- Member for
- 6 years 46 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|1 day 19 hours ago||I don't even agree with him.||
I don't even agree with him. I'm going to take his words and substitute in another distinction between some fans and other fans--whether we grew up as Michigan fans. I don't believe what this says either (i.e., I think this is arrogant and stupid, too), but to me it doesn't sound any less reasonable than what he wrote. My edits are in bold.
As fans who grew up cheering for Michigan since childhood, our connections to the university are much deeper and far more meaningful than those who basically decided to become fans in adulthood (when they went to college). And as someone else mentioned, it's the thin-skinned "well, I went there and you didn't" that gets old.
I'm sorry if it's arrogant or elitist, but there are people who have loved Michigan since birth, and there are people who haven't. Everyone has a right to follow the program, everyone has a right to love Michigan. And not all lifelong fans are great fans, just as not all newcomers are great fans. But there has to be an acknowledgment that a lifetime of cheering for Michigan means something far different when it comes to fandom. That's all.
|1 day 21 hours ago||For what it's worth, Bando||
For what it's worth, Bando doesn't speak for many of us.
|1 day 22 hours ago||And who are you to decide how||
And who are you to decide how meaningful someone's connections are to a university? This is stunningly elitist... and stupid.
|1 day 23 hours ago||I agree. And this||
I agree. And this conversation is getting so old. I'm not even sure what here is debatable:
1. Recruit rankings are correlated with college and NFL success. If you know nothing about two classes except for their star ratings, pick the higher-rated one, because it is a predictor of success.
2. Those correlations are strong but far from perfect, and there are a lot of reasons to question them in specific cases. Some position groups (e.g., OL) are harder to project and have weaker correlations between recruit rankings and college performance. Some groups of prospects are systematically underrated because they don't get much attention from recruiting services (e.g., kids who physically mature late, live in overlooked states, or commit early to low-profile programs). Some prospects fits better in certain coaches' systems and their ratings don't necessarily reflect that. And some coaches are better than others at talent evaluation.
There's a crowd here that acts like recruiting rankings are almost infallible and anyone who doesn't defer to them is naive and doesn't understand statistics, using point 1 as the argument. That's stupid. And then there's a crowd that says "Mike Hart, bitches" whenever anyone raises point 1. That's also stupid. The reality is obviously somewhere in between.
|3 days 18 hours ago||Then why wouldn't you just||
Then why wouldn't you just set the over/under higher?
|3 days 22 hours ago||I think this is totally||
I think this is totally valid. I'm getting nervous/confused about this, too, especially when we're hearing talk about 4 WRs, 7 OL, 100 RBs, etc.
|3 days 23 hours ago||I see at least two things||
I see at least two things about other commits (in a short posting history), and regardless of the context, I'm not sure how it'd ever make sense to post the line above on MGoBlog.
General point is that the guy is off to a rough start as a poster.
|3 days 23 hours ago||14 weeks 10||
|4 days 1 min ago||If you check his posting||
If you check his posting history, you'll see that he found time to talk shit about Muslims and talk shit about our other commitments, all of which seems totally appropriate for MGoBlog.
|4 days 9 min ago||I understand this critique||
I understand this critique when it seems like the coaches rush to offer a lower-rated prospect instead of waiting on a higher-rated recruit they might get (and probably would prefer). I've had the same reaction with a few offers during the Carr, Rodriguez, Hoke, and Harbaugh regimes.
But let's say the coaches evaluated Paye and a bunch of higher-rated guys (through game film, camps, background reviews, etc.) and they judged Paye to be a better player in this system. Do you honestly think they should pursue the 4-star instead of Paye even if they don't think the 4-star would be as good?
To me, it looks like Brown just thinks he's that good. It's not like this coaching staff is unwilling to wait for high-rated guys to commit near Signing Day.
|4 days 1 hour ago||With those stats, it sounds||
With those stats, it sounds like "Throwing at Lewis or Stribling" could be MSU's starting QB.
|4 days 1 hour ago||... and the period after||
... and the period after "him" should have gone inside the quotation mark.
|4 days 2 hours ago||Hey, hold on there. Let's||
Hey, hold on there. Let's not forget that Ole Miss is the greatest 3-4 team in the history of competitive sports, which is why they're still getting a few votes in the Coaches Poll. I mean, they beat Wofford and Georgia and Memphis.
|1 week 1 day ago||I mean, he's 6'3" and, if||
I mean, he's 6'3" and, if this website is correct, runs the 100m dash in 11 seconds. And he has a lot of the characteristics of someone's who's overlooked by the recruiting services... He's from Rhode Island, committed early (to a great DC), committed to a small program, etc.
