I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
|6 days 3 hours ago||I think you're right, and I||
I think you're right, and I think people with kids are less likely to see sports as the most important aspect (or one of the most important aspects) of their lives. I have a friend who talks about how much less stressed out she got when she had kids because she gained perspective on what's deserving of serious stress and anger and what isn't.
|6 days 3 hours ago||Ah, thanks. Best definition||
Ah, thanks. Best definition I've seen.
|6 days 3 hours ago||My sense is that she's||
My sense is that she's thinking non-parents are more bottom line oriented (win/loss) and less forgiving of a hard fought loss. My guess is that there's some truth to that, though who knows whether people are forgiving because they have kids or because the types of people who have kids are more forgiving.
Even if the observation is correct, I'm sure there are many, many exceptions here (in each direction).
|6 days 3 hours ago||Thank you, but I understand||
Thank you, but I understand trolling. Just not concern trolling.
|6 days 10 hours ago||Seriously. WTF is going on||
Seriously. WTF is going on here? I can't tell whether everyone knows but it's a pain to explain, no one knows, or no one is reading these threads anymore. I feel like Herm. The world stopped making sense, dammit.
|6 days 12 hours ago||I mentioned it below (as an||
I mentioned it below (as an inspired performance) not having seen this here. Gutsy win. No Mike Hart, a badly banged up Chad Henne, a tough, nationally televised night game against a good team.... all while we were still recovering from Appalachian State and the Oregon annihilation. The 2007 season had plenty of ups and downs, and this was a definite up.
|6 days 14 hours ago||If you're talking about most||
If you're talking about most inspired performance from a Michigan team, a few others come to mind for me from the past decade.
The comebacks in the 2003 Minnesota game and 2004 MSU game are in that discussion for me, too.
|6 days 14 hours ago||Can someone briefly explain||
Can someone briefly explain concern trolling to me? I looked it up last night, but I'm old and dumb and I still don't get it.
|6 days 21 hours ago||So were you entirely content||
So were you entirely content with the Akron game, since "a win is a win" (the flip side of "moral victories are worth zero").
I'd take an actual victory over a moral victory any day, but not all losses are created equal. Losing by 50 yesterday would have produced a much uglier offseason than this one will (with respect to recruiting, media coverage, etc.). Maybe you'd prefer that because it might have triggered bigger changes, but it's definitely not true that a loss is a loss and the details don't matter.
|6 days 21 hours ago||Yeah, realistically, I would||
Yeah, realistically, I would have loved the call if it had worked and hate the call now that it didn't. (I loved Hoke's call to go for two.) I haven't watched it closely since seeing it live, but my biggest gripe at the time was the lack of spacing. Then again, that spacing might have come if the line had held up for another second or two.
The bottom line is that crappy call or not, the offense did more than enough to win yesterday. I'm more tempted to crap on the defense than the offense. Even there, OSU's offense is damn good and we were missing a bunch of guys up the middle who really could have helped (Pipkins, Ross, Wilson).
Plus, I haven't seen much discussion of this, but I would NOT have felt comfortable with a one-point lead and 30 seconds left. In that situation, I think there's at least a 25-30% chance that OSU drives for the win. Even a 75-yard TD pass wouldn't have surprised me.
|1 week 11 hours ago||Can someone help me||
Can someone help me understand "concern trolling"? I just looked it up and I still don't get it.
Please note that I'm old and dumb if you're up to the challenge of defining this.
|1 week 19 hours ago||I just noticed that I||
I just noticed that I accidentally spelled Funk "F-u-c-k." I wonder how often he gets that. My fingers are very used to typing "fuck." Not so much with "funk."
|1 week 19 hours ago||For some reason when people||
For some reason when people hear "execution" they lose it, but that was obviously the difference. You can't develop talent in a week, and while I preferred our play-calling this week, it wasn't as different as some people are implying. For whatever reason, our offense executed much better this week than in recent weeks. That's true of Gardner, the O line, the non-OL blocking, and on and on.
To me, what to think about Borges (and Fuck, Jackson, etc.) depends on how you attribute the very uneven offensive execution throughout the season. In general, I think getting guys to execute is a big part of coaches' jobs. I also think that young players play like young players at times, and that's really hard to avoid.
I'm genuinely undecided at this point. With the talent that we have growing up and coming in, I don't have any doubt that our offense will improve markedly if we keep the same coaches. I also think there are better coaches out there than some of the guys we have. I'm interested to see what happens in the bowl game, and I don't think I'll be too upset no matter what happens.
|1 week 20 hours ago||I can't tell what here is||
I can't tell what here is about this game and what is about the season more generally. I'm talking about this game. I can't defend the offense earlier in the season.
|1 week 21 hours ago||This is a ridiculous comment.||
This is a ridiculous comment. Too many wasted downs? That was an outstanding game offensively. Every team in every game has a few bad/nothing plays. And Borges gets dinged because we lost despite the outstanding offensive performance?
|1 week 23 hours ago||relax. personally, i see a||
relax. personally, i see a 500-post thread and think, "eh, screw it."
|1 week 23 hours ago||i vote for deleting this||
i vote for deleting this thread.
|1 week 1 day ago||Would these be rumblings||
Would these be rumblings originating from the other Ace (the 12 year old one)? If so, definitely believe them, and thanks for sharing that here.
|1 week 3 days ago||Interesting that this list is||
Interesting that this list is so dominated by defensive coordinators. I wonder why that is.
|1 week 4 days ago||[First line removed because I||
[First line removed because I was being a hypocritical dick.]
Many of us (including me) would like a new offensive coordinator. That isn't a license to be a complete dick to a guy who's probably working his ass off and probably as upset and embarrassed about this as anyone. And no, the fact that he makes a lot of money doesn't excuse being a dick, either.
In my opinion, complaining about the offense is fine, calling for a firing is fine, expressing frustration about play-calling and talent development is fine, etc. A lot of the Borges stuff has crossed the line into really mean-spirited and personal. I get that it's the internet and places like this are a shit-show for humanity. Still, at the end of the day, Al Borges is probably a really good guy who is doing his best for Michigan and feeling really bad about what's happening. A little restraint from some people here might be nice.
|1 week 5 days ago||Awesome post. Thanks. Some||
Awesome post. Thanks.
|2 weeks 11 hours ago||This guy gets it. I was going||
This guy gets it. I was going to make a similar point.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||I'd be fine if we gave that||
I'd be fine if we gave that kid two scholarships. Very happy to hear that he'll be part of the program.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||My avatar is an actual||
My avatar is an actual photograph of me. What more do you want from me?
|3 weeks 4 days ago||SHUT UP.No, my original||
No, my original prediction here was Alabama. And I'm really not an "everything's horrible / we're doomed" guy.
My honest answer, though, is that I have no idea where he's going. He surprised everyone with his final three of Michigan, Alabama, and Florida, and he's been quoted saying it's funny to him that everyone thinks he has a leader. The Michigan in front stuff, as far as I can tell, is mostly based on him saying that we have his favorite staff. But he has used superlatives for other schools too (e.g., Bud Foster being his favorite coach). Yes, he has visited here a few times and loved it, but he has also visited other places a few times and loved it. This just feels to me like a case of the blind leading the blind with those expert predictions. My clueless probabilities would probably be something like 45% Alabama, 40% Michigan, and 15% Florida.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Poopy Ferguson Prediction:||
This isn't just based on our struggles this season. I probably would have predicted Alabama a month or two ago. I just don't get where the "Hand to Michigan" conventional wisdom comes from.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Remember this||
Remember this thread?
Sam's predictions for final five guys in this class: Da'Shawn Hand, Artavis Scott, Malik McDowell, Jamarco Jones, and Adoree Jackson.
