|10 weeks 3 days ago||i'm not an insider so I can't||
i'm not an insider so I can't read the whole article, but from the summary, it sounds like they are ranking the next three years in total. They may think we're still not going to be great this year or maybe even next, but a significant turnaround in year three could have us as the 15th best team over that 3 year period.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Why does the MHSAA have to||
Why does the MHSAA have to change to get one of these academies? Don't most of them pull out of their state associations to play nationally anyway? Does the MHSAA prevent schools from playing these types of academies so that a michigan based national academy would not be able to schedule any local teams?
I get the argument that maybe if we didn't have the 300 rule and the limits on regular season games, a DCD or someone could become a Chicago Whitney type school where they're not quite national academy, but a local school that could compete on that level occasionally while keeping some kids away from the national academies. But I don't see what the MHSAA is doing that actually prevents a true national academy from setting up locally.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Floating an idea that has||
Floating an idea that has absolutely zero chance of happening is not a good strategy to scare the NBA into doing something.
|15 weeks 2 days ago||I don't think that's what||
I don't think that's what he's talking about. I think he's saying that plenty of teams take a very long time to initiate the offense even after bringing the ball up. And he's probably right. The only way you need 35 seconds to get a good look as an offense is if you're really bad at offense or you're wasting time.
FWIW, perimeter passing with no other physical movement is the least effective strategy against a zone defense.
|15 weeks 6 days ago||Often at the end of games TV||
Often at the end of games TV isn't going to commercial during timeouts anyway. I don't think less total timeouts in a game is going to lead to less commercial breaks. The exception probably being the NCAA tournament. My guess is that the NCAA will run these past CBS/Turner before they are finalized.
|15 weeks 6 days ago||Doesn't go far enough, but it||
Doesn't go far enough, but it is a good start.
|16 weeks 11 hours ago||That really should be enough||
That really should be enough to overturn the suspension by an indipendent arbitrator when it gets to that point. Especially considering that if you assume Anderson used the gauge he said he did and if you account for the Colts footballs being measured at the end of halftime when they had a longer time to warm up and add psi, the entire difference in psi loss between the patriots' footballs and the colts' footballs is negated.
Without that one presumption, of which there is questionable basis, there is no evidence of any tampering at all.
|16 weeks 6 days ago||Agree on moving on, but how||
Agree on moving on, but how does eliminating the boundary not solve the problem of someone pushing the boundary?
The point is that the NFL allows (as they should) QBs to tailor the football to their liking yet they rather arbitrarily set inflation limits. Aaron Rodgers wants to go above them. Tom Brady apparently wants to go below them. I'm sure there is a wide range in between. If the NFL would just allow QBs to also dictate air pressure, then this wouldn't be an issue.
|17 weeks 17 hours ago||Or some other reason, like||
Or some other reason, like coaching (Tiki Barber greatly reduced his fumble rate mid-career), play design that doesn't lead to a lot of WRs getting hit shortly after gaining possession, etc. I don't doubt in theory that having a lower psi in the footballs could make it easier to hold onto the ball, but I imagine it is a minimal advantage.
|17 weeks 18 hours ago||My questions/thoughts on the||
My questions/thoughts on the report other than that the rule is stupid and patriots personnel were deflating balls after official inspection.
There's really no evidence that Brady asked that the balls be illegally tampered with rather than at the low end of the allowable pressure. The only direct mention of Brady in the texts that are a large part of the "case," is that he is expressing his belief that patriots personnel should prevent officials from pumping up balls beyond 12.5 psi. The other mention of Brady understanding it is a "stressful" job or whatever could mean anything.
Who knows how long this was going on. Only an offhand mention in the texts of the guy calling himself "the deflator" serves as a basis for any belief that it wasn't just a result of Brady being pissed that the officials overinflated game balls for one game.
What about road games? The report basically said that the Colts, as the road team, had no chance to tamper with game balls after inspection. So are we to understand that the Patriots only tampered with game balls at home? Seems like this would be a problem with the conclussion that the Patriots are only good because of the deflated ball. This would also apply to 538's facination with the Patriots' fumble rates.
|17 weeks 19 hours ago||Are you denying the reports||
Are you denying the reports conclusions or are you deeming it not "cheating"? If the former, I think you have to be pretty naive to think that it was mere coincidence that the one game day the locker room attendant wasn't left alone with the game balls just happened to be the one day that he left the locker room alone without permission in possession of the game balls, and that this was not a pretty clear indication of the intent to tamper with the balls after official inspection. If the latter, how is knowing a rule, then breaking it in a secritive manner not the truest sense of "cheating"?
Like I said earlier. I think it's a stupid rule. I don't think it helped the Patriots in any meaningful way. But I find it hard to deny that they did cheat. I would give it a slap on the wrist fine and get rid of the rule. But that's just me.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||But why? Football is the||
But why? Football is the rare game where it is convenient for both teams to play with the game ball of their choosing at no cost to the opponent. The NBA needs a consistent ball because both teams shoot with the same ball. Baseball needs a consistent ball because ball conditions affects both hitters and pitchers. Football has no such issues. The offense has the ball for the entirety of their possession but for potentially a few seconds a game after a turnover. Why in the world would we feel the need to dictate the ball conditions? Make sure they're the same size and that's all they should care about, in my opinion.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||Why? At literally at every||
Why? At literally at every other level of football offensive teams choose their own footballs.
I think what is stupid is to mandate the pressure levels to begin with. There's nothing inherently better or worse about any particular pressure point as evidenced by two of the very few elite qbs in the league, Rogers and Brady, wanting radically different feels to the game ball.
It's obvious that the Pats cheated in the truest sense of the word. They knew the rules, utilized an underhanded method to circumvent them, and thus cheated. I'm sure Brady knew what was going on. It is a stupid rule and I think anyone pretending to really care is kidding themselves if they think it really matters one bit in the scheme of the things, but they still cheated.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||If we played Iowa this year,||
If we played Iowa this year, I doubt Iowa releases him to us.
|19 weeks 2 days ago||A two-loss team is going to||
A two-loss team is going to have a shot some years. Hell, a two-loss LSU already won the BCS. An 8 team playoff would mean that's true every year and would probably give 3-loss teams a shot now and then.
I'm not disagreeing with you that it would be difficult for a season to produce 8 deserving teams, but you also can't draw a line in the sand and say teams with 2 loses don't get a shot.
The absolute best system is also completely unrealistic, where you determine the number of teams at the end of each system based on what the season dictates. This year would have been a year to be expansive, with maybe 6 teams. Other years there is going to be a clear 1 and 2 when we will have too many teams in the playoffs.
|20 weeks 6 days ago||Hayes is staying as a||
Hayes is staying as a sophomore and Konig is back. That's a solid 1-2. Though I wonder if Hayes will struggle as he becomes more of the focus of the offense/opposing defenses. They also lose Dukan. So the only other returners that saw any minutes are Showalter and Brown who averaged 7 and 6 minutes a game respectively.
They will be relying on a lot of youth next year. Will be interesting to see just how far back they fall. Could see them as 5th or worse in the league pretty easily.
|21 weeks 13 hours ago||With Towns, he shoots free||
With Towns, he shoots free throws well, so there's at least a sign that he could develop that outside shot. And Booker and Lyles will be drafted high on potential, so it makes some sense for them to go. Generally though I agree with you. I didn't think, outside of Towns, that anyone on Kentucky was such a great individual talent. Kentucky's big factor was depth. They had 8 or so guys that would have been the #1 or #2 guy on all but a handful of teams in the country.
|21 weeks 14 hours ago||Still two, I believe. I'd||
Still two, I believe. I'd guess DraftExpress had Harrison ranked higher than 60 and he assumed that meant he was a third round pick.
|21 weeks 14 hours ago||Calipari is probably really||
Calipari is probably really smooth about it. He accepts commitments from the absolute minimum of guys he knows he is going to have room for. Then probably continues to recruit everyone else hard but says something along the lines of "I don't want you to commit yet until you see exactly what we have coming back and where you would fit on the roster. I want you to come to Kentucky, but I don't want you to step into a situation where your development would be slowed due to a lack of playing time." It can't be a coincidence that there are so many top-25/top-50 caliber players still undeclared when the rest of college basketball recruiting has sped up.
|21 weeks 14 hours ago||He's great at recruiting,||
He's great at recruiting, great at managing players, pretty good at instilling a system. But, you're right, bad as an in-game coach. The last few minutes of the Wisconsin game were brutal for him.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||I don't think that's||
I don't think that's necesserily fair to the Harrisons. While I doubt their pro potential, they are still very good college basketball players who would be epxerienced juniors. I don't think Calipari would force them out over what could possibly be an upgrade. Besides, I think he knew they were going pro.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||I think they had one open||
I think they had one open scholarship this season (assuming you can take one back from a walk-on). Kentucky currently has three players signed with a potential fourth that could reclassify. So they are only two over before defections. I think they were pretty safe to assume that Cauley-Stein and Towns would be gone. So they're set right now even ignoring the Harrison twins and likely departure of Lyles. If you told Calipari he could keep those three and not add anyone else, I think he'd gladly accept. So, no, I don't think he's encouraged anyone to go for his own benefit.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||Great idea in theory. But I||
Great idea in theory. But I think the thing that may prevent it from becoming a reality is Title IX. Scholarship count for men's and women's sports is a factor in Title IX equality analysis. Now, I would think that normal attrition would probably bring the total number of scholarships used down to 85 or lower for most schools, but would the schools be forced to calculate football scholarships closer to the total possible? Hard to know.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||I agree with you. They have||
I agree with you. They have NBA body types but I wasn't all that impressed by either's skill set.
As to the point in the OP, I thought it was assumed that they were both going pro, so I don't know if this changes anything for Brown. If Booker goes pro, that may change the equation.
|21 weeks 2 days ago||That's how it's called every||
That's how it's called every single time. Jackson got away with a more blatant example against UK on a 3. If Koenig wasn't beat on the play he wouldn't have given Jones the chance to make that play.
I think the blame on officials in this game is way overdone. They blew the two out of bounds plays and probably the first Winslow charge, but that's really it. The second Winslow charge was a good no call. You think there weren't equally dubious calls that went Wisconsin's way?
Duke was in the double bonus early because they were aggressive and consistently beating guys to the hole. The aggressiveness made the body bumps that is the hallmark of Wisconsin defense obvious fouls.
Let's not be like MSU or Wisconsin fans that think every call against their team is a bad one just because their coach doesn't believe his team has ever committed a foul.
|21 weeks 3 days ago||I'm one of the last people||
I'm one of the last people that would defend Duke in an officiating debate, but if you're really arguing that call (it was Jones by the way) then you are letting your personal bias get in the way. If the defender leaves his feet and is not straight up, it will be a foul if there is contact every damn time.
