Unverified Voracity Is Coming To Your City

Submitted by Brian on July 24th, 2014 at 12:02 PM

RIP. Condolences to the friends and family of the deceased Jim Schneider. Madej has a great story:

"I remember (we had a student assistant) doing a press release one year on women’s gymnastics, and he knew nothing about women’s gymnastics, so (he asked) how (should he) write the release,” said former Michigan media relations director Bruce Madej on Tuesday. “And Schneids says to him, very nicely, ‘Don’t worry about it, the people reading it will know less than you do.’"

Words to live by.

dannyy-840241-albums-new-projects-pic65308-chicago[1]

pretty sure the building is somewhere in this photo

Hey guys, I'm going to be in Chicago. If you're in town and like terrible terrible powerpoint slides, boy do I have an event for you.

2014 Michigan Football Season Preview with Brian Cook (MGoBlog) and Chris Balas (TheWolverine/Rivals.com)- NEW

When: Tuesday, July 29th, 6:00pm - 8:00pm

Where: McGuireWoods LLP, 77 West Wacker Dr, Suite 4100, (map)

Cost: $20 for Alumni Association members; $30 for non-members. Pay at the door for $30 with Cash or Credit Card

Details: Join fellow alumni and several special guest speakers as we preview the 2014 Michigan Football season. During the evening, alums will be joined by Chris Balas from TheWolverine/Rivals.com, Brian Cook from MGoBlog.com and others to be confirmed. You'll get insights on the upcoming season and an opportunity to ask your questions. There will be appetizers and complimentary beer & wine available for those in attendance.
Walk-ups will be available for cash or credit card of $30 day of the event.

Register/Contact: To buy a ticket, click here.  If you have any questions, email David Ingmire at [email protected]

I realize that terrible terrible powerpoint slides are not a great and superior attraction, but in my defense they are snappy and brief. Also, complimentary beer and wine. Last year they flagged down Gerry DiNardo and they may also get a BTN Personality again this year.

Pastujov[1]Michael_Pastujov_large[1]

Nick left, Mike right, please try not to think about how old you are vis a vis those guys, the answer is "old."

Hello, nurses. Hockey picked up a couple of massive commitments yesterday. As per hockey recruiting's wont, their commitment is the first time I'd ever heard of them. They're brothers separated by one year, both forwards. Nick Pastujov, the older, is (probably) class of 2016. He's committed to the NTDP program for next year after tearing it up with Belle Tire's U16 team, and was seriously high profile:

His younger brother Mike may be an even bigger prospect.

The usual OHL disclaimer applies. In this case, Nick's NTDP commitment and the obvious appeal of playing together will hopefully mean defection chances are low. Will be interesting to see if either tries to accelerate a la Werenski.

FWIW, Michigan's 2016 class is looking pretty badass right now with Pastujov, Luce, Sanchez, and a couple more potential NHL draft picks.

Meanwhile. Red on Werenski:

“The most difficult thing for younger players is the maturity level and social change going from high school to college, but Zach is mature beyond his years,” Berenson said. “He's like (former Michigan forward) Jason Botterill in that sense. I think he'll fit in really easily.”

I do not make fun of typos and errors, because we all make them. So I… I'm just going to… I'm just going to…

JnMjOF8[1]

Cumong man. I know I called Geoff Cameron "Jeff" and Axel Witsel "Alex" during World Cup preview bits but that's a whole additional level there. For one, there are approximately 12 words in this entire image. For two, CUMONG MAN.

(Via mgouser MiGit)

Big Ten media day, circa the paleolithic. Lee Corso was a game show host, Hayden Fry spontaneously impregnated your mom, Bo was just chillin', thinking about your mortgage, Denny Green wasn't angry yet, and everyone else was quickly and gratefully forgotten by history:

large[3]

Man that back row aside from Hayden is something.

