ANN ARBOR, Mich. -- After recording just the second triple-double in the history of the University of Michigan men's basketball program, junior guard Manny Harris (Detroit, Mich./Redford) was named as the Co-Big Ten Player of the Week on Monday afternoon (Nov. 16). Harris shared the award with Ohio State's Evan Turner, who had back-to-back double-doubles, including a triple-double of his own during the week.
After getting close three times last season, Harris recorded his first career triple-double with 18 points, 13 rebounds, and 10 assists in the Wolverines' season-opening 97-50 win against Northern Michigan (Saturday, Nov. 14). The only other U-M triple-double came 22 years ago when Gary Grant (1985-88) had 24 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists against North Carolina (March 14, 1987) in the second round of the NCAA tournament.
Harris' 10 assists marked just the third time in his career he has had 10 or more assists in a game. Last season, he had a career-best 13 against Oakland (Dec. 20, 2008) and had 10 at Ohio State (Jan. 28, 2009). Harris' 13 rebounds marked just the seventh time in his career he has had 10 or more rebounds in a game, while his 18 points earned the 55th career double-figure scoring game in his 68 career games. Overall, it marked the sixth double-double in Harris' career.
With Harris' triple-double and DeShawn Sims' double-double (22 points, 10 rebounds), the two became the first Wolverine duo to post double-doubles in the same game since the 2006-07 season when Courtney Sims (26 points, 10 rebounds) and Brent Petway (13 points, 11 rebounds) each had double-doubles against UW-Milwaukee (Nov. 15, 2006) in the championship finale of the John Thompson Challenge.
Michigan's next game is Friday night (Nov. 20) when it hosts Houston Baptist in Crisler Arena. Tipoff is set for 7 p.m. and will be webcasted on BigTenNetwork.com.
How many of you believe in spooky, other-worldly happenings going on today?
(everybody who believes in psychokinesis, raise my hand).
No? Well tell me, how many of you at least believe in coincidences?
For you skeptics, consider:
Mark Twain was born and died on the day of two successive Halley's Comet appearances 75 yrs apart;
A falling baby was saved twice by the same man;
2 brothers were killed while riding the very same moped by the same taxi driven by the same driver - and even carrying the very same passengers;
Louis XVI, previously warned by an astrologer to stay home on the 21st day of each month, since that was not his lucky number, ended up being arrested, deposed and executed by guillotine on the 21st day of each month.*
Well, if that’s not enough for you, get ready for the next entry into the book of strange coincidences: The second “Upset of the Century.”
The OSU game on Saturday will be played on the 40th anniversary of what has been termed: the upset of the century in ’69.
Then, UM had been a college football power but recently had fallen on hard times, including, in the past 6 years, a 2-victory season and 3-victory season (like now)
Michigan was in the process of rebuilding (like now)
The game involved a coach who had recently come to Michigan (like now)
He was a young coach, in his 40s. (like now)
He was known for his teams’ running attack. (like now)
He had a conditioning program far more rigorous than any the players had been exposed to before. (like now)
He had many sideline outbursts. (like now)
He had come from outside of Michigan, from a state bordered by the major tributary of the Mississippi River (like now)
That year, UM had already lost to its other rival, MSU, on the road. (like now)
The Wolverines had been humiliated the year before in Columbus (like now)
OSU was known for its strong defense: (like now)
Nobody gave Michigan a chance: Ohio State was favored by 17 points (about same as this year’s game)
What happened in the actual game?
The Buckeyes had committed an unheard-of seven turnovers on the day, six interceptions and a fumble, which occurred on the final clinching play and involved a player named …(what do you think?)
--you guessed it
Wait, it only gets more interesting……
An article once made it widely known that Pryor was cast in the role of Superman before he played his first down at Ohio State.
What is not well known, however, is that Pryor thereby became part of another series of coincidences, later termed the notorious Superman curse. It’s a curse that’s spelled doom for the creators and producers of Superman, as well as many of its costars (Marlon Brando, Mariel Hemingway, Margot Kidder) and so-called Superman stars George Reeves, who committed suicide and Christopher Reeve, who became quadriplegic and died from its complications.*
In addition, Marlon Brando’s son, shortly after a Superman episode, shot and killed the lover of his half-sister, then claimed the shooting was not a crime.
