Michigan NEVER LEFT - and complete douches

Submitted by sheepman on January 5th, 2012 at 11:19 AM

On a sirius radio program, they just had a long talk about UM. I guess Eddie George and his cohost (?) were just frying Hoke for saying that Michigan never left. Some caller called to defend the statement. And Eddie G wouldn't even respond - being a total arrogant douche - and the cohost lambasted him, saying something about how UM is completely irrelevant since the BCS era, and still is after beating a mediocre VT team. They were again ripping on Hoke for saying this and saying that UM is nowhere near back (though he did say we were on the fast track to being where we want to be). I got pissed and decided I wouldn't call and tell them this, but I thought I would share it with you:

Michigan never left because Michigan is still (and has been) one of the greatest universities in the world - academically and financially. The amount of scholarship and advancement in multiple areas we produce is rivalled only by other top tier universities - even in the Ivy League. The integrity of the university is equal to best. Though we are a public university, we are consistently labeled a top school. Bang for your buck, we may not be rivaled by anyone. A university is worth much more than football team. And in every area other than football, we never left. I would even argue we never left on the football field - if you consider fanbase, stadium, ticket sales, uniforms (except for the away UTL), national brand, etc.

I think this is what Hoke meant. And those guys are stupid to limit this statement to wins and losses on the football field. 

That is all. Go Blue.



January 5th, 2012 at 12:12 PM ^

....that Eddie George's criteria for Michigan "being back" would either be unrealistic or, indeed, impossible to attain on a consistent basis anyway. To that end, I will disregard his opinion.


January 5th, 2012 at 12:15 PM ^

Man, if you're gonna get irritated by what others say about our program, you're going to live a long and arduous life.

If we had just won the National Championship, there would STILL be people ripping on Michigan.  To hell with them.  They don't matter.

Go Blue!


January 5th, 2012 at 12:21 PM ^

among moronic half-grown football boys. Who gives the tiniest what Eddie George thinks? In these people's minds college athletics long since ceased to be about millions of kids having fun on a field and became the big business that OSU has hurried it into being. 

Yes ESPN, two SEC teams are probably better, with all their oversigned players, than all the others this year. (They just happen to be the two teams that do the most oversigning, who have the highest-paid coaches, etc; what does that tell us?) Does this mean that all the people who love their schools and enjoy watching kids play should stop? Blow me, chumps.

Let's start taking this shit back; we can begin by turning off talk radio and letting these weenies die the mediocre death they deserve. Better things to do with our lives, no? Eddie F'ing George, my ass.


January 5th, 2012 at 12:21 PM ^

Why worry about them. OSU had to start calling themselves THEE Ohio State U to feel good about themselves. When did this happen? Have you ever been to Columbus? Last time MSU had anything really going on was the mid 60's when Afro americans  couldnt attend Texas and other schools. How do you think they ended up with Bubba Smith? Michigan has good kids coming in and look to be good for a long time.

Twisted Martini

January 5th, 2012 at 12:25 PM ^

Bill King and Chris Childers are the only reasons to listen to that channel, unless you are a 'Bama fan.  Bill got moved to 6-9 AM and Childers is now on at night.  They are both head and shoulders above any other goofs on that channel.

Eddie George and Mark Packer are your typical conventional wisdom spewers, filling hour and hours with their arrogance, ignorance and stupidity. 

Listen to Petros and Money on Fox Sports, Petros is really knowledgeable about college football and brings a nice west coast flavor to it.  And they are funny as hell.

Twisted Martini

January 5th, 2012 at 5:20 PM ^

FWIW, Petros made a bold prediction for 2012 last night when he said that Michigan and USC would meet in the Orange Bowl next year for the National Championship.   Cue the heads exploding in the SEC, he took a call from a guy in MS of course who sounded like a reject from Finebaum.


And I couldn't agree more about Bill King, he is extremely knowledgeable, fair and spares no sacred cows. 


January 5th, 2012 at 2:07 PM ^

I listen to Bill King everyday, and I have to say it's quite refreshing to hear a radio talk show host that is as close to unbiased as they come.  Not only that, but the majority of his callers are at least sane (when compared to most radio callers.

