MichiganCardinal

Another one bites the dust.

I can't remember the last time I was waiting to watch a TV show as it first aired... may have been The Following when that was airing on FOX.

I don’t like WC or his site for personal and political reasons, but I do think he has a relatively sharp football mind. I think a lot of what he wrote has truth to it, though I’m not as optimistic about the result, as I see it more as an absolute ceiling than an expectation that I would predict. I would probably drop a star from both RB and receivers, but otherwise concur with his positional breakdown. A lot hinges on what Jared Goff we get.

For those of you who put stock in Walter Cherepinski, or just needed a Kool Aid refill...

Browns and Panthers play each other week one. Should be a fun watch. I think Mayfield could be really good in Carolina.

While unnamed sources are about as reliable at predicting realignment as astrologists, this matches my thinking about where the B1G may be heading.

I’m so sorry. I know we are just internet strangers, but know that we are all here for you.

I think UNC and Duke are ideological fits but I’m not sure they make sense in the context of having just added USC and UCLA. If the Big Ten wants to be a coast-to-coast conference, adding North Carolina doesn’t really move that needle. Notre Dame is different, as always.

I think this is a really interesting point, because it speaks to the evolving landscape and how much things have changed (while other things have remained the same) since the Big Ten added Rutgers and Maryland in a clear money grab at adding the NYC and DC television markets. I look at fandom in two ways: (1) butts in seats/game day experience and (2) nationwide following. As fans, we care about #1 because games are more exciting in a sold out Big House or a Penn State white out… Butts in seats is a small fraction of the overall revenue generated though which is why (1) is pretty much outright dismissed by the powers that be in conference expansion… Frankly, ten years ago, the powers that be didn’t really care about fandom at all. The system was setup such that it was a binary: either your regional market carries the B1G Network or they don’t. Adding Maryland and Rutgers checked those critical market boxes, fandom and competitiveness be damned. Nowadays though, streaming is all the buzz. Butts in seats still means nothing to anyone but fans, but national following now matters increasingly more. Not only does checking the “Los Angeles” box matter, so too does garnering interest from USC and UCLA’s alumni base. They may not have attended a game in 20 years, but they still care, and they’ll buy the B1G Network streaming service. That’s what is wanted and that’s what will drive this round of expansion. I think it’s also why a school like Stanford and/or Cal might be the next target, before UW, Oregon, or Utah, despite the latter three generating far more fan interest for their competitiveness and game-day experience (though Oregon is an interesting case and might be an exception). Stanford and Cal would bring the SF market (to check the boxes of yesteryear), but also have international followings. Their attendance figures are pitiful when compared to the Midwest or SEC, but that just doesn’t matter when it comes to the real money.

I will admit that when the Lions did not come out as having any interest in DeShaun Watson I was a little put off. Seemed like an opportunity to get a franchise QB in his prime. With the benefit of hindsight though, I do not envy the Browns at all. They may have over $60 million tied up in QBs this year, while starting Jacoby friggin Brissett for 17 games. It's not unrealistic to envision the Browns finishing in the bottom third of the league.

Except beach volleyball, those selfish bastards.

Academics will be the spin the Big Ten gives this expansion, even though you can rub two brain cells together to see it's all about TV deals and money. Notre Dame can F themselves sideways and I feel like a lot of B1G presidents likely feel the same way, though I would still be surprised if they aren't given one last chance at the final spot. A call with an ultimatum of "we have 23 schools and we are stopping at 24. You have 48 hours to take it or we are offering (Kansas/Pitt/Virginia/whoever) and we already know their answer". Another school I haven't seen brought up is Georgia Tech. They are AAU and would bring the Atlanta market, though would probably prefer the SEC. If I had to predict where we are in 2026, it would involve the B1G and SEC withdrawing from the NCAA for football and forming their own league with its own playoff... B1G East: Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State B1G Midwest: Wisconsin, Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois, Indiana, Notre Dame B1G Plains: Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Colorado, Utah, Arizona B1G West: Washington, Oregon, UC Berkeley, Stanford, USC, UCLA - SEC Atlantic: Florida, Florida State, Miami, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Clemson SEC East: Georgia, Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Tennessee SEC North: UNC, Duke, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri SEC West: Texas, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State - Each team plays every other team in their own division every year, plus every team in another rotating division in their conference, for 11 total games, plus one game with a team from the other conference and one game against an FCS team (practically a preseason game), for 13 games total. If you win your division you make the postseason and play a quarterfinal against the winner of another division, then the semifinal is the conference championship, and the National Championship is Big Ten vs. SEC.

