Ask my Grandma's sewing finger.
It's damn damn real. Damn real.
Ask my Grandma's sewing finger.
It's damn damn real. Damn real.
You really shouldn't get high before noon.
there goes my weekend...
Then again, it's noon somewhere.
For non-married folk (no Wife Day, etc.), that means that time is irrelevant, so you're safe. Today is still Friday, though.
No, there is no such thing as toughness.
But there are such things as grit, sand, or balls.
My stepdad cuts trees for a living. His climbing spike slipped and stabbed an inch and a half deep into his thigh. He poured superglue into the hole in his leg, climbed back up the tree, and finished the job. Tough exists.
for a cut on my finger and it burnt like Charlie Sheen's schwantz when he pees. Apparently your step Dad is tougher than shoe leather. Wow
or is it pain tolerance? Or are the two the same thing?
Does super glue have medicinal qualities? I would want to be sure I would not be doing something extremely hazardous to my health before I poured something like super glue onto any bleeding part of my body!
as the liquid bandage stuff they use in urgent care. Super glue was used to treat Vietnam War soldiers. Bank on it.
for decades. In fact, it was tested in Vietnam in '66. It isn't magic, I am not sure about medicinal qualities, but there are people alive simply because superglue kept all of the red stuff from leaking out.
When I was 11 or so, I was playing football and ran into a fence. I cut my eyebrow open pretty good, and when I got the urgent care place, they decided to patch it up with superglue instead of a few stitches. I don't know if they had some special medical glue or if they just used some regular ol' Elmer's, but it did the trick. Except when the stuff started peeling off, it basically took my whole eyebrow with it.
I think you're confusing toughness with tetanus.
I can think of two things off of the top of my head that separate some players from others: the willingness to play through pain and a taste for violence, for lack of a better way to put it. It's somewhere between hard and impossible to know how much pain someone is in, so it's hard to say how tough a player is being in the face of pain. As for a taste for violence (maybe "enthusiasm for physical violence" would be a better way to say it), you can see that more in some players than others. I'm particularly excited about 2012 recruit James Ross because he's a kid who initiates a lot of very violent contact. He could be contrasted with other players who do not.
We heard you the first time.
Gahh! I sense a new Ask Profit meme.
Something something rivalry, jerseys, ohio.
Wow, Michigan jersey sales are increasing in ohio!??! That's a great sign of things to come in the future.
Kovacs is an example of someone playing tough. Sometimes the "tougher" team loses because of a lack of technique, athletic ability, etc. But for a team to achieve it's highest possible level, each player has to be willing to face his own fears, overcome adversity, and play each play as though it were his last. In the end, I don't know which team was tougher last weekend--it's impossible to know without being in each player's head. I think the pundits, however, sometimes mistake dirty play with toughness. Toughness is letting the open receiver run by you because you know the safety has him, and you trust the system. Toughness is not responding when your adversary cheats and tries to injure you. Toughness is putting the team ahead of yourself. I see toughness in UM this year, and no, it doesn't always show up on the scoreboard, but it's why I could never root for any team but ours.
Troy Woolfolk playing every game, with cast and half an ankle.
He may be tough, but his ankles and wrists are certainly not.
I think it's mostly a way for analysts and commentators to speak to the lowest common denominator. I.e. most people watching the ESPN talking heads or reading their local sports columnist would have their eyes glaze over if told that Michigan's problem against MSU was the constant A gap blitzing of the linebackers and Michigan's inability to adjust to it. Instead we get 'tougher' or 'wanting it more' because that helps feed the passion for fans.
We don't want to hear that our team won because they were bigger or stronger or faster or out-executed the other team. We want to believe that our team won because they wanted it more.
On the one hand,
I recall Rueben Riley playing with two broken thumbs in the '05 season. So that's toughness right there.
I think most people would define toughness as being able to push yourself physically, at the cost of aggravating your injuries. On another level it's something of a state of mind. I'm going to accomplish X no matter what - that sort of thing.
On the other hand,
I don't think "toughness" had much to do at all with the MSU loss. Go watch the snap count post Brian put up:
and ask yourself if Dave Molk having to block 2 guys at once has anything to do with toughness.
Not blocking the corner blitz on a 4th and 1 doesn't have anything to do with toughness.
Vincent Smith running a hitch instead of a slant that led to the pick six doesn't have anything to do with toughness.
Those were mistakes, plain and simple, on the coaches and the players. When Hoke said he was outcoached... he was right.
always manifest itself on the field every game but instead occurs when a team faces adversity.
For example, I would say the last few years Michigan didn't have that mental toughness as evidenced by their late season collapses, whether that was a coaching or player thing is yet to be determined because the same thing could very well happen this season also.
Nickel has it right. Talking heads and ignorant people make shit up to explain what they don't understand. "UM" was getting blown off the ball ----> MSU is Tougher" No, MSU brought the house every other play.. More guys pushing on less guys = blown off the ball.
Slow linbacker picture pages example.
MSU 12 yard run. They must be tougher? Nope, UM got push by 2 guys singled, 1 walkon who was doubled held his own, 2 LB made poor/slow reads, one small CB missed a tackle, Onle LB missed a tackle. Bad Tech, not low toughness.