I also used to really enjoy college football playbook with Jack Arute and Mike Leach...but then Leach left :(

P.S. Bill King has an ipod app if you want to stream the show or listen to it after the fact, or you can listen online live or later.  Website/ipod app are 'billisking'. Free sign up for quality college sports radio?  I think so.


January 5th, 2012 at 3:15 PM ^

His show is a complete contrast to Paul Finebaum, he an his callers annoy me to no end.  Bill King is awesome.  Not everyone likes him around here but he drops a lot of national college football knowledge on my ears every morning.



[email protected]

January 5th, 2012 at 12:27 PM ^

....who hosted a college football show for 9 years this thread is pretty much spot on when it comes to local sports talk radio. 

If I can get a show...ANYONE can get a show.  By no means to do I want to paint everyone in the "biz" with the same brush, but local sports talk radio today (for the most part) is a laughable.

I hosted my show for 9 years all with the same sponsor.  When the economy tanked so did his business and he could no longer afford to sponsor the show.  I'm not a salesman (nor do I play one on TV) and honestly make my living at my real job and didn't feel like spending every waking hour kissing somoenes ass to sponsor what was basically a glorified hobby.

The new local sports talk radio (for the most part) works like this...if you've got the money to get on the air (regardless of your talent level) some local stations will allow you on.  Radio revenues are tanking faster than ever and sales managers will go to extreme lengths to increase revenue.

For example one of the shows I produced (errrrr ran the board for in my early days) was a horse racing handicapping show.  The host was truuurible, sounded awful and couldn't pronounce 98% of what he was trying to articulate.  But they let him on the air because he paid $375 an hour to talk.  He's been on the air now for almost 10 years not because anyone is listening (ratings are awful), but because he pays his bills ontime. 

Don't get me wrong, guys like Sam Webb hands down deserve a seat at the table (I tune in the podcast daily).  And there are more like him in other markets, but witnessing this industry first hand and seeing what goes on "behind the dial", there are local guys getting paid next to nothing to do the am/pm drive while others (mostly on the weekends) are paying their way on with little to no real "journalism" experience.

I'm sure guys like Eddie George come with a wealth of game experience, but when it comes to the wild west that is sports talk radio, his lack of journalistic integrity tends to shine through.

The biggest thing I took away from my nine years behind the mic is that I was able to remove myself from being a "fan".  While I bleed blue, I was able to be critical at the same time and it's helped me to watch the game with a completely different perspective today.  I think to many local sports talk radio personalities (specifically the younger ones) allow the fan in them to overshawdow the "journalist" part of the job.

I guess (to some degree), you could put me in that "amature" category when it came to sports talk radio, but unlike most in this business I knew when to say when.


January 5th, 2012 at 12:31 PM ^

beating Iowa, MSU and Wisconsin again, opinions will probably change on this.

The first mistake was listening to windbags like Eddie George or Robert Smith in the first place. Who on this planet honestly waits with bated breath on their opinions?  


No one.



January 5th, 2012 at 12:33 PM ^

If anything, this validates the argument that Michigan is "back."  Michigan is no longer the punchline it was the past few seasons...and that scares the shit out of OSU fans.


January 5th, 2012 at 12:37 PM ^

I could care less what Sirius-radio personalities have to say about UM.  Did Michigan struggle a bit the last 4-5 years?  Sure.  Heck, Texas has been a veritable crater for the past couple of years - does that make them irrelevant?  How about Florida, they of the 8-5, 7-6 records the past couple of years, with few signs of dramatic improvement ahead?  Or how about USC, which hasn't played in a bowl game for the past couple of years and was treading water a bit since their Rose Bowl win against PSU in 2008? 

Teams have their ups and downs - Michigan just happened to have their first sustained rough patch in 40+ years recently.  They seem well on their way back, and while I expect a regression next season to 8-9 wins, this team is going to be a player going forward nationally for the rest of our lifetimes.


January 5th, 2012 at 6:55 PM ^

Great measured response.

The school is terrific. Team strength comes and goes. It is easy to forget that after Tom Harmon there was a long down period - with a lot of 50% teams. The Fifties saw the rise of OSU and MSU and that pattern remained largely that way until Bo came in. So there was a about a 20 year period where Michigan wasn't that good a football team.

