At some point, I should just shake my head and laugh at the "annoyance journalism" of Drew Sharp, "columns" in which the only purpose behind their writing is to sit back and revel in how upset he can make the targets of his attacks (and they are attacks, make no mistake about it). I guess I keep reading and posting about it in the silly hope that somebody at the Detroit Free Press will finally wake up regarding the intellectual dishonesty of his pieces (of...).
Drew's latest piece (of...) is entitled "Michigan isn't a top 10 program nationally." The piece (of...) deals with Michigan's coaching search and the attractiveness of the job.
Now, that very title was solely picked to poke. Plain and simple. You can argue my response is a "homer" one since this is a Michigan blog, fair enough. Take me out of it. But Urban Meyer, Steve Spurrier, Phil Fulmer, the ESPN crew and every other coach and pundit writing about the U-M coaching vacancy have called it one of the premiere jobs in the country.
Which is exactly why Sharp wrote his piece (of...).
Sharp can't bag on our season or our coach anymore. The season is over, the coach moved on. And the focus of the media has been on this wonderful coaching opportunity that has opened up to outsiders for the first time in 40 years. So what does he do? Take something that everybody is taking about in a positive light, tear at that, then sit back and watch the response.
And it's annoying because I always assumed the Free Press was supposed to be a step up from a "lowly" blog. Or so I thought. But I see much more honest reportage and stories coming out of the blogosphere on a daily basis.
According to Sharp's expertise, there are five principle factors in determining a program's reputation: Institutional support, quality of resources, natural recruiting base, competitive coaching salaries, historical pedigree. The only one Sharp "gives" Michigan top 10 credit for is historical pedigree.
He dings Michigan for its lack of a "natural" recruiting base which he defines as the recruiting base within a 3 hour drive of a school's campus. Never mind that teams like Michigan recruit nationally, regularly having a top 10 class.
He says Michigan has no institutional support because the school is only now adding luxury boxes to bring in "much needed" revenue. As if such suites are the measuring stick of program's "institutional support." Oh, and never mind that they increased seating capacity to 107,501 in the last 10 years or so. Or that with such a seating capacity - in the LARGEST stadium that is ALWAYS sold out - Michigan has been in no way, shape or form in dire need of such boxes. And don't bother to mention the seat licensing fees which were instituted in the last five years to bring in such revenue on a more stadium-wide basis. But hey, if Sharp mentioned all that, he might have to take a more honest look in his "reporting."
In his piece (of...), Sharp ties, blends and intertwines his Quality of Resources category into the institutional support slam, knocking Michigan for just now starting to build a new indoor practice facility. Uh, wasn't Michigan the first team in the country to even have an indoor facility? Correct me if I'm wrong, but that facility was built in the 80s. Are they supposed to build a brand new one every 10 years? It's time, now they're building one. End of story.
Finally, and most laughably, he says Michigan isn't competitive with its football coaching salary. This could be the most intellectually dishonest piece of crap in his entire piece of shit article. Lloyd Carr's salary is $1.5M a year. A ton for you and me, but not on the level of the standard $2M coaching salaries at the big programs. Yes, that's true.
But - and it's a huge "but" - what assclown fails to mention is that the reason Michigan "only" pays out $1.5 for its coach is, first and foremost, Lloyd Carr isn't a money grubbing whore. If even non-Michigan fans learned anything about the man over the course of his tenure and during his press conference last week, it's that money wasn't/isn't important to Carr in the way it is to, oh, say, I dunno, let me throw out a name...Nick Saban.
You think Carr could have left Michigan after winning the national title in '97 for a huge raise? Or used the the leverage of being the 7th winningest coach in the country during his head coaching career to constantly renegotiate like so many coaches do? Yes he could have, but no he didn't.
Furthermore, had Carr left, say, four or five years ago, guess what? The new coach's salary, if he would have come from outside the program, would be up in the level of the Stoops, Carrolls and Browns of the coaching world. Yet Sharp instead uses the class of Carr and the unique longevity of head coaches at Michigan as a "strike" against the program.
Seriously, if you're a sports editor at the Free Press, how do you print this crap with a straight face?
UPDATE: Just saw this dick article regarding Les Miles possibly coming to A2 that doesn't even constitute a column. It's all of four paragraphs long, with two of those being a sentence each. No, this "column" was written in the wake of LSU's loss to Arkansas for the sole purpose of these
"If LSU loses in the SEC championship game next week, doesn't Les Miles then become the prototypical Michigan coaching candidate?
He would have lost his last two games since the job became available. Sounds like a seamless transition from the Lloyd Carr era."
Folks, what I just posted above is half the article! HALF! I say again, is this the Detroit Free Press or a blog run by a fan of some Michigan rival? Seriously.