Even More Links!

Once again, I'm linking to CSTV.com's Battle of the Blogs, in part to make sure you don't see some of OSU and Michigan's best bloggers duking it out, and partly because I'm up again in it. As I mentioned, we apparently have a slacker in our midst on the Buckeye side, and for once I'm not talking about myself. Since this unnamed blogger didn't get his article submitted, I got the chance to take over for him, arguing that the dotting of the "i" is better than Michigan's fight song. I think I did a credible job with it, though it certainly took me a lot of words to do. But there is a misconception about Script Ohio, as explained by my opponent, Frank of UMTailgate.com, that I would like to correct. Frank writes:

But fortunately for Michigan, this debate is win-win. Because not only did Michigan Marching Band invent "The Victors," they also were the first to perform "Script Ohio." That’s right. We invented your march Buckeyes. Performed by the Michigan marching band in 1932, the Ohio State marching band copied it starting in 1936.

Not exactly. It is true, the Michigan band did perform a script Ohio in 1932, four years before Ohio State first did Script Ohio. But Michigan just put together a formation that spelled "Ohio" in script. Starting in a Block O, marching that mimics actually writing "Ohio," setting it to "Le Regiment de Sambre et Meuse," the performance culminating in the dotting of the "i," basically everything that makes Script Ohio what it is - that all came from the OSU marching band. Saying Michigan invented Script Ohio is like saying the Wright brothers invented the stealth bomber. For more details on the whole thing, the OSU library has a nice page on the "controversy."

Moving on, the Dispatch briefly discusses the new field here. In short, it's supposed to be good to go. They say it took hold nicely, the seams are gone, and it's not going to impact the game. I certainly hope they're right, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Last up, John Porentas has an article at the Ozone about Tressel. Well, it's more an ode to Tressel. Check it:

Tressel's leadership is really characterized by three qualities. He is a rare mix of an individual who has a clear understanding and firm grasp of the big picture and is yet obsessively immersed in every detail of his undertaking. Those two qualities almost never coexist in people. That's why we have CEOs (big picture people) and accountants (detail people). Tressel, however, is both for his football team. He provides clear-cut big picture goals, but can call the parents and siblings of every player on his team by first name. He knows everyone's major, where every picture is hung in the WHAC, who every football alumnus is, the name of every team manager and trainer.

Listen, I love Tressel as much as the next rabid Buckeye fan. But I do not buy that he could identify a walk-on's sister by name, talk to her about her brother's major, then point her in the direction of some random picture of Archie Griffin. But then, I've been wrong before.

Regardless, it's an interesting article, especially the part about how players basically repeat what Tressel says in interviews. I've noticed the same thing. The younger players will occasionally say something interesting in interviews, but by the time they're seniors, it's all but a waste of time to interview them, because they're just going to spout the same old cliches. Not that that's entirely a bad thing. When's the last time an Ohio State player provided bulletin board material for the other team?