“On the offense last year, they had great spacing. That’s what I remember. Great spacing, great shooters, like Nik Stauskas, who’s not there right now. But they always have someone to fill the roles. They have a cutting offense, kind of hard to guard.”
"Northwestern fans can be both heartened and disheartened by the loss to Minnesota just like how nineteenth-century resurrectionists were heartened when they pried a heart from a freshly-buried corpse and then disheartened it when they sold it to a disreputable anatomist."
"The experience he has from last year is starting to show," Jazz forward Gordon Hayward said. "He’s making shots, and he made some gutsy plays against Portland. He’s got a confidence about him that he can get the job done."
A long, long time ago now a Lloyd-Carr coached Michigan team was struggling through the 2005 season when they met Northwestern. A lot of throws to Tacopants (Jason Avant's 11-foot-tall imaginary friend) on both sides later, Michigan emerged with a 33-17 win and I embarked on one of the first of an endless procession of stat-nerd diatribes about the evils of punting.
You've probably heard it already: punting decisions have not kept pace with the increasingly offensive nature of the game, leaving coaches in a perpetual state of risk- and win-avoidance. Romer paper, Pulaski High, Mathlete chart. Etc.
In this particular Northwestern game, though, Carr went for it on fourth and five from the Northwestern 23, a decision I thought was too aggressive(!). When paired with a number of similarly aggressive calls from earlier that season, it seemed like a sea change for the old man:
In multiple cases he's made tough, correct decisions: going on fourth and goal from the one against Wisconsin, pounding it into the line twice against Michigan State, etc. Even when the strategy has backfired, he accepts the downside and persists in a more aggressive posture.
In context, the Penn State gaffe seems more like one last hit of that sweet Bombay Popsicle* snuck in-between rehab sessions than evidence of 1970s thinking taking hold. Lloyd Carr has checked himself in to the Betty Ford Center for Coaches Addicted to Low Variance. I wouldn't expect a flying-colors discharge any time soon, but he's made the first, biggest step.
*[I don't know either.]
That change lasted into the fourth quarter of that year's Ohio State game. Having acquired a two-score lead by converting a fourth and inches around the Michigan 40, Carr reverted to his primitive instincts at the crucial moment. With three minutes left from the Ohio State 40, he called for a wide receiver screen on third and ten. It gained six yards. With a two point lead, three minutes on the clock, no Ohio State timeouts left, and a fourth and four on the Ohio State 34, Carr punted. Ohio State drove for a touchdown; Carr would never again have the opportunity to kill a game against the Buckeyes.
In the moment, Carr choked. Six years on that single decision seems like the best way to explain why a lot Michigan fans found his tenure frustrating despite its high rate of success: the program was perpetually making poor decisions because a combination of fear and arrogance. Something could go wrong if you made a high variance decision, and Michigan could spit on expected value because This Is Michigan. See any game in which Michigan acquired an 18-point lead or the first half of the Orange Bowl for confirmation.
Carr coached like he had a kickass running game and killer defense no matter the facts, which was the difference between being a legend and a being a B+ coach who lost the battle with Tressel authoritatively. Hell, even Tressel blew games when he failed to adjust to the reality that sometimes his defense and special teams were not enough, and he ran roughshod over the Big Ten for nine years.
Part of the reason a segment of the Michigan fanbase (including the author) blew up at Hoke's hire is because it seemed to represent a return to that expectation-spurning 1970s decision-making.
Brady Hoke put a lot of those fears to rest by going for—and getting—the win against Notre Dame with eight seconds left. That decision was a no-brainer. If the field goal team had run out onto the field, I would have been livid. That was a test he passed, but it was one with a low bar.
On Saturday, Hoke sent out the punting team with about two and a half minutes left in the first half. It was fourth and two around midfield, and I was mildly peeved. It was not the percentage play, but I've watched a lot of football and it seemed too much to hope that even the rootin'est, tootin'est, eyepatch-wearingest pirate of a head coach would go for it. Needing more than a sneak and up fourteen in the first half, the world punts. My peevishness was directed at football coaches in general, not Hoke in particular.
And then an angel came down from the sky, and signaled timeout. Great trumpets erupted from the flagpoles, playing a fanfare as a golden staircase descended. Each of the steps was engraved with the names of World Series of Poker winners. Down from the clouds strode Doyle Brunson, clad in a jacket of hundred-dollar bills. And lo, Texas Dolly spaketh unto the people: "check-raise." Brady Hoke sent the offensive line onto the field.
