Unverified Voracity Is Panda, Hammers Comment Count

Brian

So this happened. This is going to get out of control.

I'm warning you to brace yourselves for how out of hand this is going to get.

This is where we got involved.

And then Smoothitron from the top rope:

I hope you lashed yourself to the deck before reading this collection of tweets.

A coaching carousel on deck. At the midway point of the season it's looking like this could be an interesting December:

  • Les Miles is already gone from LSU.
  • Brian Kelly is 2-4 at Notre Dame, is definitely losing to a service academy, and is unlikely to make a bowl.
  • Charlie Strong is running out of rope at Texas, now 2-3 and 0-2 in the Big Twelve while playing horrendous defense.
  • Baylor still needs a long-term coach.
  • Oregon is 0-3 in the Pac 12 and may be thinking about pulling the trigger on Mark Helfrich.
  • Both LA schools have two conference losses already and sit at 3-3; wholesale collapse from one or the other isn't out of the question.

All of these schools will be pitching Tom Herman, and either all but one or all of them will end up disappointed. Once you get past Herman, up and coming candidates include... uh. Harbaugh acolyte Willie Taggart's turned USF around, PJ Fleck's itching to move up for anyone who's a boat enthusiast, and that's about it. Gonna be some weird guys getting head coaching jobs at major schools this offseason.

The situation in East Lansing. It's not good if you're a Spartan fan, but you're not no matter how much you're scouring the RCMB for hilarity and then emailing me when Google naturally responds by popping up MSU ads on this here site. (You know who you are. You are legion.) So it is good.

Bill Connelly had a deep dive into the decline from a team that was technically invited to the playoff to one that S&P+ currently has at 20% to make a bowl game. I jokingly referenced it in the game column but it deserves some actually attention. The problems in approximate order of severity:

  • The OL is a "sieve." This has led to some ugly rushing stats ("85th in Rushing S&P+, 101st in rushing success rate, only 18 rushes of 10-plus yards (119th)") despite having LJ Scott, who I continue to believe is the truth. It is also getting Tyler O'Connor sacked a ton.
  • The DL is a nonentity, deep into the triple digits in sack rate and largely responsible for a rushing S&P+ that is just as bad as their offenses's. This was predictable to some extent since MSU took not one but two grad transfers on the DL in an effort to shore up their line after Craig Evans and Montez Sweat got booted.
  • It's an old team not likely to have a midseason turnaround as the youth gets their heads on straight.

The numbers figure to get a bunch worse next week, when S&P+ finishes whittling away the preseason projections that still make up a portion of their rankings. Without those projections MSU, currently 60th, would be 84th. Even now S&P+ has Michigan a 25-point favorite(!!!) on the road in East Lansing.

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the season?

A couple more things about MSU. Their depth chart this week features an OR between their top three QBs. Also, instagram sleuthing by iSportsDave seems to indicate that Riley Bullough is out for the season. Or possibly another one of their linebackers.

Weekly fancystats love us update. Michigan is now 85%+ to win each game before OSU and an 18-point favorite against Iowa, the toughest remaining game before Football Armageddon II. S&P+ sees that as a dead heat, with OSU getting a slight edge because the Game is in Columbus.

In other S&P superlatives, Michigan is #1 nationally in:

  • field position
  • opponent success rate (at 19% Michigan is giving up less than half the number of successful plays than an average D-I D)
  • points per trip allowed once the opposition gets inside the 40
  • rushing defense, rushing success rate, and adjusted line yards
  • passing defense, passing success rate, and adjusted sack rate
  • standard down D, success rate, and line yards per carry
  • passing down D (they're top five in every other passing down category but not #1, shame)
  • third down D
  • havoc rate

The D is on pace to be historically good.