But that was the time of incredible developments and expansion on campus from Harlan Hatcher to Harold Shapiro. The school became really a great national school and the notion that it was a "public ivy" and on par of any of the great national schools became not just a self-congratulatory piece of propaganda but reality. That is really what a lot of the fans and alumni of the other Big Ten schools didn't always appreciate. Yes, football and big money sports were never the same after Bo and Don Canham but the school as a whole became bigger and better.

Some of the confusing misguided and mis-aimed emotion after the PSU scandal broke relates to this point. PSU's football rise occurred with a rise in the quality of PSU as a school in general and the whole local community there felt a tangible link. IF UM football went back down or see sawed up and down, sure people would be disappointed and mad, but as a school, it has long moved on to a point that it doesn't need to have a good team to have know what Michigan means or is about. IF the only way someone can have an interest in a school is if it is a regular contender for the MNC, then they just didn't get much out of the classroom time.


Blue in Yarmouth

January 5th, 2012 at 12:46 PM ^

Not many, but a couple on this thread agreed that UM had actually disappeared for a while and to that I would say:tell that to Mike Martin, RVB, David Molk and all the other guys who have been here over the past few years. Perhaps Hoke said what he did because he knew saying anything else would be disrespectful to those who have been here during that time. 

Think about it...what does that say to them. What would it mean to you if you gave your blood, sweat and tears for a program that people said essentially disappeared over the past 4 years. 

UM's record wasn't up to its normal standard, but the spirit and essence of Michigan football was stiil here in all its glory in the form of the young men who put on that winged helmet and gave their all for this university while persevering through some of the most tumultuous times in the programs history. That is more what Michigan football is than simply their record, and Hoke was right...It hadn't gone anywhere.

Screw Eddie George, nobody cares what that douche thinks...but for UM fans to buy in to the idea that UM had gone somewhere over the past few years is disgusting and disrespectful to these players in my books.



January 5th, 2012 at 12:56 PM ^

fans is they actually think they are going to win the next 8 in a row.


The last 10 years has completely clouded their understanding of what the ohio/michigan rivalry is about and how its played out over the long haul.


Also they're just douche bags and are never worthy of any seriousl discussion that involves using more than 10 brain cells.


January 5th, 2012 at 12:59 PM ^

I was listening to the show when billy packer mentioned the Hoke quote. Eddie George said that Hoke was a great coach and he loved Hoke. He mentioned how he got to spend some time chatting with Hoke up in NY at the college HOF. George disagreed with Hoke saying where has Michigan been the last seven years when OSU was winning B10 titles. Michigan has been a bottom feeding B10 team. I wouldn't take it personally. Billy and Eddie like to ruffle the feathers of popular teams because it helps get more callers attention. They were talking strictly in regards to football and not the school as a whole. Personally, I won't consider Michigan truly back until we win a Big10 championship.


January 5th, 2012 at 1:34 PM ^

We just won a BCS bowl. I wouldn't be too Proud of losing two bad rose bowl games to USC. The Texas game was a great game but taking all 3 appearances as a whole, those are disappointing performances that gave those seasons a bad after taste.
<br>Winning the big ten is necessary, but not the only thing we need to do.


January 5th, 2012 at 1:08 PM ^

I've learned to stop caring about it. Nobody ever gives the credit Michigan deserves...11-2 was by far an overachievement and people still try to discredit the accomplishment. Oh, they're not back. Even though they were saying that if Michigan wins they would be back. And then they said that it doesn't count because it was ugly. Well, no body seems to care that LSU got outplayed against Alabama but still won somehow 9-6. 

At the end of the day, whether Michigan was as talented or not as previous teams, they still did something that NOT A SINGLE MICHIGAN TEAM has done since 2000. That's over a decade. If that isn't "back" I don't know what is. So when a person says they're not back...well, eff 'em. Because the scoreboard said 23-20.

It's on the same level as folks claiming that beating a 6-5 OSU team doesn't mean anything. Even though OSU didn't seem to care when they beat bad-to-mediocre  3-8, 5-6, and 7-4 Michigan teams. They never said it didn't matter. They don't conveniently leave those out when they say they beat Michigan for 7 straight years. MSU doesn't seem to care that their 4-game win streak was 3 years of the worst Michigan teams ever followed by a first year coach halfway into his first seaosn. So, why should we care when folks try to discredit the label 2012 BCS SUGAR BOWL CHAMPIONS.