I thought officiating was bad but equal. First half went Wisconsin, second half went Duke. What decided the game was Okafer eating Kaminsky's lunch in the last three minutes.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||An established mid major is||
An established mid major is still a mid major, is it not? I don't see 5-star recruits knocking at the door begging to come play for VCU.
I also think it's silly to compare Jeff Capel and Anthony Grant to Smart. The level of success is just not comparable.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||Isn't that where a talent||
Isn't that where a talent disparity would hurt you more? Transition buckets are easier shots. Tougher to get good looks in the half court, no matter the coach. If you're not as talented, it's going to show in the half court.
People seem to hold Smart to a higher standard because he's had consistent success for the last five years at VCU. Meanwhile they ignore the fact that he's had that success with a grand total of two guys in that time period to see time in the NBA.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||Why won't his system succeed||
Why won't his system succeed at Texas? WVU changed to a very similar system this year and had far better success in the Big 12 than they should have based on talent alone.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||Is his system really that||
Is his system really that unique? It's different press defenses. Sure he may deploy them a little differently or whatever, but the concept still isn't that new or even that unique. Plus, in general, I don't think there really is a "system" that allows teams with lesser talent to compete with greater talent in basketball that wouldn't translate to better talent. Maybe you could argue that some of the extreme plodding offensive systems that try and limit possessions to keep games close shouldn't translate, but Tony Bennett is doing a pretty good job of making that system work at the highest levels.
I wouldn't be too worried about Smart's system translating with a year or two to make sure his roster fits his system. After all, is it really all that different than Nolan Richardson's "40 minutes of hell" defense? He seemed to do all right.
|22 weeks 15 hours ago||They went to three||
They went to three tournaments in the 2000's before Smart's arrival in 2009-10. It's not like he stepped into Gonzaga. And, some institutional advantages didn't save Butler form missing the tournament two out of four years following back to back final fours. I stand by the statement that five straight tournaments for a mid-major is a legitimate accomplishment.
I think Smart is starting to "suffer" from his own success. Get a mid major consistently into the tournament, but don't get to the sweet 16 or better, and people start to forget that you're not playing the same game, recruitment wise, as the teams that generally make the sweet 16.
|22 weeks 16 hours ago||Grant got to two NCAA's in||
Grant got to two NCAA's in three years and Capel got to one in four years. Neither won a game. Smart's had better success and more sustained success than either guy or even both guys put together. I do think you may have a point with your second paragraph. Though, since I don't watch much CAA/A-10 basketball, I wonder how much of that is x's and o's vs. the Jimmies and the Joes.
|22 weeks 19 hours ago||On the other hand, just||
On the other hand, just getting to five straight NCAA tournaments at VCU is an impressive feat. Not many mid majors, aside from Gonzaga, do that.
|22 weeks 2 days ago||This would seemingly be a||
This would seemingly be a pretty good candidate for a sixth year if he could ever get his legs in working order.
|23 weeks 2 days ago||I think you're missing the||
I think you're missing the point, or choosing to ignore it because you can't buy that Calipari is actually one hell of a coach. He's all over the record that he says his season doesn't end until the NBA draft and his number one goal isn't winning it's developing kids for the NBA. His pitch absolutely is that he will make you more prepared in your one year on campus for the NBA than anyone else will. I think it's far more likely that kids are buying what he's selling rather than UK boosters are suddenly paying more than they were under Pitino, Tubby Smith, or Billy Gillipsie.
|23 weeks 2 days ago||He's saying Cal's recruiting||
He's saying Cal's recruiting pitch is "nobody is going to make you more prepared for the league than I will." It's compelling. I'm sure UK boosters still hand out plenty of cash, like a lot of (most?) programs in the NCAA, but Cal doesn't particularly need it and its not why UK is winning.
|23 weeks 2 days ago||I think Fisher is probably in||
I think Fisher is probably in the same league with most names in this thread. He didn't "know" what was going on, but that's probably because he made sure he wouldn't know what was going on. I think that is true for pretty much every successful basketball coach of the last 30 years. If one were able to expose every instance of paying recruits/players/family members/AAU coach done by anyone seeking to get a kid to go to a certain school, how many coaches would pull through as "clean"? I'd imagine it is very, very few.
A lot of coaches I'm sure steer clear of guys they know will require a payment to get to your school, but I bet the vast majority just prefer not to know about any illicit dealings.
I will buck the trend and say there's nothing to suggest Calipari is cheating worse than anyone else in college basketball. At this point, I don't think he has to. He doesn't have to play the game of offering kids a couple grand to come. He says "come to me and I'll make you a millionaire."
As for the dirtiest coach of all time, has to be Dave Bliss, right?
|24 weeks 1 day ago||Nobody is going to seriously||
Nobody is going to seriously defend a 3, so hoping for a foul is sort of silly and may even be detrimental to your chances to make the shot if the offensive player looks to create contact. The best bet is to try and catch the ball as close to the basket as possible, make the immediate bucket, and look to create a turnover (preferably a 5-second call) on the inbounds play.
|24 weeks 2 days ago||Dantonio might not have a||
Dantonio might not have a choice. Brandishing a weapon on campus might earn him an expulsion regardless of criminal proceedings.
|24 weeks 2 days ago||You're right that Cook and||
You're right that Cook and the OL returners are probably enough to still be a competent to good offense. But, if you assume Williams is gone, then they lose their top three rushers, their top WR, their second or third WR, one lineman and their blocking TE. Those aren't minimal loses.
If Kings also gets tosssed (highly doubtful), they would be losing every meaningful skill player but Cook, Price and Burbridge. That is nothing to sneeze at. Cook could see his production take a major hit, much like Jameis Winston did last year, and Cook is no Winston.
|24 weeks 2 days ago||You honestly think that the||
You honestly think that the Big Ten would ever have a chance of being the odd-conference out? Or that Maryland/Rutgers would somehow prevent the Big Ten from being the odd-conference out? If you truly believe either of those then there's not much point in continuing the conversation because neither position is remotely rational.
There is no evidence that Maryland or Rutgers appeals to national networks. They were pure additions based on cable subscribers. In fact, to take your option, I think networks would lean heavily toward UM v. Mizzou. Mizzou is at least a football school.
|24 weeks 2 days ago||Yes. If and when there is a||
Yes. If and when there is a movement to four super conferences, one conference (likely the Big 12) is going to have to die. The Big Ten could have then taken the pick of the litter, or at worst second choice with the SEC. At a minimum, they would have been no worse off chosing four teams at that point rather than two.
|24 weeks 2 days ago||I think the argument is||
I think the argument is "nobody." At least not ayone we could have conceivably gotten.
There was no dire need to get to 14 teams. Maryland and Rutgers arguably only bring one major program between them that is worth having. The only reasonable basis for the invitation is the cable subscription numbers of Maryland/DC and New Jersey/NYC. If that goes up in smoke, will there be enough Maryland and Rutgers fans out there willing to buy BTN to pay their own way? I have my doubts.
|24 weeks 2 days ago||I think there's also the||
I think there's also the argument that their fan bases aren't as big as their local tv markets. While it may make financial sense when the entire local markets were brought into the BTN coverage area, it may not make as much sense when you're relying on actual Rutgers and Maryland football fans to purchase BTN.
|24 weeks 3 days ago||It was a really dumb move||
It was a really dumb move because he is on probation. But isn't there a decent chance he had the day off on Sunday? Not going to generally say a kid can't go out and have a good time one night a week even when he is in season. College kids don't need two days to recover from drinking...
|24 weeks 3 days ago||Even if you accept that as||
Even if you accept that as true, that doesn't support Calhoun's point. Players aren't coming in with less skill because of AAU, they're not developing as far because they leave early. And even then, it's not really pure skills they're developing but understanding the system and the level of play.
|24 weeks 3 days ago||Except, as Brian notes,||
Except, as Brian notes, offensive efficiancy is up and turnover percentage is down, while stats like shooting have remained the same. The stats just don't back up the idea that kids are entering NCAA basketball with less skills than they used to have.
Teams are younger because of early entrants to the NBA, but this is not a new problem. Certainly not in the last 5 years or so.
|25 weeks 19 hours ago||Forget catastrophic injury,||
Forget catastrophic injury, repeated minor head trauma is probably more than enough reason for a kid who knows his future is in something else yet still has lived his dream of playing bigtime college football to walk away.
|25 weeks 1 day ago||In the NBA, after a combine,||
In the NBA, after a combine, I don't think you're going to see many examples of teams having a guy as a potentially lottery pick that nobody else views as higher than 2nd round. There is lots of scouting on each and every player the NBA could consider, at least U.S. based players, and basketball skill is less dependent on system than football. Your NBA draft boards are going to look fairly similar across the leage.
I do understand what you're saying, but I think it's a minor concern. And it isn't exactly clear who will be informing the underclassmen of their prospects. It could very well be that the league asks for evaluations on all underclassmen prospects from every team and puts together a package for the underclassmen to consider. The individual team's private thoughts would then be protected.
|25 weeks 1 day ago||Yep. I'm sure he didn't mean||
Yep. I'm sure he didn't mean it this way, but definitely a shot at Fred Jackson.
|26 weeks 2 days ago||I don't see it in any of||
I don't see it in any of those links, so I'll ask the question. Why did you think that guy was from Princeton to begin with?
|27 weeks 18 hours ago||So Indiana is showing that||
So Indiana is showing that it's possible to reject horrible Adidas ideas that interfere with classic looks. Hopefully the AD is paying attention when it comes to the next horrible football proposal.
|30 weeks 17 hours ago||I didn't say it wasn't due to||
I didn't say it wasn't due to availability. But there is a reason that class size factors into these evaluations at all, the more bullets in the chamber, the more likely you'll have productive seniors four and five years from now. But, even considering the small class, our star rating isn't at Michigan standards. If it were a top 5 or 10 class by average star rating, nobody would be calling us "signing day losers."
Again, that's not to say that extenuating circumstances don't make it silly to call the day a loss in the big picture. But when writing articles about the small picture, i.e., what do respective classes look like today, it's not unreasonably to say we were a "loser" on the day.
|30 weeks 17 hours ago||Don't take this too||
Don't take this too seriously. From a small picture standpoint we were one of the "losers" yesterday. We had a small class and even our average star rating was below what we normally see at Michigan. We only have one consensus top 100 recruit. And we landed none of the biggest recruits we were competing for, including a guy who most thought we would get. The guys premise is completely reasonable viewing signing day from this point of view.
