Member for

10 years 1 month

Recent Comments

Date Title Body
03/11/2016 - 12:05pm Go Blue

Wreck the program.

03/11/2016 - 11:50am Where to watch this

on the computer? Is ESPN or BTN streaming this? 

04/10/2015 - 12:38pm So they are losing





Anyone else? Hayes?  That's basically the entire starting lineup.

02/01/2015 - 1:04pm thanks!


02/01/2015 - 12:59pm running adblock and noscript

but screen is blank. hmmm

02/01/2015 - 12:57pm No antenna that I know of

Unless they are built into TVs or something?  I'm totally ignorant of these things

02/01/2015 - 12:49pm Emergency! any streams?

Snow has knocked out cable....

12/19/2014 - 1:25pm Stock options?

In the stock of....what?

I'd like to purchase 250 shares of the University of Arizona, please.

12/04/2014 - 12:50pm ROFL


12/02/2014 - 2:41pm I don't think I've ever

read someone on here say he was perfect. In fact, it's practically an unwritten rule that you must first acknowledge everything he did wrong while he was here before giving him any sort of praise or even wishing him well.

12/02/2014 - 2:27pm Amount of

salt in this thread (and, really, all RR threads) is hilarious. 


12/02/2014 - 2:23pm No to UF

as they already ruled him out.

I wonder if any of the bigger schools will take a swing at him this year?  Given his track record and what he's done at Zona in a few years, I would think most programs would now view his time at Michigan as an aberration. 

Since everyone is calling shots these days I'll call mine - Les Miles to Michigan, then RichRod to LSU.  LSU fans want offense, after all.

12/02/2014 - 11:21am I want to be an agent

Sit around and chill for 360 days a year, float a thinly-sourced rumor about your client being considered for a job, day or 2 of negotiations for a new contract with the lawyers doing the heavy lifting, pass Go and collect 10%.

12/02/2014 - 11:12am WELP


12/01/2014 - 2:30pm Strongly disagree

You only keep Hoke if we cannot get anyone better than Hoke.  Since there are approximately 231,043 better candidates out there, I think we need to pull the trigger. Hoke more than had his opportunity and we know for a fact that he is not a good coach.  The decent candidates will almost always need to be pried from an existing program and there will always be competition for decent prospects - no point in waiting until next year.  If we can't do it this year we can't do it next year.

The one thing Hoke did was recruit players with high star ratings.  If we can't get the obvious top choices then just hire anyone with a history of developing players and getting the most of his available talent.  Our current staff clearly is no good in this department and we have plenty of data to evaluate.

11/26/2014 - 2:06pm Yeah (minus the milk toast, weird)

It doesn't get brought up that often, but the BIG has been complete garbage 2011-forward, while it was good to great prior to 2011.  Weren't there like 3 BIG teams at 11 wins in 2009 and in the top ten or something like that?  Hard to imagine looking at today's BIG. 

My personal theory is that DB knew 2011 was setting up to be a monster year for whoever the HC was, so he wanted to install a guy and make himself look like a genius (which he did).  DB knew if he kept RR on for 2011 he would have done pretty well (possibly earning an extension/buying a few more years) and then DB never would have had the opportunity to satisy his giant ego by installing a HC.

11/25/2014 - 10:27am Love the subtle jabs

at the previous coaching staff:

"We win our first year? How’d that happen? Man. I dunno. Something right happened. Now, was it loaded that first year? What, we have two guys drafted? That wasn’t a mirage. That was Brady Hoke who did that. I mean, let’s be really, really honest. That was him who did that."

The mental gymnastics it takes to attribute 2011 solely to Hoke and to completely discount everything since then is completely hilarious.

11/24/2014 - 3:55pm I don't see

what Maritime Law has to do with all this.

11/21/2014 - 10:30am 2 of my favorite players

in this clip.  He's pointing out his potential blocking assignments though, not the Mike.

11/21/2014 - 10:27am The offense is generating

90-95% open looks for our best players. That's all you can ask. Sometimes, they all go in (see first half of Bucknell game).  Other times, nothing goes in (see first half of Detroit game).

It's strange how people on this blog of all places still cannot grasp how it's a high variance game. Everything can fall against a very good team and they can lose to a crap team (Charlotte last year) while still having an amazing season.

We will see growth in our players throughout the year and we will soon be hoping Walton and Irvin do not declare early to join Caris in the draft.

