May 10th, 2011 at 10:05 PM ^

I found the most significant point to be the details of Stonum's suspension.  Sounds like he might be ready to go by the Big Ten opener.


May 10th, 2011 at 10:58 PM ^

Why does Brandon always claim everyone only cares about Big Ten championships? It really grinds my gears. Set the bar higher, Athletic Director of the Winningest Football Program in History and Lotsa Hockey National Titles.


May 11th, 2011 at 8:53 AM ^

Michigan plays in the Big Ten. Michigan can't win a national championship in football without winning the Big Ten. 2006 proved that. There are twelve regular season games, and soon enough nine of them will be Big Ten games.

The point is we don't play the other teams we're competing against for a national championship: the SEC leader, the Pac 12 leader, the Texas et al. leader, and so on. See a pattern there? At the end of the year, the teams at the very top of the BCS rankings are always conference champions. The coaches prepare the team to compete against the actual opponents they play, not against some media-driven formula. Going unbeaten in ten Big Ten games (nine plus the championship game) is always going to be the first item on a resume for the BCS championship game. Michigan can beat Alabama and Notre Dame in 2012, but it won't mean shit if the BIg Ten is lost. The non-conference schedule only helps if the Big Ten is won.

Putting all that aside, I think the idea is not that focusing on a national championship is aiming too high or anything like that. The idea is that going unbeaten is in itself not a goal. If that's your goal, your season is over with the first loss. The highest-level championship Michigan football has control over is the Big Ten. Win it and you play for either the BCS championship or the Rose Bowl championship, or both. End of story.

Hockey is different. You can lose the conference and still win the national championship. But that's not the case in football.


May 11th, 2011 at 12:55 AM ^

the home uniform. Period.  Blue jerseys with Maize pants and numbers.  And you never change the helmet for any reason, ever.  That is sacred.  Maybe widen the stripes or slightly re-position them, but altering the design of the helmet is a strictly forbidden.

Some traditions must be adherred too regardless of the times.

Six Zero

May 11th, 2011 at 8:41 AM ^

as anyone, but I refuse to pass judgement until we at least see it.  If they go true throwback, it could certainly work.  You can invent all the ProCombat gloves and army camo and duck wings you want...

but you can't invent tradition.  Michigan football is tradition.


May 11th, 2011 at 11:23 AM ^

It's happening.

Brian beat me to it months ago, but my intial thought when they started talking about going retro is Michigan should come out in our regular home uniforms while Carl Grapentine says over the loundspeakers "wearing throwback uniforms from the beginning of time, your Michigan Wolverines!"

At this point we all laugh at Notre Dame for wearing their ridiculous costumes.


May 11th, 2011 at 9:40 PM ^

when brandon made mention of remembering who dissed us when in the practice mess... who was he referring to?  who dissed us?  dantonio? tressel? an AD ?    someone please answer this, who has the knowledge.

Section 1

May 11th, 2011 at 10:35 PM ^

I know, from having asked Brandon the question about the Rosenberg, Snyder and the Free Press at a very similar-sized gathering at a different club, that Brandon is not afraig to let rip with his very angry criticisms of the Freep. 

I would guess that that is part of it.  Whether there is more, I don't exactly know. 

The event where I questioned Brandon was an alumni meeting.  There were no reporters, although I don't think Brandon knew whether or not there were any.  I'm not sure he cared. 

The meeting in Midland was a Michigan Associated Press-sponsored meeting.  With a collection of what I presume was at least a quorum of the entire state's sportswriters.  Brandon might have been pulling some of his punches at certain members of the press for that particular event, out of mere politeness to the hosts.

But I don't know; I'm not honestly sure what he was referring to.


May 12th, 2011 at 9:19 AM ^

My read is that he was not referring to the press in this case. He was talking about other ADs or coaches who said things about the investigation into Michigan that were self-serving or whatever. I'm don't know what he meant, but I have a feeling the people he's talking about do.

You'd have to go back through all the coverage of the jihad and the NCAA investigation to see who gave quotes and what they said. Dantonio? Brandon was just saying he isn't going to do the same to OSU and Tressel.


May 14th, 2011 at 8:33 PM ^

I hated the Leaders and Legends division names initially, but have softened since.  I can't think of a better alternative.  It's funny, though, how many of my friends were pissed that we weren't "Leaders", as if the BIg Ten needs to endorse our fight song.