Oh, dear; Mark Snyder is not happy.

Submitted by Section 1 on

From Mark Snyder's dispatch tody in the Freep (my emphasis in bold):

"Forcier 'pumped' - M quarterback Tate Forcier has not spoken to the Detroit media since last season but touched base with his hometown paper, the San Diego Union-Tribune, for his thoughts on U-M scheduling San Diego State for 2011."

"I'm super-pumped for this game," Forcier told the paper. "Honestly, San Diego State is a team right in my backyard, and they didn't show me any love or attention. (Former) coach (Chuck) Long didn't pay much attention to me, which was surprising because I showed some interest in them. So I'm really looking forward to playing them."

Oh dear, Tate; you mean you haven't spoken to the Detroit media since last season?  What a great idea!  I'd make Tate a Team Captain on that basis alone.  Pissing off Mark Snyder ought to be a team goal right behind "Winning the Big Ten Championship."

CalifExile

May 21st, 2010 at 6:27 PM ^

I understand your point. You're right that the extra coaches is the serious substantive violation. I guess what bothers me is that "failure to foster an environment of compliance" sounds too much like "loss of institutional control," and like something where they add up everything else (too many coaches + too much stretching and ensuring that kids go to class) and hammer you for all of it. Plus it specifically names RR.

Thanks for the reply.

dahblue

May 20th, 2010 at 3:35 PM ^

I have plenty of issue with some of the media coverage we've received of late.  But...my main concern is our record.  The media didn't make us lose games.  We lost them on our own.

There probably is some kick-em-while-they're down sentiment among some media folk, but not all.  Further, I've had significant media dealings, and it seems that laziness is a bigger issue than malice.  I wonder if our athletic department didn't slip in its media relations skills.  I think we did RR no favors by failing to properly prepare him for an entirely different sort of media focus.

I think Tate is smart to move cautiously in the press, but they aren't all the devil.  I find Sam Webb to be an excellent source of info.  Doug Karsh is solid.  Angelique is also good.  True, no love for Snyder and Rosenberg, but we need to concentrate on putting a winning Michigan product on the field rather than fretting about the media.

Section 1

May 20th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^

I do remember saying, "Without the Free Press, its suspect sources, and its defective reporting, there'd have been no NCAA investigation."

BigBlue02

May 20th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^

The only players still on the team that spoke ill of the program....didn't actually speak ill of the program, so it wasn't the 3-9 record, it was the shoddy journalism. Did the 3-9 record make the freep misquote our freshmen?

dahblue

May 20th, 2010 at 10:34 PM ^

Really?  Your response is to add a qualifier about players "still on the team"?  The Freep certainly exaggerated any wrongdoing.  That being said, however, the University specifically admits to wrongdoing.   I know it's fashionable, but at some point it becomes really weak to continue to bash the messenger.  It wasn't good journalism by the Freep, nor was it good program oversight by UofM.  It's ok to admit that we did something wrong.  That's exactly the best way to move forward.

And, again, if RR didn't lose all those games...no one would have said a peep.

NomadicBlue

May 20th, 2010 at 3:56 PM ^

to me is that Tate is doing this the right way by not saying anything at all.  He has not come out and slung mud at Freep or Birkett.  Sometimes you can get your point across without saying a word.  Smart kid.  I hope he keeps it up and leaves the mudslingin' to the bloggers.  FUCK YOU FREEP!!!!!!

Like I said, stay classy, Tate.  :)

Blue Balls

May 20th, 2010 at 5:04 PM ^

I hope all Michigan Coaches and Michigan Players respond to the FreeP with a simple "no comment " to any of their questions.   Post game media conference-"no comment" should be the only two words spoken to any FreeP reporter.......

maizenbluenc

May 20th, 2010 at 5:11 PM ^

Like I said in an unrelated post, I wish Rich would master the Lloyd Carr stare. Say nothing, glare at them so they know you know they asked something and you are intentionally ignoring them, and then say next question.

Dallas Wolverine

May 20th, 2010 at 5:06 PM ^

What year was that with Elzinga and Leach? I think Elzinga graduated in 73 so that was 74 right. I think he won the state title from TL Handy in Bay City. Oh the memorys!

Section 1

May 20th, 2010 at 6:17 PM ^

Elzinga was a Junior in 1974; Dennis Franklin as a Senior and co-captain started 9 games that year, Elzinga started 2 games.  I am trying to remember -- was Dennis Franklin banged up for a bowl game that year?  {Edit. - No; Michigan did not go to a bowl game, as it was the last year of the Rose Bowl-or-nothing era.  Michigan lost one game that year, to OSU, 12-10.  Michigan had rolled through the rest of its schedule unbeaten and untied, playing the rest of the Big Ten plus Stanford (in Palo Alto), Colorado and Navy.} 

In 1975, Elzinga was a Senior, and before the season began, he was widely expected to start.  I don't think a Freshman had ever started at QB for Michigan at that time.  We had recruited the All-Stater from Flint, Rick Leach.  But as good as he was, and as much as we had high hopes for him, nobody expected Leach to take the job from Mark Elzinga, who had been almost as big a star in High School as Leach had, and who had already started a couple of games at Michigan.

The rest is history.  I think Elzinga's family ran some successful businesses in nothern Michigan, and Mark, if I am not mistaken, went on to work in the Secret Service.

Blue boy johnson

May 20th, 2010 at 5:31 PM ^

So Tate feels dissed by San Diego State, I find this humorous. Don't know much about the intricacies of recruiting, but I have a feeling Chuck Long knew Tate wasn't coming to the Aztecs.

Whatever it takes to keep you motivated I guess. Chuck Long is going to meet a dastardly fate for shirking his duty to show Tate some love

XxNoRemorsExX

June 18th, 2010 at 5:10 AM ^

Honestly, with their recent track record, how can the Detroit media at all wonder why they're not allowed access to Tate.  I'd be afraid they'd try to start a fire around him too.