that's fair. my initial comment was made after a plain reading of OP's OP, with zero background information about the author. I can see how, if one knew from past experience that OP was trolling, the initial post in this thread could be read as trolling.
Reading it objectively and with zero context, it didn't seem trollish to me, hence me calling people negging him 'soft like the 11W crowd'. Now that some of you have taken the time (which i appreciate) to briefly inform me as to OP's background here, I better understand the reaction to his post. I think negging me for not thinking his post came off trollish is a different kind of soft, but whatever. message boarders are gonna message board.
i'll still apologize, and perhaps some of the down-voters can rescind their negs.
negging the OP? man, some of you seem as soft as the 11W crowd.
what's wrong with asking whether or not the pace of securing commits in the current recruiting class is worrisome to anyone? The tone of the question reads rather neutral to me, and not troll-ish. It's not an unreasonable question.
Am I worried? not at the moment. the playoff/championship, and uncertainty thereafter, followed by the transition, put us behind what I think most would expect to be the usual 'schedule' here. If we get to mid-season and it looks like the staff is still struggling to get commitments from the targets on their board, I'll start to worry. but for now? nah.
EDIT:
**** After having it explained to me that the OP has a history of trolling around here, I understand how/why some of you reacted to his post the way you did. I had no such knowledge of OP's MGoBlog history, thus my plain reading/interpretation of his post. Knowing now what I did not know then, I apologize to everyone for calling OP's critics 'soft like the 11W crowd'. I should (and will) do a little research next time before critiquing a post/poster's critics. Again, my apologies. GO BLUE. ****
i'm in agreement with this. If Warren Davis compares well to Cade, our floor this year is higher than I think many of us might have expected. I also think our ground game is going to be good enough that it's going to take a lot of pressure off of the QB, whomever it ends up being.
and i'll be honest, i wouldn't be disappointed if Moore and Campbell decide to put together an offense that looks kind of like the '14 and '15 "bowling ball covered in razor blades" Buckeyes.
while i like this comment, it's important to remember the timeline here - that the NoA in this case was already in M's hands when the bulk of the defensive staff took promotions into the NFL. They cooperated (except for one, according to the NCAA) while still employed at M, as we would/should expect.
that said, i'm wondering what, if anything, beyond the "i don't recall who paid for lunch" bit, the NCAA is referring to when they accuse harbaugh of not cooperating.
reading the text in that one paragraph, i'm not surprised by Mars' social media post saying Harbaugh is pissed that M effectively threw him under the bus. but i also think that if that's what M did, they did it because they thought it was in the best interest of the program, at the expense of a guy who's no longer in the program. ::shrug::
to the contrary, the couple of buckeyes i've discussed this with briefly think it confirms every negative thing they ever said about the program under Harbaugh.
it's absurd. but at a certain point we have to realize that there will always be stupid people who hold stupid opinions for stupid reasons...or even otherwise smart people who hold stupid opinions for stupid reasons. And there's nothing we can do about that (except maybe point and laugh).
In my decidedly non-expert opinion, yes. i'll go so far as to say that if he had near the volume in passing stats that the other top QB's had, he'd be in serious discussion for #1 overall. his skill-set and physical abilities, his decision-making, and his attitude and overall 'moxie' are all top-shelf. That he played for a team whose philosophy was more 'Bully Ball' than 'Air Raid' doesn't make him a less valuable or viable future pro.
I have no idea how much truth there may be to the rumor that that's what he was doing, but from my understanding, the FBI involvement had more to do with the fact that AAPD doesn't have terribly abundant or sophisticated resources with which to investigate computer crimes...but the FBI does, and they have a field office 3 blocks away from AAPD HQ.
so the AAPD asking the FBI for help on this case had more to do with who was better equipped to investigate them than it did anything else.
I think it's a combination of B and C - the bylaw prohibiting in-person scouting specifically prohibits that action being undertaken by coaching staff and program employees. Meanwhile, a 2013 revision to the bylaw specifically greenlights 3rd party scouting, and lists the ubiquitous presence of public domain video sources as one reason for doing so.
In that light, CS sending randoms to games with a request to film game/sideline action does NOT violate the bylaw, unless the NCAA decides to say that because the video CS solicited was not in the public domain before he obtained it, that it somehow constitutes a violation.
