Tuesday Presser Transcript 10-15-13: Greg Mattison and Al Borges
Greg Mattison
What are you stressing in practice this week?
“Well, getting ready for Indiana and getting ready for the rest of our season. It’s playing fast. Teams we play send a lot of tempo at you, and sometimes the next play is in 7 seven. It’s guys getting back to the huddle, it’s guys getting the signal on the fly, all those things. The good thing is we’ve been working on the rotation all along. If a guy has to play five plays rather than three plays, fine, we’ll get them in and out that way.”
Some teams prepare for a high tempo offense by having two entire scout offenses rotate in and out. Do you do that at all?
“Well Brady does a great job with that. We’ve played against this kind of offense before. Brady does a great job getting the tempo as fast as it can be.”
How did Jake Ryan grade out, and what was his impact?
“Jake ended up giving us another rotating guy. It was his first game since the spring. I thought he played his heart out. I thought the defense played their heart out. They played extremely hard.”
Can you take us through the last drive in regulation?
“Well when you don’t stop them. When you want to be a great defense, that’s what you play for. And both those plays, the two plays – you’re sitting there on the sideline thinking it’s intercepted. The young man that was on both of those has more interceptions and more knockdown balls in camp than any corner we have. It’s just a situation where we didn’t get the football. As far as the kid’s playing and execution, I couldn’t be more proud.”
Will you be playing tighter coverage?
“We’ve seen it all along. Like I said, in the last two plays, you can’t be much tighter. There’s three guys around the football when he catches the ball on our sideline, and the other one, you can’t be anymore on the guy. God allows one guy to be 6-4 and jump real real high, and that’s what ended up happening on that play.”
Brady said Channing Stribling could play more moving forward.
“We love what he’s been doing. He truly has been a guy in ever practice, you see him get to the football. You see him intercepting footballs, breaking passes. I think now he knows the defense, he understands everything he has to do, I expect him to be a big plus.”
Looked like the pass rush made another step forward. You had a lot of sacks.
“I don’t worry about stats. We have great pass rush sometimes when you don’t have any sacks and you don’t have great pass rush when you have four. The thing about that game is there were a lot of times where you were almost on a sack. You just about have a sack. That’s what happens all the time in those games.”
---------------------------
Al Borges
Not why Michigan lost.
Can you talk about your philosophy at the end of the game?
“Well we have the best kicker in the league. At least, we think. Especially inside of 40 yards. We were just trying to position it so we could finish, and we didn’t. The biggest thing is if you aggressively try to score and turn the ball over, you wouldn’t give him a chance. Then everybody’s going to second guess you. That was our approach. We threw the ball, what six times? Eight times? So it wasn’t like we reined ourselves totally in.”
MGoQuestion: Brady said that a lot of the blocking problems were because one guy made an error. How easy is it to identify those errors from the coordinator box?
“You can spot them. But what you have to do, what we have to do at this point is we have to obviously make it more competitive. Again, I’ve told you guys since day one that depth chart is in pencil. This week we’re auditioning more players. We’re going to see how they turn out. We’re going to iron these mistakes out one way or another and we’ll find the five guys that can do it. That doesn’t mean that the guys that are in there aren’t going to be in there. We’re going to give them a chance, too.”
But at some point you have to stop switching guys, right?
“I would have hoped that would have happened a while back, but it didn’t, so we are where we are. It’s like tailbacks my first season here. We didn’t really find Fitz [Toussaint] until six or seven games in.”
You can’t do this every two weeks, though, right?
“No, you don’t want to do this ever, but you have to find the best five. Whatever it takes to get the best five.”
Changing the offensive approach during the game?
“We did that. Because the power game wasn’t as good, you can’t just say, “We’re not going to do it anymore.’ You still have to sprinkle it in. What we did in the second half was we threw the ball more, created a few big plays, and did a pretty good job. The thing I was really impressed with was Devin Gardner. Devin’s footwork has jumped a quantum leap in two weeks. After getting a couple balls intercepted in the first half and having a fumble that really wasn’t his fault at all – he got blindsided – he recovered and showed composure throughout the football game. At no time was I in any doubt that he could not bring us back, and he proved me right.”
How much thought has been given to giving Derrick Green an entire series?
“We’re going to approach that – everything’s competitive. If we feel at one point that Derrick Green can do that, we’ll have Derrick Green in there.”