Ross Fulton on OSU's (relative) struggles against Indiana. OSU still won comfortably, but under 400 yards against a hurry-up team like IU is a sign that the Buckeyes are indeed mortal. Ross Fulton examines why that was so:

The simplest explanation for Ohio State’s passing problems was that J.T. Barrett was off. ... As he admitted after the game, he again refused to take the open underneath routes. For instance, below he does not get the ball to Curtis Samuel out of his break.

dxlmxadoawbhzbkqdnvz

He instead tried to force mid-range passes. But such throws were often late and with too much velocity, leading to inaccuracy high and outside. ... The game became reminiscent of other contests where Barrett was off, such as Penn State in 2014 or Michigan State last year, when Barrett missed open deep throws. As Meyer reiterated in his Monday press conference, Ohio State’s offense is based upon running the football and hitting vertical shots off play-action. Without such completions, opponent safeties can play aggressively downhill, resulting in a lower rushing success rate and a less efficient offense.

Things went from bad to worse last year because Barrett was decidedly not off, hitting two heavily contested bombs. Even so, if Michigan can put the game on his passing chops their chance to win goes up a great deal.

Perspective. The Rutgers game continues to generate thinkpieces, like this one from Inside NU:

The Romans at the Battle of Cannae, for example, were outsmarted and then completely destroyed by Hannibal’s Carthaginians. Rome’s armies took a full decade to recover. At the English victory over the French in the Battle of Poitiers in 1356, the entire French army fell apart and the French king was captured. Significant parts of France would remain under English rule for nearly a century.

Michigan 78, Rutgers 0 is worse than any of that. At least the French could claim that they brought an army to Poitiers. At least the Romans can take pride in the fact they had a plan whatsoever, even if it was incredibly dumb. Rutgers could not do anything. It was immobilized through lack of competence. The closest historical comparison is the Battle of Ulm, in which Napoleon was able to capture a huge Austrian army simply through highly skilled movement over the course of three days. And even then, it’s hard to compare. It took Michigan three hours.

Yes, it's a very Northwestern piece. I can't wait for The Only Colors to write one through the lens of the greatest Jerry Springer episodes they've seen or participated in.

NLRB is coming at the NCAA again. With the O'Bannon case now finished with no clear victory either way, but the NCAA did take hit as an antitrust violator. The National Labor Relations Board has now handed down a ruling that refers to football players as employees and bans certain practices:

In an unprecedented foray into college sports, the National Labor Relations Board has declared that Northwestern University must eliminate "unlawful" rules governing football players and allow them greater freedom to express themselves. The ruling, which referred to players as employees, found that they must be freely allowed to post on social media, discuss issues of their health and safety, and speak with the media.

The new rules apply to the football programs at the 17 private universities that play in the FBS, including schools such as Notre Dame, Stanford and Baylor -- but not public universities.

This is not a big thing right now but might open the door to more seismic items.

(HT: Get The Picture.)

Etc.: Grant Newsome hopes to return next year. Peppers now #4 in Heisman odds. The Daily on that. Tracking Michigan-Union hockey in depth.

Comments

Vasav

October 11th, 2016 at 1:44 PM ^

I don't believe the Roman plan was stupid at Cannae - they picked the field, tried to shield their weakness in cavalry with the terrain, and saw their legions almost breakthrough. They were outsmarted, outfought on the horse, and the brutally massacred. Their most obvious mistake was they did not take advantage of their numbers by creating a dense line. But the plan is only stupid in hindsight because of its result, and that result is primarily because of Hannibal's tactical brilliance, IMHO. Outsmarted? Yes. Stupid? I disagree.

Vasav

October 11th, 2016 at 2:23 PM ^

And after Trasimene, the Romans spent a year of the now famous and then infamous "Fabian Tactics." They spent that year drilling recruits to rebuild their legions. Trasimene and Trebia certainly made the Romans wary of Hannibal - but in both, their legions had managed to break through his heterogenous, often Gaulic infantry. They tried to play to that strength and failed.

I think you also have to look at the strategic situation - the northern part of Italy was in open revolt, and the Romans were unable to protect any of their neighbors after a year of Fabian tactics saw Hannibal move somewhat freely through the peninsula, taking what he wanted. The Romans wanted a show of force to reaffirm their wavering alliances that were the strength of their empire. They had double the army, so taking the field certainly wasn't a mistake.

