|03/03/2011 - 2:51am||I am so thankful...||
that my parents didn't force any beliefs on me, but rather allowed me to develop my own opinions about the world, and what is right and wrong.
I am so thankful that I and my siblings did not grow up in a repressive community like Mr. Davies, being forced to believe that homosexuality and sex before marriage are sins. I am thankful that my brother was able to tell our family that he was gay at the age of 18, and we of course love him for who he is and love that he is able to communicate with us without fear of judgment. Compare that to the last generation when my relative couldn't tell her parents she was gay until she was in her 30s, or the generation before that when my relative lived in a sham marriage for 30 years before coming out.
I'm sorry for getting off topic but reading about people that are repressed and living as if it is still the 19th century within our country really gets me going.
|03/03/2011 - 2:49am||I see, I read you wrong...||
its option B then, you feel that religion saved your life.
I would say that many people aren't happy in high school, sometimes it takes more time growing up to discover who you are. I don't know you personally, but the people I know that have similar stories of redemption I find usually just didn't realize that they had the strength within themselves the whole time. But hey, if they feel that the religion was what made their lives better, rather than their own free will, thats their decision. At least they are happy I suppose.
|03/03/2011 - 2:20am||Maybe||
just maybe, I mean I'm spitballing here, but MAYBE when you are 18 years old, and you have the maturity/emotional development of a 15 year old because you've lived your whole life in the restrictive world of the LDS, MAYBE you just don't realize the ramifications of signing the Honor Code pledge. Maybe, just MAYBE you've never fallen in love with a girl(or boy) before, maybe you think you know that you don't want to have sex until you get married. Then maybe, who knows, it is college after all, and there are thousands of young enthusiastic people mingling in one small area, MAYBE you meet someone you love. But oh shit, you can't fully express that love, sorry son, remember two years ago when you signed that Honor Pledge? Yep, we've got you by the balls now, separate beds or you're outta here!
Just sayin', things aren't always so black and white. And just because the policy is clear to incoming students doesn't automatically make it right to enforce a policy so far outside our cultural and social norms.
|03/03/2011 - 2:04am||Wow||
I feel bad for you DC Wolverine. I hope one day you will be able to free your mind from its indoctrinated state. Hopefully while you still have time to enjoy your youth.
|12/25/2010 - 4:09am||MNC equivalents?||
Not really. They were deemed "mid-major champs" which doesn't mean anything, they didn't even get invited to the FCS national championship tournament.
Thats like the MAC, Sun-belt and WAC getting together, holding a championship game, and calling the winner the mythical national champion of the FBS.
Had to nit-pick that statement, as far as the rest of your argument....I'll just say that you make a lot of assumptions with no factual support and leave it at that.
|12/16/2010 - 6:29pm||Wait....||
so the sky ISNT falling?
I just don't know what to do.
|12/16/2010 - 5:34pm||Thank you Magnus||
I've been trying to say this for weeks, but you put it much more succinctly.
|12/16/2010 - 5:20pm||Thats great and all...||
But the coaching uncertainty is lurking no matter what DB does. No matter how forcefully he comes out and endorses RR, you're still getting negatively recruited just based on the last 3 years of results, and the uncertainty that persists. Furthermore, this tack makes it look like you're giving him one more chance, rather than evaluating objectively based on progress. Not really a stabilizing force IMO.
Negative recruiting is gonna happen this year no matter what DB does/doesn't do. I'm sure there is a lot going on that we don't know about, I'm just going to trust that he is approaching the situation the right way. IMO the only thing that can really restore confidence is a strong showing in the bowl game with a finally healthy and rejuvenated team.
|12/16/2010 - 5:14pm||Disagree||
Harbaugh would not have done a substantially better job recruiting if he had to deal with all of the negative press and irrational personal attacks that RRod has had to deal with.
|12/15/2010 - 8:13pm||I said strong possibility...||
Summer was a long time ago, and the talk was mostly fluff. Didn't see any strong beliefs recently.
So yeah, I don't understand when a thread about a single player verbally committing elsewhere goes all doomsday, and I especially don't understand it when the player verbaling elsewhere was expected.
|12/15/2010 - 1:25pm||Plus....||
How is it a positive to have your conference associated with miserable conditions like those in the Chicago game? Noone wants to play in that, and if they do have to eventually, they would still rather do it as little as possible, and not until they're being PAID to play.
|12/15/2010 - 5:08am||Really?||
I mean really? Why is this thread so depressing? Did anyone think Cooper was ever a strong possibility?