MGoQuestion: A couple delay of game penalties hurt you late in the game. What can you do to help Devin get to the line of scrimmage faster?
“That’s not all Devin, now. Some of it’s miscommunication, but it’s not all the quarterback when there’s a delay of game. They say it on the [PA], ‘Delay of game on number 98.’ But it’s not his fault. We have to do a better job of getting him in and out of the huddle, everybody in and out of the huddle, and get the play right.”
MGoIDon’tThinkYouUnderstoodMyQuestion: Is there anything systematic you can do to change how you communicate plays?
“No. This has not been a problem. How many delay of games have we had this year? It cropped up in this game. We played in a real noisy stadium. There’s some elements that could lead to that. Again, I’m not sure exactly what they were. If this were a chronic problem, I would be a lot more concerned about that.”
Devin’s your best running threat, but like Brady said, he’s one hit away from being knocked out of the game –
“Oh you hate it. I don’t like it. But you do what you have to do to win the game. End of discussion. Every week. How come your tailbacks aren’t getting anything? If no one’s getting any yards, you have a problem. I would prefer the tailback. But if the quarterback’s the guy that beats you, I don’t particularly like it, but we’ll do what we have to do to win the football game.”
Does that mean moving forward you’ll spread it out with Devin legs?
“No. I don’t want him carrying the ball 25 times. Nobody does. Because he ain’t gonna make it. Denard didn’t make it. We should have learned something from that situation. You guys have been Michigan fans for a while right? You saw what happened before we got here. It’s hard for a quarterback to carry the ball that many times and stay in one piece. But there’s going to be times in the heat of the battle, if those are the things that work and those are the things that help you win, you have to go do them. It’s that simple. And our power running game wasn’t that good, so we had to find a way. Put some pistol runs in, do some things to mix it up, quarterback draws.”
When you get less than a carry from your running back, is it more blocking problems?
“Oh yeah. We did a poor job blocking the line of scrimmage. End of discussion. Sometimes we targeted it well and still didn’t move the line of scrimmage.”
Have you lost confidence in running up the middle in third and short situations?
“No. No. We haven’t lost confidence in anything.”
MGoQuestion: Part of your problems in the run game seemed to be because Penn State loaded the box and played off your receivers. Did you ever consider doing something like, you know, throw a bubble screen?
“That’s your solution? A bubble screen?”
MGoIReallyShouldHaveBroughtThisScreenCap
MGo: Just something to get the defense to play you more honestly, right?
“We threw three balls over their heads, did we not?”
MGoWeAreNotGoingAnywhereWithThisAreWe: Yeah.
“Well there you go. The answer is yes, we did.”
October 16th, 2013 at 3:59 PM ^
since you have the same "gift" for caricature of what people have actually said. If you honestly read the transcript of this presser and believe that a different phrasing of the question would have elicited actual information in response, then you and I will have to agree to disagree about that.
October 16th, 2013 at 12:33 PM ^
saying "bubble screen" is basically telling the man how to do his job. How would you like it if someone who is not an expert coach in your field told you what you needed to do? Especially now that he's been asked about it 3 years in a row.
No, there was a better way of asking this. A simple "How do you get away from letting the defense stack the box against you, and did you think you did that enough on Saturday?" would have been better.
October 16th, 2013 at 1:19 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 1:47 PM ^
"How would you like it if someone who is not an expert coach in your field told you what you needed to do?"
I'd honestly consider their ideas, and if they appeared likely to lead to improvement - implement them.
The idea that only those more trained in a field than oneself can provide insight/inspiration is the height of hubris.
October 16th, 2013 at 2:03 PM ^
Fresh perspectives can never be taken into account. New and viable ideas never come from the "lowliest" of places. He's an offensive genius of the grandest scale, with zero flaws, and we should all count ourselves as fortunate enough to be blessed with the ability to see his mind work every Saturday.
October 16th, 2013 at 10:58 AM ^
The kids didn't execute. 1 or 2 more defenders than blockers on every run. How are they supposed to execute that?
We're doomed.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:01 AM ^
Well, I think the Indiana game plan is pretty clear. They really do think thay can grind it out under center and keep indiana "off the field", ala 1985. No thought of making sure your offense keeps pace with Indiana's high-scoring offense.
