I thought the phrase was "Ass 'n' 9". Shows how much I know...
landing spot. will be interesting to see how he does.
I thought the phrase was "Ass 'n' 9". Shows how much I know...
I once thought it was "for all intensive purposes". What fail. We suck.
I thought the exact same thing until I was 12
I used to think it was "excuse me, while I kiss this guy", imagine my shock as a child.
My was "Dead Devil in the Freezer" by Bruce Springsteen. Imagine the horror when I found out (at age 30) it was "10th Avenue Freezeout."
what is it like to suck so much?
Wow. Just another great example of idiocy. Thanks...
...and another one by me...
Yeah? You care to tell me why a$$shole? Prove me wrong rather than just calling me an idiot otherwise shut the F-ck up.
Something must've crawled up his a$$ and died.
I enjoy neg'ing jerks like you.
This post is more awful than your avatar. Here's some advice-sit back and learn how to post here without acting like this is mlive.
This could have been expressed in any of the other 1,000,000 threads about the 3-3-5.
Besides, your solution is to run a 5-man defensive line or put Roh at MLB?
And you're saying the 3-3-5 is dumb?
You should probaby sit this one out for awhile.
My solution is to put anyone on the field rather than Ezeh in his spot.. I didn't advocate running a five man defensive line if you read the post, call it what you will, or maybe just tell me i'm wrong when iowa brings in two tight ends and a fullback next week and runs it down our throats. If you think I'm wrong, maybe you should be down there on the field with Gerg commandeering our next big ten ass-handed loss.
You DID advocate running a 5-man defensive line:
bring in roh on third down as a fifth defensive lineman
By the way, if I remember correctly, we had 4 down linemen on 3 of the 4 touchdowns yesterday (Baker's run, the pass to Dell, and Bell's run). So...uhh...yeah...maybe the 3-3-5 isn't the whole problem.
But yes, I guess if I think you're wrong, I should be down on the field with Gerg. That makes complete sense.
It's going to be a very crowded sideline because EVERYONE thinks you're wrong.
No, what the post meant was that you could bring in Roh in some situations on third town as a fifth defensive lineman against heavy run packages. we used to do this all of the time with crable. That is what Roh is. he is not a defensive lineman. I don't care if you all think I'm wrong because I'm not wrong. I guarantee you before the end of the year you will see Campbell and Martin out there at the same time, with two other traditional defensive ends. Watch.
The best part is if you are right, you aren't going to have points enough to make a thread about it.
thats great David, so your basic point is that it is better to be popular and wrong rather than being right even if it is unpopular. Cool man. That is a great lesson. Thanks.
No. My basic point was that you are annoying and I don't want to hear any more of your ideas, even if do happen to be right. But, you don' seem to understand anything anyone else is trying to tell you.
then why aren't you coaching college football?
Magnus is right, you need to take a seat back on the bench an learn a little bit about how things work on this board, let alone how to fix things on the field every saturday. their makin' the big bucks, they'll get it figured out. and i'm quite sure they'll do it WITHOUT your help!
I think Magnus on the field standing next to/over GERG with a "dont fuck this up" look could inspire him to find his inner play-calling genius...
but there is a difference. The million posts about the 3-3-5 all came before yesterday, when it was proven to be absolutely the worst possible defense we can be running against a big ten team that can run the ball, the category of which at iowa, ohio state, and wisconsin fall into. We know now that it can't possibly work and it has to change. Unless of course you like losing to these freaking rummy teams every year that we used to beat.
I think you should watch the game again. We used 4 down linemen on 3 out of 4 of MSU's touchdowns, all of which were big plays.
You're blaming the wrong thing (the 3-3-5) and grasping at straws. It's not the 3-3-5. Maybe it's the coach, it's definitely the recruiting and depth, etc., etc.
But your ideas are much, much worse.
What in the hell...? You have thoroughly confused me.
I don't know how having four defensive linemen on the field equals a 3-3-5, but good luck with this theory going forward.