But clearly a greater army doesn't get encircled by a lesser without a few mistakes. I want to be clear - I think the Romans were the dumber of the two parties at Cannae. But I'm dumber than Hannibal, and I'd be pretty offended if someone were to tell me I was "dumb." I think on the merits, the Roman plan wasn't bad and almost broke through the center of Hannibal's line. But his line held, his Libyan wings skillfully faced in, and his Spanish and Gaulic cavalry expertly reformed to win another engagement and then closed the trap.That was a series of masterful events. A military disaster for the Romans for sure, but being beaten by a master doesn't make you a fool, you know?

S.D. Jones

October 11th, 2016 at 3:20 PM ^

Ash would do well to mimic Fabius' stalling tactics, which in football terms would involve running a lot, staying in bounds and generally milking the clock while scheduling creampuffs and waiting for his decimated ranks to be replenished from the fertile Garden State.

S.D. Jones

October 11th, 2016 at 3:45 PM ^

While Hannibal was a tactical mastermind at Cannae and elsewhere, his strategic vision was less than stellar. He not only failed to stir up the large-scale revolts that his plan (such as it was) required and inexplicably spared Rome, but was ultimately forced to double-back to Carthage double-quick when Scipio Africanus ran the ol' end-around and landed on his doorstep at Zama (where Hannibal and his over-touted elephants done got schooled).

My point (such as I have one) is that Harbaugh, unlike Hannibal, will not fail in his ultimate quest and would certainly burn Jim Rome if given the chance.

victors2000

October 11th, 2016 at 4:17 PM ^

logistically, he could not hope to win a seige against Rome, he wasn't prepared to do so. He had a small army, a seige would take months, and it was bound to be lifted due to some other Roman armies coming to support Rome. At Zama, the Romans made adjustments to their order of battle; they actually had lanes for which the elephants charged through, leaving the legions relatively unscathed. So they learned.

The rest of your comments I agree upon; Coach Harbaugh will succeed and he would burn Jim Rome if given the chance.

Vasav

October 11th, 2016 at 8:14 PM ^

Hannibal couldn't take Rome - but he tried to settle peace with them after Cannae. Credit must go to Rome for not even allowing his envoys to enter the city.

But if Hannibal's army wasn't strong enough to take the Eternal City, it cetainly wasn't large enough to fight a war of occupation. To me the major strategic failure was not committing when Rome was losing in every theater of the war - and that's not on Hannibal.

What IS on Hannibal though is after Zama, convincing the Carthaginian Senate to agree to Roman terms. At their lowest, the Romans refused to entertain defeat. Much credit to Scipio Africanus, but as cliche as it sounds the real reason much of the world speaks Romance languages and not Punic ones is the Romans refused to give up.

Also I love how a comment about Rutgers football launched a full on discussion on the Second Punic War

Mr. Yost

October 11th, 2016 at 6:35 PM ^

Fisch is more likely to go back to the NFL, IMO. Especially now that his contract in the NFL is up.

I could see Drevno getting a look at Stanford if Shaw bolted, but that's about it. His other options, IMO, won't be a great fit. Unless he REALLY wants a SDSU type job.

I don't think Mora gets fired and USC is too dumb to hire Drevno despite the ties...they'll be all in on hiring Marcus Allen or some bullshit.

I think there is a much high chance we lose someone like Wheatley to a HC job.

Before you hit reply and go off, hear me out. Wheatley isn't going to one of those big schools...I'm no an idiot. But you're going to have a lot of mid-major/group of 5 coaches moving up. That's where someone like Wheatley comes into play.

Sure he's not going to Oregon, but Wheatley as the head coach at Western Michigan because PJ Fleck get poached sounds more than reasonable, doesn't it?

I'm just hoping Haraugh finds a way to keep this group together because we seriously have the best staff in the country. Pay them whatever, what we have right now is special and deserves to be kept together as long as possible.

