The New York Times has a football blog (who knew?) called "The Quad". How quaintly East Coast liberal arts school of them, no? Anyway, since "The Quad's" writers look like college guys, I think we're supposed to buy that they're somehow providing expert coverage. Uh, like this preview of last week's Michigan/Wisconsin game:

Pete: Michigan. A fully healthy Mike Hart is the difference. Thayer: Michigan. Game’s only highlight would be if “The Great Daynes” are part of the halftime ceremony to retire Ron Dayne’s jersey. Connor: Michigan. A tuneup for next week’s showdown with Ohio State.

I write more insightful previews that than. And I'm a woman! Compare what the "legitimate" New York Times college football crew wrote to MGoBlog's preview. Like our friend Drew from the Longhorn Mafia, Brian at MGoBlog clearly knows his stuff and how to write about it entertainingly.

I'm bringing all of this up because yesterday Brian broke the news that Lloyd Carr would retire at the end of the season. Even though Brian is clearly really an expert on Michigan football, the boys over at "The Quad" dismissed his news with this:

Well, how about the potential of Lloyd Carr’s final game as Michigan coach? A Michigan blog cites three unnamed sources saying, “Carr has made his decision to retire official and people around the athletic department are being told. The formal announcement will come after the Ohio State game, possibly at the Monday press conference, possibly a day or two later.”

Let’s just say that MGoBlog is not exactly a rock of journalistic credibility, as their site features a picture of a guy holding a “Jesus hates Wisconsin” sign and a cartoon snake bludgeoning a Badger. But there is certainly a buzz. The far-more-reliable Teddy Greenstein of the Chicago Tribune writes that two industry sources believe this is Carr’s final year at Michigan.

Oh, the hypocrisy! While clearly Jesus does love Wisconsin (after all, it is God's country), it's also quite clear that MGoBlog has at least as much journalistic credibility as CBS News, Newsweek, or even Sports Illustrated. In fact, after reading this quote, I think Brian might have far more journalistic credibility than those bastions of the traditional media:

At MGoBlog, things are different. It is a blog. I am a guy. I float on the internet. So for it to be credible at all it has to be right all the time. And I have to do this largely without ever meeting or talking to the people who provide information. So there are some requirements. Everything I post has to be multiply sourced if the tipster hasn't established a track record. I try to lay out the situation in as much detail as I can, giving a timeline of events and stating what I think and why. (Unfortunately, in this situation all sources have requested no details be relayed.) I am very serious about getting things right. I have to be. It is my sole source of credibility.

The traditional media want it both ways here. They want to play with new media so they seem hip and cool, but they are also so very protective of their "journalist" status that they'll grab every opportunity to mock a blogger. They still think bloggers are on the fringe, that they're the Ron Pauls of the Internet. They haven't yet figured out that a guy in Michigan with sources in the university's athletic department or that a guy on the ground in Iraq might actually know more than they do or that some of the best information on 9/11 came from eyewitnesses talking to each other on gasp! message boards. Bloggers and the like aren't always right. Sometimes, like "real" journalists, they're irresponsible and careless. But, more than a few of them know how to write.

Oh, and they also like kittens.