That's a quote.
I did not make this headline up
That's a quote.
You were born in 1977 and have been posting here for a year and you can't understand that his signature is a quote from one of the_big_house 500th's gazillion melt downs?
No wonder you've started ending your posts with "Go Blue." The classic attempt to hide the stupidity of your post.
1. You want to take Roh (arguably one of our better pass rushers) off the field at all points.
2. You want to start Black at DE instead of an Freshman All American Team Sophmore
3. You want to run man coverage with our corners.
4. Adding an extra DL will turn Ezeh from absolute fail to tackling magician
5. The 3-3-5 is somehow on fire
Feel like someone either drank a shitload of redbull.
One of the scariest things I can envision is a team going 3 wide with a TE and HB set under center. Based on a 4-3 scheme, that puts our CBs on the outsides and either Mouton, Kovacs or Carvin Johnson 1v1 with a slot receiver. Play action (which Ezeh bites) will basically leave Kovacs trying to D up a speedy slot 1v1 with questionable deep support...
dude, i love roh but he really hasn't done much this season. No matter who you have in at linebacker, even if it is ezeh, he doesn't have to guess each time about which wide open hold the running back is going to hit (like he had to yesterday on each of their long td runs that demoralized the team. With a four man front, Ezeh probably would improve twice as much. Roh, up to this point, despite his popularity, has been neutralized and simply isn't big enough to play defensive end in the big ten.
Just stop. Please.
You do realize that Jibreel is basically the same weight as Roh just 2 in shorter?
You also realize he has 2 tackles on the year.. where as Roh has 21 and a sack?
I feel like when you watch the game you dont really watch the game.. Roh, when in a pass rush capacity, has consistently forced the pocket to move or the QB to scramble. He also has been held considerably. I wont discount Black's play on Saturday (he was a solid bright spot) but you cannot expect me to believe that if we gave Roh the ability to put a hand down every play he'd be worse than Black..
black's frame ultimately will support the weight of about 270. He will for sure be a definitive strong side defensive end in the big ten. Roh is not a strong side defensive end. dude. . We've all seen Roh. Roh is great but he's getting neutralized.
You're right. He'll constantly go up against the left tackle, strong or weak side, because he is either our best pass rusher or our second behind Mike Martin.
If GERG actually took all of your suggestions to heart, our opponents would never have to run the ball. They could throw on every single down and absolutely rape us. Also, Roh is a beast and hoping that Ezeh will imporve is a complete lost cause. stop posting
WTB 500 point requirement for starting threads in weeks following losses.
Ladies and gentlemen, I will now ask that you please neg this dude into oblivion so he cannot make threads anymore.
...doing the posting equivalent of repeatedly hitting themselves in the face doesn't amuse you?
dude check this out. you guys all went to make it so I can't talk here that is fine with me. You all seem to agree with whatever unsuccessful scheme we have because the coaches who are running it are supposedly experts. If free speech is something you guys all want to outlaw, so be it. If you have time to score 10 thousand points here, great. That is sad, but good for you. Cool. But do me one favor. If you have the time post your own thread on why the 3-3-5 is preferable against a traditional big ten powerhouse team. I challenge you to do this. You can silence me that way but no matter how much you guys all neg bang me in your frustration over the loss, its not going to stop Terrell Pryor, its not going to stop Iowa, and it certainly isn't going to stop Wisconsin. I don't mean any disrepsect to Brian, because I think the guy is a genius, and his content is great. But the rest of you are just transplants from rivals and the insiders, coming over here and ruining free dialgoue by silencing anyone that you don't agree with with your moral majority conventional wisdom. As fans, with the likes of you, we all deserve to lose.
The problem is not the scheme. The problem is the fact that our defensive secondary consists of two true freshmen, a converted wide receiver, a walk on, and JT Floyd.
I'd be damned if anyone could muster up something competent out of that.
they are a problem agreed. But we have multiple problems and my aim is to point out which problem is worst problem.
Our worst problem is idiot fans that think they know everything...oh wait.
My god you are dense. Do you not read anything people on this board are trying to say to you? Our defense is bad because It's a personnel issue, not a schematic issue.