Making those kinds of predictions is really hard, so I'm not dumping on the guy, but unless someone seems to have first-hand knowledge of what a kid's doing (no pun intended), I generally take these predictions with a grain of salt. I've been saying for awhile that I'm skeptical of the "Michigan's the clear leader" stuff on Hand. He surprised everyone with his final list of three and has said that he doesn't know why everyone thinks he has a favorite. Sometimes I think one "expert" comes up with a prediction and then the echo chamber starts going, making it look like there's consensus when it's really not based on anything.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Actually, we should be good||
Actually, we should be good for awhile now. When the Big Ten expands to 96 schools, we'll only play them once or twice per century, so this should carry us at least into the 2300s.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||I think the main reason is||
I think the main reason is sample size. In football recruiting, with 20-25 kids per class, the classes even out quite a bit. In basketball recruiting, with <5 kids per class, getting lucky/unlucky with one or two kids can make the difference between a great class and a lousy class.
To me, if we're looking for trends, look for whether Michigan is involved with top recruits and whether this staff has shown some ability to finish with them. I think the answer to both questions is yes. It sucks that we missed on Blackmon, Booker, etc., but if we're using this to predict our long-term recruiting potential, I'd be much more worried if we weren't getting serious looks from those types of prospects. Plus, we're just one class removed from the McGary, Robinson, etc. powerhouse class.
I also think that the Final Four run (and pretty play) will pay off later and that even if we never reach Kentucky-level recruiting we have coaches who can win with other kinds of talent. So I'm not worried.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Yes, and Jehuu Caulcrick's||
Yes, and Jehuu Caulcrick's Twitter account was totally hacked when he said that he and his teammates took money at MSU.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||I've been in "wait and see"||
I've been in "wait and see" mode with Borges. I've seen now.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||It's funny - the only thing||
It's funny - the only thing that really bothered me about the clip was the praise of Brandon. I think some people here are taking this way too seriously. She's a 70-year-old woman who has served the university well (in my opinion), is nearing retirement, and had a few drinks at a football game (apparently at an event that further serves the university). I'm more than willing to laugh this off as a "we've all been there" moment. Plus, there's something endearing and human about it, given that she holds the position she holds and has no known history of these kinds of things.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||I totally agree with this.||
I totally agree with this. In fact, if I were sketching out my ideal coach, I think he'd be a great leader, teacher/mentor, face of the program, and recruiter who makes good in-game decisions (e.g., has a good sense of when to go on 4th down)... and one who's able to hire great coordinators and willing to let them do their jobs. Obviously we have coaching issues on the offensive side that need to be resolved, but aside from that, I think Hoke's close to my best case scenario. The fact that he loves the institution and won't leave only helps.
|4 weeks 15 hours ago||Any thoughts about what looks||
Any thoughts about what looks like our best option, short term (this season) and long term (next season)?
|4 weeks 15 hours ago||+1, Realistic||
|4 weeks 15 hours ago||I really think the increased||
I really think the increased coverage and following of recruiting is giving people false hopes about what guys do as underclassmen. The fact that we're paying attention to what high school kids are doing now doesn't mean that they're suddenly much better prepared to contribute immediately.
Our guys will most likely be really good... in a couple of years. I know that's shitty, but I've been saying it since last season and still believe it's true. It's just really hard for 19- and 20-year-olds who are getting their first college playing time (and college life experience) to compete with 22- and 23-year olds who have grown physically, matured, been coached up, and learned to play together for the past several years.
If there's an upside to our youth, it's that we'll be insanely experienced in a couple of years. We won't be the usual type of experienced - lots of juniors and seniors who are stepping into increased roles. We'll be experienced in that we'll have juniors and seniors who are multi-year starters. I'm looking forward to that.
|4 weeks 15 hours ago||Really, this is one of the||
Really, this is one of the central tragedies and absurdities about being a sports fan, no?
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Also, the narrative that||
Also, the narrative that we're the smug, arrogant ones is really stupid. It should be reconsidered after the past few years, but I'm sure it won't.
MSU fans are talking way more shit these days than Michigan fans ever did. We talk a lot of shit, but about 95% of it is directed at our own program. Plus, there's nothing more arrogant to me in college sports than MSU's whole "you can't root for a college team unless you went to college at that school" / "Walmart Wolverine" thing.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||I don't think, that dude,||
I don't think, that dude, understands, where commas go.
What a brutal read.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||Meh. I like this as a||
Meh. I like this as a gesture of good will and wouldn't feel bad about it if I were an MSU guy. I hate Sparty's athletic teams. I have no problem with MSU as an institution, even if it is the second or third best one in the state.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||For context, this guy is||
For context, this guy is known as an extremely polished route runner. This is some damn nice evidence of that.
If he can block, I sense an early contributor here.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||Guess what. You've all||
Guess what. You've all posted in a thread in which a guy who has smoked pot has posted.
Fired, all of you.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||I agree with Cook looking||
I agree with Cook looking much better with time. Between that, the inability of our defensive line to get pressure rushing four, and MSU's question marks at WR, I wonder whether we'll see more aggressiveness from Mattison than we've been seeing. It seems like it could work here. Then again, he might also look at MSU's offense and figure, "Let's see these guys string together 10 well executed plays to get points."
|5 weeks 3 days ago||No, I agree. It'll be death||
No, I agree. It'll be death against MSU. As I said below, though, if you put 27 for 27 in context ("14 for 4," as someone says below) it feels like more of an indictment of our running game than an indictment of an OC who blows play after play doing something that obviously won't work. A bad running game is damn good reason not to run like crazy against MSU, but my understanding of "27 for 27" (as a meme) is that it was meant to reflect play calling failure as much as anything. There were huge coaching failures against PSU, but until we decided to put all of our eggs into the Gibbons and don't-let-them-drive-90-yards-in-one-minute baskets, we really hadn't run Fitz into the ground. Anyway, this is all kind of beside the point...
I think Saturday's game will be decided largely by what kind of Gardner we get - and whether we can avoid the cheap shots at his knees and ankles. I'm fine with feeling out an RB-based run game early to see if it looks like there's anything there, but if Fitz can't find anything, it's time to switch quickly to going all in on Devin.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||That's fair. I agree. I||
That's fair. I agree. I just think "27 for 27" is misleading (or at least ambiguous) as a meme and this post made me think that Brian wants to keep it around.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||It might be worse, but it's||
It might be worse, but it's different from the initial critique. The initial critique (kind of broadly, not just from one person) was "Why the hell do you do something over and over and over again when it clearly doesn't work?" On the other hand, 14 for 4 is more of a, "Why don't we have a damn running game?" I'm not saying either is fun... in fact, I"ll say neither is fun... but the critique is different. I'm personally inclined to put more of "14 for 4" on Funk and Rodriguez for the state of our interior line. If it had been all about wasting plays when we were trying to drive, I would put more of that on Borges.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||Yeah, this isn't big deal||
Yeah, this isn't big deal territory, but I rolled my eyes a bit when qualification was advised on Michigan's final (successful) drive against Indiana and yet "27 for 27" apparently can stand as totally representative.
|5 weeks 5 days ago||I just read that link about||
I just read that link about Mone and it didn't seem conclusive to me. Do we know for sure what's happening there? Has Sam said anything recently?
|5 weeks 6 days ago||Something tells me you didn't||
Something tells me you didn't watch either game. UCLA played Oregon even-up (in score and in their play) in Eugene until the last few minutes of the 3rd quarter and then lost control and looked exhausted. That's probably because the week before they played Stanford even-up until at least the 3rd quarter in Palo Alto. If you think we would have hung in either of those games (@Oregon, @Stanford) like UCLA did, I'm not sure what that's based on.