And how do you figure the D will be thin forever? You must think theres no talent there right now, I guess, but I don't think anyone can reach that conclusion in regards to first and second year players. Its TBD.
|12/11/2010 - 10:13pm||I still don't know...||
what a "Big-Ten style run offense" is. The association of the Big Ten with the pound it up the gut running strategy hasn't been accurate in my lifetime, with the exception of Wisconsin.
|12/11/2010 - 6:36pm||The point is...||
There is no "Groban moment." Who the heck cares what songs the coach is playing at an emotional team event. The fact that the media jumps on these things, and people like you accept their narrative is ridiculous.
|12/11/2010 - 5:16pm||I disagree||
Olympic Ice feels a lot different. A lot more open space everywhere- neutral zone transitions, more important to use all the lanes, harder to play D in the D zone, a lot more room to cover.
|12/05/2010 - 7:06pm||That position is untenable||
I believe Rodriguez deserves another year, but for the sake of argument I will take your side and say ok, we need to move on. What then does Michigan gain by firing Rodriguez right now? Absolutely nothing, and they stand to lose everything.
The only replacement that you can even make an argument for as a possible upgrade is Harbaugh. It is not believed that he would leave before their BCS bowl game, so announcing that you are firing Rodriguez now creates the most possible uncertainty and recruting turmoil of any option. No matter what, if he was fired there would be a lot of turnover, but if there was a prolonged search it would only be worse.
The fact that you are using the "Groban moment" as part of your argument is just embarrassing, and leads me to believe that you are the type of person who likes to make snap judgments relying on what the public perception is without knowing the actual facts of the situation.
|12/05/2010 - 4:39pm||No...||
Try to keep up here, I know reading is difficult.
We just agreed that:
"Saying you are keeping RR does not stop the negative recruiting. Recruits want a coach who is here for the long term, by addressing the controversy DB would make it look like he is giving RR one more shot.
This is the situation a team is in after 3 disappointing years. It is what it is, and no press conference can mollify it."
So no, holding a press conference tomorrow doesn't do anything to save recruiting, and I think everyone on both sides agrees that there will be no "recruiting of a new coach." Its either Rodriguez or Harbaugh.
And as for "Groban moments," thats only embarrassing because of the vindictive local media that partly caused this whole situation in the first place.
|12/05/2010 - 4:06pm||Exactly||
It doesn't matter, thank you for agreeing with me.
I can flip it around on you, name one reason he needs to announce right now, since we just agreed that it doesn't matter.
DB has a plan, and he is sticking to it. What is so hard to understand about that?
|12/05/2010 - 2:37pm||As has been said a million times...||
Saying you are keeping RR does not stop the negative recruiting. Recruits want a coach who is here for the long term, by addressing the controversy DB would make it look like he is giving RR one more shot.
This is the situation a team is in after 3 disappointing years. It is what it is, and no press conference can mollify it.
|12/05/2010 - 1:54pm||No Biggie...||
One more scholarship for defense.........assuming Tate doesn't transfer, they're set at QB for now.
|12/03/2010 - 7:20pm||Auburn/USCe||
Auburn is only 5 point favorites, an upset is not that unlikely.
|12/02/2010 - 8:12pm||LOL||
That is such horrible logic.
Whatever the best decision is on who should be the coach(I believe it is to keep RR), it is still the best decision regardless of what happens with Dee.
And stating tomorrow what the plan is doesn't stop the negative recruiting any more than waiting does, its a fact Michigan will have to deal with this recruiting season, like it or not.
|12/02/2010 - 8:07pm||"Press Conference"||
I would like to address the theory that all DB has to do is hold a press conference and everything is hunky-dory and Michigan can go forth and haul in a top 5 recruiting class.
Unfortunately, thats not the case. Announcing a press conference just makes DB look weak by changing his course of action to pander to the mob. And stating that RRod will be back next year won't stop the negative recruiting, because it will look like he only has one more chance, and other coaches will call it a lame duck situation. Recruits want a coach that will be there for all 4-5 years.
I don't think RRod has gotten a fair shake, but unfortunately this is the situation that the program is in. DB has been upfront with the process he will employ, I think he should stick to it.
|12/02/2010 - 5:43pm||Huh?||
Your complaint has no basis in reality. Were you unhappy with the line play this year? I don't see how you could be, they were the strength of the team, other than Denard.