This was a really, really good decision. Even if you don't believe the exact outlines of the Mathlete's calculations, it is not close: average offense versus average defense means the break-even line is around eight yards. This was not an average situation. Michigan had Denard Robinson against a pretty horrible run defense. And that number does not take into account the game situation. If Michigan gets the first down they are almost certainly robbing San Diego State of a possession. Punting gets you thirty, forty yards of field position. Getting the first down puts you in good position to score and is essentially another +1 in turnover margin. You need two yards and you have Denard Robinson.
stealing a joke from the internet: the guy on the right looks like he just looked into the Ark of the Covenant. via the News.
One speed option later Michigan was en route to the endzone and had essentially ended the game. Without that massively +EV decision they go into halftime up maybe 14, maybe 11, maybe 7 points. That ugly third quarter becomes the gut-check time most were predicting before the game. Maybe Michigan comes out on top (24-21, say). Maybe not. That didn't happen because when Michigan had its boot on San Diego State's neck, Hoke called Z 22 stomp right.
The Lloyd Carr example above shows we don't know that Hoke's going to do this consistently, that he'll stick to the non-pejorative MANBALL when the pressure is at its greatest, but so far so good. Even my doubts about Hoke's ability to math up in the waning moments of an Ohio State game are faint. When things go wrong he does not scowl or pout or throw headsets like Rich Rodriguez or Brian Kelly or Bo Pelini. He does not go on tilt. He calmly talks to guys about what in the hell they were thinking.
Hoke continues to leave best-case scenarios in the dust. Saturday night I watched Dennis Erickson punt on fourth and five from the USC 37 and thought "my coach would never do that." Then I watched Erickson chew out the punter who put the ball in the endzone because that's what happens when you punt from the 37 and thought "my coach would never do that."
That felt good. It felt invent-a-time-machine-to-assure-yourself-its-all-going-to-be-okay good. It feels like Michigan has finally learned how to gamble.
Boy do I want to play poker with certain people on the internet. Evaluating the decision has popped up on every Michigan message board. It's mostly been met with praise, but man, there are a lot of people who can't estimate and multiply out there. Maybe it's Carr Stockholm syndrome.
That's a great question. Just as our rationality leads us to a belief in an objective reality, Kant believed there is an objective morality we can locate from the same process. The Categorical Imperative is an absolute, fundamental moral law on par with Minnesota losing to teams from the Dakotas. Things are either right or wrong—there are no gray areas, and context does not apply. You could call him the BJ Daniels of philosophy*.
*[Ten-cent summary of Kantian philosophy cribbed from Three Minute Philosophy, which is terrific. Philosophers wishing to quibble with my paraphrase of a comedic summary are invited to consider the moral consequences of their actions and also jump in a lake. USF fans wishing to WOO BJ DANIELS can skip to the latter.]
And the internet eeeed Countess. When Troy Woolfolk headed to the sidelines, all Michigan fans everywhere winced. When Blake Countess replaced JT Floyd in the third quarter, all Michigan fans everywhere prepared for the deluge.
It never came, and as a result everyone from my uncle to the internet to thenewspapers are having little freakouts about Michigan's #4 corner. I am with all of you. The only thing stopping Countess from having a few PBUs or interceptions was Ryan Lindley's inability to throw the ball anywhere near the guys Countess had blanketed but Lindley targeted anyway.
For most of the third quarter I stopped watching the offensive backfield and started watching downfield coverage and while I won't be able to confirm this on the tape I think Countess was doing really well even when people weren't going after him. I'm with the rest of the internet when I suggest that Troy Woolfolk should take the Minnesota game off to recover from his multiple nagging injuries so we can see some more of the freshman.
I thought Avery did well, too. He had a third-down slant completed on him and was the DB victimized on the touchdown but in both cases he was right there tackling/raking at the ball. Is he doing something wrong I'm not perceiving yet? Because I think he's playing better than Woolfolk, who gave up some groan-worthy easy completions. (I don't blame him for allowing Hillman to bounce on one third down conversion because he was clearly held.)