|6 weeks 1 hour ago||Because they've been better||
Because they've been better than us. Competitive road losses in back to back weeks against Stanford and Oregon doesn't exactly warrant a free fall down the rankings. Records are misleading.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||I'm not at all a complain||
I'm not at all a complain about officiating guy (except in the 2005 Alamo Bowl and all college hockey games), but I think the OP makes a fair point. The way that the pass coverage is officiated will be a huge factor in who wins this game. If I'm Hoke & co., I'm getting on the refs early (maybe even now) and often.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||Way, way, way too early for||
Way, way, way too early for any conclusions like that. And Lewan was a mess early in his career.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||I agree with you on #1 (that||
I agree with you on #1 (that a lack of information leads to analysts citing one another and developing a baseless conventional wisdom). That actually worries me a bit with Hand. For awhile there was a conventional wisdom, based on who knows what, that he was focusing on Virginia Tech and Michigan (and maybe another school, I can't remember). Hand never corrected that except to say, "I haven't told anyone anything about my favorites." Now the conventional wisdom is that Michigan is the clear frontrunner, but again, I've never seen him say anything that makes that clear. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he ended up at one of the other schools even with everyone calling Hand to Michigan these days.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||I agree if you're talking||
I agree if you're talking about a baseball team 80-100 games into its schedule, but we've only seen this Michigan team seven times and while there are some patterns in their performance, I still feel like we're figuring out what we have. I'm sure the team's youth has something to do with that, but it's not like I feel like I understand OSU, Northwestern, PSU, etc. like I usually understand the Tigers, White Sox, etc. through this % of their games.
Edit: This would probably be better placed as a response to denard, above.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||If Oregon wins its next two||
If Oregon wins its next two games (vs. #12 UCLA, @ #6 Stanford), I think they jump both Alabama and FSU.
|7 weeks 13 hours ago||Obviously it's really early||
Obviously it's really early for this, but it's interesting that we might return 10 offensive starters in 2015... with the other one being the QB. That can't possibly happen very often in college football.
|7 weeks 13 hours ago||Good, right. Obviously,||
Good, right. Obviously, you've identified all of his successes (one, by your count... today) and failures, making this a really good, well reasoned, balanced look at his performance. My apologies for using aggregate statistics and, you know, sanity.
|7 weeks 15 hours ago||Some of you guys act like||
Some of you guys act like such children on here.
No, you're not "supposed" to put up 750 yards of offense against Indiana and bail out your team for a horrific defensive performance. And no, you're not "supposed" to look like that every game. Coaches and players have a natural up and down to their performances.
I've posted this a couple of times already, but let's recap the 2.5 years we've had Borges. In Year 1, the offense exceeded all reasonable expectations after the coaching change and ranked 9th in Football Outsiders' opponent-adjusted offensive efficiency, if that's a statistic you like. In Year 2, we were up at times (Iowa, South Carolina) and down at times (most maddeningly, OSU), and our year long offensive efficiency was 25th IIRC. I wouldn't call it a great year offensively but it definitely wasn't terrible. This year we've seen four games that have been pretty brilliant offensively (CMU, ND, Minny, Indiana) and three that have been pretty awful offensively (Akron, UConn, Penn State).
To me, the rational position to have on Borges is wait and see. Last week's combination of "fire him immediately," "fire him later - it's obvious," and "burn that piece of shit - I hate him" reflected an absurd amount of selective memory, pettiness, nastiness, and lack of reason among our fans. We're getting a lot more information each week. Is it really so hard to show a little restraint and take in that information without losing your shit online after each game? And to those pointing to the montages of bad plays/calls as reason to still hate him, believe me, I could create one of those to make any coach look terrible. Hell, Mattison has probably provided far more material for those than Borges since they got here.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||Oh, right, I forgot the||
Oh, right, I forgot the purpose of this exercise was to talk exclusively about every poor game, quarter, play, and step we can remember without also mentioning the positives. My apologies for using aggregate statistics and reason.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||First, yes, I think he gets a||
First, yes, I think he gets a pass, because I think sports fans are way, way too quick to jump on the "COACH X SUCKS, FIRE HIS ASS" bandwagon.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||I swear this Borges stuff has||
I swear this Borges stuff has brought more craziness, memory loss, and selective presentation of information, both on the front page and in reader comments, than any other issue I remember as a Michigan fan.
Al Borges has been our coordinator for <2.5 seasons. In the first season, our offense was excellent, outperforming all reasonable expectations considering the coaching change. I'll let you pick your own statistics, but Football Outsiders' offensive efficiency numbers (opponent-adjusted) had us with the 9th best offense in college football that year. Last season, our offensive output was up and down, with some great games (Iowa, South Carolina, etc.) and some crap games (most obviously and frustratingly OSU). That same measure had our offense 25th in the country. This season the offense has been spectacular at times (ND, CMU, maybe Minny) and maddeningly inept at times (PSU, Akron, UConn). It's early, but Football Outsiders has us 29th.
This idea that the offense has sucked beyond explanation for three years now is completely without a basis in reality. Honestly, I think the most rational perspective to have on Borges is "undecided - let's see what happens for the rest of the season." I personally expected this year to be a semi-rough one and hoped mostly that we'd do well enough for the crazies in our fanbase to stay off the coaches' backs while we obviously build for the seasons beyond this one (and really beginning in 2015). Am I sure that Borges (or, especially, Funk) is the guy? No, and if at the end of the season it looks like a change would be beneficial, I hope we do it. But let's not rewrite history -- or the present, for that matter -- by remembering and presenting only the worst of the last few years.
|7 weeks 2 days ago||Excellent. I was thinking the||
Excellent. I was thinking the one thing this roundup needed was an invitation to turn it into yet another discussion of Al Borges.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||I second the praise for Space||
I second the praise for Space Coyote. You've become my favorite voice on this blog, staff or reader. Thanks for your contributions, especially your most recent ones.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||I see a lot of people blaming||
I see a lot of people blaming the lack of user moderation, and while I think that could help, a moderation system is only as good as the users who moderate it.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Even if people are going to||
Even if people are going to be reactionary and emotional, which fine I get because that's sports, can some of you try not to be such fucking assholes? I'm sure that Borges doesn't enjoy it when the offense is crappy and I'm sure he's working his ass off. By all accounts he's a good, nice guy. Even if you don't like his offense, at least be civil.
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Thanks for doing this, but I||
Thanks for doing this, but I don't think there's much information here of relevance. Some reasons...
1. You've cherry-picked the one school that runs MANBALL and has come out of nowhere the fastest over the past few years. What about others? Obviously, we'd love to rise at that pace, but I don't really like the "we should be able to do it since [one outlier] did it" line of reasoning.
2. Did Stanford transition from anything like what we ran under Rodriguez?
3. The problem under Rodriguez definitely wasn't our ability to run. That's the one thing we did really, really well (especially against mediocre/bad teams). Defense and passing were the problems there. In Hoke's first year, when we were still essentially running the RR offense with Denard, we expected to run reasonably well.
