|3 hours 8 min ago||That would be great. Add us,||
That would be great. Add us, PSU, WI and USC or Oklahoma. USC is better but OK would get in off of their 2 losses and conference championship. Honestly, the margin between the teams that get in in UW/OSU/Clemson and those left out like M/WI/PSU/USC is pretty thin and just a few plays here or there. 7 games of playoff football instead of 3.
|3 hours 14 min ago||Why do people keep saying||
Why do people keep saying like "Hoke players" or "once Harbaugh gets talent then xyz"? This team had a shitload of talent, Hoke recruits or not, and the NFL draft is about to verify that when we have the most players drafted of any school. It's not at all a certainly that future Harbaugh teams are going to be more talented. Yeah, we'll probably be better in the OL as they weren't that good. We'll probably also be worse in the DL and secondary than this team which was really exceptional.
|3 hours 20 min ago||2014, any chance you can take||
2014, any chance you can take us back in your time machine to oh say November 11th? It's only 3 weeks ago today. Back then, we were 9-0 and #2. Now we are 10-2 and #5 or #6. It seems so long ago but it was just a mere 3 weeks. I'd pretty much just like a do over for everything from that point on. K thx bye.
|3 hours 26 min ago||How it should||
How it should be:
What the committee will say:
OSU at 4 may well not happen but I'm throwing it out there. Committee penalizes them for not winning a conference and getting in over B1G champ by sticking them with Alabama in the first game. Setting up 2014 rematch and then 2015 rematch with Clemson in the championship. PSU ahead of us is dumb, but the world has short attention spans and recency bias.
|3 hours 36 min ago||Agreed. Clemson keeps getting||
Agreed. Clemson keeps getting by in sketchy ways. They are 6-1 in games decided by a TD or less. Talking heads will say that is clutch or some such bullshit, but there is a mountain of evidence across all sports that winning a lot of close games is just lucky/random and not sustainable.
Clemson's defense is rickety. UW hasn't played a tough schedule but they've performed well and played quite well away from Seattle with wins @Utah, @WSU and vs CO. There's no way that Clemson gets left out but if we were truly picking the 4 best teams it would be M and OSU for 2 and 3 and then UW at 4 while Clemson can go off and play PSU in the Teams I Hate Bowl.
|3 hours 47 min ago||Perhaps based on having one||
Perhaps based on having one fewer loss, not losing to Pitt, not losing to us by 39 points, actually beating us (kind of), having a good non-conference road win @Oklahoma, beating WI on the road instead of neutral, curb-stomping Nebraska by 87 touchdowns, etc.
Also, not having a fanbase that idolizes a piece of shit scumbag who aided and abetted a child molester in remaining free for years by intentionally covering up his crimes to protect his football program is a significant point in their favor. In my opinion. It makes me sick that I have to root for the fucking Buckeyes but no fanbase is more deserving of being handed a steaming pile of shit than the Nitwits.
|4 hours 19 sec ago||I'll watch because I care||
I'll watch because I care about Michigan football more than I should. But can't get excited about this disappointing outcome. Interest level is like...4/10. Hard to convince myself this is exciting when we were so close to truly meaningful games.
|7 hours 3 min ago||I dunno man. If we could have||
I dunno man. If we could have hit FGs that game would have been a comfortable win. Their defense is stout but they really couldn't move the ball at all on us. And if we'd hit FGs they would have had to pass more to catch up and that would have probably benefited us and extended the game and final margin. They're good but I think we are more than slightly better.
|7 hours 11 min ago||OSU's fault. They blew a game||
OSU's fault. They blew a game where they clearly dominated PSU with some stupid special teams plays. PSU = 4th best B1G team. Which....god it is horrible that i would actually rather have something good happen to OSU, but fuck PSU and their Paterno Cult.
|7 hours 15 min ago||It's not clear at all that if||
It's not clear at all that if we had beat Iowa we would be in. OSU and AL would still be in ahead of us after the OSU loss. We'd still be idle this week while UW and Clemson are 1 loss conference championship teams. I mean, maybe. Clemson probably passes us. UW hmmm, dunno.
|7 hours 23 min ago||Why would the Board melt||
Why would the Board melt down? There's no difference between 5th and 6th.
|7 hours 24 min ago||Uncatchable. Meh. VT||
Meh. VT sucks.
Fuck the world.
|9 hours 16 min ago||That theory doesn't make any||
That theory doesn't make any sense. If the committee wanted us in in over UW, then the committee surely would have had us at 4 this week and UW at 5. All of the stated reasons for choosing us were available for consideration last week and we were still ranked behind them. They can't rank UW higher, have them win a conference championship in a blowout (by a larger margin on neutral field than our home win over CO) and then have us pass them while we're idle. They'd be heavily criticized for how stupid that looks. If they were hellbent on having M in we would have been 4 this week. It's over.
|9 hours 42 min ago||So 10-2 WI beats 10-2 #7 PSU||
So 10-2 WI beats 10-2 #7 PSU by whatever score. Probably not that much because their offense is pretty meh. And 11-1 UW beats 10-2 #8 CO by 31. Both have conference championships now. Both have added wins over 10-3 teams. And now WI will pass UW based on what?
You're right, it's just an opinion w/ zero inside knowledge. Well, except that since the committee publishes their rankings weekly, we already know that they had UW ahead of WI. The other fact is that UW just killed CO on national TV. So my argument is premised on the facts that UW was ranked ahead of both PSU/WI coming into this weekend and posted a dominating win. UW has 1 loss and the B1G CCG winner will have 2 losses. UW was ahead already in the rankings and had a blowout win. Explain what WI can do to pass them? What's the support for your opinion? Win by 70 is about the only plausible reason you can come up with for WI jumping UW and their offensive performance year to date indicates that's not happening. You act like there is no prior context or knowledge of how the committee feels when comparing these two teams but last weeks rankings tell you exactly that. UW was 4. WI was 6.
Ummm...is there any way we can bet on this? Because I would love to take my chances on my opinion vs yours.
|9 hours 58 min ago||Sorry, but this is one of the||
Sorry, but this is one of the dumber threads I've seen. So...the committee puts UW ahead of M this week but says it is close. UW beats 10-2 CO by 31 while M is idle. And...we're going to jump them in the next set of standings. Right.
It sucks, but this pretty much summarizes our playoff chances:
|12 hours 45 min ago||LOL. Just....lol. We're||
LOL. Just....lol. We're losing guys like Lewis, Charlton, Wormley, Butt, Chesson, Darboh, Smith, Glasgow. Mags, Braden, Kalis, Gedeon, Stribling, Thomas, D. Hill and our do everything kicker. And you're talking about we'll be fine because we get a nickel corner back if the NCAA grants a 6th year and Ian Bunting who had 6 yards of receiving on the season? Our leading returning receiver by yardage is our FB who averaged 9 yards/game. I mean, I like McDoom and Crawford a lot but they also each had fewer receptions than our backup FB Henry Poggi on the year. These guys are going to need seasoning and it will take time to replace the current group. On defense, our entire starting secondary and a significant chuck of our badass DL rotation is gone. We lose 9 starters.
There is young talent but old experienced proven talent > young unknown talent in the short term. 2017 may be a harsh reality for this who think the upward trend is going to continue. Next year will almost certainly be a step backwards.
|13 hours 8 min ago||That's not happening. A 2||
That's not happening. A 2 loss team isn't jumping a 1 loss team that just won a CCG by 31 points over a 10-2 team.
Wisconsin getting in would require Clemson losing.
|13 hours 11 min ago||Sett aside all of the playoff||
Sett aside all of the playoff scenario talk since that horse has been beat to death and you are left with hoping for VTech to win.
Unfortunately, VTech managed to avoid the 3 good teams in the ACC: Louisville, Clemson and FSU during conference play, yet they were still was a 3 loss team. With a 3-0 record in close games with 2nd order wins of 8.2 and 27th in S&P+. Everything in their profile suggests they aren't that good and are about to get beat down. #CollegeFootball but it's hard to have much faith in them.
|13 hours 43 min ago||A lot of the down to down||
A lot of the down to down football things that could have gone wrong like QB play, LB play, Don Brown's performance against the spread, Allen's FG kicking after that little blip, secondary play w/o Clark etc went well. We turned out to be a really good football team.
And that's why a lot of the little random events during games that went wrong and resulted in a record that, yes, did underperform the considerable experienced talent that we do have. We are an 11-1 caliber team-like OSU, Clemson, and UW- except that have a 10-2 record and they are all 11-1. People saying oh, well the OL wasn't that talented this year are right. But if the premise is that future OLs will be better but everything else stays the same, that's wrong. We probably have a better OL in 2-3 years. We probably won't have all talented senior playmakers at WR/RB/TE and a defense like this comes along once a decade or so even at M. You can say it exceeded your initial expectations and don't worry be happy. But when I look at us as #2 in fancystats, remember that we were #2 and 9-0 a month ago and now consider that we won't make a 5 team playoff that is a disappointing final outcome. Which...is pretty much how Michigan football goes for most of the 30 years I've been watching and really much of the last 70 years.
I suspect the younger types who only remember the RichRod/Hoke types are more positive on this season many times before. But hey, at least we're back to our pre-RichRod/Hoke status of being the pre-2004 Boston Red Sox instead of the pre-2016 Chicago Cubs.
|1 day 3 hours ago||The question of who lost||
The question of who lost doesn't matter, but the difference in their opponents does. It would have been better if it were UW losing because then our CO win looks a lot better as a 10-2 PAC 10 champ we beat by 17 whereas after this stomping of the Buffalos by 31 (at the moment), that only hurts our SOS and quality of wins.
|1 day 3 hours ago||Well teams #3 and #6 will||
Well teams #3 and #6 will have lost in this scenario so they're really only jumping us. They'll be adding a win equivalent to our current best win over WI, a conference championship, have an extra 11th win that we lack and look good (presumably) on national TV. And while getting in over a team that they lost to head to head looks problematic, leaving out a team that won the conference for one that finished 3rd in its division is an even less appealing complication. So yeah, pretty good chance they jump us.
|1 day 3 hours ago||Sadly, 2018 will have road||
Sadly, 2018 will have road games @Notre Dame, @MSU and @OSU. Plus we get both Nebraska and Wisconsin from the West. Not conducive to making the playoff.
|1 day 6 hours ago||This is correct, at least in||
This is correct, at least in my time watching M since mid-80s. Probably more NFL talent on the 2000 line but for college play the 91-92 lines were the best. Despite getting destroyed by Emtman in the Rose Bowl.
|1 day 14 hours ago||Yeah, both will be 5th years.||
Yeah, both will be 5th years. O'Korn already left once for playing time. If he can grad transfer to like a MAC school or something, are we sure he is going to want to spend his 5th year in what looks to be a clear backup role rather than playing somewhere else? [I assume he'll have a degree]. Not saying it is going to happen but I don't think you can just dismiss it out of hand.
I'd be suprised if Morris is the only one who leaves (if he does) when we have 3 other QBs. Realistically, Malzone is only 1 year behind Speight and looking at being a backup until his 5th year, at best, and then competing with Peters/McCaffrey/New guys in 2019. And since we're not taking another QB this cycle and Browne would not be around in 2018, it shouldn't impact recruiting. Only relevent to the quest to get to 85 this fall. Now, Browne was a pretty meh QB at USC, but having an experienced hand for one year to backup Speight could make sense if we lose Morris and one more.
|2 days 5 hours ago||This is true but usually||
This is true but usually happens in a place where the local culture is receptive to old school hard ass types. Like Pullman, WA or Knight at Texas Tech or Petrino in Kentucky etc. San Jose State is not that type of fit. Plus there is the obligatory cooling off period.
|6 days 3 hours ago||Off-topic, just went and||
Off-topic, just went and checked the offensive FPI ranking for San Jose State. #108th. Ouch. Which I mention because the San Jose State staff, including our old friend Al Borges, just got fired.
|6 days 3 hours ago||Forget about Oklahoma and||
Forget about Oklahoma and OSU. Whoever wins Bedlam still loses a beauty pageant against any other 2 loss team amongst Michigan, Colorado and PSU/WI.
|6 days 7 hours ago||I mean, it is like that this||
I mean, it is like that this year and the trend is definitely to just be Alabama and everyone else. Pretty crazy that Saban is looking at winning his 5th in 8 years.
But still, you've got 4 different SEC schools (Auburn, LSU, Florida) contributing to them winning 8 of the last 10 national championships. Although the LSU one was a huge fluke since they had 2 losses. So probably not quite the same as SEC basketball but yeah, we'll see. Auburn was all Cam Newton. With Florida being weaker without Meyer and Miles gone there is no other SEC program with a track record of the current staff being successful outside of Saban.
|6 days 7 hours ago||Right, makes sense. Was just||
Right, makes sense. Was just thinking of SEC teams that we could play since they love to talk about how great their conference is. And we'd kill any SEC team not named Alabama.
|6 days 7 hours ago||One other complication||
One other complication though, what if it is Colorado? What is CO wins but doesnt make playoff then they would be in Rose. Committee probably wouldn't want a rematch.