Release the Martin. This week in the I-told-you-so files: Mike Martin is just fine. His good day last week was obscured by EMU never throwing and having quite a bit of success attacking away from him. Against SDSU he was nigh unblockable, bowling a veteran offensive line over backwards multiple times and drawing holding calls left and right. Craig Roh had two big plays and will show up doing little things when I do the UFR; Will Campbell had a couple of line-pushing plays. Hillman's YPC was still over five, so there are issues but I think a big chunk of them are localizable to…
Problems. So… everyone's talking up Jake Ryan, too. I'm with everyone in a general, long-term sense but a little less enthused about his performance on Saturday. One of the results of the first few weeks of UFRing/picture paging is that whenever the opponent tries to get outside I immediately focus on Ryan. Result from last week: three "aaargh Ryan" screams that no one in my section comprehended. He's still giving up the corner way too easy.
Also, there are two caveats to an otherwise encouraging performance from the secondary. One: Lindley and his receivers were flat bad as a group. Drops, bad routes, and bad throws artificially boosted Michigan's efficiency against him. Some of that was caused by pressure. Some of it was just a crappy opponent. Two: I wonder if Michigan's familiarity with the SDSU offense allowed them to beat the Aztecs' favorite routes into Michigan DBs heads.
Still, 5.3 YPA and actual depth at corner. +1 Mallory.
Offensive construction bits. Another week, another confirmation that running Denard is the offense. While I still groan whenever they line up under center, snaps from there were limited. I would really prefer it if they never ran I-form power on first and ten again, though. They've mixed in some inexplicably effective short play action so far; if they can't run that will probably dry up.
Things I liked: That screen to Smith. The essence of an RPS+3 is when three offensive linemen have no one to block for 30 yards. And then the much-discussed speed option debuted. I'd gotten a couple insider emails telling me it was part of the offense but thought it would be extremely bad form to publish that, so I'd been waiting. It was quite a debut.
I'm hoping we see Borges add wrinkles at the same rate Rodriguez did. He'll have to to keep the run offense ahead of the wolves. He's off to a good start.
Tailbacks. I'm suddenly happy with Michigan's tailback situation after Vincent Smith made a lot of yards on his own, including the above touchdown where he kept his balance at about the five and managed to drag a safety into the endzone. There was also the zone play where he squeezed through a crack in the line it's possible literally no other D-I back would have fit through.
Toussaint, meanwhile, didn't have the yards Smith did but ran hard on the inside; I still like him best but understand if they're going to split duties between the top two. I feel bad for Shaw—maybe it's time to put him on kickoffs? He's got speed Smith does not.
The Denard question. So they did run a curl-flat. Denard went to the curl way late and threw his first interception. Not sure if that was schemed or just bad execution by the offense. If it's the latter that might be attributable to not running it over the offseason as Borges attempted to install his route packages, route packages that now seem like things Denard just can't do.
A three-point plan in an attempt to get Denard back on track:
Stop throwing on the run.
Provide some easy throws early—all hitch, snag—in an effort to get him calmed down.
Develop some sort of counter-punch to the opponent getting all up in Denard's face on the rollout PA. A shovel pass?
Bending but not breaking. Michigan's giving up a lot of yards but not a lot of points. Frankly, some of this is luck. They are acquiring turnovers at an unsustainable rate. Not unsustainable for a mediocre defense, unsustainable for Michigan 1997. When the well dries up they'll do some more breaking.
The other thing is the secondary. Michigan's newfound ability to make plays on deep balls and Jordan Kovacs being stone-cold reliable (so far /crosses self) have erased cheap touchdowns for the opposition. WMU's touchdown came on a 15-play drive. ND touchdown drives went 7, 10, 7, and 4 plays. San Diego State's took six plays but started from the Michigan 38. The only quick drive Michigan's given up all year was ND's desperation drive, on which Michigan gave up chunks on purpose because of the time situation and then tried an NFL-style defense they weren't ready for and blew it. The longest touchdown other than that was the 16-yard pass Lindley hit in the third quarter.
Opponents have ripped off chunks on occasion, but they have not been handed free touchdowns. Michigan's at least making them earn it. That's a necessary first step on the road away from completely awful.
The next opponent. When Minnesota managed to hang with USC on the first weekend of the season they seemed like they might be more intimidating than your average Minnesota team. Then they lost to Not Even The Good New Mexico and North Dakota State and seemed even less intimidating than your average Minnesota team. Compounding matters: Jerry Kill is again out of commission with his seizure issue.
I did not VOAV this week for reasons of being spooked. Boyz In The Pahokee provided the usual bounty if you are jonesing.
Matt Wile. Wait, let me try that again. MATT WILE!!! Yeah, I think he was properly pumped up to play his Dad's team. Net yards per kickoff were 50 for SDSU and 49.2 for UofM. To be even on kickoffs is a win for us. Net yards per punt were 34.7 for SDSU and 43.5 for Michigan. To gain almost a full first down per punt is huge. Two punts were inside the 20, and two were 50+ yards. #82, Terrance Robinson had 2 ST tackles and did a great job as the gunner on punts.