Well, okay. Patrick Omameh is listed as a potential breakout player by ESPN. He's 25th on a list of 25, but that's not bad at all for a guy who went undrafted a year ago. Even if the article comes with one of those "are you sure you're talking about the right player" scouting reports:

Tampa Bay plucked him from there in mid-October, and while he never appeared in a game, the Bucs clearly had plans for him. He goes into training camp in the lead for the right guard position. The scouting reports on Omameh a year ago dinged him for sometimes being unable to finish blocks or move properly to the second level, but he's a consistent and powerful drive-blocker. His greatest attribute, however, is his intelligence. He was offered scholarships at MIT and Princeton before heading to Michigan, where he made academic All-Big Ten.

Um… what? Not to overrate one play or anything but the Te'obliteration is actually a pretty good representation of his career. Omameh was terrific when he was asked to move to the second level and not so good when a burly defensive tackle was put right over him:

Also I just like posting that.

If Patrick Omameh is a year two NFL starter that says something about something, there. Like maybe Michigan should have tried to keep doing the zone stuff they were good at.

NFL draft changes. The NFL is making an effort to tone down the number of underclassmen leaving college despite dubious prospects, at least according to one Nick Saban:

Now, teams can only submit five players for grades from the NFL Draft Advisory Board. Last year, Saban said Alabama submitted 11 names.

Also, the NFL will give just three grades of feedback: first-round grade, second-round grade or a "stay-in-school grade." The NFL previously had five grades: first round, second round, third round, fourth through seventh and not draftable.

If the NFL approves extra draft grade requests you can get them, FWIW. John Infante keeps banging the MLS drum here and he's probably right: MLS hand-selects a number of players who sign "Generation Adidas" contracts and makes them available in the draft; anyone not explicitly approved has to go to college. Or overseas or whatever, but they're not available. If the NFL only wants underclassmen who will probably go in the first two rounds, just make that explicit. They'll have to negotiate that into a CBA but current players are always happy to negotiate away stuff from future ones.

Funchessssss.

Etc.: Tiny Basque club manages to raise enough money to play in La Liga. EA settlement wrangling. Say no to fall weddings. "Embracing debate" is tolerating all sorts of things you shouldn't. The NCAA is Marxist. Michigan participates in Make A Wish. Get The Picture demolishes things better than just about anybody.

Comments

gwkrlghl

July 24th, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^

I suppose it depends on when you decided Werenski truly committed, but an amusing statement since Werenski was only officially committed about a week ago

And yes, this continues the trend of Michigan's 2014-2016 classes being pretty righteous indeed

BlueCube

July 24th, 2014 at 12:26 PM ^

They didn't want to have to worry about paying Jake Ryan for using his image so they created the mythical figure Jeff. They had planned on using Jack Ryan but Tom Clancy was using it.

Space Coyote

July 24th, 2014 at 12:27 PM ^

Jeff Ryan is Jake Ryan's alter ego that plays MIKE instead of SAM. It's just part of the craziness factor that the former Jake Ryan incorporates into his game.

You can hear more of Space Coyote's preview by heading to the park down by your house, where you'll find a crazy man yelling random things and throwing squirrel poop at you. Because that's my live preview alter-ego, rather than the whole talking dog spirit guide thing.

dragonchild

July 24th, 2014 at 1:49 PM ^

I thought that was Michigan's move in anticipation of the NCAA's (probably) impending humiliating lawsuit loss and can't use JMFR's name to market materials without making arrangements that can't be finalized while the case is in court.  They probably all have aliases now. . . Dave Gardner, Frankie Canteen, Taco Charl -- oh wait that's not his real name, but you get the idea.  Anyway, I'm sure it was planned.

You may laugh at my joke now.

Bryan

July 24th, 2014 at 12:35 PM ^

is at a law firm?

Though, I willing to bet a small sum of money that a good chunk of the material contributed to this site has been written while at a law firm...like this post. 

Space Coyote

July 24th, 2014 at 12:35 PM ^

I made one stipulation. No Fall wedding. Anything else was fine, but anything from late-August thru early January was off limits. No, a bye week isn't allowed. That won't always be a bye week, you're only setting yourself up for awful anniversaries later in life. Team is down, no. College football is on TV. I get 4 months a year, and assume I only have about 50 more years left. That's not enough time to miss a Saturday a year. And when I bring kids into this world, I expect they not have me provide such a negative example for where on the totem poll college football belongs. 

