could be interested in that, along with Indiana-Purdue and maybe a few others.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||The wording of your post left||
The wording of your post left open the possibility that the Columbus Zoo actually labeled one of its animals "weird-ass monkey thing." Since that would be one of the funniest things I've ever seen, I looked it up, thinking to myself that I'd probably look at OSU differently if this were somehow true. Not surprisingly, that's not what you meant and OSU still sucks.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||It's amazing how much||
It's amazing how much different this thread looks if you mistakenly swap the first and last letter in the title's last word.
I agree with the OP that this has been frustrating. We don't seem to have a true lockdown defender, big or small. I always think there's a place on the roster for one of those guys, if you can find one.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||How do you know that his||
How do you know that his ex-roommate isn't Belarusian biathlete Darya Domracheva? She won gold today, too.
(Actually, I agree that there's probably a better, more subtle title available.)
|2 weeks 4 days ago||I appreciate the||
I appreciate the contribution, but is that really the most pleasant expression that Ira was willing to give?
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Why? Professors carry those||
Why? Professors carry those titles all the time, and it's not like Michigan is the first school to bring those titles to their athletic coaches.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Personally, I care a lot||
Personally, I care a lot about winning the Big Ten and very little about seeding.
My guess is that seeds actually matter very little.* I mean, even a team that could somehow be either a 5-seed or a 12-seed, the only difference in the path they face, seed-wise, is their first round opponent. After that, they face identical paths. When there are dominant 1-seeds, then I think there's value in avoiding them. In that case, I'd want to avoid a 4-, 5-, 8-, or 9-seed if possible. Beyond that, I think people worry way too much about seeding. (And I don't think there are dominant 1-seeds this year.)
(*Obviously, better-seeded teams perform better in the tournament than worse-seeded teams, but that's because they're better. I'm talking about whether it matters to a given team whether they get a slightly better or worse seed. Confusing lecture/statement complete.)
|2 weeks 4 days ago||They're two damn good||
They're two damn good candidates.
The case for this Hall photo is that you have:
It also has OSU beating Michigan, which unfortunately is becoming pretty typical OSU, too.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||And there we have the single||
And there we have the single most OSU thing ever.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Makes sense. I don't think||
Makes sense. I don't think we're getting a one-seed, but that's because I think we'd have to win out (including the tournament) and the probability of that is very, very low. If that somehow happens, a 16-2 Big Ten team with regular season and conference tournament titles (and a brutal schedule) would certainly have a shot.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||If Wichita State loses a||
If Wichita State loses a game, they probably lose the 1-seed. They've had some close calls lately, and I wouldn't be shocked (HALOL) to see them drop one.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Please rename the thread,||
Please rename the thread, "Section 1's latest attempt to be obnoxiously political and then, when someone confronts him on it, either deny it, claim that he doesn't make the rules around here, or argue that he's only doing what others have done so this is obviously a horrible double-standard."
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I think "Plastic Man" fits||
I think "Plastic Man" fits for LeVert, but in my mind that nickname will always belong to Stacey Augmon (the former Detroit Piston). I can't imagine that too many other people will have that problem, though.
EDIT: It looks like I'm the second guy to board the HOW DARE YOU DISRESPECT STACEY AUGMON bus. That's not a seat I ever expected to occupy.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Those who stay... will very||
Those who stay... will very possibly tear their ACLs.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I don't have much to add but||
I don't have much to add but also don't want to pass up an opportunity to agree that Comcast is the worst thing in human history.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||I really like Stauskas and I||
I really like Stauskas and I hope he tears up the NBA, but it's hard for me to see him getting drafted before Gary Harris. Harris is a really well rounded player and I'd guess that he'll be the best NBA player to come through MSU during Izzo's time there.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||But they're individual||
But they're individual decisions. If Stauskas thinks he should come back, he'll come back. Same goes for McGary and Robinson. I'd be a little surprised if all three come back, but it's definitely possible given how the draft might look.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||You might be right||
You might be right (at least about going nine deep), but I'm thinking about where the minutes come from - and a little about game continuity. A lot of this is complete guesswork, but...
You have 200 minutes to go around. If everyone comes back, the junior versions of McGary, Stauskas, Robinson, and LeVert all seem like 30+ minute guys, as would a sophomore Walton. Some of those guys will get much more than that, too. On most teams, Irvin would get major minutes, too, so I figure that he's probably getting at least 20 (and maybe he and Robinson should be swapped).
That doesn't leave many minutes, and I'm not sure how thinly Beilein would want to spread them. There would be plenty of capable guys, though, with Horford, Albrecht, Chatman, etc.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||The topic could be||
The topic could be interesting and fun. Whether it will be is TBD, depending mostly on whether it's overrun by 25 people making the same (ridiculous, in my opinion) "How about we focus on this year?" point. Often, that kind of thing crowds out discussion that others would like to have.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||You do realize that "next||
You do realize that "next season" will be "this season" in a year, right? I have a feeling you said the same thing last year and it turned out that you cared about 2013-2014.
If you don't care, stay out of the conversation. Those of us capable of enjoying one season and thinking about the next won't miss your contributions.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||The combination of star||
The combination of star power, depth, and game experience would be crazy. My guess is that Beilein wouldn't want to play nine or ten deep, but he definitely could if he wants to. He'd be looking at a roster with McGary, Stauskas, Robinson, LeVert, Walton, Irvin, Albrecht, Horford, Chatman, Donnal, and Bielfeldt, among others.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Thanks (to each of you who||
Thanks (to each of you who posted this).