Now they are graduating one starter, two backups that didn't play much, and they're going to be adding 4 freshman, how is that not enough linemen for you?
Not to mention that this whole parroting of the "Rich Rod only cares about skill players meme" is ridiculous. All college teams have lots of RBs and WRs, Michigan has a very standard distribution of scholarships.
|12/02/2010 - 12:58pm||I disagree...||
There are 3 OL in the class, and they're planning on adding one more. Thats a solid class for OL, especially when they are only losing one starter.
Having a lot of skill position players is important as well, because
1. RBs get injured often
2. This offense utilizes the skill position players in unique ways that most other offenses do not and
3. A few will inevitably make the switch to CB or Safety...granted we've seen some shuffling of the OL and DLs lately, but skill positions switching to defense seems a lot more common.
|11/30/2010 - 6:19pm||re: chris 1709||
But its never anything new, the OP just thinks it is.
|11/29/2010 - 7:10pm||Thank you||
The person I was imitating with that post acts like hes 5, so I'll take that as a compliment.
|11/29/2010 - 4:53pm||"Prevent Defense"||
Noone seems to understand that a prevent defense is designed to stop long passing gains while conceding short, underneath routes. Not exactly how Michigan has been scoring this year.
No team is going to let up against Michigan, because they have seen what the offense can do once it gets rolling. Unfortunately the comebacks inevitably came up short because unlike Auburn vs. Alabama last week, or Michigan vs. Minnesota in 2003, the defense didn't hold up.
That doesn't render the second-half TDs the offense scored suddenly meaningless.
|11/29/2010 - 4:51pm||You missed my point...||
I'll restate: In what universe is "being in the game at halftime" only to be blown out in the second half preferable to falling behind early, mounting a furious comeback, and coming up short?
Not to mention that, IMO, the Michigan offense has been plagued by untimely penalties, untimely dropped passes and turnovers that had varying degrees of bad luck involved in these first halves. Its a small sample size issue, and though there seems to be a pattern, I don't know in reality how much of a role just plain bad luck played.
|11/29/2010 - 4:36pm||Yeah...||
So if I understand this correctly, you believe hanging with a team for a half before utterly collapsing in the second half is superior to falling behind in the first half before battling back in the second half?
Ultimately a win is a win, and a loss is a loss, but IMO fighting back shows character, team unity and conditioning, while collapsing in the second half is a hallmark of badly coached teams.
Just my opinion.
|11/29/2010 - 4:22pm||dr. of statistics iiiiiiiiiiiikkkkkkkkkkkeeeeeesss||
You're pathetic bro, have an original opinion for once.
You want to talk numbers? Against real football teams Michigan lost by an average of over 3 TDs, lolololllllll.
Give it up dr. iiiiikkkkkeeeeessssss, Rich Rod is toast.
|11/26/2010 - 6:27pm||Hmmm...||
Well if you can't navigate google ably enough to verify my claim, then I don't really care about your opinion.
|11/26/2010 - 4:26pm||I've said this before...||
but it bears repeating. Prior to this year, the last time the Big Ten was rated higher than the Big East as a conference, according to Sagarin, was 2005.
|11/25/2010 - 2:07pm||Justin Boren||
|11/23/2010 - 4:32pm||zlionsfan,||
YPP is more accurate because you are isolating the offense from most of the things it can't control- Field position, Field goal kicking, and bad luck in re: turnovers.
Of course there are turnovers that aren't bad luck as well, but it does better as a rough metric than PPD.
And attempting to isolate the offensive performance by the game situation has a sample size problem. Its a short season already, and when you break it down into quarters, and then further into against good Ds/against bad Ds and losing/close/ahead, you are beginning to look at very small slivers of data.
|11/23/2010 - 2:41pm||Yep||
Internet.T.Guy nailed it, that is why Yards Per Play is a much more accurate statistic than PPD.
Even if you controlled for field position in regards to Michigan's chances of scoring, that doesn't mean that their offense still doesn't have to regularly go farther to score than the opponents do.