Hail-Storm

July 25th, 2014 at 9:18 AM ^

I know it is unnacceptable around here to have a fall wedding, but I had a fall wedding and it was great. My wife and I met in A2 and both loved the fall.  We got married in A2 and had the reception at the union.  The day was the MSU-Michigan Game, but we were able to schedule the wedding around the game (it was away) so that we could watch.  It helped me during the day because I was focused on the game.  Everything turned out great, walked down to the Victors with my new wife, had maize and blue pom poms, yellow and blue flowers, and pre reception donuts and cider from the dexter cider mill.  I don't regret one bit of it.

In regards to kids and watching games, I just thank god that DVRs have been long established before I had kids. I am constantly pausing and fast forwarding through commercials.  Kids mean my priorities have had to change, but there is still plenty of options.

bsand2053

July 24th, 2014 at 12:36 PM ^

The NCAA, in its wisdom, decides that in order to limit early entry they are just going to withhold critical gudiance from players and the ones that they do deign to inform are gonig to be given less precise information.  

 

Keep it up guys!

UMaD

July 24th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^

Omameh's Exhibit A in why people are openly questioning the OL coaching under Hoke.  OK, maybe Exhibit A is Devin Gardner's X-ray chart, Exhibit B is the change in Gardner's gait from August to Decemember, Exhibit C is the lack of proven starters coming from the '12 OL class, and Exhibit D is the RB's YPC, but Omameh is at least exhibit E.  An all-conference caliber performer under Rodriguez and future NFL starter (if this article is to be believed) looked barely competant during his post-Rodriguez years at Michigan.  Lewan didn't appear to improve much either.

Also - seems like too much might have been made of his early highlight plays in a still-for-now-unconventional offense.  Those ESPN criticisms reflect more of what we saw under Hoke when repeatedly struggling to effectively pull.  One of those "we should revisit our early assumptions" things.

The FannMan

July 24th, 2014 at 1:23 PM ^

Omemeh was less effective because of the change in philosophy and the fact that he was being asked to do different things than in years past.  If he is now a good NFL drive blocker, it may be a sign that he benefited from OL coaching at Michigan.  

Your Exhibit C is a little dubious too.  It is typical for even a stud OL recruit to red-shirt and then spend his second (or even third) year in the program fighting for playing time.  (See Long, Jake).  I think it is a little unrealistic to expect kids who got on campus in '12 to be proven starters after two seasons.  IMHO, they were forced into action too early.

Also, Lewan was picked 11th in the draft and was the third OT taken.  Not sure how much better you wanted him to be.  

I think the jury is still out on the OL coaching under Hoke.  However, that jury will be coming back with a verdict in a few weeks.  The '12 guys are now in their third year, and there are a number of guys in their second year that have experience.  They also will (I hope and pray) be playing in a simpler and more consisent offensive scheme.  

UMaD

July 24th, 2014 at 1:50 PM ^

Long started as a RS Freshman, as did a bunch of other future NFL players. His impact was immediate and he got all-conference honors.  Those guys who played then were on OLs that were a lot better than last year's, which started a true freshman and several walk-ons. 

Not every quality OLmen has to be ready by their 2nd season, and I would not expect a single specific player to do so. But, out of a 4-man class, you'd like at least one to show the career arc of a future-NFL pick.  Magnuson and Kalis at least look promising, but their impact didn't stand out.

You're right that one could spin Omameh's success as sign that Michigan's OL coaching is good.  But he played poorly enough under Hoke that people were openly saying "it can't be any worse" about his departure....

You're also right that the jury is still out, but so far, under Borges things looked really bad.  I don't think that's a controversial thing to say regardless of how much of it you want to pin on inexperienced personnel.  I disagree that we'll know in a few weeks.  The OLmen are still young, even younger than last year.  We'll have more info by the end of the season for sure.  We have no choice but to hope that the offense will be simpler, but it doesn't mean the OL will be better.

