Stupid Person Feelingsball: The value of players opinions
The Elliot Mealer muggle thing has sparked a lot of conversation around here, and I have seen both positives and negatives. I can see how "muggles" can be taken as a derogatory term (as it is basically used as one through Rowling's stories). During my time as a student-athlete, we generally announced to the non-athletes who didn't understand that "I'm D-1, you don't know." Right or wrong, morally justifiable or not, this was the attitude taken by myself and several of my peers.
I guess where I am going here is that it is hard to make an argument that a student-athlete knows whats best for an athletic department, notably not many student-athletes have significant (if any) experience on the administrative side.
That being said, how much value should the player's opinion on a coach merit? Unless all the other people that have played for Brady Hoke and spoken out about their love/appreciation/confidence in his abilities as a coach are just doing so because of loyalty, it seems that they are some of the few still in his corner.
Should the opinions of the players factor in when picking a head coach? We have seen coaches fired for "losing the team" (Charlie Weis, who one time held a practice without the seniors to "develop future talent"). Should we write off these opinions as quickly as we condemn them for thinking they know how an athletic department should be run?
November 5th, 2014 at 10:18 AM ^
their inputs deserve a lot more consideration than any of ours on this site, for no other reason than they are the ones who will be directly playing for that man.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:20 AM ^
I think the issue is when someone, anyone, implies that their's is the only opinion that matters or that the opinions of other groups "don't count" at all.
That's not Michigan. We are all part of the same family.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:22 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 10:28 AM ^
Sorry, when you talk about "good" and "bad" it is nothing but an opinion.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:32 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 10:36 AM ^
This is feelingsball not granular mathematics
November 5th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 10:50 AM ^
Despite performing only the lowest risk surgeries? Resources better or equal to any other hospital?
Neither of those are similar to Brady Hoke's coaching.
Also, how bad can you mess up the lowest risk surgery?
Doctor: Hey, sorry, I know we were just supposed to cut that mole off but I accidently took your left arm with it, my bad.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:03 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 11:07 AM ^
but a stellar surgeon can make a massive mistake, and there are a lot of moving parts in that process.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:08 AM ^
"Lowest risk surgeries=highly rated recruiting classes."
This is probably the worst analogy i've ever read. And boy is that saying something.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:16 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^
Yes, its easier to win with talented players. But the problem with your analogy is that talented high school players does not necessarily mean talented college players. I'm not trying to argue the entire discussion here with you, but you're not comparing apples to apples with this analogy, imo.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:30 AM ^
I think coaching college football is a great deal more involved than you seem to think. You cannot, for instance, say that Hoke is a failure because he recruits so well (and that is the implication of making "highly rated recruiting classes" the denominator in your coaching evaluation equation, because then all Hoke has to do is recruit crap players and he becomes a better coach in your model).
My advice: you are in a hole. Stop digging.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:31 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 10:24 AM ^
Being an athlete =! Being an administrator
Knowing how to play a sport =! Knowing sports administration
To be frank, neither the fans nor the athletes are good judges of these sorts of things. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions to the rule. I'm sure there are plenty of alums that work in sports administration who know what they're talking about, just as I'm sure the same can be said of many former athletes.
Just because you played LaCrosse or Baseball doesn't give you some magical insight into how to run an entire athletic department. That's like saying a fast food worker would know how to run Taco Bell or Yum! Brands. Perhaps that's a little unfair, but I don't think it's that unfair.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:31 AM ^
I believe the correct syntax is !=.
code nazi'd.
I also don't care about the AD thing. Does playing LaCrosse qualify you to have an opinion on LaCrosse coaches? Undoubtedly, yes. How much value should be given to this opinion? Probably need a person by person evaluation to know whether their opinion deserves merit.
November 5th, 2014 at 12:17 PM ^
Obviously none of you, in fact, played lacrosse.
LaCrosse = city in Wisconsin.
lacrosse = sport
no capital C
Sorry, pet peeve. Back to discussion...
November 5th, 2014 at 12:58 PM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 10:37 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
Joey Galloway. That man has an IQ of a potted plant.
November 5th, 2014 at 2:07 PM ^
Fans pay the bill.
Fans buy the tickets, fans pay the tuition, fans make the donations.
The love of the plebs means everything.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:34 AM ^
I can see how "muggles" can be taken as a derogatory term (as it is basically used as one through Rowling's stories).
This is not remotely true. Your entire premise is incorrect.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:42 AM ^
So you are saying that not a single person was offended by the use of the term?
Or are you arguing that Rowling's world was one where wizards and muggles lived on equal grounds?
For the record, I am not offended at all by the use of the term; I think it is funny. And, Rowling's commentary on this:
The word 'mug' came to mind, for somebody gullible
November 5th, 2014 at 11:04 AM ^
So you are saying that not a single person was offended by the use of the term?
Oh, people were offended. People can get offended over any old thing. But I think it was utterly idiotic for people to be offended by what was clearly a good-natured, joking term.
Or are you arguing that Rowling's world was one where wizards and muggles lived on equal grounds?
