|10/19/2017 - 6:14pm||Upsets and numbers||
I don't get those who predict a win is impossible. Michigan has a very good record against PSU, does it not? And for some reason, it seems that some teams just have the numbers of other teams. And with all of the upsets - like Syracuse and Cal - shouldn't there be reason to be at least hopeful?
|06/22/2015 - 8:21pm||Stranded - streaming?||
Stuck in a hotel room in Springfield, MO with no FS1.
|06/05/2015 - 5:44pm||Ranking based on offers||
Chaning ranking based on offers makes the MOST sense to me. That is a recruiting service of non-professionals recognizing that the professionals want the recruit.
|01/30/2015 - 9:52pm||Tork or torque||
|01/30/2015 - 9:37pm||Amazing||
Post and comments. Just wanted to say this is why I love this blog.
|11/17/2014 - 5:15pm||Eloquently stated||
Brian, you have a knack for saying things in a very moving way. I find myself gravitating toward the human stories as often as the statistics. For some reason, this one really gets to me.
|11/12/2014 - 4:31pm||Why I support Hoke||
Did anyone see the ND game - what happens when a QB makes poor decisions repeatedly in a game against good opposition? ND has developed players, gone to an NC, whipped up on us, etc.
I love DG as the teammate, the competitor, the human being. But I think his decision-making has repeatedly crippled the offense. What would UM's record be if our offense mirrored our defense? 9-1? And it all starts with having a solid leader at the most important offensive position - the position that decides when and where to put the ball. The leader.
I support Hoke because I bet UM will be considerably better next year with a different QB running the offense, a couple of solid running backs, a better O-line, and an offense that mirrors the defense - all of which is not only probable but likely IMHO. And in two years, if a good QB becomes a very good one (and we have every reason to believe that Nuss can make that happen), then an experienced Michigan team will contend for a championship.
Hoke is not the problem - he relied on Borges and now relies on Nuss. Nuss is not the problem. He had little choice but to stick with DG and he simply could not get it done this year. Some writer recently wrote that the failure to develop a quarterback may doom Hoke. It may, but I'm not at all convinced that any other coach gets DG to make consistently good decisions.
|08/21/2014 - 4:50pm||Liked the sentiment||
Not a DB hater, but I like the sentiment about Hoke. He seems to be a great human being - to his players, the fans, the community, etc. He has assembled a very good team - all of whom seem to be very loyal to him. He and his team have recruited top tier atheletes at an astounding rate. We have every reason to get behind him.
|02/13/2014 - 1:57pm||Silly||
Women constitute half the population - or more, actually. We have separate locker rooms due to that fact. If the female population were equivalent to the gay population, I bet there would be many more co-ed locker rooms, and who cares? I have three daughters and would have no problem whatsoever were that to be the case. The reality is that there are only single locker rooms for professional sports teams and given that reality any notions of "discomfort" should be completely irrelevant to anything.
|02/13/2014 - 1:53pm||Yes!||
Completely agree and upvoted.
|02/13/2014 - 1:51pm||"Discomfort" is irrelevant to anything||
Westward, you and others apparently think that some amorphous notion of "discomfort" is relevant to anything having to do with Sam's hiring and employment. My god, the same amorphous arguments were made about women in the workplace and blacks, other minorities, etc., etc. A person's subjective discomfort has no place in a discussion about whether someone should be hired. Many are uncomfortable with straight men "looking at their junk" and it would be no different with gay men. Women in the military have no privacy in the field and in many places (e.g., Israel) there is no problem. Discomfort, whatever that means, does not equate to sexual harassment - which is prohibited by policy and law.
|02/07/2014 - 5:33pm||Great comparison||
Comparing OJ and Gibbons. Interesting. Comparing the amount of evidence we actually know about from a months long televised trial and a confidential internal proceeding. Hmm. I think I fee more comfortable expressing "beliefs" about the former rather than the latter. By all means, express your beliefs. The earth is flat, for instance. That was a solid belief for what a millennium? The point is we know next to nothing about the Gibbons case. That is what makes it so dangerous to attach labels.
|02/07/2014 - 5:28pm||Difference||
I would think there is a big difference between being expelled from a University and incarceration for many years. Please. Using the appropriate terminology actually matters. A lot.
|02/01/2014 - 1:42pm||Children's schools||
UNC - Chapel Hill is amazing and it is a great University. The BBall fanbase is second to none, too.
|01/31/2014 - 1:03am||Not the entire board||
Just OSU haters who do not understand anything about internal investigations, FERPA, etc. Why are some around here making the same mistake with regard to Hoke whom we have good reason to believe is an otherwise honorable guy. I don't get it.
