I didn't over-react after Michigan lost to Utah, or ND, or PSU, and come out and say that this season was going to be god-awful and that we would only win 3 fucking games. I was rational,(somewhat)patient, and did not jump to conclusions that seemed overly pessimistic. I even kept faith that defense and/or Shafer were decent until the Purdue game. When FJ criticized Sam McGuffie, I didn't see it as a real big deal, I didn't over-react and view it as indicative of a much larger underlying problem. I was rational,(somewhat) patient, and did not jump to conclusions that seemed overly pessimistic. I was also completely fucking wrong about these things. Now granted, I've only given two examples and hence they could well be anomalies, but I'm beginning to suspect that what I think are rational, patient, reactions are actually less than rational biases that are a result of being a fan. I think of how awful ND was last year, and how at that time I was convinced that their awfulness was clear proof that Charlie Weis was totally ass fucking the program. I don't think that the Weis situation is analogous, mainly because that wasn't his first year. However, I wonder if I would still have the same optimistic outlook for Michigan football in the years to come if I were able to look at our situation entirely objectively, i.e. with the biases of a fan. I'm not so sure I would, and that worries me a great deal. Strange days indeed, most peculiar, mama.