From a big picture standpoint it's hard to see it as a lost day considering all the factors working against us. We did flip guys that other schools wanted. We did fill our limited numbers with guys that weren't complete flyers. And we knowingly were sacrificing part of this class to land Harbaugh, a sacrafice every single person in college football would have made. Obviously we hope that the talent we did bring in plays above their recruiting rankings and are solid contributors over the next five years.
|30 weeks 2 days ago||Gambler's fallacy has nothing||
Gambler's fallacy has nothing to do with it. Under his logic, Michigan had to "win" 3 straight 50/50 propositions, the odds of which were 12.5%. There's nothing wrong about that math. Gambler's fallacy says because some event happened at rates greater than would be expected by strict odds, the opposite event is going to happen more often for a while "to even things out." Gambler's fallacy would say that because Michigan "won" the first two 50/50 chances they were less likely than 50/50 to win the third. Which isn't true.
|30 weeks 2 days ago||The point wasn't that the||
The point wasn't that the guy's assumptions were correct (they weren't, and I don't think he would really contend they were), just that under his assumptions, the 12.5% chance at a victory was the right math.
|30 weeks 2 days ago||If you have 50% chance to||
If you have 50% chance to make the two and force overtime, under his math you have a 50% chance at losing if you miss (obviously not true, but work with it). If you make it, your opponent has a 50% chance of hitting the winning bucket at the buzzer, knocking your winning percentage down 25% and your opponents up to 75% (the missed two point shot plus hitting the game winner in regulation). Now, if you have survived your 25% chance to get into overtime, you now have a 50/50 chance again to win. Your chances of winning overall are 12.5%, your opponents are 87.5%.
The guy's assumptions are way off base, but I think his math reasonably makes sense.
|30 weeks 2 days ago||The big factor missing from||
The big factor missing from all of this analysis is just how small the class was expected to be from the beginning. 12-15 guys has been the prediction all along. Thus, when Hoke's class filled up quickly with studs there wasn't a lot of strong interest on the part of Michigan to other recruits that Harbaugh could then run with when he got going. Also, when the few commits started leaving, it left an even tinier class to come back from.
If we get Clark, Wheatley, and someone that appears to be a longshot right now, that would be a great class considering the circumstances.
|30 weeks 6 days ago||That's always been the case||
That's always been the case though. Now they're just announced as these 5th year transfers whereas before, guys who would be expected to make little or no contribution in their 5th year were given a slap on the back, thanked for their contributions, and pushed out the door, hopefully with their degree in hand.
If a freshman isn't going to make a contribution his first year on campus it is still in everyone's best interest to see him redshirt.
|30 weeks 6 days ago||I don't think it's more of a||
I don't think it's more of a thing than it has been in the past. You used to just see these guys show up for a year at FCS or DII to complete their eligibility. There was proablably a little seen press release from the school announcing their departure.
The Russell Wilson type transfer obviously is more common now, but that comes from the rule change, as others have noted.
|32 weeks 18 hours ago||I think it depends on how||
I think it depends on how they cheated. If they had a ball boy deflate the balls after inspection then that's clearly "cheating" even if it's a stupid rule and should draw a real punishment (not keep them out of the super bowl, but fine/draft picks). Whatever one thinks of a rule, sportsmanship says you should play within it. On the other hand, if they did something along the lines of what was discussed on this board yesterday where they pumped up the balls in a much warmer room right before inspection, and after a couple hours in the cold they were no longer kosher, that's probably violating the spirit of the rules but shouldn't draw a huge punishment as its the type of advantage football teams take all the time.
|32 weeks 18 hours ago||Exactly. The balls are all||
Exactly. The balls are all manufactured the same, there's really a limit of what you can do to the ball. It's not like someone is going to gain a huge technological advantage. Since they let them do basically anything they want to the ball to make it to the QBs liking, I don't understand what's so sacrosanct about the pressure reading.
|32 weeks 6 days ago||That's the frustrating part.||
That's the frustrating part. The on the field punishment really had little to do with the problems Penn State was being punished for, whereas the Paterno related punishments were directly connected. As it stands, only the on-field punishment will have actually taken affect.
|32 weeks 6 days ago||Since they'll probably put||
Since they'll probably put Paterno's statue back up next, I'd imagine it will go on for a while, and deservedly so.
|32 weeks 6 days ago||Trey wasn't going to get||
Trey wasn't going to get taller or quicker had he stayed. GR3's progression had stalled, same with Hardaway. McGary probably would have been wise to leave after freshman year, but would have benefited from a year of healthy play if he had the opportunity to stay. I don't think Nik was going to get a second leap in the college game, to improve he had to compete every day against better players.
Unless there's a correctable flaw that can be improved by sticking around (Darius Morris' shooting, for example) or there's a legitimate chance of the player blowing up into a star (Trey after freshman year), a player should go Pro when he reaches his approximate peak of nba draft value. Our recent departures have mostly done that with the exception of Morris and McGary who erred by staying an extra year.
|33 weeks 12 hours ago||And there's no chance that||
And there's no chance that none of those guys are as productive as Miller or Barrett? Especially with two guys being true freshman?
You have to be a real homer to not see that it's much more preferable for others that Ohio State's backup is someone who hasn't played a down rather than someone who has spent at least one season as the Big Ten's most productive QB.
|33 weeks 15 hours ago||Once we get to talk about||
Once we get to talk about actual on the field stuff, the khaki stuff will take care of itself. Bready Hoke never wearing red was once a thing too...
|34 weeks 3 days ago||They were starting Tony||
They were starting Tony Lippett at the end of the season...
While saying thay have no talent in the secondary may be a bit of hyperbole, I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that they have serious questions in the back four, a back four, which to my eyes, was fairly mediocre this season. I think it's fair to say that when you turn to a true freshman and a WR (or two if what you say about Shelton is correct) late in the season, your coaching staff isn't all that thrilled with the state of the rest of the position group.
|34 weeks 3 days ago||Even if he is forced to||
Even if he is forced to transfer and sit out he's basically just committing himself to a RS year, something he was likely to take anyway as a freshman QB.
|34 weeks 3 days ago||Would guess that's as of||
Would guess that's as of whatever date that was published. Just eyeballing it, he has our offensive numbers correct with Funchess going pro, but is off by one on MSU's defense with Trae Waynes' recent declaration reducing their starting numbers down to 7.
|34 weeks 3 days ago||Would guess that's as of||
Would guess that's as of whatever date that was published. Just eyeballing it, he has our offensive numbers correct with Funchess going pro, but is off by one on MSU's defense with Trae Waynes' recent declaration reducing their starting numbers down to 7.
|36 weeks 2 days ago||Lets hope he really was what||
Lets hope he really was what made MSU's D go and that he takes a defensive assistant or two with him...
|36 weeks 3 days ago||I think the school decides.||
I think the school decides. Nike/Adidas/Under Armour all have schools that do it, some schools reject or minimize it, most prominently Alabama, Texas and USC. There's no reason why we can't be a school that rejects or minimizes it, no matter which apparel company we sign with.
|36 weeks 3 days ago||You want to be a truly||
You want to be a truly competent reporter to get to the NFL where you can receive tips from your sources to report what the league wants you to report, and in exchange, you get fame, relative fortune and job security. Seems like a good gig.
|36 weeks 3 days ago||I guess my proplem with the||
I guess my proplem with the "someone's kid" theory and I guess his stated connection of being close to a family friend of the agent (which, I guess makes him a son of the family friend of the agent?), is that he seems to be a Michigan person and not just a kid who knows he has a source of info on news that lots and lots of reporters are chasing. Now is it possible that the agent has a very close family friend who is presumably a huge Michigan fan? Sure, even though I think the agent is a west coast guy. But, if you were going with the fact that he's the son of someone important, I'd be more agreeable to the theory if he seemed to be reporting information coming from a Michigan source.
|36 weeks 3 days ago||Maybe he's saying that none||
Maybe he's saying that none of those jobs are all that promising. And there might be something to that...
Bears/Jets/Raiders/Redskins are all organizational messes. Falcons and Panthers are playing for a playoff game, that might save a coach's job. Jags are going to be perpetually young and underfunded, probably not paying top dollar for a coach.
I think Giants and Falcons are the only two jobs there that a coach can look at and reasonably think, yeah, I can go win there quickly. And I'm not sure either job will be open.
|36 weeks 3 days ago||I wouldn't be surprised if||
I wouldn't be surprised if the last time he ever had to report on something Michigan related was when he was actually at Michigan. He's an NFL guy, he has NFL connections. I'm not shocked that he hasn't cultivated any connections at Michigan. For what purpose would he need those?
|36 weeks 3 days ago||And to be fair, isn't every||
And to be fair, isn't every fan base going to act that way?
If they drop off next year it will because they may lose three or so guys with eligibility remaining to the NFL. I don't buy that MSU is a program that can just plug the next guy in for early departures. Also, finally losing Rush is going to be a blow.
|36 weeks 3 days ago||Those people would be stupid.||
Those people would be stupid. Even Alabama lost to Louisiana-Monroe in Saban's first or second season. Worked out pretty well for them.
|36 weeks 3 days ago||I think the more likely||
I think the more likely scenario is that Brandon contacted Harbaugh late in the season and maybe basically said the job was his if he wanted it, with Harbaugh saying something like "I'm interested, but don't put me in a position to decide whether to finish the season with Stanford or take the Michigan job, you won't like the answer." Brandon holds off firing Rodriguez and by the time he officially does so, Harbaugh has become a hot name in NFL coaching searches with specific interest from the one franchise that keeps his family in place. Thus, he no longer wants the Michigan job once an official search begins.
Both stories are then consistent. Brandon can tell people he had an "accepted" offer from Harbaugh. Others can say it never even approached anything official. This scenario also explains the insanity of the timing of the Rodriguez firing.
|36 weeks 3 days ago||The timing didn't really work||
The timing didn't really work for Harbaugh to have "accepted" the Michigan job. If I recall correctly, he was announced as 49ers coach only a couple days after Rich Rodriguez was fired. He would have been going through that process with the 49ers probably before there was even an official opening.
My guess is that Harbaugh said through back channels that he would have been interested, but as it became apparent that he was in play for NFL jobs, specifically one that would not require him to move, he never really became involved beyond that point.
|36 weeks 6 days ago||The line about $8M/year||
The line about $8M/year sounds dumb, but I can't deny there is real logic to it. And I would think a businessman would understand the psychological value of hitting that round number rather than leaving it at $49.
|36 weeks 6 days ago||I don't think money is an||
I don't think money is an issue, even if the 8 year contract is correct. Yes, $2M a year is nothing to sneeze at, but this isn't a situation where an athlete has to maximize his contract earnings before his career ends. Harbaugh has already had a long financially fruitful career, both as a player and as a coach. He had a 15 year NFL career, with 12 years where he was likely to be paid as a top-half NFL starter. He coached for four years at Stanford where he likely made $1M a year. He has coached for four years at SF where he has made $20M. I'm assuming he is not an idiot so he is probably set for life financially. Plus, he is still young and can coach for another 15 years. The man has made and is going to make enough money that $2M a year isn't going to change his life.