The FannMan

July 24th, 2014 at 2:29 PM ^

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say at this point.  I sense you are looking for a fight that isn't here.  I am not trying to spin anything or pin anything on anyone.  I did disagree with the point I thought you were making - that the OL performance is on Hoke and his staff.  But, by the end of your post, it seems that you don't even agree with that.  Maybe I misread where you are coming from.

By the way - Long started after two or three three games in his RS Freshmen year.   As such, he was fighting for playing time in his second year.  He was also Jake Freaking Long.  He turned into the overall number 1 pick and a great pro-player.  So yes, at this point, no one from the Clas of 12 is Jake Long.  That doesn't mean that none of the current guys will be good or NFL draft picks.  It shows how long it takes to develop good OL players and good offensive lines.  

UMaD

July 24th, 2014 at 2:45 PM ^

I do think the OL performance is primarily on Hoke and his staff.  Not only have guys like Lewan and Omameh seemingly not improved, but none of THEIR GUYS appear to be on the fast-track to NFL glory. 

Could the Hoke OLmen be NFL players? Sure, but early returns say probably not high level ones. Many, maybe most, starting-caliber NFL players are either starting or pushing experienced veterans in their RS Freshman year.  Since our OL had no experienced veterans to push (outside of tackle) and was starting walk-ons and freshman - it would have been nice for Kalis and Magnuson to have locked down season-long starting gigs and look like high quality players.  Put another way, their 1st season production was more on par with Omameh than Lewan, and that's being generous.

OLmen deserve our patience.  But this coaching staff hasn't given us much evidence that they develop OL talent. They did get great production out of Schofield and have developed Glasgow. But after three years, the lack of examples is damning.  But yeah...this is far from a final verdict.  We'll know a lot more in the months to come.

 

dragonchild

July 24th, 2014 at 2:02 PM ^

Or at least I'll try to defend what I think was a misstatement.

"OL coaching under Hoke" is just fine.  Both tackles got drafted and the gooey center of the O-line last year was also one of the youngest, if not the youngest, middle three starters in FBS history at a position where age is one of the most reliable indicators of consistency.  Point is, evidence that individual player progress was stunted under Hoke/Funk is lacking.

The more pertinent point I think being made here is that Borges had his head so far up his ass that he was misusing the talent that he had.  I get that he's not a spread coach but if you're being paid $700k to do ANY job (not just OC, I don't care what it is) then "I don't know" and "I don't like to" are NEVER acceptable excuses.  And he tried, I'm sure he did, but the guy just completely seemed to lack the flexibility to effectively use the parts he had.  Again, I won't question the effort, but it's been analyzed to death how talented players were neutralized by the scheme itself and Borges was as often as not bailed out by his players.  I remember more than one highlight reel where Toussaint, Smith or Denard picked his way through traffic because even though nobody missed a block, Borges so steadfastly refused to option a defender and made Omameh pull that the play was all but planned to have the ball carrier somehow dodge three free hitters en route to a 5-yard gain.  That made guys like Omameh look much worse than they actually were.

The FannMan

July 24th, 2014 at 2:43 PM ^

I was responding to the comments about OL coaching uder Hoke.  My points were:

1) Change on the OL is hard.  That impacted Omameh.  He spent years never pulling and was then told to do so.  That is hard.  While that calls into question the decisoin to change the offense, it does not mean that the OL was coached poorly.

2) Youth and inexperience on the OL is really bad - especially when it is true of all three middle linemen.  Especially when you keep changing the mix.

3) OL takes awhile to develop - even when they are Jake Long

4) The fact that OL in their second year are not clear NLF picks does not mean that the coaching is bad. 

I didn't mean to spark another Borgess debate.  The dude is gone.  As I mentioned in my first post, let's just all hope and pray that Nuss runs a system that is easier for the OL to execute.  

UMaD

July 24th, 2014 at 2:55 PM ^

I don't necessarily disagree with any of this, and it matches what I HOPE is rationale for the steady decline in OL play. BUT, the hypothesis that this coaching staff simply sucks at developing OL talent has yet to be ruled out either.