I do question the original comment, which I am sure is based on good info, that we would be passed over for a divisional champ who we beat and who has 1 extra loss just because they won a division? When we'll be ranked liked 5/6 and that team will be like 13 or something. And we haven't been to the Rose in a decade. Especially if it is Wisconsin who loses as their fan base has been there a lot lately.
|6 days 7 hours ago||Don't see much upside to||
Don't see much upside to playing an ACC team. Florida State could be intriguing but it's kind of annoying to have to play another FL team in FL. No one will give us credit for beating Louisville after the last 2 weeks so only downside. Clemson obviously would be very interesting but I doubt that happens.
Would rather play Washington or Oklahoma or take it out on an SEC team like Florida or LSU.
|6 days 9 hours ago||Right. This is why I don't||
Right. This is why I don't love the pepcat, aside from the deteriorating productivity during the season. You're using him in a way where there is no substantial passing threat and the safety play is dictated by that. So yeah, he gets touches but the spacing is still tight, especially against the athletes of an OSU where he can't just completely run around the corner on them the way he would against Illinois or something. I'd have much rather seen a spread set with 4 wideouts using him, as a slot or a RB. Even use him at running back decoy and do play action or a flea flicker.
Well, at least I probably don't ever have to see that Morris running play ever again.
|6 days 11 hours ago||Some good points. I'd still||
Some good points. I'd still pick OSU because of the extra loss. Pitt may be solid, but it's way way harder to be a 1 loss team than a 2 loss team so that loss is huge in my assessment. But it's an intriguing question of what the committee cares about.
I guess the one other thing, and I doubt that the committee cares about this, is that I wouldn't put that much emphasis on the head to head. If you watched that game, OSU outplayed PSU on a play to play basis. But a few special teams breaks carried the day. Which is ok, that's how it goes sometimes, but it's more reflective of random weirdness than of PSU being a better team or outplaying OSU. No sustainable edge in performance for PSU. I'd be more inclined to give the edge to PSU if they soundly outplayed OSU. Plus a 3 point win is basically just home field advantage. Again, just my opinion.
|6 days 11 hours ago||Peppers is gone. Newsome...I||
Peppers is gone.
Newsome...I hope he returns healthy but you don't spend a month in the hospital after an injury unless there is some serious stuff going on. We'll see.
Clark is a maybe. Agree the DL is still promising though it lacks depth.
Perry seems like a guy who can be a useful piece as a 3rd down receiver on short passes like this year but not sure he will be anything more than that. Not sure JBB is more than just a backup. Kugler was a 4th year guy who doesn't play much, Cole moved to his position, young OL passing him for snaps when we have injuries. Not promising.
I agree there are some talented young pieces. I like Bush, Evans, Asiasi, Wheatly, Crawford, McDoom, Kinnel etc . And the recruits. But they'll need seasoning. I mean, weird stuff happens in college football but 97% of the time when you lose the experienced talent we do you take a step backwards.
|6 days 11 hours ago||That's not going to work. At||
That's not going to work. At best, frame it about what his minion who will read your email is charged with caring about: $$$. Something like "I'm unsubscribing from the BTN until you address the quality of officiating."
Even then, don't kid yourself.
|6 days 12 hours ago||But the part you don't||
But the part you don't mention is the rest. Factor in the non-conference where PSU lost to Pitt and OSU won @OK. Also, PSU did not play 9-3 Nebraska or 10-2 Wisconsin in conference while OSU beat both. Well, the Wisconsin win is offset is PSU beats WI on a neutral field but even then you still have dominating wins against Nebraska and Oklahoma outside of their common opponents and PSU with a loss to Pitt. To me, that more than offsets the head to head advantage and CCG title.
That said, I can definitely see a committee taking that perspective in terms of precedent and all so what you say might happen. But it would be the wrong call.
|6 days 12 hours ago||Oklahoma has very little||
Oklahoma has very little chance. Because regardless of the possible results you will have:
PSU or WI winner with 2 losses in a better conference/SOS
Clemson with 1-2 losses
Washington with 1-2 losses or Colorado with 2 losses. Even if Clemson and UW lose, they're more attractive 2 loss teams than Oklahoma. Or if you want to emphasize the conference championship aspect, then a 2 loss Colorado with wins over WSU, Utah and Washington is more deserving than Oklahoma.
You just can't get stomped at home by 3 TDs and lose convincingly to a non-Power 5 school and then come back and say you're one of the 4 best teams because you beat a collection of other terrible Big 12 teams. But that's just my opinion.
|6 days 12 hours ago||There's no way Clemson (if||
There's no way Clemson (if they win their CCG) is getting left out in favor of a 2 loss B1G champ or UW. Clemson has too much national respect after their success the last few years. The question is PSU/WI or UW. It'll be interesting to see. The PAC 10 was left out last year too (as they should have been) but those politics do play a factor in this. I think they would be pretty unhappy if a 1 loss PAC 10 champ that was #4 in this next to last poll, as UW almost certainly will be, is then jumped by a 2 loss team from another conference that beats another 10-2 loss team while UW is racking up a win over a 10-2 CO team themselves.
|6 days 12 hours ago||Your question was rhetorical||
Your question was rhetorical but I'll answer it anyway. The purpose of a conference championship game is to have a primetime TV game between two good teams on a weekend with few games being played while interest is high. Thereby generating significant revenue for television networks, the B1G and in turn, the schools. You didn't really think it was about anything but money did you?
|6 days 14 hours ago||But part of the reason the||
But part of the reason the gap closed this year is that we were a senior experienced team while they had a ton of turnover. And those guys from the previous coach were actually fairly talented and underperformed in 2013 and especially 2014. Next year will be the opposite. At best we return 6 out of 22 starters and lose our kicker. There's some young talent but there will be struggles next year.
2018 figures to be a better year but we have @Notre Dame, @MSU, @OSU, Wisconsin, PSU and Nebraska. Hopefully ND and MSU are more like 2016 than 2015 or else that scehdule looks brutal.
|1 week 5 hours ago||Maybe. In that case, Alabama,||
Maybe. In that case, Alabama, Clemson and OSU would get in ahead of us and possibly UW. UW could lose. If not, even at 11-1 with an Iowa win, it's far from certain we get in over another 12-1 Power 5 conference champion which UW will be if they win next week. Conference championship might be enough to more than offset our edge in quality of wins and loss.
|1 week 8 hours ago||Why? That sounds miserable.||
Why? That sounds miserable. Even if they're friends or family, I would not want them around on this day.
|1 week 8 hours ago||No. But they will fall behind||
But they will fall behind one of them the week after.
|1 week 8 hours ago||UW and Clemson win out. PSU||
UW and Clemson win out. PSU blows out WI. Helps a little if OK State beats Oklahoma. And even then it is pretty unlikely that OSU gets left out while UW and PSU get invited instead.
And...PSU is still getting in in that scenario, which-- fuck that both from a football and from a cosmic justice standpoint.
If WI wins, and UW and Clemson win out, the B1G probably only gets one team. I don't see WI getting in over OSU but one can always dream. I guess we'll see if all of the people who keep citing TCU and how important conference championships are turn out to be correct. Think they are going to be disappointed when a head to head win by OSU over WI, a better resume of wins, and an extra loss for WI trumps that championship trophy.
|1 week 9 hours ago||There's no more Elliott and||
There's no more Elliott and Barrett won't play out of his mind like Cardale Jones did in 14. OSU is not beating AL unless Jalen Hurt turns the ball over 4 times. Which...might happen, but probably not. It won't happen because I don't think we could take another fucking OSU championship and they are way overdue for some bad karma.
|1 week 9 hours ago||I get it. You're done and||
I get it. You're done and just angry.
But yes, we have a very very small chance that depends on several games breaking our way. Yep, it's like 2% or something. That said, some pretty weird shit happens in college football from time to time.
I prefer to hold onto that possibility as long as I can. If you wanna just be pissed off though or say it's unlikely or we dont deserve it or whatever because we lost then go for it.
|1 week 9 hours ago||I don't know that you||
I don't know that you necessarily need Clemson to lose. It can just be the first 3 things that you said with Clemson, AL and OSU in. Maybe. It's our only chance but also requires us winning a vote as a 2nd at large team from the B1G over our 3 loss B1G conference champ, over a Pac 10 champ with 2/3 losses (which is why UT over CO and then USC over UW is a better scenario for us) and then winning a vote over Oklahoma, WI, USC/CO which should in theory happen with USC/WI having 3 losses and our superior resume compared to OK and the head to head over CO. But taking 2 at large teams from one conference is how it should be, but doesn't necessarily seem like something the committee would be likely to do.
Anyway, unless MN scores soon we're done.
|1 week 9 hours ago||They should. This isn't the||
They should. This isn't the old days where all the teams played each other once and the records were important. There are weird tiebreaker outcomes and scheduling inequities that come up in a 14 team conference with divisions. The best teams, nor the teams that had the best seasons, frequently don't win the conference. PSU benefitted from not playing WI like M and OSU did or they might well not be in the B1G game. And at best WI, if they do beat PSU winds up 8-2 in conference games while OSU is 8-1 and we're 7-2.
Or let's just make it simple. If you've watched them all season, does anyone really believe that either WI or PSU is better than M and/or OSU?
|1 week 9 hours ago||It's not as far-fetched as||
It's not as far-fetched as some people are making it out to be. You need Sparty or Minnesota to win today, or yeah, we're toast but both are in competitive games. As long as one team loses and then either OSU to win next week. Or a WI team that picked up a 3rd loss today loss to MN today wins beats PSU so both are 3 loss teams. No way a 3 loss team is getting picked, B1G championship or not.
Then all you need is a USC win (preferable since they have 3 losses) or a Colorado win over UW. But if Colorado wins, then we have a good shot but they will have a conference championship. And you've still got to beat Oklahoma/OK State in the vote too which should happen if you've watched all of these teams but who the hell knows what the committee will do. I mean that's probably 50/50 but a decent shot.
But yeah, if PSU and WI both win today we are completely fucked.
|1 week 1 day ago||Right. It was 2004 and the||
Right. It was 2004 and the stated reason was security/bombs or whatever. Believe it was done as they got off of the bus, and had to stand around being searched/sniffed in front of OSU fans who were of course talking a bunch of shit.
|1 week 3 days ago||maybe...||
The opposite of muppets? I'd assume that's the 2016 Rutgers football season highlight reel.
|1 week 5 days ago||Also, by his purported||
Also, by his purported reasoning of ranking by how a team plays that week, how in the world do you wind up with Louisville ahead of Houston after getting spanked?
|1 week 5 days ago||I mean it is unique and kind||
I mean it is unique and kind of interesting and I can sort of buy into a few ideas like having USC highly ranked. But some of the other teams like PSU and Oklahoma and Wisconsin scream recency bias and an over emphasis on killing lesser opponents rather than winning close games against good opponents.
His whole underlying premise is that his qualitative assessments of teams is more accurate than W-L but if you wanna go with that there are more objective complex and valid fancystat systems that are probably more useful than some random writer's opinion on who is good or not with minimal emphasis on actual outcomes (losses).
|1 week 6 days ago||As long as he can still||
As long as he can still recruit and relate to young kids, I wonder, what's the downside of having an old coach if you're a Purdue? And Miles certainly has recruited successful and related to younger players.
If he fails, you'll fire him in 3-4 seasons before his age comes into play. If he succeeds, I mean, yeah, you've probably gotta replace him in 7 years or something when he retires but after a decent run of some sort and a better foundation and roster for the program are in place. And wouldn't a successful young coach at Purdue probably leave after a similar period of time for a better job anyway?
I can see it as an issue at an Notre Dame/LSU/Texas/Oregon that can afford to be picky and maybe hope to be able to retain a coach for 15-20 years if all goes well. THose are destination jobs, rather than stops on a career ladder job like a Purdue/NC State/Oregon State/Arizona etc. I guess to me, if I'm at Purdue and I've gone....3-29, ouch, in B1G games the last 4 years then I'd rather take a flyer on a Miles who won a ton of games in the SEC the last dozen years but is an old dude rather than take another shot at the latest MAC coach de jour. Even then, I mean, how many coaches have had their jobs for more than a decade or so? Stoops, Gary Patterson, Ferentz? That's about it. The days of coaches sticking around for 20-25 years are fading.
|1 week 6 days ago||Yep, this is the better||
Yep, this is the better analogy because Mack Brown was very successful over his tenure but definitely slipped at the end in culture and talent, perhaps even more so than 05/07 Lloyd. And Strong was never accepted just like RichRod, though obviously for different reasons.