Sorry, one more question... We haven't heard a final answer on Hatch's status yet, have we?
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Can someone explain the||
Can someone explain the scholarship situation for next year? My memory is that Beilein recruited under the assumption that McGary and/or Robinson would leave early. Does that leave us with too many guys, potentially?
|3 weeks 2 days ago||I knew this post was coming||
I knew this post was coming and I hate it.
Relax. We're fans. We can enjoy the present and be excited about the future. And our looking ahead won't cause the basketball team to lose the Wisconsin or MSU games. Trust me.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Good stuff. It's actually||
Good stuff. It's actually kind of interesting that the lines haven't trended more strongly toward out-of-region over these 100+ years. I mean, we're talking about automobile ownership and commercial aviation starting up in here somewhere, not to mention people starting to have telephones, televisions, computers, and Hudl accounts.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||I'm not sure (and again, I||
I'm not sure (and again, I think the mods do a really nice job around here).
I guess I don't know what the goal is. If the goal is to prevent any content from offending/hurting visitors to the site, then I'd personally be more offended by not being allowed to talk about this than I would by seeing one or two assholes post hurtful things among dozens saying "this is huge" or "good for him."
I should say, however, that I didn't see the original thread, so I don't really know how the conversation was going. I also understand that you guys have jobs and lives, so constantly refreshing the site to see if someone said something awful isn't how you should be spending your days.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||I agree completely, mGrowOld.||
I agree completely, mGrowOld. If a major racial barrier were broken in American sports, we wouldn't prevent discussion because of the potential that someone might say something racist. We'd just deal with racist talk by deleting it and banning the users.
The existence of homophobes shouldn't prevent the celebration of major sports milestones in the same way that the existence of racists shouldn't prevent the celebration of major sports milestones.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||I understand the thinking||
I understand the thinking behind it, but I'm annoyed that these threads were taken down or the comments disabled.
In my opinion, this is no longer a "political issue" in the sense that each side deserves a voice. If someone wants to speak out against homosexuals participating equally in the NFL or any other part of American life, then we should delete their comments and ban the users. Those types of comments should be treated like overt racism, not like stances on actual political issues like abortion or capital punishment.
This is a hugely important, great moment in American sports. It's not a debatable political issue, and we should be able to celebrate and appreciate the moment. If people expose themselves as intolerant assholes, then I think you should deal with them as such, but removing/locking the threads altogether feels inappropriate.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Also, just so I get this in||
Also, just so I get this in along with my critique on this particular call, I think you guys (the mods) perform a thankless job excellently. Thank you for keeping the board readable.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Thank you, but I have a||
Thank you, but I have a clarifying question.
I got down to "But was it as magical as a Brady Hoke point?" and realized that if I am Brady Hoke, then all of my points are as magical as a Brady Hoke point. Where does this leave me?
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Given that, it seems like a||
Given that, it seems like a curious decision to make the subject of your post "My thoughts." Wasn't it pretty obvious that your post would contain your thoughts?
|3 weeks 5 days ago||I'm not a big "How dare you||
I'm not a big "How dare you raise this again?" guy, but if someone's going bring up a familiar topic, the least he could do is make it clear from the thread title. I opened this up hoping to learn whether I am, in fact, Brady Hoke, and I'm no closer to knowing the answer to that question.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||I'm curious about the "much||
I'm curious about the "much better schedule" line.
Let's take out the games that are identical (@OSU, @ Purdue). That leaves you with these games, in rough order of difficulty for each team:
Michigan: MSU, Wisconsin, @ Illinois, Minnesota, IU
MSU: @ Michigan, Iowa, Nebraska, Illinois, Northwestern
To me, that looks tougher at the top for MSU (having to play Iowa and in Ann Arbor) and tougher at the bottom for Michigan (with Nebraska-Illinois-Northwestern pretty soft). Maybe MSU's schedule is easier the rest of the way, but it's pretty close.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||You mean the same Izzone that||
You mean the same Izzone that chanted "Who's your daddy?" To DeShawn Sims because his father was in prison and out of his life? Please.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Unless the Pistons have a top||
Unless the Pistons have a top 8 pick, their first rounder is headed to Charlotte (for the "please take Ben Gordon" trade). Just one more reason to be thrilled with their roster management and future.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||I won't fight with people on||
I won't fight with people on this point now, but I think that fan negativity could have played a role in the 2013 football season falling apart like it did (and in the recruiting momentum slow-down). With a young team like that - and kids who undoubtedly read and hear this stuff - there's no doubt in my mind that it can make an impact. There's psychology research to back this type of thinking up.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||At least two things make this||
At least two things make this stupid. (I assume you aren't offended by some poster calling your ideas stupid.)
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Seriously, the only thing||
Seriously, the only thing less appealing to me during a Michigan game than a game thread is one of those live chat disasters during football season.
|4 weeks 7 hours ago||With eight of our remaining||
With eight of our remaining 12 games against Penn State (wins, please) or Minny, we'll definitely get a shot at catching Minnesota.
|4 weeks 11 hours ago||Bingo||
|4 weeks 12 hours ago||Recruiting rankings obviously||
Recruiting rankings obviously matter in the sense that getting better, more polished athletes helps your team win games (all else equal).