As the old saying goes...Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
what he is trying to say, i think, but stupidly, is that row isn't a true DE. despite the fact he is the best pass rusher coming out of a 3 pt stance. he appears to think that black would be a more effective DE than roh. i, however, would like to try both black and roh as bookends at DE for an extended period of time.
couldn't do any worse could it?
Curious as to what we should make of the fact that in three recruiting classes Rich Rod has not brought in a single linebacker type that is better than Ezeh. How is that possible?
Separately I know that this sentiment has been shared before but how can scheme possibly be the culprit here when you look at the talent pool? Bill Belichick couldn't do anything with this defensive roster.
I actually share your hatred for the 3-3-5, but they are the coaches and know the talents of this team. I can't believe I'm saying this, but maybe the 3-3-5 gets our best 11 players on the field. That being said, its hard to see GERG coming back next year with the performances that have been put up the past two years. Lets just hope we can get to a bowl game, because after seeing Illinois beat PSU, I am now concerned with that game as well.
If Illinois now scares you then Penn State shouldn't. You can't have it both ways.
That is a good point, my only concern with PSU its at Happy Valley at night. But anything can happen, I still think we can surprise some people and beat Iowa, PSU, or Wisconsin. I'm hoping we can put it together for one more game against a worthy opponent.
I'm pretty sure we were running a 4-2-5 for a large part, if not majority of the game.
But by all means...rabble rabble rabble, 3 man-front
Also, if you've got "Camnpbell is a beast" sourced, I'd love to see that. Kthxbye.
p.s. on a not-so-sassy note, agree we need to fix our cutback woes.
the 4-2-5 is not a 4-2-5 when roh is one of the defensive lineman. The 4-2-5, by definition, has to have at least four defensive lineman that could at least potentially draw a double team. I'm saying four actual defensive lineman.
You should go back through the Notre Dame UFR. Roh got double teamed quite a bit and fought through one for a big TFL on a particular play.
I saw the same thing you did, as well as everyone else on this board. If we were playing a 3-3-5 then CC would have had help deep on the (what was it,) 40yard bomb. I liked the fact we blitzed our asses off, the defense showed some signs of improvement. Now they need to work on a MLB, this is the one thing I agree with Ass, or whateeer his name is, on. Obi either steps it up or he is benched, but once again as everyone has made clear it is for the coaches descion to make. I hope they make the right one.
I love how one loss brings these kind of fans out of coaching retirement. You sir know jack shit about football.
what, and you do because you have three thousand points on your mgoblog account? My position is simple, it advocates putting players on teh field to take away either the run or the pass, but not both. Right now we are giving up both. It may take someone who knows jack shit about football to actually be able to suggest something that might help us win, because right now our defensive experts are riding our team into a dungeon that is irretrievably crippling.. Certainly GERG is reputed to know more than jack shit about football yet look how bad his defense is. Its last in the country. Are any of you watching these games?
Are you wasted right now, or are you always this stupid?
Are you looking at the players on our defense?
Maybe Greg Robinson isn't the answer we can't make an informed judgement when his secondary consists of a Walk-on Sophmore, a guy who switched from WR this year, Sophmore JT Floyd and a Redshirt Freshman who also switched from WR this year
Are you looking at the players on our defense?
Maybe Greg Robinson isn't the answer but we can't make an informed judgment when his secondary consists of a Walk-on Sophmore, a guy who switched from WR this year, Sophmore JT Floyd and a Redshirt Freshman who also switched from WR this year
I know about football because I actually played college football. That does not make me a coach and neither does you watching the game on TV. You advocated for a five man front on 3rd down as well as our corners playing man coverage. This alone reveals that despite watching the game on Saturday you don't know jack shit about football.
So you think that basically it is preferable to give up the line of scrimmage for the advantage that one extra mediocre player gives us in pass coverage?
You do not know more about football than GERG. You just don't. You may think you know more, but trust me, you don't. I'm sorry to break the news to you. Please take this information into account on all new mgo posts. Thank you.
I didn't say that I know more than him, I in fact, know that I don't. But you have to admit that what I'm suggesting (a traditional defensive line against the heart of the big ten schedule) is really not that crazy, regardless of how bad our defensive backfield is. Teams have to keep Denard off the field, and to do this, they will attempt to establish the run. We can't stop the run against wiscy, iowa, and osu with three defensive lineman and Roh. Thats what yesterday showed us. IF we run that front against any of those three teams, they are going to kill us.
