CC: Adam Schefter on Countdown: Harbaugh to Michigan

Submitted by Laveranues on December 26th, 2010 at 12:33 PM

Presented as an aside to discussion about drafting Andrew Luck, "sources say" Harbaugh to Ann Arbor.  He usually has good information.



December 26th, 2010 at 2:38 PM ^

has a bowl game in less than a week.  No bowl games in the last two years.  And a talking head says he is hearing Jimmy Hairball is comming to Michigan.  What has DB said to anyone in the media to indicate that he has made a decision.  Seniors worked hard to get to this bowl and other underclassmen that are experiencing their first bowl.  Michigan fans get to travel.  And some guy essentially passes some,  in my estimation a well worn rumor on air about CC.   Really what is the revelation here?   DEAD HORSE unless DB says something significant.    


December 26th, 2010 at 3:40 PM ^

Adam Schefter is a respected NFL contributor on a widely viewed pregame show.  Literally millions of people heard what he said this morning.  Of course, nothing is in stone until DB makes the announcement next week but this was a worthy post.

Also, you might want to consider dropping the "Hairball".  It makes you look like a 7th grader (unless, of course, you are one).


December 26th, 2010 at 4:40 PM ^

He's an NFL analyst.  His job is to look at NFL issues.  Harbaugh is a potential candidate for NFL jobs.  Schefter was saying that JH is most likely coming to Michigan so he won't be filling those NFL (potential) vacancies.  It's pretty easy to make the correlation.


December 27th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^

Unless you're counting high school or some other level of football, he only won one Big Ten championship.  Just being a statistical jerk because (a) I am sick of all this CC talk and (b) people read some of this stuff and take it as gospel.  I love how he has represented the school over 25+ years, but just wanted to update that stat for you.


December 27th, 2010 at 10:26 PM ^

I gave respect for what he's done, but just noted that he only won one Big Ten championship, not multiple.  If you took a look at his Wikipedia page, you would see how many BT championships he led them to.  And if you want to think he got Bo as close to an NC as he was going to get, you must have forgotten that Bo had a shot at the NC his last year, but a phantom clipping call in the Rose Bowl did them in.  And look at all the close calls in the 70s against OSU or in the Rose Bowl.

Are you too young to remember these things and have to live through Wikipedia to remember those bygone years?


December 28th, 2010 at 7:22 PM ^

Actually had the pleasure of watching JH play while I was at UM.  Hope he goes Blue again so that he can win another B10 championship. 

"The 1985 team posted a 10–1–1 record, defeated Nebraska in the 1986 Fiesta Bowl, and finished with a #2 ranking in the final polls, the highest finish for Michigan during Schembechler's tenure as head coach."  Wikipedia


December 28th, 2010 at 9:04 PM ^

Just like some of those teams, the 1985 team finished second in the conference to OSU, but were unable to go to a bowl game due to Big Ten policy only sending the conference champ to a bowl.  If we would have been allowed to play in those bowl games, then we could have finished #2 as well.

And just because you finish #2, that does not mean you had a shot at the MNC.  We did not have that chance before the OSU game that year OR the bowl game.  In Bo's last season, we had a shot at the national title going into the bowl game.  And look at our ranking going into the OSU game in the 70s.  We entered those games with a legit shot at the MNC. 

If you go just based on how a team finishes in the rankings, you would think that the 1985 team was closer to a national title than the 2006 team.  And we know that's not the case. 

I'm out before that damn horse getting beat graphic is thrown up in response!

gnarles woodson

December 26th, 2010 at 8:23 PM ^

DB isn't saying anything to the media but that doesn't mean anything.  IF (and that's a pretty big if, I'll give you that) Brandon has agreed to a deal with JH, the leak doesn't have to come from DB.  Let's remember there are two sides in a deal like this.

Section 1

December 26th, 2010 at 1:39 PM ^

Are his "sources" named?  Or just more unnamed sources, like the one(s) who said Jim Tressel would be leaving OSU?  Or the unnamed source, a former Michigan player we were told, who slapped his wallet down on the table in front of Michael Wilbon and said that Coach Rodirguez was out, last year?

Who pays for "ESPN Insider"?  If I paid for a subscription to something, and all that they gave were unnamed sources, I'd feel ripped off.  And I'd be pissed.

My respect for these rumor mongers at places like "ESPN Insider" is less than zero.  I'll respect the first reporter, any reporter, who gives us news with named, on-the-record, sources.

