Michigan Football, Team 138, 2017 Season.

[Rocky Bleier]

I'd bet Martin before Collins....but could be wrong.

But isn't Martin a slot ?

[Hannibal]

mgoblog would be better if the message boards weren't so prone to getting furious at any criticism of Michigan players. Basically any time that you criticize a Michigan recruit or player, you have to preface it with a great big apology about what a terrible person you are.

Sure. They do, and should. And sometimes they really shine as examples of modern journalism more ethical than the traditional models. Coaching searches are an excellent example. Instead of selling insider nonsense to drive clicks and revenue, like the NFL bullshitters, they've got a model based on honest transacting that still gets them plenty of clicks, and raise nice amounts of direct subscriber revenue through the annual preview. It's a far more honest business model.

But they do have a very strong editorial voice, and are hard to move off it when need be. That's good when it's Hoke and they are from the start pointing out what a nepotism hire is is; somewhat bad when it's now and they just don't want to really open up on Speight. I think they're frank about him, but would kinda rather not talk about it. Overall I agree with the policy of frying coaches but kid gloves when it comes to players not measuring up. And most teams probably don't have a blog this good, so it's not real/serious criticism unless you're talent and insist that there is no room for human error amongst the Michigan community. But it is fair to note that they're a little bit pollyanna right now. I think they are at their best when M's AD and coaching staff are shit. Which is to say that we don't want them at their best...

I agree about the ethics part. They have a policy of "it's better to be right than to be first" and I think that it pays off for them.

Their biggest editorial shortcoming to me is that they default to the position that people who are negative about the team are "irrational" and people who are optimistic about the team are "rational". This leads them to developing a laundry list of excuses for chronic failures long after most fans have identified a root cause. To them the "torch and pitchfork" crowd is always wrong. But sometimes they really are right. The best example of this to me is the RichRod fiasco -- they were frustratingly slow to realize that he was doing a terrible job and he had to go. They also seem to have 1990s era expectations about how player development works (e.g. "this guy's only a redshirt sophomore you can't expect him to be any good yet!") and they have yet to catch up to the times in that area.

[iam416]

The message boards are awful. I mean, really bad. Or, you know, like any other fan board.

Every Monday someone posts a thread title "Michigan Monday Is Up" or something like that. Without fail, half the thread is actually interested in Gerd's take and half the thread is outraged that someone had the temerity to post analysis from an OSU thread.

Their take on recruits, though, is really awful. I actually think it's worse than OSU fan boards -- boards that are, as a whole, "disappointed" with low-ranked recruits. I mean, you still get some "trust the coaches" shit, but mostly it ranges from "meh to wtf?" at OSU sites. Good luck with THAT at Mgo.

Anywho, this is not to detract from that actual substance. They do a really good job on a lot of things. I think they're really only average to subpar on recruiting. But, by and large, I enjoy getting the "M perspective" from Brian and his keyboard monkeys.

[Hannibal]

It was better when it was a one-man show. Since then Brian has abdicated about half of the writing duties to guys who aren't nearly as good. They only things that I read on there now regularly are the Monday post-game columns (still excellent), the UFRs, and Opponent Watch, which is the only funny thing there that Brian doesn't write. Over the past couple of years the front page of the site has gotten cluttered with lots of fluffy bullshit like cooking recipes and the staff's fantasy drafts.

[hack]

Maybe last to reality on RichRod, but first to reality on Hoke. Can't get it right every time.

Good takes, talent. All fair enough. I wasn't really a reader all that close until I moved to AA in 09, so the last of the TomVH years. Recruiting coverage is not as good, clearly.

Basketball coverage, IMO, is pretty darn good at least in the category of ``are they willing to criticize". There were a whole lot of ``BEILEIN IS AWESOME BEST OFFENSIVE COACH F U" two years ago, but Brian was at the ``he isn't getting fired but might deserve it" stage, and correctly identified the at that point upcoming offseason assistants overhaul as the inflection point. Which it was. At umhoops there was just a managing down of expectations, as if the only knowable fact was that Beilein was awesome. Now the writers talk about defense now as if they've always known its something you do for half the game, which they most certainly did not before Donlon arrived.

[iam416]

They do a good job on hoops. They have an underlying "millennial analytics fervor" that appeals to me when it comes to CBB analysis. And they do a good job of making their case in those terms, which I like. They bask in the glow of JB's offensive efficiency numbers and have come around to that notion that, shit, defensive efficiency matters, too.

I think their hoops stuff is probably the most in the weeds, but I like that. (I can't comment on their hockey stuff, but I'm sure it's in the weeds, too)

[WM Wolverine]

MGoBlog has went down in quality as a result of the quantity of content they've added. Brian is writing less and less and nobody is close to being as entertaining as him...

The quality of the contributors has ticked upwards. Some writers that I didn't respect their knowledge of football have put in the work to understand the game better and offer good analysis now.

The forum is utter garbage however I side with them over harshly calling out athletes by name. The forum is heavily visited by M athletes and anything said there has a good chance of being read by whoever you're criticizing.

[hack]

Sure. No shitting on the players is a good rule. Shit on the coaches, point out the shortcomings of the players without being an asshole about it.

[Hannibal]

Being willing to call out players by name is a prerequisite for having meaningful insight or analysis. Truth wins out over hurt feels.

[paul daugherity]

And first to reality on Brandon. He was all over Brandon early on. And for the stupid commercial bs that Brandon pulled - not the bad coaching hire.

Agree that the recruiting coverage is so so. A little too much homerism/trust the coaches for my liking.

The hockey coverage is also good. It is one of the few sites that actually covers hockey, and the segments that break down the goals scored is good. It gets very technical, which is helpful to someone like me who watches, but never played hockey.

[hack]

Calling out a player is different than taking a crap on him though.

[Rocky Bleier]

Is there a cutoff age for the ultra-sensitive? Seems like it's anyone under 40 yrs. old is really sensitive about feelings these days. Full disclosure: I still refer to him as Bruce Jenner. Oh, the horror!

[hack]

If one is sensitive about sensitivity, is one sensitive or insensitive?

[Rocky Bleier]

How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

[The Oracle]

Alot, so you're really sensitive to the sensitivity.