4. Our offensive line should be blocking better, but there's still that stubborn reality that we have a really young offensive line right now and offensive line is probably the position group that requires the most coaching, seasoning, and body development. Plus, I'd imagine that we won't be putting many walk-ons out there once these guys get a little older.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||I'm really not a Borges||
I'm really not a Borges defender, but I think it's stupid to call for firings six games into a 12-14 game schedule during which we get a lot more information each week. I'm as infuriated as anyone with the offensive coaching on Saturday (and through most of this season), but I can see many realistic scenarios for the rest of this season that make the early season sins forgivable. My view of Borges's performance here is this:
If this season keeps up (keeps down?), I think a change needs to be made. If we go 2012 Iowa / 2013 ND against most of the rest of our schedule, including MSU and OSU, and if it looks like there's some learning and direction happening, I'll argue for keeping him. I think it's stupid to do this now. Football sets us up beautifully for week-to-week emotional overreactions. I try not to do that, either on the ups or the downs.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||It makes me happy to know||
It makes me happy to know that there are people like you in this world and on this blog. I wish there were more like you.
|7 weeks 6 days ago||In hindsight, I wonder if a||
In hindsight, I wonder if a fade might have been the right call there. In single coverage, which they almost certainly had, it's a pretty low-risk play (especially with a nice height and hands advantage). You just tell Morris to throw it into the stands if there's any hint of double coverage or other trouble.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I won't get into with you||
I won't get into with you here -- and you're right that my post is dickish, at least out of the context of the past couple of weeks. Also, for what it's worth, I have no problem with the WLA guys getting banned. In fact, I've made that point on the board (not that you'd have any reason to remember that).
Anyway, whatever. I hope the shirt sells well. If anything, I suspect that people who find things funny that others don't find funny - a position I'm often in, too - will be more excited to buy this shirt if they think others don't get it.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||Ah yes, the new MGoBlog||
Ah yes, the new MGoBlog mentality of "How dare anyone question our awesomeness and righteousness"? If you've decided that you won't tolerate anyone questioning anything the staff does, writes, or creates, then why not make an explicit board rule about it? I'm sure that people who love the shirt as much as you suggest will buy it even though a few of us simpletons aren't crazy about it.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||Now that the video is working||
Now that the video is working for me, I see that it's supposed to look like John Belushi. So that's good.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||I don't get it. And it looks||
I don't get it. And it looks like John Belushi.
|10 weeks 1 day ago||It's remarkable and telling||
It's remarkable and telling that this guy (WD) wasn't targeted in this week's clean up efforts. Welcome to the new MGoBlog.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||I think I might have||
I think I might have misinterpreted your "only four posters" point -- and that MGoBrewMom might have in the same way. Are you referring to the WLA guys as those four posters? I initially took your point to be that only a few people were pissed in the original 600-comment thread and at the end of the day they don't really represent any bigger, meaningful group. I took it as a slap to the face of some of your long-term (or more thoughtful) readers, but maybe it was intended as a slap to the face of the WLA guys?
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Thanks for saying something||
Thanks for saying something about this, Seth. I want to speak my piece too, but I won’t push this forever or pick a fight.
Here’s the way that this exchange came across to me and the reason that I found the whole thread depressing. It felt like MGoBlog was essentially saying this:
How dare you, MGoBrewMom (and others), say that this 14/15-year-old, whose photo I just posted, looks young? Guh. Of course everything we’re doing is totally appropriate, stop asking questions and giving advice. Since social media exists, it’s totally fine to approach anyone there directly, however young, interview them without extending the courtesy of contacting their coaches first, and then post those interviews – without showing them to coaches or parents before publishing – on a blog visited by tens of thousands of people daily. You guys are pricks for asking about it and we don’t need you.
It’s hard to reconcile that with the blog’s critiques about the NCAA’s exploitation of college kids, antagonistic mocking of other schools’ recruits (e.g., MSU’s WR-turned-rapper), harsh treatment of Michigan athletes for their play (the Obi Ezehs of the world), frequent comments that seem at least as likely to offend as the “he looks young” stuff (e.g., frequently posting Jeremy Gallon’s photo alongside that of a girl), and, I think worst of all, the expressed frustration with the UM AD making Michigan more like every other school (for short run $) instead of emphasizing what many of us believe makes Michigan unique and worthy of our absurd devotion. I thought this thread showed signs that same kind of move from the MGoBlog staff.
I think you’re all good dudes and I’ll keep reading, at least until something else comes around, but the whole thing is sad to me. I also disagree with the “it’s only four posters” point, but I’ll leave that alone.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||This thread certainly has an||
This thread certainly has an "MGoBlog jumping the shark" feel to it. I keep hoping that someone from the staff will respond in a reasonable way after a couple of days of reflection, but it's probably time to give up on that.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||I think that probably||
I think that probably reflects correlations between time spent on the site and some personality characteristics.
There are obviously loads of exceptions, but I think the longer-time posters are probably, on average, a little more drawn to the analytical stuff here (e.g., the Mathlete's work) and some of the bigger, broader questions about ethics and college sports. We're also probably more entitled and snobbish, more inclined to be "get off my lawn" types (who aren't thrilled with DB), more interested in reading good writing (as, I think, Brian's is), more sarcastic with our humor, etc.
The potentially bizarre future for MGoBlog is one in which most of the front page content appeals primarily to this personality type while the vast majority of people who visit - and post on the board - are completely different types of Michigan fans (e.g., MLive expats). Getting to that future might require an another site to pop up and attract the personalities I'm associating with the old-timers here - and it's very possible that we won't get to that future anytime soon - but it'll be interesting to watch.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||haha, +1||
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Brian, for what it's worth, I||
Brian, for what it's worth, I think you should address this again at some point. Although I can only speak for myself, I suspect you've left a lot of readers feeling alienated. I almost always find your writing insightful, fair, consistent, clever, and charitable to the people you're writing about (or addressing), but this thread - to me - doesn't meet those standards. I'm totally willing to chalk that up to a weird moment. I'd imagine that UFR'ing the Akron and UConn games does strange things to a man.
I'm not worked up about chitown, because while I liked reading his posts, I get that there's a personal history that we don't need to know about and that's more than enough to justify him getting axed. What bothers me is (1) the attack on posters who had no reason to believe they had done anything wrong, without any suggestion that MGoBlog might have been partly responsible, and (2) the complete lack of ambivalence expressed about contacting and writing about young kids (and lack of interest expressed in engaging in a conversation about reasonable precautions to take while doing so).
Personally, I'd love to see MGoBlog take the lead on responsible interaction with recruits, since I think you guys are unusually classy for people working in this area and I think your product is more than strong enough to stand on its own without constantly breaking recruiting news. Not that I was asked, but I could imagine just a couple really basic rules like (1) we won't contact kids until they turn 16 and (2) we'll reach out to kids through their coaches first. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if that ended up getting you access to some kids who won't talk to other sources because the kids, coaches, or parents don't like how the other sources do business.
Just my two cents.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||I find this post really||
I find this post really depressing. I think you're making straw men of legitimate arguments about how a site like MGoBlog should behave in a really crazy recruiting coverage environment, and while I don't know what Butterfield and chitown have been posting lately, it's sad to me that posters like them are your targets (rather than the "Wolverines Dominate" types). It's your blog - and a really damn good one - so I'll step aside, but if I'm reading this comment and thread correctly then I hope you're right that a good, non-MLivey alternative either exists or comes into existence.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||I think it's funny that we||
I think it's funny that we all think this board has gone to hell because of the presence of posters who behave differently from us, yet we all have different ideas in mind about whose posts are good and whose posts aren't. I guess one man's douche bag is another man's friend? Nah, that sounds kind of gross.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||I just read your comment, and||
I just read your comment, and I think this whole post by Brian is absurdly, uncharacteristically childish and irresponsible. MGoBlog publishing an interview with him is 1000x more to blame for his response than you essentially saying "he looks young."
I'm in complete agreement with Brian that we should be careful not to upset these kids, especially when they're so insanely young. Aside from disabling comments or not running the stories, I don't know how to do that, since it's so hard to predict what will upset a 14/15-year-old.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Definitely recruiting||
Definitely recruiting coverage as a whole. I just kind of liked seeing MGoBlog rise above that (again, something that I think Ace deserves credit for).
