- Member for
- 6 years 11 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|2 days 20 hours ago||Refs screwed up||
Sure, the coaches should be paying enough attention to catch that when it happens, but at the same time, as a coach, you don't expect the refs to screw you on the clock management. And usually when there's a play clock issue, they stop and review it -- for some reason, they didn't do this yesterday. Is it frustrating that they don't get to the line as fast as other teams? Absolutely. But there was more to the sequence at the end of the half than just whether the coaches were paying attention.
The thing that always frustrates me about the "I was booing the coaches, not the players" argument is this: even if the players realize it's not them the fans are booing, aren't the players still going to take it personally when you boo their coaches? Have we seen any indication that these players DON'T have faith in their coaches? And so long as they do, whose side do you think the players are going to take? The side of the coaches, whom they trust, or the side of the booing fans? Do you think the players ever think to themselves, yeah, the fans are right to start booing my coaches over one bad call on 4th and 6?
|2 days 20 hours ago||Jourdan Louis||
Love it! This kid's a competitor. I keep seeing comments on this board about players having no passion or no fire, and I just don't get it. These kids play with discipline, which is a good thing, but there's no question in my mind they've got fire as well. That ND loss may have been a perfect storm of errors, but the players not having the will to win was NOT a contributor to that in my view.
|1 week 14 hours ago||Yes||
Cal and Berkeley are the same thing. The official title of the university located in Berkeley, CA is simply the "University of California," and it is formally the flagship school for the UC system. When asked where they go, the students variously mostly answer "Berkeley," occasionally "Cal," or "UC Berkeley;" to my knowledge no one ever says they "go to California" the way students say they "Go to Michigan."
/Michigan and Berkeley alum
|1 week 5 days ago||loud noises||
Playing music the players like might actually be more effective as a distraction than playing white noise is: not only does the volume inhibit verbal communication, but catchy songs you like are also more likely to demand your attention and interrupt your concentration than white noise is. Sure, it's not as 'realistic,' but then again, the Michigan Drill isn't a perfect representation of an in-game situation either. It's a drill that distills out an important part of an in-game situation and therefore makes an effective practice tool. Anything loud and potentially distracting can serve the same role in prepping for crowd noise. So I don't really have a problem with playing music as preparation, especially it's just one of the tools they use (along with playing the ND fight song on repeat, etc, as discussed up-thread).
|2 weeks 2 days ago||Mowins v Galloway||
She mostly kept it professional, but that jab and the other about him being a terrible downfield blocker stood out to me. Her tone didn't seem like friendly teasing, so much as getting in a dig when she could. Seems like maybe Beth Mowins dislikes Joey Galloway as much as I do. Which good on her if that's true.
Also, did anyone else catch the very beginning of the broadcast at the switchover from the Bristol anchors to the actual announcing team? I could have sworn the lady anchor at ESPN introduced the broadcast team as "Joey Galloway and Pam Mowins." Ouch.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||App State's running "success"||
Just re-watched the game, and it's worth noting that many of App State's successful running plays came against 6 or even 5 in the box on defense for Michigan, and often with Michigan in a 3-man front. In other words, not base defense, and at a numbers disadvantage if a linebacker or safety doesn't fill right quick. Now I'm sure Brady would love for Michigan to be able to line up with 3 DL and 2.5 backers in the box and still stop a running play. But I, for one, am not going to get worked up about ASU running the ball well under those conditions. When we actually called run-stopping defensese, we kept them in check pretty effectively.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||The cynical answer||
is that this is a clever end-around to the idea of selling jerseys without the players profiting from it: you can always claim the jersey for sale isn't the jersey of Devin Gardner, current player, but of Tom Harmon, Legend. Thus, you can argue that Gardner doesn't necessarily deserve a cut of the jersey sale profits and/or that he isn't being exploited personally when the #98 jersey just happens to be the one they're selling a lot of while he's wearing it. If this cynical view has truth to it, then expect legends jerseys to to whichever players the AD thinks will sell the most jerseys in a given year.
What argues against cynicism here is that Courtney Avery was never going to sell a lot of #11 jerseys, but he did deserve to be honored by his coach and teammates for his leadership and his willingness to do whatever the team needed from him.
But I agree with you mGrow; in general I'm confused too. Seems like a great idea if you hand out one or two. When there's 10 of them and 2-4 of them might change hands each year, it becomes more confusing than clever.
|3 weeks 11 hours ago||damn you sharik||
after a comment like that, of course I had to try it.
