Freep reports UP not sure it's staying in Michigan (MGoSatire)

Freep reports UP not sure it's staying in Michigan (MGoSatire)

Submitted by mfan_in_ohio on March 22nd, 2011 at 2:08 PM

[Ed-M: Bumped because I'm still laughing]

Upper Peninsula can’t be sure it’s staying in Michigan


The Upper Peninsula said all the right things.

It said it would “definitely” be back next year.  After all, it is geologically attached where it is, and already has the Mackinac Bridge connecting it to the rest of Michigan.

But the UP will investigate other options.

Once caught in the middle of a Michigan-Ohio recruiting war over Toledo (who later proved to be one of the largest busts in history), the UP was lured away from Wisconsin with the promise of being part of an actual state.  Things in Wisconsin have changed since then, however, and the UP may find the attraction of a living, breathing NFL team, as well as Bret Bielema’s musky man-scent, to be too powerful to resist. 

The UP has been a valuable asset to Michigan.  Once a source of lumber for paper mills and the iron that eventually fed Detroit’s automobile industry, the UP has recently put together an impressive collection of Indian casinos and even taken a Hollywood turn in “Escanaba in da Moonlight.”

However, the presence of Mackinac Island on its southeastern border has become an irritant.  The overwhelming odor of horse feces and fudge can be a powerful repellent, and may push the UP toward the greener pastures of Green Bay.

The UP said Sunday it will be back.  It was understandably emotional.  It has since been unreachable for comment, as the invention of the telephone has not yet progressed that far north. 

I believe, as of now, it will return to Michigan.  When it makes the decision official, Michiganders can exhale.

Until then, even the UP can't be certain itself.

Contact Mark Snyder: [email protected].

Editor's note: A previous headline on this story named the Upper Peninsula a part of Canada. This version is correct.



Hoke on Tressel

Hoke on Tressel

Submitted by Jasper on March 9th, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Brady Hoke comments (in MGoBlog's Favorite Newspaper) on Tressel:…-

Regular version, in case the Print one expires:

His remarks seemed too unrehearsed and off-the-cuff for my taste.  Just saying Tressel is a "good man" (however preposterous that might be to some) and a "good coach" (much more supportable) would be fine.

But adding "... they'll fight through that situation ..." and then "... I don't know that situation ..." is, at best, awkward.  Why say anything like that?  Certain other coaches at UMich have been tattooed for being "unpolished."

One wonders what Corporate Guy Brandon (who would not be expected to shoot from the hip) thought when reading that.

Really Freep? Really?

Really Freep? Really?

Submitted by Augger on August 2nd, 2010 at 9:54 PM

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.  I am trying so so hard not to hate the Free Press these days, plus I know a growing segment of the Mgopopulation hates any mention of the paper, but I had to mention this...using Tim's awesome notes from the hallway press conference we get this question regarding Mike Shaw:

"What is Michael Shaw's eligibility status?

Well we're still waiting on some - we don't comment on our guys' academically, and they still have two weeks of summer school left. Uh, which for some of our players, uh, we'll keep in touch with them."


Here is the top of the page headline on right now:

U-M's top rusher, Michael Shaw, not yet eligible


While this may or may not be true, leave it to the Free Press to cast the information in the worst possible light.  Is Shaw our leading rusher by yardage, yes, but was he the most liklely #1 choice at RB this year, probably not from the information I have maybe he is eligible right now, but his current grade could drag him under the limit who knows...I just don't understand why the Freep continues to show every bit of U-M information in the worst possible light, its nuts.





Rittenberg best-case worst-case rewind

Rittenberg best-case worst-case rewind

Submitted by Geaux_Blue on January 18th, 2010 at 5:29 PM…

Slightly painful to recap the pitfalls of this season but it would be interesting to hear what people believed at that point in the season to now. I don't know if I've just been broken down by the past two seasons but a mediocre/bad/missed bowl season still would not get me to my neighborhood pitchfork and torch store. Not even because I drink the RR-Kool Aid but just that I don't believe coaches can win and just simply fall on their faces for 3 years straight. Fall into mediocrity? Absolutely. Go from BCS to bowl-less for 3+ years? No.

Anyways, I had to shift the post away because I accidentally reposted old info so I thought this would open the floor to something productive.

What is one thing you're almost positive on for next year? Tate starting all season? A position shift for the city's Fastest Man? Etc.

New LB Coach Candidate: Ruffin McNeill?

New LB Coach Candidate: Ruffin McNeill?

Submitted by CCBlue on January 14th, 2010 at 12:50 PM

It appears that the much beloved Ruffin McNeill, the former DC and Interim Head Coach for Texas Tech, has been fired by the new Tuberville regime. He was apparently also their LBs Coach.

Would love to get him in the mix for LB Coach consideration as possible. He appeared to be beloved by the players who had supported him to replace Leach after the Alamo Bowl win. He seems like a players coach would also likely give us more recruiting chops/connections in TX and the South.

