Embedded Files
My personal blog is where I freelance write my opinions and thoughts on athletic topics.
Michigan Invested in Bryce Underwood's Potential. Tommy Carr Just Complicated Its Future.
After a halftime quarterback change sparked Michigan's first Big Ten victory of the season, the Wolverines face a difficult question: How much patience does potential deserve?
Tommy Carr just proved he can help Michigan win a conference game. Now, the Wolverines have to decide what that means for Bryce Underwood.
Michigan's 21–18 comeback victory over Penn State on Saturday was more than its first Big Ten win of the season. It was a turning point in a quarterback conversation that has followed the Wolverines throughout 2026.
After a scoreless first half that saw Michigan produce just 80 yards of total offense, head coach Kyle Whittingham and his staff made the decision to bench sophomore quarterback Bryce Underwood. The former No. 1 overall recruit completed just five of 11 passes for 43 yards and threw two interceptions before being replaced by true freshman Tommy Carr.
Carr entered the game and helped Michigan produce three second-half touchdown drives, including a 12-yard touchdown run of his own late in the fourth quarter.
The change worked. Michigan won. But the implications of that decision extend far beyond Saturday's final score.
Underwood arrived in Ann Arbor carrying expectations that few college athletes will ever experience.
As the nation's top-ranked recruit, he reportedly secured an NIL package valued at approximately $12 million over three years. That number has followed him through every success, mistake and criticism since his arrival.
But Michigan didn't invest that money in a finished product. It invested in potential.
Underwood is still a sophomore, learning to navigate one of the most demanding positions in college football while playing under the pressure of being one of its most recognizable young athletes.
The financial expectations surrounding him don't disappear simply because he's still developing. But they shouldn't eliminate his opportunity to grow, either.
Michigan invested millions in Underwood's potential. Now, it must decide how much patience that potential is worth.
Bryce Underwood hasn't suddenly lost the physical ability that made him one of the most anticipated quarterback recruits in recent memory.
His arm strength, athleticism and natural ability haven't disappeared.
But his recent performances have raised concerns about something just as important at the quarterback position: decision-making.
There's a difference between losing your ability and losing trust in your ability.
A quarterback cannot afford to consistently hesitate, second-guess his reads or play afraid of making mistakes. At a position where decisions are made in seconds, hesitation can be just as costly as making the wrong decision.
Underwood's recent struggles raise questions about whether he's playing with the same confidence and decisiveness expected of a starting quarterback. That doesn't mean anyone outside the program can definitively determine his confidence level from watching him play.
It does mean his execution has become a legitimate concern.
And when a quarterback begins struggling with consistency and decision-making, the solution isn't always as simple as giving him another start.
Tommy Carr didn't need to throw for 300 yards or deliver a statistically remarkable performance against Penn State.
He needed to help Michigan win. And that's exactly what he did.
Carr completed five of seven passes for 47 yards and added a rushing touchdown, helping the Wolverines find offensive momentum that had been missing throughout the first half.
Michigan's defense also played a significant role, forcing turnovers that gave the offense favorable opportunities. Carr didn't single-handedly win the game, but he helped Michigan capitalize when those opportunities arrived.
His performance earned him a legitimate place in the starting quarterback conversation.
Still, one successful half doesn't automatically make Carr the better long-term quarterback, just as one difficult half shouldn't erase Underwood's potential.
The question is no longer whether Carr deserves an opportunity. It's what Michigan chooses to do with that opportunity.
Michigan now faces a decision that could influence more than its next game.
Does continuing to start Underwood allow him to work through his mistakes and rebuild consistency? Or could keeping him on the field while he struggles create additional obstacles in his development?
On the other hand, could stepping away from the starting role give Underwood an opportunity to reset, or would losing that position make his return more difficult?
There's no guaranteed answer.
Sometimes developing a quarterback means allowing him to make mistakes. Other times, it means recognizing when a change might benefit both the player and the team.