The first hit is to the MGoBlog twitter feed.
The rest of the first page... well... I'll leave to your imagination.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Goal line||
This is an important point. Goal line packages may only be called for a few times per game, so a goal line package specialist might not see many snaps. But those few plays per game can easily be the swing plays that win or lose the game for your team, so they take on outsized importance. If you've got a guy you think can help you here, you use him, redshirt be damned.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||David Molk||
David Molk provides another example of a surly offensive lineman, famous for head-butting Jack Miller before games. Indeed, offensive line recruits in particular are often praised for having a 'nasty streak.' In other words, being a dick is sometimes considered a GOOD trait in an O lineman.
|9 weeks 1 day ago||+1 informative||
|12 weeks 22 hours ago||upvote for lego movie reference||
I can deal with the rough patch more than I can deal with the decline in tradition, personally.
Likewise. Fans who have been around long enough understand that there are ebbs and flows to winning and losing, but during those ebbs, we have our traditions to fall back on to keep us engaged. Remember the early 90's when Miami (YTM) was completely unstoppable? For a couple of years, they were a hot ticket, and people everywhere were wearing those hideous orange jerseys. But Miami plays in a pro stadium, and has a 'winning tradition' built on bought-and-sold players, and never had a Bo Schembechler. So now that they're no longer an unstoppable juggernaut, they're just another team. From 1994-2013 Miami is 75-50; Michigan is a near-identical 77-49. So why do we still sell out our 100k-plus stadium, get plum TV deals, and rank in the top 5 in merchandise sold every year, and Miami does not? Why, when I lived in California, did I see people wearing Michigan gear minimum once per week for six years, and saw someone wearing 'Canes gear maybe once total? Because Michigan stands for something beyond just wins and losses, and what it stands for keeps fans engaged, and therefore keeps Michigan relevant even when the team underperforms. Without that, we're just another team. On a decadal timescale, it really is the traditions, more than the wins and losses, that account for why people care.
|12 weeks 1 day ago||incorrect||
There exist fans, even Michigan fans, for whom winning is all that matters. You may be one of them. But in some fanbases, in the Michigan fanbase perhaps more than any other, there are a great number of fans who also care about HOW we win: what uniforms we wear, what teams we play, what offense we run, whether the band goes to Dallas, and yes, whether our athletic director is making tone-deaf statements to the media that make it sound like he's actively working to cheapen the Michigan fan experience, even as it grows more expensive in financial terms.
I will not claim to speak for the "vast majority" of Michigan fans (and you probably shouldn't claim to do so either). But I will say that for myself, I absolutely do care what Dave Brandon says and does, and will continue to care no matter what the W-L column says. Judging by the comments here, I'm not the only one.
|13 weeks 6 days ago||Brian:||
and Michigan's run defense is going to be real, real good.
|19 weeks 4 days ago||15 years ago||
(jeezus, that long?) I took Calc BC jr year of HS, took calc 216 my sr year of hs and aced it, then took 285 instead for calc III and it kicked my ass big time. (note: you can take calc III and IV in either order: they're both offered both semesters, and they don't really built off each other). My problem with 285 was mostly that it involved actually doing proofs, which I'm terrible at. I can solve equations, but justifying them? That's why I'm an engineer and not a mathematician. But I think everyone's mileage varies. People will encourage you to take the honors section because you're young and bright and people always encourage young bright students to challenge themselves (as they should). But which version of calc you take isn't just about how "smart" you are. Each version has a different focus. Take whichever version has the approach that seems most relevant to you. (That's general advice for choosing college courses, not just for calculus.) That might be honors, or might not be.
And don't worry about all the college kids looking at you funny. I was nervous that I'd stick out like a sore thumb as the obvious high school smartypants kid in a room full of college kids, but it turns out that it isn't that obvious, and the kids who do notice don't really care. Heck, I found out 3/4 of the way thru the semester that there was another HS kid in my class, and even I hadn't noticed.
