Rome this year, South Africa next year, and beyond

Rome this year, South Africa next year, and beyond

Submitted by MGoRob on February 1st, 2017 at 4:54 PM

Looks like Harbaugh and Company plan to do the abroad trip after Finals ever year.  Specific places were mentioned and hadn't seen that posted yet.

  • This year its Rome.
  • Next year he wants South Africa
  • Japan next
  • Israel after that

New Zealand and London mentioned but no specifics given.

They plan to avoid the only once in 4 year limitation of international abroad trips by not scrimmaging against any other team.

Trip costs are said to being covered by a single donor. Speculation, Ross?…

*SIAP, any mention of south africa brought up no results

***edit: I see I was beaten to the punch. Guess formatting and more information loses the race

Freep article on SEC hypocrisy

Freep article on SEC hypocrisy

Submitted by StephenRKass on January 26th, 2017 at 9:36 AM

The Freep has an article this morning on the hypocrisy of SEC and ACC coaches whining about Spring Break practice in Florida. "What about the kids?" rings very hollow when they have no problem with kids giving up Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, Winter Break, etc., but somehow, Spring Break is sacrosanct. It's all about a recruiting advantage, and keeping Michigan (and other northern interlopers) out of their territory.

There isn't much new ground in the article. And there is one factual inaccuracy:  the Rome trip is happening not over Spring Break but after finals and the term is over. Still, I don't think there was a single snarky comment about JH or Michigan in the piece.

LINK:  Shutting down spring break trips for Michigan football shows hypocrisy

Here's some of the content for those of you who refuse to go to a Freep link:

Really, this is nothing more than a battle for potential recruits. Schools in talent-rich areas don’t want to give up their geographical advantage. Plain and simple.
As soon as Harbaugh announced he was headed to Florida last year, coaches — primarily in the ACC and SEC — started complaining. Their conference commissioners complained, too. Greg Sankey asked the NCAA to stop teams from practicing during spring break. Last week, he got his wish, when the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee voted to ban the practice.
Sankey wasn’t concerned about the well-being of Michigan football players. He didn’t care that they might lose out on frolicking in the sand somewhere or whatever else they’d be doing if Harbaugh hadn’t dragged them down to Florida.
Sankey didn’t want Harbaugh — or any other Northern interloper with a brand name — coming down and setting up shop in the most fertile recruiting area in the country.

NCAA Bylaw 16.7: Reasonable Entertainment

NCAA Bylaw 16.7: Reasonable Entertainment

Submitted by FormAFarkingWall on January 5th, 2016 at 5:09 PM

A few days ago some MGoPosters wondered how it was permissible for the MSU hoops team to fly to Dallas for the Cotton Bowl.  The answer is apparently a change to NCAA Bylaw 16:7, which allows for "reasonable entertainment in conjuction with practice or competition". 

“It’s part of the movement of, if your school can afford it, you can do it,” said Smith, a senior associate athletic director on Hollis’ staff.

For example, Izzo’s team also has traveled to Cleveland for a leadership session with Cleveland Cavaliers owner and MSU alum Dan Gilbert. Schools can now pay for a team on the road to attend an amusement park. A golf team from the north can travel to Florida to practice – previously, such a trip would only be allowed for competition.

Apparently spending 40k fflying from Iowa to Texas, unrelated to any hoops competition (but practicing in Dallas) qualifies as both reasonable and in conjunction with practice -  the article (Freep, sorry) states that the B1G cleared the trip.

I'm all for the student athletes having some fun, but perhaps it's time to just get rid of the rule altogether if it is going to be interpreted so liberally. 


New 2016 academic eligibility standards

New 2016 academic eligibility standards

Submitted by docwhoblocked on March 22nd, 2015 at 8:54 PM

I was at the UM coaches clinic and this was brought up. I thought that the high school coaches on the blog ought to know about this as well as any of you that are parents of high school athletes.

The new eligibility standards have moved the GPA up from 2.0  to 2.3 for the core high school courses of English Math and Science and the lower the GPA the higher the ACT or SAT must be. You cannot repeat courses for a better grade after the 7th semester.  You can have a GPA of 2.0 but you will not be able to compete freshman year (academic redshirt).  The coaches, kids and their parents had best be thinking about these standards when they set their courses for their freshman year of high school.  There may be no way to ever be eligible if you mess up your course requirements and your grades from your freshman year of high school

Jameis Winston insurance policy paid for by FSU - huh?

Jameis Winston insurance policy paid for by FSU - huh?

Submitted by Dan Man on August 4th, 2014 at 10:33 PM

Florida State University, via its "Student Assistant Fund," is paying for an insurance policy for Jameis Winston on which he can collect if he is injured in a way that hurts his NFL value.  The article linked below says that it's up to the conferences to determine how such student assistant funds can be used.  Am I missing something here?  This seems like the school is giving Winston a direct monetary benefit to play there.  Just to clarify - I'm not making an argument that athletes should or should not be paid; I'm just wondering how FSU can get away with this under the current rules.  Does Michigan or any Big 10 school ever pay for such insurance policies for their players?  Anybody know?