The only way it comes down to money is if with his ego he thinks he is the best coach in football and should be paid that way. And if that's the case, the NFL is always going to win that battle.
Assuming the $49M/8yrs is correct, it still makes him one of the ten highest paid coaches in all of football. We're offering more than enough money.
|37 weeks 16 hours ago||It's been a long time since||
It's been a long time since he's been in Ann Arbor, and I'm not sure he's ever reported on college sports. I'm not sure why it's shocking that he doesn't have real sources within Michigan.
|37 weeks 16 hours ago||Anybody can claim to be||
Anybody can claim to be family friend's with Harbaugh's agent. I still don't see any evidence that he's reporting information that comes from said agent. My guess is he is a high school/college kid who scours the Michigan boards and reports rumors from others as his privately sourced information.
|37 weeks 16 hours ago||This. If he drags it out a||
This. If he drags it out a couple weeks into the NFL postseason I think fans have a right to be mad at him. He'll actively be hurting Michigan. If he turns down Michigan on the soonish side because he's an NFL coach now, that's fine and shouldn't change a thing.
|37 weeks 17 hours ago||Gotcha. I'm convinced this||
Gotcha. I'm convinced this guy is full of it, though...
|37 weeks 17 hours ago||Yeah, I'm with you. I don't||
Yeah, I'm with you. I don't see anything in his timeline to make me think that he actually is credible or has sources.
|37 weeks 17 hours ago||The agent is working through||
The agent is working through some rando on twitter? If the agent really wants things out there big reporters will have the story.
|37 weeks 18 hours ago||His misguided point is that||
His misguided point is that Michigan is cheap so the $8M/year contract can't possibly be real. Thus, using the contract offer to argue against Schefter's points isn't really effective.
|37 weeks 1 day ago||If I'm Jim Harbaugh, I think||
If I'm Jim Harbaugh, I think that one of these owners is going to be willing to give me full control, or damn near close to full control. I don't thik he'll need to wait to hear that as an actual offer to think that something along those lines will be on the table.
Maybe it's naive, but I just don't think that Harbaugh is going to put Michigan through the ringer that would be a couple additional weeks of waiting through the entire NFL process which is complicated by being under contract with the 49ers if the decision comes down to which NFL offer to weigh against a Michigan offer.
|37 weeks 1 day ago||I look at it like this, he||
I look at it like this, he isn't really chosing between job offers. He's choosing a lifestyle path. He can choose to either be a college coach at what has to be his dream college destination or he can choose to be an NFL coach and feel pretty comfortable that there's going to be a palatable option in the next two seasons. I think he cares enough about Michigan that he's not going to drag out the process so he can weigh individual job offers against Michigan. If there is still indecision I think it's because he doesn't know if he wants to give up the NFL, not that he doesn't know if the right NFL opportunity will be there this offseason. He has either told Michigan he is coming but he's not going to announce until this season is over or he is still making that decision.
Come the 29th, I think we'll know. He's either coming, or on that date Hackett will demand an answer. If it drags on past them I will be highly dissapointed in Jim Harbaugh.
|37 weeks 1 day ago||One huge difference is that||
One huge difference is that the Raiders can't actually talk to Harbaugh or his camp without risking tampering charges, unless the 49ers have given permission and I think that would have been reported. Thus, there's no real information to report for NFL people with NFL contacts.
|37 weeks 2 days ago||I'm not sure your Dennis||
I'm not sure your Dennis Erickson characterization is fair, at least for his return to Oregon State.
|37 weeks 2 days ago||I'm going to guess his agent||
I'm going to guess his agent did inquire about the Pitt job. Think Pitt could be of interest to Narduzzi? Good recruiting state in an area he's familiar with, without having to directly compete on the field with the better Big Ten schools. A P5 job where coaches have shown some ability to be successful. Certainly a better option than UConn ever was.
Edit: It's almost hard to imagine that he wouldn't have at least inquired. If he is taking youngstown job out of at least partly a desire to be coaching back home, the Pitt job accomplishes almost the same thing.
|37 weeks 2 days ago||The 2007 Herbstreit thing was||
The 2007 Herbstreit thing was only a thing because of the timing with Miles. He was trying to win an SEC (?) title that night so he was forced to make a strong public statement that he intended to be the LSU coach. The LSU AD then basically used that and UM dragging its feet to force Miles to ink an extension keeping him out of the running for the UM job. There is no remotely similar scenario that can play out with Harbaugh. Rumors of him leaving have zero impact on his current team and his current management seem disinclined to keep him anyway.
|37 weeks 3 days ago||I never thought the Niners||
I never thought the Niners being eliminated from playoff competition was important in so much as he would then be able to leave his job before the end of the season to come coach Michigan. I thought it was important in that Harbaugh was obviously not going to make or at least announce a decision when it could possibly be interpreted as interfering with his team's title chances. Now that the season is effectively over, I think Harbaugh can decide and either announce his acceptance of the Michigan job starting Dec. 29, or tell Michigan that he is staying in the NFL and have his agent start the process of pursuing other jobs.
I don't think he's going to "quit" on the 49ers, but with them out of playoff contention, I don't think he has to quit in order to announce his intentions, either publicly or behind closed doors.
|37 weeks 6 days ago||That's right. It's a chicken||
That's right. It's a chicken and the egg situation. Michigan adds value by itself, but that value has been built by generations of great players.
While you can't say as many Denard jerseys would have been sold had he been playing for Eastern Michigan, you also can't say that as many Michigan jerseys would have been sold if Denard wasn't as special of an athlete as he was. Both Michigan and Players bring money into the university.
As someone above pointed out, it's the same thing with the NFL. When the USFL was "challenging" the NFL, they were stealing a lot of the best players coming up from college. The level of play was probably closer to the NFL than the NFL would have ever admitted, yet the USFL had to fold because it wasn't as popular. The NFL brands had value irrespective of the players playing. Yet, the NFL players are still highly paid because without those great players, those same NFL brands quickly lose value.
|37 weeks 6 days ago||On the other hand, if the||
On the other hand, if the quality of play/players didn't matter, how come we're talking about paying Jim Harbaugh over $5M to come coach our football team.
You're not wrong that there's a lot of value in Michigan by itself. But the players also bring value and money in. It's fair to say they aren't adequately compensated for that value. Especially the guys like Denard Robinson who undoubtedly push a lot of jerseys and Michigan gear in general.
|37 weeks 6 days ago||Yeah, Miss prevents contracts||
Yeah, Miss prevents contracts of over 4 years (or 5?) so Mullen gets a one-year extension to the state limit every off season. It doesn't mean anything with respect to his willingness to take another job.
|37 weeks 6 days ago||How do we know he isn't Will||
How do we know he isn't Will Muschamp? An excellent coordinator but not a very good head coach? His Pitt tenure hasn't really answered any questions. I understand why Wisconsin will go this route, but there's a decent chance it doesn't work out.
|38 weeks 18 hours ago||Just because you gave two||
Just because you gave two examples of good offenses at shit schools doesn't mean "It's Iowa State" isn't at least some form of an excuse. Bad college football programs are bad for a reason and just because it's theoretically possible to do well at such a school, it's not like the failure to do so necesserily indicates a bad coach. Maybe 1 for 5 under the circumstances of coaching Rice and Iowa State is great?
I was more looking for if there's any other information out there. For instance, in his third year, two different QBs started multiple games, with the backup starting the last 6 of the regular season and the starter coming back for the bowl game. Injuries? Just shitty QBs because you're Iowa State? I don't know. But it probably has something to do with the offense struggling. The two years before a different two guys got multiple starts at QB, and though one seemed to be largely the starter, there are enough games in there where both saw action to indicate that it was far from settled. If I had to guess, I'd say that Iowa State had very, very bad QB play. I don't know how much can be said to be Herman's fault.
I wonder if there were other issues on offense? An O-line injury collapse? A Maryland-esque WR apocalypse? I don't know. What I do know is that Urban Meyer saw enough in Herman, or someone influential to Urban Meyer saw enough in him, that Meyer plucked him out of Iowa State to run his offense. That means something.
|38 weeks 18 hours ago||I would hope that a guy we||
I would hope that a guy we hire as head coach wouldn't leave his current team in the lurch right before the playoffs, even if that team is Ohio State. Coordinators regularly take head coaching jobs, begin their duties there while coordinating their current team in their bowl game.
|38 weeks 19 hours ago||It took Schiano two||
It took Schiano two additional years before his breakthrough at Rutgers, and, despite that, most thought Schiano was a fine, if not spectacular, candidate in 2007. The problem is that with Schiano we saw what happened after his breakthrough. Losing reords in the Big East three of the next five years. A disasterous two years in the NFL. We have more information now than we did in 2007 or was available for Gary Andersen two years ago, and that information says he's probably not a great coach and Michigan should be able to do better.
|38 weeks 19 hours ago||I'm not sure why you're so||
I'm not sure why you're so biased on this subject. The reason UF's offense didn't crater in 2009 is because it returned everyone but Percy Harvin, including NFL players at over half the positions. And the offense still took a slight step back. In 2010,the offense did crater, which you conveniently ignore.
Nobody is arguing that Meyer isn't hugely important to his offenses, but he IS more reliant on his OC than most "offensive genius" head coaches.
|38 weeks 1 day ago||Correction: Schiano's Agent||
Correction: Schiano's Agent targeting Wisconsin.
|38 weeks 1 day ago||Other than the explanation||
Other than the explanation simply being "it's Iowa State," any explanation for the struggles there?
|38 weeks 3 days ago||I sort of think the opposite.||
I sort of think the opposite. Albama isn't as dominant as they have been. Meanwhile, Baylor makes life difficult on safeties, the one glaring weakness of the Dantonio/Narduzzi scheme.
|38 weeks 3 days ago||If the guy they got to||
If the guy they got to pretend to be Kevin Hogan against UCLA is available, then yes. If not, then no.
|38 weeks 3 days ago||I don't think it's so much as||
I don't think it's so much as a contractual out as that Harbaugh can simply chose to resign and become a college coach without causing any financial damage to the 49ers. Harbaugh is prevented from coaching a different NFL team while he's under contract with the 49ers by NFL rules. It isn't written into his contract. That's different than the college game where there is no overarching league to enforce contracts. Thus, you need buyouts (Liquidated Damages clauses in contractual legal terms) in college to keep a coach from fleeing at the drop of a hat. You won't have a buyout in the NFL because there's no fear of your coach resigning to coach your competitor.
|38 weeks 3 days ago||I agree with your assessment.||
I agree with your assessment. The Niners do seem like huge long shots at this point, but nothing is impossible when it comes to December football in the NFL. That being said, I like the chances of the Niners being eliminated from the playoffs next weekend.
