Just something about Colt Brennan and Hawaii, they did try to schedule Michigan State and other teams like that, but they (Michigan State and others) paid to get out of it. So at least they're trying.
The reason I pity MSM: opinions cannot exist in a vacuum. Opinion must be informed by fact or it becomes a Monty Python sketch. Back when information was less accessible, it was hard to check facts and MSM ruled. Not anymore.
Also, since dead tree media doesn't seem to be smart enough to understand that information is readily available, they are becoming increasingly irrelevant. For example, take Angelique Chengelis who occasionally covers Michigan football for the Detroit News. Her job seems to be to take quotes from Media day and stretch them out to a month's worth of stories. That passed as news years ago, but now anyone can go to MGoBlue and get those quotes the next day.
People don't go to Mgoblue though. I used to hear this all the time when I read political blogs. Something along the lines of "the mainstream media is obsolete because people can get better information quicker on blogs." That may be true, but the percentage of people who actually read blogs isn't very high. Mainstream outlets do matter, if for no other reason than they are where the vast majority of people get their info.
Orson just passed 5 million hits. I wouldn't be surprised if Sports Guy does that on some stories he writes.
You've tainted Vonnegut by linking Tressel to something of his creation. Damn you, Brian.
This may have been mentioned in another comment thread, and if so I apologize, but Mike Hart is on the freaking cover of SI. Well, it's a regional cover, but I can only assume that this is a massive blow.
http://blog.mlive.com/
wolverines...over_boy_m.html
I've got a hot tip! Totally verified! Must credit me!
...Charlie Weiss and Jim Tressel caught in illicit love affair!
...with a donkey!
...and Maurice Clarett!
...and Stuart Mandel!
To quote your previous post:
"Note that unless there are special circumstances all blogs must be six months old to join to prevent the flameouts that so often occur."
And some of your readers didn't realize they needed to have a blog?
READ, people ... don't just mouth the letters as you scan them ... READ!
But ESPN does lick monkey balls...they do, they really do
The local MSM is probably the only thing which penetrates Fort Schembechler once in a while ( Carlos Brown injury the latest news ). But they don't present it in a delectable way as Bloggers esp Brian. Carty and Sharp are hackjobs who generate traffic not because of their style or content but because of their controversial hatred. This is their schtick.
I had the privilege of watching MSU vs Hawaii game in CSTV a few days back and even USC couldn't have won that day. Our poor Spartan brothers were held, were subject to late hits etc. etc. Not to mention their incredibly weak pass defense. Good corners are hard to come by for cupcakes and [insert random quarterback] would be very successful in Hawaii. True that Brian that Brennan is overrated.
sorry again guys, more harbaugh/BGS stuff... ignore if you want.
I wrote this to Carty @ his blog.
Jim,
I know you've been over this point before, but you simply misread the UM source pages you quoted a few days ago re: Gen. Studies being a major. It is not a major. There is only a degree (the BGS degree). There is no GS 'major' at Michigan.
http://www.admissions.umich.edu/
...easofstudy.html
This lists GS, yes, but if you click the link for Gen. Studies, it brings you to the Degree options page:
http://www.lsa.umich.edu/lsa/
det...55F2625,00.html
This does NOT describe requirements for a B.A. or B.S. specifically in GS, but rather the general requirements for those 2 degrees as well as the degree BGS.
Obviously, just as i can obtain a BS while concentrating in Astronomy, you can obtain a B.S. in math, engineering, chemistry, business, etc. The same can be said about the BGS. As a result, the BGS should properly be compared to a BS, BA, or BBA (business) simply b/c they are all degrees. Comparing a major (communications) to a degree (general studies) is an apples to oranges comparison. You need to compare apples to apples, as they say. According to the ND media guide for example, 50% of the players who have chosen a degree have chosen a *business* degree. Is that troubling? Not really for me, but see point (B) for why this may be more troubling than the 60% in BGS at UM.
Based on the above facts, I think the following arguements you make are invalid:
A) There must be funnelling of players into a BGS, b/c why would such a high % (relative to the UM student body %) of football players be in GS?