(like Terrelle Pryor saying: “everybody kills”).
Moreover, one of the villain’s in Superman III became drug addicted, almost died in a fatal accident, then developed a demyelinating neuromuscular disorder
(Terrelle’s father has a demyelinating neuromuscular disorder).
What was the poor villain’s last name????
Hearing of all these strange coincidences, and fearing that the Superman curse will lead Terrelle Pryor to a game-ending fumble as occurred in 1969, OSU coach Jim Tressel this week has been furiously pouring over not game films but old episodes of Superman. He has the complete collection, anyway, since he always did kinda like guys wearing capes and tights.
Recently, however, rumors of a successful exorcism for a curse had spread far and wide, even to the most backward, primitive, illiterate societies on the continent..finally…even to Columbus, Ohio. It was then that Tressel learned about how Boston ended the Curse of the Bambino. Recall that the Red Sox opened Fenway park on the day the titanic sunk and after the year the team sold Babe Ruth to the Yankees, had an 85 year spell without a championship, while the Yankees won 24. Bostonians who had already suffered flashbacks of the British invasion centuries ago, were then having flashbacks about a ground ball going through the legs of Bill Buckner, leading them to blow their Championship hopes in ’86. So, they hired Father Guido Sarducci to sprinkle holy water on the Green Monster (the gargantuan left field wall) and exorcise the spirit haunting Fenway park. Father Guido told to Boston Faithful not to expect immediate results. He was right. Nothing happened for fifteen years. Finally, however, the exorcism worked, Boston won a title. The Curse of the Bambino had been vanquished.
Accordingly, in anticipation of a repeat of 1969, Tressell called Father Guido. He asked him to go to AA for an exorcism of on the eve of The Game. Father Guido agreed that an exorcism was badly needed, especially since Goss' halo had been removed from the stadium. Unfortunately, Father Guido told the OSU faithful that he has a different kind of "prior" engagement. He’s been asked by ND not only to remove the spirit of Charlie Weiss but also his body. And regrettably, Father Guido’s already paid for his equipment: 24-a foot Ryder truck.
So, it looks like OSU is as doomed as poor Charlie.
Stick a fork in ‘em.
The spirit lives.
All that we need the team to do is to write the next entry in this remarkable story of coincidences—a W in the record book for 2009.
So remind Pryor that the 21st of the month was not only a bad hair day for Louis XVI, who was arrested, deposed and guillotined on that day. Make Nov 21 a memorable day for TP too.
So Put Pryor on his Posterior!!
I guess I can't say for sure where I'll be a year from now on the question of whether I think RichRod should stay. I know what I expect: I still believe he's going to have M kickin butt across the land. But of course I'm way less sure than I was in September. However, this is where I am today:
For so long, it had been easy to be a Michigan football fan. The wins came like the rising sun. The bowl games, the championships, the streaks: they were us. It was *easy* to be on that train.
But these days are different. Today it is hard to be a Michigan fan. These are days of difficulty, doubt and challenge. Yet it is precisely in these times of turmoil when our fandom matters most.
Will we blow with the wind, no foundation to keep us straight during this storm? Or will we BE the foundation: a source of strength and continuity, stability for the program?
We are the Michigan fans. Our job is to support the program, support the team when all is falling apart around us.
Michigan is about being the leaders and best. That does not necessarily mean wins. Wins are not what define the Michigan Man. It is effort, perseverance, commitment that defines the Michigan Man. Michigan is about "ALL IN."
And so in the world of fandom, our role is to set the standard, to show all the other programs what it means to be the best 12th man, all in for then team.
On this front, I thought we epic failed during the coaching search. The Haloscan domain – glorious as it was - was filled with panic during those dark days. As a fanbase we were wussified. When we should have been a rock, we were soft. But now is our time to get back on track, to be the source of stability.
I loved Bo. I loved Lloyd. I am all in for RichRod. None of these men were/are perfect, each made mistakes. But each gave/give their all for Michigan. And I will give my best in my role as a fan, for M. That means perseverance, commitment. Valuing the effort of the team, even more than the wins.
With a nod to Lloyd for his moving eulogy of Bo in the Big House (quoting Kipling’s "If"), here is my MGo Pledge of Fandom:
I am a Michigan fan. I pledge allegiance to the team, to the program.
