The Official Minnesota vs ][V][ichigan Game Thread

[Spartanmack]

I didn't realize that's what the argument was...just how many jerks are on each side. I'm not making any claims about that.

But if the argument is about which fanbase has a higher % hoping the other fanbase will fail/enjoying it when they do, I think that's pretty clear cut.

It's not a function of our pro-Michigan bias that we see MSU and OSU reacting very differently to things in the past year.

How could you miss that? You're the one who took the conversation in that direction. Or are you now parsing words and arguing about the difference between percentages and gross numbers?

You may be right about that last part - I don't know because I don't read RCMB or mgoblog. But it probably is a function of your pro-michigan bias that you don't see how many uofm fans want to see MSU fail and enjoying it if they do...

 

[Michchamp]

I didn't realize that's what the argument was...just how many jerks are on each side. I'm not making any claims about that.

...

Well, for what it's worth, the Jerk Store of East Lansing is almost always out of stock. The Ann Arbor one, not so much.

 

[Gulo Blue]

How could you miss that? You're the one who took the conversation in that direction.

No. I never said anything about anyone being jerks. From the start it was about you replying to "My experience is that MSU fans as a general rule delight in seeing Michigan falter." with a statement about Michigan fans returning the same in equal measure.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Actually, I didn't realize this was about which fan base had more jerks because it wasn't. I reread a few posts and I had it right the 1st time.

 

[Gulo Blue]

But it probably is a function of your pro-michigan bias that you don't see how many uofm fans want to see MSU fail and enjoying it if they do...

What you're not picking up on is that that's a function of who's winning. Of course there are more Michigan fans that want to see MSU fail right now, while MSU has the upper hand. But it's weird for a fan base to still be this way when they have the upper hand. That why I'm comparing OSU and MSU. You both have the upper hand right now, but aren't acting the same at all. That comparison takes some of the bias out of it.

I also believe that when Michigan is beating MSU regularly, you see far fewer Michigan fans hoping for MSU to fail. While I do believe that's true, I understand bias plays into my perception so I'm not pushing that point. (But think back, do you really not see the change in the last 8 years?)

 

[Michchamp]

Prior to two weeks ago, I didn't really want to see MSU falter. Now I do. I wonder why that is? Am I a jerk?

 

[byco42]

I guess you're assuming the plays were identical, they weren't.

No assumptions made. These two examples were ACTUAL targeting.

There are two conditions that constitute targeting, one is that the player leads with the crown of his helmet. that obvisouly didn't happen, the defender made contact with the facemask, he didn't lead with the crown.

Read rule 9-1-4. By the way, 9-1-3 also applies. To suggest otherwise indicates limited cognitive skills, extreme bias, or a combination thereof. Notice who owns the Vine of the first hit on Rudock?

The other situation is if the defender makes contact with the head or neck of a defenseless player, #99 had engaged Rudock at or close to the moment that he began his slide, he was not a defenseless player by definition.

But #99 led with the crown (top) of the helmet.

You post Zapruder-like analysis of Bolden on Cook, but you cannot or will not acknowledge this evidence that is far more compelling and tells the story in real time.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Prior to two weeks ago, I didn't really want to see MSU falter. Now I do. I wonder why that is? Am I a jerk?

Probably turned into a jerk in the past 2 weeks. I can't think of any other explanation.

 

[TheVictors]

I have once in my life gone to check out the red ceder msu board.


that place alone is evidence of the difference. there is no comparison between the way in which what happens to Michigan, at Michigan or about Michigan is so big to people who say they're state fans, alumni or family, and how Michigan fans and alumni feel about state.

 

[Sbee]

No assumptions made. These two examples were ACTUAL targeting.



Read rule 9-1-4. By the way, 9-1-3 also applies. To suggest otherwise indicates limited cognitive skills, extreme bias, or a combination thereof. Notice who owns the Vine of the first hit on Rudock?



But #99 led with the crown (top) of the helmet.

You post Zapruder-like analysis of Bolden on Cook, but you cannot or will not acknowledge this evidence that is far more compelling and tells the story in real time.

that hit going out of bounds was targeting and the player should have been ejected. the one where rudock was injured wasn't, he did not lead with the crown of his helmet and didn't hit him with the crown.

 

[TheVictors]

591 posts later ...

 

[Spartanmack]

No. I never said anything about anyone being jerks. From the start it was about you replying to "My experience is that MSU fans as a general rule delight in seeing Michigan falter." with a statement about Michigan fans returning the same in equal measure.