If you read about the BGS, you will see there are only 2 differences between that and the BS or BA: no Foreign Lang and no concentration or major in a specific department or division.
As stated previously by others, the most logical reasons for football players to *choose* this DEGREE are primarily twofold: there is no ForLang and there is much more flexibility in scheduling upper level classes: you don't have to take those 2-3 English 400 classes (offered once a year or every other year at specified times) which are required for every hypothetical English major. Thus, someone interested in English, but had very stringent demands on their time, could obtain a degree tailored to their intrest (English) while having the freedom to pursue other areas at an advanced level (communications, say). This can be done without the specific requirements for each academic dept (which would be near impossible to fullfill under such time commmitents football players have). After having experienced the For Lang req and hearing the time constraints football players have, I don't think anyone is needed to funnel them toward a BGS- they, most logically, do that on their own.
con't
B) A BGS degree opens up the possibility for academic fraud (moreso than any other degree or even specific major).
Now, one has to admit that there are almost an infinite number of course combinations by which a BGS can be conferred (same goes for a BS or BA of course). Considering this, there is less oppurtunity for academic fraud: 'fluff' courses and/or instructors would need to be spread out across close to a dozen departments at the 300 & 400 course level. Now, considering OSU's or MSU's or even Stanford's and ND's 'clustering' of football players, it would be much easier to have a few upper level 'fluff' courses and/or instructors in a single dept, say, Communications or Family Resource Management or even the B-school, than to have a couple dozen fluff courses spread out across several depts. at Michigan.
The short story is this: it would be easy to create a fluff degree path by setting up 'less than' majors (Family Resource Management. Parks Recreation & Tourism Mgmt) whose upper level (300-400 level) requirements may only include 3-4 courses in 1-2 academic departments and steering guys into a BS/BA with a major in those depts. Much easier than having a BGS where the academic fraud would most likely need to be spread out over half the departments at the U. I realize this may be a matter of opinion, but at the very least, academic fraud via the BGS at UM cannot be any MORE probable than via a BS/BA anywhere else.
Please notice I am not insinuating that you think poorly of the BGS or that you have stated that the BGS is necessarily a fluff degree. You have made no such statements to my knowledge. I also have no problem with you investigating precisely what the players are concentrating on within the BGS DEGREE, or that UM is the focus of this topic. I am confident that this will enlighten many people as to the rigors of the UM degree, specifically the BGS. I also suspect that, as a result of this issue, future media guides will include what the players are concentrating on within tthe BGS DEGREE (eg, BGS focusing on communications and environmental studies, or BGS focusing on education & communications...etc). Also, I agree that the 40% grad rates for AA players is troubling and deserves invertigation. However, I would suggest that these numbers are not as statistically significant as most believe them to be, purely based on the small sample size.
Well done, DanK.
thanks for the support.
A good, and fair, point. And one I agree with and wish I'd emphasized a little more in my post.
Calling these guys to task -is- important. And worthwhile. And I'll note, too, that as a fan of really well-written vitriol, I get giddy when you, Brian, drop the hammer.
I was mostly speaking to a general animosity toward mainstream media that isn't focused on debunking a bad argument.
Anyway, carry on.
The thing I dislike about the MSM is when they try to discredit blogs. They figure if everyone thinks that bloggers are losers in their parents' basements, they'll be discredited and everyone will run to pick up SI, TSN, the newspaper, or whatever. In reality, top of the line bloggers probably do just as much IF NOT MORE work than MSM reporters.
Some journalists get it. A lot of local media guys have their own blogs that are updated frequently to post information that may not be found in print. These guys are adapting. The idiots that pass off their unfounded opinions as The Word are the people that need to be called out.
this is not pat forde's first foray into the world of endlessly stupid columns. forde and schlabach are the worst of the espn.com columnists. feldman, maisel, and mcshay are good. joe schad strings words together randomly. jim donnan looks close to death so we should cut him some slack. rod gilmore is mostly benign.
Commenting by HaloScan