In the glory days of victory, I cheer with might and main;
In the dark days of turmoil, I cheer, again;
I will not panic. I defy the MSM.
I will keep my head, when all about me are losing theirs.
I will meet with Triumph and Disaster, and treat those imposters just the same.
I can watch the team I gave my heart to, broken;
Then stoop and cheer to build 'em up with worn-out will.
I can make one heap of all their winnings;
And cheer while they risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss.
And lose, cheer their start again at the beginnings;
And never breathe a word about their loss.
I will force my heart and nerve and sinew,
To serve their turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in me
Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'
Win or lose, I cheer for their effort, I cheer for the team.
I am a Michigan fan.
I’ve been thinking of doing this for a while and I remember seeing something about this from Brian (he said he wasn’t going to do this, but encouraged some poster to go ahead and do it) a few weeks ago, so I’ve decided to get started.
I’m thinking there should be semiannual awards, 1 set for during the season, and 1 set for the offseason. Hopefully the 1st in-season awards won’t be until sometime in Jan, because hopefully the season won’t end until then. But, I figured I might as well start now just in case.
My plan is to do this in 4 stages.
Stage 1: Define the awards/categories and process.
Stage 2: Receive nominations for the awards.
Stage 3: Vote for the awards winners.
Stage 4: Post the results.
So, what awards/categories would everyone like to see? I think there are some obvious ones that I’ll list here, but please leave me any other suggestions below.
Best MGoBoard post
Funniest MGoBoard post
Worst MGoBoard post
Best poster (as in user providing the consistently best posts)
Best commenter (user providing the consistently best comments)
Comeback poster of the year (someone who got neg-banged but has since redeemed himself)
Best troll (maybe should call it best opposing fan, but basically a fan of another team who has worthwhile contributions to the site)
Best meme (maybe there’s no such thing as a good meme?)
I would also like some input on specifics of the voting process.
Should the voting be done entirely in the comments section?
Would you prefer anonymous voting? E-mail me votes or set up some online poll?
Any other suggestions?
Saturday will mark the 106th meeting between the Big Ten's two dominant programs, and in the 105 previous meetings, there have been 93 occasions where one team's record was better than the other's outside of The Game (twelve times we have been otherwise identical, most recently in 2006).
Overall, the "favorite" (as I'll call them - this means a better record that year outside of The Game, not what a Vegas line or other indicators may have predicted) has won 63% of the games, the underdog 32%, and 5% have been ties. Interestingly, in the twelve games we've been "even odds," Michigan has won 7 to OSU's 3 (with 2 ties), meaning with otherwise equal teams we've gotten the better of tOSU.
In the 43 games where Michigan has had the better record, M is 31-11-1 (72%/26%/2%), a pretty good record of taking care of business. And this is where it gets interesting...
In the 50 games where tOSU has had the better record, the Buckeyes have only won 56% of the matchups, with Michigan winning 38% and 6% ending in ties (28-19-3). The bunch from Columbus have done a much more lackluster job of winning when they should than have the Wolverines in this rivalry.
Even more striking - and this is where I draw my hope for this week from - in the nine games where OSU has been three or more games better than Michigan, the record is OSU 5, Michigan 4 (55% - 44%). The most recent of these was obviously last year, which doesn't lend much hope, but prior to that the most recent three were 1996, 1995, and 1993. In each of those games, OSU entered dominant with a shot at a national title riding on the line, and Michigan rose to the occasion to get the job done. I would submit that this year's OSU team is drastically inferior to each of those teams, and while we're inferior to the mid-90s teams as well, the numbers indicate that the dropoff ratio is similar.
This, combined with playing back in the Big House, gives me hope for Saturday. Let's get this scarlet&grey monkey off our backs and begin to turn the tide, Go Blue!