I'll make another pitch here... If MGoBlog adopts it as a policy that they'll only talk to high school kids after getting permission from their coaches or parents first, I think that'd be a major site making an interesting statement. Hopefully some recruits (or coaches) would take notice and start to demand that of the other sites.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Fake +1||
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Thanks for taking the time||
Thanks for taking the time and writing such a detailed, honest response. I'm still a little freaked about about all of this - and still think MGoBlog should consider that policy - but at the very least you seem like a good dude who would never deliberately harm anyone.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||I love this comment. I'm not||
I love this comment. I'm not sure whether my favorite part is what you wrote or the link. My comments definitely suggest infertility and/or having fat, unathletic kids, and I'm sure that every parent's dream is to have Roger Goodell invite his kid to the Super Bowl.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||I'd like to know the answer||
I'd like to know the answer to this. If that's not Brandon's approach (going through parents or coaches), I think MGoBlog should consider adopting that as its policy. You guys were doing great before you broke recruiting news yourselves. It won't break you to lose a few interviews if you're declined by parents or coaches.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Happy to hear that you live||
Happy to hear that you live in such a black and white world.
You don't think there are any potentially negative consequences to having a bunch of schools' versions of MGoBlog, along with national media like ESPN, 247, Scout, and Rivals, along with anyone who wants to make a name for himself by starting a blog and breaking recruiting news, pestering 14/15-year-old kids for (frequent) interviews and then conducting those interviews with kids who most likely have no idea how to handle them?
I'm guilty here, too, because I like reading recruiting news, but there's no way in hell that I'd want my own kids (if I had them) subjected to that.
EDIT: I should add that one of the things I like best about Ace is that he seems a little reluctant, in a totally healthy and grown up way, to dive into these kids' lives like some other recruiting types do. I also like that he seems to give kids the benefit of the doubt with everything he writes. Whenever I see an adult on Twitter pestering 14/15-year-olds for interviews I'm taken aback a bit.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||I haven't seen this article||
I haven't seen this article or the comments that followed it, but isn't it a fair question whether it's healthy for MGoBlog to be conducting and publishing interviews with kids who are probably 15 years old? I'm definitely glad that I don't have interviews on record from when I was that age - and that I didn't have to deal with media requests for attention.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Seth(+3) makes lives better.||
Seth(+3) makes lives better.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Got it. Thanks.||
Got it. Thanks.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||How do you figure that doing||
How do you figure that doing this well is worth "perhaps 100 yards of field position a game"? That seems like a really high estimate to me.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||I'm kind of blown away by how||
I'm kind of blown away by how often and how completely I disagree with you on things. In a way, I actually think it's cool, since most people I interact with (especially in person) tend to have views and dispositions that are similar to mine. Being a fan of a school like Michigan offers a big, broad tent.
You'll probably disagree with this assessment.
|11 weeks 26 min ago||My guess is that it happens||
My guess is that it happens occasionally. What's impressive about our fall is that it's not due to teams just below us in the rankings leaping up with good wins against good opponents. We're doing this all by ourselves.
|11 weeks 19 hours ago||I've had 75 beers and I think||
I've had 75 beers and I think this is kind of an interesting idea.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||So you think up an unlikely||
So you think up an unlikely scenario and then mockingly say, "But that wouldn't fit the narrative very well now would it?" when the much likelier explanation (that Brandon had a say in this) fits the narrative perfectly. Plus, even if one of his minions did this without running it by Brandon, it would say a lot about Brandon that anyone would have the impression that's okay.
I don't think this is a big deal - and it's really not a lot of money - but I'm not sure what else people need to see to believe that we have an egomaniacal, 12-year-old, dollars-before-people athletic director.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||I don't think massblue even||
I don't think massblue even reads these stories before he starts threads. He started one last week about how Michigan-Notre Dame was the highest rated regular season college football game in ESPN history, which was also clearly not what the article said.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||As long as they're Michigan||
As long as they're Michigan fans and they taste good grilled, right?
No, I'm kidding, San Diego Mick. I also think this is a very nice gesture.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||San Diego Mick is a cannibal.||
San Diego Mick is a cannibal. Don't do this. He killed and ate my family and all of my friends when they went to his house to watch the UConn-Michigan game in 2010. He lives for this, and I've expected this post ever since this UConn game got scheduled.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||Your user name suggests as||
Your user name suggests as much.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||I've seen "October" a number||
I've seen "October" a number of times, but have we heard anything more specific about Ryan's expected return date?
Here's the upcoming schedule:
|11 weeks 5 days ago||You do realize that you're||
You do realize that you're like the 20th person to complain about how someone posted something that has been posted before.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||It looks like she has an||
It looks like she has an alumni entry in the UM directory. I don't think MSU's online directory shows alumni, so I'm not sure how to check on that one.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Sorry, I was kidding.||
Sorry, I was kidding.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||What are you talking||
What are you talking about?
It looks like he nailed it.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Are there any national||
Are there any national records that we should be watching with Harris? When a guy is putting up 300+ yards and 3+ TDs every week, that can be too far off record paces, no?
|12 weeks 5 days ago||That photo of Beilein is||
That photo of Beilein is banner material for NCAA tournament time.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||I don't think we'll get a||
I don't think we'll get a permanent rival, but I disagree that the goal with a 9-game schedule will be to find three nonconference cupcakes. I think the goal should be to play a schedule that probably gets you into the playoff even if you lose once (without being insanely difficult). It helps that we're in the better Big Ten division.
My guess is that the long-term formula will be something like one tough game (and very tough every now and then), one should-win game against a big conference team, and one cupcake. So something like Florida State, Iowa State, and Ball State; or UCLA, NC State, and WMU; or Georgia, Colorado, and Bowling Green.
Personally, I'd rather have Notre Dame filling that tough-to-very-tough spot, but chickens and all.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||This doesn't seem too far||
This doesn't seem too far from the norm for high-profile players, does it? I'd imagine that guys like Peyton Manning and Tom Brady have cameras on them for essentially the whole game, too. Same thing for a lot of coaches, no?
|12 weeks 6 days ago||I was about to respond to||
I was about to respond to some of your points individually, but #10 looked so awesome in the context of the rest of your pompous, delusional, misinformed, self-aggrandizing, cognitively inept claims that I opted for writing out the full list.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||To make this easier for||
To make this easier for people to respond, I'll summarize your arguments here.
1. There was nothing wrong with what Comparoni said, since "Bust [knees] Doss style vs Willis McGahee" isn't explicitly banned in the rules.
2. Rather than talk on a message board, the ways to address this issue are to write a letter to Delany telling him that Quarterbacks (sic) should be untouchable or writing a letter to Hoke telling him that we don't want our Quarterback (sic) running around like that.
3. The reason that Notre Dame stopped the Michigan series is because it believes the MSU and Purdue games are more important than the Michigan game.
4. No top basketball recruit would want to play at Michigan.
5. No one in the Big Ten has a Heisman candidate, and Gardner isn't one because RichRod's exciting offensive players didn't turn out well.
6. Spartan Stadium is vastly superior to Michigan Stadium.
7. MSU football should be measured by its performance in the past five years against Michigan.
8. MSU thinks that it has rivalries with Notre Dame, Wisconsin, and Ohio State.
9. Michigan is not a traditional football power.
10. Michigan fans are pompous, delusional, misinformed, self-aggrandizing, and cognitively inept.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||This is just some dipshit||
This is just some dipshit playing to his dipshit readers, but the MSU coaches don't seem too far removed from this philosophy. Hell, immediately after playing one of the dirtiest games I've ever seen in 2011 against us, one of their safeties said their goal was to hurt Russell Wilson the next weekend.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||I had the same reaction.||
I had the same reaction. That's the time to put your arm around him, tell him you're proud of him for how he performed on that stage (which I thought was very well), and then tell him that you'll help him learn from the mistakes later in the week. That's an unbelievable amount of pressure for a college kid, and to lay into him on national television for a mistake that he already feels awful about is, to me, way over the top.
