well that's just, like, your opinion, man
Since a lot of comments on here are about how predictable our offense is, I decided to take a look at run/pass % by formation for all of our games. I kept the formations simple and just used Ace, I-form, Pistol, Shotgun, and Tackle Over (Tackle over is usually out of I-form or Ace, but deserves its own category.) I got the stats from the UConn game from a diary that Ron Utah did, everything else I looked up myself from Brian's UFR's.
Here are the charts game by game
Shotgun - 3 run, 16 pass, 84% pass
Pistol - 1 run, 1 pass, 50%
I-form - 23 run, 3 pass, 88% run
Ace - 11 run, 9 pass, 55% run
Shotgun - 5 run, 18 pass, 78% pass
Pistol - 9 run, 4 pass, 69% run
I-form - 14 run, 2 pass, 88% run
Ace - 6 run, 17 pass, 74% pass
Shotgun - 4 run, 15 pass, 79% pass
Pistol - 3 run, 3 pass, 50%
I-form - 14 run, 4 pass, 78% run
Ace - 8 run, 11 pass, 58% pass
Shotgun - 9 run, 22 pass, 71% pas
Pistol - 3 run, 1 pass, 75% run
I Form - 8 run, 3 passes, 72% run
Ace - 12 runs, 7 passes, 63% run
Shotgun - 2 run (both by DG), 13 passes, 87% pass
If there is any interest, there is a mildly interesting ACC matchup on in about ten minutes or so. A 5-0 Miami team will be taking on the 1-4 Fightin' Fedoras of North Carolina down at Kenan Stadium in Chapel Hill.
Your matchup stats, courtesy of the folks at TeamRankings. Over there, Miami is being given a pretty comfortable shot - about 80% estimated win probability:
|Rush Play %||54.40%||45.72%|
|Pass Play %||45.60%||54.28%|
|3D Conv %||33.33%||44.87%|
|RZ Scoring %||73.68%||92.86%|
|Opp Completion %||51.35%||63.09%|
|Opp 3D Conv %||31.25%||46.15%|
|Opp RZ Scoring %||69.23%||84.21%|
Basically, he has partnered with a company to sell $10.5m worth of shares in his future performance. He gets $10m of that, but he then 20% of his future earnings go to shareholders. Think of it as an insurance policy in case he has a serious injury next week.
At first I just thought this was a cool idea and was going to move on, but then I thought, "Could something like this be the solution to paying student athletes?"
What if student athletes were allowed to setup their own company in their name. They work with a company like Fantex to setup the details of the IPO for the player/company. Companies like EA then pay the dividends to the company. Even without money from companies like EA, the player probably has enough money from the IPO to make it through college. As money is deposited into the company, 20% gets distributed to shareholders. The player can then withdraw a limited amount of money each year per NCAA rules before they are deemed "professional". Maybe that means that the scholarship and earnings can only total $65k/year or something like that. Once the player graduates or leaves school for any reason, he is free to withdraw money as he pleases.
A couple of things that would make this work, I think:
- It makes a player's decision to come back for another year easier if they know that they have some money waiting for them either way.
- While 3* athletes might not get $10m in an IPO, they could still set one up as a freshman and people might gamble on some of them to hopefully get large returns by selling stock later when they become starters or when the player makes it to the pros and starts sending dividends to the investors. Imagine having bought stock in an unknown Mike Hart and then selling his stock after his Junior year. You could have made a lot of money off of the prospect
What does everyone think about this idea?
Not easy to pick 10 memorable plays in a one-sided series and then rank them. But this was my attempt.
(Click the Image to See Full Size Version)
Drastic measures... and drastic drawings.
THE BLOCKHAMS™ runs (typically) every week here at MGoBlog and on its official home page. Also, don't forget to check out the Friday Fun, my weekly single panel comic based on trending Michigan events, available on Twitter and the home page every Friday.
Space Coyote brings a provocative play by play counter-assessment of Al's playcalls, and concludes with support of Al's overall game.
Personally, I think he's partially right: Al Borges used a lot more variety and counter work than people give him credit for, and given the weaknesses and strengths of the team, produced a gameplan that was good enough put Michigan up by ten in the fourth quarter.
When you have no OL and a QB that turns it over, your options are limited, and he worked with those options.
Where I hold Borges responsible? He's the offensive coordinator. He bears some responsibility for the line being bad in the first place. More significantly, he is the QB coach, and I don't have a lot of faith in him in that capacity. I wonder how much of Devin's TO trouble is coaching related.