The problem with most of these analyses of the effects of getting higher-regarded recruits is omitted variable bias. In reality, correlations between recruiting rankings and team performance likely (badly) overstate the causal relationship between them. Programs that get higher-rated recruits also tend to have: better, more established head coaches; better coordinators and assistant coaches; better trainers and strength & conditioning coaches; better training and team facilities; more intimidating home crowds; and on and on.
Player talent is probably the most important of those variables, but there are many other variables that are correlated with both player talent and program performance. If we controlled for those, I'd imagine that you'd see much more modest - but still very large - effects from getting more highly regarded recruits.
|4 weeks 14 hours ago||Who the fuck is this guy?||
Who the fuck is this guy?
|4 weeks 1 day ago||Most fans are fickle. OH NO,||
Most fans are fickle. OH NO, I SAID IT. If McDowell goes to MSU and plays well, they'll gladly forget the whole thing ever happened.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||I've avoided these||
I've avoided these conversations, but I hope that Hoke continues to recruit him. From what I've read (admittedly not very much), it seems like the only thing keeping him from Michigan - and causing so much conflict within his family - is his sense that MSU is more fun.
If I'm close to right about that, then if anything I'd only increase my recruitment of him. I'd encourage him spend a few nights in Ann Arbor to get a realistic look at how amazing life here tends to be.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||I agree, but I don't think||
I agree, but I don't think you're responding to my point above.
My point was that I'm not sure why (1) moving guys from raw to pretty good is about coaching if (2) moving guys from good to great isn't about coaching. That's possible, but it's definitely not obvious that it's true.
Your point is that a coach who's good at (1) might not be good at (2) and vice versa. I agree with that.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||That's fair, but if we're||
That's fair, but if we're saying "Molk and Lewan would have been great no matter what he did," we probably should also say, "all those young, inexperienced guys would have struggled no matter what he did," too.
My assessment of Funk falls somewhere between TBD and disappointing, with a lean toward TBD. It'll be interesting to see what happens this year under Nussmeier.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Wait, that's two of us.||
Wait, that's two of us. Which room you in?
|4 weeks 3 days ago||The correct way to phrase||
The correct way to phrase this is that you definitely want Iowa to lose.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Does anyone know if you can||
Does anyone know if you can claim a tax credit for a proverbial child? If so, I'm about to become the Shawn Kemp of proverbial children.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||This. In cases like these||
This. In cases like these (when the public has so little information), the certainty and speed with which people draw conclusions drives me crazy. I understand the desire to have clearly defined villains and victims, but oftentimes the fair, responsible thing to do is reserve judgment.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||Probability of signing||
Probability of signing recruit you never offer: 0%
Probability of signing recruit you're the 20th team to offer: >0%
Plus, it's not clear to me that it really matters to kids when you offer them. I occasionally see someone mention an attachment to the first school that offered, but I'm not sure there's usually a preference for, say, the 5th school over the 15th school.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||I'll guess Tyriq Thompson,||
I'll guess Tyriq Thompson, but you'd might as well have asked me to guess your weight because I have no idea or information.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||I don't understand your||
I don't understand your post.
First, offering a bunch of OL and TEs doesn't mean that they're going to take a bunch of OL and TEs. Sometimes you offer a bunch of guys you like even if you don't have room for all of them.
Second, you don't recruit to improve your team in the first season that the kids arrive on campus. You recruit for a few years down the line. Offering OL and TEs right now says nothing about what the coaches think our 2014 and 2015 OL and TE situations will be. These kids wouldn't even arrive on campus until 2015, and for most of them it's almost a guarantee that they'll redshirt in 2015. These kids are being recruited with 2017-2019 in mind.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||I don't know what you're||
I don't know what you're referring to, but what's the difference? If I were a retiring coach, I'd feel a real obligation to my players. If I felt that one of them would have a clearly more promising future if he transferred, then I'd explain the situation to him and let him know that I'd support him in whatever he wants to do. I'd do that even if I loved my school and loved the new coach coming in.
Again, for the program you're leaving and the incoming coaches, the worst that can happen is they lose a few players. For the players, this kind of thing can be life-altering.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||I'm probably in the minority||
I'm probably in the minority on this, but I don't see anything wrong with it. If I were in Mack Brown's position, the people I'd be most concerned about serving right now are my players and committed recruits. I'd be far less concerned about saving my former program from a few decommitments. These recruits committed to Texas believing that they would play for certain coaches in a certain system, etc. If the new circumstances make it unlikely that they're making good decisions, then the right thing to do is to support them if they want to look around.
The guy I hear mentioned most often with respect to Carr is John Wienke. We can debate whether Wienke made a good decision about his final destination, but Carr knew that Wienke was a terrible fit for what Rodriguez was bringing in. If I were in Wienke's shoes - or this John Bonney kid's shoes - and I had real trust in the person I thought would be coaching me, I'd really want him to be supportive and honest with me rather than just protect his former program. For us, losing a few kids sucks because our favorite team might lose an extra game or two. For the recruits, this is the type of decision that can define their lives.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||I think he was just using||
I think he was just using extreme examples to refute UMxWolverines' delusional post above:
"A worthless liberal arts degree from a prestigious school is just as worthless as it would be at a mac school. It depends on what one gets a degree in."
|4 weeks 5 days ago||For many (if not most)||
For many (if not most) employers and grad schools, one's undergraduate major really doesn't matter. Whether it's right or wrong, the prestige of his undergraduate university clearly does, partly because it sends a strong signal about intelligence and work ethic.
