Unverified Voracity Takes Everything Back

Submitted by Brian on September 27th, 2011 at 11:40 AM

No, sir, I have no problems with tunnel screens anymore, sir. This is Al Borges's terrifying father:

al-borges-dad

That is a 79-year old in the photo. Gordon Borges is now 84 years old and is thinking about crushing your head like a grape. All criticisms about the offense are withdrawn.

The clans reunite to fight. MVictors runs down the clans' reaction to John Bacon's Three and Out. You may or may not be part of The Rebellion:

“You removed the chart Dooley, so gloves are off!”

This book is right in their wheelhouse.  Bacon points out in painful detail all the obstacles that RichRod faced (and yes, a few he created) along the way.  They cheered each time Bacs mentioned “The Horror” or their homebase, mgoblog.  Would have liked to seen more detail on the internal politics of RR’s handling of (or lack thereof) the defensive coordinators. 

This is a bit of revenge on those responsible for setting the course for the Michigan offense to head back to the Stone Ages and..   [oh, wait a second..they stopped reading this --Bri’Onte Dunn just updated his Facebook page.]

Dammit, Dooley, no he didn't.

If this was a business it would be the kind of business that is not a business for very long. Dan Wetzel ties mega conference realignment into a college football playoff, or lack thereof, and hits home on the absurdity of the bowl system in one tight paragraph:

College football defies all business logic by outsourcing its most profitable product to third-party bowl games. The Bowl Championship Series not only fails to capitalize on the enormous potential of a multi-week tournament, it sucks hundreds of millions of dollars out of college pockets in an effort to preserve the tradition of $700,000 bowl director salaries and the majesty of the TaxSlayer.com Bowl.

That is a real thing now, that bowl name. It boggles the mind that an organization so relentlessly focused on every nickel signs away millions of dollars a year in the name of traditions not even I believe in anymore. College football actually does more than lose potential profit to nerds in yellow blazers, it sets money on fire by allowing bowls to impose ticket guarantees they know will never be fulfilled. The NCAA could do something about this (they okay bowl games) but chooses not to. Why is a mystery.

I disagree with Wetzel when he says extra revenue from a playoff could have forestalled or eliminated the current wackiness. Wins are a zero-sum game, so there is no such thing as enough money. It's all about how much money you have relative to the other guys. As long as Texas is Texas this still happens.

[ed: I meant to post this last week but it slipped through the cracks. Might as well publish it as further confirmation of MANBALL is +EV.]

I like it. Until Brady Hoke gives me reason to believe he is a football coach I am going to pretend he is playing XBox and does not know it and will therefore accidentally make correct decisions other football coaches will not. I will take press conference statements as rock-hard evidence of this fact. So:

You looked a little mad when the team went over to the student section after the Eastern Game. How come? “I wanted to score a touchdown at the end instead of a field goal.”

WOOO TEMPLE NATIONAL CHAMPIONS 2015

I like it, too. To emphasize how often coaches get things like this wrong, here's Ramzy on Luke Fickell:

Braxton Miller then rushed for ten yards to get to the Colorado one-yard line. There were six seconds left on the clock and Ohio State had a timeout to spare. The Buckeyes were ahead 17-7, playing at home, dominant in the trenches and had time for one more play from one yard out with the ability to still stop the clock if the attempt was unsuccessful.

Fickell was presented with a classic step-on-their-throats opportunity and chose to kick a field goal, to a chorus of boos. The chorus was correct: One more shot at a touchdown was the right call. The rookie head coach was caught over-thinking yet again, while covering for the position he's trying to earn permanently.

This was not a situation where 'just taking the three points' should have been a delicious, dangling carrot. A fade or a sneak could be easily be run in under five seconds, still leaving time for a field goal with that timeout in Fickell's pocket (a disturbing trend that began in the waning moments of the Miami game). Even if the end zone shot failed, Ohio State still could have stopped the clock and attempted a field goal as time expired.

Five seconds is a little hairy when it comes to getting that second snap but he's probably right if it's from the one. Michigan's game-ending ND fade was run from the 16 and took six seconds. Given OSU's mauling interior line it was likely to be moot anyway.