Whittingham has praised Carr's preparation and the spark he provided against Penn State. As Michigan prepares to face Indiana, the coaching staff has not publicly committed to its next starting quarterback.
That uncertainty leaves both players facing an important moment in their young careers.
College athletes deserve to be held accountable for their performances. They also deserve room to develop without being defined by their worst moments.
Those ideas aren't mutually exclusive.
Underwood's reported NIL valuation makes him an easy target for criticism, particularly when the results on the field don't match the expectations surrounding his recruitment.But a multiyear financial commitment doesn't guarantee immediate success, and struggling as a sophomore doesn't make someone a failed investment.
Carr has earned consideration. Underwood still has potential. Both can be true.
Michigan's responsibility is to determine which quarterback gives the team its best opportunity to succeed while also considering the long-term development of two young players.
The Wolverines may have found an answer to their immediate offensive struggles Saturday afternoon. Whether that answer extends beyond one game remains to be seen.
**The biggest question isn't whether Michigan made a mistake investing in Bryce Underwood. It's whether Michigan knows how to develop the talent it invested in.**
If It Is "Just Sports," Where Are the Athletes?
Women have spent decades proving that they belong in sports—not as decorations, sidelines entertainment or marketing tools, but as athletes, coaches, journalists, executives and experts.
That is why Sydney Sweeney’s recent advertisement for the sports prediction platform Novig is so frustrating.
The campaign features Sweeney nude or nearly nude while posing with footballs, tennis rackets, hockey equipment and other sports-related props. The advertisement repeatedly emphasizes “just sports,” but the sports themselves feel secondary. The primary selling point is Sweeney’s body.
To be clear, there is nothing inherently wrong with a woman expressing her sexuality. Women should have control over their bodies and the freedom to present themselves however they choose. The problem is what happens when sexuality is placed within an industry where women are already struggling to be recognized for anything else.
Female athletes are constantly scrutinized for their bodies, uniforms, appearances and personal lives. Their accomplishments are often overshadowed by conversations about whether they are attractive, feminine enough or marketable to male audiences. Women working behind the scenes in sports face similar assumptions about whether they actually understand the game or earned their positions.
Against that backdrop, an advertisement using a nearly naked actress to sell a sports platform does not feel bold or empowering. It feels painfully familiar.
The issue is not that Sydney Sweeney is attractive. It is that the campaign once again presents a woman’s body as the easiest way to capture the attention of male sports fans. Instead of featuring a woman demonstrating knowledge, athleticism or authority, it relies on the same message women in sports have been fighting for years: A woman is most valuable in this space when she is sexually appealing.
Several elite female athletes have publicly criticized the campaign. Olympic swimmer Ariarne Titmus called it insulting to women who have dedicated their lives to their sports, while other athletes responded by sharing footage of their training and accomplishments under the message, “This is what a woman in sport looks like.” Their reaction is important because they understand exactly what is at stake. The Associated Press and ABC News Australia documented the growing backlash.
Sweeney reportedly had an active role in developing the campaign and is an equity partner in Novig, meaning this was more than an acting job she accepted without any involvement in its message. That criticizes the decision fairly. However, the responsibility does not belong to one woman alone. It also belongs to the executives, advertisers and consumers who continue rewarding this approach.
This campaign is also part of a larger pattern. Women have been sexualized while entering spaces traditionally associated with men, whether they are playing sports, fixing cars, reporting from sidelines or leading organizations. Sexuality becomes the invitation that allows them into the room, but it can also prevent audiences from taking them seriously once they arrive.
That does not mean women must hide their bodies or reject femininity to earn respect. Women should not have to choose between being attractive and being accomplished. The goal of feminism is not to police what women wear. It is to create a culture in which a woman’s appearance does not outweigh her ability, knowledge or achievements.
That is the distinction this advertisement misses.
Women in sports are setting records, winning championships, growing audiences and changing the industry. They deserve campaigns that reflect their strength, discipline and expertise—not another reminder that advertisers still believe the female body is their most dependable marketing tool.