Herman does have a stronger resume than Hoke, and that's probably because the behind the scenes forces at Texas are more of the insane-impatient-do-anything-to-win-now boo$ter types while the prevailing culture at M is less booster driven and more about the whole Michigan man obsession.
|1 week 6 days ago||Texas comes with more||
Texas comes with more pressure but building a juggernaut in the Big 12 is going to be way easier than the SEC West and fighting Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and the Mi$$i$$ippi schools. Texas has the tradition, better location, school etc. And definitely more money to throw at a coach. Not really seeing where TAMU is close to as attractive. USC maybe...but Helton's job seems safe now. LSU is a really good job, but still, I'd say Texas has the most appeal.
|1 week 6 days ago||Yeah, Strong was a co-DC, at||
Yeah, Strong was a co-DC, at least by title, with Mattison at Florida. I don't remember the specific year but it was around their first title in 2006 before Mattison went to the Ravens.
|1 week 6 days ago||Maybe. I've been reading||
Maybe. I've been reading various M message boards for a long time and I've read about how the PAC 10/12 sucked many times over the years. But we're 3-8 against the PAC 12 this century so I wouldn't get too cocky about the quality of the PAC 12. UW is a real good team. USC is playing extremely well right now. Colorado is pretty good, especially when Liufau is healthy. Utah, WSU and Stanford have some flaws but are still solid teams and the latter 2 have improved a lot during the course of the season. The B1G is probably better this year but it's hardly true that the PAC 12 is usually junk.
|1 week 6 days ago||I dunno man. If we'd played||
I dunno man. If we'd played them a month ago on a neutral field with Speight I feel like we would've probably won. Playing them in Columbus with O'Korn after the last 2 games has me pessimistic.
Love the advanced stats but they tend to be a bit flawed when it comes to factoring in injuries to some extent with the trends in plays. And home field is typically worth a FG or more.
Still think our defense is fantastic and better than theirs but if we can't pass the ball effectively we're going to need big plays either from Peppers or Chesson/Darboh/Evans or some turnovers on D.
|1 week 6 days ago||The most troubling part was||
The most troubling part was that he doesn't scramble forward or horizontally when he feels pressure, he goes backwards and then tries to dump it off or ground it. That's gotta be corrected because that might have worked at Houston against Memphis or Navy but it's going to result in an INT or a 20 yard sack against OSU. Gotta avoid huge negative plays. Felt more pronounced, probably because Speight is really good at that spin move and then exit the pocket quickly to the side and dump it.
|1 week 6 days ago||douche bag Marcus||
douche bag Marcus Hall
Senator was a cheater
Why poop in cooler?
|1 week 6 days ago||I guess this is the heart of||
I guess this is the heart of the disagreement. So you would put Oklahoma State in over Ohio State if OK State beats Oklahoma and wins the big 12? Their conference championship outweighs the fact that:
OK State has 2 losses at home to 6-5 Central Michigan and @Baylor (6-4). OSU has a loss @PSU (9-2). OK State would have wins @Oklahoma as probably their only top 15 win. Whereas OSU would have wins @Oklahoma, @Wisconsin, Michigan, and Nebraska among probable top 15 teams. So 4 good wins versus 1.
I can definitely see putting a PSU with the head to head and the same conference championship in or a 1 loss UW if they win out and add WSU and USC/CO wins. But at some point the records and SOS and quality of football have to matter or else we might as well invite Western Michigan and Boise State too. Because if you look at their OOC performance, it's pretty clear the Big 12 sucks.
|1 week 6 days ago||This is incorrect. Oregon||
Oregon did not pass TCU in the final pre-bowl rankings, they were always ahead of TCU near the end.
The 2 teams that did were OSU and Baylor. OSU due to wining the B1G and stomping WI. Baylor due to beating #9 KSU and their head to head win over TCU.
|1 week 6 days ago||There's a lot of variables||
There's a lot of variables and assumptions obviously. I think OSU probably is in. Clemson and Alabama in. Then the question is who is out between OSU, PSU and Washington (if 1 loss PAC 10 champ)? I think PSU gets in as champ of a conference with 5 fairly highly ranked teams. And then probably OSU but it is no slam dunk and I'm just guessing. I personally would put in OSU and PSU.
I guess my point is just that the 2014 TCU situation is different than this one.
And disappointing buckeye? Nice troll.
|1 week 6 days ago||People keep citing TCU but||
People keep citing TCU but that is apples and oranges.
TCU did not fall that week because they did not play in their conference championship. They fell because OSU annhilated Wisconsin in the B1G championship, FSU won the ACC, and Baylor grabbed their half of the Big 12 and impressed with a road win at #9 KSU. KSU being the only team that TCU beat all year, well, and #25 8-4 Minnesota I guess. All of those teams that passed TCU in the final rankings had the same or fewer losses than TCU. All of Oklahoma, Wisconsin, PSU, Ok St, Louisville, etc have more losses than OSU would have if they beat us and PSU wins the division. A 1 loss OSU with wins over WI, MI, OK, NE and a good loss to PSU getting passed over for 2 loss conference championships is different than a meh TCU team with a weak schedule and wins getting passed by other conference champs who had better schedules and the same (OSU/Baylor) or fewer (FSU) losses in 2014.
|1 week 6 days ago||Will be interesting to see||
Will be interesting to see how this game plays out. It's quite plausible that we wind up playing USC in the Rose Bowl if Utah beats Colorado. I think USC would beat WA again in the PAC 12 championship game, or WSU as well as they'd shred the Cougs defense. So they'd wind up as PAC-10 champs in the Rose Bowl and then with our QB play...
|1 week 6 days ago||This. Sparty's only offense||
This. Sparty's only offense was LJ Scott. That TOC was the one making the play was the #Fail part of the 2 point conversion, not the decision itself.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Everything you say is true,||
Everything you say is true, but he also went 114-34 at LSU. That's a 77% winning percentage over that period, which is better than that of 60 of the other 63 (Alabama, OSU and TCU) Power5 schools during the time he was at LSU. I don't know. That's a lot of winning. Quirky but well liked by fans, no major NCAA issues, hires good assistants. I mean, he's not who I would hire. He's probably not going to get hired by a Texas but I think he can get a job like UCLA or something that is clearly superior to Purdue.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||The only thing that 2014 TCU||
The only thing that 2014 TCU proved as a precedent was that head to head matters a lot. Past that, the TCU (1 loss) situation was different. The teams they were being compared to that passed them in the final poll- FSU, OSU and Baylor- all had 0 (FSU) or 1 loss. All were conference champions. The only head to head factor was Baylor-TCU which obviously played a major role there, in concert with Baylor improving their resume with a win at #9 Kansas State. So TCU falls behind an FSU team they were behind all year that had fewer losses. TCU falls behind an OSU team that won a CCG, improved SOS and destroyed Wisconsin (and yes the eyeball test does matter even if it isn't on your official critera). And they fall behind Baylor who tied them for the conference championship, regardless of how they frame the tiebreakers, had the same number of losses, comparable SOS but Baylor won head to head.
Those situations and comparisons are all much different than the ones in play here because of the extra loss PSU/WI have. And in particular for WI, because of the head to head loss to OSU for WI. Home loss too. I mean, I think there is a good chance PSU/WI would get in, perhaps even ahead of OSU, or perhaps both. But your precedent where a 1 loss team is ranked lower than an undefeated ACC champion, 1 loss B1G champ coming off a curb stomping and 1 loss Big 12 champ that had the head to head win over TCU doesn't fit this situation. TCU really had no compelling factors in its favor in those comparisons. OSU has 1 loss and PSU/WI have 2, OSU has the head to head on WI, and OSU probably has the best resume for wins/SOS.
|2 weeks 5 days ago||I think this is right. Not||
I think this is right. Not only does OSU have only one loss instead of 2 for Wisconsin but they have a win over Michigan, @Oklahoma, and obliteration of Nebraska. Whereas Wisconsin has wins over Nebraska, LSU and Penn State (in B10CG) with all 3 likely being very tight as I doubt they make enough explosive plays to stomp on PSU. Even assuming Alabama, Clemson and maybe a WI/PSU winner, how do you put in Louisville before OSU? OSU has the better wins, better ranking etc.
Where it gets really weird is if OSU beats us, but then PSU beats WI. What then for the B1G? PSU has 2 weaker losses with Pitt and while losing to us is a "good loss", the huge margin looks bad. But unlike Wisconsin, PSU can at least claim the head to head over OSU and the conference championship. Would that be enough to offset the extra loss? OSU wins the eyeball test for sure but I wouldnt be surprised if a committee stuck with a conference champion in that case. Which really...kind of shocking on several levels that PSU could be in contention.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||I don't see how Isaac doesn't||
I don't see how Isaac doesn't get a 5th year. I'm partial to Evans and Higdon as I like a little more explosiveness. But Isaac's got the most carries this year of any potential returning RB so I can't see him getting the firm handshake.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Totally agree. I mean, love||
Totally agree. I mean, love my fellow PiHi/U of M alumni, and kudos to Drake for working on coming back strong from an major injury. If he's doing it to take advantage of the team atmosphere, the educational opportunities and the physical/medical rehab resources available to the football team then more power to him. But with Isaac, Evans, Higdon, Kareem Walker, Kingston Davis, Kurt Taylor, AJ Dillon, O'Maury Samuels etc, it seems unlikely he'll be a significant factor next year. And then factor in the impact of the injury. Anyway, even though I doubt it makes on-field difference, good luck to him.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Quarterback. But yeah, RBs||
Quarterback. But yeah, RBs too. And probably DL, despite all of the losses, figures to be a good position group with less depth.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||Hill gone? Perhaps I've||
Hill gone? Perhaps I've missed something but isn't he a RS Junior?
|3 weeks 5 days ago||It varies. Depends on||
It varies. Depends on weather, what else is going on that day, and the quality of the games. I did watch a combination of AL vs LSU, UW vs Cal and the Nebraska beatdown in the evening games. I try to avoid watching 12 straight hours of football, especially if I am gonna watch NFL at all on Sunday.
|3 weeks 5 days ago||I love the 9AM games. Watch||
I love the 9AM games. Watch some football and the game is over by 1PM with daylight left to go do stuff outside. But I'm long past the staying out until 3AM on Friday night stage of life so YMMV.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Lost to a 3-6 team and fell||
Lost to a 3-6 team and fell only 3 spots. That seems a little generous to me. #SEC
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Pretty sure if you chill a||
Pretty sure if you chill a little and read the comments in the thread you'll see where I acknowledged Clemson has the better overall resume. I'd have Clemson 3, UW 4. Just saying it was their performance against NC State was indeed a crap game. And your post on Clemson's OT win being better because it was in regulation was a rationale based on incorrect facts.
No axe at all to grind. I live in Seattle, and so I see a lot of UW, but I'm fairly ambivalent about them. Michigan is my alma mater and the team I actually care about, but thanks.
Aside from that even, Washington is clearly either going to win out and be in the playoff, or lose a game and lose out in a beauty pageant to another 1 loss team, probably Louisville. That's the way these polls work, and why losing in November is worse than losing in Sept/Oct.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Yeah, they're good for a Sun||
Yeah, they're good for a Sun Belt team, hence their record. But their wins are Austin Peay, Southern Miss, New Mexico State, Idaho, Georgia State, South Alabama and UMass.
In the big picture, Troy should be a team that gets stomped by a CFP team. And Clemson should still be embarrassed about that game, even if it had been a 13 point win. One data point in a long season, but not a favorable one.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Definitely some schedule||
Definitely some schedule weakness for UW. But they'll play USC, @Washington St, and vs either Colorado/Utah/USC in the PAC 12 championship. Wouldn't be surprised if they lost but if they win they definitely boost their resume. Not sure their OL will hold up against some of these teams but we shall see.
@Utah is a good win. Thought we learned that last year.
You can definitiely make an argument for Louisville or OSU above them. Saying they shouldn't even be considered as one of what, 4 undefeated Power 5 teams in November for a 4 team playoff is pretty dumb frankly.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||? By regulation, do you mean||
By regulation, do you mean overtime? Because Clemson won 24-17 after 1 OT.
NC State is probably not quite as bad as AZ, but still.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Clemson also play poorly||
Clemson also played poorly against Troy. Troy's not horrible, but if you want to criticize WA for a weak win over AZ then that weaknesses in Clemson's season should factor in too, in addition to the NC State game. But whatever. Clemson has better wins with Louisville and @Auburn. Not sure I give them all that much credit for beating FSU given how FSU has played but still.
|4 weeks 3 hours ago||I think it depends. Like for||
I think it depends. Like for bowl selections or CFP or something, yeah, W-L should matter a lot. For assessing quality and estimating score lines, future performance etc I think it matters a bit less. Focus more on the other data. There's also a certain amount of randomness and luck in winning.
To me, LSU is pretty much Wisconsin. Some close losses to good teams. Top quality defense, too weak on offense to beat the best teams w/o turnovers. I guess Wisconsin has 2 losses instead of 3 for LSU but it's a thin margin. Change one single play in ~8 games, and have Wisky's kicker miss his 47 yarder against LSU and their loss totals are probably reserved. Pretty minor distinction IMO so I'd put them in the same group. Or put that game in Death Valley, usually a 6 point swing from home to away etc.
|4 weeks 5 hours ago||So...there are various tiers||
So...there are various tiers of teams? Seems pretty typical.
Nebraska isn't in that 2nd tier.
I don't think USC and Utah are great, but they're similar to PSU, Colorado, Oklahoma etc. USC definitely playing better now.
I'd probably argue for LSU in that second tier with close losses to 1.Alabama, @8.Wisconson, and @9.Auburn
Yeah, Wisconsin is probably tier 2. Tier 1 defense but they can't score enough to beat the other top teams unless they win turnovers decisively.
|5 weeks 6 hours ago||That might be a little||
That might be a little opimistic. We haven't beaten them more than 6* times in a row since they joined the Big 10 53 years ago. I expect we'll take over control of the series given the current program trajectories but it's probably going to be more like 7 out of the next 10.