Seattle at home vs. a reeling Niners team, Lions at home vs. the Vikings, Green Bay beating either Atlanta at home or Buffalo on the road? All seem like they should go the way we want.
|38 weeks 3 days ago||I agree that it's nice to be||
I agree that it's nice to be able to sprinkle in under-center. At the very least it changes the looks for the defense. I also think it can be successful as a base offense (Wisconsin, for instance). My point is more that if your offense doesn't have a QB capable of being a running threat, you have to be really good at something else to keep up offensively in today's college football. Points per game are up to about 29 per team from about 23 in the 90's. Offense is just better now and I think it's largely on the running QB. If you're going to be an alternate model, you better be damn good at it.
|38 weeks 3 days ago||The big difference is that in||
The big difference is that in play-action from under center, the QB generally isn't a running threat. So to get the numeric advantage required to open the passing game your running game has to be so proficient that it is capable of being succesful against a numeric disadvantage (generally 7 defenders against 6 blockers) which causes defenses to add an extra defender to up the numerical disadvantage.
With read-option and what have you, the QB as a running threat negates the defensive numerical advantage. 7 in the box (or 6 without a TE), end up going against 5 linemen, a TE/FB, a RB and a QB. The RB or QB who doesn't have the ball ends up taking away one defender, meaning a defender has to make a play while being blocked to stop the run. Hard to do. Defenses end up having to bring an extra guy into the box just to get a defender free. Thus, play-action tends to be more effective from the spread-option (see Denard's insane passing numbers as a sophomore).
That's not to say that the read-option is always better. But I do think, in today's college football, if your QB isn't a running threat you bettter be damn good at something else. A run of the mill college QB who can't run puts your team at a huge disadvantage unless you're absolutely great at running the football from the classic under center look.
|38 weeks 4 days ago||Don't do anything. Watering||
Don't do anything. Watering down the conference to get a championship game won't help. They already play 9 conference games (the same number as a Big Ten champion). Get their conference members to play better competiition in the non-conference and have their conference declare a "true" champion for playoff consideration purposes. If Baylor beats a Nebraska this year, which they would have, they're in. If the Big 12 declared Baylor the champion this year, which they were, they're in. It's stupid to make the conference weaker, make conference mates less money, just to solve a one-year problem that they could address through other means.
|38 weeks 6 days ago||I, for one, hope and think||
I, for one, hope and think that if Harbaugh turns this down he never gets another chance. And that's said with no ill will towards Harbaugh. Even if we are searching again in 4 or 5 years because this candidate doesn't work out, which I don't expect to be the case, we won't be waiting around on the end of Harbaugh's season to make a decision. This is his last shot.
I did, however, find the same amusement in the "once in a lifetime" description.
|38 weeks 6 days ago||Even accepting that version||
Even accepting that version of events as true, what does that necesserily have to do with Mullen? Nebraska hired Mike Riley of all people after four days without a coach. They explicitly said they didn't use a search firm. It's more than reasonable to suggest that they missed opportunities on plenty of worthy coaching candidates to settle on Riley. I don't see how that suggests anything about Mullen.
I think you're letting your bias against Mullen get the better of you. Your argument, especially now that you've transitioned from that wacky "no-upsets" argument to his failure to have a QB for five seasons, has merit. I think most would recognize that. Don't go looking for additional BS reasons to say he's not a good coaching candidate just because many on this board still think he is one despite his QB problem at Miss. St.
|38 weeks 6 days ago||You also have the||
You also have the Cowboys/Eagles loser.
Niners have three games left vs. teams fighting for their playoff lives (Seattle, San Diego, Arizona). Even if they manage to go 2-1 against those three, they need at least two of Seattle to lose two, Arizona to lose 3, Dallas to lose 2 (of 3 games), Philly to lose 3 and Detroit to lose 2 to even bring tiebreakers into play. No idea how those tiebreakers play out.
Detroit should take care of business the next three weeks. Philly finishes with Washington and NYG, so even if they lose to Seattle and Dallas, they should be 11-5. Seattle and Arizona have tough schedules, but one will get a win against the other and each get a shot at the Niners. If the Niners loses to either of them, I'm hard pressed to see them getting the wild card. I don't think they'll be eliminated in two weeks with a loss to Seattle, but I think they'll be damn close.
|38 weeks 6 days ago||We should just stop until||
We should just stop until there's official word either one way or the other from Harbaugh or the school. If Harbaugh wants to be in the NFL, he'll have the opportunity with someone. If he wants to coach Michigan, he'll have that opportunity. Hackett shouldn't, and probably won't, wait around for Harbaugh to weigh each individual option before he makes a decision. Harbaugh will make his decision, college vs. pro, and then we'll know. Until then all leaks/opinions/analysis are worthless. Possible exceptions being "Harbaugh has told Michigan no," or "Harbaugh has told Michigan yes but doesn't want word to leak until the 49ers are eliminated from the playoffs." Even then I'd have my doubts until someone is hired.
|38 weeks 6 days ago||At least you're now using a||
At least you're now using a reasonable criticism. I agree not having a QB to fit his system until year 5 is a big concern. Whether that was from inability to recruit a QB or inability to utilize what was there. I also agree the QB situation probably explains the lack of getting over the hump in some of their upset attempts from those first few years (they did almost derail both of Auburn's undefeated seasons before they got started).
I don't know enough to know why Mullen had that stretch at MSU without a viable option at QB. Even good qb coaches with a history of developing qbs will have blips where they can't seem to find the right guy. Was that all this was? Who knows. However, I'm not going to dismiss his success just because Todd Graham's guy turned out ok, or because Manziel was a 3-star because too many scouts couldn't see his QB potential. Also, I think crediting Harbaugh with Andrew Luck's natural ability is a bit much.
|39 weeks 10 hours ago||I think you're putting||
I think you're putting waaaaay too much into this "pulled off an upset thing." Sure Harbaugh pulled off some upsets in 2009. He also had the best pro-prospect QB at the helm since Peyton Manning. Bielema is leading a program that finished the year ranked #5 three years ago. It's not shocking that these results happened. Doesn't mean Mullen can't coach.
|39 weeks 11 hours ago||Les Miles made it to a BCS||
Les Miles made it to a BCS championship game long after Saban's influence on the program was gone. I don't think you can even remotely compare the accomplishments of Sumlin to Miles.
|39 weeks 11 hours ago||The 1990's were a weird time||
The 1990's were a weird time in the SEC. The SEC West was absolute garbage some of those years. That 1999 team that managed to go 10-2 didn't play a ranked team all year long. So, yes, it shows that it's not entirely impossible to win at Mississippi St., but Jackie Sherrill (who was cheating like a mofo at the time) wasn't exactly competing in the SEC West of the last 6 years.
|39 weeks 12 hours ago||Here's what you're missing.||
Here's what you're missing. Those numbers are pretty decent nationally. Yet, the only time he had better than the 11th best class (according to 247 composite rankings) in the SEC was in 2009 when he was all the way up at 8th in the SEC. So, he's pulling in the Purdue and Indiana type classes for the SEC. He's working with a significant talent disparity within his own conference.
I feel you're a bit biased in this post. For instance, this quote: "Did UF's offense go thru the crapper when Mullen left? No." would be laughed at by Florida people. They dropped to 8 in oFEI and 9 in oS&P in Tebow's senior year with everybody but Percy Harvin back (the pouncy twins, Aaron Hernandez, Riley Cooper, the other running backs, the offense was absolutely loaded). Then in 2010, they dropped to 68 and 50, respectively. I'd say they went through the crapper when Mullen left.
I'm not sure Mullen's a home run candidate. But I think there's evidence there that he can coach. He's coached in the SEC when it's been at its absolute beatliest. Playing in the division that has produced 80% of the SEC's good teams in that time frame. He's managed not to absolutely shit himself faced with these odds. And when the division finally came back down toward the rest of college football, his team had a breakthrough. You dismiss beating the teams "he should beat" as if that's some guarantee in football. Look at who Sylvester Croom lost to. Or even cheatin' ass Jackie Sherrill during his last few seasons. Beating "who you're supposed to" is no guarantee at Miss. St. So he didn't manage to pull the upsets until this year? Doesn't mean he can't coach. Even being in some of those games, which they tended to be, was impressive.
I think the evidence points to a guy that can clearly coach who, given at least resource parity with his competition, is going to be pretty good.
|39 weeks 12 hours ago||I'd be a little concerned||
I'd be a little concerned that it took him 6 years to find an experienced QB to really run his offense. I will grant that Mississippi St. didn't give him many natural advantages to find his guy, and hopefully one of our guys could step right in like an Alex Smith, but it's still concerning.
|39 weeks 12 hours ago||I'm interested to hear you||
I'm interested to hear you make that case. I would argue that Sumlin rode Art Briles' coattails to success at Houston and the arm of a 6th year QB to his one special year there, followed by two years with Johnny F'n Football, and a team loaded with talent. Yet he still hasn't won a conference championship game.
He's a good recruiter and probably a good coach. However he still hasn't really accomplished anything.
And, yes, he's not leaving A&M.
|39 weeks 14 hours ago||When he's talking about a||
When he's talking about a name being "out there," I'm sure he isn't trolling the depths of Michigan message boards to come to that conclussion. He's probably read a few news articles, maybe a couple blogs, and gone from there. His name, whatever voracity may be behind it, is probably not one of the big names that has been floated. He's making it more entertaining by saying it's not even on the message boards (!!!!!!), but I doubt he would have any way to back the statement up.
However, Stoops does seem to have been floated by at least one or two legitimate college news reporters, so I would be sort of suprised if that's his super-duper secret name.
|39 weeks 17 hours ago||His pre-HC resume is far more||
His pre-HC resume is far more impressive than Hoke's. He then showed that he could handle head coaching duties. It may not be a resume that generally would get you in at one of the top 10 jobs in the country. But it certainly would have earned him a shot at upper tier P5 jobs even in a deeper coaching search pool.
He's obviously no gurantee to be good, but nobody is. And programs as good as Florida have certainly taken guys with less impressive resumes.
|39 weeks 17 hours ago||I'm not sure. Aside from||
I'm not sure. Aside from Mullen apparently never being in the picture, and unless they never even kicked the tires on guys thought to be unattainable, this seems like a process resulting in a fine hiring. You can't tell me he's any worse a bet to succeed than any other guy they could have gone after.
|39 weeks 1 day ago||They're going to do that||
They're going to do that anyway. What would the assistant coaches be able to say in retort to any recruiting pitches that say "you don't know who your coach is going to be"?
