Unverified Voracity Deletes Six Jokes

Submitted by Brian on August 28th, 2009 at 10:45 AM

Oy. This showed up on the official PSU College of Engineering facebook page and is impossible to comment on without being cruel:

i never want to hear anything about arrogance from penn state fans again

So I won't. Aaaaargh yes I will. I ran an open-mic standup night* for a while, so I can say this with authority: there's but one thing sadder than arrogance from a man who only thinks he's funny.

*(into the ground.)

Scratch that. Remember "the Big Ten should nix this Indiana-in-Maryland thing"? Yeah, nevermind:

After Glass discussed the game with Lynch, Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany and Penn State AD Tim Curley, the league's athletic directors voted on the game during a conference call last week. It was approved by a unanimous vote of 9-0 (Penn State and Indiana abstained).

Why on earth would anyone vying for the Big Ten title approve this sort of thing? If you think the answer is green and floppy, you win a prize:

"With our revenue sharing, the Big Ten is going to make more money off this game than they would have in Bloomington, Indiana," Glass said.

Yeah, but how much is that going to be per school? It can't be more than a couple hundred K, and is that worth it if you're sitting on top of a pile of money and laughing a la Michigan or Ohio State? I bet the only people who think so are non-revenue coaches. If this game is actually close and Penn State wins the Big Ten next year, a lot of ADs are going to look dumb.

Point maybe? Ok, ok, lulz Ohio State is pleading with their fans not to act like jerks to the Navy, but why does this courtesy only get extended to service academies? I don't mean from an OSU perspective, I mean from a larger sociological perspective. It's always bothered me when the PA announcer asks Michigan Stadium to welcome Eastern Michigan or whoever and the response is booing. Really? Really we have a big problem with Eastern Michigan, or any MAC school, or most of the Big Ten?

I'd like to save it for actual rivals and maybe teams who are particularly annoying in a certain year. (Say, Wisconsin after that whole unpunished knee-twisting incident.) It means more that way. Right now we're just misanthropes. Boooo Ben Konop booooo.

Em. Er? Would you believe this is an attempt to debunk the idea that Mark Dantonio's offense is straight outta Pangea?

Michigan State, a supposed "run-oriented offense", ran the ball 56% of all plays from scrimmage.  By way of comparison, Michigan, a "spread & shred" offense, ran 57%. … Michigan State has a greater tendency to run when tied or leading (and an incredible 87.5% tendency to run when leading by 2 or more TDs).  This is is not necessarily some devotion to neanderthal, smash-mouth football.  Rather, it shows a deliberate, low-variance, ball control strategy, used to choke the life out of the game when leading and skewing the overall run/pass balance toward run.

I don't necessarily disagree with the rest of the points in that article; I do think it talks past the issue instead of really addressing it. The comments of that post point out that MSU's run-pass split on first down was 2-1, and that was with a senior quarterback (albeit not a very good one). And since Michigan State's runs were largely ineffective—MSU was 77th in rush yardage and averaged 3.3 YPC—that set up second and third and long situations that tilted the playcalling to the pass. Meanwhile, Brian Hoyer was not good but MSU averaged 7.0 YPA, and that was considerably better on first down.

Meanwhile, Michigan averaged 3.9 YPC and—ugh—5.1 YPA. Superficially, Michigan and Michigan State had near-identical run-pass breakdowns but… yeah, that's only superficial.

I watched this for years under Lloyd Carr, who once took senior Tom Brady, Marquise Walker, and David Terrell into a BCS bowl against a vicious run defense and horrible secondary and spent the first half plowing into the line for two yards a carry. Some coaches just want to grind into the line and last year is ample evidence Dantonio is one of them.

Aaaand nightmare fuel! LSUfreek is a terrible wizard.

[note: The OZone made a copyright claim on the hilarious opening still of the freekery. So it's down.]

I made the mistake of putting this in the post a half-hour before it was ready. It's now burned into my brain. God help me.

Etc.: I'm not going to belabor this any more than I already have—immensely—but DocSat is with me on Nick Sheridan as starter. Birkett runs down the position battles.

Comments

BlueFish

August 28th, 2009 at 12:40 PM ^

I'm not so sure that it's about NO pretty girls going to U-M. Perhaps someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I've always heard that meme attributed to Bill Frieder, who supposedly said (after taking the ASU job):

"Nine out of ten women in Michigan are beautiful, and the other one goes to the University of Michigan."

