Football Display Case
just what the Pistons need: a third string center. Joe Dumars was replaced by a mean ol' alien a few years back you guys.
this would be a close approximation of hypothetical graduation speech
no you guys they're just super pumped about COLLLLLLLLLLLLEGE
not a surprise
premature congrats. One thing we can be sure of: he'll take fewer asinine penalties than Abdelkader
Thanks to ugly transitions between Fulmer/Kiffin/Dooley/Davis, Tennessee is on the edge of APR penalties for football.
i approve of this message
strong indictment of AAU right heah
Glockner sides with justice
a good cause, and a good time
good job gents
"Jeff Withey shouldn't have called him Peter Dinklage, is all I'm saying."
this would be bad if it wasn't LIES
Drew Henson's career, or not quite career, or whatever.
“I’m more of a back-to-the-basket type of big man that rebounds a lot,” Swanigan said on Wednesday, describing his game. “I have a Zach Randolph type of game — that’s who I base my game off of. Being physical and playing with both hands on the rim.”
Some more changes for Spartans 2013 offensive strategy.
And is Dantonio pursuing future endeavors elsewhere?
Warning: Links to Freep article.
Dantonio to CFL.
Lingerie Football League.
He would make all the puppies sad
If I tell you it's Easter, you better start looking for eggs.
Some folks call it a sling blade, I call it a kaiser blade.
out of his.
WWE: he would make a great "heel" manager.
That picture makes me not want to return to this thread later.
UPDATE (8:57am): I caved. And now I regret.
I find it rather amusing that the Spartan fans (who were just eating up the OSU rants about what a piss poor coach Bollman was) are now singing the praises of this brilliant move with co-OCs.
I wouldn't be surprised if this co-OC and Narduzzi's co-HC titles aren't just ploys to pay them higher salaries than the powers that be would otherwise authorize. Maybe that's why it took so long to finalize Bollman's contract: perhaps it took more than a lateral move and slight pay increase to get him to abandon his new gig with the Boilermakers.
It wasn't a lateral move. He was Purdue's OL coach, iirc, and is a co-OC now.
Bollman not calling plays? I haz a sad.
He may not be calling plays, but we can still hope that he influences play calling.
"Wasn't that Michigan drive just great. That's like Patton riding into Berlin." ~Bob Ufer
My guess is that Narduzzi getting the coach-in-waiting position is a way to keep him around, kind of like the Will Muschamp at Texas situation. Great for Narduzzi because he can definitely look elsewhere if he wants to be HC at a real football program and have the MSU situation as a backup.
It ain't easy being cheesy
It's a good move on his part. He can wait around for a legit BCS school to offer a position and skip the cappy MAC school step without the proper resources, or if that never comes, inherit MSU. Good plan to set up his future.
Then again, remember how well it worked out for Purdue when Danny Hope was named walrus-in-waiting...
As a matter of fact I like beer.
Bielema worked out well for Wisconsin. He was there seven years and went 68-24 with three Big Ten titles. Just because he didn't stay there for the rest of his career doesn't mean it was a bad move to bring him in.
Bielema was clearly a great hire, but one could make the argument that he was a failure from a strictly "coach in waiting" standpoint. The guy jumped ship, very unexpectedly, leaving Wisconsin to track down a brand new HC from outside the program, which is exactly what the "coach in waiting" system is supposed to avoid.
Well, he jumped ship eight years after he was hired as an assistant - it's not like he took the job and suddenly bolted. (And pretty much anytime a coach leaves for another job, it leaves the school in the lurch.)
I just think that the idea behind a coach-in-waiting system is to avoid leaving the school in the lurch the way Bielema left Wisconsin. Ideally Bielema would have stayed at Wisconsin his entire career or had groomed an successor before leaving. That didn't happen, which is why I was saying that it's a failure (only) in the coach-in-waiting sense.
Obviously, a daisy chain of head coaches that just pass the keys to the kingdom on down the line of hand picked and carefully groomed successors is a pipe dream. Which is why relying on any coaches-in-waiting is stupid. (See: Texas, FSU, and PSU for coach-in-waiting situations that didn't exact pan out the way any of those schools would have wanted.)
In the end, I totally agree that Bielema was very good for Wisconsin.
If the team does well the existing coach won't leave. If the team doesn't do well, the school looks elsewhere. It only works for Narduzzi if MD leaves very soon. Unlikely. Plus, now every school uses this against MSU as to coaching stability. This is a really stupid move by Sparty, which is all good.
You're suggesting that Sparty's recruiting could actually get worse than it already is?
Well, the rationalizations that the Sparty rank and file come up with to convinvce themselves that this is good and all is well should be fun to read.
"...what do you say, is it the new Bluesmobile or what?"
"Fix the cigarette lighter."