There's nothing the assistant coaches could add at this point. They've already sold Michigan. Hopefully it's enough for the guys that committed to the school, not particular coaches.
|39 weeks 1 day ago||I don't think it's that big||
I don't think it's that big of a deal. The recruits/commits all know the story. And as these guys are going to be actively looking for other jobs it protects the coaches from the appearance of improprieties if, say, a recruit ended up signing with a school that ultimately hires said assistant.
I imagine these guys all did the right thing over the last day or so, saying that they should go to Michigan, regardless of the coaching staff. I also imagine that Mike DeBord can and will keep in touch with committs, or at least offer an open line of communication for any of the committs.
|39 weeks 1 day ago||What's striking about that||
What's striking about that chart is that 2008 saw the single unit (offense) with the least returning experience since 1997 followed by, just eyeballing it, the third or fourth least experienced unit in 2009 (defense). Puts it into perspective what Rodriguez was working with his first couple years. While Hoke's teams were getting less and less experienced as the 2010/2011 classes worked there way through, it's nothing like the first couple years for Rodriguez.
|39 weeks 1 day ago||On that note, you can't wait||
On that note, you can't wait forever for a Harbaugh answer in any event, right? Maybe give him a couple weeks, see how the season progresses, but I don't think we can wait out him entertaining every NFL option he may have before we move on to other candidates.
|39 weeks 1 day ago||Rode Al Golden's coat tails||
Rode Al Golden's coat tails to one good year at Temple. BC bounced back in his first year but have been far from being good. Was OC for Urban Meyer's lone legitimately bad season as a head coach.
In sum, what everybody else said... no.
|39 weeks 1 day ago||I don't really think the Big||
I don't really think the Big Ten's coaching hires have been atypical for power 5 conferences. Slam dunks are rare. Urban Meyer has to have take a sabbatical for Ohio State to have landed him. Alabama needed Nick Saban to not want to be in the NFL any longer. Otherwise, you look at the SEC coaching hires and they're not all that different, with the possible exception of Bielema. Malzahn was an OC of a great team and had one year of HC experience, a resume not all that different from Gary Andersen. Hugh Freeze coached for five years at FBS level (only one as HC) before landing the Ole Miss job. Butch Jones had so-so success following Brian Kelly everywhere. Florida, Mississippi St., Kentucky, Vanderbilt all hired guys with no HC experience. You can't tell me that these hires had better resumes than what the Big Ten had been getting.
Maybe the only real difference between the Big Ten and SEC is that the SEC has more schools willing to take the chance on pursuing reach candidates and have gotten fairly lucky with it (Petrino, Spurrier, Beilema).
|39 weeks 1 day ago||Yeah, I was giving my||
Yeah, I was giving my interpretation of what he initially said. I completely agree with that interpretation of his clarification to Drew Sharp.
|39 weeks 1 day ago||Think of it this way, it's||
Think of it this way, it's not as simple as just posting a job opening, scanning the resumes that come in, and calling some people in for an interview. Someone has to be calling agents for the various coaches and initating discussions regarding interest, timing, potential contract terms, etc. An AD doesn't have time to do that by himself, so he is either designating someone on his staff to do this who has very little experience with the task, or he could hire a search firm who does this constantly for coaches, ADs, school presidents, etc. Who would you be more comfortable with making those calls?
|39 weeks 1 day ago||I was sort of in between the||
I was sort of in between the two interpretations. I thought Hackett was saying he wanted the search firm to bring coaches up to speed on what would be expected of a Michigan coach. Not that the coach had to be a guy with connections to Michigan, but he had to understand that Michigan has a history of success, winning with integrity, etc.
|39 weeks 2 days ago||Listen people, unless the||
Listen people, unless the prime target just falls in your lap because he's out of a job (like Urban Meyer), or is in an obvious situation where he would be looking to move up in the coaching world (like Charlie Strong) a coaching search isn't as simple as just pointing at a guy and saying "I'll take him."
At the end of the day, we're going to be in a better position after hiring a new coach than we are today, assuming we hire someone with a proven track record and give him the unconditional support of the administration. Basically if we combine what we did in the last two coaching searches.
|39 weeks 2 days ago||He would need to make a VERY||
He would need to make a VERY convincing case to the next HC that the offense put on the field was not really of his choosing. Even then, it's not common for the incoming coach to retain someone to be one of his top two assistants.
|39 weeks 3 days ago||I think you can "ignore" head||
I think you can "ignore" head to head if it's a really tight game, especially when the winner was playing on its home field. Did Baylor's win really show that they would win more than half their games against TCU?
If you say that TCU's and Baylor's resume are nearly identical, then sure, use the head to head result. If you think TCU's season has been better as a whole, then I don't have a problem not using the head to head result to give the advantage to TCU.
|39 weeks 3 days ago||Fear of messing up the||
Fear of messing up the coaching search is reason to keep a coach that is proven to be bad? That's absurd. I agree the next guy needs to succeed, but here's the rub, there's absolutely no guarantee of that. On the other hand, the information we have on Hoke is that he can't get the job done. That his guys don't get better. That we're falling behind in one of the worst big tens in history. How anyone can see continuing with the coach that has made that happen would ever be the better option blows my mind.
If the Michigan administration, in other words Hackett, won't fire Hoke until they feel good about who the next guy will be, then the administration has failed already.
|39 weeks 3 days ago||I think the problem was that||
I think the problem was that Rich Rodriguez was forced to make that choice. In 2007 Michigan was in desperate need of modernization on the S&C front. Rodriguez needed Barwis or a Barwis type along with a new weight room. The weight room was where the money had to be spent, not Barwis himself. The problem is that Michigan, with all the money coming in, should have also been willing to spend the money on any assistant coach of Rodriguez's choosing.
|39 weeks 3 days ago||Coaching isn't the business||
Coaching isn't the business world. You coach until you're relieved of your duties. These guys understand that the staff is about to be fired, but they also know that their duty is to recruit players to Michigan until that is the case. And even after that is the case, they understand the nature of the business and will not be unproffesional on recruiting trips. It is nothing like sending business short-timers on the road.
|39 weeks 3 days ago||I think Green is probably||
I think Green is probably better than Johnson. Johnson got some benefit from playing at the end of the season with a more mature offensive line. And until the Ohio State game, I think there were real questions as to whether Johnson truly was any better than Smith has a main option.
I would guess Isaac and Green will get the lions share of the carries next year with Johnson as a third option.
|39 weeks 4 days ago||Nobody plays anyone these||
Nobody plays anyone these days. But because the SEC West has two pretty good non conference wins doesn't necessarily make the whole division great. The division is so highly thought of because the SEC had highly ranked teams in the preseason. That's it.
When you try to argue how deep the division is based on two games, all you are really doing is buying a narrative. Instead you should recognize that we have very little information for which to compare conferences. If someone says one division or conference is the best, its an opinion based on assumptions.
|39 weeks 4 days ago||Aside from KSU, those teams||
Aside from KSU, those teams haven't beaten anyone in conference either. In fact, La. Tech. lost to an FCS team.
|39 weeks 5 days ago||That's a nice little factoid,||
That's a nice little factoid, but at the end of the day, four of those possible champions have beaten exactly nobody. SEC west basically has two wins to its credit, Wisconsin (without their QB and with only a half of Gordon) and KSU. If you're comfortable calling a division great based on that resume, good for you. I'm not.
|39 weeks 5 days ago||A lot of the SEC West||
A lot of the SEC West national superiority is built on beating those SEC East teams. A&M was only highly thought of because they smacked USCe. Wins over Florida were credited as well. Turns out the SEC West didn't have a win worth mentioning over their Easterly brethren.
SEC west backers are hanging a lot on some ok non-conference wins. Hopefully the committee sees through it if the best the conference can do is a two-loss Bama.
|40 weeks 6 hours ago||Much too early for||
Much too early for pronouncements, both in the game and for the season. Even with a loss, they're just one game behind the other three others competing for the wild card.
|40 weeks 6 hours ago||Much too early for||
Much too early for pronouncements, both in the game and for the season. Even with a loss, they're just one game behind the other three others competing for the wild card.
|40 weeks 1 day ago||You know why people have come||
You know why people have come back around on Rich Rod? Because he has a not so talented team with youth at most key positions in the top 15 four years later. What are the chances that Hoke is even a head coach in four years?
|40 weeks 1 day ago||I think you're right. The||
I think you're right. The potential problem with Hackett is that he may not be able to or know how to undo Brandon's mess. As bad as Brandon was, he was only one guy, there had to be others under him doing most of the work to execute and probably come up with all the bad decisions. Hackett, as a businessman first, may not be able to recognize the structural and staffing problems within the department.
Now, that's not to say that Hackett, being a smart guy, can't reach out to someone more knowledgable in the field to help him make some of the decisions that need to be made.
|40 weeks 2 days ago||He actually sits on the UA||
He actually sits on the UA Board which oversees UAB and UAT. The Board also recently killed an on-campus stadium proposal which would have gotten UAB out of the decrepit and monstorously sized Legion Field and into a staidum that better fit UAB's needs.
It is a really strange situation that the Bama folks view UAB as a threat. It's not like UAB has ever been good.
|40 weeks 2 days ago||Rich Rodriguez also had him||
Rich Rodriguez also had him for all of 2 seasons, only 1 as the starter. Who is to say Denard wouldn't have gotten there with the zone read in year 3 under the master?
But even accepting one limitation in his game, doesn't that make everything else he did all the more impressive? This is a guy who ran for 100 yards against a very stout South Carolina Defense in his first game ever at Running Back. You're really questioning how good he was?
You seem like you're one of those sad, sad people that were always against the spread because it wasn't "Michigan Football" so much so that your hatred for Rich Rod runs so deep that you can't accept anything good coming out of him or his teams.
|40 weeks 2 days ago||Considering how often the||
Considering how often the offense devolved into "Denard do something" from 2010-12, I think it's pretty clear, even objectively, that Denard was the best player on that team. And that's not to take anything away from Mike Martin. But Denard was 2010 Big Ten offensive MVP, two time first-team all Big Ten, 2010 all-american. He's making it as a professional at a position where he would have been less valuable as a college player.
Mike Martin was a very good defensive lineman. He was the best player on the defense. But he was no Denard Robinson.
|40 weeks 2 days ago||I think pointing out the||
I think pointing out the Fickell to Meyer transition doesn't mean people expect a national championship next year. Just that it's reasonable to think a team returning a huge proportion of its talent could be 10-2ish next year and competitive in every game.
You look back at who we played this year and it's semi-incomprehensible that we aren't at least 7-5 and competitive in our loses. If you take that as what should have been for a team returning that much experience (albeit one with a big question at QB), making the jump to conference contender shouldn't be seen as shocking.