Obviously, someone can still be successful going to a lesser school, but going to top universities brings serious rewards independent of people's decisions about majors and concentrations.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||As usual, I agree with this||
As usual, I agree with this guy. Living out of country and out of state (and working briefly in college admissions), you really start to notice it. Michigan regularly gets into conversations about the country's top universities. MSU definitely doesn't. In fact, I think the only non-sports references I've ever heard to MSU have been about its riots and party school image. MSU is better than a lot of other schools, but the UM-MSU gap is vast, and it's probably getting vaster with how well UM has handled the cuts in state funding.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||That's why I'm here.||
That's why I'm here.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||Yes and no. While our||
Yes and no. While our ranking doesn't matter, these are the types of teams that we'll be up against for tournament seeds in a few weeks. It's good to see them lose because it makes our resumes stronger than theirs, comparatively (though I guess it's debatable whether we wanted Texas or Kansas to win).
|4 weeks 6 days ago||I don't completely buy that.||
I don't completely buy that. Yes, there's a strength of schedule issue (which will only affect tournament seed), but everything else about this is positive. Remember that we're competing with MSU for tournament seeds, recruits, positive media attention, etc., and that it's fun to see them lose. Plus, if this makes things a little less settled and happy in East Lansing, it could negatively affect their (Big Ten) play this season.
All in all, it's a positive in my opinion.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||schadenfreude & ranking/seed||
#6 Kansas 69
#7 Michigan State 60
We're at #10 right now. Not that it matters all that much, but if we beat Indiana tomorrow, we're likely to climb quite a bit in the AP poll.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||Seriously, taken out of||
Seriously, taken out of context, this would seem creepy at best and creepy, perverted, and/or illegal at worst.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||Hey, you spelled oblivious||
Hey, you spelled oblivious and attachment wrong.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||This is my favorite kind of||
This is my favorite kind of Section 1 post (honestly). There's nothing political or nefarious about it - it's just a fun, stupid topic that will probably provide the most entertaining thread of the weekend.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||Do you think he's a damn||
Do you think he's a damn peasant?
|4 weeks 6 days ago||Its its you, jerk.||
Its its you, jerk.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||I bet you didn't even went to||
I bet you didn't even went to Michigan.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||TAKE THAT, POSEURS||
TAKE THAT, POSEURS
|4 weeks 6 days ago||Just so there's no hiding||
Just so there's no hiding behind down-votes happening here, I'm the one who negged you.
If you're going to enjoy the benefits of being a Duke basketball fan, I think you have to pay the costs of being a Duke football fan (at least until a couple of years ago).
|4 weeks 6 days ago||They do it because people||
They do it because people want to hear about it, so they make money. Unfortunately, I think that also means that they don't have any incentive to take steps to prevent these incidents (e.g., by not covering the shooters so thoroughly), since these things make for big ratings.
And yes, I think that TV and radio types are self-interested enough to respond to those incentives.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||Seriously. I'm having an||
Seriously. I'm having an "either I'm crazy or all of you are crazy" moment, which seems to be happening to me a lot on this site these days. This looks so obviously to me like a lighthearted joke between Mattison, Narduzzi, and McDowell. McDowell essentially even said so.
|4 weeks 6 days ago||It'd be interesting to see||
It'd be interesting to see numbers related to campus gun crimes and how the trends compare to gun crimes more broadly in the US. I think you might be right that the increased attention is mostly about a changes in reporting/notification standards.
|5 weeks 4 hours ago||By "MSU people" I was||
By "MSU people" I was actually referring to Narduzzi. RCMB pushes my definition of "people." They're awful.
|5 weeks 6 hours ago||It was a joke. People get||
It was a joke. People get jokes, even if they're MSU people.
|5 weeks 11 hours ago||NOT JUST A SHOOTER|
|5 weeks 1 day ago||My mistake then. Please||
My mistake then. Please accept my apologetic upvote.
A site search suggests that it was probably MGrowold with that signature.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||It could be luck or fate. It||
It could be luck or fate. It also could be development. It could be that Michigan would have developed Williams better than OSU has and/or OSU would have developed Morgan worse than Michigan has.
I have a diary in mind that I'm hoping to get to at some point. It's about teasing apart some possible explanations for Beilein's success. One explanation is that he has a superior eye for talent than his peers. Another explanation is that he develops talent better. A third explanation is that he runs an effective system or otherwise prepares players well for game action. (Some combination of these, and other, explanations is obviously possible.)
I think we could start to tease those apart by looking at the guys Beilein offered who went elsewhere and comparing them to (1) similarly ranked guys who went to other schools and (2) similarly ranked guys who came to Michigan (or WVU). If the guys Beilein offered who went elsewhere consistently outperform their recruiting ratings, that suggests that he has a good eye for talent. If the guys Beilein offered who went elsewhere don't perform as well as similarly ranked guys who ultimately play for Beilein, that suggests that he's good at developing talent once he gets it.