BTW, Ramzy seems very much opposed to Fickell's retention at the end of the year. I'm torn: OSU elevating an unproven guy who's never really been a coordinator (Fickell was listed as "co-DC" for the past six years but with Jim Heacock around that seems more ceremonial than functional) and makes goofy gameday decisions is an excellent situation, but dumping Fickell after the season helps Michigan's recruiting momentum since presumably it will come with a poor record.

Hat collection. Brady has one.

On a shelf in his office at the University of Michigan, Brady Hoke keeps a display of various baseball caps.

There’s a Pittsburgh Penguins hat, a few White Sox caps, plus a couple from the Detroit Tigers.

“That’s my collection to this point,” said Hoke, Michigan’s head football coach.

He didn’t buy these hats, though. And they weren’t given to him as gifts. Instead, he took them from his players because they broke his rule.

“Those are hats from players that don’t wear Michigan hats in here,” he said.

"Brady Hoke gets it" tag… engaged.

Now kill some of them with fire. The NCAA was sued by the Aloha Bowl when the bowl game tried to sell itself to some people in Seattle only for the NCAA to block them. This happened way back in 2003 and is only getting resolved now. The NCAA won. Money quote:

“We will vigorously defend the NCAA’s efforts to act in the best interest of student-athletes and the collegiate model of sports, as we did in this case,” he added. “The jury found that saying no to the Seattle Bowl was the right thing. We look forward to moving on from this case and continuing to assist the postseason bowl system so it can operate ethically and appropriately.”

Thing the NCAA can do:

The NCAA does not run postseason football bowl games in Division I but licenses them to ensure they meet a variety of requirements to ultimately provide a meaningful experience for student-athletes and institutions. These criteria relate to attendance, conference commitments, revenue and other details. 

Thing the NCAA does not do: prohibit ticket guarantees that transfer money from universities to warm-weather cities with guys in colored blazers. IE: Stop setting student fees on fire.

The arbitrariness of stickers. An old Bo lineman writes MVictors about Michigan's helmet stickers and the extremely precise way in which they were handed out:

It’s funny as an offensive lineman you were never quite sure why you got one.  A good block, a good game, a good play.  It was easy for the specialty folks, touchdowns, TFL, sacks, fumble recovery, interceptions, 100+ yard games, etc.  They never told us specifically why we received  one. You just seemed to get more of them when you won.  I still have my helmet from my freshman year where I earned I think 6 or 7 of them.  I only played on the kick-off return team then and I was never told what I did to receive them.

A real throwback uniform would have to include stickers, but they'd have to wait until Denard graduates unless we fit him with a comically oversized Turd Ferguson helmet.

Etc.: Just Cover on the state of MSU's offensive line, which is shamblicious. Rant about spin on Craig Roh crying story if RR still in charge implied but mercifully omitted. Michigan's last 2012 opponent is UMass, who will be in the MAC by then. Kiffin assistant paid for Seastrunk's airfare on an unofficial visit to Tennessee—wonder how that fallout hits repeat violators UT and USC.

If I had known they were handing out muppets that look like you at BWB for winning the USMAP awards I would have created a voting robot to win.

Comments

MDubs

September 27th, 2011 at 12:13 PM ^

Bowl system exists so that AQ schools can maintain revenue disparity. 

Think of it like this:  the schools with the most power can either 1. get a larger slice of less money or 2. get a smaller slice of more money

 

They choose option 1 because it hurts their competitors & helps them maintain the pecking order, even though it seems irrational and annoys everyone else. 

 

The NCAA, for its part, would LOVE to organize a college football playoff.  Their whole budget basically comes from the MBB march madness.  However, its up to institutional presidents/chancellors to ask the NCAA to make this happen.  So far, they haven't, even though Emmert has publicly offered. 

 

NCAA armageddon happens if schools decide to put college football & basketball postseason in the hands of a different organization.  Its all about leverage baby. 

JeepinBen

September 27th, 2011 at 12:32 PM ^

and I agree, to take it a step further, NCAA Armageddon happens if the 4 superconferences start their own tournement - without the BCS or the NCAA. Then the BCS and the NCAA AND all the Non-super-conf teams will create a shitstorm. That takes their current model and cuts out the BCS - without giving the NCAA anything and takes away the small portion that goes to non-AQ schools. And could happen

zlionsfan

September 27th, 2011 at 12:50 PM ^

Remember, Connecticut lost their asses (relatively speaking) going to the Fiesta Bowl. They reportedly lost $1.6-$1.8M; this is coming out of the pockets of a program that had total expenses of $14M the season before and just broke even. (2010-11 data isn't up yet.)

