CFB Most Valuable Teams -- Michigan up to #2

CFB Most Valuable Teams -- Michigan up to #2

Submitted by Ron_Lippitt on December 19th, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Texas remains the most valuable which doesn't surprise me.  I'm thrilled to see us ahead of the SEC despite their recent success.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2012/12/19/college-footballs-most-valuable-teams-texas-longhorns-still-on-top/ 

 

Profile of former walkon Brad Bates (new BC AD)

Profile of former walkon Brad Bates (new BC AD)

Submitted by Leaders And Best on December 19th, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Boston Globe profile of new Boston College AD Brad Bates.  Bates was a football walkon during the Bo Schembechler era in the late 1970s.

Given the way Dave Brandon has scheduled with other ADs with Michigan ties (Jeff Long-Arkansas, Bob De Carolis-Oregon St, Warde Manuel-UConn, & Derrick Gragg-EMU), I bet we will see Boston College on Michigan's football schedule soon.

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/football/2012/12/18/bates/mmLRhxd8sAKe2eUtoA9PQN/story.html

OT - PopSci on the future of the Football Helmet

OT - PopSci on the future of the Football Helmet

Submitted by Blazefire on December 18th, 2012 at 10:48 PM

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-12/helmet-wars-and-new-helmet-could-protect-us-all

Popular Science this month brings us a look at the current state of the Football Helmet, concussions, sub-concussive impacts and a possible future for the helmet.

I do have some problems with the article. It opens with a sort of cloak-and-dagger setup directed at helmet manufacturers, which I find unnecessary and ridiculous. If a given technology proves itself to be better at preventing concussions and impact related brain damage, then helmet manufacturers are going to embrace that. If they haven't thusfar, it's because their data leads them to believe it is honestly not the best way to protect players.

There is some credence to the idea that manufacturers would like to protect themselves by supporting the work they've done in the past, certianly, but they're not going to ignore relevant, reliable modern data that shows better, safer ways to go. That doesn't protect them. It shoots them in the foot and opens them to more problems later.

Once you get past the bizzare, attack laced opening, though, the rest of the article is a pretty good, pretty cool look at some new technology that might help win the battle for a better football helmet. I was aware that new research showed that twisting and rolling of the brain within the skull was much more damaging than it simply bouncing around inside, and that there had been some work on developing helmets that took advantage of this knowledge, such as giving them a stretchy "skin" that would reduce inter-crainial rotation.

I had not heard of this new technology, though, which strikes me as simple and highly effective. By placing the helmet on a somewhat independently articulated skull cap, of sorts, it can protect against heavy blows while still moving and sliding independently of the head, reducing twisting.

I'm really glad to see some innovative thinking coming to helmet design. I would like to see the NCAA and the NFHS (not to mention the NFL), do some studies on the effectiveness of this new technology. What do you think?

Very Scientific Study on Uniformz: 56.8% Dislike, 15% Like

Very Scientific Study on Uniformz: 56.8% Dislike, 15% Like

Submitted by MGoBender on December 18th, 2012 at 9:57 PM

Michigan Football's Facebook Page posted a simple question:

Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down.

I went through and tallied 665 of the comments. That's not all of them, but after a while the percentages stayed the same, so I'm saying this is a SCIENTIFICALLY SOUND representation of the FB page's population. It took far too long to go through 650+ so I decided not to keep going through the now 3000 comments. Like I said, the percentages started holding pretty strong around n=300, so should be representative. I ignored trolls and unrelated posts.

Like 102 15.3%
Dislike 378 56.8%
Helmets: Yes! Uniforms: No! 154 23.1%
Meh 13 1.9%
Helmets: No! Uniforms: Yes! 18 2.7%

I had other categories as well, such as "Sarcasm" and "slappy." The former of which generally disliked the jerseys, the later of which said "anything Blue wears is good" so I did not include them in the "Like" category.

Representative "Like" Comment

SWAGG! Matt finish to the helmets!! And the jersey is to fly!

Representative "Dislike" Comment

Next thing we are going to do is make a dubstep knockoff of the Victors

Representative Pro-Helmet, Anti-Jersey Comment

Helmet ok. Jersey looks horrible. Go back to the traditional jersey.

Representative "Meh" Comment

meh

Representative Anti-Helmet, Pro-Jersey Comment

helmet looks awful and the shirt looks a little better

BONUS: Sarcasm Comment

You want a good idea? Yellow Jersey and blue numbers

Kinda fun to laugh at. I wouldn't take this too seriously, except that the M Football FB page is usually full of slappies that will "Like" anything that is posted, so I thought this was a funny enough to share.

Tradition do you really care? Or just used against rival fans?

Tradition do you really care? Or just used against rival fans?

Submitted by DirkMcGurk on December 18th, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Ok we got the new uniforms and many have issue screaming tradition. I feel Michigan's tradition is first great academics, winning, winged helmet, block M and finally Maize & Blue. Many feel the uniforms are a tradition(though the away ones have changed many times before the past few years). My question and I ask for real honesty is if you really are about the tradition, or is it another point you make in an argument to be better then rival fans? Do you really care or just really care about winning the pissing contest?

Mod edit: Title changed. OP: If this doesn't capture what you're looking for go ahead and change my edit, but "Tradition" isn't descriptive enough. JGB.