11/03/2014 - 3:09pm If I was AD for a day

I would

  • retire numbers 1, 2 and 21
  • re-retire the legends numbers
  • stop the legends patches
  • ban any and all future number retirements

I am just so sick of all the number discussions and changing.  The "living up to" numbers and "earning" a number is just stupid IMO.  I don't even care if it provides some with some nebulous motivation.  It's become a distraction and hurts more than it helps.  It's time to honor the past through number retirements, limit retirements to avoid not having enough numbers, and have a clean break moving forward so we can embrace the future with a new coach and hopefully a renewed resolve to not be stuck in the past.

10/28/2014 - 2:16pm I've never regretted

an email I've sent in a professional capacity and I suspect most of us on this blog who have retained a job where we send a bunch of emails every day feel the same way.  I've never even thought about sending an email approaching the level of a DB email and I'm 100% positive I would be fired immediately if I sent one.

Why are people still holding him to the same standard as a blogger?  He is a leader of a gigantic enterprise and "speaking" with people that potentially pay $1000s/year to his enterprise.  His emails read like Youtube comments.

10/28/2014 - 2:09pm Likely not enough for Cause

I forget his actual contract language but most only provide for Cause if it's a felony or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude.  I'm not sure if this is an MDM, but even so, there would be an argument over whether moral turpitude is involved.

As I've noted in these threads before, Cause terminations are exceedingly rare, even when a ton of money is involved and the facts are heavily in favor of Cause.  95% of the time a new severance agreement is negotiated with lower severance and a bunch of other provisions to protect the parties.

10/23/2014 - 2:42pm Juicy News

the taste

the taste

the taste

is gonna mooooooooove ya

10/23/2014 - 11:57am Didn't Hoke

explicitly say that he was cleared to play? I know he said that for the PSU game and it turned out to be...not true...but after the game didn't he again say he was definitely good to go in the future?

10/21/2014 - 4:31pm You are unhinged

Seek help.

10/21/2014 - 4:16pm Probably best

to simply delete all the comments in this post and prevent any further comments.  Not the most solid decision to allow comments on a topic like this one.

10/21/2014 - 3:39pm Pretty much exhibit A

as to why politics are banned on this blog generally.

The mouthbreathers simply cannot help themselves.

10/17/2014 - 12:52pm It's a near certainty

that you are on the payroll under DB or somehow have some other financial interest in having DB/Hoke stick around.  Are you in an office pool or something?  I can't come up with any other explanation.

10/08/2014 - 5:32pm Translated

"I'm telling Nuss not to run the QB much."  Handcuffs.

10/02/2014 - 12:24pm What?

Just because you accidentally came to the right conclusion doesn't mean you were right.

You said there's no argument for Cause but there is under several theories.  A rather strong one.  Thus, you are wrong.  As I've noted, this argument can/should be used as leverage to offer a lower severance package if they don't pursue Cause.  It's not just an academic argument.  If there was no basis for Cause as you've argued, then DB would demand and likely receive 100% of his severance due under the original agreement.

The fact that companies very rarely pursue even extremely strong Cause claims does not matter in your overall point.  I've had clients refuse to pursue a 95%+ Cause claim because they didn't want to deal with the headache/bad publicity.  And these clients could have saved 7-8 figures in severance payouts.  A lot more than money goes into these decisions.

10/02/2014 - 11:17am Yes

As rare as it is for a company to actually pursue a Cause termination, it's equally rare to simply pay out severance per the terms of the employment agreement.  There's almost always a separate severance agreement.  There's a bunch of reasons - the company might want to add in restrictive covenants, the parties want to provide for a "resignation" and the original agreement otherwise would not provide severance upon quitting, they want to provide for a transition or "consulting" period to transition to the new executive, or they want to play around with the severance numbers (usually to reduce it).

As with any negotiation, it's all about leverage.  M can claim some decent leverage if they want by pointing to the Cause definition and it's up to DB's lawyers how they want to respond - some call the bluff and drag things out, but most just settle on a 50 - 75% payout and call it a day.

10/02/2014 - 10:44am Wrong

M definitely has a decent Cause argument based on all the negative publicity which resulted from substandard medical evaluation procedures (see the Pres's comments).  It could also be argued under a material failure/gross negligence in performing duties prong.

However, as I've stated elsewhere, there's about a 2% chance they actually pursue Cause.  It's exceedingly rare, even in extremely cut and dry situations. 

10/02/2014 - 10:39am In practice,

these things go as fast as the parties want it to go.  I've been involved in negotiations/drafting of severance agreements that take mere hours (parties want to time the announcement, there's a transaction happening or otherwise they just want to GTFO) and negotiations that have taken upwards of 2 years.  I'd say the average is about 4 days to a week for top executives.

For something relatively high profile as this where time is of the essence for several reasons, once the decision is made things will likely happen quickly.  Like a day or 2, tops.  In the extremely unlikely event that M wants to push for a Cause firing then that would happen instantly and he would be out the second they deliver the good news.  The arbitration/negotiations or whatever could drag on for months/years but it will not affect the new AD search.

09/30/2014 - 3:15pm No surprise

that most are just using this as an excuse to tee off on Congress/the media.

Michigan is just being used to start/continue the national conversation on concussions, nothing more.  It's a hot topic, deservedly so.  We aren't on the national news 48x a day because they want to bring down Michigan specifically - it's to push for change in the NCAA concussion policy (which apparently doesn't actually exist).  The end result should be a safer sport.  I'm all for it.

09/30/2014 - 2:01pm note that

its willful action/inaction.  As in, the president tells you to do some important thing (lawfully) and DB just refuses or does the opposite.  This probably isn't the case here.  Gross negligence on the other hand...

09/30/2014 - 1:43pm I draft these agreements for a living

As others have said, have to look at the contract definition.

Almost all definitions have commission of a felony, crime involving dishonesty, etc.  Also, most have gross negligence or willful action/inaction in performance of duties, material breach of the employment agreement, drug abuse and violation of restrictive covenants (e.g., confidentiality, non-competition etc.).

Unless he got a REALLY favorable contract, Cause could definitely be argued under a gross negligence-type prong.  In reality, this almost never happens because people don't want to fight these out.  90% chance they negotiate a private separation agreement for 1/2 to 3/4 of what he's "entitled to" under the severance clause.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that actions/inactions bringing material harm to the organization's reputation is another pretty common Cause trigger.  DB/Hoke wouldn't look so good under that one.

09/30/2014 - 12:53pm !

Wow, that's damning.  It just goes to show that it's nearly impossible to have everyone on the same page when you construct a ton of unbelievable lies.  Especially when one of the key pieces has a room temperature IQ.

"Wait, am I supposed to have not talked to Shane and Dave?  Eh, screw it *cracks open a Busch*"

09/28/2014 - 11:48pm Well

Success of entering endzone during entire game: 60%

09/26/2014 - 1:00am Had to laugh

at the part where he claims 2015 is our best chance to win the BIG with Hoke.  Are we talking like a 2% to 2.3% jump?

09/12/2014 - 10:17am I like

how he drinks tiny waters

09/05/2014 - 12:28pm No, disagreed with the play call there

I think AZ should have gone for it on the 4th and inches and put the game away.  They were getting positive yards running all day even as their QB had a pretty terrible game and couldn't hit a receiver.  I also hated the 3rd and inches sneak - just run the read option.  I just really hate sneaks.

09/05/2014 - 10:37am I liked the call

in that situation.  There was little time left, no TOs and the QB had not thrown anything longer than a 5 yard out to the sideline all game (throwing up the middle isn't an option).  I'm not punting due to risk of bad snap or block.  I'm not kicking a FG bc going up 6 isn't worth the risk of block or missing and giving great field position.

So, I'm going for it.  I'm not throwing to the sideline due to risk of pick 6.  I might be persuaded to run a play action short throw over the middle but only if it's WIDE OPEN, or else have the QB run it.  In reality I'd probably have run it like AZ did, but maybe something slower developing like a misdirection play or a QB sweep to eat a few more seconds.

08/26/2014 - 5:26pm I give up

I actually just sort of feel sorry for the guy at this point.

08/24/2014 - 2:31pm what is this

i don't even

08/13/2014 - 1:31pm tough

physicalness tough physical toughicality

07/24/2014 - 4:27pm All weight change is good, but

lack of weight change is great!  Always great to see all these players drop all the bad weight and put on the exact same weight in muscle. More STRONGER but MAINTAIN QUICKNESS moar.

06/24/2014 - 1:23pm anyone else's

Univision feed cut out?

06/18/2014 - 4:24pm a thousand times this

I think it's a city thing.  I'd say maybe, MAYBE 1 in 20 cyclists obey traffic signals/stop signs.  The rest blow right through stop signs and red lights then scream at cars/ pedestrians for being in the way.  HATE

I'm all for sharing the road.  However, you then must obey the rules of the road.  This means they should be subject to the same tickets/fines that come along with "driving" like a goddamn idiot.

05/20/2014 - 12:39pm What does it take

to earn this guy a ban?

I like when other team's fans come here and play nice.  This guy is gloating about stealing a commit and it's definitely not the first time he's trolled the board.