*=Should be 8 from 2000-07 but for Sparty Bob's theft in 2001.
|5 weeks 12 hours ago||Hmmm. I'd rather take my||
Hmmm. I'd rather take my chances with Speight throwing out of a standard play/formation than having Morris throw deep, even if ithe latter does go against our prior tendency from that package.
|5 weeks 12 hours ago||I mean, I think we all agree||
I mean, I think we all agree that that happened today. I guess my thought is that the general pattern from Harbaugh is to destroy teams, go for 4th downs, be aggressive etc. So I don't worry about it on a recurring basis the way I did with some previous coaches who repeatedly lost games for that. There's more ruthlessness now, philosophically, so I'm a little disappointed...but not worried about how this played out being indicative of future problems.
In the end, after some time passes this will just be a win for us, and a turning point back to normalcy in the series.
|5 weeks 13 hours ago||Eh. They didn't play well the||
Eh. They didn't play well the last 3rd of the game and failed to put the game away at several key moments. Still, aside from maybe that one game where we beat bobby williams 49-3, MSU has pretty consistently overperformed in this game for the last 30 years so can't say I'm suprised.
|5 weeks 13 hours ago||Lloydball deja vu during 4th||
Lloydball deja vu during 4th quarter.
Speight was very good, despite the INT.
More Evans/Higdon, less Isaac por favor. Also, please, no matter of that Morris package.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||Briles||
The case for Briles getting another chance (will, not should) is pretty easy to make. There's a lot of evidence that people who are successful in athletics (or other walks of life for that matter) will get additional chances regardless of criminal or moral transgressions. For example:
Mike Tyson - Convicted of rape, prison time, returns to fight numerous high profile fights
Adrian Peterson - Child abuse, pleads to lesser count of assaulting his own 4 year old, and ran for 1500 yards the next year
Mike Vick - Two years in prison for his dog fighting ring, played for another decade after release.
Ruben Patterson - Convicted of attempted rape, jail, plays another ~decade in the NBA
Craig McTavish - Killed someone while drunk driving, later won the Stanley Cup
Leonard Little - Also killed someone while drunk driving, played another ~decade for the Rams.
Ray Lewis - Accused of murder, semi-rolled on his friends, and it was pretty clear all were involved. Played another 15 years and now on ESPN.
Floyd Mayweather - Convicted of domestic violence, later goes on to make a few hundred million.
There are others but that's the general idea. Briles was highly successful at school that was a doormat before he arrived. His failings were not criminal himself, but a failure to administratively handle his players' actions appropriately, which will make it a lot easier to get sell his redemption story someday.
People like him often get a 2nd chance, because there is always some place with enough desire to win that people will rationalize away any past transgressions due to the importance of winning. Just like those boosters are doing. Winning matters, for better or worse. See this story before many many times in athletics and other areas. It's similar in a lot of ways to the Paterno situation, and while most of us think PSU fans are crazy for revering that guy, the fact of the matter is that once the public outcry died down the sanctions were reduced and now they want to put up a statue again.
Anyway, his main problem is that he is kind of old. The script is for him to go to the NFL for a few years as an assistant or OC, wait until the outrage blows over and play the redemption story in 5 but he will be getting old. And you never know. But you can't rule out another chance so easily.
Not to say that I think this is right, just that it is the way it is. Same thing outside of athletics except that the equivalency for winning is usually making money.
|6 weeks 5 hours ago||We're #2.||
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Rutgers actually outgained||
Rutgers actually outgained them 382 to 320, had 23 first downs, but had 4 fumbles, which was the difference in the game. Any defense that gives up that many yards to an offense as putrid as Rutgers is going to be destroyed by us. Even at -34 I'd take that and throw a lot of money on us and maybe the over.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||1)He'll get a better job than||
1)He'll probably get a better job offer than Purdue given the expected list of jobs open
2)Killing it in the MAC isn't much of an indicator of future Power 5 success.
In fact, Hazell himself was hired after going 8-0 in the MAC in 2012. How did that turn out? Obviously Urban Meyer is a HOF coach but most of the rest of the guys who've come out of strong MAC programs in the last 30 years have flamed out after moving to Power 5 teams.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Maybe. I think that relies a||
Maybe. I think that relies a bit too much on sheer W-L records. Navy would have at least 3 losses if they'd played Ole Miss' schedule and Ole Miss would have 0 or 1 losses if they'd played Navy's weak schedule. S&P+ has Ole Miss as #10. Tough schedule with games at Florida State, at Arkansas and vs Alabama. Most of those games were fairly close, I believe they led in the 2nd half in all 3 games so they're getting credit for who they played and how they played rather than the record. Winning matters but context does too.
|7 weeks 5 hours ago||Seriously Herbstreit? Clearly||
Seriously Herbstreit? Clearly hit the ground while the DB didn't have control.
|7 weeks 7 hours ago||Wisconsin: 313 yards on 39||
313 yards on 39 plays for 8.0 yards/play in the first half
159 yards on 53 plays for 3.0 yards/play against us
Lots of credit from Fowler/Herbstreit being given to Wisconsin's improvement during the bye week. Occam's razor suggests that maybe it has a little bit more to do with our defense being really really good.
|42 weeks 5 days ago||You're right. I live in||
You're right. I live in Issaquah not Seattle. You got me.
No one is throwing anyone under the bus. I'm just recognizing that the career arc for most running backs, even all-pro ones, includes production that drops precipitously around age 30. Between that and has contract, everyone knew 2015 was his last year. As far as being easily replaced, yes, after watching 30 years of the NFL my opinion is that it is a league where wins are driven by QBs above all and defenses. Particularly DL. RBs are relatively disposible players and don't correlate that much to team success in the league. Marshawn himself didn't have much team success with the Bills or Seahawks prior to Russell Wilson. So it goes. See the string of anonymous RBs plugged in in New England for the last 15 years. I'm not trying to be negative in any way about Marshawn, really fun player to watch. Played so hard and will be missed. Fun dude. Key part of this team. But this day has been coming for a while and if you've watched the Seahawks on the regular, or been down to the VMAC much, I don't think you're that worried about how this affects the team on the field going forward.
|42 weeks 6 days ago||lol, no. Lynch was great but||
lol, no. Lynch was great but he's been injured a lot the past few years. He was their 3rd lead rushing and was the least effective of the 3 backs. This isn't 2012 anymore. The offense has already adapted and was frankly better with Rawls playing than with Lynch this year. Check the stats:
Rawls - 147 for 830 5.6 ypc
Wilson - 103 for 553 5.4 ypc
Lynch - 111 for 417 3.8 ypc
Michael - 39 for 192 4.9 ypc
Seattle was also 8-2 when Marshawn was on IR and 3-5 in games he played this year and that was against a 1st place schedule (they'll get a 2nd place schedule next year too). His best days were behind him and they're better off with a cheap option at RB and using that $ on OL or DL. I mean, Seattle might be 9-7 or whatever but if so it will be because they lose DL in free agency or because the OL is still terrible at pass blocking. Also, for all of the erratic offensive performances and some late game defensive breakdowns, they still led the league in scoring defense again for the 4th straight season, which is pretty amazing in the NFL. That's why theyve been good and why they probably will continue to be for at least a few more years.
Marshawn will be very much missed though just for his balls out style and his personality. Too bad the latter isnt as well known nationally but hopefully people at least caught the Conan appearances for some flavor.
|1 year 4 weeks ago||Pretty amazing that they were||
Pretty amazing that they were in the same 95 recruiting class. Thanks Mo! I would assume they will be the only NFL first ballot Hall of Fame pair to be in the same college recruiting class, but who knows?
|1 year 6 weeks ago||Refs||
So aggravating. Tons of terrible calls. Homefield disadvantage today.
Still waiting for the PI call on the 2 point conversion where Desmond was tripped. Sparty Bob the time keeper. So many historical officiating issues in this series.
|1 year 11 weeks ago||I can't believe so many||
I can't believe so many people are upvoting this Internet Tough Guy comment. Expressing a preference for 73 degrees rather than a blizzard does not make you soft, it makes you a rationale human who shares a pretty widely held preference for "better" weather. See the respective populations of Alaska and SoCal for confirmation of how widely held that opinion on weather is. Not soft...just better.
|1 year 12 weeks ago||MT||
I have the misfortune* of traveling to Dillon/Twin Bridges a few times a year for work. Our best spot in Dillon to date is the Lion's Den. Not a U-M bar but it is the closest thing to a sports bar in town and the food is fairly good relatively speaking. You can also occasionally see sports teams and their families there from the University of Western Montana, which is actually kinda fun. They've got a bunch of TVs and I am sure you could get them to put a michigan game on. Not sure if they'd be open at 10AM for a noon Eastern kickoff; I've only been there on weekday evenings.
*=Don't get me wrong, I like Missoula and Bozeman and some of the beautiful mountainous areas in Montana. But Dillon is a drab depressing town and Twin Bridges....lol.
|1 year 23 weeks ago||Really? Oakland as safer than||
Really? Oakland as safer than NYC? You'd rather walk anywhere in Oakland at any time of day than NYC or Detroit? Because statistically, Oakland has 3 times the violent crime rate of New York and the murder rate is even more disproportionate. So...I dunno. The facts don't fit that gut instinct. And as bad as Detroit is, there's not much seperation between it and Oakland. East Oakland may not be the worst area in America, but it is at least part of the conversation of least safe places to be.
|1 year 24 weeks ago||I hear ya. I lived out there||
I hear ya. I lived out there in Walnut Creek and Pleasant Hill. It's generic bland white suburbia. But as with everything, tradeoffs. It's only 32 minutes to Embarcadero on the BART from Walnut Creek so maybe 15 minutes further than Oakland 19th street. Roughly. And you can also get a nicer larger apartment for cheaper than Oakland and way cheaper than SF. Maybe I had friends who lived in Lake Merritt or bought houses in various parts of Oakland but none of them wanted to leave their houses, especially after dark. I'd live in Berkeley before I'd live in Oaktown. In your price range. Either live somewhere cheaper, save up and compromise, or go for the real deal and get an apartment and a roommate in SF. Oakland is a poor compromise on value vs. cost. You'll probably just wind up BARTing it into SF most of the time anyway.
|1 year 41 weeks ago||Yep, this is totally on||
Yep, this is totally on point. When I live in the Bay Area I lived in a relatively cheap area (Pleasant Hill) where you could get a house similar to the one she describes for maybe $700M nowadays. Rough guess. If you had an appraisal you would find the three bedroom house in Palo Alto would be valued at perhaps $200M perhaps but that the land would be worth $1.8MM in Palo Alto and $500M in Pleasant Hill. There is a lot of value in location and people pay top dollar to be in Palo Alto for whatever reason. That has value. A middle class family could not afford the option to choose between a moderate house in an insanely expensive area and a mansion in a much cheaper area. And rest assured, she could certainly have bought a $2 million home that actually is a mansion in parts of the South Bay or East Bay. And then she would not make this argument. It's only because the thing they own is the more intangible aspect of land or location value that she is not able to see it as the form of wealth it is. And it is a form of wealth, because you can sell it for an assload of money.
|1 year 42 weeks ago||Roy Williams? The guy with 2||
Roy Williams? The guy with 2 national championships, 7 final fours, 15 regular season Big 8/12 or ACC championships, 6 conference tourney championships, a 79% winning percentage and a 78% winning percentage at UNC? I mean yeah, his squads have been kinda disappointing for the last 2 years, by UNC standards, finishing 3rd in the ACC and "only" making the round of 32. He's a hall of fame coach and while he's had the resources of a top shelf school, he has also been killing it for 25 years. His resume is so far above and beyond guys like Alford or Crean etc that grouping them together is ridiculous.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||I would assume that his point||
I would assume that his point is that they did not have enough time to run 3 running plays from 2nd down on given the clock but by passing to the end zone and killing the clock on one of those plays they would be able to get in all 4 downs. If you run on 2nd down, you then call TO and then it's possible that after a failed 3rd down run you dont have time to reset and get off a 4th down play. That much is probably true but debateable as the time would be close. Of course, even if you accept that premise, you can call a run on second down, call TO and then pass on 3rd down so that you can have a 4th down play. Or even if you pass on the 2nd down, run a different play than that one. His point might be valid for the 3rd down play but you have to run Marshawn again on 2nd down. He gets a few yards on almost every play, in this game and in general.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Revis has a claim, and has||
Revis has a claim, and has done it for longer. Peterson isn't even close. Haden is very good but not as good as Sherman or Revis either.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Seriously? Nobody knew he||
Seriously? Nobody knew he was? You may not have known but folks who follow the NFL knew. Sherman was first team All NFL in 2012 and had a QB rating against of 44.9. In 2013 he had already been named to the Pro Bowl, as well as leading the league in interceptions at the time of the interview you mentioned. I think his QBR against was like 48.7 that year. Later named first team All Pro obviously. Obviously a pro bowler this year and will be 1st team All pro again. He's been the best corner in the game for the last 3 years and had been so for the 2 years prior to that interview.
Obviously Sherman is exceedingly brash and cocky but he does have the game to back it up. He's also one of the most articulate and entertaining athletes in the world and he's been on point with his criticisms of the NFL. And the NCAA too boo. And Skip Bayless.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Katy Perry, "Do your thang||
Katy Perry, "Do your thang Missy!"
