|03/28/2012 - 8:14am||Good read, but do we really||
Good read, but do we really have to call every single person who's name is Campbell 'soup?' I dunno, maybe it's just me.
|01/02/2012 - 7:16pm||So you're saying if you||
So you're saying if you qualify at Colorado State you qualify at Michigan? Huh?
Also, telling Peace he wants him at cornerback is NOT the same thing as what Dooley did, not at all. Dooley is worse for pulling this 1 month from signing day and being as vague as you possibly can with a recruit about their intentions, as opposed to Rodriguez who laid it out for Peace and let him make the choice. Not the same thing. That's not splitting hairs
As for Barnes, he slow played him. He didn't call him up and say "Hey bro, you might possibly maybe might should start possibly perhaps start looking around, cuz, uh we're not sure we want you." He stopped communicating, but never "pulled" his offer.
I think Dooley looks worse perhaps because of all the other negative publicity regarding transfers out of his program, but I can say that Dooley is a slimeball for the way he treats recruits and not say the same about Rodriguez.
|12/28/2011 - 6:22am||Shane won MVP at that||
Shane won MVP at that aforementioned camp.
|12/13/2011 - 11:42pm||I think this means the||
I think this means the coaches are set on taking a 3rd running back in this class. Glad to see they've turned the page so quickly on Dunn. The fact Perkins is being recruited as a RB is already an advantage over the other schools. If it doesn't work out there, he can always switch positions. This guy will fit nicely in the Big Ten.
|12/13/2011 - 11:37pm||He's being recruited as a RB.||
He's being recruited as a RB.
|12/02/2011 - 6:39pm||Dunn visiting....USC?||
This article talks about the old rivalry between Kiffin & Meyer and how it may start up again. It points out that USC recently offered Dunn and that "sources" say he'd be willing to listen and was...wait for it..."planning to visit?"
Big ? here is: WTF
|12/02/2011 - 3:53pm||I agree with you about that,||
I agree with you about that, as unfortunate as it is. Either way, letting agents roam campuses like sharks (even though they may do that already anyway) is probably not the answer. It just reinforces what the kid may be using the university for. I would hope that some of the guys who go D-1 would at least have some sort of realization of the benefit of doing their schoolwork and completing their degree. You're right though, many don't,
|12/02/2011 - 1:23pm||Point 1 never could, would,||
Point 1 never could, would, nor should happen. Sure, giving agents the opportunity to pay players wipes out a lot of NCAA wishwash, but "monitoring it closely for unintended consequences" would be futile if you ask me. The NCAA/universities have a hard enough time monitoring things already, now they have to monitor the entire landscape where some players are getting paid while their less talented counterparts do not? To me, that is asking for trouble.
Agents should never be allowed free reign to compete over the rights to represent student-athletes while they are still participating in college athletics. If you ask me, it's a major distraction and deterrent to what they kids are really (supposesed to be) there for: getting a degree.
MY SOLUTION: Each university hires one or two agents (or agencies) to represent their players in all sports . The university takes the $ (the $ that everyone says belongs to the players) and uses it to pay for this service. After the player has signed his first contract, he is then free to choose the agent of his choice.
Doing it this way eliminates the shady, underhandedness of the process and is more upfront with all those involved. Players don't have to worry about which agent to choose, the university has done the dirty work already. It would function much in the same way a university uses its connections to get graduates jobs in the real world. This one would be for its high profile athletes.
|12/02/2011 - 12:05pm||40-34; 58-43-6
The fact that
The fact that an Ohio fan would actually take the time to do this just adds to the sweetness of the victory. And, unfortunately for Ohio fans this rivalry is decided on the field, not in press conferences. Go blue
|11/30/2011 - 2:16pm||Yeah, that is a bonus. Why||
Yeah, that is a bonus. Why can't we keep the bowls but just add a playoff. It's irritating to read people arguing for either/or when both is the answer
|11/30/2011 - 2:14pm||How is Wisconsin the #5||
How is Wisconsin the #5 team
|11/30/2011 - 12:47pm||Not all coaches sub w/ 2 fouls||
I read a book by Mike Kryzyzewski (Leading w/ the Heart I think) where he goes into detail about what to do with players w/ two fouls in the first half. He says that yes, most coaches do it but that it's stupid to automatically bench a player as a result. His philosophy is (if I remember correctly) to actually coach the situation and make a decision based on who the player is, opponent, circumstances of the game, etc. He went on to say that defaulting to automatically benching someone w/ two fouls is lazy, and if he knows another coach does it, he will gameplan the first few minutes to see if he can get certain players out of the game.
|01/25/2011 - 12:50am||You might be right, in fact I||
You might be right, in fact I think you are. Either way Brown counts as a scholarship in the total #. 22 is probably more on target. The coaches are sure offering guys like we have a Ron of space though.
|01/25/2011 - 12:02am||For those STRESSING about #'s||
Relax. Let me explain.