|01/31/2014 - 12:55am||Irresponsible||
Your comment about expulsion "for rape" is irresponsible and revealing. He was expelled for violating a University policy that prohibits sexual harassment, sexual misconduct and retaliation. We don't know what part of the policy was implicated. And because you are convinced that Gibbons is a "rapist" (without any legal finding that that is the case) you apparently believe that all those with knowledge of his expulsion obviously have knowledge he is a "rapist" and should have publicly stated such. Which, of course, would have been per se defamatory unless demonstrably true. But knowledge of an accusation, an internal finding of a policy violation, an expulsion, and the nature of the policy violation are all different things that do not necessarily overlap. Hoke's choice of vague wording is not only defensible but required under the circumstances. I'm quite certain you would not be any happier had Hoke said "for personal reasons" or any other vague and perfectly defensible words.
|01/30/2014 - 6:47pm||Meyer raising alleged impropriety of the Michigan staff?||
It is certainly possible. But I am trying to envision how the conversation goes - and would be received. It is not as if OSU has squeeky clean record. And it is well documented that negative recruiting can boomerang. Hoke seems to be universally loved by players and recruits. I don't think you are giving enough credit to the McDowell family.
|01/29/2014 - 4:15pm||Jurisdiction||
I think you are missing the fundamental point relating to jurisdiction of various committees on campus and the confidentiality that goes with those bodies. Again, as a Higher Ed lawyer, I can state with certainty that internal investigatory bodies have strict rules regarding confidentiality that very often require those bodies not to inform others of the fact or status of pending investigations. Would such a committee notify faculty members who are teaching students of a pending investigation relating to such an investigation? Of course not. The same likely holds true of investigations relating to atheletes. Among other things, the reason why others are not advised of investigations is to prevent retaliation. The accused is also protected by rules against disseminating information. You would be amazed by how confidential these kinds of investigations can be. Once a decision is made, the decision is communicated to persons on a need to know basis. To assume Hoke or any of his staff knew anything material about the internal investigation prior to the decision is speculation.
|01/29/2014 - 3:54pm||My beef with Brian's post||
My beef with Brian's post has nothing to do with his not saying that rape is reprehensible. The moral depravity of rape was not his subject. My beef with the post, or the title, is that untruths abound. Do we really know that? Sure, this is a blog, a forum for opinions. But as the creator of this blog, I think Brian should be particularly circumspect before reaching conclusions about something as significant as being untruthful about a student athelete's status vis-a-vis an internal investigation of violations of the University's sexual misconduct policy.
|01/29/2014 - 1:39pm||I am a Higher Ed lawyer||
and I offer this thought. What WE know is actually very little. As I understand it, Gibbons was found by an internal University investigative body to have violated a University policy. That policy presumably prohibits both assault and retaliation. No one seems to be talking about the latter. Is it possible that there was inconclusive evidence of assault, but sufficient evidence of retaliation? Retaliatory action would presumably carry just as heavy a potential penalty. Is it possible that some retaliatory action happened long after the sexual interaction? Sexual assault is by definition criminal; retaliation is not necessarily criminal but it would most assuredly violate University policies.
I know as much and as little as everyone else. My questions are speculative - just like the vast majority of comments. We may never know the facts, the reasons for the delay, the reasons Hoke said what he did because of a variety of confidentiality requirements. But to brand Gibbons or Hoke as criminal seems to me to be irresponsible.
The same can be said about Hoke's conduct. We really know next to nothing about what he knew, when, and how. Branding him as a liar (someone who said something he knew to be untrue at the time he said it) also seems irresponsible given what I understand the facts to be.
It is clear, however, that there is an epidemic on university campuses of binge drinking and misconduct related to or arising from impairment. That is the larger issue. How do we protect students when students - male and female - continually make poor choices that change their lives forever? How do we, or can we, change culture, attitudes, and behaviors in a meaningful way?
|01/15/2014 - 9:23pm||GRIII||
Watching the '89 team last night made me think of this team's similarities. Very tough conference, other teams favored, but a Michigan team with great passion and leadership. GRIII seems to be the key. Ever since Mitch went down he seems to be on an absolute mission. Probably an unfair comparison but he reminds me of Rice - someone who can dominate any game when he puts his mind to it. I would not be at all surprised if they had a tough go in conference and then went on another run in the tourney.
|11/11/2013 - 1:45pm||Perspective||
I rarely post (obviously) but was very moved by your post. It sure puts things in perspective. I'm confident the entire MGo community is behind you and your wife. Games are games. Life is not. Best wishes times a thousand.
|11/07/2013 - 5:43pm||Really dumb, conspiratorial question||
There is still talk in St. Lou of Belichick stealing signs, cheating, etc. against the Rams. Poor excuse, I know.