Humanity is so doomed.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Yep. Even though we dont have||
Yep. Even though we dont have too many schollies, this is looking like a tiny class with some spots left over, especially after things shake out over the coming months with the inevitable attrition of injuries/transfers etc. After signing day, I wouldn't be surprised if we hear that we are adding a few more 2nd tier grad transfers from elsewhere. Basically just throwing a few warm bodies at next year and hoping that you get something out of it and there is no long term cost since it's effectively a one year scholarship. I'd rather we do that than tie up more scholarships in 4 year guys who are unlikely to play.
There is the financial cost too I guess but no big deal. And probably a wash as much of that $ would have gone to walk-ons if it was still open.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Obviously, he didn't turn||
Obviously, he didn't turn down Michigan because it would have pissed off his brother in law who went to OSU. Making career decisions based on your in-laws' opinion of a rival school rather than the career opportunity presented would make him a complete fucktard, and I highly doubt he's that dumb. He turned us down because Kentucky brought the dolla dolla bills. But then he leverages a fairly public rejection of Michigan's overtures into rah rah go buckeyes PR. Smart move for a guy who recruits Ohio, deals with Ohio coaches and will probably need to find a job somewhere near the state of Ohio after Stoops gets shitcanned in a year or two. I can definitely see how this guy would be a successful recruiter.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||As a sort of tangent, these||
As a sort of tangent, these 5th year transfers are one of the reasons why I am not as bothered by the burning of redshirts as some other people are. I mean I understand that some of the recent redshirts were burned for little in return and those may not have been wise. Some folks like many OL should redshirt. But with the 5th year transfer rule, you're also potentially risking losing whatever first year production you get from a player by banking it for that 5th year when the player can easily choose not be around. Not just in terms of contributing during games, but as far as leadership or being another practice player too. Redshirts still have value but it is less than it used to be now that 5th years are no longer under "team control".
|1 year 44 weeks ago||There's a lot in your post||
There's a lot in your post that I disagree with, but I'll just pick one thing:
Further, wealthier kids are far more altruistic. My poorer family thinks volunteering is a waste of time.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Indeed. Fail email, even if||
Indeed. Fail email, even if it was ostensibly internal in nature. Comes off as very immature. Brandon-esque. He seems more upset about the judges scoring in the Founders Cup that one year than he is about the destruction. Also, GPAs? That's lovely but not exactly on topic. Accountability is mentioned and yet the email itself has very little of it. We have blame passed to all media organizations that ran with the story, statements about how it was just a few bad apples, diversonary rah rah BS about how good they are in every other way. You take responsibility, you say you are investigating, you apologize, period.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Also lots of breweries.||
Bend >>>> South Bend. Lots of breweries in Bend. Deschutes, McMenamins, Boneyard, Worthy, 10Barrel, Apothecary, Crux, Solstice, etc. Maybe 25 breweries in the area. Very bad place to be if the goal is to stop drinking and go to bed.
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Recruits actually have to do||
Recruits actually have to do more than just play games. I mean, sure, some of them came to play football and not play school. Some do come to play school. But either way, you have to live in the place you play football/school. Ann Arbor and Michigan are great but tomorrow's forecast:
|1 year 45 weeks ago||Yep, the 2003 team was great||
Yep, the 2003 team was great and very talented. Better than the 2004 team IMO. 2003 outscored opponents by 255 points in regular season (+21 ppg) while 2004 won a lot of close games and only outscored opponents by 92 points (+8 ppg) during the regular season. That's two TDs/game better, pretty big difference. Atrocious special teams and occasional turnovers were the cause of losses against Oregon and Iowa that we definitely should have won. USC outclassed us but USC was clearly the best team that year and was robbed by not getting to play an LSU team that they would have killed.
The 2001 team was much different. Defense was quite good and the offense was just meh. Although they lost close games in a similar way to 2003, the level of competition was much worse as the B1G inferior to that of 2003. OSU was crappy in their first year until Tressel, PSU sucked and fricking Illinois won the confernce. And we just did not have the level of QB play as well as the playmakers at skill positions in 2001. Senior Navarre was so much better than sophomore Navarre. Love Marquise Walker but him + Ronald Bellamy + BJ Askew <<<< Braylon + Breaston + Avant + Chris Perry.
|1 year 45 weeks ago||It remains to be seen whether||
It remains to be seen whether or not they turn into a dynasty. That's premature. Sure, maybe a little bit over the top but it is also a reflection of people being enthusiastic about their team and hoping that the success can be sustained. Professional sports fans are starved for success around here. And while I am somewhat skeptical that anyone can have a dynasty given the parity in the NFL, the Seahawks are relatively young and have a lot of players under reasonable contracts. It will get tricky when they have to pay Wilson but they are still well positioned for the long-term. Especially in a league where the best quarterbacks of their generation are aging: Brees is 35, Brady is 37, Manning is 38.
I guess to each his own. I don't see anything resembling the Red Sox fans and outside of Seattle you don't see people biting on the Seahawks the way that they do the Red Sox/Yankees/Cowboys etc. The 12th fan I suppose may seem cheesy from the outside but the fans take pride in being the loudest stadium in the NFL and the high level of fan support. Not the worst thing in the world. Some of it is bandwagony, but it's that way everywhere. And it's an on-going thing that has been around a long time. They retired the 12 jersey in 1984 and it's been A Thing since well before the Hawks were good. It just wasn't noticed nationally because the team was not as prominent.
|1 year 45 weeks ago||Agreed||
Yeah, that's really annoying. I mean, it's ridiculous that a town be really excited about a team that won the Super Bowl. Especially a town that has a baseball team that hasn't made the World Series in its 40 years of existence, had a basketball team get sold and moved, and a football team that was was really bad for the first 25 years of its existence finally wins its first Super Bowl. So obnoxious. No other city's fans would ever be insufferable after winning a championship!
|1 year 45 weeks ago||Wilson exposed||
Whoops. There are so many LOL comments in this thread.
|1 year 47 weeks ago||$||
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that his friendships didn't really change much in the last week. Kentucky stepped up and paid him. Oh well, whatever.
|1 year 47 weeks ago||Re: $||
Granted that there are cheaper places to live in the Bay Area than Palo Alto but still it is like a factor of 8x for housing. I am very glad to no longer be paying for Bay Area housing...
|1 year 47 weeks ago||Re: Marrow||
Read the comments section below. Apparently the article was written as a contingency based on Marrow staying and then was published prior to his meeting with Harbaugh. So no actual info in spite of statements that indicate as much.
|1 year 47 weeks ago||Re: talent||
The roster distribution is really messed up right now. Early departures are the primary cause but Beilein has also tried to compensate with a quantitative solution of throwing bodies at the problem and hoping that some of these Plan C guys stick, because the qualitative response of bringing in high level freshman did not pan out in 14 and 15 classes. Hence those last minute fliers on guys like MAAR, Dawkins and Robinson.
As it stands right now, you have 7 or 8 guys who will be sophomores next year, depending on Wilson. And Wilson probably won't get a 5th year anyway as project big men who are minor contributors dont tend to get offered a 5th year. Robinson effectively has the same eligibility as those '14 recruits since he'll be a sophomore next year. There's just no way that you can keep all 8 of those guys all the way through 17-18 season. You can't have 8 of 13 guys in the same eligibility class, especially when none of them are particularly talented (Robinson may be a good shooter but if he were really talented he wouldn't have been in D3). Not saying that they'll be pushed out the door but the program will need some of those guys to leave and free up scholarships. Not worth worrying about too much, these things tend to work themselves out. A few guys will transfer because of playing time or whatever and there are always injuries or guys who decide they don't want to continue with basketball.
|1 year 47 weeks ago||Re: uhh||
Part of the problem is that they are young and trying to find their way. The even bigger problem is that they are just not that talented. Even worse, they are not talented and not big or long. This is a team of role players, or guys who can develop into role players. Not guys with a high ceiling. Nice kids I would assume and they'll develop into decent or even solid players with time. But after striking out on most of our primary recruiting targets in 14 and 15, and not getting a quality big in 13 (sorry Donnal), you have to be seriously concerned for the future. We have what amounts to an 8 man 2014 class once you throw in Donnal and Robinson since they will have the same eligibility. And there really is not too much skill or athleticism amongst those 8. Beilein can coach and I have no doubt he can turn these guys into an 9 seed at 21-12/10-8 or something like that by next year. But talent matters too, especially if we are gonna talk about conference championships or Final Fours, it's gonna take some better players. Don't see much out of this 14 group and the 15 recruiting looks like it is headed for a flameout too. It's an absolute necessity that we bring in some serious talent in 16 class.
|1 year 48 weeks ago||Re: Kelly||
Yep. Additional background:
The 49ers are certainly the most attractive job open if Kelly were to get out of Philly, which is a bit ironic since this situation sounds fairly similar to what happened there with a front office schism.
|1 year 48 weeks ago||CA/MI||
CA does have a higher state income tax but the numbers aren't even close to that. Marginal rate above ~ half a million is 12.3% so about 3x that of Michigan. Still, 8% of $8MM is only $640 so if you gross that up $750M or so you wind up at about the same after tax number. Of course, there may be ways around those taxes...but that's another topic. Even at $9 million in CA your after tax income is above $8 millon in MI.
Where the Bay Area is much worse is the cost of housing. It varies a bit by where you are but if you want a baller mansion, especially in SF you would pay way more than you would in Ann Arbor. I mean even general housing in SF is what, maybe 4 times the price of what it would be in Ann Arbor. I mean you can go East Bay or somewhere way out or whatever but you'll pay in one form or another.
|2 years 9 weeks ago||DB||
Too bad for her, apparently his noodle is gigantic!
|2 years 9 weeks ago||Re: Hoke||
Why shouldn't the Regents fire a head coach? Particularly in a situation in which the A.D. has just been relieved of his duties? Certainly, firing him for his shortcomings as a football coach is a matter that should be handled by the A.D. through normal performance review processes. But compromising the integrity and the reputation of the school/program and endangering player safety are plenty of cause to intervene. I'd argue the failure to act would be a breach of their duty if you believe that Hoke has compromised the school's integrity. Also, the head coach falls under the A.D. in some org chart but for practical purposes he is one of the leading public figures at Michigan and when his conduct is so poor that he and the University are under intense scrutiny by mainstream media then the situation has risen to a Board level issue.
|2 years 9 weeks ago||Brandon||
This one is pretty much entirely on Hoke. Hoke is toast and for all of his flaws, Brandon is aware of how this plays out for Hoke. I wouldn't expect Brandon to do anything except to try to save his own ass at this point. That means talking to the $ men/regents/presidents and finding out if it is viable to let Hoke finish the season before letting him go. Brandon will be reactive rather than proactive and make his decision based on what the other stakeholders force him to do. Brandon is nothing if not a man of practicality rather than principal. His play is probably to let Hoke stand up and take the heat, tell Hoke to apologize for making a mistake, have Hoke talk about how much he cares about his players and continue his pathetic claim of ignorance that Morris had a head injury. Hoke will claim he was aware of Morris' leg injury but did not see the concussion symptoms. It's not a credible position; but the alternative is to admit that he knowingly threw Morris back in the came after sustaining and that admission would have to result in a firing (or indefinite suspension that ends in a firing). So Hoke stills to his incompetence over negligence excuse. Brandon will also announce new policies regarding concussion processes and player protection and instigate an investigation. The results of the investigation will be released at some indistinct later date after the furor has died down. It will be done by press release rather than a press conference.
Or...if you want to be more cynical...Brandon throws Hoke under the bus. This makes Brandon look, to outsiders, like he is taking a strong ethical stand on player safety. It also allows him to put in motion the search for a permanent replacement immediately while he is still employed as the athletic director. Thereby making it a bit more difficult for the Regents to fire him. Harder to fire the guy who "protected the players." and makes it more difficult to have a schedule that would require going through an AD search process prior to conducting the coaching search process. Thereby he retains decision making power over who the next coach is to the greatest extent possible. Maybe. He might still get shit canned too. But it's less likely than it would be if he sticks with Hoke. It's at least one way to play it. Every man for himself as this ship sinks quickly.
|2 years 10 weeks ago||Re: Hoke||
The part about coming to us in our hour of need and taking the job without taking about the money is a pretty generous way to describe it. Sorry, the guy did not bring us puppies and hugs after grandma died or even help us move a couch. He took a job that was a vastly superior position in his profession to the one he held previously. His new job paid millions of dollars more per year than his old one. I don't doubt that it is his dream job or that he is a decent enough person but his choice to take the choice was hardly some charitable or magnanimous act. It was a no-brainer career decision. He was the head coach at fricking San Diego State. I mean, come on.
As far as the money, he was always gonna get paid a shit ton of money at Michigan and a hell of a lot more than he made at San Diego State. He is making $4.1 million this year. I mean, even if we assume that "aw shucks I didn't agree to the salary before taking the job" story is true, everyone involved knew at the least that he was gonna make a lot more bank than the $700k/year that San Diego State was paying him. So yeah, maybe he took the job without knowing whether he was gonna make 4 times what he made before or 5 time or 6 times. But everyone knew it was a raise that was gonna mean at least an extra million per year.