Section 1

December 26th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^

Translated, the answer is, "Well, right; Schefter doesn't say who his sources are, or why they require anonymity.  But, he's, like, such a credible guy, in such a credible and visible reporting position."

When  you are saying stuff like "strong credence to the rumor," you need to step back, take a deep breath and think about the word "rumor."

And no, I don't follow the NFL.

Can I just ask, what were the consequences for somebody like Michael Wilbon, for reporting with a straight face that he had an impeccable source who informed him of Rich Rodriugez's imminent departure, a year ago?  Was Wilbon fired?  Disciplined?  Was he even seriously criticized, outside of certain corners of the blogosphere?

Where does the respect for these guys come from?  Are they actually following any professional guidelines?


December 26th, 2010 at 2:44 PM ^

Adam Schefter is the best beat reporter in sports journalism today and had to be hired by ESPN because he kept scooping their stories working for the NFL network. He's not an outlandish talking head (like you sans microphone), but is just a really great reporter/journalist. That doesn't mean Harbaugh's coming, but it's a newsworthy item to mention.

Section 1

December 26th, 2010 at 2:52 PM ^

If you are willing to listen to them "report" stuff that they "heard," without any of the other work that reporters are supposed to do.

This whole notion reduces sports reporting to the level of Entertainment News and the gossip tabloids.  And to be sure, that is the actual, working notion of some people.  I confronted Mike Valenti on-air one time about his program's slippery "reporting," and he just went off.  "I'm not a journalist!",  he yelled.  "I'm an entertainer!  I don't want to do journalism."  And on that one point, it is impossible to argue with Mike Valenti.


December 26th, 2010 at 5:29 PM ^

You lost it when you related Schefter to Wilbon. The cherry on top: AND NO I DON'T FOLLOW THE NFL....DERP ESPN DERP. That is such a great level of perspective/commentary my head exploded. If you don't know what your commenting on, please do not feel free to vomit your uninformed viewpoint.

I didn't see the same level of journalistic rabble rabbling when reporters were expounding on the Ohio State tattoogate, but when it's beating the dead horse of our Coaching Change we need to play the Bob Woodward card? If you don't like ESPN having a respected reporter dropping a simple rumor, then don't watch ESPN. His rumor drop apparently has enough weight judging on the replies of this thread. If you knew who he is you may understand! However, if you don't have any perspective on the reporter's credentials - feel free to defecate on the 2009 Freep Jihad thread in the hopes that no one has to skip over your drivel.

Section 1

December 26th, 2010 at 10:37 PM ^

because he reported anonymous garbage that turned out to be untrue.  Wilbon works (happily, apparently) for ESPN.

Now we have Mr. Schefter, who is again reporting anonymous stuff, with no more basis in sound journalism than did Wilbon.  Also for ESPN.  We simply don't yet have the benefit of hindisght to say it is garbage, as we do with Wilbon.  Trouble with Wilbon and ESPN was, by the time we knew that Wilbon and his "source," the guy who used to play for Michigan (who's never had the guts to step forward, and who Wilbon has never had the guts to name) were full of shit, nobody seemed to care anymore.

This is why I say elsewhwhere in this thread, process matters.  There's a right way to go about the daily task of journalism and using sources.  Anonymous sources should never be the standard in journalism.  They should be the rare exception.

Adam Schefter isn't following any good journalism standards that I'm aware of.

I think that standards in sports reporting have become so lax because, well, it's just sports, right?  A form of entertainment.  Just more blather, like who's dating whom and who has dumped whom.

Except I doubt very much that David Brandon, or Rich Rodriguez have so little respect for the positions they hold.

Bando Calrissian

December 27th, 2010 at 12:10 PM ^

Anonymous sources are a cornerstone of journalism.  Always have been, always will be.

Deep Throat was an anonymous source.  You're telling us Woodward and Bernstein should have sat on the story?  I mean, you can get as overly idealistic about journalism as you want and give us novel-length posts taking journalists to task for the way they do their job, but the fact remains that in the real world, anonymous source material is neither wrong nor unheard of in a journalistic context.

Section 1

December 27th, 2010 at 12:46 PM ^

There are right, and wrong, ways to handle anonymous sources.

Mark Felt, a/k/a Deep Throat, was a serving FBI officer who would have lost his job, and might have been criminally prosecuted, for talking to Woodward and Bernstein.  And even then, before the Washington Post used much of what they had from Deep Throat, they went to their Managing Editor and Publisher for approval before using information that still needed to be double-checked.