Is there any possibility that opposing teams, especially in their stadiums, get our offensive plays at the same time our offense does?
OK, pathetic question. Sorry.
|11/06/2013 - 7:03pm||Matchups||
It seems like Mattison is most concerned by our secondary. MSU had some big, fast, athletic wideouts - or so it seemed. How does our secondary matchup against the Nebraska receiving corps?
|01/13/2011 - 8:39pm||Dee is terrific, but||
I'd love to have Dee but he has seemed so conflicted for so long. I long for crazed, committed, passionate players who love Michigan. I know, Dee's just a kid, etc. But I really think kids who are single minded are better for programs. No questioning themselves or what needs to be done when doing the hard work, practicing long hours, or in the huddle. No proof, of course, just a hunch.
|01/13/2011 - 8:33pm||Great news - and thanks Justice!||
This is very good for the program. Kids love Coach Jackson and he is a genuinely good guy. He will help stabilize recruiting. I also appreciate Justice's frequent support for the team and his steadfast committment. Looking forward to seeing him compete for UM.
|01/13/2011 - 12:04am||What do you mean, we should jump off?||
I don't understand. We should not "jump on the bandwagon" because of Hoke's record at . . .SDSU, that traditional football powerhouse? Come on, please. He has done really well at really bad places. How do you think UM would have done this year against TCU and Mizzou with our defensive situation. And as Coach said, "this is Michigan for God's sake."
|01/12/2011 - 11:58pm||Feel much the same||
Wrote a few days about the same feeling. Read alot and don't post alot. But the negativity can be really bad around here. My wife actually noticed and commented on it. Life is short. I'm amazed at how many people are so purely negative and willing to trash. I think Brian must be simply exhausted at this point. But he needs to get alot more positive about this stuff. I mean, this is college sports, not life and death. Let's have some fun, right? Brian, please lead us to a happier place with inspiring, supportive stuff, not the nearly constant downer stuff.
|01/12/2011 - 11:01pm||Have to love to inspire||
Disagree totally with this. Don't think Bo loved Michigan. You can't inspire unless you are passionate.
|01/12/2011 - 10:57pm||Totally agree||
It is easy to say "he's our coach so let's support him." But I genuinely thought Coach Hoke was terrific during the press conference. You can see passion, sincerity and love for all things Michigan. He killed it. I don't think it is fair to bash Brandon by contrast. Brandon is sleep deprived and justifiably sick of the media nonesense. I think Brandon was fired up by Coach and thought this is the time to send the message that this is Michigan. We run things, not the Detroit press.
|01/11/2011 - 1:19am||Miles is the next coach and let´s support him||
Don, it became clear to me as all of this was playing out that we should have seen this coming sooner. I think Miles has been the guy from day one. Probably planned since December or earlier. The way DB has done his ¨succession planning¨ it really makes sense to me that this has been lined up for a long time. The fact that DB and LM know each other really, really well tells me that DB did not just happen to call LM this week. This has been packaged for a long time. The rest has been a play out required to save face of good folks like RR, JH, BH, Fitz, etc. Higher ed and corporate types often conduct ¨searches¨when the winning candidate was selected in a board room or clubhouse months before. I am not being conspiratorial, and I´m not being critical of DB. I just think this is the way things are done. I simply refuse to believe that a corporate warrior like DB would let the single most important job of his tenure get started on January 1, 2011. This was ready to go, with a timeline planned out, weeks if not months before. Now the press would never approve of that, and various consituencies (like the pro RR faction) would never abide this kind of thing. So that is why a ¨search¨has been conducted.
|01/11/2011 - 1:09am||Thanks for this clipping||
I wasn't aware of this article, but this is exactly what I was referring to - succession planning. But in this case, the candidate chosen has so much history that it only seems logical to me that this has been orchestrated for some time. I saw the comment about Fitzgerald and Pinkel, which does raise the question about whether DB was really conducting a "search." But it is very common to conduct "searches" in the corporate and higher ed world when the person to be selected is a fete accompli (sp?). In order for DB's "search" to be plausible, it would make sense that there be candidates. Why have a search: to preserve the illusion for RR´s sake (he could save face with the team and the outside world until the bowl game), to preserve the illusion for JH´s sake (so that JH could play the bowl game and then JH could make his own choice and not get rejected by UM), to preserve the illusion for the outside world, and ultimately to save face for DB whose credibility is on the line.