Problem is, we don't have MSU's defense to keep them from scoring while we are sitting on the ball. We may be F'd.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:05 AM ^
Even MSU didn't keep them from scoring... This game is way scarier than it should be.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:51 AM ^
Dude youre starting to go off the reservation, calm down
October 16th, 2013 at 11:09 AM ^
I don't get it. If "power running goofy tackle alignment grunt grunt 4 yards hoo-aaaaa" is the preferred offense then why not make it a bit easier to run with a few (or many) short passes, slants, lob to fucking Funchess, bubble screens, what have you? Logic is suffering a grisly death in Schembechler Hall these days, at least in the offices of the offensive staff. The boo birds are going to be flocking to the stadium Saturday if there is a repeat performance.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:15 AM ^
Im not usually the fan that blames one player or play/instance in a game for a loss, but it really sucked seeing my boy Stribling miss two opportunities to close the game for us on defense. It made half sense putting a 6'2 corner on Robinson even though Stribling is a frosh, and putting him in zone coverage over the Penn State Tight end; whatever his name was. On that catch by their tight end Stribling was in perfect position to intercept that ball, but sadly it was tipped and the catch was made. Then on that 20+ yard pass to the goal line to Robinson, Stribling was in perfect position to make the play but jumped just a tad early and Robinson made a remarkeable catch. Those two plays could have won the game, save the 3 missed field goals by Gibbons, but thats a whole other rant and rage filled paragraph. We've sucked so far this year and have been saved by pure luck, and those missed plays in crunch time signified the wake up call for this team. We gotta make the plays that are there to be made. All offseason i said Stribling was my pick to be a standout player in these next couple of years, i hope to see the team rally around the young guy, and start focusing as a team on making plays when it matters let alone all game long. Its gonna be a long November otherwise.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:25 AM ^
Stribling was in perfect position on both plays. It was a shame that he mis-timed the jump on the throw to Robinson, but he could not have been in better position. It can't be easy to time a jump in the lights, in a sea of white, particularly when you are not familiar with the velocity of the particular QBs passes. Robinson had a slight height advantage, is a great receiver and has total familiarity with his QB, and those advantages led to a completion. Stribling can be disappointed but has nothing to be ashamed of. Hope to see him intercept a pass this weekend.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:54 AM ^
Agree. He was in a position to make a play on both balls. He did not. That happens. See Henne to Braylon Edwards countless times as a similar outcome. I would much rather have a guy be in position to make a play and fail then not be in a position to make a play, at which point you have no chance at success. Sometimes the other team makes a play and you have to tip your hat. My main concern without seeing the game chart is Stribling didnt seem to play that much earlier in the game so if true, throwing him out there relatively cold at the ed of the game is asking a lot. But again, he was there - sometimes you get beat.
October 16th, 2013 at 12:09 PM ^
come. He was on an island versus the best receiver in the conference, and damn near saved us.
Stribling will play on Sundays. He is that good. There is no shame in his game from last Saturday.
October 16th, 2013 at 3:39 PM ^
He will be a fine player at Michigan.
But I do think that putting him in on the final drive was strange. Now, I understand the move, because not only is he tall, but he is a ballhawk. And for whatever reason, he wasn't in that PSU closing drive. So, you roll the dice with a young guy.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:16 AM ^
I think you might need to go with reverse psychology. Next time say, "Man, bubble screens are dumb." Maybe Borges might then embrace them.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:21 AM ^
"Blahbity bloo blah blah blahbity bloo blah!"
I ain't hear a word you said, "hipidy hooblah!"
October 16th, 2013 at 2:58 PM ^
And this made me spit out my Dr. Pepper.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:34 AM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 11:38 AM ^
Every thing you said was spot on.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:44 AM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 11:35 AM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 12:19 PM ^
FWIW, I sent Mr. Borges a link to this comments thread. Of course, he won't read it. In fact, I'm fearing some kind of retribution, but I just wanted him to hear all the relatively sane ideas, among some name-calling, that you all have come up with.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:42 AM ^
This lack of press coverage is built for Indiana success. If you don't disrupt them in the secondary, without a solid pass rush you basically give Indiana its offense on a platter. I wonder if Mattison will deviate at all, or is willing to just let Indiana march up and down the field and only bring pressure inside our own 25, trying to hold Indiana to FGs. Indiana actually has a half decent RB to boot - but the pass offense has me worried it is going to be a very long afternoon of watching them walk up and down the field as they do 7 yard slants and 6 yard out patterns all day, every day. Watch this little guy Wynn they have on the team - he has serious speed and is full of YAC. Thankfully they have an awful defense so I expect a ridiculously high scoring event that will have us pulling our hair out again.