(records below have Michigan v. OSU impact removed)
|Year||M Record||OSU Record||Differential||Winner|
|1947||9 - 0||2 - 5 - 1||+ 6||Michigan|
|1897||5 - 1||1 - 6 - 1||+ 4.5||Michigan|
|1943||7 - 1||3 - 5||+ 4||Michigan|
|1901||10 - 0||5 - 2 - 1||+ 3.5||Michigan|
|1904||9 - 0||6 - 4||+ 3.5||Michigan|
|1923||7 - 0||3 - 3 - 1||+ 3.5||Michigan|
|1988||8 - 2 - 1||4 - 5 - 1||+ 3.5||Michigan|
|1931||8 - 0 - 1||5 - 3||+ 3||Ohio State|
|1971||10 - 1||6 - 3||+ 3||Michigan|
|1999||9 - 2||6 - 5||+ 3||Michigan|
|1902||10 - 0||6 - 1 - 2||+ 2.5||Michigan|
|1922||5 - 0 - 1||3 - 3||+ 2.5||Michigan|
|1903||10 - 0 - 1||8 - 2||+ 2||Michigan|
|1940||6 - 1||4 - 3||+ 2||Michigan|
|1948||8 - 0||6 - 2||+ 2||Michigan|
|1972||10 - 0||8 - 2||+ 2||Ohio State|
|1992||9 - 0 - 2||8 - 3||+ 2||Tie|
|2001||8 - 3||6 - 5||+ 2||Ohio State|
|1905||11 - 1||8 - 1 - 2||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1918||4 - 0||3 - 2||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1921||5 - 0 - 1||4 - 2||+ 1.5||Ohio State|
|1924||5 - 2||2 - 2 - 3||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1925||6 - 1||4 - 2 - 1||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1929||5 - 2 - 1||3 - 3 - 1||+ 1.5||Ohio State|
|1930||7 - 0 - 1||5 - 1 - 1||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1932||7 - 0||4 - 0 - 3||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1974||10 - 0||9 - 2||+ 1.5||Ohio State|
|1978||9 - 2||7 - 3 - 1||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1987||8 - 3||5 - 3 - 1||+ 1.5||Ohio State|
|1997||11 - 0||10 - 2||+ 1.5||Michigan|
|1927||5 - 2||4 - 3||+ 1||Michigan|
|1938||5 - 1 - 1||4 - 2 - 1||+ 1||Michigan|
|1955||7 - 1||6 - 2||+ 1||Ohio State|
|1970||9 - 0||8 - 1||+ 1||Ohio State|
|1981||9 - 2||8 - 3||+ 1||Ohio State|
|1989||9 - 2||8 - 3||+ 1||Michigan|
|1991||9 - 2||8 - 3||+ 1||Michigan|
|1946||5 - 2 - 1||4 - 2 - 2||+ 0.5||Michigan|
|1964||8 - 1||7 - 1||+ 0.5||Michigan|
|1966||5 - 4||4 - 4||+ 0.5||Michigan|
|1985||9 - 1 - 1||9 - 2||+ 0.5||Michigan|
|1990||8 - 3||7 - 3 - 1||+ 0.5||Michigan|
|1994||8 - 3||8 - 4||+ 0.5||Ohio State|
|1911||4 - 1 - 2||5 - 2 - 2||0||Michigan|
|1933||7 - 0||7 - 0||0||Michigan|
|1941||6 - 1||6 - 1||0||Tie|
|1952||5 - 3||5 - 3||0||Ohio State|
|1956||6 - 2||6 - 2||0||Michigan|
|1973||10 - 0||10 - 0||0||Tie|
|1977||9 - 2||9 - 2||0||Michigan|
|1980||9 - 2||9 - 2||0||Michigan|
|1982||8 - 3||8 - 3||0||Ohio State|
|1986||10 - 2||10 - 2||0||Michigan|
|2000||8 - 3||8 - 3||0||Michigan|
|2006||11 - 1||11 - 1||0||Ohio State|
|1908||4 - 2 - 1||6 - 3||- 0.5||Michigan|
|1909||5 - 1||7 - 2||- 0.5||Michigan|
|1912||4 - 2||5 - 2||- 0.5||Michigan|
|1944||8 - 1||8 - 0||- 0.5||Ohio State|
|1959||3 - 5||3 - 4 - 1||- 0.5||Michigan|
|1963||3 - 3 - 2||4 - 3 - 1||- 0.5||Ohio State|
|1976||9 - 2||9 - 1 - 1||- 0.5||Michigan|
|1998||10 - 2||10 - 1||- 0.5||Ohio State|
|1900||7 - 2||8 - 1||- 1||Tie|
|1926||6 - 1||7 - 0||- 1||Michigan|
|1928||3 - 3 - 1||4 - 2 - 1||- 1||Ohio State|
|1937||4 - 3||5 - 2||- 1||Ohio State|
|1939||5 - 2||6 - 1||- 1||Michigan|
|1942||7 - 2||8 - 1||- 1||Ohio State|
|1949||6 - 2||7 - 1 - 1||- 1||Tie|
|1950||5 - 3 - 1||6 - 2||- 1||Michigan|
|1953||5 - 3||6 - 2||- 1||Michigan|
|1960||5 - 3||6 - 2||- 1||Ohio State|