So to be clear are you taking issue w/ me calling fans that think like that "jerks"? Is that an overstep? I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. If you have a different term you'd prefer I use, let me know. You're wrong about what this was about from the start (second time you've done that). I made the equal measure comment in my reply to Byco, not you. You then chimed in to make the point that you didn't think it was equal - you took this conversation in that direction. Frankly, it's a stupid argument - holding someone accountable for a level of precision about which fan base has more jerks when both fanbases have plenty, is dumb and is just more partisan bickering

 

[Gulo Blue]

So to be clear are you taking issue w/ me calling fans that think like that "jerks"? Is that an overstep? I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. If you have a different term you'd prefer I use, let me know. You're wrong about what this was about from the start (second time you've done that). I made the equal measure comment in my reply to Byco, not you. You then chimed in to make the point that you didn't think it was equal - you took this conversation in that direction. Frankly, it's a stupid argument - holding someone accountable for a level of precision about which fan base has more jerks when both fanbases have plenty, is dumb and is just more partisan bickering

I don't know what the communication failure is here. I'm not saying anything about jerks. Only you were talking about jerks. I'm not taking issue if you want to call some part of our fan base jerks or argue about that. It's just not what I was commenting on.

The discussion about about how many MSU/Michigan fans want to see the other teams fail. I'm not quibbling over details or small differences. You think there equality here and I not only disagree with you, but think the difference is so pronounced, you should be able to see it through your bias.

 

[zyxt9]

you sound a little hysterical

sorry if that's what is coming across, not at all hysterical. just saying it as matter of fact. ripping a helmet of has not really been considered acceptable since...well, maybe the 60s but I think even Butkus's quote was more in reference to hitting the player hard enough to knock their head off as opposed to physically grabbing the helmet and ripping it off.

your comment about being a nancy is confusing. yes, it is football, but my comment was that ripping helmets off hasn't been allowed for decades and has been a personal foul. my comment is that the suspensions are not being ruled on a consistent basis and in essence the entire suspension thing should only be applied to the most egregious, violent, and intentional hits. I don't get how that is being a nancy. it should still be a personal foul due to the concussions and whatnot if that is what the NCAA is trying to prevent, but the suspension for targeting is inconsistent and has only been a negative as opposed to being a legit way of "policing" the play and helping protect players. not sure how saying most of these hits do not deserve suspensions is being a nancy. let the kids play, but when they cross Line A the PF should be sufficient instead of jumping straight to the Z level of suspension like the NCAA is doing.

 

[Gulo Blue]

591 posts later ...

I know. My bad. Michigan-Minnesota = Let's talk about MSU. This time it was the targeting comparison (I think) that steered things that way. Any MSU mention seems to provide an opening.

 

[Spartanmack]

What you're not picking up on is that that's a function of who's winning. Of course there are more Michigan fans that want to see MSU fail right now, while MSU has the upper hand. But it's weird for a fan base to still be this way when they have the upper hand. That why I'm comparing OSU and MSU. You both have the upper hand right now, but aren't acting the same at all. That comparison takes some of the bias out of it.

I also believe that when Michigan is beating MSU regularly, you see far fewer Michigan fans hoping for MSU to fail. While I do believe that's true, I understand bias plays into my perception so I'm not pushing that point. (But think back, do you really not see the change in the last 8 years?)

I suppose there could be some cyclical influence that tips the scale one way or the other but your example hardly proves that. First it's anecdotal and second, it's a comparison of a limited number of OSU fans to MSU fans on how they feel about uofm - it doesn't speak to the relative "jerkiness" of uofm's fan base vs. MSU's at all.

Again, I'm not arguing that one is worse than the other - I think they're close enough that using the "equal measure" terminology isn't a big stretch.

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't know what the communication failure is here. I'm not saying anything about jerks. Only you were talking about jerks. I'm not taking issue if you want to call some part of our fan base jerks or argue about that. It's just not what I was commenting on.

The discussion about about how many MSU/Michigan fans want to see the other teams fail. I'm not quibbling over details or small differences. You think there equality here and I not only disagree with you, but think the difference is so pronounced, you should be able to see it through your bias.

So my bias is telling me it's basically about the same in each fan base but you're able to overcome your bias and see that's it's clearly not even close - without a doubt, more MSU fans want to see uofm fail than the reverse. Of course, this doesn't mean fans on either side are jerks. Is that about right?

 

[Gulo Blue]

So my bias is telling me it's basically about the same in each fan base but you're able to overcome your bias and see that's it's clearly not even close - without a doubt, more MSU fans want to see uofm fail than the reverse. Of course, this doesn't mean fans on either side are jerks. Is that about right?

No. Though biased against OSU, I see a distinct difference between them and MSU.

Start with that. Drop the word "jerk". And reread my posts.

 

[Spartanmack]

I know. My bad. Michigan-Minnesota = Let's talk about MSU. This time it was the targeting comparison (I think) that steered things that way. Any MSU mention seems to provide an opening.

Who is talking about MSU?

 

[Spartanmack]

No. Though biased against OSU, I see a distinct difference between them and MSU.

Start with that. Drop the word "jerk". And reread my posts.

I'm not talking about the difference between osu and msu. And I think you're taking this too literally and being far too nit picky. I interpreted Byco's original statement as a comment on the overall sportsmanship of MSU fans with respect to uofm - not just the number that want to see uofm falter. There are plenty of ways to express unsportsmanlike behavior among rivals, whether it's arrogant disdain or an express desire to see the other fail, or taunting opposing fans, etc. Said differently, there are plenty of ways to be a "jerk" and both fan bases have those people in equal measure - or at least close enough.