That said, 3rd party scouting includes professional scouting services, some of whom have semi-customized services for their clients (teams that pay for footage). Given that discussion of scouting, scouts, and the definition of such is otherwise absent from the bylaws, there appears to be no official approval/validation/accreditation process for "scouts" working in the NCAA sphere.
So, i don't think it's a 'loophole' so much as i think he just took a plain reading of the bylaw and said "I can't go get film, but I can send friends/family/neighbors/fans to games and ask them to send me film."
If that's the interpretation the NCAA ends up going with, there are going to be a lot of angry people in E.Lansing and Columbus. And i will chuckle softly to myself.
That there's been no mention of Hart being linked to any other football-related job is what leads me to believe that whatever the issue was that caused him to leave the program is a threat to his coaching career, not just his tenure/relationship with Michigan.
As for Partridge, he violated a very specific directive from his boss about discussing the investigation, while the entire program was under the microscopes of the NCAA, the B1G, and the national sports media. Regardless of how inconsequential his actual actions (or what we know of them) seem, in the surrounding context, the fact that he violated the directive seems to justify his termination, imo.
I don't doubt that you read this somewhere...but if I'm understanding you correctly, I don't see how it's a sensible way for Weiss to go about doing that. A sensible person doesn't engage in computer crimes to find out whether an NCAA violation was committed or not.
Ask the player you think did the tampering, and/or ask the player you believe was tampered with. If you can't get any solid information from either source, forget about it and move on. The job he had in front of him was far too important to jeopardize by worrying about potential tampering, imo. hopefully we find out with certainty one day.
some of our friends to the south are convinced it had something to do with gambling/fixing games, which just doesn't seem supported by any known facts at the moment. but they believe a lot of things about M that aren't currently supported by facts. ::shrug::
1.What "cyber crime" did OC Matt Weiss commit that prompted FBI involvement? 2.Why did Mike Hart depart the team? 3.Why exactly was Sherrone Moore suspended for the East Carolina game in 2023?
as mentioned by others, the police report only made mention of 'accessing other network accounts without authorization'. He was going into (or trying to get into) email accounts that didn't belong to him, and without the permission of the person/people the account/s in question belonged to. Why? Anybody's guess. At one point, it seemed a common guess/belief was that it had something to do with an extra-marital relationship, but i don't recall ever seeing any evidence to that effect. It's entirely possible we won't know unless or until the investigation wraps and criminal charges are filed. And if charges are not filed, we'll probably never know.
I'm inclined to think we'll never get a clear answer on this unless Bacon writes a tell-all about the 2023 season. from what we know, it's a personal issue that may or may not have been medical. maybe he has a medical issue that has paused, or prematurely ended his coaching career. Maybe he was feeling burnt that he was not promoted to OC. who knows?
IIRC, Moore was suspended for the EC game as part of the deal the program was trying to make with the NCAA regarding the burgergate/recruiting violations. He was one of the coaches who was either on campus when he wasn't supposed to be, or watched workouts via zoom when he wasn't supposed to, or contacted a recruit during the dead period, or something to that effect.
Personally I think the mystery I'd most like solved re: 2023 is who hired the PI firm that dished the CS story to WaPo. second choice would be less a solving of a mystery, and more satisfying a curiosity - but i'd love to have been a fly on the wall (or a bug on the line) of the B1G conference calls that resulted in TP suspending Harbaugh right before the PSU game.
and, of course, we'd all love to see what information the NCAA scouting investigation has uncovered beyond what's publicly known...and how ALL of that information fits within the context of the language of the in-person scouting prohibition bylaw.
I think winning the conference is a bigger ask this year given the tougher schedule M has vs that of OSU. M has a much smaller margin for error in that regard.
I don't do brackets anymore, but the last few years that I did, I took an approach that ignored basketball altogether, and instead did it from a "which mascot would win in a street-fight" angle.
it was a lot more fun. breaking down the match-ups could be, at times, hilarious.
The comment i was responding to was your comment in response to the suggestion that he be tested every day to keep his job. You responded that that would be ineffective and overreaching.
I'm pointing out that the courts disagree with you. It's highly likely that the judge will put him on alcohol monitoring (i.e. testing) at his first court appearance, and it's likely he'll remain on it to some degree until he completes his probation. if he blows dirty, the judge could throw him in jail.
