I have been growing increasingly tired of the "Denard is too small to maintain his RB-like carry numbers" and the even more specifically infuriating "SAME MEME BUT WITH OMGSEC". I did some very amateurish analysis and came to the following conclusion: Ahhh Hamburgers.... he is small.
Denard checks-in at a svelte 27 lbs below the average weight of the top 2-26 rushing leaders in total yards (Denard iz noomber von) which comes out to beefcakey 215 lbs. He also punches in at beach-season-envious 11 lbs below the low-end standard deviation weightage of 199 lbs.
Now for the SEC comparison, which affords us the awesome right of bangkok bettying the SEC as they wave their collective penii around in the constant dick wagging contest they seem to push on everybody against our will (essentially non-sexual confrontational rape). Their average weight for RB's is cleared for a lighter landing at 211 lbs, which, as only the most astute will notice, is less than 215 lbs. Sadly, their low-end standard deviation comes in at 199 lbs or as a SEC fan will articulate: SAMESIES BITCHFACES (or something along those lines).
So I guess, in conclusion, Denard is small in comparison to the small sample of RB's I sampled. But, on the brighter side, he is smaller in comparison to the national leaders than he is to SEC starting RB's. How's that basically inconsequential humble pie taste SEC peeps? I'll get you the heavy f'ing whipping cream so you guys can beef up.
*Note: 3 SEC RB's factored into the top 2-26 numbers*
Mine are corny, but I'd love to see ideas from the community for signage during the game.
And yes, the one is in poor taste... hence why we call it a rivalry.
And also, yes ... I clearly have not mastered photoshop.
I know this was sunday but it just occured to me that I never saw a post on Todd this past week. I might have just missed it...
Regardless I was shocked to see that he was still in the NFL!! I remember him playing for the Bills a little and that was the last I had heard of him. Todd is the oldest QB I can distinctly remember watching playing for Michigan (Live). I was 8 years old. I know Chad and Tom got all the attention on monday but lets not forget that Todd played pretty well for us too.
The goal line stand game vs PSU:
Remember in 2008 when words like "Denard" and "Tate" didn't exist in our vocab since our top 2 QBs were none other than the gentleman below?
This picture provides perspective for the challenge our D faces. Aren't you glad RichRod didn't listen to the critics and put Threet/Sheridan under center in a pro-style offense? How invaluable was it that our OL and WRs learn the spread offense in 2008 to prep for what we now have in 2010?
While I do concede some things can be tweaked on D (like Roh looking lost on zone coverage vs. his strength of rushing the passer), we have to give RichRod time on defense. He made a swift move to fire Schafer for a reason. The jury may still be out on GERG and that's fine. But RichRod has brought in solid, young talent on D. If he can develop Lloyd's players (see Jr. Hemingway and Jonas Mouton), this D will grow up in time.
Regardless of how the D performs this Saturday or this year, I am positive we will have Denard/Roundtree/Lewan type all-stars on our D soon. Here's to hoping that young talent shines against Sparty this weekend.
Ok, so let me preface this with a simple bit that I've never played football in my life, so consider this a plea for those with experience who would know better.
I see a lot of these swing passes or WR screens in college football - we run it a lot. Quick pass down the sideline, let the WR grab some YAC.
I've seen them both as cannons to the sideline and some slower touch passes.
Is this a route that a defender could reasonably jump? An interception here looks like a free pick-6. Also, the slower balls look a bit vulnerable and have a fair bit of hangtime. The cannon ones also tend to be pretty low.
How difficult would that be to do? I'm wondering both for the 'hey its something our D might be able to do!" perspective and a "Ohshit is this going to happen to us?" perspective.