 

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

October 11th, 2016 at 1:47 PM ^

The OL is a "sieve." This has led to some ugly rushing stats ("85th in Rushing S&P+, 101st in rushing success rate, only 18 rushes of 10-plus yards (119th)") despite having LJ Scott, who I continue to believe is the truth. It is also getting Tyler O'Connor sacked a ton.
oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy oh boy

FreddieMercuryHayes

October 11th, 2016 at 3:19 PM ^

It's crazy to think about, but this might be Dantonio's worst team in his entire tenure at MSU so far.  I looked up the F+ combined rankings (combining FEI and S&P+, the two most respetcted advanced stat rankings), and MSU is currently 60th.  The next worst for Dantonio ws in 2008 at 32.  Even in 2009 when they finished under .500 they were 31 in F+!  That's crazy.  And they're current F+ is still anchored up by preseason projections and not just results this season.  With UM at 3 right now and MSU at 6, that is the biggest divide between the two schools since Dantonio came to MSU.  Dantonio is a still a great coach so there's plenty of time to turn it around, but man, it's bad for them right now.

YoOoBoMoLloRoHo

October 11th, 2016 at 7:25 PM ^

roster is incredibly weak (sign two DL transfers, lied to the NCAA for a 6th yr LB, weak secondary, patchwork OL, questionable CBs) after so many years to build the program. Then ponder this - it will probably get worse next year. Decent set of seniors and Malik draft eligible will take out the experienced guys and the DL. They are incredibly thin in quality with their second stringers and the 2017 class looks shaky. Dantonio is a great preparer of teams and builder of a coherent culture so they may rebound this year and even next. Still, it must be troubling to not see roster benefits from the last few years - especially as UM and OSU actually strengthen their rosters.

Stay.Classy.An…

October 11th, 2016 at 1:48 PM ^

RCMB is pure hilarity, just so many hawt-takes on MSU and how Michigan is going to pound them into submission. I lost about 45 minutes of my life the other night scrolling through just laughing about how much they have already turned against their team. Seems like three straight years of real success has put unheard of pressure on their program. LOLZ! 

93Grad

October 11th, 2016 at 1:49 PM ^

Sparty will play thier best game of the week against us and it will be a total slog.  I'm taking nothing for granted in that game.  Ever.

Stay.Classy.An…

October 11th, 2016 at 1:52 PM ^

counting my chickens either, but it's also absurd to think that a team consistently playing this awful, is all of a sudden going to wake up and rush for 300 yards and score 30 points. I'm not saying they won't show up,  but if Michigan doesn't shred them, we have bigger problems.

evenyoubrutus

October 11th, 2016 at 2:56 PM ^

I have been trying to convince myself of this for weeks now, but I really don't think this it is going to turn out that way. Could there be some fluky thing in the first quarter that makes us gasp and wonder if we were wrong all along? Sure.  But MSU is so bad in certain areas that you can't just cover up with smoke and mirrors, especially when you consider one of those areas is their offensive line, against THIS defensive line.  If Michigan had certain glaring weaknesses in some aspect of their game I would be concerned, but there is no one area that Dantonio will be able to exploit.  Michigan is going to steam roll them.

JMK

October 11th, 2016 at 3:08 PM ^

Speight imploding, Sparty jumping the snap count, and JBB being exploited are, to me, the biggest risks. We can probably stop them defensively on most possessions (their running game did look explosive at times against ND -- I know, I know, ND sucks, but Sparty's backs were patient and knew when to hit the holes hard), but we also need to be able to score to win, and that is my greatest concern. Let's hope our RBs really can grind it out.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

HimJarbaugh

October 11th, 2016 at 3:25 PM ^

Yes but their best defensive player is running past the play and abandoning his responsibility A LOT yet their coaches feel he is still good enough to play 2 or 3 different positions on the DL.

The biggest threat I see is the new QB having their best game ever and catching everybody off guard. If that happens, it could be closer than expected. Otherwise, their DL and LBs are just terrible and stand no chance of stopping this run game.

Mr Miggle

October 11th, 2016 at 4:38 PM ^

but MSU doesn't have much going it for it other than hate and home field.

What are the dangers when there is an apparent mismatch?