Also, one thing that may or may not be a problem for you: the semester break at Michigan probably doesn't align with the semester break at your high school. I ended up having to leave halfway thru my 6th period class for a month in order to go to calc because the second semester at Michigan started before the first semester at Pioneer ended. HS teachers are usually pretty cool about this kind of thing -- the teachers usually respect the smart kids who are trying to challenge themselves -- but be aware that it could become a problem, and make sure your HS administrators are all on the same page about it.
|20 weeks 6 days ago||"profit"||
The problem with distinguishing between "revenue" and "profit" in this way is that athletic departments are able to massage the accounting so that they aren't profitable no matter how much revenue they're bringing in. All they have to do is add new varsity sports, or pay for more expensive equipment, or take the basketball team to Europe, or increase the offensive coordinator's salary, or...
If athletic departments wanted to be profitable, many of the biggest ones could be. Because they explicitly don't want to be profitable, many fewer are than would be if they were run like businesses with shareholders. Athletic departments are expensive to run in part because they want to be expensive to run, so that the firehose of money has somewhere to go.
That said, I'm with you on the solution. The Universities probably can't figure out a reasonable way to pay the players, but they also don't really need to. Have the school pay the scholarship and let the perks come from outside (likeness, etc).
|23 weeks 4 days ago||biases||
Upvoted for not being ashamed of your biases, or afraid to admit them.
Interesting analysis. I'll add one other thought about Izzo's mood this year in particular. Something you'll hear from every long-time teacher is that every once in a while, you get a class of students who are, for whatever reason, just not as much fun to teach. And it wears on you slowly. Now Izzo has it better than your average high school chemistry teacher, since he gets to choose what kind of players he's bringing in. But it really only takes mis-reading the personality of one recruit to bring in a guy whose bad vibes mess it up for the rest of the team.
To be clear, I'm not defending how Izzo has handled this particular piece of adversity. Nor do I intend to speculate as to which someone (or someones) may be 'bad apples' on MSU's team. I'm merely conjecturing as to why Izzo has seemed unusually unglued this year.
|24 weeks 5 days ago||NLRB aside||
The obviousness of offering a "degree in football" makes me really wonder why no university has done this yet. Classes on nutrition, self-promotion, how to work with an agent, how manage your money such that a 3-5 year pro career can sustain you financially for a much longer period of time, how to parley your pro career into a post-football career coaching, in broadcast, etc... there are so many things that could usefully be taught to football players (or revenue sport players in general) that could legitimately be justified as in the true educational interest of the 'student athlete,' and that really do prepare such individuals for life after college. What is the downside here for the university?
|24 weeks 6 days ago||NSFmrsSRK||
Shirtless ripped Jordan Morgan? Are we sure this picture is suitable for Mrs. Stephen R. Kass?
|25 weeks 4 days ago||agreed||
Agreed that race is purely a social construct, but I'm not sure that affirming that race is purely a social construct will protect us from someone calling this thread 'racist.'
I'm happy to hear that Morgan's "race," or Craft's, never crossed your conscious mind. Maybe it never crossed your unconscious mind, either; that would be even better. The point of Chait's argument, as I understand it, is not that journalists and media talking heads are consciously thinking about Morgan's or Craft's "race" either. The point is that they may nevertheless have absorbed some unconscious biases that are reflected in the way that they discuss these two players.
No one (I guess I shouldn't say 'no one,' but you get my point) wants to be racist. Chait's article is meant to remind us that sometimes we might accidentally be just a little bit racist, even without meaning to, even without realizing it, because of biases that we've unintentionally absorbed.
Racism isn't a binary thing that you do or do not participate in. I find a claim that someone is "0 % racist" to be uncredible [and I'm not putting those words in your mouth, just to be clear]. Chait's article strikes me as a part of a conversation on how to go from being 3% racist to being 1% racist (these numbers are obviously arbitrary), by recognizing where that 3% shows up even when we don't mean for it to. Maybe some of us can honestly say that we've never consciously thought about Morgan or Craft in terms of "race." But that doesn't mean it's not a good idea for us to check ourselves to make sure we're not nevertheless guilty of having absorbed or even parroted, unconsciously, some ideas about basketball players that do have race-related elements.
|25 weeks 4 days ago||of course it is||
The thing about racial discourse in America today is, it's almost possible to mention race in any context without someone calling you a racist. It's unavoidable for the simple reason that for many people, "being aware that race exists" = racism. These people are Idealists, and having for a long time been one of them, I really wish their ideal were reality. (Growing up in Ann Arbor where the races of my friends didn't correlate to anything other than their last names made it easy to believe I was living in a post-racial America. Moving to Oakland rapidly disabused me of that notion.) But unfortunately, racism does still exist. Occasionally blatantly, but much more often in a sort of subtle setting of expectations or perceptions of exactly the type Chait discusses in these articles. If we ever want to move past racism, not just legally but actually, then we need to be able to talk openly about those situations in which none of us are trying to be racist, none of us even realize we're being racist, and yet we're falling prey to unconscious biases that are the diluted but not yet eliminated residual of our racially polarized history.