I don't really think it sucks all that much for him. He got to have his dream job for four years. He had tons of resources at his disposal to have an opportunity to succeed. He got paid, enough to never work again if he chooses. He'll be fired and that's that but overall getting his shot and $$$ is really not such a bad outcome. I am vastly more sympathetic to the players who have to go through more turmoil and to the current students who are increasly disconnected from the football program due to the emphasis on $ over loyalty and the lack of on-field success.
Whatever. Hopefully they get the next hire right and that it doesnt drag out like The Process.
|2 years 12 weeks ago||Not sure that one bad year||
Not sure that one bad year actually constitutes a failure. Carroll was fired because his team finished the season poorly after starting 6-5. OK. But one season is a pretty short leash and limited data. Also, when you consider that that was a mediocre roster that went 4-28 over the next two years after Carroll, I'm not sure that one 6-10 season looks so bad.
|3 years 29 weeks ago||Wrong Game||
I don't know how much football talent he has but he has no future in rap. Dude makes Soulja Boy look like Nas in comparison to Datbull 4 Life.
|3 years 30 weeks ago||Stonum||
You give a guy a second chance, not because you necessarily expect him to take advantage of it, but because helping college age men grow into productive adults who are responsible, learn from their mistakes, and don't have problems with drugs/alcohol is important. It's too bad that Stonum didn't take advantage but it was still a worthwhile risk to take even if it didn't work out. There are limits to what you can do, of course, but giving up on a person too soon can also be a missed opportunity to help someone. I thought Hoke handled that one just fine. Ditto Hagerup. Opportunities to come back but a severe season long punishment sounds right to me.
|3 years 30 weeks ago||Recruiting||
As a side note, this leaves us with one less scholarship for this class since Hagerup effectively becomes a redshirt junior for 2013 rather than a senior and will now be on the 2014 roster. Assuming that he does not screw up again and that he is retaining his scholarship status.
|3 years 30 weeks ago||Phones||
I understand it is crazy to text/call during an interview.
But I'm not about to leave my $500 phone with all sorts of info and data on it in my car when there are hundreds of thousands (or millions?) of phones being stolen every year in this country. Employers expect you to protect their property, proprietary and sensitive info and in fact my employer has policies about phones and laptops. For example, if I leave my hotel room to go eat dinner I am supposed to have my laptop attached by a security cable or in a safe to protect it. In turn, I am going to protect my property and data and keep my phone in my pocket where it is more secure than it is in my car. Of course it will be turned off and unused during an interview.
|3 years 30 weeks ago||Kings||
It's pretty clear that regardless of whether the Mastrov/Ranadine group or the Hansen group winds up owning the team it is going to be sold. Neither the Maloofs nor their front office is going to have anything to do with that team for much longer so that is not a concern at all. But yeah, the players on the team are not an ideal group to be around for Trey.
|3 years 31 weeks ago||OSU||
I'm not sure how they are going to score at an efficient clip. I mean they will be a good team and maybe a great defensive team but without Thomas they don't really have too many guys who can score much on their own. We'll see. Maybe Ross steps it up. Or perhaps Scott or Thompson.
I think most folks will have MSU, U of M and Indiana predicted ahead of them anyway. Iowa is debateable I guess but I like them a lot for next year. They return basically everybody and they lost a lot of close games this year, 7 games by 4 points or less so they may have been better than their record indicated. Kenpom even has them finishing as #23 with their NIT run.
|3 years 31 weeks ago||2014...||
I would imagine the preseason polls will have the B1G order as something like:
|3 years 31 weeks ago||Frequency...||
That's not really true. If you play 8 games with a 14 team league then you play 6 division and 2 non-division games every year. Which means that you do play every single team every 3.5 years so with a 4 year player's career they would see every other school. The only way you don't see all of the other teams in 4 years if you repeat home and away with schools over 3 years rather than just playing one or the other and then playing different schools the next year.
It is true that you would not travel to other schools during each players career you wind up only playing 4 road games against those 7 teams in 4 years so they never get to visit 3 of those other 7 schools. Though I can't think of a reason that not visiting another campus really matters as they don't do much more than play and hang out at the hotel on road trips.
|3 years 31 weeks ago||Each team...||
That doesn't quite add up. We play 3 games a year against the other division so 63 games in 21 years. You have us only playing 61 games.
Let's see, from the Purdue perspective they play only 2 games each year against the other 6 teams in the other division [since 1 of their 3 non-division games is tied to Indiana]. So 1 in 3 years we will be playing against Purdue so 7 in 21 years. But there are two leftover games. I believe that just means that we will play 9 against 4 of those teams in a 21 year cycle and 10 against 2 of those teams.
I think the way it will work is that they schedule out Purdue and Indiana in 3 year cycles and then repeat with the home games flipped away. Then you start filling in the other teams randomly or whatever but because of the Purdue Indiana thing you will start to repeat 2 of the 3 teams that you played in Year 1 in Year 3 but will not see the 4th team that you played in Year 1 until Year 4. I think. Might have to fire up Excel to verify but expansion will change it again anyway. The actual frequency of playing each of the other 6 teams should be 4/9ths of every years. Take 6 teams * (4/9) = 24/9 + (3/9)ths for Purdue = 27/9 = 3 games a year. So it is like a 9 year cycle. Or really an 18 year cycle if you count home and away in even quantities. I think. We play Purdue 6 times in 18 years and play the other 6 teams 8 times in 18 years. That adds up. So a home game against Purdue every 6 years and a home game against Nebraska (or the other teams) every 4.5 years.
|3 years 31 weeks ago||MSU||
I don't think Izzo and MSU are on the decline although I certainly think that things are more competitive now. I think what Izzo really did was take advantage of a lull when we were down, Indiana was no longer able to get top guys under Knight, OSU was not as good as they are with Matta etc. Had that very successful 3 year period from 99-01. The competition is better now and they won't have a run like that again. But they can still be a good team/program.
As you look at their roster though, you see a real good team next year. But I don't see much after 2014. Payne and Appling will be gone. Probably Harris goes pro after next year as he can be in the lottery. Dawson may turn into a scorer but besides that I don't know that guys like Trice, Valentine, Costello, Guana, Byrd etc have really shown much. Then these other 2 new guys who were clearly Izzo's plan B. They're young and they'll develop but their freshmen and sophomore and recruits don't catch your eye and make you think they will ever be first team all-B1G or anything. On the one hand, you can play young guys right away and reload quickly these days, as our team shows, but looking at their roster it also looks like their talent necessitates having a killer class in 2014 unless they want a dropoff over the next few years. Huge recruiting pressure for them in this class.
|3 years 31 weeks ago||Heathcote 2.0||
Izzo is way better than Heathcote. Heathcote won ~53% of his B1G games and won exactly half of them if we exclude tthe 2 years with Magic. Izzo has won like 70% of his B1G games and while Michigan's troubles certainly helped him build MSU up he's still way above the level they were at before. Even now, with us on the rise they are a top 10-15 caliber team. You're either shortchanging Izzo or else forgetting how much mediocrity Sparty had under Heathcote. Probably the latter. In the 80s Heathcote's Big 10 record was better than 10-8 just 1 time in 10 seasons and they went 6-12 or worse for 5 of those 10 seasons. There was a lot of bad Sparty basketball in between Magic and Mateen Cleaves.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||Ryan Evans...||
Reggie Evans was a grit/rebounding/defense type power forward for Iowa back in the day who managed to scrape out a surprisingly long NBA career for a guy with limited offensive skills.
Ryan Evans is a FT jump shooting Badger who takes a ton of shots for a guy who is bad at shooting the basketball.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||4||
It's true that most college teams only have 1 big but I am not sure that I view having 2 as creating a poor matchup. Matchups go both ways. If another team is playing only one big then that means that either McGary or Morgan can post up and rebound against a non-big. That's a huge advantage for us on offense though it obviously presents a challenge on D for McGary.
A lot of this discussion is general and about total minutes but in reality matchups, foul trouble and injuries are really going to decide this and it will vary by game. If say one of Irvin/Stauskas/LeVert were injured then you have to go big. Or if McGary is in foul trouble then you go small because you can't play 2 of the other bigs since they are not skilled enough. If you are playing the new look Pitino-pressing-Gophers then you go small for ball handling but if you are playing Sparty and don't want to get killed on the glass then you go big. Etc etc.
In an ideal world I think it would be great if you could mix in the zone. But I think again we are looking at a lineup with 9 of your 11 guys being Freshmen or Sophomores. Until they put in the time to really be better at man to man and to be stronger and more physical I think your practice time is better spent towards perfecting your base D instead of learning zone.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||Minutes||
I think you will see a lot of tall ball. Partly this is a function of roster construction. With Morgan, Horford, McGary and Bielfeldt you are cramming 4 guys into one position if you stay small and then 7 guys for the other 4 spots. I also have a sneaking suspicion that playing these guys at 3/4 may have been agreed to by the coaches as an inducement to get them to come back for another year. As far as spacing, you can still do a lot of the things that we do with I do think it is essential that McGary hit that 12 foot jumper if he is going to play the 4 but I think he has shown some flashes that he can do that. And pass out of the post. It does put a lot of pressure on him but he has the skills to make it work. So much of what we have been doing the last few years anyway is just ball screen stuff and that can still happen with tall ball.
Rebounding is also a big part of this and that did not come up much in this article except the point about OSU having everyone rebound. Well, that is part of how the lineups and the hope for defensive improvement tie together. A higher DREB % will be one of the ways we can improve our D and the bigger lineup should offer that. Basically we are trading Morgan's rebounding for Stauskas'/Irvin's rebounding. We finished 7th in the B1G in OREB and 8th in DREB in conference play and we all saw Behanon abuse GR3. Even if our eFG D is not much better we can be a better defensive team if we limit 2nd chances.
Not too worried about GR3's low usage and stepping up into a bigger role. He was very efficient in what he did do and Burke and Hardaway were taking over half of the shots anyway. He was not assertive because he didn't really need to be but I think he still has the game to maintain that efficiency even with higher usage.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||2/3||
Well we have two open spots so he could add one player and still have room for McLimans. We need practice players too. This is McLimans looking for playing time.
We're fine for 2013 at the 2/3 with Irvin, LeVert, Stauskas and GR3 at the 2/3. More guys than minutes, barring injury. You can assume that GR3 is leaving after this year for roster purposes but even still the solution to that is to add a Booker caliber 2014 2/3 rather than a last minute guy who is a role player like we did with LeVert last year.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||Stauskas/Irvin||
We can play Irvin at the 2 and Stauskas at 3 when GR3 slides to the 4 and we go small for short periods of the game. Or when GR3 is on the bench. However, for the 20+ minutes that GR3 is on the court and playing the 3, per Beilein's own comments, then yes Stauskas/Irvin will both be playing the same position at SG. Not sure why this was upvoted since it is incorrect, at least for the majority of the 2013-2014 season.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||B1G - ACC||
I'll bet you a shiny penny that we are @Syracuse. A Final Four rematch with the home court tilting the storyline towards a chance for the Orangemen to get revenge for that loss.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||Yeah...||
I think mostly we are in agreement. My guess is that Beilfeldt only gets in during garbage time or if someone is injured or in foul trouble but that will happen. I'd save Donnal's eligibility if he is only going to get a sprinkling of time and redshirt him.
Basically, you are seeing LeVert get more minutes in a smaller type lineup with GR3 at the 4 versus having more minutes with Morgan/Horford on the court at the same time as McGary. I hear you and I think you'll see some of both depending a lot on matchups. You go big against Sparty probably for example so that they don't slaughter us on the boards but against the press that MN will now play you use LeVert more and play with GR3 at the 4. Foul trouble and injuries will affect lineups. And there will also be situational stuff where you go small with a lead at end of game for ball handling and FT shooting or big for defense and rebounding.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||5th Year||
Agree with this for the most part. Attracting a 5th year will be tough too. I still think that if you can get a 5th year then maybe you take one. Even if the guy just sits on the bench, it gives you a practice player and perhaps some leadership skills. Also, yeah there really aren't minutes if guys are healthy. Probably one injury even doesn't matter as minutes would go to LeVert or just different lineups but it provides some insurance in case you are unfortunate enough to have two injuried guys. All you are really losing by doing so is the scholarship money so there is little downside. There's gotta be some combo guard who avged 8 points a game in the MAC or Horizon and would be willing to mostly ride the pine in exchange for the chance to be on a B1G team that made it to the Final Four last year and has dreams of doing so again this year.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||2014||
One thing I really like is that this is a bigger lineup. Our PGs remain 6 footers but all of your 2/3 guys are now 6'6" with Stauskas/Irvin/GR3. Then you've got two legit sized bigs when McGary is on the floor. With size and athleticism, I really expect to see the best rebounding team that we've had under Beilein.
I expect GR3 to be assertive and a first team all conference player. You could see the skill in games where he showed out like South Dakota State. Next year he'll have to be more aggressive.
I think the main concern is shot creation off the dribble with a finishing threat. We've got shooters and to some extent GR3 and Stauskas and even occasionally McGary can take it to the rim. All need to work on their finishing. But will Walton, and to a lesser extent Irvin, be able to create penetration and then kick it out for 3s? If so then we will be really good. Albrecht can shoot and can penetrate but I'm not sure he'll be able to finish off the bounce that much which means that people will not help to him. Need a guy who can finish and force help and then hit the open man.