I don't know what part you think is ineffective or overreaching, but the courts find it both effective and reasonable. If a person disagrees, they're welcome to sit in jail if they'd rather not adhere to conditions offered by the judge in lieu of incarceration.
Daily alcohol monitoring is pretty effective, and compared to jail, is hardly an overreach, imo. Are there ways for people to get around it if they're hell-bent on drinking? yes, kind of...anybody capable of doing basic math can figure out exactly how many drinks they can have, and what time they need to stop, in order to be able to blow zeroes by 8:59am the following morning. But it's also true that the judge and/or probation officer can order an ETG at any time for any reason, which can detect alcohol metabolites from any alcohol consumed in the previous 96hours.
so for the large majority of people, alcohol monitoring is neither ineffective, nor an overreach.
I would disagree with 'ineffective and an overreach'.
When alcohol monitoring is ordered by the court (and it often is by local judges, even for first offenses), it can be daily, or several times per week at random, and you get a choice of having a device in-home that reports data automatically, or you go to the probation department at the courthouse each morning between 5-9am to blow. The first option is more convenient, but is somewhat expensive, though for a guy making mid-6figures, the fee is probably a non-factor.
He was 8 days into a new job, and this was the weekend before Spring Practice is set to begin. that he felt it necessary or appropriate to be out and impaired at 3am raises a red flag or two...that he decided to get behind the wheel raises a couple of more...that it's not the first time he's made that bad decision raises still more. I can't speak to how much he may or may not value the opportunity that was/may still be in front of him, but from the sideline it looks like he may be having trouble prioritizing, for whatever reason.
For some people (self included), getting put in handcuffs, spending a night in jail, and having to humble one's self in front of a judge (and adhere to all conditions set forth by said judge to stay out of jail) is enough to motivate drastic life changes. Others don't find doing all of that only once to be enough to motivate those changes.
I'd be surprised if Moore decides to keep him on, but either way, I hope he's able to address whatever it is he needs to address to live a healthy, happy life going forward.
but that's not the crime Scruggs committed. the court doesn't punish potential - they act on what actually happened. I'm sorry about whomever in your life was hurt by a drunk driver, but it wasn't Scruggs that hurt them.
and yea, there's a huge difference between .09 and .24. In fact, there's such a difference that they're separate crimes with separate punishments in this state, for exactly the reason that you're indirectly talking about - the increased risk to public health/safety.
well, if he was arrested for DUI causing severe injury, or DUI causing death, we'd be having a different conversation. The court doesn't punish an individual for crimes they might have committed. Nor should an employer. If Moore wants to fire him because this kind of judgment isn't leadership material, fine. But the "what could have happened" line of thinking isn't terribly useful here - Scruggs himself will get to ponder that every day for some time to come.
I doubt they'll wait for that...it could take 6 months to get through the court process.
I bet they'll wait until the police report is available and make a decision shortly thereafter.
and for legal purposes this is a first offense, but for life purposes, this is his second, and I imagine that's something Sherrone might factor into the decision, though the court won't.
everybody makes mistakes. some mistakes aren't forgiven by some employers when the individual in question is functioning in a mentoring and leadership role. depending on circumstances and specifics, this almost certainly isn't something Scruggs can't come back from...but it may be something he can't come back to Michigan from this year.
Addressing the two questions with simplistic answers:
Re: M's OL - I think the success is more systemic than anything else. Maybe that's just because I want to see it continue, but i really think it's more the due to coaching, scheme, and M's S&C program than it is the bonus Covid year.
Re: Opt-outs, granted, it's easy for me to sit here and say this when my reputation and livelihood aren't dependent upon decisions I'm making about a 250m/yr payroll, but if i were a GM, I don't think my decisions would be too heavily influenced by a guy opting out of combine workouts. most of the players I'm looking at have 2years of film to evaluate. If a guy doesn't want to risk getting hurt and/or having a bad day, I get it. disappointing, but, i get it. 2 years of game film tell me more than a couple of afternoons of non-contact drills.
yea but the 11W belief is that we were just an awful team who got better when we let an analyst start soliciting bleacher-shot game footage from fans. but some in this thread think we'd be best served by refuting the words of every buckeye idiot who thinks along those lines.
in this day and age, one shouldn't think that refuting every perceived slight or falsehood on the internet is A) productive, or B) any kind of a good idea. There will always be stupid people who think stupid things, no matter how many hours you spend banging away at your keyboard.