Now, I don't know this is going to make anyone feel better, but in some ways it's a lot like Hoke's first year. Going into that season, no matter the head coach, most would have said with returning talent you're looking at 9-3, get some real improvement from coaching on the defensive side it could be a special year. We got probably more defensive improvement than expected but combined it with a step back from what would have been expected on offense and had a pretty great year. That transition should be easily replicated.
|40 weeks 2 days ago||It's not that surprising. He||
It's not that surprising. He has said that Mike Martin was the best player on that team. Now, don't get me wrong, I loved Mike Martin, but if you think he was a better college player than Denard Robinson, you're insane.
|40 weeks 2 days ago||Mattison: "All I know is||
Mattison: "All I know is Brady and our staff go in every day and say, ‘I’m going to make you a better player. I’m going to do everything I can to make you a better football player today’ and we do that."
Respectfully disagree, good sir.
|40 weeks 3 days ago||If chasing down a would-be TD||
If chasing down a would-be TD is the basis for not being disinterested, how do you factor that in with Funchess. Didn't he chase down a long INT return against northwestern?
|40 weeks 3 days ago||This is why I thought there||
This is why I thought there may be something positive to giving Hoke the Earle Bruce treatment. It's a distraction at this point. Most know that Hoke is gone, but some won't admit it, don't realize it, etc. If we had just ended it, they could all have gone on, prepared this week and played The Game.
|40 weeks 3 days ago||If we had Julius Peppers, I||
If we had Julius Peppers, I feel confident that he would start at WDE. Even in his old age, I think he could tear some poor college o-linemen up.
|40 weeks 3 days ago||I can't say I've paid||
I can't say I've paid attention to many AD hirings, so I don't know if there's an obvious answer to this, but could we be hearing that a lot of our targets would prefer to make the move in between school years? If so, it makes absolute sense to have an interim for a few months.
|40 weeks 3 days ago||Nope, no flag. Once the clock||
Nope, no flag. Once the clock is at a point where the game is effectively over, those types of penalties aren't called. For instance, ever see a penalty for the entire team running out on the field before the clock strikes zero? Didn't think so.
I think some only think that it may have been a penalty because it looked at first that he wasn't getting the answer he wanted from the official and through his headset up in disgust. That would have been a penalty.
|40 weeks 4 days ago||Couldn't you say that the||
Couldn't you say that the certainty is something positive about announcing the decision this week. I know it's not much, but it's not nothing either.
I bet most players know the score, but ending all doubt might be a small positive going into The Game.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||What if the guy tossing the||
What if the guy tossing the beer had simply missed? Pretty lucky shot to hit Artest. I imagine if the beer had fallen harmlessly behind the scorer's table, nothing happens and it is forgotten as just one of those minny dustups that happen in professional sports.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||If you click through to USA||
If you click through to USA Today, you'll see that Dantonio got a $2M bonus for remaining the head coach through Jan. 1, 2014. And I agree he probably got about his max bonus for winning the Big Ten and Rose Bowl. He was probably around $3M on a normal year.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||NFL contracts are different||
NFL contracts are different than college contracts. Teams don't have to protect themselves from players/coaches leaving for other NFL jobs because league rules prohibit teams from contacting players/coaches under contract without permission. Teams don't need a buyout in the contract because another team would have to trade assets to acquire a coach under contract.
I don't think NFL teams worry too much about the possibility of a coach leaving for a college job. Most think it's unlikely that a successful NFL coach would want to leave for a college job, and that if a coach doesn't want to be there anymore, it's better to move on anyway. Much like Bobby Petrino was able to up and leave the Falcons for Arkansas, I think it's a safe assumption that if Harbaugh wanted to take the Michigan job, there would be nothing holding him back.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||I agree. The only time it||
I agree. The only time it really matters that an AD wasn't the one who hired the coach is when it goes badly. There's slightly less loyalty to the coach if the AD didn't hire him. But that being said, I doubt there's an AD out there that would prefer to fire a coach. It's not like a new GM coming in and preferring to have "his guy" as coach.
A new coach is going to come in and know he has 3-4 years to have things working. That would be the case even if we had the permanent AD on board.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||Those three wins are better||
Those three wins are better than Oregon over MSU? Or Virginia Tech. over Ohio State? I doubt it. Or how about anyone over Notre Dame or BC over USC? Or Nebraska over Miami? I don't think anyone claims that the Big Ten has done anything this season, but c'mon, that doesn't mean the SEC West's OOC wins are amazing.
The SEC West's three wins are decent, but that you would argue that they're "the most impressive non-conference wins of the year," says more about the fact that nobody plays anyone than about the strength of the SEC West. Kansas State was a legitimately good win, even if they are only the third best team in the Big 12. West Virginia is the fifth best team in the Big 12 and Wisconsin is the third best team in the very bad Big 10 (and that game was without a functioning QB and half without Melvin Gordon). What's comical is that anyone would hang their hat on those three wins as the basis of superiority.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||At the same time, how many of||
At the same time, how many of those wives hold that position when their husban is a professional at sports? It's not like he can just pick up and start over at one of hundreds of other companies in the Bay Area like he would be able to do if he was in almost any other profession.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||If the Raiders leave Oakland,||
If the Raiders leave Oakland, a very real possibility, Harbaugh's wife's purported position would leave Harbaugh without a reasonable coaching alternative in the near future if he falls out of favor in SF. Something tells me that is not a likely scenario...
|41 weeks 2 days ago||All that says is that there||
All that says is that there isn't a garbage team in that division. What wins of note does the division have? LSU over Wisconsin, Alabama over West Virginia, Auburn over Kansas State, Ole Miss over an ok Boise State team (three of those four on "neutral fields" in SEC territory). That's really it. After that you're into garbage with the best wins being over Florida, South Carolina or Tennessee.
The SEC West has barely played anyone. Their greatness is based almost entirely on circular logic. I think it's a good division, probably best in football right now, but I don't think any particular team is all that great. Those teams would lose games no matter what conference they played in, even the Big Ten. Maybe subtract a loss for each team, but anything beyond that is probably giving the division more then it is due.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||Yet Auburn just got crushed||
Yet Auburn just got crushed by Georgia,Texas A&M lost at home to Missouri, and LSU got shut out by Arkansas. I think it's the best division in football, but a lot of the basis for them being head and shoulders above the rest of football lived on teams like A&M and LSU being massively overrated.
The other basis are some non-conference wins that do, on the surface, look fairly good. Auburn and LSU both managed to pull out wins that they had no right winning. I'm also not sure LSU beats Wisconsin today with a slightly more competent QB and a healthy Gordon. Alabama got by an ok West Virginia team. But that's really it. Ole Miss beat a not so great Boise State team deep in SEC territory. Arkansas beat an awful Big 12 team. I'm hard pressed to say that those games make the SEC west "head and shoulders" better than everyone else. I'll grant that it's the best division in college football, I'm just not sure it's that much better.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||It just seems like you're||
It just seems like you're over-relying on Sagarin top 30. As I said, it's silly to use one system as the sole basis of quality wins. I also find it a little silly to draw an arbitrary point in the rankings as being a quality win. And, no, there aren't a bunch of super-powers in Sagarin #30-40, but can you tell me that wins over Stanford, Arizona and Texas are really that much worse than wins over Missouri, Tennessee, Clemson, and Georgia Tech from your hypothetical 2-loss Georgia team? The former are all between 30 and 40 and the latter are all between 20 and 30. Maybe in a sport like basketball where teams play upwards of 40 games, it's ok to be a bit arbitrary, but with so few games in football it just removes necessary data points.
The more logical way to measure quality wins is to rank the wins for each team as you see them, and then compare the lists. If you want to bring in a few different rankings systems at that point to help you judge who has higher quality, that's reasonable if not necessary.
For my take, I'd line up hypothetical UCLA's wins over Oregon, Arizona State, Arizona, and USC against any one-loss team out there aside from Alabama. Can we honestly say that Ohio State's is better with Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota (?) and Maryland(??). Or that TCU's is better with Kansas State, Oklahoma, West Virginia and Minnesota? Maybe Baylor's is better with TCU, Kansas State, and Oklahoma.
The way things are lining up, I think the playoffs are likely to be Alabama, Florida State, one Big 12 team (likely Baylor), and a Pac 12 team (likely Oregon). Obviously this can all change.
For the record, I like talking about this a lot more than those other stuff you mentioned. Not angry or agitated at all. Just like a good debate.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||Why are you throwing around||
Why are you throwing around W-L v. Sagarin top 30 as some important metric? Is there any indication from the committee that they are using that as a basis at all? One computer ranking in a vacuum is practically worthless. I mean, they have a Georgia team that got destroyed by a very bad Florida team as #3. How in the world does that make sense? Obviously one weird ranking doesn't negate a whole system, but it does show why you shouldn't only consider one computer ranking system when you're working with so few points of comparison between conferences. To my eye, Sagarin is clearly over valuing the SEC (A&M at 17, Florida, Missouri, Arkansas and Tennessee all in the top 30???? This is the ranking system you're using?) while undervaluing the Pac 12. So of course, if you are simply using that as your basis, you're not going to see a two loss Pac 12 team getting in.
I think a two loss Georgia team would make it for the same reason that I think a two loss UCLA team would have a shot. The committee says they are going to value conference championships, and being the champion of one of the two best conferences is going to carry extra weight. If UCLA wins out, they will have played 12 P5 teams, with the 13th game coming against current AAC leader Memphis. That is going to play well no matter what computer poll is used.
I think an 11-2 UCLA has a shot over Ohio State, and I think they have a pretty good shot over a second Big 12 or SEC team. This process is going to be political and the most defensible move is to give four conference champions their shot. Throwing a second team from a conference in only really "works" for the committee if that second team wins the whole thing. If the champion from the conference with two in wins, people can say, yeah, well, what if conference X was better and their champion didn't get a shot. If neither conference team wins it looks really bad for the committee. I think the committee is going to look to avoid that until the selection committee has built up the reputation of the playoffs as crowning a true champion.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||Your post is why it's stupid||
Your post is why it's stupid for the committee to have weekly rankings. Nothing should constrain the committee at the end of the season from determining who they think deserves a shot in the playoffs. If the committee wanted to have those initial rankings at week 9 or so, just to show what they were currently feeling, fine, but the weekly rankings have the potential to carry over the worst part of the poll-based championship system into the playoff selection committee.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||If UCLA wins out, I think||
If UCLA wins out, I think they have a pretty strong resume. I think they would have a shot at keeping OSU and other one-loss teams out. They would have a drubbing of ASU, wins over Texas, Arizona, USC, Stanford and Oregon with their only losses in competitive games vs. Utah and Oregon.