Not saying that either, but that's a far cry from saying that "muggle" was used as a "derogatory term" in the stories. I mean, it's not like the Weasely's, Dumbledore, and all of the other likable characters who regularly used the term were portrayed as bigots. It was a term of affection, if anything.
I'm on record from the outset as saying that people getting offended by the use of the word "muggle" to refer to non-athletes were whiners of the highest order. Vincent Jackson's explanation below should have been obvious from the outset -- it was a good natured, joking term for non-student athletes. If anything, it is certainly less objectionable and more good-natured than the term "civilian," which athletes used during the Bo days.
As comments in the Vincent Jackson post make clear, at least some of the people who got upset about the word "muggle" never read the Harry Potter books or saw the movies, which makes their decision to be offended by a word without bothering to understand it even more frustrating. This was made all the worse by our own fearless leader's decision to whine about the word in a post, even though he too never read the books.
This whole controversy was stupid from the outset. People just like to get offended over nothing, apparently.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:08 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 11:11 AM ^
Doh. Fantasy football on the brain.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:18 AM ^
contributing to db's ousting did not set up a context for the term muggles to be "good-natured, joking term."
November 5th, 2014 at 11:20 AM ^
Maybe "muggle" isn't strictly a derogatory term. But in the context it was used, it's hard to argue that it wasn't meant in a derogatory way. I mean, "muggles...smh" is pretty clearly an expession of contempt.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:39 AM ^
In the context it was used by Elliot Mealer, it was not good-natured.
Anyone arguing that is the one being idiotic.
But you're right, its not a big deal.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:37 AM ^
You are 18-21 year olds with little to no real-world experience running a business or heck even working in a professional environment full-time. Many of the folks you are referring to as "muggles" have all of this and advanced degrees to boot.Just keep that in mind and stay humble.
President Schlissel also made a great point that student athletes are just ONE of many stakeholders for an atheletic department. So we "muggles" are okay with you athletes having your say but it is idiotic for you to think you are the only constituency to have a say.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:42 AM ^
athletes in one category. Vincent Smith gave a great explanation in a thread just a few minutes ago and showed that he really cared in listening to others in his replies. You one the other hand sound exactly like the stereotypical jock who would use the word in a derogatory way (When you say right or wrong that is my view, that is ignorance at its worst).
November 5th, 2014 at 11:11 AM ^
You one the other hand sound exactly like the stereotypical jock who would use the word in a derogatory way (When you say right or wrong that is my view, that is ignorance at its worst).
Wow, slow your freaking roll dude. Nothing OP said suggests that he is a "stereotypical jock that would use [a] word in a derogatory way."
Moreover, he didn't say "right or wrong that IS my view." He said that, right or wrong, that WAS the attitude taken by players -- he is distinguishing his understanding of things now from his perspective when he was an 18-21 year old student (just as most of us mature and get a better perspective on things as we get older).
Maybe you also missed the very next sentence, in which he acknowledged that not many student athletes have administrative experience and that they don't necessarily know what's best for the department.
Your response was quite dickish, and had virtually nothing to do with the original post.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^
with your view, as I spent two years as a college football player (albeit a very small school) and athletes and non-athletes have very different experiences. The muggles term isn't that different than Greeks using GDI.
Athletes, at least current athletes, don't have any special insight into running an athletic department. , I think some value should be placed on players opinions of coaches but only on the margin. Ultimately the coaches record speaks for itself.
November 5th, 2014 at 10:54 AM ^
I'm with you here. One common thing I have noticed is those that agree with the statement
"If we were winning, no one would care about any of this"
are former or current athletes. Not sure who said it the other day, I believe Reader71, but this really hits the nail on the head, at least from an athletes standpoint.
Essentially: If I had done better in that game (and we won as a result), then serenity will encompass us.
November 5th, 2014 at 1:12 PM ^
the old adage that winning cures everything.
November 5th, 2014 at 3:48 PM ^
You say that like "GDI" isn't derogatory...
November 5th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^
Sidetracked by the Charlie Weis comment...wow...perhaps it makes sense from a social justice standpoint to pay him *not* to coach, because he is not only horrible at it but he crushes souls while being horrible...
November 5th, 2014 at 11:01 AM ^
As mentioned in another thread, what grinds our gears is how former players come out with this "muggle" shit and yet say absolutely nothing the rest of the time. Clearly there are problems. They won't tell us what the problems are so we can help and target the right people, but they'll happily tell us to fuck off and that our opinions don't matter.
November 5th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 11:18 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 11:33 AM ^
November 6th, 2014 at 1:06 AM ^
So your analogy is... Dave Brandon = "...a boss that I liked and thought did a good job..."?
November 5th, 2014 at 11:03 AM ^
Gosh, it's becoming positively exhausting to be a Michigan fan. It's obvious the players don't care what I think, and I'm sort of getting to the point of not caring what they think, either. Why is everything becoming so damn contentious?
November 5th, 2014 at 11:10 AM ^
November 5th, 2014 at 1:14 PM ^
people don't like you very much here do they
November 5th, 2014 at 11:43 AM ^
its the michigan difference.