Gattis should know this by now, but his actions indicate otherwise.
the revenue distribution model is fucked. but there's no chance of getting the networks to take smaller margins. and most P5 programs are already nearing or at the max that they can squeeze from fans insofar as seat donations, tickets costs, and monies spent in-person once at an event.
e.g. the B1G members currently pull in ~60m/yr from the broadcasting rights contract, yet less than half the athletic departments in the conference get above the red line on the financial ledger.
"This is the part where it's tampering and the NCAA is powerless to do a dang thing. But, bring the hammer for signs and cheeseburgers."
And this highlights why I think(hope) the current lawsuit is going to be the demise of the NCAA as any kind of regulatory/enforcement body. If Team A can go outside the current rules to offer a player form Team B a big paycheck to transfer and the NCAA can't punish them, then the NCAA looks ridiculous trying to hammer Team C for cheeseburgers or asking fans to record games from the bleachers. The whole thing is absurd.
I'd say the thinking embodied by this post is a bit misguided - at almost any program not named Michigan, he's not a 'backup'. Hence being brought into a likely lucrative starting role at Alabama.
Had either Paige or Moore opted for the draft, Sabb would be starting here.
your post kind of underlines my point. and who said anything about 10%?
If people are asking how M can keep up with the more sophisticated/well-funded NIL programs around the country, one idea would be to tap a 'vast network' of former players who are all among the top 2% of income earners in the country.
I pay enough money to be able to attend and watch games, and I'm decidedly not in that top 2%.
I don't understand the downvotes here. Let's not turn this board into 11W. disagreeing with an observation or a take is not downvote worthy imo. Many of us don't like the reality 91wolverine is pointing out, but that doesn't make it less true.
the truth is that the modern era of the game now requires a staff to recruit new talent from high school and the portal, while also re-recruiting their own roster every year. it sucks, but that's one of the results of the portal and NIL being part of the landscape now.
Maybe M doesn't have a fanbase that's willing to throw their wallets at winning football games to the extent that other programs do? seems like an organized effort to solicit NIL donations from former players now playing in the NFL might be a good idea, but beyond that, I'm not sure how M keeps up with the Joneses.
If the Athletic Department wants to entice fans to show up in the 'off-peak' part of the season, they should at least consider dropping ticket and concession prices during the winter holiday break and spring break.
I feel your pain - I also have a family of 4, and we recently attended a game with friends. Our friend works at the U and was able to get upper bowl seats for $10/per, which was great. But even with the discounted tickets, factoring in concessions and parking (they charged for parking at Pioneer, which was news to me for basketball games) it was still ~$130 for our family of 4 to watch a team that, as often as not, looks like they don't care to be there. Why would anyone choose to pay full price for that, AND kill 3 or more hours of a weekend afternoon to do it?
How do they not have an intern who can brainstorm some promotions for the less popular parts of the season? Start selling upper-bowl tickets + a voucher for a water or soft drink, and a popcorn or pretzel, for $15 ($30 for lower bowl?), and I bet they start putting more behinds in seats for those games scheduled during breaks.
OP, your OP comes off as though you don't understand that an aspect of fandom, insofar as it pertains to event attendance, is a market transaction, and as such, market forces apply (to varying degrees, based on the individual).
If you want to knock the Athletic Department for selling tickets on the open market as opposed to giving them to specific people/groups, ok, fine (though remember that the Athletic Department, for most intents and purposes, is also a for-profit enterprise). But to criticize the fans who decide that the cost:benefit analysis doesn't work out in favor of going to these games is just kind of silly.
Recent Comments
All your RB's are belong to us.
that's fair. my initial comment was made after a plain reading of OP's OP, with zero background information about the author. I can see how, if one knew from past experience that OP was trolling, the initial post in this thread could be read as trolling.
Reading it objectively and with zero context, it didn't seem trollish to me, hence me calling people negging him 'soft like the 11W crowd'. Now that some of you have taken the time (which i appreciate) to briefly inform me as to OP's background here, I better understand the reaction to his post. I think negging me for not thinking his post came off trollish is a different kind of soft, but whatever. message boarders are gonna message board.
i'll still apologize, and perhaps some of the down-voters can rescind their negs.
sure, but this doesn't read like that to me, and i'm not familiar with OP's posting history.
Spring game attendance, and incessant wishcasting about The Hammer. One is almost inclined to feel bad for them. Almost.
negging the OP? man, some of you seem as soft as the 11W crowd.
what's wrong with asking whether or not the pace of securing commits in the current recruiting class is worrisome to anyone? The tone of the question reads rather neutral to me, and not troll-ish. It's not an unreasonable question.
Am I worried? not at the moment. the playoff/championship, and uncertainty thereafter, followed by the transition, put us behind what I think most would expect to be the usual 'schedule' here. If we get to mid-season and it looks like the staff is still struggling to get commitments from the targets on their board, I'll start to worry. but for now? nah.
EDIT:
**** After having it explained to me that the OP has a history of trolling around here, I understand how/why some of you reacted to his post the way you did. I had no such knowledge of OP's MGoBlog history, thus my plain reading/interpretation of his post.
Knowing now what I did not know then, I apologize to everyone for calling OP's critics 'soft like the 11W crowd'. I should (and will) do a little research next time before critiquing a post/poster's critics. Again, my apologies. GO BLUE. ****
i'm in agreement with this. If Warren Davis compares well to Cade, our floor this year is higher than I think many of us might have expected. I also think our ground game is going to be good enough that it's going to take a lot of pressure off of the QB, whomever it ends up being.
and i'll be honest, i wouldn't be disappointed if Moore and Campbell decide to put together an offense that looks kind of like the '14 and '15 "bowling ball covered in razor blades" Buckeyes.
while i like this comment, it's important to remember the timeline here - that the NoA in this case was already in M's hands when the bulk of the defensive staff took promotions into the NFL. They cooperated (except for one, according to the NCAA) while still employed at M, as we would/should expect.
that said, i'm wondering what, if anything, beyond the "i don't recall who paid for lunch" bit, the NCAA is referring to when they accuse harbaugh of not cooperating.
reading the text in that one paragraph, i'm not surprised by Mars' social media post saying Harbaugh is pissed that M effectively threw him under the bus. but i also think that if that's what M did, they did it because they thought it was in the best interest of the program, at the expense of a guy who's no longer in the program. ::shrug::
to the contrary, the couple of buckeyes i've discussed this with briefly think it confirms every negative thing they ever said about the program under Harbaugh.
it's absurd. but at a certain point we have to realize that there will always be stupid people who hold stupid opinions for stupid reasons...or even otherwise smart people who hold stupid opinions for stupid reasons. And there's nothing we can do about that (except maybe point and laugh).
In my decidedly non-expert opinion, yes. i'll go so far as to say that if he had near the volume in passing stats that the other top QB's had, he'd be in serious discussion for #1 overall. his skill-set and physical abilities, his decision-making, and his attitude and overall 'moxie' are all top-shelf. That he played for a team whose philosophy was more 'Bully Ball' than 'Air Raid' doesn't make him a less valuable or viable future pro.
my $0.02
To be fair, the world is full of bitter, garbage human beings. some of them just happen to work for the NCAA.
I temper my hate with hope, which may be foolish, but I've long been a sucker for hope.
is this what people in the know think happened, or is this just what we want to have happened?
I have no idea how much truth there may be to the rumor that that's what he was doing, but from my understanding, the FBI involvement had more to do with the fact that AAPD doesn't have terribly abundant or sophisticated resources with which to investigate computer crimes...but the FBI does, and they have a field office 3 blocks away from AAPD HQ.
so the AAPD asking the FBI for help on this case had more to do with who was better equipped to investigate them than it did anything else.
What would Jim Delaney have done?
I'm picturing Bill Murray tied to the mast...
so you're saying Al Borges = Coventry Trey?
I love it.
I think it's a combination of B and C - the bylaw prohibiting in-person scouting specifically prohibits that action being undertaken by coaching staff and program employees. Meanwhile, a 2013 revision to the bylaw specifically greenlights 3rd party scouting, and lists the ubiquitous presence of public domain video sources as one reason for doing so.
In that light, CS sending randoms to games with a request to film game/sideline action does NOT violate the bylaw, unless the NCAA decides to say that because the video CS solicited was not in the public domain before he obtained it, that it somehow constitutes a violation.
That said, 3rd party scouting includes professional scouting services, some of whom have semi-customized services for their clients (teams that pay for footage). Given that discussion of scouting, scouts, and the definition of such is otherwise absent from the bylaws, there appears to be no official approval/validation/accreditation process for "scouts" working in the NCAA sphere.
So, i don't think it's a 'loophole' so much as i think he just took a plain reading of the bylaw and said "I can't go get film, but I can send friends/family/neighbors/fans to games and ask them to send me film."
If that's the interpretation the NCAA ends up going with, there are going to be a lot of angry people in E.Lansing and Columbus. And i will chuckle softly to myself.
That there's been no mention of Hart being linked to any other football-related job is what leads me to believe that whatever the issue was that caused him to leave the program is a threat to his coaching career, not just his tenure/relationship with Michigan.
As for Partridge, he violated a very specific directive from his boss about discussing the investigation, while the entire program was under the microscopes of the NCAA, the B1G, and the national sports media. Regardless of how inconsequential his actual actions (or what we know of them) seem, in the surrounding context, the fact that he violated the directive seems to justify his termination, imo.
I don't doubt that you read this somewhere...but if I'm understanding you correctly, I don't see how it's a sensible way for Weiss to go about doing that. A sensible person doesn't engage in computer crimes to find out whether an NCAA violation was committed or not.
Ask the player you think did the tampering, and/or ask the player you believe was tampered with. If you can't get any solid information from either source, forget about it and move on. The job he had in front of him was far too important to jeopardize by worrying about potential tampering, imo. hopefully we find out with certainty one day.
some of our friends to the south are convinced it had something to do with gambling/fixing games, which just doesn't seem supported by any known facts at the moment. but they believe a lot of things about M that aren't currently supported by facts. ::shrug::
1.What "cyber crime" did OC Matt Weiss commit that prompted FBI involvement?
2.Why did Mike Hart depart the team?
3.Why exactly was Sherrone Moore suspended for the East Carolina game in 2023?
Personally I think the mystery I'd most like solved re: 2023 is who hired the PI firm that dished the CS story to WaPo. second choice would be less a solving of a mystery, and more satisfying a curiosity - but i'd love to have been a fly on the wall (or a bug on the line) of the B1G conference calls that resulted in TP suspending Harbaugh right before the PSU game.
and, of course, we'd all love to see what information the NCAA scouting investigation has uncovered beyond what's publicly known...and how ALL of that information fits within the context of the language of the in-person scouting prohibition bylaw.
i've had shirts made for various businesses and events, and Underground Printing has treated me right each and every time.
If by 'long season' you mean winning a lot of games with scores like 23-13 and averaging 3 FG's/game, I'm here for it.
they built that fence up, wrapped it, and i'm pretty sure they're paying to park that train along the side there too.
(/s on the train bit, but it wouldn't surprise me)
I think…
What's that sound?
I think I can hear defensive coordinators across the B1G tearing their hair out.
I think winning the conference is a bigger ask this year given the tougher schedule M has vs that of OSU. M has a much smaller margin for error in that regard.
I don't do brackets anymore, but the last few years that I did, I took an approach that ignored basketball altogether, and instead did it from a "which mascot would win in a street-fight" angle.
it was a lot more fun. breaking down the match-ups could be, at times, hilarious.
The comment i was responding to was your comment in response to the suggestion that he be tested every day to keep his job. You responded that that would be ineffective and overreaching.
I'm pointing out that the courts disagree with you. It's highly likely that the judge will put him on alcohol monitoring (i.e. testing) at his first court appearance, and it's likely he'll remain on it to some degree until he completes his probation. if he blows dirty, the judge could throw him in jail.
I don't know what part you think is ineffective or overreaching, but the courts find it both effective and reasonable. If a person disagrees, they're welcome to sit in jail if they'd rather not adhere to conditions offered by the judge in lieu of incarceration.
Daily alcohol monitoring is pretty effective, and compared to jail, is hardly an overreach, imo. Are there ways for people to get around it if they're hell-bent on drinking? yes, kind of...anybody capable of doing basic math can figure out exactly how many drinks they can have, and what time they need to stop, in order to be able to blow zeroes by 8:59am the following morning. But it's also true that the judge and/or probation officer can order an ETG at any time for any reason, which can detect alcohol metabolites from any alcohol consumed in the previous 96hours.
so for the large majority of people, alcohol monitoring is neither ineffective, nor an overreach.
I would disagree with 'ineffective and an overreach'.
When alcohol monitoring is ordered by the court (and it often is by local judges, even for first offenses), it can be daily, or several times per week at random, and you get a choice of having a device in-home that reports data automatically, or you go to the probation department at the courthouse each morning between 5-9am to blow. The first option is more convenient, but is somewhat expensive, though for a guy making mid-6figures, the fee is probably a non-factor.
I think you hit on a few important things here...
He was 8 days into a new job, and this was the weekend before Spring Practice is set to begin. that he felt it necessary or appropriate to be out and impaired at 3am raises a red flag or two...that he decided to get behind the wheel raises a couple of more...that it's not the first time he's made that bad decision raises still more. I can't speak to how much he may or may not value the opportunity that was/may still be in front of him, but from the sideline it looks like he may be having trouble prioritizing, for whatever reason.
For some people (self included), getting put in handcuffs, spending a night in jail, and having to humble one's self in front of a judge (and adhere to all conditions set forth by said judge to stay out of jail) is enough to motivate drastic life changes. Others don't find doing all of that only once to be enough to motivate those changes.
I'd be surprised if Moore decides to keep him on, but either way, I hope he's able to address whatever it is he needs to address to live a healthy, happy life going forward.
they were incidents from 10 and 14 years ago. beat writers probably didn't bother looking for criminal history. ::shrug::
but that's not the crime Scruggs committed. the court doesn't punish potential - they act on what actually happened. I'm sorry about whomever in your life was hurt by a drunk driver, but it wasn't Scruggs that hurt them.
and yea, there's a huge difference between .09 and .24. In fact, there's such a difference that they're separate crimes with separate punishments in this state, for exactly the reason that you're indirectly talking about - the increased risk to public health/safety.
well, if he was arrested for DUI causing severe injury, or DUI causing death, we'd be having a different conversation. The court doesn't punish an individual for crimes they might have committed. Nor should an employer. If Moore wants to fire him because this kind of judgment isn't leadership material, fine. But the "what could have happened" line of thinking isn't terribly useful here - Scruggs himself will get to ponder that every day for some time to come.
out of curiosity, where are people seeing 3rd offense?
edit: i've now seen links posted itt describing the full history.
you really need this explained? maybe math helps: one is 37% over the legal limit.
the other is 3x the legal limit.
per michigan law, the court will consider it a 1st offense (though Sherrone may not). But your bloodlust is noted.
I doubt they'll wait for that...it could take 6 months to get through the court process.
I bet they'll wait until the police report is available and make a decision shortly thereafter.
and for legal purposes this is a first offense, but for life purposes, this is his second, and I imagine that's something Sherrone might factor into the decision, though the court won't.
everybody makes mistakes. some mistakes aren't forgiven by some employers when the individual in question is functioning in a mentoring and leadership role. depending on circumstances and specifics, this almost certainly isn't something Scruggs can't come back from...but it may be something he can't come back to Michigan from this year.
Addressing the two questions with simplistic answers:
Re: M's OL - I think the success is more systemic than anything else. Maybe that's just because I want to see it continue, but i really think it's more the due to coaching, scheme, and M's S&C program than it is the bonus Covid year.
Re: Opt-outs, granted, it's easy for me to sit here and say this when my reputation and livelihood aren't dependent upon decisions I'm making about a 250m/yr payroll, but if i were a GM, I don't think my decisions would be too heavily influenced by a guy opting out of combine workouts. most of the players I'm looking at have 2years of film to evaluate. If a guy doesn't want to risk getting hurt and/or having a bad day, I get it. disappointing, but, i get it. 2 years of game film tell me more than a couple of afternoons of non-contact drills.
yea but the 11W belief is that we were just an awful team who got better when we let an analyst start soliciting bleacher-shot game footage from fans. but some in this thread think we'd be best served by refuting the words of every buckeye idiot who thinks along those lines.
the best way for gattis to handle it would be to not give it any oxygen. instead he's feeding the fire.
in this day and age, one shouldn't think that refuting every perceived slight or falsehood on the internet is A) productive, or B) any kind of a good idea. There will always be stupid people who think stupid things, no matter how many hours you spend banging away at your keyboard.
