|02/12/2018 - 5:47pm||Ridiculously Cheap||
If you want ridiculously cheap golf, go to Scottsdale in the summer; golf rates are upwards of 75% off, and the resorts are usually around $100/night. And the courses are pretty empty. You can play a round in a couple of hours.
While it is definitely hot, it's not as bad as you might think if you go early in the morning or late in the afternoon, and use a cart with a canopy. June is the best time to go because the humidity is still very low. In July, the monsoons start increasing the humidity and thus the discomfort.
|10/28/2017 - 4:13pm||notsureifserious.gif||
|05/02/2017 - 4:23pm||And superior academics||
And superior academics...
Having differing learning opportunities is unfair; they should make it so that all schools are equal in the academic opportunities for their student-athletes. /s
|02/20/2017 - 11:37am||I logged in just to give you||
I logged in just to give you credit for taking responsibility and being civil. It is sad how rare this is that I felt the need to post, but thank you for being an adult.
|09/19/2016 - 3:08pm||(No subject)||
He's stalking his prey. Completely focused on bringing the QB down...
|08/25/2016 - 7:28pm||I definitely agree that the||
I definitely agree that the use of blanket labels for people/points of view can dramatically undermine reasonable debates. And I would argue that you see that labeling from both sides.
It seems like it's a way to try to "win" the debate before it even starts because you paint the person into a corner and they don't get to express their opinion, but rather have to defend themselves from the start.
It's like asking: "Why do you hate American so much?" It's no longer about your thoughts or viewpoint, but instead it's about having to prove you don't fit in some ridiculous frame.
That said, I wonder if an example of someone who could be labeled (unproductively) "pro-fascist" would be a person who is a neo-nazi and argues that the Holocaust didn't happen. Some might argue that a school should not let that person speak on campus because the ideas can be harmful to groups of students. Others might argue that they should be allowed to speak because of the First Amendment and providing open-minded discussions..
|04/28/2016 - 3:38pm||I can't think of a time when||
I can't think of a time when I've ever seen (or heard of) all-male cheerleaders cheering on a female team...
|01/26/2016 - 6:34pm||"it's Like That" by||
"it's Like That" by Run-D.M.C. changed my musical future...
|07/17/2015 - 10:27pm||"The team. The team. The||
"The team. The team. The team." I'm guessing that it includes the coaches.
In other words, they are all on the same team, and an attack on any member of the team is an attack on the team...
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
|05/01/2015 - 8:02pm||Wow, that is one long hug!||
Wow, that is one long hug!
|12/02/2014 - 7:31pm||Was that contradiction on||
Was that contradiction on purpose?
Yay, "Michigan Man" is dead!
|10/20/2014 - 3:30pm||He said "run the football."||
He said "run the football." He didn't specify how. I wonder if we are going to see more runs by Gardner.
|10/10/2014 - 12:56pm||Brian is not a china doll...||
Brian is not a china doll...
|10/07/2014 - 4:02pm||IIRC, Mattison has said that||
IIRC, Mattison has said that the reason for the change was to keep JMFR on the field for all 3 downs, rather than having to be subbed out for 3rd down passing plays. That's not necessarily a terrible idea.
In hindsight, however, it may be better to lose one of your best defensive players for 3rd downs if he is struggling at the Mike. I don't know...
|10/04/2014 - 4:51pm||That's the official alumni||
That's the official alumni bar here in Scottsdale.
|10/02/2014 - 7:47pm||Emotional Contagion||
I can see exactly what you're talking about.
Be careful, because there is a phenomenon called emotional contagion, where being around a group of people in a particular mood can cause you to feel the same way.
It's partly how persons can be smart, but people can be dumb.
|10/01/2014 - 8:19pm||This fanbase doesn't do||
I think it might be more accurate to say some members of the fanbase don't do happy. Some people are just generally not happy. Research shows that even if they win the lottery, they won't be happy.
|10/01/2014 - 7:51pm||Be careful; you might be||
Be careful; you might be living in the same "stone age" in which you accuse the administration of living. Michigan was definitely a powerful program, but in the past.