Then again, I've also heard this used for California and Stanford, so maybe the person who told me that was full of poop.

BlueFish

August 28th, 2009 at 12:27 PM ^

Personally, I saw the redhead as a potential winning entry in next spring's Derby. But hey, "eye of the beholder" and all that.

I admit, the intriguing redhead quality sometimes allows the overall standard to be more...relaxed.

HartAttack20

August 28th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^

So I'm guessing that's supposed to be Pete Caroll's bananna hammock hanging into the picture of the buckeyes looking back at him. Quite the picture. I'd say Pete should suit up for gameday in that every week. It's a good look on him.

jblaze

August 28th, 2009 at 10:57 AM ^

take that down. It's obviously a joke, seeing that none of them are pretty at all, but when this spreads, they will get some nasty comments since they are all kind of gross.

CrankThatDonovan

August 28th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^

Reading the Birkett article, I had not heard that Herron was being pushed so much by Craig Roh. As far as I understood, Herron had played pretty well, so I am somewhat surprised that Roh would be pushing for starting time like Birkett seems to imply. Does anyone know if Roh could really start for us against Western Michigan?

jtmc33

August 28th, 2009 at 11:13 AM ^

So, which one of the three was brave enough to approach the other two and say "Hey, I have three funny t-shirts that make fun of UM... and since I needed two other uglies to make the joke work.. I was just wondering if....."

Don

August 28th, 2009 at 11:28 AM ^

about having one less home game to attend? Or is this a just tacit admission that attendance stinks and so Indiana has given up? Hell, maybe Indiana should drop out and join the MAC and then we can get back to a round-robin conference schedule.

Don

August 28th, 2009 at 11:30 AM ^

and Facebook just introduces an element of self-inflicted cruelty on top of the delusion. Thank god FB wasn't around when I was that age.

ThWard

August 28th, 2009 at 11:36 AM ^

I'm going to be called a nancy, but in general, I'm not a fan of posting these types of pics and (impliedly) ripping a girl's looks. Yeah, yeah, they have it coming for (1) wearing those shirts and (2) being on FB, but really, college orientation tee-shirts are usually crass and dumb and not everyone who dons them is really expressing arrogance but rather.. um,... going with the flow?

Whatever. Just saying. Seems harsh, as I don't think those chicks think they're Heidi Klum and thus need to be knocked down any peg just because they wore tongue-in-cheek shirts ripping on UM.

And this coming from a guy who thinks the "UM girls aren't attractive" argument is (1) wrong on its face, (2) ignores the fact that chicks always look better during nice weather (tan, revealing clothing, etc.) of which Ann Arbor has very little during the school year, (3) comes from a place of academic insecurity.

Edit: and I realize Brian was being restrained. There are 100 jokes to be made and he passed on them. But still, I have "why bother?" feeling about even posting the pics.

A Case of Blue

August 28th, 2009 at 2:35 PM ^

Yeah, I agree.

Plus I always get irritated by people anonymously ripping on others' looks. Really easy to do when you're not putting yourself out there, either.

Edit: I don't mean Brian. More just a commentary on the general internet phenomenon.

WolvinLA

August 28th, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^

I agree with you, but this situation is different. If Brian posted a picture of three ugly girls wearing "Go PSU" shirts and we were all bashing them for being ugly, I think your point would stand. But for their shirts, they wouldn't be on this blog. We aren't bashing them for being ugly, we are bashing them for being ugly and bashing other girls for being ugly.

In summary: The PSU girls are bashing on looks alone. WE are bashing for hypocrisy. BIG difference.

ThWard

August 28th, 2009 at 4:04 PM ^

I appreciate the distinction, I do. But I think calling this situation "hypocrisy" or stating that the girls are "bashing other girls for being ugly" is sort of phony outrage used to justify ripping ugly PSU girls. My wife's a good-looking UM grad. I promise you she would give a flying f*ck about these tee-shirts, nor would any of her hot undergrad friends - this would be equally true if the photo'd girls were hot. Any outrage over clever or ironic, needling tee-shirts beyond the standard "those shirts are dumb" is a bit phony and overdone, in my opinion. They're a joke - a dumb one - and not one that really necessitates any of this. But again, internet and all that, I get it.