It's a catch-22: we can't overcome racism if we can't talk about racism, but we can't talk about racism without being racist. And so I'd posit that your statement "that is an incredibly racist article" is completely true, and completely beside the point. Calling it "racist" to point out that something might have a subtle racial bias doesn't prove that we live in a post-racial America. It simply suppresses the conversation, thereby preserving the not-actually-post-racial status quo.
|30 weeks 5 days ago||obviously mental||
His slump is clearly a mental blockage, and not the result of him reaching the limits of his physical abilities. He may just need to play through it, and suddenly the pieces will click.
Or, maybe it's time to call a sports psychologist.
Or, maybe we just need to get him really angry. I suspect our opponents wouldn't like him when he's angry.
|30 weeks 5 days ago||time||
It seems clear with Coach Beilein that the limiting factor isn't how many sets he can dream up, it's how much practice time he has to install them before the next game. I'm not so sure Beilein is "saving" anything for the tournament, but it may look that way just because it'll take all the practice time between now and then to add new wrinkles to the offense. Remember that this team is still very young -- Morgan and Horford are the only upperclassmen. So each time the coaches want to do something new, the players are probably seeing it for the first time.
To echo an earlier poster, this is probably also where having an experienced scout team really helps you. If the scout team already knows the play you're trying to install, they can be much more effective in helping the starters pick it up. This year, those guys are young too, so the practice time becomes even more critical. Good thing we have lots of it coming down this final stretch.
|33 weeks 1 day ago||boxing||
She's not far off. The premise of Vitale's schtick is essentially to hype college basketball in the style of a boxing promoter.
|33 weeks 4 days ago||Post-doc wages||
Actually, even as an engineer, post-doc wages are only 10k better than the PhD stipend if you stay in academia. It's a little better at a national lab, but still nowhere close to having a "real" job. On a financial and opportunity cost basis, if you want to get paid, getting a PhD is a bad idea; doubly so if you're in a field where you'll end up having to do a post-doc after.
Also, if you think about it, the fact that the position "post-doc" even exists tells you how much of a buyer's market jobs in the sciences are, even for the highly educated.
|33 weeks 5 days ago||Nice main points||
On a more macro level, it felt like in last night's game, Michigan made a very good Iowa team look pretty ordinary. It didn't look like a battle of two titans, and certainly didn't look like Iowa was a top-ten outfit. It's incredible how totally Michigan dominated the pace and flow of the game. All Hain Beilein. That's a heck of a coaching job.
Also notable: Michigan wasn't really on from three, and yet that didn't mean the offense couldn't put up points (a nice change from, say, 5 years ago when a cold-from-3 night against a good team equalled a loss). This team can score in so many ways, and has so many scorers, that they can weather the loss of Walton and an off night from LeVert and still beat a top-10 team. (Yeah, I realize Iowa may not end up ranked in the top 10 at the end of the year, but still.) Depth: we haz it.
|35 weeks 1 day ago||duplicates||
I assume the duplicate listings for vs. Purdue (3/1 and 3/2) and vs. Illinois (3/8 and 3/9) at the end of the schedule actually mean those games will be in one slot or the other, but the decision as to which hasn't been made yet?
|35 weeks 4 days ago||If p then q||
Your comment touches on the most commonly made logical fallacy: if p then q does not imply if q then p.
If you want to hire or retain the absolute best people, then you must pay them top dollar.
This does not, however, mean that the fact that you're paying people top dollar implies that they're the absolute best people.
That said, it seems that the Nussmeier hire involves paying top dollar because they believe he's a top guy. So I'm not necessarily concerned about his salary (other than in the more general ethics-of-college-football sense). Seems like they're paying him that much because they believe he's worth it, not because they think paying him that much will make him better at his job.
|36 weeks 15 hours ago||Misopogon||
I nominate this issue for consideration in next week's Hokepoints.
|36 weeks 21 hours ago||The Michigan Difference||
You know how childish this sounds, right? "They'd make fun of us; therefore, we should make fun of them." Congrats on ceding the high ground as the "big brother" in that relationship.