Gattis should know this by now, but his actions indicate otherwise.
Same, but i'm choosing to think about it as growing pains, rather than an end result.
evolution is messy.
the revenue distribution model is fucked. but there's no chance of getting the networks to take smaller margins. and most P5 programs are already nearing or at the max that they can squeeze from fans insofar as seat donations, tickets costs, and monies spent in-person once at an event.
e.g. the B1G members currently pull in ~60m/yr from the broadcasting rights contract, yet less than half the athletic departments in the conference get above the red line on the financial ledger.
Yea but Bobby Axelrod was right when he said "What's the point in having 'Fuck You' money if you don't say 'Fuck You' once in a while?"
"This is the part where it's tampering and the NCAA is powerless to do a dang thing. But, bring the hammer for signs and cheeseburgers."
And this highlights why I think(hope) the current lawsuit is going to be the demise of the NCAA as any kind of regulatory/enforcement body. If Team A can go outside the current rules to offer a player form Team B a big paycheck to transfer and the NCAA can't punish them, then the NCAA looks ridiculous trying to hammer Team C for cheeseburgers or asking fans to record games from the bleachers. The whole thing is absurd.
I'd say the thinking embodied by this post is a bit misguided - at almost any program not named Michigan, he's not a 'backup'. Hence being brought into a likely lucrative starting role at Alabama.
Had either Paige or Moore opted for the draft, Sabb would be starting here.
No cap and no contracts. It's not sustainable, but it's wild to watch.
your post kind of underlines my point. and who said anything about 10%?
If people are asking how M can keep up with the more sophisticated/well-funded NIL programs around the country, one idea would be to tap a 'vast network' of former players who are all among the top 2% of income earners in the country.
I pay enough money to be able to attend and watch games, and I'm decidedly not in that top 2%.
I don't understand the downvotes here. Let's not turn this board into 11W. disagreeing with an observation or a take is not downvote worthy imo. Many of us don't like the reality 91wolverine is pointing out, but that doesn't make it less true.
the truth is that the modern era of the game now requires a staff to recruit new talent from high school and the portal, while also re-recruiting their own roster every year. it sucks, but that's one of the results of the portal and NIL being part of the landscape now.
Maybe M doesn't have a fanbase that's willing to throw their wallets at winning football games to the extent that other programs do? seems like an organized effort to solicit NIL donations from former players now playing in the NFL might be a good idea, but beyond that, I'm not sure how M keeps up with the Joneses.
I'm reminded of a certain writer's penchant for the phrase "juke a guy in a phone booth" when describing Corum runs...
If the Athletic Department wants to entice fans to show up in the 'off-peak' part of the season, they should at least consider dropping ticket and concession prices during the winter holiday break and spring break.
I feel your pain - I also have a family of 4, and we recently attended a game with friends. Our friend works at the U and was able to get upper bowl seats for $10/per, which was great. But even with the discounted tickets, factoring in concessions and parking (they charged for parking at Pioneer, which was news to me for basketball games) it was still ~$130 for our family of 4 to watch a team that, as often as not, looks like they don't care to be there. Why would anyone choose to pay full price for that, AND kill 3 or more hours of a weekend afternoon to do it?
How do they not have an intern who can brainstorm some promotions for the less popular parts of the season? Start selling upper-bowl tickets + a voucher for a water or soft drink, and a popcorn or pretzel, for $15 ($30 for lower bowl?), and I bet they start putting more behinds in seats for those games scheduled during breaks.
OP, your OP comes off as though you don't understand that an aspect of fandom, insofar as it pertains to event attendance, is a market transaction, and as such, market forces apply (to varying degrees, based on the individual).
If you want to knock the Athletic Department for selling tickets on the open market as opposed to giving them to specific people/groups, ok, fine (though remember that the Athletic Department, for most intents and purposes, is also a for-profit enterprise). But to criticize the fans who decide that the cost:benefit analysis doesn't work out in favor of going to these games is just kind of silly.