That might not make sense and I'll have a lot more to say about it when I get some time to dig in.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||You never had a reference to||
You never had a reference to or quote from John Galt (or someone/something else in Atlas Shrugged)? If that wasn't you, I apologize. Then again, even if you say that you didn't, it'll seem just as likely that you found some technicality with my language that lets you deny it even though the broader point is obviously true. That's part of what I'm trying to tell you is so frustrating.
And it's very you to find the one sentence that you want to respond to, ignore everything else, and then conclude with a "you lost me with that."
|5 weeks 2 days ago||I don't even know what "a||
I don't even know what "a political decision" means. If I'm in charge and decide to do X because I believe that X is the right thing to do - and if others with a different political orientation disagree - does that make it a political decision? But honestly, I don't care, and I don't think this is the place to talk about that. If you want stupid political bickering about which side of the political spectrum is dumb/evil//lying/corrupt, then go to a news site and argue with the assholes who post in the comments section.
And your shtick about how you're just being accurate and factual - never political - is annoying and condescending. If I remember correctly, you had Ayn Rand in your signature until recently. You're the most political poster here, even if you do it in a way that you think gives you deniability.
I honestly think that you seem like a smart person, and if you toned it down a bit, I'd love talking about issues with you. In my opinion, you just make that very hard.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||That's why God created the||
That's why God created the edit button.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||This is fucking hilarious.||
This is fucking hilarious.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Two things that I think we||
Two things that I think we should keep in mind with this story:
1. At least two people have been deeply harmed by this incident and everything that followed: the woman involved and Gibbons. In at least one of the two cases, that's absolutely tragic. Unfortunately, we're in a really frustrating place where we don't have enough information to know what happened. We do know enough to be sad.
2. People who make a living getting others to talk about, read about, or listen to other people talk about Michigan sports have an incentive to make this as big and dramatic a story as possible, even if that means talking well beyond what is known and fair. We should all keep that in mind as we're listening to local radio, reading stuff online, etc. If this a story about a football player who did something awful and then we see how university bureaucracy handled it, it doesn't have nearly the media appeal as a massive conspiracy in which Hoke lied, Brandon coordinated everything, higher-ups bullied university administrators, etc. Just keep in mind that there are offseason ratings and page click interests involved here.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||This. The whole argument||
This. The whole argument about how Hoke should have lied to us is ridiculous. It can be a "family matter" in the sense that Gibbons and to sit down with those close to him and figure out his life. To Hoke, "family matter" could reasonably mean "stuff that I can't/shouldn't get into that doesn't involve football."
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Part of what makes you so||
Part of what makes you so frustrating as a poster - and so bad at what you try to do - is that you use loaded language and bait people into petty political fights in a way that distracts from what can be important, debatable principles underlying the issues. There are really interesting questions at the center of this whole conversation. By talking about a "feminist star chamber," forcing everything into Obama/liberals language, etc., you piss people off, drive them away from your views, and make these conversations stupid and vitriolic when they could be engaging and mature.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Your politics are annoying,||
Your politics are annoying, as usual, but I actually think you're right that there's potentially a very interesting story developing. Just in the sports world, we've had recent sexual assault claims at Florida State, Michigan State, Notre Dame, and a bunch of other places that never made it through the full legal process. If universities are now required to push forward with these cases even if the victim doesn't want to press charges and if the universities are required to apply a preponderance of evidence standard, then there could be a sharp change in how we see these stories resolve.
The potential risks and benefits both seem very clear and real. I'm interested to see how this story unfolds and how much discretion universities have in managing the details. This could be the beginning of a very big story that raises some difficult, fascinating questions.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Jameis Winston entered my||
Jameis Winston entered my mind, too. With this new "preponderance of the evidence" standard, does that mean that we should expect to hear something about Winston, Payne and Appling at MSU, the ND player involved in the Lizzy Seeberg assault (if he's still in college), and a bunch of other guys who were accused but whose cases never really went anywhere? Or is this pretty Michigan-specific with how U of M is implementing it?
If the Gibbons thing is just the first example of a major change on universities across the country, this could grow into a pretty incredible story.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||The arguing about how,||
The arguing about how, exactly, Hoke should have not told us what was happening is silly. You could say it's a "family issue" in the sense that Gibbons needed to get with his family and figure his life out.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||FOR FUCK'S||
FOR FUCK'S SAKE:
@SethDavisHoops: Man those Spartans are playing with pride tonight. Short handed but not short hearted.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||I think your certainty is||
I think your certainty is just as misguided as the certainty of the people on the other side. We don't know what happened. Hopefully we will... and soon... but we just don't right now. The range of what could have happened is very, very wide, and it includes some possibilities that will make me write letters to Mark Schlissel about firing everyone and other possibilities that will lead me to feel very badly for the people being called villains right now.
We're stuck in the uncomfortable wait-and-see-before-making-judgments period, but the responsible move right now is to hold off judgment and insist on a thorough investigation of what happened.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||You have no idea what||
You have no idea what happened, just like the rest of us. How about holding off on calling a bunch of posters rape enablers until we have some idea of what this is all about?
|5 weeks 3 days ago||This is where my head is||
This is where my head is right now, too. There's way too much that's unknown at this point for me to weigh in with any certainty. If this is as bad as it could be, then I'll be calling for a bunch of heads. This is fact-finding time. Hopefully our journalists will handle that well and the University will cooperate to the extent that it can.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||Shit, Brian, we're wearing||
Shit, Brian, we're wearing the same shirt today. Let's stay out of the same room so that things don't get awkward.