When we marched down the field early was state not tough then?
All BS. We need to learn sound D, not toughness. Although a LB or two willing to knife a couple dudes at a nightclub (but not get convicted) might help??
"I love doing what ifs."
Here's a few for you:
sadism, and a lot of sadists are secret chickenhearts. Being tough is being able to TAKE difficulty en route to some higher goal. Certainly, Hoke has shown more insight about this distinction since last Saturday than Mr. Dantonio.
Dantonio's crybaby demeanor when his team gets whistled is anything but tough.
Maybe Profit knows
Well, Hoke and the team believe it is!
I have to admit I was shocked when M players were openly stating that MSU was the tougher team. Then Hoke said the same thing.
That was no accident. Hoke believes the team is not tough enough and IMHO he told the seniors and leaders to make these statements to motivate the rest of the guys.
When Hoke and the players talk about "playing Michigan football" they are not talking about merely winning the game -- they are talking about being the tougher team.
Hoke has also stated that a main reason he does not like the spread is because it does not allow the D to practice against tough offenses.
I can imagine the practices for this week and next are pretty intense (and will continue to be).
I'm confused though. I thought Lloyd Carr had too much of a country club atmosphere and that is why his teams were soft? I am confused as to when we can blame coaching/schemes and when the players are pussies.
Toughness will only take you so far. Calling something to neutralize a blitz would have been a million times better than being a tougher team last Saturday.
Yes it is real. Ask any veteran who has been in combat.
Tiger Woods for example. That dude grinds like no one else, makes more putts with it all on the line and and has won more than anyone else.
Is he statistically far and away better than everyone else? No, but he has won far and away mroe than anyone else. Why?? He is far and away mentally tougher than anyone else and its only a matter of time before he gets back to old form.
I think Hoke is preaching mental toughness just as much or more than physical toughness. he has turned 2 programs around by preaching this way, so yeah, I think its real.
All right I'll go with your example.
So after year 5 when Hoke was at Ball St and they still sucked are you saying that he was able to properly make his team tougher than the rest of the MAC, but they still sucked because had tough but terrible football players?
Tiger Woods is not a valid example, because I understand that certain football players(Ray Lewis) can be much tougher than other football players(Justin Boren).
What I am saying is that when you get to a certain level toughness is not the determining factor that the media and fans like to bring up.
Here's my example. There are 100-120 starting linebackers in the NFL. These guys for the most part have played and excelled at LB for at least 5-10 years to reach that point. Do you think toughness seperates the best ones at this point or does speed, intelligence, technique and instincts seperate them?
I would content that almost everyone of those LB's is one tough sob. What seperates them is talent.
I think by toughness, Hoke is talking more about mental toughness - which is more about attitude, believing in yourself and your team, confidence, and and undying "no-quit" attitude
I am not talking about talent, although the LB examples you mentioned are valid because talent is certainly a factor in winning. But you also have to note that veteren starting LBs in the NFL are at the top of the food chain, they dont get their unless they are tough and talented.
But we are talking about 18-22 year old kids in college football. Teaching an attitude of winning to these kids is just as important as the physical aspects of the game - getting faster, stronger, technically sound, etc.
I think you missed the point. Was Hoke not teaching mental toughness, confidence, and a "no-quit" attitude the first 5 years at Ball State when they hadn't recorded a winning season, or do you think his two winning seasons out of 6 years there was a little influenced by the QB who was drafted after his junior year and set passing records at Ball State?
Toughness is the ability of a material to absorb strain energy. To over-simplify, it's the combination of not bending much in response to a push, and bending far before beaking.
I think anyone who has comptetively played or coached a physically gruelling sport knows that toughness is a real thing.
Not sure what level you played to, but most of the people I played against were tough as well. No one wants to be embarrassed.
The "toughest" Michigan team had to be that 1997 team. They were an unimaginitive and a vanilla ugly duckly on ofefnse, but on defense they swung brass balls around like a mace and played with grit and attitude.
All those NFL players kinda helped as well. I do agree with you that that Woodson kid did a great job of overcoming his physical limitations and relying on grit and attitude to be successful
You confirmed my point that we think of the 97 defense as the toughest. It was the best and most talented defense I have seen at Michigan so it is regarded as the toughest according to everyone.
Could the 95 defense have been tougher but less talented? Yes it could have but nobody knows that and nobody would ever say that. Hence my point that toughness is an overrated and silly thing to comment on.
"My contention is that when teams win they are usually considered tough and when teams lose the fans and press question their toughness. I think talent and strength is mistaken for toughness. "- Ziff72
To me, "toughness" is being able to overcome adversity and not lose track of the point of it all. I would say that teams who win despite a schedule and circumstances which stack up against them by conventional wisdom display "toughness" to a degree. Individuals who perform at a position where they were not expected to be much display "toughness". To a great extent, I do believe you are right - some teams are simply more talented and stronger than the other team they are playing, and the physically bigger team will likely win, but it doesn't necessarily speak to how "tough" the loser in that contest may be.
Steve Everitt thread:
Everitt played center with a metal plate in his broken jaw.