Some have argued that the previous hires did not go well because the administration assumed, like you do, that Michigan should be able to simply take our pick and the coach will come running. As a result, we ended up with Plan D or E.
|10/01/2014 - 4:18pm||Watching the comments on this||
Watching the comments on this board, you can see how stupid decisions can happen so easily. It feels like we are screaming toward another version of "The Process"... important decisions being handled poorly.
|09/25/2014 - 5:06pm||Maybe it's more about||
Maybe it's more about consistency. The players may actually be learning and improving, but it just isn't consistent yet.
Really, that's the difference between most players and a star - the consistency. Can you do it every single play?
So if you have a bunch of inconsistent players out of the 11 on the field, they don't all need to screw up to create a problem. Just one of them does. That could explain how you can have these games where you outgain your opponent, but can't sustain a drive. A random player is messing up every 2nd or 3rd play...
As more of those players improve their consistency, you have better and longer drives.
|09/24/2014 - 6:19pm||There seems to be some very||
There seems to be some very good development among the defensive players:
Nice to see.
|09/24/2014 - 6:14pm||I'm so with you on this.||
I'm so with you on this. There's a time for fast, instinctual decisions, and there is a time for slow, reasoned decisions. I'd go with the latter in this matter.
|09/11/2014 - 7:40pm||Maybe Dick||
Maybe Dick Vermeil?
|08/20/2014 - 12:41pm||I miss Drake's...||
I miss Drake's...
|08/18/2014 - 4:31pm||Please correct me if I'm||
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but one of the things my (very) untrained eye noticed in that video is that there was a good bit of penetration by the Ohio State DL. It's not like there were necessarily gaping holes, with the Michigan OL manhandling and pushing Ohio State off the line.
It looked to me like Bunch, Hoard, et al., did a good job hitting the holes quickly and with force. A couple of times I saw them get their feet tackled at the line of scrimmage, but they fell forward for a 3 yard gain.
It just makes me think that our anemic running game is not just on the OL. Maybe it is more of an offensive issue.
But again, I'm no expert.
|08/12/2014 - 2:13pm||It's not just optimistic, it's||
It's not just optimistic, it's relativistic. It's always important to think relativistically with these reports.
It seems pretty safe to think that our DL is better than our OL (DL>OL) at this point in time. In other words, relative to the DL, the OL is worse. But to move away from the relativistic differences to an "objective" non-relativistic evaluation is a major leap. It all depends on how good or bad the DL is.
If the DL is All Big Ten quality, then our OL might not be too terrible (which would at least be better than last year).
If the DL is just average, then our OL would likely be below average.
And this also applies to game results. Teams and players are always performing relative to their opponents. We don't really have a great understanding until we have multiple relativistic observations before the interpretations can get more accurate.
And a sad reality for MIchigan fans is that our schedule tends to be back-loaded, and so we often develop unreasonable expectations of our teams early in the season because they tend to play the toughest games at the end of the season.
|07/22/2014 - 1:17pm||I can't get enough of||
I can't get enough of Galactic these days. Dying to see them in concert.
Love this collaboration with one of my favorite MC's, Lyrics Born:
|07/22/2014 - 1:13pm||I got turned on to Homeboy||
I got turned on to Homeboy Sandman through his collaboration with Kalae All Day (now Kalae Nouveau) on this song:
|04/06/2014 - 3:53pm||If these "tea leaves" are||
If these "tea leaves" are right, hopefully they will be MSU 2013.
|03/06/2014 - 5:53pm||I wonder if Connelly's solo||
I wonder if Connelly's solo tackle rate helps explain why the extreme spread teams have generally good records and pile up yardage, but sometimes struggle to win against high-quality opponents.
Spreading the defense out leads to more solo tackles. If your team has a talent advantage, then your playmaker is trying to make a less talented player make the tackle. Win.
However, if the opposing player is equally talented, if not more, then they make the tackle. Lose.