  1. Better coaching - not this time around.
  2. Complacency from the players - not given last year's finish.
  3. Complacency from the coaches - ha ha ha.
  4. A lack of discipline when the game is tougher than expected - seems unlikely. Good depth helps avoid that. So does good coaching.
  5. Matchups the underdog can try to exploit  -  McDowell perhaps, good luck elsewhere.
  6. Super motivated underdogs - MSU is an overrated team dealing with greatly lowered expectations, not the greatest mindset.
  7. Flukes, every break going the same way - let's hope they've used up their miracles and it's not close enough to matter.

ST3

October 11th, 2016 at 1:59 PM ^

I found this Mike Dantoni quote from Kyle Austin's twitter,

Dantonio on fans: "If you want to jump off the bandwagon, I understand. People are fickle. Success is fickle."

Does success come before the pride or after the fickle? Because I know where the fall comes. It's right now for good ol' sparty.

Someone needs to correct Mike, Spartans are fickle. Wolverines are in it for life.

 

Stay.Classy.An…

October 11th, 2016 at 2:07 PM ^

State wasn't going to play for the B1G Championship and a CFP spot every year!? As we Michigan fans found out, success is never a given thing, hiring a couple of bad coaches can make that transition much quicker. State is lucky to have hired Dantanio, he's a great coach, probably one of the best State has ever had. But, IMO, this three year run they had, will never be duplicated again. They for sure hit their ceiling by making the playoff last year.

FreddieMercuryHayes

October 11th, 2016 at 3:21 PM ^

Oh man, Dantonio is going full on Hoke this season.  Mid year QB change despite the QB not being the problem.  Bowl eligability in question.  Calling fans 'fickle' for being discontent with poor play.  Wow, I would not have expected a Hoke-ian vibe from any Dantonio team before this season.

ak47

October 11th, 2016 at 2:00 PM ^

Brent Venables deserves to get some real hard looks as a coach.  Scott Frost is seemingly doing pretty well with UCF as well.  Whoever Boise State's head coach is has done a good job I think.  There are some not terrible coaching options but Hermanns agent is probably going to have a boner for the rest of the season over how much he and Hermann are about to make getting LSU and Texas to bid against each other and maybe Notre Dame too.

Mr Miggle

October 11th, 2016 at 6:08 PM ^

They promoted their OC. That's failing. I wouldn't think the next logical step is to promote his OC, minus this year at UCF. Those are the type of moves you make when you lose a coach, not fire him for his record. It's probably time to bring in someone from outside the program, unless it's Chip Kelly.

oriental andrew

October 11th, 2016 at 2:14 PM ^

He played in So Cal, coached mostly in Texas with stints in the midwest, is a UT alum (M. Ed), and is a d*mn Mensa member, according to Wikipedia. If he wants any of LSU, Texas, ND, USC, etc., he's probably got it. Only one which may not make sense from that perspective is Oregon, but imagine what he could do with the resources at Nike U. 

Wolverine In Exile

October 11th, 2016 at 2:47 PM ^

You've got the unlimited resources of the Nike checkbook, none of the psychotic behavior of Texas alums, they'd be open to Hermann's offensive philosophy, and Hermann's Texas ties can be used for recruiting to Oregon. Add in that the Pac-12 may be ripe for the taking with USC & UCLA possibly in turmoil. I think it's overreaction by the talking heads that discount Hermann going anywhere besides Texas or LSU.

funkywolve

October 11th, 2016 at 2:16 PM ^

Petersen is only about 2.5 yrs removed from Boise.  While Boise hasn't seemed to take much of a drop off, I'd be a little hesitant hiring the Boise coach until he's been there a little longer.  I'm guessing Petersen's finger prints can still be seen on the program so it's hard to tell whether Boise is still riding what he built or whether the new coach is pretty darn good too and is going to keep the program at a high level for a while.

oriental andrew

October 11th, 2016 at 2:21 PM ^

Helfrich at Oregon is probably someone you could point to in this case. 11-2, 13-2, 9-4, now 2-4. They're definitely appearing to regress for whatever reason. Does he survive this low point given his first two seasons, or is this falling too far too fast?

You could also look at Larry Coker who, by all accounts, won big his first 3 seasons with Butch Jones' recruits, then starting reverting to the mean his last 3 seasons.