I think the fact that none of the '12 class have looked that great is not conclusive of anything by itself. It is a bit troubling though, when taken in the context of all the other evidence.  Those guys could have looked a lot better, and there's example all over the country and in this programs past that speaks to that.

I understand the instinct to seek out reasons for optimism.  But sometimes it's not entirely rational.  See last years: "it can't be any worse", which is bizzarly getting repeated this year.

mGrowOld

July 24th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^

New York - Chicago.  Chicago - New York.

Rinse, repeat.

You guys ever consider taking your road show to say....Cleveland?  I know we're in Ohio and all that but common.  You've got a TON of board participants, players, ex-players, Heisman trophy winners and even Space Coyote who call this place home and would definitely attend.

UMaD

July 24th, 2014 at 12:45 PM ^

BS move by the NFL.  There's a huge difference between being a 3rd rounder and going undrafted.  Seems like their motivation is to keep more kids in the NCAA's clutches.

Blue in Denver

July 24th, 2014 at 1:59 PM ^

 

I can't believe I just read the line "Seems like their motivation is to keep more kids in the NCAA's clutches."

The NFL could give a rat's ass about the players.  It cares about its teams and its quality of product.  I suspect their theory is fewer 21 year old draftees = fewer draft busts, since an extra year is always useful for evaluating the player's actual ability.

I don't have an opinion on whether this is a "good thing" or a "bad thing" for players, but assuming the NFL is just out to get them is absurdity.

UMaD

July 24th, 2014 at 3:06 PM ^

If you're saying the NFL cares about itself and not the players, I agree. My point is that kids staying in the NCAA helps them, but not the kid.  The NCAA/NFL and NCAA/NBA arrangements are mutually beneficial to the leagues, but not to the players.

The NFL benefits from it's rookies coming in already famous, as does the NBA.  I'm sure they'd love to go back to a time when everyone stayed in the NCAA for 4 or 5 years.

Nothsa

July 24th, 2014 at 12:50 PM ^

I'm planning to use this for trivia at lunch. Pretty sure it was either '81 or '82. I recognize five, maybe six of those guys, but have to track down the rest... Can anybody name the back row? I'm guessing that's Muddy Waters in the middle, and of course Fry on the right.

Nothsa

July 24th, 2014 at 1:10 PM ^

Front row: Dennis McClain (Wisc), Denny Green (NW), Earle Bruce (OSU), Lee Corso (IU), Bo (Mich)

Back row: Leon Burtnett (Pur), Smokey Joe Salem (Minn), Muddy Waters (MSU), Mike White(?) (Ill), Hayden Fry (Iowa)

 

Mike White images online don't look like that Illinois guy, but... that's who it must be, right?

bronxblue

July 24th, 2014 at 1:29 PM ^

I suspect most kids don't really care about the grade they get back from the NFL board, save an absolute, crystal-clear "you aren't getting drafted, so go back", which doesn't seem that common.  And even then, I think kids would still leave.  Many of these decisions aren't made lightly by the these kids, and they tend to be influenced by factors beyond football and ability.  So telling a potential draftee that he isn't a 1st- or 2nd-rounder probably won't change much for kids who have families who need money, any money.

Michigan Arrogance

July 24th, 2014 at 2:34 PM ^

re: "Embracing debate" is tolerating all sorts of things you shouldn't.

 

the same thing happens when people want to "debate" evolution or "debate" global climate change. It's bullshit to consider both sides b/c there is only one side: the fucking truth. This is why most scientists turn down formal debates - it legitimizes the bullshit by just being on the same stage. Many people didn't think Bill Nye should have debated that nut job a few months ago.

blueinuk

July 24th, 2014 at 5:38 PM ^

re:  "Embracing debate" is tolerating all sorts of things you shouldn't.

the same thing happens when people want to "debate" creationism or "debate" global climate change is not caused by humans.  It's bull to consider both sides b/c there is only one side:  the truth.  This is why most theologians turn down formal debates - it legitimizes the bull by just being on the same stage.  Many people didn't think Ken Ham should have debated that nut job a few months ago.