It seems that it would follow that spread teams can sometimes have only one really talented player on offense and have a good bit of success (see Robinson, Denard) because they can win more of those one-on-one battles. But maybe the schematic advantages shrink when up against a quality opponent? In the end, does it mostly just come down to overall talent (The Team, The Team, The Team)?
|03/05/2014 - 11:03am||So do you tape those MP3s to||
So do you tape those MP3s to the "cassette" with just regular Scotch tape? Or does it need to be duct tape?
|03/05/2014 - 10:59am||I remember watching it in my||
I remember watching it in my girlfriend's room in Bursley...
|03/05/2014 - 10:51am||Thanks||
I was a sophomore at Michigan that year. Had basketball season tickets.
It wasn't that long ago...
|03/04/2014 - 5:42pm||Amen.||
|01/14/2014 - 2:07pm||If... and... but...
If... and... but...
/damn, too late!
|01/12/2014 - 5:30pm||Go Rats!
|01/10/2014 - 11:56am||He will be on the sideline,||
He will be on the sideline, wearing a headset to communicate with himself in the booth. He will also change plays after time traveling to see the defensive play.
|01/10/2014 - 11:43am||I'm tiring of this. I didn't||
I'm tiring of this. I didn't mean this to become some argument. There is no "winner" here.
My last comment is this: I still think you are cherry-picking the data.
Yes, this year was bad. Any year that ends 7-6 is not a good one. I don't think anyone is arguing that this was a great year overall, especially for the offense.
What is being argued, however, is whether it means that Borges was so bad that he needed to go. You are clearly under the impression that the answer is that he definitely needed to go. And you have evidence to back that up. I get that.
I'm just trying to argue (and I'm going to stop pestering you after this) that those who didn't think that Borges needed to go are not idiots, and also have evidence to back that up. Some of that evidence will come from this year with those above average performances against quality opponents. Some of that evidence will include the fact that good coaches have bad years, sometimes through bad luck (e.g., injuries, last second heroics/goat, weather, etc.), sometimes through personnel (e.g., lack of experience, lack of depth, lack of talent). But most importantly, these people will also look at all three years of the coaching and see an 11-2 record during a transition year, using a philosophy that was not the normal philosophy. Looking at all of that evidence, I think it is fair to say that things are much more ambiguous than you make it out to be.
In the end, though, I think that those wanting Borges to go were ultimately correct because the one person with the best ability to judge all the evidence just let him go.
|01/09/2014 - 9:30pm||I don't begrudge you your||
I don't begrudge you your opinion. You have every right to feel whatever you want about this season. However, I don't know that it is as realistic (and can't be argued) as much as you might want to believe. Maybe think of it like this...
In your response you say:
I think it is fair to say that a comment like that focuses on half of the data: the half which supports a particular view. In other words, it sees the glass as half empty and thus was pessimistic about Coach Borges' abilities. Some people just see their team this way.
Other people look at the other half of the data, and see the glass as half full. Some people just see their team this way.
Oddly, these people seem to piss you off, even though, in a way, they are doing the same thing as you.
Personally, I think the data are very ambiguous with regard to Coach Borges. Maybe the better way to think of it is:
|01/09/2014 - 8:58pm||And baseball also works||
And baseball also works better because there are so many more "observations." Sample size is the issue. Even with random variance, it's easier to predict season outcomes than individual game outcomes.
Thus, advanced stats are useful in predicting the likelihood of your baseball team making the playoffs, but once the playoffs start, it's a crap shoot (too few games, and thus random chance has a strong pull).
Football seems like baseball playoffs. So few games.
And then consider the number of variables in any given play from scrimmage. You have 11 players on either side trying to execute their assignments, play call, weather, down and distance, etc.
|01/09/2014 - 5:41pm||I will predict that most||
I will predict that most people won't change on this board, not just SpaceCoyote.
Psychology shows that people who were happy before winning the lottery are happy after winning the lottery, and people who were unhappy before winning the lottery are unhappy after winning the lottery. Much of our reactions to our experiences come from our thoughts about our experiences. And our ways of thinking don't tend to change too much.