But the opposite of the point you make is the entire point behind my post genius. The conventional argument, as you aptly point out along with your comrades, is that we run the 3-3-5 to compensate for the woes we have in the defensive backfield. Check. But against powerhouse running teams in the big ten the gaping whole we leave in the middle with respect to the run outweighs the risk that the defensive backfield prevents. Would you rather give up the long pass or would you rather have the other team consistently bend us over and control the line of scrimmage? If they complete a long pass for a touchdown we get the ball back immediately. Denard, in most games, can compensate by scoring fast. However, by leaving a hole in the middle with our band-aid defensive line, the other team controls the clock, and thus our destiny. So I would opt for the former situation, where we give up the long pass, but don't give up control of the line of scrimmage, and don't give up time with Denard on the field. Does this make sense to you?
dude check this out. No one is trying to ruin America forever by denying your "right" to speak on a webpage privately owned by somebody else. You're not being negbombed because of the thrust of your argument, which is basically "I don't like the way the defense is aligned, why not try this alignment" - that's reasonable, if misguided, and many others have been critical of the current defense without getting hammered for it.
You're being negbombed because you've 1) started an unnecessary new thread (seriously, I think the "don't make new posts" crowd is way too active and even I can tell this would have been better placed in one of a dozen worthy threads), 2) made your argument with inflammatory, hyperbolic, insulting, and occasionally brah-speak riddled posts, and 3) attacked others when they called you on it.
Do 12 Hail-Marys, half a dozen Our Fathers, take a cold shower, reread your posts (recognizing that only the Penitent Man will pass), and try again tomorrow.
1) started an unnecessary new thread (seriously, I think the "don't make new posts" crowd is way too active and even I can tell this would have been better placed in one of a dozen worthy threads),
I agree that starting unnecessary new threads is annoying and I don't like it when other people do this, and I apologize on that point BUT
, In my defense what I am going to say though is that a topic or post that is critical of the 3-3-5, regardless of which thread it is brought up in, is always greeted with the reply that it should have been brought up in another thread and that it shouldn't be discussed because it has been discussed extensively already.
Continuing on that line of reasoning, I thought that what we experienced yesterday during the MSU game brought new relevance to the discussion of the 3-3-5, because yesterday showed us the result of running this scheme against a team who can run the ball, and MSU is really the first good running team we have faced. Up until yesterday, it was arguably "unknown" how the 3-3-5 would fare against a strong running team. Given this fact, I made a new topic.
2) made your argument with inflammatory, hyperbolic, insulting, and occasionally brah-speak riddled posts,
I don't recall or see anywhere in this thread where I was insulting unless someone insulted me first without a good critique of my argument however terrible it may or may not be. When someone insults me or just instructs everyone else to negbang me, my first response is to insult them because I'm thinking, that's just what OSU fans tend to do, not Michigan fans. So I insult them back, at least on mgoboard. If Lamaar Woodley insulted me, I would thank him and run away.
I don't see much Brah-speak in my posts, but then again, this is a site dedicated to football. To the extent that my screenname originates from common law property doctrine, I figure maybe this would absolve me of any dreaded brah-speak were I to have engaged in it but perhaps i that isn't enough I could also include a link in my signature to The Smiths Best II, which I own, for my own mgoenjoyment.
attacked others when they called you on it
The general import of how I speak on blogs is not to attack people unless I feel like they are tryng to incite the collective community against me without providing any concrete reason of why I am wrong. If you look up and down this post, where people bring up relevant issues with my argument I respond to them in a cordial manner.
If you bring up fact a, and fact b, and fact c, I don't respond by calling you an asshole. I respond with what I think may be a follow up to the argument or a comment on what they said. Where people just call me an idiot and they don't explain why they are the ones who are being inflammatory, I get pissed. Granted perhaps I should even concede that even these people deserve cordial responses if the topic Ihave raised is already unpopular, but this behaviour is something I have seen all over the place on this board.
Anyway, thank you for at least not being one of the people who just calls me an idiot but brings some substance to your post. . Go blue!
You saved yourself with the Go blue! there at the end
I don't recall or see anywhere in this thread where I was insulting unless someone insulted me first
I don't see much Brah-speak in my posts
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, please consider the following Exhibits:
if GERG can't freaking come up with a solution or continues with this fu--ing insanity, then he will deserve to get what's coming to him. Freaking moron.
on the field with Gerg commandeering our next big ten ass-handed loss.
Unless of course you like losing to these freaking rummy teams every year that we used to beat.
But the rest of you are just transplants from rivals and the insiders, coming over here and ruining free dialgoue by silencing anyone that you don't agree with with your moral majority conventional wisdom. As fans, with the likes of you, we all deserve to lose.
