if you seek an image of the most Wisconsin OL ever, enter here
“I like Michigan in the Big Ten,” Drew said. “I'm mostly looking at Michigan; they have a great football program but mainly looking at them for the educational standpoint,” Drew said.
“When I talk to the Michigan coaches they need me for the program and they want to turn the program around. I’m not sure If I will visit them it’s a possibility,” Drew said.
Per Scout: Height = 6'5", Weight = 248, 40 = 4.74, Position Rank = 8
[Ed-M: What are these numbers? Returning players on 2-deep? Next year's upperclassmen? Whatever: to the board with you]
edit: fuck it, see below. Much better stated.
I am sorry for not writing what I was using down. I DERPed up. I am doing this by Varsity letters earned by returning players.
For paragraph 2 I will state this: for career back-ups I awarded a varsity letter only if they are an upper-classman. This was to differentiate between a returning sophomore who only played (for example) 3 games and crap time, and who hasn't gotten enough lifting time in and a 5th year returning senior (who you could say would equal Banks I guess, so it's still off). The thought was that a returning 5th year who was a career back-up would only get 1 vasity letter awarded beause they didn't do much in PT, but they did get scheme training, and weight training.
*We run a 3-3-5, not a 4-3. Thus, we’re under a player here.
**For convenience I’m putting the Spur as a WLB, not an additional safety, for this metric.
*** based on the metric below, the average is 5.9 years of PT.
Complicated crap that you might not care about:
If you shift the numbers on DL to a three man front, it gets really complicated. Whose production do you take out? The other team's least or most experienced player? I can't think of a metric for this other than AVG EXP/player/3 DL positions. If you use that, the average EXP for DL is about 5.9 years. If anyone has any better ideas for this metric, tell me.
WHAT THIS MEANS:
You’ll see that our DL is more experienced than average (per player, not unit) while the rest of our D will be just around the normal experience level. In Fact, our secondary will be more experienced than the average BT secondary. This makes sense.
- We lose 1 player in the secondary: Rogers. Not much of a loss, but a significant loss when you think about PT. Counter that with Woolfolk, a 5th year Senior taking Roger's place, and you don't lose any experience.
- We don't lose any other players in the secondary; everyone comes back with experience
- After such decimation for two years, we should have expected this. It only makes sense that teams will tend back to the norm.
The fact that the DD argument will no longer be tenable next year (due to us having MORE!!! experience than an average BT team) is a good thing. While we can no longer cling to that as a legitimate excuse for RR, we can now bring up our expectations.
- DD is no longer a valid excuse. It's premise was that we lost experience; we now will have average experience. If low PT was the reason for a poor defense, a middling PT/experience factor should give us a middle-of-the-pack defense.
- Our D SHOULD be middle of the pack, based on the PT logic. I've argued from day one that a middle of the pack D would give us a shot at the BT title and if our O is #1 (which it could be, but depends on TOM) a shot at the MNC.
- We should shoot for the BT title next year. If our offense continues taking the strides it has, and we stop this TOM BS our D should finally be good enough for this to be a goal.
Rich Rodriguez staring with fire in his eyes after Illinois goes up 45-38, meanwhile GERG picks his nose.
Note: This started as a board post and evolved into something diary worthy (I think). However, bump to the board if need be. Thanks!
So I know that there are 3 games left, and I know that individual awards don't matter in comparison to the team winning games.
And I also know that the Heisman does not go to the best player in college football anymore, but rather to the best player on a top 10 team. Its been that way for a long time.
HOWEVER, I find myself looking at the stats that Denard is continuing to put up and can't help but wonder why he is getting absolutely ZERO consideration after the media explosion that happened earlier in the season.
Let's look at some facts:
Denard leads the nation with 351.44 YPG (ahead of Cam Newton by almost 50 YPG!)
In terms of pure yardage he is 3rd behind Griffin III and Moniz who have each played an additional game.
Denard is 2nd in the nation with 149.89 YPG (behind OR's James at 166.38)
However, he is actually leads James in total yardage with 1349! James is only counted for 8 games because he was suspended for punching his girlfriend against NM, while Denard is counted for 9 despite barely playing against BG and missing close to a half against Iowa and Illinois.
So basically if someone out there was ambitious enough to do a "yards per 60 minutes played," I guarantee Denard would be the nation's leading rusher.
DRob is also 2nd in the nation with 7.37 YPC behind Taylor Martinez and well ahead of James at 6.79.
Denard's Total Passing Yards (1814) are obviously nowhere near the top of any list, but being a duel-threat QB that isn't really relevant (see Total Offense).
However, Denard ranks 11th! in Passer Efficiency Rating (160.90) with Kellen Moore and Cam Newton leading the way.
Denard has 25 total TDS, 12 Rush and 13 Pass.
James has 18 total TDs, Newton has 34, Moore has 22.
Denard has 7 INTs and may 2-3 lost fumbles? So we'll say 10 TOs
James' TO #s are irrelevant (plus I can't find them), Newton has 5 INTs, and Moore has 4 INTs.
So, after looking at those numbers the question becomes: Why is Denard not a Heisman contender any more?
The Answer: Oregon, Auburn, and Boise are undefeated. Plain and simple. If Michigan only had one loss or less and was in the top 10, I would almost guarantee that DRob would still be in the thick of the Heisman race even if his numbers were exactly the same.
Now a lot of people would say, well its not all about the numbers. There are other factors.
And I would agree with them. BUT this is not Timmy Chang, Colt Brennen, or one of the Texas Tech QBs putting up 6000 yards.
We are talking about a sophomore QB on a Big Ten team! Michigan's schedule is no joke, and declaring Denard to be a "system" QB in the line of those mentioned above doesn't seem to fit. What is the system? Passing? Rushing? Scoring? Denard ranks well in every category.
Its just frustrating to me that the media blew up in epic proportions during the first part of the season over Denard, but now they barely give him a mention. I think they definitely gave him too much pub by declaring him the winner after week 4, but I also think they are giving him too little respect at this point in the season.
Denard has numbers comparable or better than every other top Heisman candidate, and he plays a schedule much more difficult than that of Oregon, Boise, and most other teams outside the SEC.
And last but not least lets not forget that he plays on a team FAR worse than those of James, Newton, or Moore. Its funny that Michigan's record is a big part of the reason he is not under consideration when the fact that Michigan is terrible on defense should be an even bigger credit to his abilities.
Newton, James, and Moore are all on teams surrounded by superstars and playmakers, and while Michigan does have an excellent offense, our team as a whole is not very good.
People should realize once again that the Heisman is about the most outstanding player in college football, regardless of record. I know that strength of schedule has to be considered in making that determination, but having a bad team should not count against you.
I'm not saying that Denard should win the Heisman. I think Newton would have my vote at this point. But Denard would be second or third without a doubt in my mind, and I hope that other people are thinking the same thing. The kid deserves it.
For all the excitement of this roller coaster of a season, there has been a palpable lack of CONER this year. When we last left Georgia's Finest he was going full force into an acting career, but it's been a while since we last heard what the stud was up to.
FRET NO MORE! Presenting: The Return of the Coner!
EDIT: Can't figure out why my resizing efforts are failing, mod help appreciated.
I avoiding posting anything after the last few losses, but I'm pleased to share my homage to Saturday's win.
Since I couldn't find a good picture of the final play, I created one by combining other pictures; so it's not completely accurate. i hope you like it.