Sydney Sweeney is not solely responsible for how women are treated in sports. But influential women, especially those who profit from these campaigns, should consider whether their work challenges harmful stereotypes or simply repackages them as empowerment.
Women in sports have fought too hard to be taken seriously. They should not still have to prove that their value extends beyond what they look like.
College Athletes Are Still College Students
Being a sports fan can feel personal. Families raise their kids to cheer for the same teams they grew up watching. Friends and relatives build rivalries that last for years. People plan their weekends around games, spend money on tickets and place bets on players they have never met.
There is nothing wrong with caring about a team. That passion is a huge part of what makes college sports so special. The problem is that some fans become so emotionally attached that they forget the athletes on the field are real people.
Fans can develop parasocial relationships with athletes. They follow them online, know their stats and watch them play every week, so they begin to feel like they actually know them. When a player makes a mistake, fans sometimes react as if that player personally did something to them.
A missed free throw can ruin someone’s night. An interception can start an argument between family members. One bad game can have fans calling for a player to be benched or attacking them on social media.
At the end of the day, though, these are college students, not professional athletes who have been doing this for years.
Many college athletes are only 18 or 19 years old. This is someone’s young son or daughter who just moved away from home to begin the next chapter of their life. They are experiencing adulthood for the first time while also trying to balance classes, practices, workouts, travel, and performing in front of thousands each week.
Most college students can fail a test or have a bad day without thousands of strangers talking about it online. College athletes can make one mistake during a game and have it replayed on social media for days. People who know nothing about their lives may question their talent, effort or character based on a few seconds of play.
Sports betting has made the problem even worse. Fans put their own money on a college athlete’s performance, then get angry at the athlete when the bet does not hit. The player never asked anyone to bet on them, but they still receive the blame for someone else losing money.
Fans also argue that name, image and likeness opportunities mean college athletes should be treated exactly like professionals. But earning money does not automatically provide a young person with the emotional experience of a veteran athlete. Money doesn’t cancel out their age, academic duties or humanity.
Fans are allowed to be disappointed after a loss. They are allowed to care, complain and wish their team had played better. But when a college student’s performance determines someone’s entire mood, day or even year, it may be time to take a step back.
College athletes wear the colors of a school, but they are still people before they are players. They are students, classmates, friends and someone’s children. They are going to make mistakes as they learn to play their sport and live on their own.
They do not owe strangers perfection.
Source: My own opinion based on the sports world and communities that I've seen online and in person.
Will AI Take Over Sports Journalism?
A box score can tell fans who won the game, but it cannot capture the emotion inside a locker room after a season-defining win or loss.
Artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly prominent in journalism, especially in sports media. Some news outlets already use AI-generated content for game recaps and statistical summaries because of its speed and efficiency. With just a box score, AI can produce a full game story within seconds. It can also assist with research, transcription and data organization.
Still, sports are about more than numbers.
At its core, sports journalism is built on emotion, teamwork and community. While AI may improve efficiency in newsrooms, it cannot replace the human connection, emotional understanding and storytelling that define meaningful sports coverage.
Audiences rely on journalists to provide accurate reporting while also capturing the moments that statistics alone cannot explain. AI cannot build trust with athletes, read emotion during interviews or recognize the atmosphere inside an arena after a major moment. It cannot fully understand the context behind a story or make ethical decisions the way experienced journalists can.
For example, in reporting on international student-athletes, the story extends far beyond athletic performance. It includes homesickness, cultural adjustment, sacrifice and identity. While AI may be able to summarize quotes or statistics, it cannot truly understand those experiences the way a reporter can through firsthand conversations and observation.
The rise of AI has also raised questions about trust within journalism. According to The Poynter Institute, newsrooms must be careful about how they implement AI in reporting. Alex Mahadevan, director of MediaWise and head of the AI Innovation Lab at Poynter, said, “Every newsroom and creator is going to use AI — if they’re not already. The question is whether they do it in a way that earns trust or erodes it.”