But you are implying that you know more than him if you have this great shiny wonderful idea that the team should try because it would fix some problem...and you somehow think GERG hasn't had the same thought.
Just stop. Please.
There's more than 1 reason to be afraid of me. If you want to find out make the trip down here some time, I'll show you if you like. - the_big_house 500th
David, literally man, I don't think that personal threatening a fellow fan is really in line with the spirit behind being a michgan fan. Sorry I made you that angry man. Go Blue.
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.
my bad, now i feel stupid.
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.
How I didn't say I was sure. You seem to know everything, worse you think you do. I love how you spout self goverence, such as us telling you your wrong, disagreeing with your opinion in the majority , down voting your opinions and even more so your argument style. Yet your resonse to that is calling everyone an asshole etc.
Were you thinking that you could claim MGoBlog and no one would notice? Also for a 33 year old you might want to rethink your priorties besides wasting a night being obnoxious on the intenet.
You knew you would be a villiain? So isn't that a self fulfilling prophency? Has this happened before that you knew that you would be considered the villian? Maybe someone needs to rethink his argument style and or change.
i think a lot of us spend more time following michigan football than we would rather admit. AFter all, you are here posting things as well, albeit , in your defense, probably less than I have tonight. You sort of turn self-governance on its head, as it is expressed anyway in regards to free speech. No problem, is is somewhat of an opaque term.
The self governance aspect of free speech goes towards the idea that we think it is a bad idea to suppress criticism by the minority of those who are in the majority. Therefore, self governance may not be one of the tenets of free speech that would be your strongest argument against me. I would probably agree with the notion however that there is a marketplace of ideas (discovering truth) and perhaps it is a viable conclusion that because most of the people posting here on mgoblog believe that the 3-3-5 is the best chance we have to succeed on defense this year, that it in actuality is the best chance we have of succeeding on defense, and therefore free speech has been satisfied in that we have discovered "the truth" that the 3-3-5 is the best defense.
About the name, I mean, I'm not posting to intentionally make people angry, but I guess I could see why my explanation would make you think that. peace.
Does anyone remember that GERG has never ran a 3-3-5 before? This was not his idea, it was RR's. And that defense looked totally invincible yesterday in the first quarter. And I believe RR said they were running the 3-3-5 because it was simplier to run with so many inexperienced players out there. So get off GERG's ass.
Yeah, but GERG didn't run a 3-3-5 last year and the results were no prettier.
At this point, does it really matter which formation we run? I think our tackling and secondary would be pretty bad regardless.
any defense formation is called the BASE formation where the players run onto the field and generally go to.
Then the DC calls the new formation for that play based upon scouting and game situation and adjustments.
So a 3 man front can turn into 4 or 5 or 6 depending on the call. It could rush 4 all game.
All defenses are fluid in the modern game.
Anyone that tells you a defense runs a 3 to 4 or whatever all the time doesn't know anything.
Not to be a jerk, but the best way for this defense to improve is more of this:
And less of this:
And I'm not sure how that improvement will occur outside of time and getting better players into the system. Changing defensive schemes and play-calling will help in the short term, but we've all seen the talent this team has on defense. If someone like Campbell has not broken into the 2-deep, there is a reason for that, and no amount of hope or "I don't care what the coaches think, play him" rhetoric will change that reality. Maybe GERG needs to go, maybe RR needs to adopt a new defensive philosophy, or maybe this just needs more time. Those are all options, but they are options that nobody can honestly address until the end of the season. For now, let's take some solace in the fact the defense looked competent for stretches of the game, the young kids are getting some experience, and the team is 5-1 with a winnable game coming up.
wow...after reading through this entire thread, i've narrowed my thoughs on this gent down to three possibilities:
1) he simply had far too many Mgopoints and felt the need to go into Mgodebt
2) he's a glutton for punishment
3) he's ingnorant/incredibly stupid...coin toss if it's this one.