I don't see how it's bad. Narduzzi has made a top defense out of nothing and is now assistant HC. That shows coaching stability and familiarity with future recruits. And as recently as this very press conference Dantonio said he will be coaching for years to come. He continues signing extension after extension with MSU and has indicated in countless interviews that he won't be moving to anywhere but MSU, so he isn't springboarding anywhere. As long as he wins enough to keep the fans happy, he will retire as the MSU head coach. All of the comments about Narduzzi's loyalty to the program and now making him assistant HC make it seem like he is happy waiting, counting the days until he can take over that program.
I think this is a pretty straightforward deal MSU is going with. Not sure where there is confusion or worry from our fans, considering they aren't worldbeaters with that staff.
And that worked really well for Texas.
To be honest, it's where he belongs.
That said, I don't think he'll get the opportunity. I think he'll see the writing on the wall that Michigan has reclaimed the state and he'll head for the hills and allow Narduzzi to take the blow.
With or without Dantonio, MSU is back to just average. Michigan and Ohio are going to dominate this conference for at least the next 10 years.
That's not homerism (how could it be when I just gave Ohio somewhat of a compliment)...it's just reality. Between recruiting, new coach momentum, budgets, exposure, etc., MSU is f*cked.
Plain and simple, the window has closed.
“True loyalty is that quality of service that grows under adversity and expands in defeat. Any street urchin can shout applause in victory, but it takes character to stand fast in defeat. One is noise — the other, loyalty.”
i'm sorry but that's textbook homer. let's let michigan win a big ten championship before we declare them dominators of the big ten?
If you have a conference where two teams are consistently signing top-10 recruiting classes, while no team in the rest of the conference consistently finishes in the top 20, then it's a pretty good bet that, over time, the two teams that recruit well will come to dominate.
"You will suffer humiliation when the team from my area defeats the team from your area." -- The Onion
Oh it's absolutely very promising and much better than the alternative. However, nothing is guaranteed from any of this. Last year we went 8-5 and we haven't one a big ten championship since 2004 iirc.. While we're certainly looking very promising, football is played on the field. That's why it annoys me when people just declare us world beaters because of recruiting classes. They need to develop first.
Oh, it's not just the recruiting classes...it's because THIS IS MICHIGAN FERGODSAKES
this is true
We all know football is played on the field. But how do you think Alabama wins the SEC? How did USC dominate the Pac 10 (when it was the Pac 10)?
How did Michigan and Ohio dominate the Big Ten when they dominated the Big Ten?
It started with recruiting. Good coaching also helps. I hate Meyer, but he's a damn good coach...and he's got the hardware to prove it. Hoke, Mattison and the Michigan staff are just as good, and it's shown.
MSU was terrible last year and isn't getting any better. Wisconsin just lost it's coach. PSU is going to be a JV team in 2 years.
Soooo...Nebraska and Northwestern? Really.
Who are you banking on that my comment was so far fetched?
it is possible to have a very good team with highly ranked players (see: alabama). it's possible to have a very good team with not highly ranked players (see: boise state early 21st century). it's possible to have a bad team with highly ranked players - look at fsu and usc this year, people were predicting them to the BCS Championship game and they were mediocre. basically what i don' think you get what i'm saying is that it is preferable to have highly ranked players, but that doesn't GUARANTEE success. that's why it's, in my opinion, silly to declare michigan undenied dominators of the big ten in the next ten years when it's been that long since michigan has won the big ten. i want these players to succeed as much as you, but they aren't assured to be great because they have more stars. i'm also not sure you can say hoke and staff are just as good as ohio state's staff either...
Boise St. is a terrible comparison. Their recruiting classes are good for their conference. Put Boise St. in the SEC or the B1G and they're going to lose more games.
Are they still going to be good? Hell yea, they win with less talent. So does Northwestern (not to the level of Boise, but if you just went off recruiting, they'd never win).
The point is, that is where is STARTS.
And you're missing the point because you think that I said Michigan and Ohio are only going to be good because they've dominated in recruiting.
That is not true. They've also got the best facilities. They've got the budgets. They've got the coaches. They've got the history. Michigan and Ohio are likely 1 and 2 in any category you can think of to predict success (ON THE FIELD).
And they've ALREADY had success ON THE FIELD. Michigan won a BCS game in Hoke's first year and Ohio was undefeated last year...WITH sanctions.
I stand by my statement 100%. Especially when you look at what MSU's success was built on (Rich Rod, Michigan being down, PSU and Ohio "stuff").
i think there is a problem here and that is that we are both making different points. i'm not trying to compare anyone here to boise state, i am just saying that there are examples of teams with high classes doing poorly and poor classes doing better. while there is certainly a correlation between them, they do not guarantee anything. in your OP, you said that in the next 10+ years, UM/OSU will dominate the conference. i think this depends on what you define as domination. if you asked me, i'd guess that these two teams will win a combined 6+ of the next 10 conference championships, and more is a definite possibility... however, you did not say that in your OP that things are looking bright for UM..you said that they will DOMINATE with no doubt. what i am saying is that, while UM's future appears it will be very bright, it is not a guarantee. therefore, this is a commonly shared opinion i see around here that truly irks me and surely others. i mean, all you need is one injury, coaching departure, sanction, or anything else for a whole season or span of seasons to quickly turn to shit.
