Tuesday Sips: Now With 1000% More Humble Bragging

by Loretta8 on Dec 27, 2011 8:01 AM CST in Sips

First things first: sign up for the Big Ten basketball gambling contest. So far we've had a rather underwhelming nine entrants (as of last night when I wrote this), but one of the nine entrants is Deadspin founder Will Leitch. Yes, really. I believe Mr. Leitch has now earned the prestigious title of most famous person to comment on Sippin' On Purple, edging out former Northwestern basketball player Ed McCants, so, congratulations. He's also an Illinois alum and picked the over on Illinois and the under on NU, so, boo. Make sure to post your entry for the contest by 7:30 eastern tonight. Now that an actual famous person is involved, you don't have an excuse not to join.

And now, actual news.

- The Chicago Tribune's Teddy Greenstein writes that Pat Fitzgerald doesn't plan to change up NU's bowl preparation despite their long bowl losing streak. There's also a telling quote from Venric Mark on exactly what that preparation entails:

"[Fitz is] even more energized at practice, running around and screaming," Mark said.

Scary. According to sources, the intensity meter is registering at previously unseen levels.

- GoUPurple of Hail To Purple wrote a great piece on how the Texas Bowl should have been Randy Walker's final game at Northwestern.

- Philip Rossman-Reich of Lake The Posts breaks down Drew Crawford's monster game against Creighton.

- Black Shoe Diaries has a nice rundown of the Big Ten's performance in non-conference play.

- Down With Goldy is less than optimistic about Minnesota's NCAA chances despite their gaudy record.

- Iowa continues to have problems at running back, as Marcus Coker is suspended for their bowl gameand his backup Mika'il McCall is apparently transferring.

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Another 'Fitz is intense' blurb from media.

Aren’t we all tired of Fitz is intense? Is it that much more intense than other Big Ten coaches, and to be honest, what does all his intensity get NU? 6-6 (3-5). So, clearly, his intensity is not the most effective way to lead a football team.

by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Dec 27, 2011 8:17 AM CST reply actions

You're right

I’d prefer Fitz lackadaisical, or Fitz on autopilot, or Fitz not emotionally engaged in trying to win a bowl game.

by Chadnudj on Dec 27, 2011 8:21 AM CST up reply actions

Well...

First off, Happy Holidays Chad to you and your fiance.

Second, Chad, I’m with you, of course I want Fitz motivated, excited, etc for a bowl game (eventhough I find the result meaningless), but I’m just tired of story after story week after week about how intense Fitz is. I know you are the biggest Fitz fan, but aren’t you a little tired of this too?

Don’t you just want to see results and not hear about intensity? I mean what has intensity gotten NU, nothing. I know I’m a one trick pony, but NU has gone from 9-3 to 6-6. So clearly, his ‘intensity’ isn’t working.

by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Dec 27, 2011 8:33 AM CST up reply actions

asking fitz to be less intense

would be like asking you to stop including unnecessary personal details of other people’s lives that nobody else knows, wants to know, or wants to know how you know in your comments.

by Rodger Sherman on Dec 27, 2011 8:59 AM CST up reply actions 4 recs

huh?

wishing someone happy holidays is too personal? Chad and I have commented about how we are planning our upcoming weddings, so that is why I wished both of them well.

I’m not asking Fitz to be less intense, I’m asking for reporters/media/blogs, etc to not comment on Fitz’s intensity as if that is an indication of his team’s performance.

by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Dec 27, 2011 9:07 AM CST up reply actions

missed that one

but congrats to both of you.

by Rodger Sherman on Dec 27, 2011 11:37 AM CST up reply actions

Answers

To answer your questions above:
1. No.
2. Yes.
3. Possibly recruiting interest, plus general hilarity (see Intense-O-Meter.)

Also, to your comment(s): you say that “clearly, intensity is not the most effective way to lead a football team.” This is not “clear” at all; I would argue that this intensity can and is a very effective component to many succesful coaches.

Also, you subltly shift from basically saying intensity is totally overrated, to “I’m not asking Fitz to be less intense, I’m asking for (others) to not comment on Fitz’s intensity as if that is an indication of his team’s performance.” I read the full article and see NOTHING that indicates Teddy was trying to imply that Fitz’s intensity was going to lead to some awesome bowl performance. As a sports reporter, when players that you are talking to TELL YOU that their head coach, who is known for being a generally intense guy, is now being more intense…sorry, dude…no writer in the world is going to pass that up. Nor should they.

by Shatner on Dec 27, 2011 11:39 AM CST up reply actions

Fair.

Shatner, I think we are disagreeing on a degree issue. I’m just tired of hearing about his intensity, b/c that was a topic (forget the Intense-O-Meter) from fans and media about how Fitz is intense after Army loss, after ILL loss, after UM loss, it seemed all we heard about his how hard his practices are, how intense he is, how passionate he is, etc. So, maybe I’m tired of hearing about it, b/c to me it proved to be irrelevant, or heck, it hurt the team. How do you explain 6-6 (3-5) w/this schedule, the maturity/experience of the team, etc, etc? Could his intensity have hurt the team? I don’t know, but what I do know is that his intensity isn’t resulting in wins, so to keep bringing it up is silly.

