So Michael Rosenberg is getting it from all over the U-M blogosphere (and some beyond) and even is the target of a Twitterembargo. 

I suppose I’m one of the few that actually knows Rosenberg a little bit having interviewed him this time last year for his excellent book, War As They Knew It.  No, we’re not pals, we don’t bowl together nor do we ride a tandem bike around town.  I just know him from sitting down for an hour or so for the interview at Sweetwaters, stopping by the book signing and seeing him at a few media events.

He’s a nice guy (and has a top notch dry sense of humor).  And that has nothing to do with anything you feel about the piece, beyond those of you who think he wrote this just to be a prick.

I noticed there’s a few folks reading the interview from last year, especially part two where he discusses his article from the time that was highly critical of Rodriguez.  Suggest you a) read the whole interview, and; b) remember that these items were said a year ago and obviously not related to the current story.   That said, he hit on a few topics that I think many would like to ask him today, right down to criticism from mgoblog and fans in general:

On fear of being frozen out by the athletic department for being critical of Rodriguez:

  • “No, I don’t write for access. I try to be fair; I think I’ve been very fair. Over the years there have a lot of people at Michigan that are happy to talk to me, there still are to this day. There are people that have had problems me. For some of them, based on some of the things I’ve written I wouldn’t necessarily talk to me either [laughs]. But I’m alright with that. I’ve always felt like if you’re fair that people will respect that and ultimately you’ll be able to talk to people. I haven’t had that problem at all.”
  • “There are people at Michigan who didn’t like that column and have told me that. They tell me they didn’t like it, but they’re still talking. They respect how I do my job.”

On Brian Cook’s legendary Darth Vader mask fisk on mgoblog, and the criticism from fans in general:

  • “I don’t mind being criticized in the public forum because I criticize people in a public forum, so it’s all fine. That doesn’t mean I’m going to sit here and say I was wrong. I talked to a lot of people. So, I feel comfortable that my opinion is grounded in reason.”
  • “I don’t want to say that I know more about it than someone else, because that’s not necessarily accurate or fair, but I may know more about it than some people give me credit for.”
  • “…there are millions of people who have a vested interest in Michigan football, who care about it, right? Some of them care desperately about winning. Some of them only care about how the program represents the University. Most people are on that scale somewhere in between. I think it logically follows that people on message boards or someone who has a blog about the football team who is putting as much work into as Brian does, is going to care desperately about winning and losing.”
  • “So, if you’re on the internet and you’re saying a lot of people are killing me, I what guess I’m saying that’s not a representative cross-section of Michigan people. I’m not saying that cross-section is wrong, but that’s where they are.”

1 Comment

  1. Here’s the problem: all he does is talk to people. He doesn’t seem to do any other research of any kind. “I talked to a lot of people. So, I feel comfortable that my opinion is grounded in reason.” How does that meet any sort of journalistic standard, let alone make sense? It doesn’t and it doesn’t. In the current case, he seems to have barely read the NCAA guidelines, let alone tried to find out how they are meant to be applied. Just because he doesn’t know he’s a hack doesn’t mean he isn’t a hack.