If I were a recruit, there's no way I'd want to play for an asshole like him. I strongly prefer the Hoke/Carr style of protecting players in the public and taking care of the discipline and criticism behind closed doors.
|13 weeks 19 hours ago||This raises questions about||
This raises questions about the ethics of asking a buddy to DVR a Michigan game and watch the recording with you if you'll be an hour late. I don't think I'd ever ask anyone to do that, but if one of my friends asked me I think I'd be fine with it.
|13 weeks 20 hours ago||Like he said, no one likes a||
Like he said, no one likes a quitter. Thus, no passing out.
|13 weeks 20 hours ago||If it's any consolation, the||
If it's any consolation, the feeling is mutual. There are probably only three or four posters here who make me cringe every time I see their avatars. You're in elite company.
Regardless, Go Blue.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||Plays or drives? If it's||
Plays or drives? If it's really 5 turnovers in their first 5 plays, that's one of the craziest stats I've ever seen.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||If true - and if it's not a||
If true - and if it's not a completely subtle/trivial change...
Fuck you, Brandon. The only thing I don't like about seeing video and photos from UTL is not seeing Michigan against Notre Dame in each team's classic uniform. To me, those images would be much nicer if we had been wearing, you know, the best uniform in sports. This crap is so misplaced for a home game against Notre Dame.
Okay, rant over and time to calm down and get back to getting excited for the game.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||I agree. Boo to that one. My||
I agree. Boo to that one.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||Uh, I think that's the joke.||
Uh, I think that's the joke.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||He looks like a really good||
He looks like a really good prospect. Best of luck to you guys with your season.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||I'm not sure that "role||
I'm not sure that "role model" is what jumps off the page when I look at that list.
|13 weeks 5 days ago||The NFL does it. I know they||
The NFL does it. I know they punish the players, but I'm not sure about the coaches. It's definitely not impossible, though there would obviously be challenges.
|13 weeks 5 days ago||This is a great write-up,||
This is a great write-up, Brian. My favorite line -- "Since the only foot that went off of was Dymonte's I think we should have seen the world's first offensive roughing the kicker penalty."
|13 weeks 6 days ago||I like it, but win 2-0 and||
I like it, but win 2-0 and we're down to one kickoff and one punt. We might need a couple of scoreless 25-30 minute possessions, but how hard could that possibly be?
|13 weeks 6 days ago||I like this. I was going to||
I like this. I was going to propose an after-the-fact review of film, prompted when an opponent files a complaint, but I wasn't sure about the punishment. If the kids are just doing what they're told it's hard to punish them, and something like scholarship penalties seems a little detached from what happened and maybe too severe. I like the idea of banning the coach from participating in coaching activities for a bit if his team is found guilty of this on film.
|14 weeks 2 days ago||33-10, good guys||
33-10, good guys
|14 weeks 5 days ago||What I think they should do||
What I think they should do is make the patches permanent fixtures on their given number. For example, #21 will forever have Howard's name on it as a way to honor him but keep the number in circulation. After that, just do the numbers as they've always been done. If a freshman (or any other) reserve wants to wear #21 and no one else has it, that's fine with me. Just don't ask guys to switch numbers or make such a big deal of these things.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||Wow, with that, I'd say that||
Wow, with that, I'd say that Indiana has almost no shot at the national title this season.
|14 weeks 6 days ago||Did Hagerup figure into that||
Did Hagerup figure into that somehow?
|14 weeks 6 days ago||It looks like it. The guy||
It looks like it. The guy opens his mouth and everyone starts smiling and laughing. I love these videos.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Highly recommended. It sure||
Highly recommended. It sure isn't hard to like this kid. Canzior, can you remind me of your connection to him?
|15 weeks 1 day ago||The kid can kick, too.||
The kid can kick, too. These are from Bill Greene (OSU recruiting guy) last night:
|15 weeks 3 days ago||I'm really not contributing||
I'm really not contributing anything with this, but FWIW, I found this to be one of the most intriguing, thought-provoking little exchanges I've seen on this blog.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||Yes. It's awful. Horrible,||
Yes. It's awful. Horrible, really. Really, really horrible.
We have no idea who will be good in 2016. If the coaches assume that they should just start the guys with the best recruiting profiles, we have a problem. That's a little different from us speculating on a message board about how we might have a talented, experienced roster in a few years.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||Your whole comment left off||
Your whole comment left off Canteen and Ways whom we're bringing in next year. I wish people would STOP making posts that aren't absolutely thorough in describing our roster.
(I even said it's a sampling of our roster. Easy there, He-Man.)
|15 weeks 4 days ago||I was going to make a joke||
I was going to make a joke about how Facebook and Google know too, then it hit me that if Redd described his trip or sent photos to anyone then Facebook and Google probably actually do know this.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||I agree. This is especially||
I agree. This is especially depressing to me because Darboh had a high fun factor going into the season. We know little about him and yet it seemed like he could be fun to watch.
Shit happens I guess, and this makes that 2016 offense just a little more ridiculous with respect to its potential talent and experience. A sampling of the guys who could be around that year (and yes, I know that some of them won't work out as well as hoped).
QB: Shane Morris (Sr./RS Jr.)
We could be in an interesting, nice spot. A lot of really talented young guys will be playing this season and next, so by 2015/2016 these guys will have way more playing time and starting experience under their belts than you usually see.
The defense shouldn't be so bad either.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||24/7 doesn't let people||
24/7 doesn't let people change their predictions once a recruit is committed. Lorenz was one of many with a UNC prediction, which he couldn't change after Hood committed to ND.
Lorenz, however, was happy to bring attention to his brilliant foresight with a recent Twitter posting.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||Also, since you mentioned fan||
Double post. Sorry. OSU sucks. Go Blue.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||Also, since you mentioned fan||
Also, since you mentioned fan speculation of bias...
Our two most insufferable rival fan bases (OSU & MSU) both have their primary message boards on the 24/7 site. Something tells me it's not a coincidence that 24/7 is much higher on each program's recruits than the other sites.
MSU, for example, has no composite 4-star recruits in its 2014 class. Yet it has six(!) 4-star recruits according to 24/7. The "no composite 4-star recruits" is true despite the likely 24/7 inflation. Also notable: four of those six 4-stars snuck in with the lowest possible rating for a 4-star recruit (a 90). No MSU recruits have an 88 or 89. They're playing to the MSU fan base.
I'm sure we benefit from this somewhere, too, but all of these rankings are suspicious to me (though better than nothing on average).
|15 weeks 5 days ago||This is interesting, Ace. I||
This is interesting, Ace. I think there's a potential source of bias in your analysis, though.
Let's say that Rivals invites the prospects that it believes are the best in the country, even if other sites disagree about who's best. For example, maybe Rivals invites Travis Rudolph to its event because Rivals thinks that Travis Rudolph is really good even though the other sites disagree. If they invite him, he comes, and then he's ranked higher on Rivals than on the other sites, that's not really because of Rivals' bias. They just always liked the kid better.
If you had infinite time, it'd be interesting to see this comparison run with the first rankings released for this cycle, too. I think this case would be more persuasive if the gaps showed up now (as they do) but didn't show up in the initial rankings. Then Rivals wouldn't have an argument that they liked these kids better all along.
Does that make sense?
|15 weeks 6 days ago||Crap. Hoke is totally going||
Crap. Hoke is totally going to be ineligible this year now. I hope they hold him out for the first few weeks.
|16 weeks 49 min ago||Did I miss something? Braden||
Did I miss something? Braden won't be starting at guard?