TL;DR: ohio state and michigan likely to be two best teams in conference for forseeable future, michigan hasn't been dominant for a long time so let's hold off on ensuring their dominance already.
I gave you multiple measures of how you can justify my statement beyond recruiting.
I then challenged you to come up with measures and tell me that Michigan and Ohio aren't routinely #1 and #2 in those measures to predict future success.
Things I mentioned:
Other things to note:
Since Hoke got to Michigan "recent record" might be the only category where Michigan doesn't rank at least tied 1 or 2 in the B1G. I'm not sure I would think we're damn close to the top though because Wisconsin and MSU both fell off this year after having good years in Hoke's first year. Ohio had a bad year in Hoke's first year and went undefeated this year. I'd assume there's about 4-5 teams right there around a 19-7, 18-8 type record.
Of all the CAPS!! They DOMINATE on and OFF THE FIELD!!!!
But it's also worth noting that the stupid divisional setup of the Big Ten cost us both in 2011 and 2012. We were two games better than Wisconsin in the standings in '12 and had the same record in '11, but because we were in the better division both times, we didn't make the BTCG.
Michigan and Ohio have DOMINATED the B1G in recruiting and it's not even close.
Michigan and Ohio have DOMINATED the midwest in recruiting and it's not even close. (Remember, Rich Rod had some decent classes, but his talent was from out of the footprint, this allowed MSU to get more kids that Hoke would've looked at). Also, the Ohio sanction worries are over...MSU can't poach any of their kids either.
Spartys window is slammed and sealed. Last year was just the beginning. Can they have one good year? Sure. But I guarantee over the next 10 years, it'll be Michigan and Ohio and then everyone else. Wisconsin will have some good years, Nebraska will, MSU may have a year or two. Hell if you're talking 10 years, Penn St. might even grab a solid year on the tail end of that span. Don't forget about Northwestern. Just like in the 90s.
But I'm willing to bet over the next 10 years, the best records in the B1G will belong to Michigan and Ohio. You've just got 2 coaches in the PERFECT situation for their schools. Michigan fans wouldn't trade Hoke, and rightfully so...Ohio fans wouldn't trade Meyer and rightfully so.
It's going to be a WAR once they really get their kids in for their system. But it'll be a war between them and whichever "other" team is good in that particular year.
In the end, MSU benefitted from Rich Rod's lack of recruiting in the midwest and his lack of success on the field. They benefited from PSU's mess and OSU's uncertainty. All of that is over. They better hope Meyer retires again, and I'm being serious.
Before you start talking about how much we're going to "DOMINATE" on the field, maybe we should win 2 in a row against MSU/OSU. Or actually win in East Lansing and Columbus. Or win a Big Ten Title.
Then we can talk about "DOMINATING" on the field
If you're doing nothing, how do you know when you're finished?
StraightDave owes me a steak dinner
#2 I included Ohio in the comment so we wouldn't have to dominate them.
I said dominate the B1G...really we wouldn't have to dominate either team.
You sound like someone who lives and dies by having top-10 classes. So far, those haven't gotten us to the B1G title game or Pasadena. Fact is, we live in a world where programs like UW and MSU can make noise with less than stellar classes. It is NOT going back to the "UM/OSU and everyone else" world. You need to accept that.
Or win a road game in Columbus or E Lansing.
The Big Ten has not undergone realignment yet either. It's a subtle point, but I got to believe that if MSU winds up in the same division with Michigan and Ohio, that will probably be the push Dantonio needs to call it a day, because he knows he's never going to win over both of those programs.
Now is Sparty winds up in the oppoing division with Nebraska, that's definately a more favorable scenario for the program to compete.
He did it in 2011.
He shared the title and didn't play OSU. In the current conference environment, do you really think that MSU placed in a division with both Michigan and Ohio is going to be able to compete year in and year out? In that scenario, if MSU managed to find it's way to the top of the division more than once in a decade, I'd be shocked.
Though I agree with your overall message, Sparty actually did play Ohio in 2011, and defeated them in Columbus. I remember because it was a brutal 10-7 game--which, if I am not mistaken, was the game that spawned the incredible Joe Bauserman passing chart. Notably, Ohio was without the entire Tat 5 for that game.
True, except that MSU won a share of the 2010 Big Ten title, where they didn't play OSU that season. 2011 they lost to Wisconsin in the Big 10 Championship Game.
As recently as last year, Wisconsin was running the Big Ten and God knows they don't have our budgets, new coach momentum, exposure, or recruiting. That IS textbook homerism. Take a minute to breathe, Yost, and realize that it's no longer the Big 2/Little 8.
Damn straight, it's Big 2/Little 10! Or maybe Big 2/Little 12. How many schools are in the Big10 these days?