Additionally, if you want to isolate the offensive performance, you have to remove kicking, so looking at points scored is not as accurate as YPP.
|11/18/2010 - 2:41pm||Lemme get a....||
One time dealer!
|11/18/2010 - 2:34pm||Of Course...||
I agree that Michigan has a great opportunity to be a contender next year. But you're way overanalyzing the importance of recruiting rankings and how much attention they really get. Its a nice story in the offseason for starved cfb fanatics, but its not a consideration of players and coaches in-season.
No opposing coaches or players are going to be like, "ooooh Michigan had a top 10 recruiting ranking according to Scout, we better be ready when we go to the Big House."
Thats just patently ridiculous. The reasons they get up for the game and don't overlook it despite Michigan not being dominant in 4 years are: 1. Its Still Frickn Michigan and 2. Dilithium, bro.
|11/18/2010 - 1:19pm||Yeah...||
THATS why they'll be underestimating Michigan, because their recruiting class was unfairly ranked 25th instead of 10th. Not because they barely beat UMass and Indiana, and pending the results of the final 3 games finished with 4 or 5 losses.
|11/17/2010 - 11:51pm||Born Blue||
Their backups were in for the entire 4th quarter, can you fault them for trying hard? The only other action that QB has gotten is in a 70-3 win over Austin Peay. He only gets in when the game is out of hand and you want to tell him he can't try to score?
And by the way, they only threw the ball 3 times in the 4th quarter, so obviously they reigned it in.
|11/17/2010 - 11:24pm||Naw||
You're giving them too much credit in believing that they are looking closely at the actual score between a top #10 BCS team and a bottom feeder like Indiana.
As long as it wasn't close, it doesn't matter.
|11/17/2010 - 10:50pm||Nope||
I don't find that argument very convincing..........its Indiana, noone will discuss this game when they discuss Wisconsin's BCS chances. They will discuss 1. Their dismantling of OSU 2. Their win @ Iowa 3. Their loss to MSU 4. Their escape against ASU.
Noone cares if they won by 40 or 60, its friggin Indiana. The only time the game will be discussed is 1. to LOL at and 2. in the context of a stupid and very stale sportsmanship debate.
|11/17/2010 - 10:40pm||Ok?||
Theres no story here...........Wisconsin had their backups in the entire 4th quarter, its not their fault Indiana can't stop them.
And there isn't much motivation for Wisconsin to run it up since Margin of Victory was removed from the computer polls.......an 83-20 victory over Indiana doesn't impress voters anymore than a 62-20 victory would.
Also, is there supposed to be some unwritten rule in conference? If this score offends you, why is it ok for teams to routinely run it up to 70 or 80 points against no-name non-conference teams? Don't those kids feel just as bad?
|11/16/2010 - 1:15pm||NoHeartAnthony||
Your brother is the man, but you couldn't even commit suicide properly.
Good to hear they have mgoblog in prison.
|11/16/2010 - 3:08am||Public Perception...||
Nice story, but Michigan was 3.5 point dogs vs. Iowa and @ Notre Dame.
They're only 4.5 point dogs vs. Wisconsin.
Public perception is not reality.
|11/15/2010 - 10:31pm||Martin's Ankles...||
Having to compensate for a leg injury can cause further injuries as you put more strain on other muscles and joints with your altered stride.
|11/14/2010 - 2:32am||Yay! Finally!||
The mouth-breathers are so much more tolerable when they are on your side of the argument.
|11/13/2010 - 2:42pm||...||
Well those may be better strategies, I'm only talking about looking at a team's results against the spread or over/unders over the last 10 games. There are reasons why Paul Johnson teams may be undervalued, teams coming off embarrassing losses may be undervalued or teams under first-year coaches may be overvalued.
I haven't been betting on Michigan and the under the last couple years, but the point is that that information isn't relevant, its already included in the line. You can only tell in hindsight when a streak is going to begin or end.
|11/12/2010 - 6:11pm||Past Trends||
Looking at past trends, or how often an Over/Under has covered in the last 10 games is squarish thinking.
Think about the present and the future, not the past, the line is already taking the past occurences into account. Finding a trend in the past has little relevance to whether it will continue, not much more valuable than saying a quarter has come up tails 9 out of the last10 flips, so I think its going to be tails this time.
|11/11/2010 - 1:25pm||Hmmm||
I mean yeah, obviously more possessions=more points, so by pure scoring/yardage, the defense will always be underrated. But looking at yards per play, or other more accurate ratings it wouldn't make a difference.
I don't buy the other argument you make that less time of possession=more pressure.