Wile's just lost his punting job; if that allows him to improve his kickoffs and compete for the field goal job, Michigan's kicking could be one of those strength things by midseason.
Michigan needs Hagerup back. Maybe Hagerup isn't the only answer. Wile's kicks are improving it would seem, both on KOs and punts, possibly because his nerves are settling down. Kickoffs regularly made it to the goal line and only 1 of 4 punts was returned for much while they averaged 49 yards per with a long of only 51(!).
After the Notre Dame game, I tweeted very simply: "And the singing, Captain?" "Let them sing." The moment was too good to start worrying about the future. But at some point, the future arrives and you need to deal with it. How well prepared you are for that future plays a large role in how well you're able to handle it when the moment arrives. The non-conference schedule, particularly one played as four games at the start of the season should, theoretically, be a nice combination of challenges and the working out of kinks. Before the mission starts, you must know the capacity and capabilities of your crew.
Fifth-year senior defensive tackle Ryan Van Bergen caught Hillman from behind inside the 10-yard line and knocked the ball loose for the second fumble.
Try reading it this way: a 288-pound defensive tackle caught the nation’s second-leading rusher from behind in the open field — 30 yards away from the line of scrimmage.
Van Bergen got a block from fifth-year senior defensive tackle Mike Martin, but most of his help came from practice.
“But when it comes down to it, we have the most explosive player in the country in our backfield,” Van Bergen said. “We get to play against (junior quarterback) Denard (Robinson), so we’ve learned how to take angles at guys who have speed.
“I took off on my horse just thinking, ‘I’ve almost caught Denard before, maybe I can catch this guy.’ ”
“They were very emotional after the game, depressed, disappointed, upset, however you want to say,” said Long, whose team dropped to 3-1 after Saturday’s 28-7 defeat. “It was a very emotional locker room after the game and not in a good sense.”
They probably would have done a “poor job” of answering questions, Long said, so he kept them behind closed doors. “It’s my job to protect them,” Long said Sunday. “This is not pro football.” …
"The defense got shocked by the speed of especially one guy (Robinson),” Long said. “They got shocked by the strength they had up front and the speed of quarterback early in the game.”
• Offensively, Michigan is 13-for-13 on red-zone opportunities. It is one of 13 teams in the country to have scored on every trip inside the 20-yard line this year.
• Even better? The Wolverines have scored touchdowns on 12 of those 13 trips. That 92-percent touchdown rate trails only Texas Tech nationally.
One of the main arguments made in favor of Shotgun Forever is that red zone efficiency is not a stat that shows much repeatable skill year to year and that the huge chunks of yards Michigan picked up without, you know, scoring in 2010 would turn into points if you just left the damn thing alone (and got a kicker). The early returns are excellent.
- Michigan 28, San Diego State 7. Brady Hoke’s new team faced his old team, and I’m still not sure, despite their 4-0 record, that we know anything about this Michigan football team. The defense seems to be improving under DC Greg Mattison, but they’ve been using so much movement and motion to cover up their talent weaknesses it’s unclear how the defense will fare against a polished opponent. And while the offense has found a better rhythm running a Rich Rodriguez-lite Denard Robinson attack — including Denard’s long TD run on the speed option — his passing line was abysmal: 8 of 17 for 93 yards, no TDs and two interceptions. He’s obviously uncomfortable in the new offense. He looked like a more polished and comfortable passer last year. I chalk some of this up to the fact that the very techniques he’s using are new, but he’s going to have to improve for UM to have success. That said, given Michigan’s favorable schedule — no Wisconsin and the easy part of the Big 10 schedule up next — we may not learn anything about Michigan until the last three weeks of the season, when they play Illinois, Nebraska and Ohio State.
No one else bothered. A couple weeks after puntosauring himself into a loss against Iowa State, BHGP documents Kirk Ferentz opening Iowa's game against ULM in a shotgun spread, demonstrating the Carr thing above perfectly.
Yep...somebody's going to hurt us while we're flopping at one point. Hopefully it doesn't cost us a big play. Luckily, we've been quick to recognize the changes in strength and the guys hustle to get to their spots. Teams that are dumb/lazy get hurt with it a lot more often.