EDIT: I just read Heiko's notes in the thread below this one. Wow, strange.
|16 weeks 3 days ago||You're so cute. Unbearable||
You're so cute. Unbearable in person, I'm sure, but very cute online.
|16 weeks 4 days ago||It's a review of our roster.||
It's a review of our roster. Our roster consists of guys from the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 classes. RR recruited about 2.75 of those classes. Should Brian have left those out?
Just so you're prepared for all of the future pain coming your way, I'd imagine that Rich's name will be mentioned in similar posts one, two, and maybe even three years from now.
|16 weeks 4 days ago||It looks to me like we'll||
It looks to me like we'll have to wait until 2015 or 2016 before our roster really becomes a terrifying band of death monsters. One redeeming thing about the holes in the earlier classes is that it means that when the 2012 and 2013 classes get into their upper-class years, many of them will have multiple years of starting experience. That's actually pretty rare.
Thinking about what could be in 2016 is almost ridiculous. Some of these guys will be gone by then I'm sure, but guys potentially on that offense, many of whom will have a ton of playing experience, include: Shane Morris (Sr./RS Jr.), Derrick Green (Sr./RS Jr.), Deveon Smith (Sr./RS Jr.), Damien Harris (So./RS Fr.), Drake Harris (Jr./RS So.), George Campbell (So./RS Fr.), Jehu Chesson (RS Sr.), Kyle Kalis (RS Sr.), Ben Braden (RS Sr.), Kyle Bosch (Sr./RS Jr.), Erik Magnuson (RS Sr.), Patrick Kugler (Sr./RS Jr.), David Dawson (Sr./RS Jr.), Mason Cole (Jr./RS So.), LTT (Sr./RS Jr.), JBB (Jr./RS So.), Jake Butt (Sr./RS Jr.), Ian Bunting (Jr./RS So.), and a bunch of other damn good football players. That's some serious raw talent, and many of those guys will have played a lot of games by then.
The defense looks like it could be similarly loaded.
|16 weeks 5 days ago||If we had lost that game,||
If we had lost that game, there would be much less sentimental attachment to those uniforms. I personally hate the things, and whenever I see photos or video from UTL I find myself wishing that I were looking at a Michigan home uniform.
On the other hand, as long as they don't touch the helmet, I don't care what we do on the road. We could literally wear bumblebee costumes on the road - stingers, antennae, all that stupid bee shit - and I'd be fine as long as we're wearing our traditional helmets.
|17 weeks 5 hours ago||Manlicality.||
|17 weeks 5 hours ago||I wonder how the players feel||
I wonder how the players feel about these things. I feel like I'd be tempted to say, "Coach, I love the Wistert brothers and the history of our program, but that's just not my number." The BYU stuff makes me think I'm not alone.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||Interesting point. I||
Interesting point. I remember this conversation coming up shortly after Michigan hired Hoke and Hoke started assembling his coaching staff. There was an argument made, most publicly by Brian, that we'd struggle to recruit because our coaches were too white and old and not flashy and cool enough. I think these interviews are helpful in exposing that view as misguided. Sure, there are some kids who want everything flashy, but most of these kids - and certainly most of the ones we seem to be recruiting - are just good kids who want to go someplace where they feel embraced and whose families want to make sure that their kids are cared for now and in the future.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||I really like this||
I really like this kid.
Brandon, congrats on the engagement. One thought, after reading this interview and the Hand interview (both of which were great)... I left both of them wondering if these kids have a leader in their heads right now. Even if a kid has X finalists that haven't been ruled out, it'd be interested to hear whether they think they know where they'll be going.
I'm not sure there's a good way to ask that, and it might be a stupid question anyway, but it occurred to me after each of these interviews.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||I'm really impressed with||
I'm really impressed with Da'Shawn Hand. I'm not the first one, obviously, but with the way he has handled the process - and his perspective, priorities, tone with the media, etc. - I think he'd be an unbelievably good kid to have associated with our program.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||I don't want to speak for||
I don't want to speak for Ace, but in recent months absolutely none of our Michigan recruiting experts on any of the sites (to my knowledge) have suggested that we'd ever offer Campbell. When Campbell was a freshman, it looked like he could potentially develop into a must-offer type prospect, but whether it was a bad fit at Michigan or Campbell not developing as some prospects do, no one believed that Michigan would offer him. Ace isn't being defensive here. Maybe he was overly optimistic before or something, but he's not being defensive or unrealistic here.
|17 weeks 4 days ago||Honest question... Has MSU||
Has MSU signed a single player (or do they have any current commitments from players) in the 2012-2015 classes who could have committed to Michigan on the day that they committed to MSU? One definition of a head-to-head recruiting victory would be that a kid chose School X over School Y when he first committed. I can't think of a single one.
We've offered guys shortly before signing day who had been long committed to MSU - and who stayed committed to MSU (Reschke and Dennis Finley). We've "offered" guys and then pushed them away because of grade issues, leading them to turn to MSU (e.g., Burbridge). We've filled up at spots leaving them to take guys who missed their chance with us (e.g., Shane Jones). We've taken a guy back who initially chose MSU over Michigan (Drake Harris).
Am I missing any straight up losses (maybe Madaris, that WR a couple of years ago?)? There must be dozens of those that have gone our way since 2012.
|19 weeks 6 days ago||Really, the appropriate||
Really, the appropriate comparison group is probably more like big, physical, male 18-22 year olds - many of whom are from disadvantaged backgrounds - who don't play sports. That 7% figure probably isn't too crazy.
|20 weeks 19 hours ago||McGary said before the||
McGary said before the Florida game that it actually came down to Michigan and Florida for him (with Duke third). We still beat out Duke, so it doesn't make much difference for this conversation, but I found that interesting.
|20 weeks 2 days ago||Congrats, coach!||
|20 weeks 4 days ago||We're on that level, too||
We're on that level, too (e.g., EXTRA STRETCHING? THINK OF THE CHILDREN!). Fortunately, we just don't seem to be doing as much bad or stupid stuff right now.
|20 weeks 4 days ago||And, with that, Will Muschamp||
And, with that, Will Muschamp just became my second favorite college football coach.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||Give me Hand, McDowell,||
Give me Hand, McDowell, Nicholson/Westphal/Smith/Jackson, and some other guy (or two) and I'll be thrilled. The only position that still has me a little nervous is QB, but I think I'll always be nervous about QB. It's just that important.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||Supposedly coming for the||
Supposedly coming for the BBQ.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||Dammit, I knew we should have||
Dammit, I knew we should have hired John Clayton instead.
|21 weeks 12 hours ago||Whoa, that's fucking awesome.||
Whoa, that's fucking awesome. (Please excuse the f-bomb, which I save for special occasions.)
|21 weeks 5 days ago||Your user name and your||
Your user name and your prediction are extremely consistent. Thank you from all of us.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||That surprised me, too.||
That surprised me, too. OSU's schedule, for those interested:
That's garbage, but I'll still take the under.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||I'll go with the "on" for||
I'll go with the "on" for that 9.5 number. I say we go exactly 9.5-2.5. Winning more than 9.5 games and winning fewer than 9.5 games both seem ridiculous to me.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||You posted this and it got||
You posted this and it got upvoted to "5," so maybe I'm crazy, but where do you see this? His Scout profile lists him as a 3-star prospect and the #59 OLB, no? ESPN has him as a 4-star, though.
|22 weeks 5 days ago||I'm with you on this. It||
I'm with you on this. It seems like this is just an attempt to say that we'd might as well charge what people will pay rather than set the price too high (and leave tickets unsold) or too low (and let a bunch of asshole scalpers buy them up, contribute nothing, and make a profit).
|23 weeks 16 hours ago||And please, before anyone||
And please, before anyone starts with the "you don't know, trust the coaches, they know more than you" standard reply, that only works if the coaches are never wrong and fans are never right (not to mention recruiting services).