And really, the reason my wife and our friends would dismiss the shirts with a laugh is because (1) those shirts aren't really aimed at them - they're not, they're aimed at a stereotype often used between "rival" schools - to suggest otherwise, again, is just phony outrage. They're dumb, pseudo-clever shirts. My wife/friends are secure in their looks, or secure enough not to pretend that a bunch of 18 y/o PSU engineering students who couldn't sniff UM's engineering school and have never been to Ann Arbor are somehow legitimately offending them. (2) But posting these girls' pics invites the inevitable photo-shopping, 8 head comments, and other mean-spirited comments (under the guise of "IT'S JUSTIFIED THEY STARTED IT LULZ!"), which are aimed, of course, directly at these chicks.

Whatever. I think it sucks, but that's the internets, I realize.

WolvinLA

August 28th, 2009 at 5:13 PM ^

That's very big of you, but I don't see this as making fun of them for being ugly. I am making fun of them for doing something dumb. IMO, this is analogous to a youtube video of Miss America tripping and falling on her ass. It's the same way we make fun of the Sparty commenters when they say something like "your an idiot." It's funny because it's ironic.

ThWard

August 28th, 2009 at 6:29 PM ^

Not making fun of them for being ugly? Again, just disagree I guess.

Analogous to Miss America pageant hopefuls? Sorry, disagree for the same reason I think the Beasley comparison is inapt. Chick's dad sent the photo to an engineering group that posted it on Facebook. Public figures, even F-celebrities like pageant types, subject themselves to a bit of criticism and "tripping and falling on their ass" isn't half as mean-spirited as calling a chick ugly.

Sparty commenters? Geesh. Again. Incredibly inapt in my Eroc-like e-opinion. Not sure how calling out anonymous dudes behind message board handles for poor grammar is on the same level as Brian posting these real, identifiable chicks' pictures in an implied invitation to comment on their uglieness, but whatever.

I think all of that is a pretext (for most, maybe not you) to justify ripping ugly chicks. Which, you know, is fine. Rip away. I'm actually surprised anyone legitimately disagrees with my take - I was much more expecting for baorao's take (essentially, "dude, I dont' care, it's the internet, this shit happens") rather than nuanced justification. But who cares, I commented a bunch accordingly. We can all forget about it and cheer for UM football in 8 days.

WolvinLA

August 28th, 2009 at 8:07 PM ^

Wow, that's a pretty horse you ride.

I think you misunderstand why people laugh at this. You keep saying that it's an excuse to make fun of ugly girls, which isn't the case. It's to laugh at ugly girls who are making fun of ugly girls. Pot and kettle, so to speak. To many people (BUT NOT TO YOU!!!!) that's funny.

Sven_Da_M

August 28th, 2009 at 11:38 AM ^

It's a bit of sartorial sarcasm that works on many levels. Yeah, Michigan's always had hot chicks (I married one 28+ years ago). But many more in the last 10 years, from my wanderings around the Diag...

The difference between UM alumnae and the rest of the Big 10: the Wolverines can get jobs that don't require a pole bolted to the ceiling and working under the nom de guerre of "Chantelle."

moffle

August 28th, 2009 at 11:40 AM ^

If you follow the facebook link, it looks like they didn't necessarily post the photo themselves in a fit of unchecked vanity. It was posted by the PSU School of Engineering.
Given that, I think it is kind of mean to put this up for public mockery. My impression is that being from Michigan, one of them saw the shirt at the student store and thought it was funny. Then someone took a picture of them, probably at an orientation function or something like that, and it got posted by whoever runs the school facebook page.
I do think that it's weird that such a shirt exists at PSU, but whatever.

BlueVoix

August 28th, 2009 at 7:22 PM ^

Eh, I guess, if I posted a picture wearing a shirt that said "Every Michigan Man has a 14 inch penis" while wearing no pants and showing off a 2 inch pecker, I think everyone from tOSU has the right to poke fun.

Big Boutros

August 28th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^

Rather than comment on these girls' appearances, I would instead ask what kind of vapid, self-centered person/program even prints a shirt like that? It's both a desperately unconvincing attempt at self-assurance and a completely unnecessary dig at another school. Does Syracuse make shirts that say "The music school at Canisius is a bag of hobo shit?"