This team is one, especially if Stauskas puts in the effort, that can be better defensively. We'll miss Burke obviously and Hardaway but it will probably be easier to make up for their losses on offense if we have more active defenders.
Can't wait until the season starts.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||Minutes||
These are the positions they will play in the league so both are probably cool with this. I'm not too surprised. There were some serious tradeoffs with rebounding and defense that the typical Beilein lineup tried to offset with ball handling and shooting. But as the talent level rises those compromises become less necessary. It was obvious that physical teams gave our small lineup a lot of problems. If Beilein has proven anything it is that he is able to adapt and be flexible. Showed it in changing assistants and in recruiting and in moving to man to man and now in going bigger. GR3 losing the rebounding battle to Behanon in the 2nd half showed the limitations of this lineup.
Also I think that this recognizes that with the current roster construction without Burke/Hardaway has a lot of bigs. If you play GR3 at the 4 with Donnal you have Beilfeldt, Morgan, Horford and McGary all playing at the 5. We'll still see smaller lineups sometimes when McGary is out of the game.
Winner is clearly Morgan as he now can start at the 5 and get his 20-25 minutes. On the other hand, hard to see where Caris fits in for next year if Irvin is as good as advertised and everyone is healthy.
Bearing in mind that Beilein's starters traditionally avg over 30 minutes I think we will see something like:
Walton 25/Albrecht 15
Stauskas 30/LeVert 5/Irvin 5
GR3 20/Irvin 20
McGary 30/GR3 10
Morgan 25/Horford 15
I suspect Walton starts at about 20 minutes but will be up to 30 by the end of the season. I think you redshirt Donnal and go small when McGary is out. Can't play of 2 of Morgan/Horford/Bielfeldt simultaneously as there is not enough skill there. But I guess the choice between Donnal at the 4 and sliding GR3 back there in a small lineup all depends on how good Donnal is. I have a sneaking suspicion that you are better off going small and having Stauskas/Irvin on the floor at the same time rather than Donnal on the floor.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||Culture||
The university's culture may not change but the 10 year ban and disassociation ends a month or two. The new president/administration will not be restricted by that NCAA ruling.
Also, the president may well be an outsider or even if it is an insider it will probably be someone who wasn't very involved on the athletic side of the school. So the perspective will likely be different. Time heals all wounds etc etc. MSC was around since 2002 including the end of the investigation, the sanctions period when other athletes suffered for other people's transgressions and the period during which the program was struggling which a lot of people blamed on those 4. Those experiences would likely shape her views in a way that is probably less favorable to a reconciliation than would be the perspective of someone new who hadn't been around during that period. The scandal will probably be less personal and more historical for the new President.
|3 years 33 weeks ago||Hardaway||
Actually his FT shooting was down a couple % points and he got to the line a lot less often. And while his total assists was up, his assist rate was actually down from 14.2% to 13.0% this year. That reflects a lot of other buckets for Stauskas/McGary/GR3 that were being created by Burke. Anyway, Hardaway pretty much had the same season as last year except that he shot 37% from 3 instead of 28%. All of the other differences in Hardaway's final line are pretty minor differences.
|3 years 33 weeks ago||Most Improved||
Yep. Hardaway was better than last year by a hair but the truth is that Burke was the most improved player. With 6 freshmen eligibles and 2 seniors who didn't play much that really only left Burke, Hardaway, Morgan and Horford. Morgan was injured and less effective when he did play this year. I can understand giving it to the less deserving Hardaway over Burke I guess just because Burke had already won every POY award on the planet. To me, even though his year was more of an injury comeback than an improvement, Horford would have been a worthy choice for that one because at least he played and contributed this year, unlike last year.
|3 years 33 weeks ago||Irvin||
He looks like a 2/3 naturally. He doesn't seem quite as muscular or athletic or GR3 and even GR3 had some definite matchup and rebounding shortcomings.
But where the suggestion of Irvin playing out of position at the 4 gets serious is if GR3 leaves. In particular, what if Hardaway stays and GR3 leaves? Then you've got Hardaway, Stauskas and LeVert at the 2/3 but the 4 is real iffy. Donnal has the closest skillset to the ideal Beilein 4 but is he good enough to play major minutes, especially as a freshman? If he is OK, but if not then your choices are either an undersized Irvin playing out of position at the 4 or going with two bigs and McGary at the high post while Morgan/Horford/Bielfeldt try to set tons of screens and get boards. Would be a better rebounding team but you lose skill if those guys are getting more minutes. Tricky.
Or what if McGary and GR3 both left? I don't think you can go with 2 of Bielfeldt, Morgan and Horford on the floor simultaneously as there is just not enough offensive skill. So again it gets down to Donnal versus Irvin at the 4. Donnal fits the position better but Irvin is almost certainly the better player and more useful on offense. Actually, they might both have to play some at the 4. At that point, we are starting to get thin if those two are gone.
Really this is not so much about Irvin as it is about whether GR3 (+ McGary) comes back. And then it is also about either finding a true stretch 4 who can play Beilein's offense but also has the size/athleticism to defend and rebound better than some smaller guys have in the best. Or whether Beilein adapts again and goes big. Or whether we sacrifice on the defensive end/boards at the 4 to get the best players all on the floor. Hopefully GR3 comes back and makes this all moot.
|3 years 33 weeks ago||3||
Best of luck to him. He's going to be the first M player in quite a while who is not a fringe NBA guy and I look forward to seeing him play in the NBA. As much as I would love to see him play in a Michigan uniform again, this is clearly the best decision for Trey.
|3 years 33 weeks ago||Yep||
I was just thinking, Congress and Lobbyists or the NCAA and Compliance Officers? Which is the bigger incestuous cesspool?
|3 years 33 weeks ago||Tressel||
He's not going to say jack about OSU violations or anything about that.
Ask him what he thinks about the NCAA concept of "amateurism" and the O'Bannon lawsuit? It would be hilarious and ironic if he sided with the Emmerts of the world.
The stories suggestion is a good one. He won't be telling any OSU recruiting stories but I wouldn't be surprised if you can get him to tell some funny recruiting stories about other things. Ask him if he has heard anything about all of the rumors about Ole Mi$$.
If you really want to be ballsy, get a pic of Clarett from the 2002 MNC game and ask him to autograph it.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||NBA||
I don't think that you can criticize anyone for choosing the NBA versus college. I do think that you can judge the timing of that decision as well as the assessment of how likely they are to be drafted. We've seen several Michigan players like Darius Morris, Manny Harris, Sean Higgins etc make the decision to go early, not get picked in the first round w/ a guaranteed contract and then not stick long or make any impact in the league. If the ultimate goal is to have an NBA career, sometimes you are better off waiting. Trey coming back probably flipped him from a 2nd round pick to a lottery pick. Every year there are guys who go pro and do not get drafted and never play a game in the league. Nothing wrong with wanting to go to the league but there are only a limited number of spots available and a lot of guys are out of the league by 25.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Pitino||
A lot of times with the zombie movies you don't really get the whole backstory about how the zombies came to be. I guess the unspoken assumption that we are all just supposed to make is that Rick Pitino:Zombies::Adam:Mankind.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Last Minute||
Yep, that was part of the problem. Love Beilein but once Caris stepped on the baseline it immediately became a foul situation. Would have liked to have seen a TO there to communicate the strategy to the team as they did not foul very quickly. At the least, he has to sub out Burke on D there for Spike because Burke has 4 fouls. Then Burke back in with the free throws. I really don't know why he was not substituting Burke out on D in the last 50 seconds as he could have subbed in offense with each Ft. Definitely cost us time as Burke did not want to pick up his 5th. Some other guys though were not as quick to foul as they could have been.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Block was clean||
Perspective is good.
Perspective also makes me nervous because it is 20 years since we've been to the championship game and 24 and counting since we won. All of the comments about the program rising and how fun this run is and how impressive the VCU-Kansas-Florida-Syracuse string of wins was are true. It was great. But at the same time these opportunities are pretty rare and it's hard not to feel like a national championship slipped away. We were very very close a national championship. We were at 75% win probabilitiy with that 12 point lead. For me at least, the wallowing in self-pity stage will need to last a bit longer before I can move into the magnanimous appreciation state.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Also...||
The absolute most disgusting thing about "amateurism" in college sports is that the unpaid players who generate the fan interest and money all have to sit up there and answer the questions from the media after they lose. But god forbid that the officials who make six figure salaries ever have to go up there and be grilled by the media about their performance. We would absolutely never want to hold them accountable or anything. I would love to hear an explanation for about 50 calls in this game. Some are subjective but a lot of the stuff like the goaltending or McGary's kick ball or Burke's block were obviously incorrect at game speed. I really want to see Mike Higgins getting grilled about all of his missed calls that he gets paid to make correctly.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Refs||
Officiating was terrible. I've never seen such a significant game so poorly officiated. From the goaltending to Burke's 2nd foul to Burke's fast break block to Robinson's jumper to McGary's obvious kicked ball...it just went on and on. More calls went against us than for us. It sucks but it will never be changed. The missed foul on Hancock's 4th was huge. We also were so close to getting several of their guys with a 4th or 5th but could never get the calls.
Once again I think the big picture question is how is college basketball going to be officiated. The scrums on the rebounds and the over the back was insane. There were a few Louisville possessions at the end where they rebounded their misses and both teams were just fouling the living shit out of each other. It's a joke. The officials failed to set the boundaries by calling the fouls early and it led to more ridiculously physical play. Once again college basketball proves that if you can get away with overly physical play. It's not basketball; it's fouling. I think it is much more of a big picture question than just a problem with this game. They need to clean it up and swing the pendulum back to skill rather than physicality.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||97||
He was offered the Celtics job and a really big pile of money. Think it was like $75 million for a decade or something. At that point he'd just been to two straight national championship games with Kentucky and had little to prove as a college coach but still obviously had dreams of being successful (and rich) in the league. He wasn't.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Pitino||
Not really sure why you'd associate Pitino with Calipari. They've never worked together, it's pretty well known that they don't like each other:
Pitino should have kept his snausage in his pants and he has some other not so attractive characteristics. but he doesn't have anywhere near the rep of Calipari as far as being a douchebag, breaking amateurism rules and leaving his schools as the NCAA probation/forfeiture hammer is about to drop.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Pitino||
This story has been around unofficially since it happened although I think it was only in the past few years that Pitino added the part with his wife preferring Kentucky to the public narrative. Although it was widely suggested that she was why they went back to Kentucky even though people said that he could not take the Louisville job at the time given that he had been the coach at Kentucky. Previously, the story was just that he was going to go to Michigan but called to talk to Martin and Martin was MIA playing squash or something. Maybe he would have gone to Louisville no matter what but you have to wonder how Martin could let him bail without at least upping the offer and trying to talk him into going to Michigan. I mean, I like Beilein a lot more as a person but Pitino's at his 7th Final Four...
|3 years 34 weeks ago||One game||
Jordan Morgan with some key plays.
Burke, Stauskas and Hardaway go 5 for 29 and we won. Amazing.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Recruits||
They missed on Albrecht. He's probably not who you'd want as a starting PG in the B1G in the long-term. But he certainly is good enough to be at least a role player. Which means that he is good enough that he should have had better offers than Appalachian State which is pretty low on the D1 ladder. He should have had some interest from at least MAC or Horizon league caliber teams.
McGary, you can see that his motor is just off the charts. The impressive thing to me has been the little 10'-12' jumper that he is flashing as well as how good he is at driving from the top of the key. His defensive ability to create steals and his passing too in the open court. His game is pretty well rounded and with him now in shape he looks a lot more like the 5 star #2 or #3 ranked recruit as he was ranked at one time than the #30 type he would up as. Underrated.
GR3 was probably rated correctly. He's too deferential at this point but the athleticism is excellent and he has a pretty smooth jumper and he can drive too. The SDSU game is a nice example of what he can do. I really hope he comes back and becomes an assertive player because he could wind up being a really high draft pick and make a big difference in how good next year's team is.
Stauskas is about right. He really is a great shooter. I'm not sure how much more upside there is to his offensive game as he doesn't have 5 star type athleticism. But he will still improve and he can become a much better player if his defense improves.
LeVert seems underrated to me. I know some folks don't like his game and his frame is so small. But he is quick and has long arms. Plays hard. Like his handle. Obviously he is overwhelmed and the redshirt probably would have been a good thing but this is our year so you had to play him. He's scored a ton in HS. Not a top 100 talent but he was a late bloomer who should have been attractiing more attention.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Calipari||
No. Not even close. If you ever get a chance to talk to someone in major college basketball, or someone connected in the AAU circuit or certain people who work for Nike in a relatively private setting ask them about Calipari.
Also, do some googling of Bret Bearup and World Wide Wes, just as a starting point.
I mean, I am sure you are right that there are probably kids who are choosing Kentucky because it is Kentucky and because of all the NBA kids they are churning out and the chance to play with other talented kids.
But no, they are not on the up and up. There will eventually be probation and there will be vacated title(s).