Right now there are 65 scholarship players on the roster, which is where everyone is getting the #20 from. HOWEVER, this is only a baseline number for us to start with.
Mike Williams is almost certainly unwilling to return from his concussions to risk further brain damage practicing for a team he won't ever see the field for again.
Steve Watson is also unlikely to return. From what I understand, it's generally up to the player to decide if they want to return but not many guys usually do when a coaching change occurs. We don't have any confirmation with this guy, but chances are he won't be back.
Early enrollees don't count towards this years scholarship count. I present to you, Greg Brown, already on campus.
It's %100 that we have at least 21. About 95% that we have 22. And what, maybe 60-70% we have 23.
Also, Big Ten rules allow for teams to sign 3 over the space available provided they arrive at the 85 player limit by August and have documented thoroughly how they got there. (Got that info from the Steward Mandel article today on oversigning, no link sorry go check it out.)
So, if the staff knows of any guys who will be transferring they could technically push it up to 26 (that ain't happenin' though it is something interesting.)
So, with 23 spots open, 14 guys officially committed, and 5 more pretty much in the fold, that leaves us with maybe 4 spots for BELLOMY, BARNETT, FISHER, COOPER, and MCCLURE.
CONCLUSION: We have plenty of space for all of our needs people. RELAX
|01/04/2011 - 6:09am||The way Rosenberg put it||
The way Rosenberg put it regarding his source was interesting. He said the source didn't want to be named "because Rich Rodriguez is still the head coach." Even though it's not normal to name your sources, this seems like it may have come from the athletic department. If this came from an outsider, who gives a rip if Rich Rod's still the coach, but if the source is from within then you wouldn't want yourself or where you come from to be named. The source had "direct knowledge of his thinking." You would think Brandon has direct knowledge of this kind.
I think Brandon has received word from Jim regarding his status, and that this was an intentional leak to the media so there isn't a major letdown when Hoke or whomever shows up at the press conference and not Harbaugh. CONSPIRACY!
|01/04/2011 - 5:33am||They only have 12 starters||
They only have 12 starters coming back, but that's including Andrew Luck. It seems like the fates of those two might be intertwined.
|01/04/2011 - 4:54am||Now I think we have to keep||
Now I think we have to keep Rich Rod, unless we can get a guy like Meyer, Stoops, etc. I know I'm in the minority, but think about it.
1.) You give Rodriguez two years, I mean publically announce it that he will be back for 2011 & 2012 (of course barring total collapse next year). That would give him the stability to go out and hire a top notch DC, and also let him finish out Denard's career. We return 19 starters next year, and only lose 13-15 seniors the following season. No way we win less than 8 next year, and we could legitimately win 10.
2.) Best case scenario, the skies clear, it all works out and Rodriguez stays for another 10-15 years. Worst case scenario, Rodriguez hovers around the 7-9 win mark the next two seasons, the fanbase continues to be restless and he gets let go. In the meantime we'll all know by then if Brady Hoke is a legit candidate or not, and Jim Harbaugh would have scratched his NFL itch and could potentially make a return to college coaching his alma mater. Who knows, maybe even Meyer hasn't returned by then and would jump at the chance to take over a spread system.