As AI continues to evolve, it will likely remain part of the future of sports media. However, technology cannot replace the value of human perspective. The stories that stay with audiences are not always the final scores or statistics, but the moments, emotions and people behind them. That is something no algorithm can fully recreate.
Sources linked below:
Why You Should Hire Former Student Athletes.
Why You Should Hire Former Student Athletes.
When a resume includes a background as a student-athlete, it signals more than just time spent on the field.
While student-athletes are often recognized for their time management skills, their real value in the workplace comes from qualities like coachability, resilience, teamwork and discipline.
Athletes are coached constantly, which means they are used to receiving feedback and applying it quickly. In a workplace, that translates to employees who are adaptable and willing to grow. Rather than resisting criticism, they expect it and use it to improve their performance.
They also understand teamwork at a deeper level. Success in sports rarely depends on one person, and athletes learn how to communicate, support others and play their role. Whether they are in a leadership position or contributing behind the scenes, they know how to prioritize the success of the group over individual recognition.
Resilience is another defining trait. Athletes face losses, mistakes and setbacks regularly, yet they are expected to show up the next day ready to compete. That ability to reset and move forward is essential in professional environments, especially in high-pressure situations.
In addition, student-athletes develop discipline and consistency through early practices, travel and balancing academics. They learn how to perform even when they are tired or unmotivated, which is a skill many employers struggle to find.
Hiring a former student-athlete means bringing in someone who is prepared not just to work, but to learn, adapt and contribute from day one.
Sources linked below:
How to Watch a Game Like a Reporter.
How to Watch a Game Like a Reporter.
Most people watch a game for the score, but reporters watch for everything else.
While fans focus on who wins and who loses, reporters are trained to look beyond the final result and find the story within the game. Every possession, substitution and timeout can reveal something important if you know what to watch for.
The first thing reporters notice is momentum. A game can shift in just a few plays, and those moments often become the turning point of the story. A defensive stop, a key assist or even a missed opportunity can say more than the final score.
Reporters also pay close attention to roles. Not every athlete is the leading scorer, but every player contributes in some way. Hustle plays, communication on the court and energy from the bench are all details that shape how a team performs. These are often the moments that go unnoticed but matter most when telling the full story.
Body language is another key detail. How a team reacts after a mistake or during a tough stretch can reveal leadership, confidence and resilience. A player encouraging a teammate or a coach making adjustments can shift the tone of the game entirely.
Finally, reporters are always thinking ahead. Instead of just recording what happened, they are asking why it happened and what it means moving forward. This mindset turns a simple recap into a story that gives readers a deeper understanding of the game.
Watching a game like a reporter means looking past the scoreboard and focusing on the moments that define it. Because in sports, the story is rarely just the score.
Sources linked below:
The Transfer Portal Changed Everything, Now What?
The Transfer Portal Changed Everything, Now What?
In today’s college sports landscape, staying in one place is no longer the expectation.
The rise of the transfer portal has completely reshaped what it means to be a student-athlete, creating new opportunities while also introducing new challenges. What was once a long-term commitment to a single program has become a more flexible and sometimes uncertain experience.
On one hand, the transfer portal gives athletes more control over their careers. Players can leave situations that are not the right fit and find programs that better match their goals, whether that means more playing time, a stronger team or a different environment. It has created opportunities that did not exist for previous generations.
At the same time, that freedom comes with pressure. Athletes are now constantly evaluating their place on a team, knowing that movement is always an option. This can make it harder to build long-term chemistry and trust within a program, as rosters change more frequently than ever before.
The transfer portal has also shifted how fans and programs view loyalty. While movement is now part of the system, it raises questions about what commitment looks like in modern college sports. Is staying the same as loyalty, or is making the best decision for your future just as important?
Ultimately, the transfer portal reflects a larger change in college athletics. It places more responsibility on athletes to make decisions about their careers while navigating uncertainty along the way.
The game has not changed, but the path through it has.
Sources linked below:
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse