Valenti gives Michigan credit for Austin White

Submitted by Stephen Y on July 15th, 2009 at 2:41 PM

Listening to Valenti and Foster this afternoon...

Mike Valenti spoke for a few minutes on Austin White, commending Michigan for getting a commitment from him. He even spoke of his ability, sounding far more optimistic than even Brian's review of White.

He also went on to say that Rich Rod is a great coach AND Charlie Weiss is a horrible coach.

I am a shocked that I am admitting this, but I feel Valenti has earned some respect today...

Comments

MichFan1997

July 15th, 2009 at 2:44 PM ^

bag on him so much on here. It has to be that he went to MSU. But he is by far the best radio host in Detroit. I truly feel he calls it like he sees it. Sure, his college football opinions are a little biased at times, but I feel he's mostly worth listening to. He's right though. AW is a great pickup for UM.

Seth

July 15th, 2009 at 4:12 PM ^

What's going on with our resident Lloyd boy getting 7 negatives for this?

Did Jay rustle feathers elsewhere today or something? I'm not taking sides, but I was surprised to see a "+1" response get BlueFronted*

* There, now it's a verb.

Seth

July 15th, 2009 at 4:37 PM ^

Yes, what's the problem with that?

Personally it doesn't bother me much -- just like another guy in the room nodding in approval. It's pretty common message board slang for "yup," and I've seen it used everywhere from xkcd forums to Yahoo. I don't make much use of it, but heck, since the voting's random, how else are you gonna communicate accordance?

Typing "+1" as a response conveys more than giving a point to the poster -- you're effectively lending your own credibility to the post. When we communicate, we consider who it's coming from just as much as much as we consider what's being conveyed. A public display of approval, e.g. typing "+1" in a response, lends another person's voice to the statement. Psychologically, this changes how we read it -- since it's now the opinion of multiple people.

If Brian replied "+1" to something, that would mean something, because we respect Brian's opinion, right? If it's the resident troll, that means something too.

It's communication, which if I'm not mistaken, is the raison d'etre of a message board to begin with?

evenyoubrutus

July 15th, 2009 at 3:54 PM ^

I know that many times he's right, and I know he tends to be "fair" in his criticisms, but he made up his mind in the beginning that RichRod was a horrible human being, and nothing will ever change that.

Also, there was one show during last season where he listed off Michigan's offensive line, talking about how they were so very "talented" because many of them had offers from schools like Northwestern, or Notre Dame (during the Willingham years) and because of this RichRod had no excuse for such a poor performance from the o-line. No bigger piece of BS have I heard on radio before or since (by anyone not named Drew Sharp).

StevieY19

July 15th, 2009 at 2:52 PM ^

All I know regarding Valenti invloves his MAKE PLAYS rant a while back, which was epic. Wasn't he the guy that made some comments about the Corey Smith lost at sea thing too?

Anyway, I just moved back to Michigan and started listening to 97.1 at work. Foster has been going solo this week and I haven't been able to take it, but I'll have to give Valenti a chance.

qbwaggle

July 15th, 2009 at 3:12 PM ^

In defense of Valenti, he was reading a listener's "instant feedback" joke. It was in poor taste, Valenti acknowledged that it was before he read it, and Terry Foster encouraged him to read it anyways. He made a quick decision to read it, it was the wrong decision. But I don't hold anything against him regarding this incident.

I agree that Valenti is the best Detroit sports radio host. I think Karsch is number 2. Sure Valenti can be abrasive at times and his MSU homerism shines through occasionally but for the most part his commentary is pretty good. He at least has some personality, which is more than a lot of the guys at that station can say.

Kvothe

July 15th, 2009 at 3:31 PM ^

Valenti is a joke, not just because he is an MSU slappy. Anyone with a different opinion than him is railroaded off the air. The world misses the FAN and Stoney and Wojo. Valenti should have been Parkered after those comments.

TomW09

July 15th, 2009 at 3:49 PM ^

Not to go OT, but why in the world did the above post from QB Waggle get a negative point?! He gave good information and provided his opinion. Some people need to stop docking people for simply having different opinions.

FTR, I'm a big fan of Valenti. He tells it like it is, plain and simple.

big gay heart

July 15th, 2009 at 3:08 PM ^

Valenti is a joke and a loud-mouthed homer that speaks before thinking and is often incorrect. He's not the best radio host anywhere. Remember when he went on a 20 minute rant about MSU losing to ND like it was life and death and then, later, made jokes about Corey Smith dying. You know, because he was on a shitty Lions team? Fuck Mike Valenti.

Jay

July 15th, 2009 at 3:13 PM ^

He read an "instant feedback" on the air that a listener sent in which made light of the Corey Smith tragedy. That was definitely in poor taste and he was reprimanded for it (and appropriately so), but, he didn't sit there cracking jokes about it.

big gay heart

July 15th, 2009 at 3:40 PM ^

How you can defend this chump is beyond me, Jay. Maybe it's because he shares your absurdly negative outlook on life. I don't care that he's a MSU guy, but I do think he's an absolute hack who almost never knows what he's talking about.

And say what you want about the Corey Smith thing, what he said was terrible. He read an e-mail, gave it hearty chuckle, then lingered on the subject for a little while. I don't buy the "poor taste" thing. Saying/laughing about horrible things while you are employed to be on the radio isn't poor taste, it's a window into what/how you feel. He's shitbird. I was almost more offended by his pathetic groveling after his bosses told him to apologize or he would lose his job.

qbwaggle

July 15th, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^

Regarding the rant - he's a fan and he got emotional about his team. Unfortunately for him (but good for us) he was on the air when he blew off some steam. I like that he's passionate about his team.

Regarding the Corey Smith jokes - Read my earlier comment, it was a mistake but I don't think he's a bad guy who regularly makes fun of the deceased.

Regarding him being the best/worst - to each's own. I know plenty of people who can't stand Valenti. For whatever reason, I find him entertaining. He sometimes tries to get analytical when that's obviously not his strength, but again, I think he's better than the rest of the 97.1 personalities.

MRG

July 15th, 2009 at 3:23 PM ^

...if he didn't try to pass off random things he read on message boards as fact.

And not read jokes about people that died less than 24 hours prior too.

goody

July 15th, 2009 at 3:31 PM ^

and with them, karsh and anderson, and Jay and Bill helped put WDFN local radio off the air. Valenti came be an ass sometimes but he is saying what he feels and when he's wrong he normally owns up to it. Also I love the "Hate Mike" sigment.

B Ready

July 15th, 2009 at 3:32 PM ^

He's the best radio host in Detroit. He's not right about everything (that is impossible) but he is right more often than not. Sometimes his biases get in the way, like his love for MSU and his beliefs about Edwin Jackson and Brandon Inge, but he is very good for the most part.

JNQ_GOBLUE_79

July 15th, 2009 at 3:33 PM ^

an ass who for the most part has nothing but negative opinions on everything. I listen only becuase there is no other local sporst talk choice, but I really miss Stoney and Wojo. And Beligian for that matter. Thank God for Rome.

JNQ_GOBLUE_79

July 15th, 2009 at 3:54 PM ^

there is no other choice. Once Rome is off the air its Valenti and Foster or Craig Meyers' national show. I still like the local talk, so Valenti it is.

By the way, Rome will give credit where credit is do. Plus dude is hilarious and usually has quality guests. Like he says, give the show two weeks. If after two weeks you don't like it or don't get...then you need to give it another two weeks!

JNQ_GOBLUE_79

July 16th, 2009 at 10:48 AM ^

of choice has nothing to do with it. Karsh is a huge UM slappy, and I'm really not all that wild about him. To be honest, I never ever listened to 97.1 until 1130 got rid of everyone.

As far as Rome = Valenti, I disagree. Rome goes about it in a much different manner. Sure, he is rough on people, but he does not come off as a know it all if you ask me. So much of Rome's stuff is tongue in cheek, whereas Valenti honestly believes everything he says. For instance, Rome would never claim he could run a franchise, yet I've heard Valenti numerous times infer such things. I just get tired of every move a local team makes being ripped by him. And if I have to here Foster call a grown man Baby Boy one more time, I'm gonna snap.

umjgheitma

July 15th, 2009 at 3:37 PM ^

I lived in the Detroit area for my whole life and recently moved down to Indy for a job. I loved listening to Valenti and Foster on the way home from work. I know Valenti is a bit blunt and can rub people the wrong way, but you should hear what's available sports talk wise here in Indy. It is terribly dull, it sounds like two old guys sitting on rocking chairs just sippin on some lemonade. Doesn't help that the only teams to talk about are the shitty Pacers and the lovable Colts. I'm too far south for too many people to talk about Notre Dame (which I've heard some refer to Weis as "Pear Bryant") and Purdue as well as Indiana have no good news to hear. So I guess ask yourself, would you rather have Valenti or old man river putting you to sleep from 2-6?

redcedar87

July 15th, 2009 at 3:43 PM ^

You can't be serious. I was expecting Valenti to step off the short bus and start some spin on White's commitment. I read that he was going to do this on a really objective blog somewhere.

I am shocked.

ShockFX

July 15th, 2009 at 4:17 PM ^

If the blog was that biased you wouldn't be here, and even if you were you wouldn't have 67 points. Everyone else got the objective biased comment. The CONTENT is biased, the OPINIONS are objective. Subjective bullshit or statements without facts get shredded.

Additionally, the Corey Smith thing was in such poor taste it was amazing.

ShockFX

July 15th, 2009 at 5:03 PM ^

Biased UM kid thinks this is the most unbiased blog with a bias.

Let me put this in terms that you can understand. It's kind of like being the coolest Internet message board commenter; you're still not cool by any real standard. Likewise, mgoblog is not very objective when viewed through the lens of another fanbase.

Let me know if that's still too complicated of a simple argument for you.

Your words.

Also, if the most objectionable thing you find on a MICHIGAN blog is that the writer calls the slobbering articles written about MSU this offseason part of a "Spartan spin machine" then is it really that bad? Additionally, if you don't like it, leave. This is akin to me walking into someone's house uninvited and then criticizing the food they serve for dinner.

redcedar87

July 15th, 2009 at 5:23 PM ^

I'm not criticizing the blog; I'm merely disagreeing with the masses that believe this site is "OMG 100% objective you better have facts".

It's more like informing some small-town hicks that the local greasy spoon isn't actually the pinnacle of fine cuisine. I'd still eat there, though.

ShockFX

July 15th, 2009 at 8:32 PM ^

"It's more like informing some small-town hicks that the local greasy spoon isn't actually the pinnacle of fine cuisine. I'd still eat there, though."

I don't know about you, but I prefer to be places (real or virtual) where people things fit my style, rather than somewhere I'm barely tolerated at the most basic level. You could learn a lot from how Irish interacts on this message board.

UMFootballCrazy

July 15th, 2009 at 8:48 PM ^

As someone with a degree in Philosophy [who now sells real estate...but that is another story] I wonder if everyone is entirely clear on the concepts at play here. As one of my graduate professors used to say, "A good distinction is worth its weight in gold." Perhaps I can lend a modicum of clarity:

Bias -- the favouring of one party, group, argument over another such that your natural instinct is to favour the one over the other. Bias is a milder form of prejudice and bigotry. A reasonable case could be made that it is impossible to operate without bias. To do so you would have to operate without any formed ideas or opinions. That being said, one can argue as to whether or not one's basic biases and prejudices are clouding one's judgment and one's ability to be fair towards someone biased towards a position differing from yours. In that regard, this blog and for the most part its readership are biased towards UM Football.

Subjective vs. Objective -- In our society with its bias towards scientific thinking, tends to hold in high regard the ideal of objectivity, that is someone being able to completely seperate themselves from their basic biases and prejudices to make pronouncements that are completely neutral and unbiased. Obejectivity is an idea strived towards and generally likes to use "facts" that cannot be in any way construed as arising out of the person making the case. That is they are independant of subjective biases. Subjectivity is gennerally considered to be thoughts and pronouncements made out of one's self. What is interesting as we have moved from modernism and its belief in objective thought into post-modernism is the recognition that there is no such thing as pure objective thought. The best that we can do is deconstruct our biases with hope of understanding how they cloud our perception of the world and how we form judgments about the world.

Opinion -- by definition an opinion is subjective. This does not mean that it cannot be right and cannot be rooted in so-called "emperical" evidence. Ironically, it was partical physics that put to rest the notion of the "fact" as something independant of the observer and made the case that there is no neutral observer. The very act of observation itself is biased. In partical physics the observer must choose whether to determine position or the vector of the partical and that choosing to measure one precluded you from measuring the other. The observer and the observed are intimately linked in the process of observation.

At best, one can surface and be public about one's biases and prejudices and that with cogent, careful and honest research and analysis one can make a cautious attempt at attaining something akin to the truth.

In that regard, we need to recognize that no matter how careful we are as a community, how sensitive we are as researchers and analysts are towards the material, and how conscious we are of our biases, no matter how much insights here might aspire to the truth of the matter, no matter how much they are accurate analyses of reality, they will forever and always have a UM "bias." There are no "objective" conclusions here. None. It simply is not possible for any of us who are historically, materially, and temporally bound to fully escape our circumstances to stand outside of our selves, our our society and our era to look at the material from "outside" of ourselve and be thus "objective." No matter how careful we are we cannot escape ourselves.

That said, this is an intelligent community that offers smart, albiet biased and prejudiced thought about the Michigan Football program.