October 16th, 2013 at 11:47 AM ^
"That's your solution? Throw a bubble screen?" Al's Solution: Continue to run where there is nowhere to effing run. If he can see that same screen shot from where he is sitting and that is how he answers the question....we are in big trouble.
Why did nobody ask about calling audibles????
October 16th, 2013 at 11:50 AM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 11:53 AM ^
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
October 16th, 2013 at 12:05 PM ^
one, this may have been the most anticipated weekly presser in mgoblog history. two, I'm struggling to concile the freewheeling, agressive Borges from UTL II (pretty much flawless gameplan) with Saturday night's fuckery.
I might be the only Borges defender left on this site at this point and even my will is waning.
I keep saying, Borges is aggressively old-school. He wants the RB to crack 1K yards and 2 different WRs to hit that mark as well; look at Ryan Lindley, Ronnie Hillman & co from San Diego State. That offense checked pretty much every box except for a high TD/ INT ratio. So what's the difference between him and "Communist Football" pro style DeBord? There are a few.
I like that Borges spends his offseasons going over NFL tape instead of talking to college coaches. The guy obviously isn't interested in the latest innovations; but the most effective ones (that actually make it to the league).
We aren't ready for manball yet. What you're seeing is the journey, the transition and we're getting nearer. Overhauling Michigan for power football was literally the biggest goal Hoke could have set for himself when he came here. RR just did not leave enough beef.
but homie comes off / across as a dinosaur here. Our OL can't block, Devin Gardner has regressed into Terrelle Pryor circa 2009, and we're stuck wit Tresselball for another year.
They need to spend the rest of the season chewing up so much damn clock that they near choke on it. I'll patiently wait for 2 performances: MSU and OSU. Aside from that....Capital One bowl. 2014 is the year, man. No more excuses.
And yall can relax; we aren't losing 8 times to Ohio State in a decade again. Seriously. Mattison and Hoke are building the spread antidote defense. Just wait.
October 16th, 2013 at 12:28 PM ^
Young and inexperienced O-line? Maybe. But it is also stacked with talent. We have not been playing premiere DLs. Performance problems with that combo and context have to fall primarily on position coaching.
We have tried mutiple running backs behind this line for three years. It's not the running backs. It's not Coach Jackson.
The problem is that we have consistently underperformed in coaching one critical position. Responsibility is with Funk. Hoke will make the right choice. He has generally made excellent choices with the program thus far. He will make this one, too.
October 16th, 2013 at 1:45 PM ^
Yep.
I dunno if firing Funk is the issue. He had the OL at SDSU working fine. When Hutchinson visited Michigan and worked with Kalis, it's not like he was explaining anything new to him. The light will go on eventually for the kids in the middle.
If they do toast Funk however - so long buddy. Won't be missed.
October 16th, 2013 at 12:10 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 12:29 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 12:43 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 12:46 PM ^
I have never been a fan of Borges, though I do believe his offensive system can work. But at this point, they need to just cut his mic and not have him do these pressers. He simply will not acknowledge that his system is working with this team, and that the only parts that DO work are usually the ones employed by RR and which a decent portion of this team was recruited for. I don't mind the assholeness that much - he's defending his position, and he's a coach in college football, so expecting eloquence and thoughtful responses is going to be disappoint people. That said, he's an inflexible man who, frankly, hasn't earned the patience from the fanbase that he seems to expect.
October 16th, 2013 at 1:50 PM ^
Until this assclown is given his walking papers, Brandon, Hoke, etc. are a bunch of mealy-mouthed liars. "Leaders and best" at what? Ensuring that the incompetent ALWAYS have a job?
It started with Lloyd refusing to get rid of DeBord and Herrman. It continued with Rodriguez foisting the 3-3-5 on to Scot Schaefer in order that his buddy Tony Gibson would have a semblance of a clue as to what to do when coaching. It's continuing AGAIN with Hoke.
Denial is perhaps THE MOST powerful force operating in the state of Michigan. It took YEARS for the car companies to admit to themselves how they were screwing up. Michigan Football has become a microcosm of that.