Link here.

Mark Emmert Proposing Changes in D1 Governance Model

Mark Emmert Proposing Changes in D1 Governance Model

Submitted by Zone Left on July 25th, 2013 at 11:48 PM
While not explicitly calling for specific changes, "“There's one thing that virtually everybody in Division I has in common right now, and that is they don't like the governance model. Now, there's not agreement on what the new model should be. But there's very little support for continuing things in the governing process the way they are today.” The conference heads calling for change was, as everyone knew, not coincidental. The meetings have happened and change is coming.…

Last of the NCAA recruiting rule changes may also go down in flames

Last of the NCAA recruiting rule changes may also go down in flames

Submitted by Butterfield on March 19th, 2013 at 2:52 PM

Yesterday we learned that 2 of the 3 new NCAA rule changes were being put on indefinite hold due to their unpopularity amongst member institutions, especially B1G schools.  These defeated rules dealt with who could recruit (basically anybody) and what they could send (basically anything), but the rule pertaining to quantities of texts/phone calls a recruit could receive was, astoundingly, left alive. 

Yesterday's news here: 

Well, it looks like it was only given a few extra days to live: 

Once again,,  institutions are telling the NCAA their new rules suck.  Assuming the override is succcessful, the winners will be the recruits (and the coaches who realized the rule was crazy).  The losers include cell phone providers, whoever drafts NCAA rules, and creepy text-happy coaches. 

Between yesterday and today, it feels like Arab Spring Part 2, just on an athletic level. 

NCAA recruiting rule changes (probably) dead

NCAA recruiting rule changes (probably) dead

Submitted by Butterfield on March 18th, 2013 at 8:30 PM

The widely discussed rule changes that would have allowed for unlimited texting and mailing to recruits appear to have been killed, apparently in large part due to the B1G's opposition. EDIT:  I got it wrong, the provision allowing for unlimited contact still seems to be in place but other rule changes pertaining to who can contact recruits and what types of materials can be sent were shot down. 

The article notes that the rule changes could still pop back up at some point in the future, but if they did, it sounds like major modifications would be neccessary. The rule allowing for unlimited texting/mailing was the worst of the three in my opinion so why it survived is beyond me. 

P.S.  I'm not trying to set any sort of personal record for posts in one day, but after waiting a couple hours after the article was posted on in hopes that someone else would link to it, I've given up.  It is a pretty important story and board worthy IMO. 

Big Ten Opposes Recruiting Changes

Big Ten Opposes Recruiting Changes

Submitted by Zone Left on February 11th, 2013 at 9:36 PM


Today, the Big 10 issued a statement opposing the changes in recruiting rules scheduled to go into effect in July, reading in part:

We have serious concerns whether these proposals, as currently written, are in the best interest of high school student-athletes, their families and their coaches. We are also concerned about the adverse effect they would have on college coaches, administrators and university resources. We look forward to working with the NCAA toward improving the game, the recruiting process and the overall college football experience for all student-athletes.

Personally, I hope this provokes the NCAA to respond to increasing levels of criticism about the upcoming changes. The changes are going to do nothing but eliminate any down time for recruits and the coaches who recruit them.

COLUMNIST: Michigan's jersey giveaway sets dangerous precedent

COLUMNIST: Michigan's jersey giveaway sets dangerous precedent

Submitted by The Barwis Effect on September 15th, 2011 at 1:13 AM

Stumbled across this while perusing the interwebs this morning.  Any merit to what this guy is saying?

Say it isn't so.

Please say that after what happened at Ohio State, the University of Michigan isn't letting its football players keep the throwback jerseys worn in the Wolverines' last-second victory over Notre Dame.

No athletic director who pays attention to the world, and conference, around him would say "yes" to such a request.

And yet, Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon, after checking with his NCAA compliance officer, acceded to the players' wishes. They get to keep the jerseys.

While this is not a violation of NCAA rules, it is a violation of common sense.

Don't people learn?

The mess at Ohio State, which cost football coach Jim Tressel his job and seems likely to put the Buckeyes on probation, began with players trading memorabilia for tattoos.

Several Michigan players say nothing untoward is going to happen, that they will keep the jerseys forever in order to preserve the memory of their victory.

OK. That's a nice thought. But why put temptation in front of players?

Does anyone think well-heeled Wolverines boosters will resist the urge to line players' pockets with cash while getting a "legacy" jersey to frame and hang on their den walls?

Even if you believe players have the right to sell whatever they are given, the NCAA disagrees. If you want players to avoid violating rules by selling jerseys, don't give them jerseys to sell.

Click HERE to read the rest of the column.