And every DC gets shredded sometimes, especially when you have offenses like Clemson's on the schedule.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||There might be some truth to||
There might be some truth to that, but where did he say that the military is enabling him to sit on a couch, read a book, and watch TV? I think his point was just that he's pleased that others have it in them to do that - or raise kids who do - because he's not wired that way.
SRK -- Best wishes. Your daughter is braver than I am.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||If someone had shown this to||
If someone had shown this to Harbaugh on Saturday morning, we probably would've won 131-0. Can't be outdone by the 1904 team like that.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||At some point, the questions||
At some point, the questions about Jabrill just get repetitive and annoying. Khalid Hill scored like 14 touchdowns on Saturday, and he got three questions: How awesome is Jabrill?, How awesome would the offense be with more Jabrill?, and How about that defense (with Jabrill)? It happens to Harbaugh, too, and I think you can see him kind of roll his eyes when he has to come up with the 300th different way to answer the same question.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||I appreciate that and believe||
I appreciate that and believe that you thought he'd be a good DC. But did you believe he'd be a "superstar" DC?
I like the man and think he's a terrific DL coach, but Dick LeBeau he is not.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Literally 0 of the 350||
Literally 0 of the 350 million people in the country said that about Hoke as DC. In fact, it's the only thing that has never been said by an American.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Zero people said that when||
Zero people said that when Hoke got the Oregon DC job.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||That's not it. Period.||
That's not it. Period. You're oversimplifying things.
In most seasons there are maybe 4-6 power conference teams that end up undefeated or with one loss. In some seasons there are fewer than that. With a four-team playoff, it's totally possible that there aren't many undefeated or one-loss teams to pick from. Even if our schedule doesn't doesn't look so hot, a one-loss Michigan team easily could find itself in contention, especially since the loss probably would happen on the road against the #1 or #2 team.
If I had to guess, I'd probably guess that a loss knocks us out, and especially if it keeps us from the BTCG. But it's not certain at all, and it's not as simple as just looking at our schedule and declaring it weak.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||I'm not sure I'd call them||
I'm not sure I'd call them "weird" (as you did) or "funny" (as the OP did). I'd call them entitled, unsympathetic, and annoying.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||I don't understand how PFF||
I don't understand how PFF gets through so much film for so many teams so quickly. They aren't just looking at a sample of plays from each game, are they?
|6 weeks 3 days ago||Starting QB Sefo Liufau||
Starting QB Sefo Liufau
|7 weeks 5 days ago||... which is what makes them||
... which is what makes them mouth breathers.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||No, that's not what I||
No, that's not what I said.
"On a 1-10 scale, Speight was going to fall somewhere between a 4 and 7 going into this year."
It's hard to me to believe that Speight, right at this moment, is at the level of a 2006 Chad Henne (an 8), 2013 AJ McCarron (a 9), or 2011 Andrew Luck (a 10).
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Even before hearing that||
Even before hearing that umbig11 has knowledge/access, I got a kick out of his posts. That's partly because I think he upvotes all of his posts right after he makes them. And that's partly because of his enthusiasm, optimism, and use of exclamation points. I remember thinking that if Harbaugh posts here, that's the most likely account.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||I think Speight is probably||
I think Speight is probably much better than we remember him, and I totally trust that Harbaugh & Fisch made the right choice, but I'm still a little disappointed that O'Korn didn't win the job. Here's how I see it:
On a 1-10 scale, Speight was going to fall somewhere between a 4 and 7 going into this year. O'Korn could have been anything from 2 to 10. Last year's buzz on O'Korn made me think he was already a 7 or 8, with room to grow. Now it looks like Speight might have hit the upper end of his range (7), but we missed on what seemed like a real possibility to have an 8 or 9 there.
|8 weeks 3 days ago||Does that mean that OSU||
Does that mean that OSU reorganized the org chart and put football coach below university president after Gee and Tressel left?
|8 weeks 4 days ago||Can we account for Chris||
Can we account for Chris Evans' whereabouts that day? Maybe he took the Tonya Harding approach to moving up a depth chart.