By comparison, Michigan had $18M in expenses and took in just under $45M in profit* from football alone; Purdue had $11M in expenses and about $7M in profit.

The bowl system exists first for the suits and second for the really big AQ schools. The big guys sit up front; the little ones ride in the back of the pickup and suddenly realize what wind chill means.

 

*just revenue - expenses as reported to the DoE; obviously it's not "profit" like "woo dividends" but more like "woo new facilities"

MDubs

September 27th, 2011 at 2:08 PM ^

This is true, when I referred to AQ schools I really meant the most high-profile AQ schools.  The Michigans, Texas, USC, etc. 

Those are the schools that have the leverage to decide what they want to do.  The lower-tier AQ schools can't make anything happen on their own - and yes, pretty much ride the coattails of the larger schools in that sense. 

But if you get the top 10 earning schools collectively decide they want to make something happen, watch how fast it will go through. Similarly, if they aren't on board, it aint happening baby. 

Thus, the BCS.   

imafreak1

September 27th, 2011 at 12:36 PM ^

Would have liked to seen more detail on the internal politics of RR’s handling of (or lack thereof) the defensive coordinators. 

OOF. Probalby not too excited about having the redneck typo featured above the fold on the mothership.

Brendan

September 27th, 2011 at 12:40 PM ^

A Pittsburgh Penguins hat? I am very disappointed on someone on our team. That kid better have had to run some stairs for making such a poor life decision.

M-Wolverine

September 27th, 2011 at 2:10 PM ^

Because I get the feeling the chart and pretty much nailed it dead on, and has said exactly what's going to be said, ad nauseum, around and around.

Though I still don't believe in the Fierce Pragmatist category.  They're like actors in Hollywood: everyone wants to claim to be one, but no one really knows anyone who is successful at it.

M-Wolverine

September 28th, 2011 at 11:32 AM ^

If you weren't so angry about everything all the time, you'd get that.  Why so mad?

I mean dude, you may hate Cubs fans being mad and going nuts over Bartman, but you're the same way...always looking for someone to blame and tear down and be mad at. Might be time to re-evaluate.

BRCE

September 28th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^

I called you a Lloyd Loyalist clan member (you are, you just take after your master and are too coy to address it) and threw you in with two other posters with very myopic views on what Michigan football should be.

That's angry? I posted those things with a smile on my face, knowing you were being pigeonholed into something you don't want to admit but can't deny. The squirming you and ilk are doing over this book is palpable. And it's absolutely hilarious.

 

M-Wolverine

September 29th, 2011 at 9:31 AM ^

But it's one I've never denied. When the chart originally came out, I labeled myself as a Lloyd Loyalist with a whole lot of Bo Traditionalist peppered in. And it doesn't bother me at all. And my views my be myopic on what Michigan Football should be, but guess what?  It's what Michigan Football thinks Michigan Football should be, was formed from what Bo and the people after him molded it into, something successful and admirable.  And that's what it is today. Frankly, if you wanted it to be something different, you lost. Maybe THAT has you mad.  Though I'll give you credit for being unique - I didn't see a category for those who feel the need to crap on everyone, whether they be people clinging to Rich or Lloyd, or the Tigers, or frankly everyone else.  I'm not sure what you bring to the site, other than being douchey as possible about everything. I wasn't sure there was a need for the Drew Sharp of the MGoBoard though. And I don't agree with them all the time, but I'd much rather be associated with guys like jmblue or Bando than you. (Or for that matter, guys like profitgoblue, who I have fun teasing as a mod, but is a Rich loyalist that's utterly reasonable, and not hateful). There's a reason your views on Lloyd and such, which is the editorial opinion of the blog, just about, get grayed out, along with the rest of your posts. It's presentation. You come off like an angry teenager way too often, looking to trash everything.  You don't have to post funny cat pics, or throw in a joke (though that doesn't hurt), but at least make the things you think are good and positive in the world at least 10% of your posts.