I follow two teams closely: Michigan and Stanford. Look at where Stanford's coordinators end up. They get head coaching gigs or end up moving up to the NFL. Then, the next man up steps in and does a great job. There's no "chicken-littling" over "what will we do when so-and-so leaves" because the next man up is QUALIFIED and excellent. When was the last time Michigan could say the same thing about its staff?
Dump Borges. Open the freakin' check book and go get Loeffler. That way, you can have your precious "Michigan Man" waiting in the wings to become the next coach. Next, exploit your NFL connections and find someone that can coach the offensive line.
I feel no pity for a program that keeps shooting itself in the foot. The only people for whom i feel sorry are the kids that bust their asses playing for these clowns. They deserve better. It's only a matter of time before this repeated behavior becomes part of Michigan's DNA and it starts to affect recruiting.
October 16th, 2013 at 4:47 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 1:45 PM ^
questions in adverse circumstances hundreds of times. Often people's jobs or career advancement was directly tied to the answers.
When I was inexperienced, especially when I was upset, I would sometimes phrase the question as much to make a point as to actually get a meaningful answer. Often the response I received was a knee jerk defensive comeback that served neither participant well. As I grew more experienced I learned to determine exactly what I was trying to unearth and how to put the question(s) to accomplish that goal.
In this case, both Heiko and Borges were under pressure. Heiko to get answers to what troubles the readers here and to get whatever answers Brian tasked him. The pressures on Borges are obvious. The situation is complicated by the rather obvious comradery that has evolved between Heiko and Borges.
I do not think that Heiko was trying to stick a question to Borges, rather I think he failed to understand how Borges might hear his question. Heiko did contextualize the question using bubble screen as an example, but what I think Borges heard was a cheap shot from someone who had earned his trust and respect. Borges reacted. Reading more into that exchange is pointless.
As an aside, were I Heiko, I would reach out privately and off the record to Borges and clairfy my intent. That relationship is of value to both men and deserving of maintenance.
The coaches owe us NO explainations. Not a single one. Borges answers to Hoke, Hoke to Brandon, and Brandon to the University administration. Press conferences are a courtesy and a coach is free to blow off any question they choose.
Put yourself in Borges' shoes. Read the vitrol, personal attacks, and wild accusations rampant on this blog since the game. Why in the world would you give any kind of details that could be spun into further attacks on yourself or others. The commentors who are in full melt down have shown no respect for Borges or Funk, often painting Hoke and the players with the same tarred brush. Why should they respect your desire for information? In their position I would not, and if you are honest you'll admit that you would not.
If you want meaningful information the first step is to stop venting and show some respect for at least the notion that Borges was not lost, but had valid understandable reasons for the choices he made. I am not going to defend any of his calls, but I am willing to grant that he had well thought out reasons for them. Granting him that possiblity would at least allow us a framework to discuss those reasons. I doubt he would, but without it he'd be a total fool to entertain any discussion.
At this point a large percentage of the commentors here come across as searching only for another stick to beat on the coaching staff.
Lastly, barring contractual breach or misconduct, no member of this coaching staff is getting fired this year. You are free to scream about excuses, and regressions, etc to your heart's content, but it is quite clear that Hoke believes that this is a difficult transition requiring more time and that Brandon believes in Hoke. If things are still going sideways at the END of the 2014 season, I'd expect a shake up, but not before.
October 16th, 2013 at 3:36 PM ^
To explain: Borges likely does not read the commentators on this blog. Therefore, it's reasonable that Heiko liaisons the opinions written here to the coaches, heavy-handed or otherwise. Heiko is our connection and best opportunity to sway Borges' gameplan.
Both fans and coaches have the same goal: winning. If a majority of the intelligent football fans here think Borges should try something, it should be communicated to him. If Borges disagrees, he does owe some viable explanation. The fans support his career. He should at least return some favor.
If Borges doesn't care about defending his actions to the fans, why should the fans support him and this team?
Really, a great write-up, Uncle Fred.
October 16th, 2013 at 4:43 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 2:04 PM ^
If you want to ask a question straight from the Drew Sharp school of journalism, you deserve that kind of response. If Heiko just asked the question using his follow up, "something to get the defense to play you more honestly" instead of "bubble screen," he wouldn't have looked like so immature. If you're telling me that Heiko didn't include "bubble screen" just to get this reaction out of Borges, you're a liar.
October 16th, 2013 at 3:08 PM ^
Heiko will get another chance to ask the same question next week. I'm sure he'll phrase it better then.