I think it's too risky at this point to hire a guy like Hoke. I think we all have to admit that our best chance at having a big season next year is with Rodriguez at the helm.
|01/04/2011 - 4:45am||And why not? The NFC West is||
And why not? The NFC West is weak, and he could be potentially dominant in that division. There's also his old nemesis Pete Carrol with the Seahawks so there is definitely some intrigue there for him.
|01/04/2011 - 4:37am||thewolverine.com is also||
thewolverine.com is also reporting it. This sounds legit.
|07/12/2010 - 12:29pm||FYI||
The final will be at Maracana in Rio.
|07/12/2010 - 12:28pm||Final in Maracana||
I´m currently living in Rio, and there´s been a sign up saying in Portuguese "the future home of the final game for the 2014 World Cup." Final will be in Rio at Maracana. FYI, they recently closed it down for 2 years for renovations in preparation for the cup.
|05/24/2010 - 11:31am||Their rankings will be out||
Their rankings will be out June 1st. That´s next Tuesday. Don´t have a link but saw it on some mailbag they had.
|01/12/2010 - 9:08pm||This is good for a couple||
This is good for a couple reasons.
1.) Rivals #2G and 4-star Torrian Wilson´s final three was USF, Tennessee, and Michigan. Both USF and Tennessee are out coaches at this point so it looks promising. If CM gets the job at USF (unlikely at this point) that could complicate things but for now we´ve got the inside track.
2.) The USC recruits we´re into had their feathers ruffled enough to get us an in-home with Baxter and Parker was already leaning our way.
If we can close with Baxter, Parker, Wilson...
|11/22/2009 - 4:07am||YES, it's world cup year.||
YES, it's world cup year. That should help those boring summer months go by a little quicker. It's on to UConn!
|11/22/2009 - 4:05am||Thanks, really helpful.||
Thanks, really helpful. Looking forward to hearing how we did. Cullen decides on Tuesday, and here's hoping we can pick off Jefferson and a couple other defensive guys.
|11/07/2009 - 3:55pm||Those backs were already||
Those backs were already good, and so was Roundtree once he got a chance to play. RR's personnel decisions have been crap this year. All these late realizations that so and so is not doing his job, so in game 9 we put in the guy who should've been playing all year.
|11/01/2009 - 11:16pm||But aren't we talking about||
But aren't we talking about reality and not simply perception? We're digging into what kind of teams these guys actually were, because everyone has different perceptions based on the plethora of opinions on this thread.
|11/01/2009 - 11:13pm||Great response, my sentiments||
Great response, my sentiments exactly. We were a fraud in terms of not being like USC, Florida, Oklahoma, OSU, Miami of the early 2000's etc. But we were most definitely not in the bottom half of the big ten and there was never a question we would reach a bowl game.
|11/01/2009 - 11:01pm||I think when it comes to||
I think when it comes to mistakes in a single game, you can put that on the players. If it's a recurring theme on your team, that falls squarely on the coaches. IMHO you have to fault the player and the coach, with the coach taking responsibility. In the end it'll be the coaches head if the players don't execute, and like it or not that's just how it is.
|10/31/2009 - 7:26pm||Which brings us to another||
Which brings us to another point...when are we going to recruit actual LB's! I'm so tired of hearing about how we have this safety recruit...who's eventually going to end up at linebacker.
|10/31/2009 - 7:24pm||Got it. We're young. But||
Got it. We're young. But Pat White and Steve Slaton went 11-1 and beat Georgia in the sugar bowl their freshman year. Granted they had some established players around them. I think you might be right, but I think we'll find out for real next year. You can only be young for so long.
|10/31/2009 - 6:51pm||The Big East. Pat White.||
The Big East. Pat White. Steve Slaton.
|10/31/2009 - 6:49pm||Agreed. He needs AT LEAST a||
Agreed. He needs AT LEAST a third year, and after that the new AD will have to seriously evaluate where the program is headed. I'm not one for predictions, but with 5 scholarship players in the secondary this defense won't be getting much better. What, are freshman going to come in and save the day? With the 5-6 3-star guys Rich Rod is getting it doesn't look good.
|10/31/2009 - 6:45pm||We don't "just happen" to be||
We don't "just happen" to be the victims. We happen to be a team that fumbles a lot, can't run with anyone on D, don't have the coaching wherewithall to know that Carlos Brown is not our best goalline option, or that if you need 3 scores and one can be a field goal that you should kick the field goal to give your team a chance. We're not victims, we dug our own grave.
|10/31/2009 - 6:07pm||Thank you. He wants to do it||
Thank you. He wants to do it a certain way and is always late in realizing what should be done. If we planned on running it everytime, why not line up in a heavy package with no WR's instead of that crap.