If the Big Ten were smart (they’re probably not), they would move to poach the PAC12 of all their schools with AAU academic prowess (Washington, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Utah, and Colorado). If they all accept it puts you at 23 and even if they don’t all I think most would, and it puts you very close to a true super conference. You can send invites to Kansas, Duke, UNC, Vanderbilt, and/or Pitt to fill you out to where you want to be.

The older I get the more I realize what a waste 2008-2010 was. There was an opportunity to do so much. A supermajority of 60-40 in the Senate, and all that was accomplished was baby steps towards a more equitable health care plan. That was an opportunity to pass gun regulation, make DC a state, reform the electoral college, codify Roe, the list goes on.

I don’t even like basketball and this has me invested. Next I want a six team trade involving multiple front office and coaching personnel, maybe a vendor or two also.

The reckless ways of death that many 20-something’s die of are often only exacerbated by immense wealth and repeated untreated brain injuries.

Okudah excites me because he’s virtually no risk and potentially enormous reward. He’s a product of the prior regime, and if he’s unable to come back from the Achilles, well, we are building up from last year anyway. If there is any chance of him still becoming a starting to elite caliber NFL CB (as many scouts - not just Quintricia - believed), I fully believe this regime can do so. And he could instantly turn the defensive backs group into a strength on this team.

It's remarkable that Michigan held onto him as long as they did. Big Ten schools are just geographically not setup well to succeed at a high level in a non-revenue spring sport like baseball. If you're a sought after recruit, why would you play for Michigan, where your first two months of the season are played on the road and the most pertinent outdoor facilities are not even accessible for five months out of the year? If Vanderbilt, Florida, Texas A&M, or a California school wants you, they can get the upper hand just by their location on the map. You can go there and bleed baseball 24/7/365. I'm sure the money played a role, but he was fighting an uphill battle here anyway.

I’ll miss having his comedic relief of a name on the roster, but he likely would have struggled to make the team anyway. May have seen the writing on the wall and wanted to end things on his terms.

Maybe with good OTAs and a good preseason we can trade Benson and a 6th for a 5th and 7th?

He was leading and he’s charged only with misdemeanors. I could totally see the GOP spinning him into a faux victim of their self-created witch hunt.

Did you connect with him? Could be a good networking opportunity.

Colin Kaepernick was absolutely black balled, but I think the reasons why evolved as time passed. At the onset, I think there was a large sentiment that they (the owners) didn’t want this disruptive social justice presence on their payroll, which was fueled by racism. I think the NFL was at least passively complicit in this. Whether the owners themselves were racist or not (I’m confident a handful are), I think that even those owners who may have quietly approved of his message, or at least understood it, did not want to create a stir with their fanbase, benefactors, and fellow owners that did not, and Goodell and the NFL were perfectly okay with CK not getting another job, even if there was never a memo or email or announcement saying so. This was truly despicable on the part of the NFL and owners, and I think history will reflect extremely poorly on them for it. As time has gone on though, I think it has had more to do with the media frenzy that would come along with picking up Kaepernick. A lot of squads are probably of the opinion that CK could plausibly compete for their #2/3 QB role, but simply isn’t worth the thousands of hours of press coverage that would be dedicated to him. Is a fringe backup QB worth turning your training camp into a media zoo? Worth the 15 minutes of questions at every press conference? Worth turning your starter into “the guy that’s in the way” of CK? Worth talking points in the media when he gets cut, asking whether the cut was due to race or merits? That’s not fair to Kaepernick at all, but I think it is at least a little more understandable on the part of the NFL teams. In that sense, today, I can understand why a HC/GM would take Case Keenum, Matt Barkley, Chase Daniel, etc. for a backup role over Kaepernick. Keenum/Barkley/Daniel can sign that contract and just do their job. So much more would be expected of both CK and the entire organization if you signed CK…. I think nowadays Goodell would love for CK to be picked up by someone. I don’t think it will happen though.