A substantive point:
There's obviously no reason to get riled up about matchups in projected brackets in January, but the fact that we're even thinking about a Final Four path speaks to how drastically this team's outlook has changed. Two weeks ago we were still finding paths for Michigan to get into the tournament. In fact, I think that was the basis of the argument that we were playing with house money against MSU. Now there is no house money because we're playing for a conference title, and questions like "Which one-seed is the best matchup for us?" are kind of reasonable to consider. It's an amazing turn of events over just two weeks.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||I don't know the Title IX||
I don't know the Title IX implications, but I love the 25 scholarships/year idea. In fact, not only would it limit the incentive to cut players, it would increase the incentive to graduate players. Want to make sure that you don't have to burn redshirts on special teams? Be sure that you keep those backup upperclassmen around. Want to avoid any desperate depth issues? Same solution.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||Good point. What is it about||
Good point. What is it about MSU and hostility toward inanimate objects? Whether its their students burning couches, Brandon Dawson punching a table, or their basketball team slapping floors, they have this weird need to attack things that most of us find helpful.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||If it really bothers you that||
If it really bothers you that much, why not just neg the OP and skip the dickish, worthless post?
|5 weeks 3 days ago||That's funny... I had this||
That's funny... I had this exact thought when people were talking about how the college basketball rankings are pointless. I get that argument (and agree, even), but there's something absurd/hilarious about people singling out some aspect of sports as meaningless when if we're honest with ourselves we know the whole damn thing is meaningless.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||I think that Illinois game is||
I think that Illinois game is on the road. We have 6 home / 5 away left, right?
Regardless, thanks for doing this.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||This is outstanding. I said||
This is outstanding.
I said it before the game, too, but I have no idea how anyone who is neither an MSU fan nor a blood relative of Tom Izzo could like Tom Izzo. I think he's one of the most weaselly coaches in sports right now.
John Beilein, on the other hand...
|5 weeks 5 days ago||Next year will be||
Next year will be interesting. There's a lot of uncertainty with our roster, but MSU should look very, very different. Harris will almost definitely declare. Payne and Appling are gone. Their recruiting of late has been weak by MSU standards, so they'll be lighter in both star power and depth than we've seen in awhile. It's way too early to know how our roster will look, but even if we lose one or two guys of the McGary-Robinson-Stauskas-LeVert-Walton-Irvin-Horford-Albrecht core, it'll be the first time in awhile that we enter the MSU games with rosters that look to me like we have a clear advantage. It'll be interesting to see whether Breslin changes at all if they have a 2012-13 to 2013-14 Indiana kind of drop off.
Michigan basketball could be fun for a long time.
|5 weeks 5 days ago||This. I always resist||
This. I always resist blaming games on officials and get in lots of arguments with friends who think that we're being screwed by poor officiating. That said, last night's game was a joke. That was absolutely one-sided until around the time that Beilein lost his head (a pretty good indication that he agreed it was BS).
The fact that MSU message board posters think the officiating hurt MSU says nothing, given how many of those people are delusional/dumb (a much higher % than we have here, frankly).
In general, officials have a hard job and tend to mess up calls both ways. Sometimes those calls get tilted in one direction, especially when there's a rowdy home crowd. There's no doubt in my mind that happened last night.
|5 weeks 5 days ago||Dear 2013:Please suck our||
Please suck our nuts/ovaries.
|5 weeks 5 days ago||That fan base is completely||
That fan base is completely insufferable and it follows the lead of its coaches. The officiating and injury whining right now especially hilarious. You can complain about injuries, I guess, if a string of bad luck gets you. Payne, like McGary, got unlucky and had to sit out. Dawson just did something quintessentially Sparty-stupid. You don't get to claim bad luck for that.
|6 weeks 6 hours ago||Let's add LaVell Blanchard||
Let's add LaVell Blanchard to this list. No one got screwed by Jalen and company as badly as Blanchard did and yet he was nothing but graceful and classy all the way through. Every time I hear Jalen whining about this stuff, I think about what Blanchard must think when he hears it.
|6 weeks 8 hours ago||Section 1 exists on this||
Section 1 exists on this earth as some kind of weird anti-being whose purpose is to help sane people clarify their own thinking by constantly showing the absurdity of the opposing views.
|6 weeks 8 hours ago||Whoever the best coach in||
Whoever the best coach in Michigan history is, it sure as hell isn't Steve Fisher. Sorry, Jalen, but the bad counts along with the good. Same goes for you and everyone else who contributed to the decimation of the Michigan basketball program.
|6 weeks 8 hours ago||Of course you're lukewarm on||
Of course you're lukewarm on John Beilein. How any Michigan fan could but anything but thrilled with Beilein is beyond me.
|6 weeks 13 hours ago||This week their QB recruit||
This week their QB recruit from Cass Tech (whom a year ago a lot of people on the board wanted to be our QB recruit) bodyslammed one of his high school security guards. And we played their mediocre hockey team last night at the Joe, and won 2-1 on PDG's goal at 17:42 in the 3rd, and had a posbang thread for it. These are small things, yet received greater attention because the horrific events of late 2013 are still fresh.
