Sam Webb on Bush and Walker.....

Submitted by MichiganAlum2014 on December 15th, 2015 at 12:16 AM

So Sam Webb did an update around 11:35 tonight on Scout.com and his gut still thinks Michigan leads for Bush and that Michigan lands him from his sources very close to the situation. When it comes to Walker though, he thinks FSU has really closed the gap and he cant put a gut feeling on that call, though he still thinks Michigan leads for Walker too. Needless to say, these next two days are going to give me extreme anxiety. Here's to hoping we get both!! Fingers crossed! 

Comments

SharkyRVA

December 15th, 2015 at 9:06 AM ^

I don't get how it is wrong to post premium content...  the vast majority of people on here have no problem sharing netflix passwords yet they are the same people saying sharing premium info is wrong.  Not saying you are one of them but help me understand why sharing info that I may have paid for with others is wrong.

JayMo4

December 15th, 2015 at 6:46 AM ^

There are always a bunch of idealists ready to stand up for the premium sites, but in this day and age especially, the very concept of paying for secrets and expecting that none of those thousands of subscribers will tell a soul is beyond naive.  Yeah, you can pay to be the first to know.  You can't pay to be part of a group of the only people that will ever know.  Information doesn't work that way.

Also, how is it alright for the premium sites to sell info that in many cases was given to them in confidence?  How often have premium posters said something like, "Now don't go spreading this, or my source will be very cross with me and won't share info in the future!"  They're basically telling you that they just sold someone out in order to get you information.  I know their honesty in those situations sure makes me want to post on mgoblog to defend them.  And of course, if this information they're getting from those inside sources has a monetary value, shouldn't they be kicking some of it back to the original source?  If they are, there's corruption inside the program.  If they're not, they're asking us to pay for something that they got for free, that will inevitably spread no matter what they say, and that they were often told not to tell anyone else but did.  And then there are the many instances where one premium site takes info from another and tries to pass it off as their own.

These are the people whose info many of us try to shame others out of posting.  There are a lot of crusades worth taking up in this world, but excuse me if I don't see this as worth the effort.

jmdblue

December 15th, 2015 at 9:00 AM ^

It's not a crusade. It's a discussion as to whether Sam Webb's paid content is worth paying for.  As I wrote below, when you pay for content you are either honorable or a rube.  When you don't pay you are either smart with your money or a thief.  Own it.  Everything you wrote is completely secondary to the discussion.

SharkyRVA

December 15th, 2015 at 9:11 AM ^

How many posters on here have come out and said they just steal netflix and cable user names/passwords from parents and friends so they can watch free tv???  At least the people posting this "premium" info have paid for it.  Shouldn't it be their right to share it?  Anyone here share music in a similar way? 

jmdblue

December 15th, 2015 at 12:02 PM ^

Scientific research? Not without credit. News info? Maybe, but you have no source to rely on ( besides your belief in another's reliance on the original source). Opinion piece? Sure but you know what they say 'bout opinions and assholes. Anyway, doesn't effect the original accuracy ( or lack thereof) of your analogy.

SharkyRVA

December 15th, 2015 at 1:52 PM ^

My point is that people get on their soap box complaining about posters that share premium content that the OP has paid for and has the right to share but many of those same posters are stealing or have stolen TV subscriptions.  For the record, I think it is wrong to steal netflix, etc and have never done it.  I do not think it is right just because everyone does it.  I do think it is OK to share premium content that has been paid for.  If Sam didn't want the news to get out then Sam should have not put it out there in the first place.   

jmdblue

December 15th, 2015 at 2:15 PM ^

and I think the board's policy on reprinting premium content has been both proper and effective. Certain modes of argument drive me nuts though... Among them pointing out mass hypocrisy. Hypocrisy matters in terms of credibility, but has no effect on the validity of a position.  Posting premium content is right or wrong regardless of whether people pay for their own Netflix.  

I once watched a guy looking for hiking boots without any leather content.  He was apparently doing his best to live his vegan beliefs (which I vervently fail to share).  When he left I listened to one sales dude tell the other, "Yeah, I'll bet his belts are leather".  

Cheers and Go Blue.

Albatross

December 15th, 2015 at 9:14 AM ^

If the entire concept is that you, as a subscriber are paying for information, then you can do with it as you wish. You don't buy a hamburger and not be able to eat it, you don't by a car and not be able to drive it, you don't pay for a vacation and not be able to go.

And you definitely do not pay for information and then not be able to share it or discuss it. That flys in the face of having the information in the first place.

If that is the intention of pay sites, than their model is badly flawed.

jmdblue

December 15th, 2015 at 8:53 AM ^

at least a decent portion of the users paying for a subscription.   If you pay you are either honorable or a rube.  If you don't pay you are either smart with your money or you're stealing.  

In any event, don't use your own description of Sam's poor business model to rationalize your use of Sam's content for free.   Be the thief.  Or the rube or smart guy or whatever.

Danwillhor

December 15th, 2015 at 2:51 AM ^

why is it that nobody every questions the very ethics of Sam's "job"? Every pay for info on TEENAGERS thoughts site and "insiders"? I could get it if the kids were given something but these places/people are vultures making profit on info that will be known in time anyway. They're worst than the NCAA! "Hey, kid, let me stalk you, hound you and secretly talk to those close to you so I can get info ON YOUR LIFE to sell online"....how is that a sacred system here or anywhere? It's twisted. I'd be ok with it if they merely used a free content, ad based income system that ONLY used info given to them by the kids with by their full desire. If they were that I'd be fine with it but I say fuck "premium content protection" in this current system. They deserve none as it's s bunch of ego driven 45 year olds selling info ON KIDS for pay. Try to justify that without being a complete bag of shit. Try.

alum96

December 15th, 2015 at 12:23 AM ^

I honestly think Walker is more important with the inability for UM to run the ball like a top third Big 10 team...or heck top two thirds Big 10 team.  If he doesnt come you might have to bite the bullet and move Jabrill over and say we are going to have a top 30 defense instead of a top 10 defense so that we can have a top 20 offense rather than a top 50 offense.

Obviously we need bodies at LB so not discounting Bush but just think the impact a rb can have immediately and thhe lack of playmaking ability in our group speaks to him as a need more.

Please just don't go 0 for 2!