......is not much different than a 3-4 defense, IMO, when considering the front seven for run defense, other than replacing a typical LB sized player with more of a hybrid LB/Safety. The scheme is good, and works particularly well employed against a spread offense. What we lack is experience, intelligence to diagnose plays quickly(mostly a product of experience), and the athleticism at certain key spots to make it really work.
One other aspect about it is the aggressiveness of GERG employing the defense. IMO, Roh needs to be given the green light to the QB, or RB on pass or run blitzes. This takes away a pass defender, but given his ineffectiveness at defending the pass anyway, would not be a terrible loss.
The 3-3-5 will work in the B10 when we get the experience and talent all-around to use it effectively. How different would this year be if Troy W. was healthy, along with a completely healthy Carvin J.? I don't think it would be a world beater yet, but IMO, it would be significantly better than it is right now.
Why even try to continue arguing your point? I'm not saying I love GERG or the 3-3-5, but coaches do what they do for a reason. I trust his judgment a little more than I do yours for some reason. But more than anything, just stop.
is not the problem,in this defense you need a good nose tackle which we have.2 you need a big time middle linebacker which we don't have.I don't like hate obi ezeh he is just not getting the job done.
......reason that the defense, no matter what alignment they are making for a play, is not working. The MLB is the QB of the defense, and as such, has to make the correct reads on plays which dictates what the other guys playing LB and safety will do. Our current MLB does not make the correct read ever, intentionally, and only occasionally happens to be in the correct place.
If one watches the better college MLB's, one can see the effect upon the entire defense of being in the right place for the type of play being run by the offense. More stops are made. Rarely do you see any runs gashed on their defenses, other than the rare one that is set up by great blocks other than defensive mistakes. Watching the pros is even more eye opening, as far as LB play is concerned. Our LB has the size, strength, and speed to play the position, but not the intelligence. Usually a guy like that is moved to the outside where the decisions aren't nearly as critical.
Right now we have no one who fits the typical MLB mold of intelligence and physical stature to play the position effectively, and we hurt greatly overall as a defensive unit because of it. This isn't going to be fixed this year at all, and not necessarily next year either, unless we get some guys more PT. I think that needs to happen because no matter what, we can't get much worse at the position, and there might be a pleasant surprise waiting, either in Demens or JB.
I agree with you there. Part of the reason I thought going to a solid four man front would be to ease the effect that not having a David Harris on our team would have on our overall defense, as the reads for ezeh would get a lot easier if the potential gaps on running plays were reduced. If we had a kick ass linebacking corps, the 3-3-5 would probably be a more viable option.
....does not ease the effect of not having an effective MLB. The MLB still has to make the correct reads during the play, as we saw during the game when Roh was on the line. They still gashed us for some runs that they shouldn't have if Ezeh had filled the hole he was supposed to, and not run away from it.
In my limited time as an MGoBlogger, I have never seen someone lose this many points in a single thread...AdverseVillain is getting gashed just like our secondary does every weekend
The legal theory bit is the clue you've gone full on retard (no offense to retards).
But a good reminder: there are many casual M fans that like to be a winner and talk shit. They too, believe they know what they're talking about and don't understand the full extent of their full retard.
In offices across Michigan tmw, they begin breeding. So prepare.
yeah legal theory seems vastly unpopular. should have known...
well hopefully I can recover by the end of the year. I am getting smoked though thats for sure.
I am interested to see the UFR... Kovacs was pulled up on a blitz on both of the TD runs... Line was not the problem... Linebackers followed the play left and out of position... Counter cut back and right were the LBs should have been... then Gordon is all by himself because Kovacs is behind the line of scrimmage watching the play from behind...
He is the best tackler we have in the backfield, and in my opinion we need to keep him back there to save our bacon...
Kovacs blitzing is a defensive play calling issue... would rather see Gordon blitz and keep Kovacs back to make the tackle...
The 3-3-5 works just fine if you have the athletes that fit the scheme, and the guys need to know there assignments!
that was a 10-2-0. They gashed us the way they did because we came out of our base.
You want Craig Roh to be a situational pass rusher? You do realize he is arguably our second best defensive player, right?