The Campbell story was a big thing because it's shocking video. That video reached far beyond Michigan blogs because it's so disturbing. (For the record, I didn't find it enjoyable, but it did feel very Sparty to me.) And who cares that some fans on MGoBlog wanted Michigan to offer him? Our coaches didn't. And even more than that, since when can you not enjoy a win over your biggest hockey rival because they kind of suck? I'm sure that OSU and MSU fans have been really disappointed to beat up on our pretty shitty football teams over the past 5-10 years. Plus, every damn thing that happens generates a posbang thread these days.
|6 weeks 13 hours ago||Maybe, but commitment can||
Maybe, but commitment can light up a scoreboard.
|6 weeks 14 hours ago||Izzo is so full of shit. I||
Izzo is so full of shit. I don't understand why any non-MSU person likes that weaselly SOB.
|6 weeks 17 hours ago||Well, they're pretty damn||
Well, they're pretty damn good at keeping a secret, aren't they? I haven't even heard a hint of a rumor. For something this high profile, that's pretty amazing.
|6 weeks 1 day ago||Your argument is confusing,||
Your argument is confusing, too. What about Michigan says flash in the pan? Historically great college football programs all seem to go through down periods and then bounce back up. No one is arguing that we've been great lately. By our own historical standards, we've been terrible. The fact that MSU's 10-year record in its modern glory years is almost identical to our 10-year record in our modern nightmare years definitely doesn't point to Michigan being a flash in the pan and MSU being a stable power program.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||~Gandhi, I think||
~Gandhi, I think
|6 weeks 4 days ago||I don't want to spoil||
I don't want to spoil anything, but I remember that game and would recommend it to other Michigan fans.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||That seems like a good||
That seems like a good argument for getting a QB committed early (and a charismatic one). But we're offering these kids earlier in the cycle than we offered Speight, so we're probably okay there. Why is that an argument for needing the first QB offered to commit?
|6 weeks 4 days ago||He's currently committed to||
He's currently committed to Notre Dame. The 247Sports Composite has him as the #6 pro-style QB and #136 player overall in his class. They also have him at 6'-3.5", 195 lbs (playing in Corona, CA).
There's been an interesting shift in the QB recruiting strategy since last year. Last year, it seemed like they wanted to be sure that the first guy they offered would commit. I'm not really sure why. I like (what I think is) this year's strategy much better -- go try to get guys you like best and don't worry if you get a "no" or two before you get a "yes."
|6 weeks 4 days ago||"Just win the||
"Just win the conference..."
Easier said than done. Also, I'd say that "just" winning this conference will very likely make someone a #1 or #2 seed, not just a top five seed.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||Just giving you a hard time||
Just giving you a hard time because it's a funny sounding word. Thanks for starting the thread.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||Honestfulnessly, I think it||
Honestfulnessly, I think it is mostly about the "now" but it's the "now" defined over a longer period of time than just a year or two. It probably doesn't take long for a program to establish itself in the eyes of recruits as an excellent program rather than just an excellent team (these kids are only 14-17 years old, after all). Beilein is probably just a couple of seasons away from doing that.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||Eh, I like their obsession.||
Eh, I like their obsession. It's a fun rivalry, made more fun by each side really caring. Sure, a lot of their stuff isn't funny, but that's because OSU/Columbus sucks, which is the reason for the rivalry in the first place.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Playing in a place called||
Playing in a place called Value City Arena is so damn OSU.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||I loved that and then I hated||
I loved that and then I hated that and then I loved that again. Great fucking win.
|7 weeks 6 hours ago||Easy for me, too||
|7 weeks 6 hours ago||300/100/100 It's about time||
It's about time for the NBA's first triple-triple.
|7 weeks 1 day ago||Others can answer this better||
Others can answer this better than I can, but they're apparently after a RB from Florida named Marlon Mack. He has a UCLA offer and then offers from some less prestigious programs. No offer from Michigan yet.
|7 weeks 1 day ago||FFS, he's a high school kid||
FFS, he's a high school kid you've never met, and he hasn't committed/decommitted anywhere yet (unlike Denzel Ward). As far as I know, he's never gotten into any trouble, and the coaching staffs from many top schools and programs - who can shy away from a kid if they have character questions - have continued to pursue him aggressively.
There's no reason to question a kid's character just because he's taking his time to figure out which college to choose. If anything, it's a sign of maturity, since he isn't putting himself in a position where he'd decommit later.
|7 weeks 1 day ago||Isn't that exactly the right||
Isn't that exactly the right strategy? You wait as long as you can with the top prospects until you have to move with the higher-probability, lower-ranked (but still very talented) guys?
|7 weeks 1 day ago||Loooser than you are.||
Loooser than you are.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||The Lions really are creative||
The Lions really are creative with finding new ways to punch their fans in the balls.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Interesting. Thank you for||
Interesting. Thank you for posting this.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||Shove it up your ass, jerk.||
Shove it up your ass, jerk.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||I don't know. I just watched||
I don't know. I just watched his clips from that game, and for one game - and an all-star game at that - I thought he looked pretty damn good.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||What exactly is slimy/questionable||
What exactly is slimy/questionable about offering a scholarship to a kid who didn't realize that the program he committed to was about to be obliterated by the NCAA, which came to believe that said program had been protecting a serial child molester?