I also think at the end of the day a conference championship is going to carry weight. Everything the committee has said indicates this to be true. I think the committee is going to know that the gathered information only means so much when there are so few data points between conferences. Unfortunately for the Big Ten, all the data points that do exist are negative, so a Big Ten championship probably carries the least weight. OSU isn't going to climb over a one-loss conference champion and would need the committee to put a lot of weight behind the conference championship to overcome a one-loss Mississippi State.
|41 weeks 2 days ago||Does it really matter who is||
Does it really matter who is the 4th team right now? I think at the end of the day, with no further upsets, Mississippi State gets left out for Baylor. I also think that Mississippi State's resume isn't going to be so noticeably stronger than a one-loss TCU or even a one-loss Ohio State that the committee would leave out a conference champion in favor of a second SEC team. Politically, the far easier move is to give another conference champion a shot.
Mississippi State is honestly the SEC's worst shot at a second team. They played nobody in the non-conference schedule and drew the two worst SEC-East teams. The only thing propping them up is the idea that the SEC West is so great. However, A&M just lost at home to Missouri. LSU lost to Arkansas. And Auburn got crushed by a so-so Georgia team. Those are Mississipp State's "big wins." If the committee does their job, they'll ignore the fact that the pollsters rushed to judgment and declared all three to be top-5 teams at some point this season.
|41 weeks 3 days ago||I will laugh if they hire Mke||
I will laugh if they hire Mke Shanahan.
|42 weeks 15 hours ago||I don't know how logical it||
I don't know how logical it is to say you won't fire your current coach until you have a replacement lined up. The coaching world is a fraternity and most won't go the Bobby Petrino route of completely undermining a sitting head coach. Yes, a search committee can talk to agents for coaches and guage some interest, but nothing definitive will be done until the current coach is fired.
|42 weeks 16 hours ago||They are usually published on||
They are usually published on Thursdays and Fridays during bye weeks.
|42 weeks 1 day ago||It's hard to admit you were||
It's hard to admit you were wrong. They are part of the group that was driving the train to hire Hoke. To say he should be fired is to admit being wrong. Not everyone is able to do that.
Edit: That's in addition to what people said above about liking him and all that...
|42 weeks 1 day ago||I think it's started to||
I think it's started to happen less. Not the putting football far in front of academics, but the not getting kids to their 120 credits part. Pretty much everyone is on campus for summer class so that coaches can keep an eye on them. You almost have to try to not get 120 credits and a degree under those conditions.
These days, if you're a senior football player, you've pretty much going to graduate, with possible excepions of 4th year seniors that ditch the spring semester for combine work.
|42 weeks 2 days ago||I think schools do have some||
I think schools do have some say in primetime vs. non-primetime, but otherwise, I think you're right. I think a school has almost no control over what time an afternoon game kicks off at.
|42 weeks 2 days ago||I bet you won't find many||
I bet you won't find many traditional top-25 programs that play many games at noon.
More games used to be at noon because 3:30 was the "primetime" slot for college football, with the exception of an SEC night game on ESPN. That has changed. Now the primetime slot is 7:00 or 8:00 and is likely to see a big game on Fox, ESPN, and ABC, with possible big games on CBS or NBC. With slightly lesser games on ESPN2 and Fox Sports 1. That has bumped most of the better noon games up to 3:30 leaving primarily the dregs for the noon slot. Michigan, even when awful like this season, only seems to qualify for the dregs if we're playing an FCS or MAC-equivalent. The Ohio State game is the lone exception and that is more out of tradition than anything else.
|42 weeks 3 days ago||I think Morris at least has||
I think Morris at least has to get a possession or two in the first half of the Maryland game. And that's being said knowing full well that he hasn't shown anything to indicate he's even a viable option at QB. Morris has had to have shown something at some point to get the Minnesota start (our coaches are not so dumb as to make that change if they've only seen the bad version of Morris that we have seen in his limited playing time). It's time to see if there's anything there. After all, somebody is going to have to play QB next year...
I would start Gardner, it is senior day and the kid deserves it. Let them split reps in the first half. If they look equal maybe split reps in the second half or even go with Morris. If one looks significantly better, he's your guy the rest of the season.
|42 weeks 4 days ago||I was going to say the OP||
I was going to say the OP spent a lot of time talking about the Big 12 three way tie to not realize that KSU and Baylor still have to play each other.
|43 weeks 1 day ago||The Sugar Bowl was a brutal||
The Sugar Bowl was a brutal struggle on offense (184 total yards) and a game we were very lucky to win. Hemmingway caught a prayer or two, the fake fg disaster that somehow worked out, etc.
Much like I sometimes wonder how perceptions would have been different had RichRod's teams gotten two or three lucky breaks in his first two seasons, I wonder how perceptions would have changed for Hoke had he not seemingly been shitting horeshoes his first season.
|43 weeks 1 day ago||It's still good to have.||
It's still good to have. What if he has an injury plagued 4th year on campus? That 5th year gives him the flexibility to come back and improve his draft stock.
|43 weeks 1 day ago||Actually, I don't think that||
Actually, I don't think that is correct at all. You have to apply to the NCAA for a medical redshirt, a process that can be done at anytime. Once that's done and granted, this year becomes a redshirt. If it happens before next season he will be a RS-Fr.
|43 weeks 1 day ago||To answer your question.||
To answer your question. Generic football players' opinions should be given greater weight than the average member of the public, at least when it comes to on-field success. However, individual players' or groups of players' opinions should not be given any weight if they cannot remove their individual biases.
Ideally, your current players should never want a coach fired. It's a bad sign even if the current coach really should be fired. Current players and coaches should be on the same side moving the team forward.
I think your problem is that, in your own words, "all the other people that have played for Brady Hoke and spoken out about their love/appreciation/confidence in his abilities as a coach are just doing so because of loyalty." I don't think it's a question of whether Hoke's players/former players are doing so because of loyalty. I think it is absolutely so, it's just that some are unable to recognize that their loyalty has blinded them to reality.
|43 weeks 1 day ago||Were we really going to be||
Were we really going to be 7-5 with the offensive talent on that team in 2008? Someone is divorced from reality and I don't think it's Brian.
|43 weeks 2 days ago||Narduzzi is in the box, no?||
Narduzzi is in the box, no? I do see your point, though, and agree it's a natural disadvantage. In all honesty, I'm probably not all that worried about actual sign stealing. I'm more frustrated when we show a blitz and the offense sees it, has a play relayed in from the sideline and we go ahead and run the blitz anyway seemingly every time. I know part of all that are simply head games, not knowing whether the offense is actually changing when the whole team looks over at the coaching staff. I guess I'd just like to see us participate rather than simply being caught with a tipped blitz.
|43 weeks 2 days ago||I'm assuming you meant||
I'm assuming you meant between Pitt and Stanford (where Walt Harris went). I'd say there probably was a disparity. I didn't raise this in my OP, but if my recollection is right, Harris wasn't popular. Wikipedia says he was pushed out at Pitt (I know, wikipedia...). I just don't think there was any sort of groundswell to keep Harris at Pitt, nor even frustration that he was gone.
To me he wasn't a "strong" hire the way you have characterized others.
|43 weeks 2 days ago||I guess I don't understand||
I guess I don't understand why multiple signalers is slower. High tempo offenses do it. If Mattison is making the call and someone is signalling in the plays, how is it slower to have one guy signalling in the play while two other guys are simultaneously faking signals? Does Mattison signal in the plays himself? I guess I could see how it would be slower to relay it to signallers. But again, other coaches who DC from the box have someone relaying their calls in, I don't see why we couldn't do the same.
And yeah, it doesn't have to be multiple signalers, but do something besides holding up some towells. I think simply throwing your hands up in the air and saying "that's life" is a deteriment to the team. I understand that he thinks the worst thing to do is not get everyone on the same page, but be a problem solver.
|43 weeks 2 days ago||There's a disconnect with the||
There's a disconnect with the coach-in-waiting hires. Hiring away James Franklin from Maryland is a Strong hire, but hiring away Will Muscham from Texas is average? I'd also argue that locking in Jimbo Fisher who was destined for a big time coaching job was a strong hire on FSU's part, especially if we're counting hiring away a coach-in-waiting.
Also not sure I'd call Walt Harris a strong hire. I know technically Pitt in 2004 was BCS, but he won his only conference championship that year and was ranked 25. That version of the Big East was a stepping stone conference. You treated Big East hires properly when you called Randy Edsall average.
|43 weeks 2 days ago||That would have to be a||
That would have to be a pretty amazing defense, no? Basically would have to win a game playing your base set all game long without blitzing. Who can do that?
I think Mattison should spend more time on making sure the offense doesn't know what's coming and then maybe the defensive players will be shown to be pretty good. Is it really that hard to do the offensive signaling route of having two or three guys signaling in the plays? Is it really that hard after you show a blitz to have the defense give one or two signals that means either revert to defensive call x or continue with the original call? Most other teams manage to do this.
The ability of offenses to get to the line and have an audible called in from the sideline based on what the defense shows is a huge advantage and a relatively modern one. That Mattison refuses to adjust beyond simply putting towels up is not a good thing.
|43 weeks 3 days ago||I disagree on the latter||
I disagree on the latter part. I think there are very, very few athletic director candidates that are going to keep a coach from coming to a particular school. An AD may be a pull, but the coach is generally taking the job because of what the job offers, not what his future boss offers. Michigan has history and resources. A coach looking to make the move to a Michigan-like program isn't going to say no because they don't know who the AD will be. It is a question mark, and maybe it pushes a guy deciding between us and Florida to Florida, but it won't keep a guy from even considering the option. Especially a guy like Harbaugh or Miles, for whom Michigan is more than just a job.
|43 weeks 3 days ago||A slam dunk hire prior to the||
A slam dunk hire prior to the new AD coming on board would be a fine scenario. Of course, that's pretty much just Harbaugh.
Could also argue that hiring the football coach before the AD would give the new AD a few year buffer before he sees any pressure. If the axiom for ADs is that they are judged by their football and MBB hires, then coming into a situation where you have a stable basketball program and a football coach that is going to, at worst, get at least three years before you get to pick your guy. I could see an AD thinking that he has 5+ years of job security under that scenario.
I know pro sports GMs like to have their guy and even college ADs seem likelier to pull the trigger on firing a guy they didn't hire, but I'm not sure an AD feels all that strongly about walking into a situation where someone else has just made the coaching decision. Seems to me that the best scenario for an AD is walking into a department where there is no need to hire a coach.
|43 weeks 3 days ago||He's carrying water for those||
He's carrying water for those that feed him his access which feeds his career. It's a quid pro quo relationship. We usually see his recruiting/injury information/depth chart/etc. ("the quid") now we're seeing him push the agenda of the current coaching staff ("the quo"). Not saying he's being told to explicitly do this, but I'm sure he feels pressure to say things that can only be interpreted as "we better keep Hoke."