David, literally man
dude, i love roh
dude check this out
The prosecution rests. The jury finds the defendent guilty on all counts, including hyperbole, inflammatory rhetoric, insults, and occasional brah-speak.
You've demonstrated the ability to sound surprisingly quite reasonable. Please exercise this ability whenever you are able, and, when not able due to mitigating circumstances / emotional distress, take your lumps and then turn off the computer for awhile.
Most importantly, when you hit the sewer, stop digging.
AMEN, enough said.
To be clear, when I suggested that we might need to replace GERG if the defense does not improve, I was not calling for the OP to be the replacement.
Why didn't Greg Robinson think of this? It's so crazy it just might work! You'd better hurry and email it to him. I'm gonna buy my Rose Bowl tickets now!
cool dude, maybe I'll be next to you on the plane
i'm sure he's being facisious
Funny story about the word "Facetious"...it contains all of the vowels in alphabetical order. "Facetiously" even includes the sometimes "y".
the plane comment was sarcastic but my original post isn't.
This is too ridiculous to even comment on
And yet you did, and so did I. Funny how things work out that way.
I guess I just couldn't resist
It's like Jeckyll and Hyde in this blog. Everyone tries to suggest extreme changes every time we lose. Those will not take place at this point. We just had a shitty, inconsistent game all across. Let's sit tight and watch. There's a lot of football to be played...
I actually liked the Defense we played, I loved seeing pressure on the Cousins and watching our inept DB playing up on the line of scrimmage. Now yes they were burned but I really enjoyed seeing a different aspect of what could be. We working on some technique in this style of D and tackeling and we just may have something there. Of course this is just my opinion.
"I know you guys are going to hate this..."
My favorite posts have always been the ones that started with
You'll never believe what happened to me..."
Not that this thread even deserves to be analyzed, but you do realize that Adam Patterson is Martin's backup right? So even if they ran with your proposal, it probably wouldn't be Big Will.
but dude I am advocating that we move Big Will in alongside Martin / patterson, thats the whole point of my much-maligned post.
I understand that is what your advocating. My point is if Campbell isn't even ready to be Martin's backup, what makes you think they should create a starting position just for him. It makes no sense.
I see what you are saying. But I guess the spirit of my post is saying is that if Campbell seriously isn't ready to play division 1 football at michigan yet, then stick whoever the next true defensive tackle is into the game next to martin with two true strongside defensive ends next to them in situations where you need to control the line of scrimmage. Personally I think the number 2 defensive tackle is campbell, but if it isn't, then whoever that would be (sagesse maybe).
Oh my god. That GIF is just outstanding. I just laughed for the first time today, maybe first time at all since yesterday's loss. So funny. Thank you.
I'm good, i think my free speech reading went to my head...
I don't believe this is his first screenname either. Just a feeling.
By the way on the subject of "free speech." Just because you have free speech does not mean you need to be provided a forum for your free speech. This is a private enterprise owned by Brian et al. They are under no obligation to give you a forum to post your thoughts.
For example, before the internet if you were to write an letter to the editor, they were under no obligation to print that letter. But you seem to think that newspaper would be limiting your own free speech.
If your worried about your free speech. I'm sure adversevillion77.com is available, feel free to spout your views there.
everyone also has a right to remain silent....but they seldom do.
I think its obvious to most people that i'm not advocating that i would have a bona fide legal claim under the first admendment for getting negbanged on mgoblog. As I'm sure you know, this would be a moot question and foreclosed in the literal sense because first and foremost I have no injury.
The relevant point is that the sprit behind any blogging community is the same spirit that drives the history of free speech, which is self govenance, discovering truth, self expression, and promoting tolerance. Does that help?
I don't believe this is his first screenname either. Just a feeling.
Actually, your feeling is wrong. This is the only screenname I have used on mgoblog. I signed up on November 12, 2009, and followed the blog long before that, as Brian is has the best content out there. In case you were wondering, Nor will I change my screenname just because I have been negbanged. My screenname is based on the common law property theory of adverse possession, which basically says that you will come to own property that you don't hold legal title to if you act like it is yours and nobody contests it within a given statutory period.
In the mgoblog community, I had the foresight to see that many of my opinions would in fact give me the reputation of being unpopular, so in time, my conduct through posting, would adversely and literally turn me into a villain. I was born in 1977. So I am adversevillain77. Thank you for playing.
I had the foresight to see that many of my opinions would in fact give me the reputation of being unpopular, so in time, my conduct through posting, would adversely and literally turn me into a villain.
This is hilarious. Absolutely hilarious.