Also, is Fitz really more intense than Bielma, D’Antonio, Ferentz, Hoke, etc? I doubt he is.

by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Dec 27, 2011 12:03 PM CST up reply actions

Got it.

I hear that you are sick of hearing about Fitz’s intensity. Let me see if I can come up with a comparable example:
NU Alumni is to Hearing from the media and others about Fitz’s intensity as Just about everyone here is to Hearing from NU Alumni about Fitz’s coaching.

Yep, I can definitely relate to your annoyance.

by Shatner on Dec 27, 2011 12:30 PM CST up reply actions

You must not be too tired of me based on your comments.

Plus, my point, while in the minority, came true, whereas the blind believers will soon realize that he is overrated as an ‘elite coach in the Big Ten.’

by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Dec 27, 2011 12:46 PM CST up reply actions

Also, too.

No one would argue that there are other intense coaches out there. Whether or not Fitz is more or less intense is debatable and, ultimately, completely meaningless to the conversation. Intensity is, for better or worse, one of the (if not the) defining characteristics of Coach Fitz. Media, bloggers and even the average fan are going to latch onto this meme and propogate it.

My point is that his intensity will be, and should be, commented on before, after and during games and seasons. You took an article about Fitz being very intense at bowl practices and immedietly inferred that whoever was talking about that intensity was implying that it would translate into on-field success. Again, I don’t read that in this article. I read that players are noticing how intense even the usually-intense Fitz is during these bowl practices. That is something to mention in a news article about the team THAT YOU ARE COVERING. Asking that media not comment about this is a ridiculous waste of time.

I get that you are sick of hearing about it. I get that you think Fitz is completely overrated as a coach. We all get it. My snarky analogy was meant to illustrate how you being sick of hearing the same thing over and over from the media is quite like a number of folks here getting sick of hearing the same thing over and over again from you. Just because you and we are sick of it, doesn’t mean that it is going to stop, though.

And that’s OK.

by Shatner on Dec 27, 2011 1:39 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs

Understood.

Look, like I said, I realize that you are tired of my message, but I wish many of you would be tired of the failed results by Fitz with the same vigor as you comment to me.

by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Dec 27, 2011 6:13 PM CST up reply actions

And furthermore, sir!

Your comments often seem to imply that there are two camps: those who think Fitz is an arrogant failure as a coach, and those who think Fitz can do no wrong, is the best coach in the world, and should be retained forever. The first camp cares about winning, and the second camp could care less about winning, as long as Fitz is the coach and Northwestern always does things “the right way.”

Sorry, my man, there are a lot of shades of gray out there; shades that you rarely if ever acknowledge. Roger and Lorreta8 (and other posters and commentators) often point out Fitz mistakes and baffling coaching decisions, yet because they are not pointing out that he is an arrogant overrated asshole, they are relegated to the “blind followers” camp. Others point out that Fitz (and the team’s results) are backsliding and not wholly acceptable. Yet if they are not calling for his head, or if they pointing out other factors that may help explain that lack of success, they obviously don’t care about winning. When folks here comment on things that might be contributing to NU’s lack of success without singling out Fitz, your cry is usually something along the lines of “6-6 is a successful season? You don’t care about winning, you blind deluded fool.” (Note: quote may not be entirely accurate.)

Fitz and only Fitz is the reason this team is a failure in your eyes. I don’t mind pointing out Fitz’s failures. I don’t mind arguing that this team’s progress is lacking, especially this year. But your M.O. is to use every opportunity (e.g. an innocuous article about players commenting on Fitz’s higher level of intensity for the upcoming bowl game) to come out firing about Fitz. When challenged, your arguments often change subtly, and usually become more reasonable (e.g. “I didn’t mean that Fitz was too intense, but that people should stop talking about how intense he is because other coaches are intense, too!” Ha…this is still a ridiculous argument.) When challenged further, out come the “blind follower” or “you don’t care about winning” retorts.

My point: I care about winning. I daresay that a shit-ton of us on this site care about winning. I also like Fitz, and think that it is OK to give him more time to coach this team. He’s done some remarkable jobs coaching, and some baffling inane jobs, sometimes within the same game. Our critiques run the gamut from Fitz should be let go (you) all the way up to Fitz is awesome and should be made president of the university (a few)…with many, many shades in between.

Stop lumping it all into two buckets, with martyr-you on one side, and the sheep on the other.

by Shatner on Dec 27, 2011 10:56 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs

Some EXCELLENT POINTS.

Shatner, I completely concede on the point of black/white (2 buckets) vs. shades of gray. You are correct, and I am wrong in assuming that people who support Fitz don’t care about winning and losing.

But, I just NEVER want to hear how he is a great/elite/outstanding/upper tier coach, and I’ll absolutely relent off my bashing of him.

The only other point I disagree with you on is more time for Fitz. First off, we all know he’ll be here till 2020 even if he is terrible, NU doesn’t fire coaches. So, discussing him being fired is silly and not my point at all. But, what is also silly is to think that after seven seasons with Fitz, the next 3-4 seasons will produce a Big Ten title contender. That is false, not realistic, and people who believe that just want to believe in Fitz.

by NU Alumni - Class of 2002 on Dec 28, 2011 7:17 AM CST up reply actions