|1968||8 - 1||9 - 0||- 1||Ohio State|
|1975||8 - 1 - 2||10 - 1||- 1||Ohio State|
|1983||8 - 3||9 - 2||- 1||Michigan|
|2007||9 - 3||10 - 2||- 1||Ohio State|
|1907||4 - 1||7 - 1 - 1||- 1.5||Michigan|
|1910||3 - 0 - 2||6 - 0 - 3||- 1.5||Tie|
|1920||4 - 2||6 - 1||- 1.5||Ohio State|
|1945||6 - 3||7 - 1||- 1.5||Michigan|
|1961||6 - 2||7 - 0 - 1||- 1.5||Ohio State|
|1967||4 - 5||5 - 3||- 1.5||Ohio State|
|1919||3 - 3||5 - 1||- 2||Ohio State|
|1935||4 - 3||6 - 1||- 2||Ohio State|
|1951||3 - 5||4 - 2 - 2||- 2||Michigan|
|1957||5 - 2 - 1||8 - 1||- 2||Ohio State|
|1969||7 - 3||8 - 0||- 2||Michigan|
|1979||8 - 3||10 - 1||- 2||Ohio State|
|1984||6 - 5||8 - 3||- 2||Ohio State|
|2003||9 - 3||11 - 1||- 2||Michigan|
|2004||9 - 2||7 - 4||- 2||Ohio State|
|2005||7 - 4||9 - 2||- 2||Ohio State|
|1954||6 - 2||9 - 0||- 2.5||Ohio State|
|1965||4 - 5||6 - 2||- 2.5||Ohio State|
|2002||10 - 2||13 - 0||- 2.5||Ohio State|
|1906||3 - 1||8 - 0||- 3||Michigan|
|1936||1 - 6||4 - 3||- 3||Ohio State|
|1962||2 - 6||5 - 3||- 3||Ohio State|
|1995||8 - 4||11 - 1||- 3||Michigan|
|1958||2 - 5 - 1||5 - 1 - 2||- 3.5||Ohio State|
|1993||7 - 4||10 - 0 - 1||- 3.5||Michigan|
|1996||7 - 4||11 - 0||- 4||Michigan|
|2009||5 - 6||9 - 2||- 4||??????|
|1934||1 - 6||6 - 1||- 5||Ohio State|
|2008||3 - 8||9 - 3||- 5.5||Ohio State
Spread Quarterback Rankings
A few games into this season, it really became clear to me that this “Spread and Shred” offense is massively quarterback dependent. So much so, that I began to believe that the performance of the defense is almost irrelevant. Now, starting in the second half of the Illinois game it became pretty obvious that the defense needs to be at least competent to make this all work, but I still feel that this offense is so quarterback dependent that the team’s fate lies almost exclusively with the play of the quarterback. The main metric to measure quarterbacks currently in use is the quarterback passer rating system. This system completely ignores a QB’s rushing stats and is therefore not particularly relevant to this offense. So, I set out to design a “spread quarterback rating” and correlate it to winning football games.
With the help of FormerlyAnonymous and a few other posters, I compiled a list of teams that run a pretty similar offense to UM’s current system and used ESPN.com to collect quarterback stats for all of these teams. I ended up with a sample of 222 games played in similar systems. I’d be happy to email the excel sheet to anyone that is interested (or hopefully can do better than I did with the data). I classified the results of each game into four categories. 1 = loss by more than 10, 2 = loss by 10 or less, 3 = win by 10 or less, 4 = win by more than 10. I basically then just played with the numbers as much as I could to come up with a metric that had the highest possible R-Squared value correlating spread quarterback rating (SQBR) to game result. The final formula came out to be…
SQBR = (Pass Yds / Attempts ^ 0.5) + (Rush Yds / Attempts ^0.5) + PassTD *5 + RushTD * 4 – INT*11 – Sacks*7
Please realize this was done 100% empirically, so that’s why it seems weird. But serious, look at the passer rating formula and this is nothing.
