Given your overall odds (and assuming you treated the two games as independent events), you've got us with a just over 47% chance of beating Wisconsin and a just under 13% chance of beating OSU. I guess I can't argue too much with those numbers.
In my exchanges with him he was highly disingenuous, frankly I cut off the exchange because I realized I was wasting my time and I was almost embarrassed for him.
The "scoring percentage" approach has driven me nuts for years. Average points per possession is far more relevant, so the approach here is far more useful.
I hope folks realize that most of the buildings on campus were built through the state's capital outlay process. If U-M wants to go private, the state isn't going to just give them the buildings as a going away present--at least not without expecting the taxpayers of the state to be reimbursed for the tax money that went to build those buildings.
It's hard to fault someone for the choice of one word, I guess. If he'd used "more lenient" instead of "fairer", that would have made my interpretation a lot different.
But this statement stood out: "I think Michigan's handling of the case has been a model of how to deal with a major infractions case so far. And the result will likely be fairer penalties . . . "
This seems to imply that if a school is uncooperative they will receive unfair penalties. Does he have examples of unfair penalties being imposed on uncooperative schools?
I mean, the schools which stonewalled/repeat offended over the years seem to have bounced back pretty quickly from whatever sanctions were levied (look at Kentucky around when Pitino arrived), so I wouldn't characterize those sanctions as severe or unfair. SMU's an exception, but that was over 20 years ago.
The NCAA has to keep its powder dry in case there's evidence that Rodriguez or others higher up conspired to over-practice. As you note, if it's simply what is alleged, these things will lead to U-M changing procedures and ensuring future compliance. It's not a big deal.
If there's some coverup going on then that's another matter. And until the NCAA is satisfied that it's relatively minor things, they're going to keep their options open.
The definition of secondary violation makes it clear that it's something that only gives a minor advantage (or no advantage) with no top-down commands, etc. Barring some evidence of higher-ups ordering things or covering things up, these are secondary violations.
I had exchanges with both the sports editor and the Freep's editor/publisher. Even late last August the paper had stuck its neck out so far that the higher-ups were manning the barricades, defending their writers and articles.
It's probably their best bet -- hope that the NCAA finds something on Rodriguez then claim vindication no matter how minor it is.
If U-M is cleared, then there would be hell to pay for the Freep no matter how strongly or weakly their editors supported their writers.
I've never bothered to e-mail Sharp because he's generally not worth taking seriously, but the OJ comparison really put this one over the top.
Based on others' exchanges with Sharp, he'll probably just accuse you of being a U-M homer who is blind to any faults at U-M. He loves to tear down straw men and hold himself out as the only truly honest man.
It's clear from his column that Rodriguez did talk to him privately after the presser, likely off the record, about Dorsey's situation. I suspect the column would have been worse if that hadn't happened.
Couple notes on the photos -- the first is of Freehan catching the final out of the 1968 World Series, a foul pop-up off the bat of the immortal Tim McCarver. Pitcher Mickey Lolich is coming in from the left and first baseman Norm Cash is approaching from behind the umpire.
The second is of the key play in the '68 Series, one of the biggest plays in franchise history. The Tigers trailed 3 games to 1 in the '68 Series and Mickey Lolich gave up 3 runs in the top of the first inning in game 5 at Tiger Stadium. They scratched out two runs to make it 3-2 entering the 5th inning. Lou Brock, who had run wild on the Tigers, doubled with one out. Julian Javier singled to left and Brock came flying home to extend the lead. Willie Horton's throw was perfect, Brock did not slide, Freehan blocked the plate perfectly, and Brock was out.
The entire Series turned on that play. The Tigers rallied for 3 in the 7th, won 5-3, won Game 6 back in St Louis 13-1, and in game 7 Mickey Lolich, on two days' rest, outdueled Bob Gibson, and the Tigers broke open a scoreless game in the 7th and won 4-1.
Freehan's book "Behind the Mask", a diary of the 1969 season, was greatly overshadowed by Jim Bouton's "Ball Four". It's not as good or as funny as "Ball Four", but his discussion of Denny McLain and Mickey Lolich is quite interesting. McLain was every bit the con artist then that he became later in life.
Oh, I suspect Rodriguez would be in demand at a number of schools if people thought he was available. No, Florida wouldn't hire him to replace Meyer. But Clemson, if that job was open? They'd think "U-M was a bad fit for him, he was here before, did well, we know the guy". A coach's reputation isn't simply defined by what he did when he coached at your favorite school.