That's a good point. I started talking myself into Lalo having to die while writing that post. We've even seen earlier in BCS that prison won't stop him from orchestrating chaos and attacks. Though an angle of him being arrested again would be interesting as it relates to Saul and his relationships in the courthouse, I'm not sure there is enough time left in the series. It makes more sense for Lalo to die, perhaps as you said at the hands of an unexpected character... Mrs. Nguyen, Irene, or Kaylee?? 🙂 I missed the old site while re-watching everything. It used to be fun to watch the episodes and read the takes as the episodes aired in those old threads.

Ugh. Just so good. I was insistent to rewatch all of BB and BCS 1-5 before diving into season six. I thought I could do it before the season premier but a recent move delayed me. I just finished episode seven. A knee-jerk reaction for sure, but I believe BCS may be even better than Breaking Bad, which I didn’t think was possible for a prequel. Breaking Bad had a slow start to it, I remember I false started that series twice when it first came out before I stuck to it (and was rewarded immensely). I’ve never felt like walking away from BCS, not once. While I’m sure that part of that is assisted by how good BB was, it speaks volumes about the show’s writers that even with set pieces for the “end” they are making this so damn engaging. I also think the characters are more poignant and precise to their role in BCS. I was part of the anti-Skyler group during BB, which I know is a controversial take, so I’ll just leave it as that I don’t dislike the portrayal of any of the BCS characters in a similar way. I really liked Howard’s character. A dick at times, but clearly a morally just person, of which there are fewer and fewer in the show as it goes on. In his final scene, I felt really bad for him (ugh). As was mentioned above, he was right. Jimmy and Kim didn’t have to do any of what they did. They did it because they could, same as they were playing the stock broker at the bar as Viktor-with-a-k and Giselle, though at least he was designed to be obnoxious and unlikeable….. I think they ultimately stage Howard’s death as a suicide though, possibly with the help of Mike/Fring, to avoid questions. I don’t think Kim dies. I think that would be too “easy” an ending in a way, and I personally think Jimmy wouldn’t have been able to be the Saul Goodman we knew in BB if she had tragically died shortly beforehand in the timeline. He would have been distraught and may have left the law entirely. As for what does happen to her, I could see prison. I could see witness protection if she rolls on Lalo… maybe even forced servitude as an attorney for the Cartel, similar to how Jesse was treated by Uncle Jack and the white supremacists in El Camino. Thinking outside the box on that last one. It would have to be something significant that Jimmy wouldn’t go looking for her before becoming Gene. Though I think she is who he will be going to when we next see Gene. I don’t know that Lalo dies either, because I think it’s something everyone loyal to Gilligan expects (so he could flip it on us). They seem to have played the “Lalo didn’t send you?!” line from BB like a fiddle and I don’t think they would ignore it in crafting Lalo’s fate….. BUT I don’t know how they end this Salamanca/Fring war short of Lalo’s death. Lalo isn’t going to just pack his bags and leave everything at this point, short of something huge and unforeseen. He’s chips all in on causing Fring’s death. It’s just so damn good. Give me a Mike spin-off, a Fring spin-off, a damn Beanie Baby court employee spin-off, if Gillian writes it it will be gold.