October 16th, 2013 at 4:30 PM ^
How dare a lowly wannabe-reporter from a "blog" (I think that's what the kids these days call it) have the temerity to mention the words "bubble screen" to me, the highest-paid OC in the B1G who has the patience and grace to come down from on high and meet with the huddled media masses. Sure, I had an extended interview with this kid from the "blog" where we talked about bubble screens and I expressly acknowledged that it's a play "designed to take advantage of" a DB coming down into the box to defend the run, and sure, that's exactly what Penn State did last weekend, but to use this "bubble screen" shorthand to question my playcalling and make me a laughingstock -- sure, only to regular readers of MGoBlog, because frankly, nobody else would have the slightest clue about the supposed "baggage" attached to this "inside baseball" reference -- is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE and immediately vaults this kid into the ranks of Drew Sharp!
Poor Al is obviously too fragile to be exposed to the relentless hounding of Heiko . . . .
October 16th, 2013 at 4:39 PM ^
We used to rip Jim Carty, Drew Sharp, and Rosenberg for asking questions in this manner. I'm not saying he's a bad guy. I'm not saying he's a bad journalist. I'm saying this was a poor way to ask a question if you expect to be taken seriously. If you're interviewing someone and you know there is one sure way to piss them off, why on earth would you do that one thing?
October 17th, 2013 at 10:58 AM ^
that Heiko's question was on the level of something Drew Sharp would ask, then by all means criticize him. You'd be wrong, of course, but you're entitled to your opinion.
In my view, if you look at the discussion between Heiko and Borges on this specific topic of bubble screens, and then you look at the question Heiko asked at this presser, the mention of bubble screens was a shorthand reference to what these two guys had specifically talked about in the past -- a play designed to counter a DB brought into the box to shut down the run game, as Penn State did last Saturday. I think the regulars on this blog are too caught up in the "bubble screen" subplot, and tend to think it has more meaning to Borges -- who, I'm pretty confident, doesn't read this blog -- than it actually does. Isn't it possible that Borges gave a dickish answer because he was defensive about the deficiencies in his playcalling, and not because the question was designed to "piss him off"?
October 17th, 2013 at 11:42 AM ^
I do the think the way the question is phrased, when read from a transcript, is a Drew Sharp type question.
I didn't watch or listen to the press conference. I don't intend to. I don't care enough to do any more than scan the transcript after games like this. It's entirely possible that if I listened to the question, it would be clear that he wasn't trying to sound like Jim Rome interviewing Chris/Jim Everett. If that's the case I apologize to Heiko for mischaracterizing him and his question.
I also think it's possible, just like you're giving Heiko the benefit of the doubt for the phrasing of his question, that Borges was not being a dick with his answer when he's giving Heiko an answer to a question that they have specifically talked about in the past.
October 16th, 2013 at 2:35 PM ^
October 16th, 2013 at 3:09 PM ^
Forget running Fitz into the OL's ass 4,179 times for negative yardage. Those three passes makes up for EVERYTHING.
I know I should be even more pissed than I already am, but between Al's Don't Give A Fuckness and the comments on these posts, I can't stop laughing.
I think I've finally lost my mind.
October 16th, 2013 at 3:52 PM ^
Al Borges hates me
I am bubble screen
October 16th, 2013 at 4:12 PM ^
official version for what occurred. And we've examined it and sometimes challenged what took place as the final word.Most of the time, you don't question it.
Well, this week at least, the official version of what happened in Happy Valley last Saturday from an offensive standpoint doesn't fit the story we saw unfold, then analyzed on film and can document. And challenging any explanation that seeks to deviate from the truth we witnessed just seems like rationalizing a failed gameplan, one without hope that is supported without real conviction.
Yeah, we get that Devin can't run the ball 30 times a game. But we also get that when the defense sells out to stop the run, that running into a brick wall is total idiocy, and yet there appears on the basis of presser comments, that strategic planning about the future of this team's running game is about to change much. WTF.
Now, you understand that the perpetrators of the gameplan must defend it, and will not deny that what they ordered didn't make sense even if they see the folly of it as the fan base has.
But, c'mon on. Manball doesn't make sense if you can't find five guys to block for it, and if you still don't have a back who can sustain it with yards after contact, which this team's primary ball carrier isn't capable of. And if you don't trust his primary backup to carry the ball because he hasn't shown the ability to break tackles or find daylight, then why are we still trying to prove a negative will work?
Comments