|10/26/2009 - 3:15am||I'm with you Tom. We need to||
I'm with you Tom. We need to be willing to call it like it is, while still supporting the staff. I think we all want Rich Rodriguez to succeed for the sake of Michigan football. Our teams, while mostly young are littered with some very good veterans. I think the expectation of a football player, or any athlete for that matter, is that you don't beat yourself. In our three losses this season we haven't played our best football, and maybe except for the Penn State game we would have won if we had. I think that they're going to get it done, and these will just be bad memories in the future.
|10/25/2009 - 6:34pm||I also believe that we should||
I also believe that we should get the best players we can find, no matter where that is. But why shouldn't we get the 10 best players in the state when our competition is MSU, EMU, WMU, & CMU? Texas gets most of their recruits from Texas, and while it's a huge state with a LOT of good players, there's also 9 other universities in state not to mention everyone else trying to pillage their recruits.
Kids do go to other schools, and the fact that it's happening more now than in the past is the point. People in Ohio are probably lamenting Woodson and Turner going to Michigan and they should be. Those losses hurt. The point of the posts is to point out a recent trend in in-state recruiting. As the dominant football program in the state, and historically in the midwest, we should get who we want from our state. Period. That's not unrealistic as proven by our history in being able to do that. Am I wrong?
|10/25/2009 - 6:07pm||Yes it will, we really need||
Yes it will, we really need to get that guy.
|10/25/2009 - 5:59pm||I understand your point, but||
I understand your point, but you are also not taking into consideration intangible values such as playing for the team you grew up rooting for. Getting Donovan Warren is a great pick-up because he helps us, but if we lost out on him he would've gone to USC. If we lost out on Devin Gardner it would be a much different story. He would've gone to OSU, and was offered by MSU. Again, if he's on your sideline he's also not on the other one.
Dantonio is putting a recruiting class together this year that is comparable to Michigan's. Also, watch the end of the MSU-UM game this year. We were beat by instate recruits: Kirk Cousins, Glenn Winston, Larry Caper, Mark Dell, Keshawn Martin...
|10/25/2009 - 5:52pm||I think you're right, it's||
I think you're right, it's hard to know who we really "lost" and who we weren't really trying to get. I think the interesting things is the number of guys we were getting as opposed to the number of guys we're getting now.
|10/25/2009 - 4:52pm||Point taken, but they were a||
Point taken, but they were a year before him. And that still leaves us without a backup at the 3rd position. I understand what you're getting at, we just need more solid Linebackers.
|10/25/2009 - 4:47pm||Keep in mind this was done||
Keep in mind this was done using 20/20 hindsight. I'm not holding it against the coaches for not trying to sign him. but he put up 343 on us last year!!
|10/25/2009 - 4:42pm||I don't think they should||
I don't think they should just offer players "to have them" or that Gainer would have magically fixed the problem. We'll see how he turns out. However, he is an example of a bigger issue in that there is no one behind the guys who already struggle at LB. I'm sure they had a good reason to not offer, I trust Rich Rodriguez and his staff with that judgment. But the facts speak for themselves over the past few years, and so does our big ten record compared to MSU.
|10/25/2009 - 4:35pm||Read part II. The stats show||
Read part II. The stats show it was pretty even until Dantonio arrived.
|10/25/2009 - 4:32pm||I trust the coaches. Just||
I trust the coaches. Just pointing out the facts.
|10/25/2009 - 4:27pm||Understood, so then why do we||
Understood, so then why do we not have depth on defense again? I'm not saying these guys are big-time guys or that they will be, or that the coaches are doing a bad job. There's just no excuse for a lack of depth when we keep passing on these decent players. They're not that bad, or they wouldn't have gotten the rating they did.
|10/24/2009 - 8:04pm||Board police.||
|10/24/2009 - 8:02pm||Yeah, I don't think we were||
Yeah, I don't think we were good enough to win that game, but I definitely think it could've been closer.
|10/24/2009 - 8:00pm||No, I actually said we've||
No, I actually said we've been doing those things since he's arrived...
|10/24/2009 - 7:56pm||Molk is a huge loss, but he's||
Molk is a huge loss, but he's one guy out of 11. If stuff is breaking down, change your game plan. Throw more quick slants, use misdirection, and compensate for the loss. The team lost because the 11 who were on the field didn't play well, and one more guy wouldn't have changed much about that.