Mark Snyder Update (Not that Mark Snyder)

Mark Snyder Update (Not that Mark Snyder)

Submitted by TomVH on January 12th, 2010 at 12:22 PM

I've been talking with Adam Rittenberg this morning about the Mark Snyder rumor. For those that haven't heard, there was a rumor that Mark Snyder has interviewed for the void in the coaching staff left by Jay Hopson.

Rittenberg told me today that Snyder HAS interviewed for the position. He doesn't know much more yet, but should know more later today. One of their guys is at the coaching conference, and is having lunch with Snyder today.

I'll let you know if I hear more.

Free Press Predictions- Tell me they don't love them some Sparty Green now

Free Press Predictions- Tell me they don't love them some Sparty Green now

Submitted by swarwick33 on September 3rd, 2009 at 11:54 AM
First I would like to say hi to everyone out there.  I have been following the website for about 2 years now.  I found it while I was bored in college one day, and now I am a everyday visitor.  My name is Stephen, I live just south of AA, and have been a die hard Michigan fan since I came out of the womb in 1985. 

I thought my first blog should be about the predictions that I heard while listening to the radio yesterday, and that appear in the Free Press today.  The prediction for Michigan, which was done by the always bias, Mark Snyder have Michigan going 5-7, with a loss this weekend to Western.  So in the last week Mark Snyder has co-wrote one of the most insanely bias, witch-hunting pieces of "journalism" in recent memories, then blatantly ignored the fact that this season will be far better than last for Michigan for all of the obvious reasons (second season for Rich Rod, new QBs that can run the system, and a new DC that actually knows what is going on).

In the same paper, MSU was predicted to go 9-3, with a win over PSU, "being a game that could decide the Big Ten Champion."  This is absolutely insane!!!  The boys in East Lansing may not be being coached by John L anymore, but to think that they will beat PSU and possibly be going to the Rose Bowl (and at worst the Capital One Bowl) is down right stupid. 

All the projections for Michigan this year have them at a minimum of 6 wins, with some as high as 8 or 9.  While MSU may go 9-3, in no way is that going to be close enough to win a Big Ten Championship.  I am not a conspiracy theorist (all the time), but you cannot tell me that the Free Press does not have an agenda here to smear the good name that is Michigan.  We will talk to you more soon...Go Blue!

Michael Rosenberg Deserves Better!

Michael Rosenberg Deserves Better!

Submitted by restive neb on September 1st, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Michael Rosenberg should be outraged. He deserves better than what he’s gotten. I know most of the readers here are already moving their cursors toward the “-1” arrow, but please read what I have to say before joining in the “negbang.”

First an analogy:

Ned works as an engineer for a large company. He enjoys his job, and is proud of the 15 years of his life he has dedicated to the company. Last year, they hired a new employee, Edna, in the human resources department. Ned has been frustrated by what he’s seen from Edna. One of the many things that bothered him is that she seems to bend the rules on personnel issues on a regular basis. Ned hasn’t said anything to anyone, because he doesn’t have proof. He is pretty sure he is right, but he cautiously keeps quiet.

Then one day, Ned becomes ill. After several trips to the doctor, he learns that insurance isn’t covering his expenses. The bills pile up as he begins to dig into the insurance problems. Finally, he finds that his insurance records were filed incorrectly, and that he has lost his coverage. Irate, Ned immediately composes a long, angry, accusatory letter to Edna, and copies several of her bosses and co-workers. After he sends the letter, a quick investigation shows that it had actually been Ned’s fault for the lapse in insurance.

Is Rosenberg Ned?

Well, yes, even though it isn’t a perfect analogy… One of the admittedly numerous differences in Mr. Rosenberg’s case (besides the fact that Michael Rosenberg had never let the lack of evidence slow his criticism) is that unlike Ned, Michael Rosenberg didn’t just send out his hate-filled diatribe in a mass e-mail. He submitted it to Mark Snyder. It was Mr. Snyder’s responsibility to review the document, judge it for its merits, and send it back to Rosenberg to be fixed.

As the editor, Snyder failed Rosenberg. Sure, Rosenberg wrote the filth that was made it to news programs across the country, but unlike Ned, there is a system put in place to protect Rosenberg from himself. When even a buckeye calls out the article for what it is (a ”witch hunt”), it is clear that the system failed him. Even Rosenberg deserved better.

Snyder and Rosenberg

Snyder and Rosenberg

Submitted by Glen Masons Hot Wife on August 30th, 2009 at 5:24 PM

Congratulations shitheads! Your story is now a topic of national discussion, you trailblazers of journalism. You Williams and Wada of the Midwest!
Considering the current state of the print media, becoming the next Woodward and Bernstein is more necessity than dream. Why not shit on your alma mater to make it happen?

After all, you're the good guys! You're doing it for the kids... Even if you're "breaking" this story a week before their season starts... adding stress and scrutiny to an already torturous regimen. Even if it's the kids that would suffer most from program-debilitating sanctions that could hinder the accomplishments of the team.

Having interacted with Snyder, I can personally attest that he is a little weasel. When confronted for quoting "I don't know nothing." out of Manningham, he proceeded to cower and giggle like a little girl.