As for Draper, friends of mine have had run-ins with him. You're right, I shouldn't have let those experiences lead to me publicly calling him out like that.
Leaving all partisan political considerations aside, DeVos was not ready for prime time. There are some products that are very difficult to sell and DeVos as Governor was one of them.
As for the cross and Ave Maria, that's Tom Monaghan's doing, not Brandon's. I don't even think Brandon was working for Domino's when those endeavors began.
Rodriguez? There are people in the athletic department who've dropped the ball on things (like filing practice reports--which was their responsibility, not Rodriguez's, Rodriguez just had to fill them out). If there are no consequences for such incidents, that will speak volumes about the Brandon regime.
If Brandon is as supportive of Rodriguez (or Beilein, or Red) as Brian was told, then he needs to eliminate the behind the scenes stuff as soon as he has the authority to do so. His statements today about factions were reassuring, hopefully he recognizes that there is a problem and causes me to eat my words.
The people who screwed up with Witty, Witherspoon, practice logs, compliance are all from the Lloyd era. No way Brandon will do anything to Lloyd's people.
If I was Rodriguez and something like the Clemson job was available, I'd be getting out of town as fast as I could. It isn't, so he'll be here through 2010.
It's not whether Brandon is supportive -- the same underlings who've been pulling the death by a thousand cuts stuff on Rodriguez are going to be emboldened by this hire. And they'll pull the same crap on the next coach if he's not Hoke or DeBord.
The most reassuring background thing would be the reassignment of some AD staff as well as some "retirements". Starting with Scott Draper. But, as noted above, I'm highly highly skeptical that that will happen.
He talked about how tough the Nebraska team was and that's why they deserved the title.
Scott Frost had a chance to prove his toughness two years earlier, when Lawrence Phillips came into his room and dragged out a screaming Nebraska coed. Frost did nothing. He never has been and never will be in a position to talk about toughness or manliness. His lack of manhood was established when he cowered in terror before Lawrence Phillips and let Phillips drag and beat a woman.
I agree with you on your last point too -- John L was really treated badly by the media. In part that was because he had those close losses to Michigan (and the one to ND in '06) so never had enough defining victories. He was a good coach, I think he just couldn't pull in the talent necessary to succeed in the Big Ten--in part because he didn't work the state enough.
I bet you don't know the difference between a countable and non-countable hour either. Just like your hero.
Oh, and the forms *were* filed as soon as Rodriguez found out his "friends" in the athletic department failed to file them. And, as noted, they aren't required by the NCAA.
But thanks for playing.
And when Michigan gets vindicated by the investigation, I look forward to your apologies. Just like I will look forward to your buddy Rosenberg's resignation.
I understand the anger among fans. But let's look at the reality -- if Rodriguez gets fired U-M will not be hiring an outsider. And, given Brandon/Carr's problems with Les Miles, I don't see how Les will be allowed to come to the rescue. And given Carr's problems with Jim Harbaugh, same thing.
So that narrows the coaching possibilities to former Lloyd assistants. For those who want Rodriguez fired, which former Lloyd assistant do you think will be an improvement? Or, a different question, is there any former Lloyd assistant, the mention of whose name will not cause Jim Tressel to break out in a giggle fit?
If you make it the first time, you kick the extra point the second time. You don't go for two the second time if you make it the first time.
So here's the possibilities:
1) Go for 2 the first time, make it, kick the extra point the second time. 15 points, you win. That's .44 * 1 = .44 of a win (we're assuming 100% on the extra point kicks).
2) Go for 2 the first time, don't make it. Go for 2 the second time, make it. Go to overtime. That's .56 * .44 = .2464. You have a 50-50 chance of winning in OT, so that's .1232 of a win.
3) Go for 2 the first time, don't make it. Go for 2 the second time, don't make it. Lose. That's .56 * .56 = .3136.
So your chances of winning with this strategy are .44 + .1232 = .5632, or 56.32%. Granted, your chances of missing the extra point in scenario 1 are greater than zero, so you can dampen that down a tad, but it's still over 50%.
Recent Comments
Given your overall odds (and assuming you treated the two games as independent events), you've got us with a just over 47% chance of beating Wisconsin and a just under 13% chance of beating OSU. I guess I can't argue too much with those numbers.
In my exchanges with him he was highly disingenuous, frankly I cut off the exchange because I realized I was wasting my time and I was almost embarrassed for him.
Boren was critical of Rodriguez. And by your standard he has "give more to this university than we ever will".
Well, let's just say that my inability to stop laughing my head off at the video caused a few folks to wonder what I was up to . . .