Mike and Mike destroying UM students

Saying if the team was 5-0 there would be no rally. Said they are using the Morris situation because the team isn't good. I agree 100%. Also said that kids at school will go to a rally because it's something to do.

Gruden agrees that the rally is only happening because of the record.

I guess I don't get the point. Sure all these things are related. Hell would Good Morning America and the Today Show be talking about Michigan football if we were 5-0? They aren't talking about any other team. It is the fact that the ship is sinking (oh and the ship is one of the most storied programs in CFB by the way)and Hoke doesn't see that his QB looks like he is walking home from a frat party. It is all a part of the circus that is Michigan football.

Sounds like the media trying to trying to fan the flames.

If the team was 5-0? Have these motherfuckers watched single play of ours all season (offense, defense or special teams)??

People don't go to rallies in college because it's something to do. This isn't the 1960's. There's plenty of other stuff to go do. Hell, at worst, sit at home, get high and read Malcolm Gladwell's 'Outliers'.

Personally, I'm so damn glad that the focus has turned to Brandon the most, and yesterday's rally by the students and others made sure that the President knew what everyone is thinking. There's no reason in hell this guy should be around for the next football hire.

There is one point though people are talking about Michigan, what do people say advertising is advertising even when its bad.

These students are just hurting recruiting in my opinion. No top player wants a school with anarchy on campus.

IMO that is a dumb argument and totally ignores that things have a cumulative effect. Did Gavril Princip assassinating the archduke of Austria start WW1? Yes in one sense, but it was after many other precipitating events.

fishgoblue22 wrote:

These students are just hurting recruiting in my opinion.  No top player wants a school with anarchy on campus.

Then kill the anarchy and fire the prick. He has alienated fans and students. He has turned Michigan athletics into a Sper Bowl halftime show. He has mishandled media multiple times and allowed stories to linger when they should have just been a blip on the screen.

IMO I think the real root is the way he's treated the students these last two years. Shane Morris was the final straw.

Brandon messed with their seating policy and then he jacked up their ticket prices. Those two alone had the student body heated, although they  weren't ready to march and petition over it.

The student body sees Shane and every player on that team as an extension of themselves (and they are). And when they see the way Brandon and the staff have F-ed up the entire situation with their lack of communication, their back-and-forth statements, their support for each other and then finally Brandon essentially throwing Hoke under the bus, and they see Shane in the middle it irritates them.

This was really just the last straw and not necessarily  an "excuse to rally"


You do have to ask yourself though... if UM was 5-0 and Shane took that hit and stayed in the game, would there be rallies or would the students be saying "That Shane is one tough SOB"

MgoBlue wrote:

fishgoblue22 wrote:

These students are just hurting recruiting in my opinion.  No top player wants a school with anarchy on campus.

Then kill the anarchy and fire the prick.  He has alienated fans and students.  He has turned Michigan athletics into a Sper Bowl halftime show.  He has mishandled media multiple times and allowed stories to linger when they should have just been a blip on the screen.

Can't cave to the students. I think he should be gone, but if you cave to the students on this, they will just rally every time they don't like a professor or the president or the regents or anything else. A change will be made, but the students are contributing to the embarrassment of the school.

Student activism in the late 60s, early 70s didn't seem to keep us from recruiting blue chippers like Dan Dierdorf, Billy Taylor et al. get the right coach and AD and we'll be fine.

Fish wrote:

Can't cave to the students. I think he should be gone, but if you cave to the students on this, they will just rally every time they don't like a professor or the president or the regents or anything else.

Ding, Ding, Ding

wshoes wrote:

Student activism in the late 60s, early 70s didn't seem to keep us from recruiting blue chippers like Dan Dierdorf, Billy Taylor et al. get the right coach and AD and we'll be fine.

This isn't the late 60s and early 70s.

fishgoblue22 wrote:

wshoes wrote:

Student activism in the late 60s, early 70s didn't seem to keep us from recruiting blue chippers like Dan Dierdorf, Billy Taylor et al. get the right coach and AD and we'll be fine.

This isn't the late 60s and early 70s.

True but not sure why you think that will hurt recruiting if we get the right replacements.

wshoes wrote:

fishgoblue22 wrote:

wshoes wrote:

Student activism in the late 60s, early 70s didn't seem to keep us from recruiting blue chippers like Dan Dierdorf, Billy Taylor et al. get the right coach and AD and we'll be fine.

This isn't the late 60s and early 70s.

True but not sure why you think that will hurt recruiting if we get the right replacements.

I think it will have a major impact on the current class.

fishgoblue22 wrote:

wshoes wrote:

fishgoblue22 wrote:

wshoes wrote:

Student activism in the late 60s, early 70s didn't seem to keep us from recruiting blue chippers like Dan Dierdorf, Billy Taylor et al. get the right coach and AD and we'll be fine.

This isn't the late 60s and early 70s.

True but not sure why you think that will hurt recruiting if we get the right replacements.

I think it will have a major impact on the current class.

OK, I follow you.