August 31st, 2009 at 8:53 PM ^

took jump shots for the Knicks. Ben Bradlee was the editor for the Washington Post during Watergate.

Regarding the Freep editorial, MSC does not have to say a word now. This is an athletic department issue and she has let the very capable gentleman who has been running the department for years take the lead. If she was all over this it would be micromanagement IMO.

Lets focus on Saturday's game and support the team and just let this shit lay at the side of the road. We cannot control what the Valenti's and Bayless's of the world say, but they are really nobodys to begin with.

Remember when Mitch Albom used the bogus byline from the Final Four in St. Louis a few years ago? The sham investigation the Freep ran uncovered that there was massive dysfunction in the Freep sports department. This incident lets me know that this is still true.

Magnum P.I.

August 31st, 2009 at 11:24 PM ^

I would like to see Albom weigh in on this with a voice of sanity. Whatever you think of him (I like him) he's a hometown supporter and a level head. In the aftermath of the shitstorm this report created, the Freep has obviously chosen the strategy of circling the wagons and yelling out in as many tones as possible that they are in the right. it's embarrassing really that they are the only ones continuing to write on this issue from the perspective that U-M is in real danger of NCAA penalty. They keep pumping them out: the editorial, Windsor's joke of an article, Sharp's joke of an article, etc, etc. The reaction of the real media to the report was one of curiosity and balance: "hmm, interesting allegations; let's examine the theory they're proposing based on their evidence, logic, and values." The Freep's opted to just make as much noise as possible to try to keep this from becoming an intelligent debate. I really wish Albom would come out with a fair assessment of what's happened. I doubt the Freep would let him, though.

biakabutuka ex…

August 31st, 2009 at 9:18 PM ^

There is one glaring problem I find with their editorial:

"The issue is whether the coaching staff followed NCAA rules governing practice and workout time for the players"

Yes, this is exactly the issue. So why didn't they find out the answer? The onus is not on a Michigan program that has compliance officers and actual records. All they confirmed was that players practiced tons of hours. But they completely sidestepped the discussion of whether these hours were NCAA-legal.

I can ask any question I want to too, but to call myself a journalist I have to actually answer the question.


August 31st, 2009 at 10:17 PM ^


Very well said. You've managed to encapsulate the entire issue, very well, in about a paragraph.

The Freep basically said, "Michigan, you're guilty of violations. If you're not, prove it." while the Freep didn't actually make any sort of case themselves. If Freep wants to make allegations, the onus falls on Freep to provide definitive factual evidence to substantiate those claims.


August 31st, 2009 at 9:31 PM ^

The freep editor wrote:
"There are no cut corners on that block M. Never have been. The University of Michigan has a culture, tradition and record of being better than that."

Then why did he let Rosenpuke and Shyster cut so many corners for their "expose?" And why is he defending their results?

If I allowed it to, this would sicken me.


August 31st, 2009 at 9:45 PM ^

but at this point I could care less about what the Free Press has to say on this subject. Because the original articles lacked objectivism, their credibility is shot! The were content to approve the original articles, making UM seem like they were the only college program that trains over the time limits. In this editorial they mention time and time again the phrase "NCAA rules." If that were their concern, they should have investigated all the D1 schools in Michigan at least, and present their findings. If NCAA rules and the abuse suffered by student-athletes were their concern, Free Press should have tried to start a nation-wide movement to look into what colleges make their athletes go through. But hell, it took people only a few minutes today to find a blog from an MSU player describing their 14-hour-day of football activities. The Free Press investigators couldn't have done that because it turns out only the block M has straight edges and should be held to a higher regard.

By the way, I have no doubt that the culture and atmosphere within a football program is such that some student-athletes feel the pressure to dedicate a lot of hours to football, whether they like it or not. I have no doubt that, practically speaking, the off-season workouts are not really voluntary. Heck, even RR has joked multiple times about the "voluntary workouts", as seen in some video clips taken during alumni meetings. We might say that those who can't handle it can leave. Whether it's right or wrong, that's a philosophical debate for another time. I feel that once the dust settles, there will be nothing wrong with the way our football team has operated. In those youtube clips from alumni meetings, I remember RR mentioning how he wished he could spend more time with the players, but that he couldn't go over the NCAA rules and limitations. Again, setting aside the philosophical nature of this whole argument, I hope nothing wrong is proved so that every writer with an agenda is forced to shut up.

Oh, and I'm not ever clicking on a Free Press link! It has nothing to do with being a fan with hurt feelings. I'm all fine for the truth to come out, but when only a tiny fraction of the truth is presented, I consider that version of the truth in a state of spinning!


August 31st, 2009 at 11:12 PM ^

It appears to me this Freep piece was written as a desperate attempt to keep a troubled media outlet alive and relevant. The fact that this piece is generating nationwide attention is evidence that it worked -- at least for now. Not good.

How to respond, MGoBloggers? If we want to punish the Freep, ignoring their site and all discussion of this piece is a good start.

But remember, on the internets, it's all about the clicks, people: No clicks, no ad revenue. So if you really wish to punish the Freep, the best method is to hit their bottom line. Cancel your subscription (if you have one); do not click on any link to or from the Freep ever again, and encourage other alumni to do the same.

However, if your anger is boiling over (like mine), the most effective punishment would be to visit, find out who is advertising in their sports pages, and either boycott the merchants or -- better yet -- contact them to inform them that you will not purchase their products or services as long as they advertise on, and copy the editors of the Freep on any email or letter you write to these advertisers.

In the end, money talks and bullsh*t walks. However credible (or not) the Freep is, it matters little if they can keep getting eyes on pages and clicks on ad links by publishing this garbage. So, let's let the market speak on our behalf!

Freep, you are officially dead to me.