So you're laugh at an imaginary thing. Because no one's squirming. Because the guy I wanted coaching the team is (and at the time, you were ready to throw a funeral for Michigan Football over). And I hope he succeeds. Just like I hoped Rich would succeed, even if he made me groan now and then.  The book won't change that.  It'll be some bad PR for the program, which we don't need, but that's what's it's going for. It's just one side of the story, because now two sources that have read the book says it didn't try to get the other side, and completely glosses over the biggest error of the Rich Rod era - the defense (which is THE story...but apparently doesn't get webclicks or sell books). It's sounding like from people who have read it that it's a Rosenberg-like equivalent, just trashing the other side. I guess that's equal time, but one can't be bad and the other good.  It really isn't going to convince anyone of anything. And that was the point of my post, that the grid was brilliant, because it perfectly showed what the reaction will be like. It won't change anyone's opinion, just give them more to argue about, and the positions they take were so accurately illustrated by the chart (to hilarious effect...from Lloyd people to Rich people and everyone in between). I read that, and I defacto read every post on here in late October. It shouldn't stop commentary. But they showed the redundancy of it in a very funny way.

Raoul

September 27th, 2011 at 9:25 PM ^

A ban on discussion of the book would have to come from the head man here, who fits into the Rebellion category, doesn't he? So how likely is that? This site isn't going to ignore the book--it's taking part in the book's promotion through the publication of excerpts and an interview with the author.

I don't even agree that there should be such a ban. But it's entirely predictable that a whole new round of pointless arguing is going to break out here in a few weeks. And I say pointless because I think the book will change the minds of few if any people about what happened during the Rodriguez era--and it's just going to reopen old wounds that had started to heal.

M-Wolverine

September 27th, 2011 at 10:22 PM ^

I just thought the chart perfectly encapsulated what everyone's view will be. Because you're right, it's not going to change anyone's mind. It's just another one-sided opinion that's going to open old wounds and start old arguments. Discussion shouldn't be banned; it's just unnecessary, because you can read the chart and know how it's going to go right now.
<br>
<br>It's quite brilliant, actually.

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

September 27th, 2011 at 12:48 PM ^

Ah yes, old One-Note Wetzel is at it again.  "A college football playoff" would not have prevented half the Big 12 from getting pissed off at Texas and either leaving or trying to.  Perhaps Wetzel's version - one of thousands of ideas - might prevent teams from, say, jumping from the MWC to the Big East.  But then, Wetzel, like everyone who thinks they have a good playoff idea, thinks his is the only one, and confuses "I want a playoff" with "I want this playoff."

Then again, Wetzel would link a playoff to peace in the Middle East and feeding the starving children in Sudan if he thought he could get away with it.  I can see him, in three years, insisting that gas prices would be lower if only we had a playoff.

Zonereadstretch

September 27th, 2011 at 12:49 PM ^

Not defending Fickell’s decision to kick the FG at the end of the 1st half as it still didn’t give them a 2 score lead, but Ramzy is incorrect as OSU had 0 timeouts left at the end of the 2nd qtr. If OSU’s attempt to punch it in failed, they would not have had time to spike the ball and run the FG unit on the field.

imafreak1

September 27th, 2011 at 12:49 PM ^

At least in the NFL, you can expect running an offensive play to take 6-7 seconds. I believe there is a rule that any play, like spikes, must take a minimum of 4 seconds. Taking a snap with 6 seconds left would have put OSU at the mercy of the clock guy. You either have to take the FG or accept you are rolling the dice. I don't think you can stay on the fence and suggest you can have both.

However, with 8 seconds left I felf Michigan was safe taking one more snap.

Mengin06

September 27th, 2011 at 1:04 PM ^

I'm just now reading "Bo's Lasting Lessons" and I just read the part where he tears the Notre Dame shirt off of one of his players. I immediately thought of this when I read about Hoke's hat collection. I love it.

Idubbz

September 27th, 2011 at 1:53 PM ^

Pros:

1 - After 9*-1, we could use a few years of vengeance.

2 - He's pretty representative of most of the tsio fans I know - you feel me, brah?

3 - Should pick up all the recruits who aren't big Brawndo fans.

Cons:

1 - The integrity of The Game suffers....okay, I guess I'm not all that conflicted after all.

4 more years, 4 more years!