And since it is you who has decided to give me a hard time about this, let's remember that the Rich Rodriguez story wouldn't be what it is without our litle friends at the Detroit Free Press, who broke their own paper's rules for the use of anonymous sources.

Section 1

December 27th, 2010 at 3:11 PM ^

...the treatment of Rich Rodriguez offends me.

As an alum, as a fan, as a fair-minded person, and as a discerning and critical reader of the news; it all offends me.

The great tradition of our University, as one of football-team excellence on and off the field, has been injured.  Not because Rich Rodriguez did anything terribly wrong, but rather because one reporter, Michael Rosenberg, had a personal vendetta.

And it further offends me that while Rodriguez, who was substantially and personally cleared of the worst of what Rosenberg alleged, continues to suffer attacks and subversion in the press, Rosenberg, who was shown to have been wrong, has drawn almost no criticism from his colleagues in the press.  Not that it is difficult to find reasons and ways to criticize Rosenberg.  Just look at what Jon Chait, a real hero to Michigan football now, has done.

Michigan football is a very big enterprise, and the Michigan alumni base is a big, diverse crowd.  There are lots of niche areas for people to be interested in, and you see it on this Board:  How does a 2-deep zone really work?  What does zone blocking look like in practice?  What's the history of Yost Fieldhouse?  Who is on the recruiting list?  Who are all of our Assistant and Associate Athletic Directors?  What will next year's basketball uniforms look like?  Who was the composer of the music that the MMB played at halftime? 

One of those sub-categories is, "What is the nature of the reporting that led to the NCAA football investigation?  And was it fair?  Is current reporting fair to the program, and to Rich Rodriguez?"  Among a lot of other niche topics, some of which might interest you, and some of which might not, it is a perfectly valid, and, I'd submit, important topic.


December 27th, 2010 at 4:24 PM ^

performance while at Michigan.It is beyond me why you and others feel obliges to defend his record. If you are a Michigan alum the you should be embarrassed on what has transpired while he has been the head coach. We are awful on the field, our reputation tarnish with the NCAA (three year probation... we admitted to his violations the same ones pending at WV) and made a laughing stock on the internet and sport talk radio shows with his raise me up stunt to protect his job.

If you knew in advance what would transpire during his three years while at Michigan would you have hired him? Don't forget this guy left WV six months after signing an extension and then try to lie his way out of having to pay for breaking the contract. 


December 27th, 2010 at 1:36 PM ^

I will give you my viewpoint on Section 1.  Take it what it is worth.  You ask why he cares so much.  Imagine your profession, people saying things about it from a public perception view that may not be correct.  And you are a passionate person who wants to make sure people know the truth from being in the field for a long time.  That's how section 1 comes across to me.  Maybe I am totally off base, but this is my view.

Section 1 has contributed alot to this board.  I know that when I first came on here and asked questions about the Freep and the MSM bias, he was kind enough to take the time and explain it.  There were others that were helpful as well, but Section 1 always took the time to respond and his response was very well thought out and not a one word answer.  I was a person that thought RR was close to the worse human being around because I was misinformed.  I thank the people on this board as well as Section 1 for always having the time.

If you don't agree with him, please feel free to refute him.  But if you think he is going overboard, then skip it.  Don't respond.  Simple enough. 


December 27th, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^

Yes, Schefter specializes in NFL.  Yes this is important news to the NFL.  The hottest topic in the NFL is Coaching Vacancies.  JH was being strongly considered for many teams. 

Does this make Schefter "qualified" to report this topic?  Absolutely!  Moreover, he usually is right and very current with his information. 

I'll be the first to say (my opinion) I would like to see RR have two more years (assuming next year he is at minimum consistent or one game better, preferably a big game).  I think this is important for the further development of our current team; and the Alabama game in Dallas is a HUGE game for our program.  It will be a recruiting dream if we can go there and win that game.  Lord knows Alabama will be coming in prime, consistent, and experienced. 

However, having said all that, I'm very ready to have some closure either way.  The bottom line is, regardless of what happens...We're Michigan and we will rise again!

Go Blue!


December 26th, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^

This is a shit comparison. 

Wilbon is not an insider, just a talking head. Schefter has a long history of accurate reporting. Wilbon just gives his opinion. Never has he broke a story. He relies on others to break it first.

on top of all this-if you don't want the info or don't agree with how AS reported it or gathered information, then don't read it. How hard is this. You gave your opinion and now leave it alone