One of the cites being discussed.
We all realize what a physical speciman and talent Denard is and how much he has improved from '09 - '10. I wonder how much better Tate would be in '10 vs 09' with our clearly improved O-line play. If I recall last year, it seemed like 1/2 the time, Tate was scrambling for his life and using his 'moxie' (or was it 'mojo') to make plays instead of operating the offense.
My question for you stat geeks and smart people, is there anyway to compare except to actually see Tate on the field this year? My thinking is that even if Tate has minor improvement from '09, he'd seem much improved due to O-line play.
Is this an example of posts getting dumber and dumber as the week progresses or a valid question? Inquiring minds want to know.
I don't think anybody has Mallet within a mile of the Nard Dawg right now, but there is a big time opportunity coming up this week for Mallet when he takes on Alabama.
If he lights up that Alabama defense (which I highly doubt he does by the way), it will be hard to make the argument for him NOT to become the leader in the race. Then we pretty much HAVE to beat MSU, WISC and OSU for the Nard Dawg to get back in.
So, despite being led by the devil himself (Saban not Mallet), I ask, nay beseech you to support the Alabama defense and pray for an ugly ass 7 (fumble returned for TD) -3 (fumble-3andout-FG) win for Alabama this weekend.
For those who are inevitably going to say "the team, the team, blah blah blah", the positive press Denard is bring to UM and recruiting advantage of having a Heisman Trophy winner more than justify rooting for personal accolades. I want Denard to stay humble throughout the process but I am going to be rooting like hell for him to win the stiff arm trophy.
I was just watching the Herd on ESPN this morning and Colin was talking about the schools he went to in the Big Ten for Sportsnation and the Herd. He started off by saying we expected Wisconsin and Penn State to be alot of fun, but we were very leary of Michigan and Iowa. He goes on to say that Michigan was amazing. They had the most fans, they were respectful, they were the most enthusiastic, and the best experience so far on our tour. Just thought I would throw this out there.
First off I want to say that I have been a believer in Mike Barwis. He looks and acts like a guy I want running the S & C progam. But this is year three now. Have we seen any real affect of having him on our staff. He was one of the main guys in the NCAA investigation.
It seems that especially on defense we get pushed around. I know we want to be fast, but in my opinion we need a little more mass. Are the players on defense just not good enough? Are they not smart enough to know what to do? Do we not have enough depth? How is any of this an issue in year 3 of RR and Barwis? Is it just youth?
I think that people go crazy over Barwis. I just think he is overrated, and we need to see some real evidence that these guys are getting stronger and faster, and more importantly it has to translate over to the field. Again, this is more about our D.