Dantonio seems to love to gameplan for stuff like that - like jumping all our snap counts a couple years ago. I can see OSU doing it now that Fickell's there - he'll probably feel like he needs to plan on ways to out scheme us.
Tressel, of course, would have just anticipated that we would anticipate that he would try to take advantage of our tendency here and would thus get us to jump at shadows. Or something else more closely connected with the ritual death of puppies.
Speaking of flipping formations: Are we tipping a Denard run every time we flip the RB? I started specifically watching for it yesterday, and it seemed every time the RB switched sides, it was to be a lead blocker for a QB power/iso/sweep/whatever. I didn't notice any other plays after the flips, although I may have missed some when my daughter decided she didn't like the game having my full attention.
when it is a RB run out of the gun the RB is a couple of steps behind Denard but when we pass or the RB is the lead blocker for the QB he lines up even with the QB. Having said that, I am not sure how easy it is to see that from the field level across the line of scrimmage.
The Michigan defense played well vs SDSU, however, on 2 or 3 third downs (or perhaps fourth downs) there was an SDSU WR/TE open and Lindley didn't see him or threw a poor pass which resulted in a turnover or a punt.
Also, was the shifting D-line meant to confuse SDSU or where the linemen just getting into correct formation? I couldn't tell which it was.
it wasn't an attempt to confuse. SDSU would flip the strength of the formation, so Michigan would respond. It gave me the heebie-jeebies because it seemed like moving a TE could cause Michigan's DL to fall into disarray at a time when it's perfectly legal to snap the ball. I didn't mind it so much when SDSU would send multiple guys all over the place, because then they have to re-set.
Saying Woolfolk has had crappy luck the past 14 months is a major understatement. Still, given how well Countess performed and given that one (and maybe both) of his ankles are not 100%, I agree he should take the next week or two off so that he can be as healthy as possible for the meat of the B10 schedule. FWIW, in additional to his ankle issues, he also seems to be having difficulty tackling consistently with one of his paws in a cast. I also wonder if, when he returns, it would be better to move him to safety. With his experience and knowledge of the game, and ankle issues possibly affecting his speed, I think that might be the better place for him.
"I didn't do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can't prove anything." B. Simpson
have had good safety play though, so why mess with whats working? i think we should get him healed up and go from there. remember, we are all trumpeting blake's game but troy is the #1 corner for a reason.
Assuming a competent field goal kicker I didn't mind that. It's much later in the game (three minutes left in the third) and you're up 21. FG makes SDSU score three times and make three two point conversions to tie. It's 7/8ths of a four-score lead. A touchdown is 100% of a four-score lead, so the risk of not getting it on fourth and four (or having to kick anyway) seems to outweigh the marginal increase in points given the game situation. If the opponent is really going to score four touchdowns in little over a quarter you didn't lose because you went for a FG.
Assuming a competent field goal kicker is kind of a problem, granted.
I got the impression that that's what Hoke was going for. I mean, I've never tried to kick a FG in my life, but what I gather is that kicking in practice and kicking at game speed are 2 different animals. Up 21, with D playing solid against a clearly struggling offense, still with plenty of time for your O to get another score or 2, its a good chance to get your kicker some game experience. We can't expect Hoke to go for it on 90% of 4th downs, then bitch about bad kicking when he doesn't get any attempts.
How angry were you all about the missed FG (and the decision to kick it in the first place)? Me, I turned to my wife and said: "Watch this" and then chuckled as it sailed. I presume that I wouldn't be laughing if the game had depended on that kick . . .
I turned to my wife grinning and told her that if he made this, it would be the longest of his career. I also crossed my fingers, thumbs, and arms to try to help him out. Next time, I'll do the legs and toes too.
Gibbons' last shot at securing the FG kicker spot. 40 yard attempt with a double digit lead. Not the most nerve-racking kick. Hagerup is back this week which means Wile can concentrate on kicking insted of punting.
As a left-footed kicker with the ball on the right hash mark, it should have set up perfectly for Gibbons.
Here's my ridiculously-unqualified golfer's view of the kick: Gibbons over-kicked it just a bit. He had plenty of leg; and the mistake I see him making (in all my years of big-time placekicking) is that he hits it harder than necessary.
The one he missed last Saturday was wide left. It didn't hook for him. And that too is odd, because usually when a kicker hits it hard, there is a bit more hook. I couldn't see down the line of the kick so I couldn't tell how much hook he had on it. But I could see how hard he hit it, and it was hit much harder than necessary. (Non-golfers might wonder what is wrong with hitting the ball hard, and there's nothing wrong with it if you've got good control of direction and spin.)