All I know is that I ordered a hat that says those very words on it. And it doesn't have an asterisk. I will wear it proudly, and will confidently confront/dismiss any who think Michigan didn't "deserve" it.

Gorgeous Borges

January 5th, 2012 at 1:40 PM ^

When people talk about 'relevance', I assume they mean a team is a national title contender. In that sense, Michigan has not been relevant since September 1st, 2007.  Even this year when Michigan was undefeated going into the Michigan State game, nobody was talking about national title aspirations for Michigan. Michigan indeed left the national title hunt for the duration of Rich Rod's tenure (this might be something of an understatement). In my opinion, Michigan is still not back to being a national title contender, even after this season. They don't have the talent to compete with the best teams. Michigan's wide receivers couldn't create separation from VT, their defensive line has only one returning starter, and their secondary is still in need of a talent upgrade.

In 1997, Michigan won the national championship. In every year 1998-2005, Michigan was ranked in the preseason top 10 in at least 1 poll. In 2006 they started out at #14, but no one can deny that Michigan was nationally relevant in that year. In 2007, Michigan was preseason #5. In every year since 1997, Michigan was expected to compete for the national title and the expectation always was that Michigan would be very good. It didn't always turn out that way (frankly, it usually didn't), but the perception always was there that it was possible for Michigan to run the table.

Michigan's still not back there yet. To MGoBlog nuts who know Michigan's depth chart, recruiting rankings, who read the UFR's and see how essential Molk, Martin, and Van Bergen are to this team, it's obvious that the roster next year is not one of a team that would be expected to go toe to toe with Alabama and contend for the national championship. But frankly, that is totally missing the point of this season.

This season, to me, is about the seniors. It's about those who chose to stay, through three different coaches and four different defensive coordinators, through the most crushing and embarrassing losses in Michigan history, through the streak. How after 2007 the seniors chose to break apart but in 2011 they chose to come together. It's about perseverance and toughness and character. And then, finally, they were rewarded with a tremendous season.

Section 1

January 5th, 2012 at 2:08 PM ^

Just imagine, if Hoke had said something like this:

It's great that people are saying we're back...but it's kind of, where have they been the last two or three years?  These kids have been wearing the same helmets...






cf., Bacon, J.; Three and Out, Rich Rodriguez and the Michigan Wolverines in the Crucible of College Football, p. 429.


January 5th, 2012 at 5:52 PM ^

I remember Eddie George's Heisman season. I remember the Michigan-Ohio State game that year. I remember seeing a fantastic back who carried his team to victory with his consistent and spectacular play.

But I don't think that back's name was Eddie George. He had a weird name that was hard to pronounce.

I remember that guy because he was wearing this awesome helmet and was playing in the biggest stadium in the country and every time he or his teammates scored we would sing the greatest fight song in the country. And then I remember many more years, without any break in between, of that same helmet and same fight song and same building and same pride. Sometimes that team lost some games but it never left the front page, never left the consciousness of all around, never stopped believing in itself, never stopped running a program and never stopping striving toward ideals and never stopped operating with the competency that has made it the envy of every other school. You might even say it never left.

Picktown GoBlue

January 6th, 2012 at 1:05 AM ^

...there will be 14 teams with 2 losses or less this season, and Michigan is one of them.

...there will be 8 teams from BCS conferences who were eligible for the postseason with 2 losses or less this season, and Michigan is one of them.

...and osu is in none of these categories.

In 2010, osu finished the season 5 games ahead of Michigan (11-1 vs. 7-6), pryor to the NCAA adjusting their record to 0-1.

In 2011, Michigan finished the season 5 games ahead of osu (11-2 vs. 6-7), punctuated by the 40-34 win.

Sorry, Eddie, but folks can't even ask if osu is back next year, since they're in timeout.  When my kids got sent to timeout, they were gone (we did a minute for each year they were old).  Since Ohio Agricultural and Mechanical College is 142, you'll be gone for over two hours.  But let's just round it up to 12 games.  And if you behave yourself in 2013, and don't bring LOIC down upon yourself while on probation, and Urban isn't sick or retired, and maybe you make a bowl game even after losing The Game, then we'll make a note to send Mark May to your stinkin' restaurant on New Years 2014 to ask you and the coach if your cheatin' school is back.