This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.
Important notes on articles:
- Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
- Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
- If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.
Post being replied to
Fair points, but with other contradictions by Flanner89
Agree with everything you said, and those are some of the points that give me pause about putting this in the "flop" vs. "big game ass-whoopin'" category. Even within this thread posters are giving contradictory points -- why it was a big game and others saying Michigan was tanking. I can see it either way. Just because Savvy treated it as a big game didn't mean the team did.
In either case there is still the obvious elephant in the room: Kelly's teams consistently get their butts kicked in big games, while the elite teams up their level of play in those games and (at least sometimes) win their share. I don't need to put the Michigan game in the 'big game' category to support that point.