To apply that to MGoBlog, yes, it is likely that SpaceCoyote will still continue to look at the plays and continue to be reasoned and analytical in his understanding of the thinking behind them.
Likewise, others will continue to complain about the playcalling, even though they are happy to be rid of Coach Borges, because that is what they have always done. It will be hidden initially because there is going to be a regression to the mean effect that will make fans think that the new coach is better than the old coach. But I can't imagine that there won't be a Fire Nussmeier movement at some point in the near future (unless he leaves for a head coaching position before the inevitable randomness of wins and losses sees him with more losses than he should have).
|01/09/2014 - 1:29pm||Doesn't matter||
If Michigan wins, whatever he does will be fine.
If Michigan loses, whatever he does will be a problem.
|01/09/2014 - 1:22pm||Thank you Coach Borges.
Thank you Coach Borges.
Being the OC at Michigan is a thankless job, and I thought you did it with class and style. I can't imagine how knowing all that you know (football knowledge and experience, intimate understanding of your players and what goes on in practice, what it's like to coach during a game, awareness of the team's dynamics) you never once "lost it" on the media or fans.
|01/09/2014 - 1:15pm||I'd like to see Michigan have||
I'd like to see Michigan have a top 20 defense every year. If they can get there, then we will win a lot of games.
To me, it is as simple as that.
One way to think of it is: given how much people hated this year's offense, with a top 10 defense, what record might we have had this year?
|01/09/2014 - 12:52pm||I'm with you Mathlete.||
It's more about variance than it is about averages.
Offenses like Oregon have gaudy numbers (averages), but it will take a good amount of luck to have everything fall into place to get 13 games of excellence (because of high variance). Usually, you will get a bad game (or two).
Defense does seem to have much less variance, and thus you can rely on it more consistently. As a result, you should put more of your chips into defense if you want a consistent winner.
But I teach intro statistics, so variance is always an issue in my mind.
There's a lot of random variability going on in any football result that we like to attribute to our favorite scapegoat (OC, QB, headset-wearing, sitting in a booth, etc.). I think that's why most coaches come around to the execution issue. Improving execution improves reliability, reduces variance, and limits the effects of the random variables.
If you want a consistent winner, don't forget variance.
|01/08/2014 - 7:08pm||Agreed.||
I don't think Borges was the only reason for the poor play this year (it was a number of issues), but if the players perceived it that way, then he might have become toxic.
The new coordinator will likely look very good next year because just regression to the mean should result in what looks like "improvement."
I also hope there aren't a lot in transition costs as well, mostly with the receivers and Gardner and their route running.
|12/07/2013 - 2:44pm||Have to disagree.||
For my last job, I got noticed in a stack of 200 applicants because I had an undergraduate degree from Michigan in Psychology and English. Michigan's reputation is much better than Alabama's when it comes to academics.
|11/27/2013 - 12:13pm||Touché||
|11/26/2013 - 3:27pm||It's fickle if you're not||
It's fickle if you're not there on Saturday cheering loudly for Michigan because that is what would give the team the best chance to win. It will be disheartening for the team to see a sea of red, and it won't help with recruiting either.
You have abandoned the team. Yes, it's fickle.
Yes, it may also be sensible. It is painful to watch a team you love lose.
In fact, many people dial back their fandom if they can't handle the pain of your team losing.
This last part seems especially true for teams with winning traditions. The fans get so spoiled that they feel entitled to wins. Sometimes I love talking with fans of other teams because they have such a healthy fan attitude with their teams. They love it when they win, but they don't fall apart when they lose and throw fits.
You still see them at all the games cheering their teams on. Rain or shine. Win or lose.
|11/26/2013 - 3:15pm||I still think that if the||
I still think that if the tickets were free, you would still have a lot of OSU fans at the game. You can hear it in the comments on this site. People don't want to watch Michigan get pummeled by OSU.
I think the pricing is just a rationalization for the fair-weathered-ness of the fans.
Yes, Brian is right about the prices. Yes, Hoke is right about fickle fans.
I'd argue that they are two separate issues.