|01/10/2011 - 7:42pm||I understand your frustration but||
I really do understand your frustration - the scenario could seem like a screw up. But think about it. Do you honestly think that DB, a creature of the corporate world, has not been thinking of contingency plans for months and months with the single most important corporate decision he has to make? He has undoubtedly been considering his options since he took over - during practice-gate, after losses to B10 rivals, etc. I am absolutely sure he had a very short list of candidates long ago. I am actually also convinced he decided to hire Miles long ago. What we cannot be sure of is whether he told Miles that long ago (assuming I'm right, which is, admittedly, a big assumption).
But to me, all of the "DB is a screw up" crowd really is ignoring the basic reality of who DB is, what he knew his number 1 job has always been, and how he had to have been gameplanning this long ago. Again, he may have had bumps in the road, but to me this is really the only thing that makes sense.
Finally, if I were a betting man, I think that Miles has known he was going to get hired long ago, but he will take that to his grave. I mean my God, these guys played football together. This is like the mafia. The outside world will never, ever be inside.
|01/10/2011 - 7:16pm||I think I have it figured out||
The only thing that makes sense is the following: Brandon has known that RR was going to go for some time - back to December at the latest. But he could not approach JH or LM until after bowls. He also did all the due diligence and determined that all of the constituencies and considerations supported a LM hire more than a JH hire. He also cannot afford to embarrass JH so he prepared a response at the RR presser to say JH to the pros, because he had already planned to go with LM. BH was never really in the picture except as a backup. But in order to (1) treat RR with dignity; (2) allow the bowl games to get played; (3) allow JH to save face (and permit a possible future hire), and (4) to get LM hired, he had to let these things unfold this way.
I am an employment lawyer. This does not qualify me in any particular way, except to say that I have been involved in executive hiring before and it is rare indeed that these kind of moves are not choreagraphed in advance. I think Mr. Brandon's years in the corporate world have served him well. This may have been set up months ago this way. I would be highly surprised if there is not a timeline somewhere on DB's lawyer's computer with this kind of thing put together in great detail. There may have been surprises along the way, but I'd put money on this. Admittedly, a small amount.
|01/09/2011 - 10:00pm||And let's not forget about media witch hunts||
I agree with your thoughts completely. And what really disturbs me is the numerous posts by anti-Miles people who base their opinions solely on a media report relating to an athelete who claims he wasn't treated fairly by a coach and who transfered. That athelete was then the focal point of a media dust up about a practice that is rampant in the conference. Does that sound even slightly familiar to anyone? Didn't we just live through that experience - chapter and verse - with the practice time and Freep reporting. Has it occurred to folks that there is another side to it? I may be wrong here, but I am guessing that alot of the RR supporters are anti-Miles and ironically base their judgments on the same kind of incomplete information that contributed to Coach Rodriguez's unfortunate downfall. Please, please. Let's not do this again. And I am really surprised that Brian, who launched the Jihad for goodness sakes, seems to have fallen into this trap.
|01/08/2011 - 10:22am||Didn't know that||
I'm just a lawyer. And I appreciate the information. I think the OP's connotation was more negative than suggesting that Mr. Brandon was a member of the Wolverine family, Thanks, though.
|01/08/2011 - 9:26am||The negativity abounds||
So, here we are again, responding to a post where a "fan" calls our AD a rodent lbecause he terminated a nice man who unfortunately failed to produce enough wins to survive at Maryland let alone Michigan. More head bashing of our leadership over timing of the move when numerous reasons supported a post-bowl game decision (e.g., he said he was going to do that - ergo, truthfullness; buyout - ergo, fiscal responsibility; and premiere coach availability - ergo, the top targets were playing bowl games).
I am dedicated with my measly few points to reject the incessant bashing that goes on here. I will support our Athletic Director. Have you considered how nice that would have been three years ago when Mr. Martin hired a new coach? Are we really that foolish as a fan base to eat our own young over, and over, and over until no one we'd care to invite is willing to join our merry little band of self important critics?
|01/07/2011 - 9:27pm||Hoke v. Miles||
OK. Hoke - basically three or four winning seasons in the MAC and . . . what is the conference that SDSU is in? Miles - numerous winning seasons - even 10 plus win seasons - in the SEC. A national championship. Really? Do you want to cheer as Michigan beats OSU? Do you want the thrill of crushing MSU every year?