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Oh, the irony of being the||
Oh, the irony of being the 20th person to post the same message about how this wastes valuable board space.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||You mean like retroactively||
You mean like retroactively hire Vince Lombardi, Chuck Noll, Bill Walsh, and Bill Belichick and then claim that we won all of those Super Bowls?
|7 weeks 4 days ago||I agree on the pass||
I agree on the pass interference thing. Here is my impression of MSU's defensive strategy:
Play with extra guys in the box to stuff the run and generate some pass rush. Have your corners play physical at the line of scrimmage to disrupt routes and throw off timing. Figure that between this disruption and the pass rush, most routes won't develop as cleanly as offenses like. Then, dare officials to keep throwing pass interference flags on you - which they won't want to do (aside from the ND-MSU crew) - by hanging on guys as the play progresses. At that point, to take advantage of your defense, an offense will have to overcome extra guys in the box (if it wants to run) or a pass rush, heavy route disruptions at the line of scrimmage, and pass interference (if it wants to throw). Even if they're getting single coverage, few Big Ten passing offenses are capable of that.
I really think it's a smart strategy for Big Ten right now. I'd like to see Michigan move in that direction.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Now there's a man who would||
Now there's a man who would appreciate the Northwestern uniforms above. He'd probably think it's sissy shit that any team doesn't wear those uniforms.
|7 weeks 5 days ago||Really, if you think about||
Really, if you think about who's expected to play, the whole offense looks like that except for at QB (thank God for that after-the-fact Gardner redshirt). Nuss will have a young group to work with. The bright side is that they're a year or two away from being insanely experienced.
|7 weeks 5 days ago||Agreed, and the next time||
Agreed, and the next time that I feel comfortable seeing Furman in our defensive backfield would be the first, but we have serious questions at safety next year and Furman is one guy who has played a decent amount of football here. I'd be happier with him on our roster than off of it.
|7 weeks 5 days ago||This crossed my mind too, but||
This crossed my mind too, but as long as they aren't on the field at the same time they can have the same number. With Furman a safety and Harris a WR, this pretty much just rules out seeing them on the same special teams unit.
|7 weeks 5 days ago||Wow. Congrats to Michael||
Wow. Congrats to Michael Ferns for getting the Seth Broekhuizen legends number.
|7 weeks 5 days ago||No, but knowing our defensive||
No, but knowing our defensive personnel inside and out could be a thing. We're bringing back basically the same defense next year. Borges probably knows the strengths and weaknesses of our guys at a level that no other OC could pick up from film study. There's an advantage there. Him knowing Mattison's tendencies and Mattison knowing Borges's tendencies might cancel out, but I'd rather not have opposing coaches with such insane familiarity with our personnel.
|7 weeks 5 days ago||So here's something that I||
So here's something that I don't think is a problem but I do think is interesting to think about. We're talking about a 2016 QB. The plan for that guy most likely would be to redshirt in 2016, sit behind whoever's more senior for some combination of 2017, 2018, and 2019 and then start playing somewhere between 2018-2020. I'm not sure that any of us believes that Nussmeier will be here in 2018, let alone 2020. I'd be shocked if Nussmeier himself believes that he'll be here that long.
What, exactly, are his incentives for that kind of way down the line recruiting of QBs? I'm sure he's a good, loyal guy and he understands that part of his job is to recruit for Michigan's long-term future, but it seems like if he's being totally self-interested he's thinking more about positions/guys/classes that will make an immediate impact. It's the same kind of situation as when you get a hot seat college coach who burns redshirts that a stable coach wouldn't burn or an NFL coach/GM who trades away future picks to get an immediate return.
I'd imagine that Hoke is keeping an eye on those things (and, again, that Nussmeier is a responsible, loyal guy). Still, just from a people respond to incentives perspective, I hope that he sees his reputation as a recruiter as really central to his head coaching prospects, even if it sometimes keeps him from doing things that would most directly contribute to our offensive performance over the next year or two.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||I'd add "4) because he's a||
I'd add "4) because he's a high school kid and high school kids do weird shit sometimes" and you'd have a statement that explains a lot of behavior in college football recruiting.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||On the other hand, if you||
On the other hand, if you know that they think they know what you're going to do, then why not take advantage of it?
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Especially since it's January||
Especially since it's January 9th. Maybe I'm not as all-seeing as the rest of you, but it usually takes me more than 9 days to figure out how a year's gonna go.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||We're getting a lot of these||
We're getting a lot of these threads lately. Pretty soon I'm calling for a POSBANG NEGBANG.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||I think this idea that saying||
I think this idea that saying there are execution issues is throwing players under the bus is so stupid. Throwing players under the bus is doing things like calling guys out individually or blaming their work ethic or character. Our coaches repeatedly said that they have to coach better. There were clearly execution issues this season,, many of which are on the coaches (which I'm sure they would agree with). What are they supposed to do, constantly tell everyone that the execution is great and it's just the scheme that needs work?
|8 weeks 1 day ago||You thought the defense||
You thought the defense played well against Akron?
|8 weeks 2 days ago||This is a good||
This is a good read:
I'm pumped. Looks like a great fit, great hire.