As stated above, this was all manipulated to fit the data. The following graph plots game result vs SQBR.
The trendline shows an r-squared value of 0.3901. Obviously this is far short of the perfect correlation of 1, but as the following data will show, it’s better than anything out there. Below is the same data set plotted against conventional passer rating.
The conventional passer rating system correlates approximately half as well as the SQBR for game results.
For a little comparison, the following graph shows how the SQBR and passer rating systems perform for pro-style quarterbacks.
The SQBR actually performs better at predicting the winner with a pro-style quarterback than the conventional passer rating system does. This isn’t particularly surprising given that the SQBR was designed to predict outcome while the passer rating system wasn’t, but I think it’s interesting nonetheless. All in all, the highest correlation between outcome and rating is for the SQBR for spread quarterbacks.
Finally, some numbers. The mean SQBR for spread quarterbacks was 36.93. For quarterbacks that scored more than one standard deviation above the mean, they won 97.2% of the time while winning only 18.1% of the time when scoring more than one standard deviation BELOW the mean.
So what does it all mean? It means the better your quarterback plays, the better chance you have of winning. This obviously isn’t groundbreaking, but I think it’s interesting to see how much bigger a difference it makes in this system. Keep in mind that all of this is calculated completely independent of defense. The extremes are very extreme here. Only one game was lost with a SQBR more than one standard deviation above the mean and that was a shootout loss by Pat White and WVU to Louisville at the peak of their Petrino era in 2006. On the other side, only 18% of the games were won with a SQBR more than one standard deviation below. Contrast that with the fact that in pro-style systems, teams were able to win 32% of the time with a poor SBQR and 48%(!) of the time with a passer rating more than one standard deviation below the mean. Close to twice as likely to win with a bad QB performance in the pro-style system.
Let’s see some numbers from the guys we know and love.
And finally, what I think most can agree is where we want to be.
The discrepancy between White’s last season with Rodriguez and where we are now is honestly mind boggling. In 23 games, we’ve seen a total of five above average games, and no games more than one standard deviation above the mean. The good performances basically line up with on field results. Forcier against WMU, ND, and Illinois*, Sheridan against Minnesota, and Threet against Notre Dame. White on the other hand had nine out of twelve games above average and eight out of twelve exceptional games. Unsurprisingly, WVU lost two of the three games where White’s numbers were below average.
What can our guys do better to emulate White? I think looking at these tables, it’s pretty obvious. One, be more of a running threat. White ran often and he ran well, our guys generally do neither. Two, limit the negatives. White only threw three INTs the entire season and was sacked less than once a game. Needless to say, our guys don’t exactly live up to this standard.
A big positive? Forcier is definitely doing better than last year’s guys. He is a true freshman, and I think we can expect a big jump from him next year (or else…). At the same time, I would also argue that Gardner should be given every possible chance to compete for the job next year. It’s clear to me that you need the best QB play possible for this to succeed and I think it’s only sensible to explore all of your options. With the current trends and feelings out there, I don’t think Rodriguez can worry about getting space between Forcier and Gardner, he needs to win as soon as humanly possible.
So basically, I guess I’m saying we need to continue to get better quarterback play if we’re going to succeed in this system. Looking at this, I’m starting to feel like Gardner is really the key to success, not Forcier. If Rodriguez needs to win next year to save his job, he should stick with Forcier. If he has the 4-5 years we think he does, I’d throw Gardner in there next year and get it rolling. Secondly, I really don’t think defense is all that important. Obviously the last two and a half games have made that statement sound kind of ridiculous, but I believe with good quarterback play in this system, the defense needs to achieve only competency.
Please let me know of any suggestions you can think of to make this better. Again, I’d be happy to give anyone the raw data that is a better statistician or is interested.
*I realized right at the end of this that I don’t have fumbles in the equation. For whatever reason, it wasn’t in the ESPN data I got. Crap… I think it would only be better though with fumbles included.