|01/07/2011 - 9:24pm||More extreme naivete||
Come on. Miles coaches in the SEC, the most competitive conference in the country and he wins. That conference permitted oversigning. Want to compete with Tressel? Want to beat Dantonio? Really? You sure?
|01/07/2011 - 9:18pm||Naivete||
Volumes of slime is naive and an overstatement. We as fans insist on winning records, B10 Championships and occasional national championships. Then when we find out how the sausage is made we say "oh no, not us." I'm sorry, but this is so naive. If you want a winning program, hire a winner. Les Miles is a winner. Please understand, I am not condoning breaking rules, but oversigning in the SEC is not breaking the rules. Change the rules (they are). Blame the SEC, not Miles. He has just done what he was supposed to do, and what we crave. He has won buckets of games.
|01/07/2011 - 4:54pm||Miles in the SEC v. Miles in the B10||
Assume Miles signs 85 per year in the SEC and goes 6 and 6. He is not even in this conversation. I am NOT condoning oversigning. I am bemoaning the SEC's and NCAA's rules. And I don't blame Miles by playing by the SEC's rules in the SEC. Miles should not be the target of derision here.
|01/07/2011 - 12:20pm||Miles to UM/Pelini to LSU rumor||
This was reported on some Notre Dame boards two days ago FWIW. The alleged source was also Pelinis agent. To me, this sounds like the very typical internet rumor - like the Tiger flight to Phoenix for emergency dental surgery, etc. that supposedly came from someone connected with Tiger's agent.
|01/06/2011 - 9:13pm||Not helpful||
I realize this is a blog where opinions flow freely, often with very little grounding in fact, but really? I just don't like X? He may well be our next coach. Please help us all by posting something that informs or enlightens rather than just expresses a baseless opinion. There were plenty of "I don't like RR" posts in media when he came and I really don't want to live through that again.
|01/06/2011 - 1:54pm||Negativity about possible coaches||
I have followed this blog for a long time. I very rarely write (obviously). This place has become so negative, and is filled with so many self proclaimed experts that I really wonder what has come of Michigan fans. Unfortunately, I attribute a fair amount of this to Brian. Hoke and Miles are obviously legitimate coaching prospects with strengths and weaknesses. Yet he has virtually written them off. Brandon had a hugely difficult task in dealing with Coach Rodriguez, yet Brian says he has botched it into oblivion. It is so thoroughly negative and in my opinion unbalanced and unfair.
In reality, we know only so much about any of the candidates. We also know very, very little about what Dave Brandon's reasons for waiting were (possibilities include Harbaugh and Miles asked him to, Rodriguez was thought to be entitled to put his team on the field for the bowl game, etc.).
If we are fans, why not talk about candidates we would like to see considered, and identify their strengths rather than defame or disparage potential coaches - who, by the way, may very well end up here, have to recruit student atheletes and have to unite the fan base?
|12/21/2009 - 10:49pm||IanO||
Two things. Ian is a great name. And thanks for the Iowa info - confirms my suspicions. Unfortunately, it worries me even more about our scheme and/or coaching. I want our defense to be as well coached and disciplined as Iowa's. There is no reason it can't be next year. No more excuses. I think a better defense this year and we are clearly bowl bound, even with turnovers. Thanks again.
|12/21/2009 - 10:42pm||To an Azurite||
I'd give you points
Furman's stars are mercurial.
Run like a warrior.
|12/19/2009 - 6:04pm||The Conference||
Let others have numbers. We are simply "The Conference."
|12/19/2009 - 5:52pm||An interesting coaching challenge||
Most of us apparently think that Denard is so physically gifted that we should have him on the field as much as possible. But DR apparently envisions himself as a QB. If RR and the staff can convince Denard to take a chance on a position change at some point, that could be really exciting - for Denard and the team. But it wont happen unless and until there is are two viable and healthy QBs.
Does anyone know of any other programs that have turned QBs into running backs, or slots as sophomores? Was Percy Harvin a QB before he went all world at Florida? I remember Bert Emmanuel became a WR in the pros, but I think he played QB throughout his time at Rice.
|12/19/2009 - 5:39pm||Has anyone done this with Iowa?||
This is a nice analysis of a team whose defense we covet. I was wondering if anyone has considered doing this same kind of thing for Iowa - a team that seamingly always is lower in the recruiting rankings, but is well coached and has been quite a bit better, if I am not mistaken, on the defensive side of the ball. I would be very interested to see how this shakes out.
|12/19/2009 - 12:54pm||Dusting in the Lou||
We'll be brushing off the greens and playing G tomorrow in St. Lou. Or at least a couple of us nuts will be.