So we should only trust expert opinions when those experts are correct 100% of the time and everyone else is correct 0% of the time? Einstein probably made a mistake or two along the way, so we should have crowd-sourced theoretical physics, since why trust the guy? No one is right anywhere near 100% of the time with projecting prospects to college. Given the choice between trusting: (A) our coaches (who watched these two closely and then made them the only two 2014 offers from camp); (B) you; or (C) the recruiting services, which probably haven't seen much more film than we have, I'll go with A. And no, I don't think they're infallible.
EDIT: Also, I don't know as much about Watson, but Rutgers was a real threat for Canteen. I think he even called them his leader after our camp.
|23 weeks 1 day ago||I'm always a little blown||
I'm always a little blown away by these posts, too, only because people with so little information are so confident in their views. Our coaches know 1,000,000x more than us about (1) how good these recruits look as prospects, (2) how good the other guys look as prospects, (3) how well everyone fits on the roster, (4) how likely different guys are to commit, (5) what the team needs most (and how the rest of the roster looks going forward), (6) how best to allocate time between game prep and recruiting during a season, ... and on and on. I'm all for being disappointed when we swing and miss on some guys and then clearly have to settle for lesser prospects, but there's very little evidence of that here. Our coaches saw these guys up close and offered knowing that others were available. Mattison apparently loves Watson, and Canteen is impressing every coaching staff that sees him in a camp setting.
|23 weeks 1 day ago||Next time, I'm turning this||
Next time, I'm turning this blog around, kids.
|23 weeks 6 days ago||Sorry. I should have said||
Sorry. I should have said more in the original post.
To start, my memory of the Stribling offer is that a lot of people were upset because it seemed like we had a good shot with a lot of other elite prospects (even if a couple of kids, like a Kendall Fuller, might have been gone). The worry was that he would take one of their spots. That's not the situation with this Collier kid. If he had been offered four months ago, I think you would have heard that reaction from OSU fans, but it's pretty clear at this point that their top options are off the table.
Also, I think there are important differences between CB and QB. You can miss at CB without terrible consequences, since you take a lot of them and guys can move from other positions to CB (safety, WR, etc.). Plus, CBs aren't as carefully scouted as QBs, so it's more likely that a good one (or 50) slips through the cracks. On top of that, QB is an extremely important position, and since you typically only take one per year, a couple of misses there can hurt badly. It's a dangerous position to take a lot of risks in recruiting.
Just my thoughts. Oh, and OSU sucks.
|24 weeks 2 hours ago||OSU was turned down by a||
OSU was turned down by a whole bunch of QB prospects before they got Collier. Collier and Stribling are alike in that they both had weak offer lists and were lowly rated before they committed. Beyond that, there are some real differences.
|24 weeks 2 days ago||Purdue was actually his first||
Purdue was actually his first offer, and he came very close to committing to Purdue before he committed to Michigan. In fact, I remember some concern then about the firmness of his Michigan commitment, since he seemed so thrilled with Purdue and then so thrilled with Michigan just a couple of days later.
Here's an article from a year ago in case anyone is interested --
|24 weeks 4 days ago||Dude, you just made almost||
Dude, you just made almost the exact same point above.
|24 weeks 5 days ago||False.||
|24 weeks 5 days ago||I'm somewhere in the middle||
I'm somewhere in the middle on this. I like that we police that stuff so that I don't have to cringe every time I read a thread, but there are better ways to police threads than have 20 people make the same comment, rendering the thread useless and unreadable. Just neg the damn thing and move on after the first couple of critical comments.
|24 weeks 5 days ago||I think that was elementary||
I think that was elementary school my friend.
|24 weeks 5 days ago||For the sake of getting one||
For the sake of getting one comment in here on topic, my lasting memory of Webber in the NBA will be that 2002 Western Conference Finals series against the Lakers. One of the most entertaining (and frustrating) NBA serieseseseses I can remember.
|24 weeks 5 days ago||So the MSU recruiting||
So the MSU recruiting strategy is to travel hundreds of miles from East Lansing to tell highly rated kids, in person, that they suck and aren't wanted? I'm no expert, but Mark, this might not be optimal.
|24 weeks 5 days ago||I'm not sure I should admit||
I'm not sure I should admit this, but I just googled "Arnie Danglepenis" to see if that's a thing or that's just you continuing to be a funny SOB. Hats off to you, BiSB.
Even though there were no hits, I'm in a Starbucks and not "feeling lucky" enough to check the images.
|24 weeks 6 days ago||That is a good article, but||
That is a good article, but most of those quotes are a few months old, no? I feel like I've seen almost all of those lines before.
|25 weeks 2 days ago||True. And we can't properly||
True. And we can't properly judge a president's performance until we have at least 50-100 years of perspective and hindsight. Are you okay with people on message boards starting to talk about President Harding's performance, or should we all wait awhile on that?
|25 weeks 4 days ago||I led that charge in the||
I led that charge in the other thread, and I mentioned this there, but I'm sorry about that. We've had a lot of people come through who claim to be insiders, make a prediction, and then sit quietly to see whether they should gloat about that prediction or fade away without anyone noticing. My sense is that you aren't one of those guys, and I wouldn't have been such a dick earlier if that had been my impression then. Sorry about that.
A question: By any chance, are you the guy who posted on Eleven Warriors about being with Hand (and wearing maize, I think) when he visited Columbus?
|25 weeks 4 days ago||I have a feeling that I might||
I have a feeling that I might owe you an apology pretty soon. If so, damn, I'm sorry to have lumped you in with the rest of the asshats we get around here pretending to be insiders.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||Maybe, but do you really||
Maybe, but do you really think guys from Minnesota, Duke, etc. have any of their own information about Hand? They're just copying the guys who seem legitimately in the know. I'd take something that Farrell says as 100x more informative than most of those 24/7 predictions combined.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||You're a smart guy, BiSB, and||
You're a smart guy, BiSB, and this is an honest question. On what grounds are you even entertaining the possibility that this is true?
|25 weeks 5 days ago||I don't think that's how||
I don't think that's how "information" is spelled. The rest of your post looks good.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||Dammit, I was hoping you read||
Dammit, I was hoping you read that somewhere. Instead you're just a jerk-off who gets his kicks pretending he's an insider on message boards.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||Help me out, because I'm not||
Help me out, because I'm not a very smart man. Is this a joke I don't get, or news that would excite me way more than it should?
|25 weeks 6 days ago||It wasn't a legitimate||
It wasn't a legitimate bid.
|26 weeks 1 day ago||Yeah, I feel like we need to||
Yeah, I feel like we need to start over and take another shot at this.
|26 weeks 1 day ago||Well yes, everyone in the||
Well yes, everyone in the world of projecting football talent from high school to college makes mistakes. Obviously. Your original point, though, was that we should probably trust Rivals and Scout (which are relatively low on Bunting) over 247 and ESPN (which are relatively high on Bunting). My point is that if you're going to do that, you're really trusting Rivals and Scout over 247, ESPN, and the coaches at a whole lot of programs that can be extremely selective with their offers.
|26 weeks 2 days ago||Also probably rating him as a||
Also probably rating him as a 4-star:
The coaching staffs at:
His offer list suggests that 247 and ESPN might be onto something with this one.
|26 weeks 4 days ago||He has recently said that||
He has recently said that he'd like to make a decision by December.
|26 weeks 4 days ago||In that case, maybe that Gordon Gee||
In that case, maybe that Gordon Gee was onto something about Catholics.
|26 weeks 4 days ago||I believe it's spelled "Samm||
I believe it's spelled "Samm Web." Thanks in advance.
|26 weeks 5 days ago||Okay, now I'm doubting you.||
Okay, now I'm doubting you.