If I understand what Hoke has been telling us about Matt Wile, Gibbons was on the edge of his assigned range at about 40 yards or so. A couple of yards deeper, would have sent in Matt Wile. And maybe Gibbons subconcsiously felt like he head to give it a good hard boot.
a field goal there, as I thought it was little more than a confidence booster (yeah, I know it was a glorified extra point).
With the game on the line and 3 seconds left (or in the half, for that matter), at, say Iowa, the last thing you want to do is bring in a field goal kicker who hasn't made anything all year and was a disaster last year. I wouldn't have a problem in kicking (an hopefully making) a few more against Minnesota a little further back.
If we didn't make the TD against Notre Dame and given last year, kicking that field goal would have been an adventure. In all likelihood, we're going to need a FG sometime this year; it would be nice to have a kicker that has actually knocked in a few before then.
The whole team (particularly defense) seems to be playing with a little more confidence... lets spread the wealth to the kickers.
Yeesh... I like that I take flak for getting exactly what I wanted.
"Hey, Magnus! You moron! You just won a million dollars! Sucks to be you!"
I always wanted Smith to be used as a pass receiver (he's the only RB to catch a pass this year), not to be used on short yardage (Toussaint is our short yardage/goal line back), and to be used as a change-of-pace back like Darren Sproles (so far he's getting roughly two-thirds as many carries as Toussaint).
Meanwhile, Toussaint - who I liked a whole lot more coming out of high school - is averaging 5.5 yards a carry and leads the running backs in touchdowns.
I scream, you scream, we all scream for ice cream.
Why is it so hard to realize that he wants the best back to start and he just thought that Mike Cox was the most physically-gifted back and at least deserved some playing time when no one else was doing anything?
but all evidence suggests that Borges is using precisely these sorts of strategies to try to get Denard into his comfort zone. Against SDSU, there were fewer downfield throws -- I remember only one, later in the game -- and more short stuff that Denard has shown success with in the past. Granted, Denard was still a bit shaky despite this playcalling, but once again, we've seen evidence that this coaching staff is adapting and trying different things to bring out the best in Denard. All in all, I liked the game plan -- which I'm sure is a big comfort to Borges, who was anxiously awaiting my approval . . . .
“They got shocked by the strength they had up front..."
I can't remember the last time an opposing coach or player said Michigan "shocked" them in any way. To the contrary, there've been too many times when the opposing team said that "they didn't show anything we hadn't seen in film." or "they were just like we were expecting."
It's a tiny speck of a data point, but I think it's encouraging.
Along with the 4th down call, I really liked how Brady coaches during the game. Many coaches have their headset on all game and rarely talk to the players. Hoke was constantly going up to players when they were coming off the field and coaching 'em up. He was gabbing people by the arm and getting their full attention.
Lloyd Brady must be close to graduating, he's rockin' a more corporate looking haircut. Maybe the bowl he used to use can be enshrined at Schembechler Hall.
at one point Brady was giving an "on the spot correction" to some players that may have been too close to the field. He pointed at them and I could see him mouth the words (or something to the extent of...) "Get back there to where you're supposed to be." It highlighted the discipline and the attention to detail that he expects from everyone at every moment that there is time showing on the clock.
Rocky Long seems like a really good guy and a coach. The way he protected his players after the game is nice to see, especially after they played their old coach. You can tell that he really enjoyed working with Hoke.
Greetings from Bolivia.
"It's special how the real true people hang together. And if you don't support the program you're not a true Michigan guy. It's that simple." - Gary Moeller
If you really need an explanation, here's the reason: The majority of your previous posts have constantly harped on Rodriguez. (e.g. "RR= bad coach", "I will say it one more time for you "RICH ROD WAS A FAILURE AT MICHIGAN", "He's a bum and a snake. The moron wasn't smart enough to adjust his offense to his players and only won 8 games in his first two seasons."). This time, instead of just voicing your opinion, you throw Hoke's success directly in Brian's face as if Brian is hoping that Hoke fails. No ad homenem attacks, No more Rodriguez vs. Hoke hate speech. That's why I docked you the points.
That said, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and will set it so that your points return in 30 days. Please, going forward, be cool.
Do you really think that was a "valid" question? Have we sunk so low that what matters is getting Rodriguez supporter to admit that they are glad he's gone or that Hoke is a better coach? If so, its a sad state of affairs here on the Board and even more reason to prevent those kinds of inflammatory posts.