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Albrecht||
Spike does well in space but he doesn't have the control over it when things get crowded. Spike actually has the highest turnover rate on the team this year at 20.6. Granted that LeVert's low TO rate has more to do with him never touching the ball but I think if you watch them both off of the bounce, with both hands LeVert is better. He has the better crossover. Certainly in terms of a quick first step to create offense Caris is better. And guys on the team have said LeVert has a good handle as well.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Champs||
How would the NCAA vacate a championship that it doesn't even award? Worst case is that they might have to vacate every game but there is no sanctioned national championship to vacate. Don't think that the networks or polling organizations will ask for their glass football back either. Especially since the Oregon team that lost to them may be vacating some games soon as well.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Caris||
LeVert actually has a good handle, probably the best on the current team besides Burke and he is able to get to the rim reasonably often. The problem is that he has zero ability to finish and is always getting blocked or missing layups after he gets the chest bump from the defender. He will probably never be very good at finishing with that thin frame but if he can learn how to draw contact fouls as well as pass off of the bounce then he can be somewhat of a creater. Definitely a project but I have some hope for him. Agree with your overall point that this team needs guys who can create shots and Walton and Irvin are probably going to have to step up and do that if we are going to be really successful.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||2014 team||
That's probably the starting lineup for the 1st game but I would be shocked if Albrecht is still starting over Walton by the time we start B1G play. Spike can do some things but he is not a 33 minute/game type PG for us. Wouldn't be surprised if Irvin passes LeVert at some point although that will depend on how big of a step forward Caris takes this offseason.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Draft||
Yep, and projections for next year's draft always involve guessing how high school seniors will do as freshman and thus how attractive they will then be when they are eligible for the draft. History is littered with super blue chip guys who either didn't pan out or took a while to become good. It's highly speculative to talk about next year's draft.
Also, if a large number of guys in college now who might go pro next year decide instead to go pro this year because "next year's draft is so loaded" then this year's draft winds up having more talent and 2014 has less.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Hardaway||
It seems very odd that a Forbes reporter would break this rather than a basketball source.
I like Hardaway but I am more concerned about GR3 than him as far as replacing him for next year. We'll see what happens with the games too. Have to think that winning a national championship could tilt the equation if anyone is on the fence.
Still think he needs to work on being a better passer and doing more off of the dribble. Right now he just drives straight ahead and does his pretty finger roll or layup but his handle is not tight enough to have a bigger variety of moves and I'm not sure that is going to be that effective in the NBA.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||93||
I was just a few years older than you and still in high school at Pioneer and like you I wound up being an LS&A student a few years later. My dad was still teaching in the business school and we had had season tickets for years. Because of that, we were actually able to get faculty tickets to the Final Four and amazingly the seats were better than our upper bowl seats at Crisler. We were behind the Michigan bench in about the 25th row which was great there were some places in the Superdome that were a long way from the court.
We actually had to stay in Mississippi and drive in because we couldn't find any hotel rooms in New Orleans (or perhaps they were all insanely priced). Kentucky fans were everywhere, thousands of them were there even though they did not have tickets. UK and Pitino had won their first 4 games by something like 120 points and were a heavy favorite. We had really struggled in the first four rounds even though we were gifted a really easy path to the FInal Four (unlike 92). Remember that UCLA game? Great comeback. Then we had to beat a #12 and a #7 in the Sweet Sixteen and Elite Eight.
The early game Saturday was the Kansas UNC game and that was not that exciting. Kansas was not as good as the other 3 teams as they had good guards with Jordan and Walters but did not have the front court skills of the other teams. When our game tipped off it it seemed like the whole arena was from Kentucky. But we led early and that game was back and forth. It went to overtime and in the end we won. The Kentucky fans were just so incredulous that they could lose. Mashburn, Travis Ford, Rodrick Rhodes, Jared Prickett, Dale Brown, Tony Delk, that team was loaded. I know some people say the Duke Kentucky game the year before was the best basketball game ever. That may be, I really don't know. I am convinced though that the Michigan Kentucky game was the best college basketball game that Michigan has played in in the last 30+ years in terms of the quality of play and being an exciting game. Other games like Kansas this year can perhaps compete based on how exciting they are but the quality of play was off the charts. Webber was awesome.
The National Championship game...what can you say. Donald Williams had a career night on the biggest stage possible. Webber was great again and I really thought we were gonna win partway through the second half. Jimmy King played well. I loved Ray Jackson because he was not as talented as the other guys but he had a tough night and fouled out. When the free throw was missed you just felt that it was destiny for Michigan to either tie it and send it to overtime or for Rose to penetrate and kick out to either King or Pelinka (was it Pelinka or Voskuil who was in the game?) for a 3. Everyone was in such shock that Webber was not called for a travel and the arena was still up in arms about that before we all realized what had happened with the timeout. Such a sad ending. To not even have a chance at the tying shot was just so disheartening. And then after the game you felt like well at least the starters will all be back next year and even better. That was a ray of hope since the 93 team was so much better than the 92 team and you felt we had to win in 94. Back then no one went pro until after their junio year. But Webber left and Arkansas beat us by 4 in the Elite 8 on their way to the national championship the next year and that was the end. So close...but not quite. Great times and exciting basketball even if the ending wasn't the same as 89. I'll feel the same way about this team. Even if it doesn't end up with two more wins it was still great fun to watch the ride.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Woodson||
Right, Woodson get a tuxedo and some incidentals related to his trip to the Heisman ceremony paid for by an agent (Marion Jones/Summit Mgmt Group). Additional trips paid for by an agent were taken over the summer of 97. The difference was that Michigan Football/A.D. folks were not implicated in knowing about it whereas Fisher was aware and actively trying to conceal the relationship with Ed Martin (and fraudulently tying it to Perry Watson by putting the tickets he left for Martin under Watson's name). So it was not deemed an NCAA violation because it was an agent rather than a booster and because Fisher was dirty but Carr wasn't. Strictly as far as the players though, it was pretty similar. Woodson also probably perjured himself by saying that he never took illegal benefits while at Michigan even though the paper trail indicates otherwise. But in that case he was testifying on behalf of the prosecution in regards to Summit Mgmt's financial problems/debts/fraud. It's fascinating the difference in the way that Webber and Woodson are perceived by M fans even though both took illegal benefits and probably perjured themselves.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Webber||
Some of what you say is true, like the administrative complacency regarding facilities. But a lot of the other decisions can be traced in part to Webber's (and others') actions. Ellerbe was hired to be an assistant and was promoted because the independent report by the law firm on the scandal came down in October 1997 and left no choice but to fire Fisher immediately. With practice about to start, no coaches on the market due to the timing, Dutcher being tainted etc there was no one to hire except Ellerbe at that point as he had not been around for any of the chicanery. Then Ellerbe actually had a good year, earning a #3 seed in the tourney and winning the BTT and with probable sanctions on the way we were in no position to go get a name coach. We made the wrong but seemingly sensible at the time decision to keep him and plow through the sanctions and get to the other side. No one understood then that it would not be resolved for many years.
As far as Amaker, certainly Bill Martin screwed that up as Pitino claims that he would have gone to M. But one of the primary reasons that Amaker was hired was because he had that squeaky clean Duke image and with the case still dragging along the University wanted to appear to have changed. Moreover the scandal was still hanging over the program and limiting the pool of candidates.
Facilities - I mostly agree that this is on the administration. But don't think that the scandal also didn't turn off some of the big money people who help get facilities paid for.
You can't blame Webber directly for a lot of MIchigan basketball's problems for the decade from 97 to about 07. But a lot of the choices that other people made were influenced and altered by both the sanctions, the sense of impending doom before the sanctions and the complications that arose because of the choices of Webber, T(r)aylor, and Bullock. Their actions set in motion the chain of effects that led to a lot of shitty basketball.
Don't get me wrong, I loved going to games during the Fab 5 era and the two tourney runs were great. In the big picture, violating amateurism rules is pretty small potatoes. Forgive that and move on and I am happy to reconcile with Webber. But I do still believe that a lot of the bad basketball grew out of Webber's choices and the long lasting consequences they resulted in.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Enfield seems like a dubious||
Enfield seems like a dubious hire to me. They just went with a guy having his 15 minutes of fame. It seems in large part that he was hired for style of play based on the Dunk City media fixation and the fact that Kevin O'Neills teams were boring as shit. He does have some NBA assistant experience and time at FSU but overall I think this one is also a little thin. USC has a pretty mediocre basketball history though.
Alford...not convinced he can recruit the players UCLA wants but he is a solid coach. Kind of a prick supposedly. I think this was just an OK hire, not terrible but not too exciting either.
Aside from assistants, I maybe would have tried to look at someone like Randy Bennett, Tad Boyle, Fran Dunphy, Andrew Toole, Marvin Menzies, maybe Keith Dambrot although he is a little old, Dave Paulsen etc. No doubt there are others but I don't know enough to say. Greg McDermott, although he might not be interested. I'd consider Larry Eustrachy although I also understand why you wouldn't hire him. Hiring a name coach isn't necessary but for me at least I would want a little bit more of a track record of success as a head coach.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Pitino Lite||
Kenpom has them 5th in the country in TO % and 11th in steal % with a fairly fast tempo so presumably they do indeed run the same pressing system.
Ten win improvement from last season for them but the resume is pretty thin. Who knows how it will turn out but I have to imagine that a lot of MN folks are wondering WTF? You would think they could at least find someone with a multi-year record of success and improvement.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Tourney Run||
I won't hold my breath waiting for Wichita State to start out recruiting North Carolina even though they've made it three rounds deeper in the tourney.
Regardless, hiring a kid's HS coach is a pretty good way to win his commitment based on anecdotal evidence from the past.
I'd still be most excited about a Booker commit if given a choice of any of the guys we are targeting.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||WI vs MN||
But when Wisconsin did their search, Ryan was hardly a hot name. His previous coaching career was basically 2 years of going .500 in the Horizon league at Wisky-Milwaukee and killing it at Division III Wisky-Plattsville. I don't really blame MN for trying but understand that if you find your guy it is going to be a young head coach from the MAC or Richmond or Northern Iowa or whatever. It's not going to be someone like Brad Stevens, Shaka Smart, Buzz Williams which are way out of Minnesota's league. Maybe it is just the media that is floating these names but you would think the A.D. would be leaking realistic names to the media for them to write about and thereby to control expectations so that the hire doesn't land with a thud.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Buzz||
Marquette is a better job than Minnesota. I guess you can't blame a program for trying but if they want to over reach and try to get Smart or Williams or some of these other coaches they better be ready to back up a Brinks truck for that coach because there is nothing else about that job that makes it really compelling.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||5th Year||
That was my first thought as well. Even a potential scrub just for depth and to allow for some possibility of redshirting Morris if Gardner stays healthy would have some value. Or to hedge against the disasterous possibility of Gardner/Morris being dinged simultaneously. Obviously you'd have to see attrition of 2+ before fall to put us at 84 and open up a schollie.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Rebounding||
Sorry but this is incorrect. Syracuse is 278th in the country in DREB% at 34.3%. In Big East play they finished 13th out of 15 teams in the conference at 36.6%. They are a bad defensive rebounding team just like most zone teams. McGary killing them on the glass and making his putbacks will be a huge key.
Not sure what stats you are looking at but they are probably some tempo free rebound numbers that reflect the low eFG% that Syracuse allows. They are a good OREB team FWIW, as you would expect based on their length.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Syracuse||
We won't get the shots that we did against Florida after they went zone because Syracuse is much longer. Their length does concern me as our perimeter shots will be pretty well contested. We'll have to get Burke penetrating and passing as well as having the guy who flashes towards the high post not have TOs and find the open man. Syracuse does not rebound well so we need McGary to go berserk on the boards. I think the matchup is OK but as always we will need to hit our 3s which means Stauskas/Hardaway. Hardaway is definitely in another one of his cold streaks.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Roster||
It's pretty hard to get guys who are good this late. We get LeVert late and you can see he has some talent but is also a bit of a project who will take time to develop. And we also took Albrecht but that was because we were going to basically have no PGs on the roster if Burke left. Had to do that and it worked out better than could have ever been hoped for. This year at the least you have one guy at each position on the roster returning for sure. The thing that would make a lot more sense to me would be to take a 5th year grad transfer. Get one or two of those guys for 13-14 who are attracted to a successful program for depth next year if we lose 2 or 3 guys to the league. Helps next year but doesn't tie up schollies on less talented guys. And then bring 2014 guys who are blue chips.
Burke is ghost and assuming that Hardaway/GR3 leave we have:
PG - Walton/Albrecht
SG - Irvin/LeVert
SF - Stauskas
4 - McGary/Donnal ?
C - Morgan/Bielfeldt/Horford
That lineup means you need to either have Donnal be good enough to play right away or you go with a traditional 4 type. The high post guy would then have to be McGary as he is the only big on the roster who can use the bounce and who has shown much potential with a 10'-12' type jumpers. Alternatively, in theory Irvin is about the same size as GR3 but if he plays at the 4 then you have only 3 guys manning 2/3/4 and not a single bench backup save Albrecht spelling everyone. That's 160 minutes for 1-4 which means that no one gets injured and everyone has to play 30+ minutes including the freshmen (again). And then a 5 man logjam at the 5 which is crazy; or at least 4 if Donnal backs up at the 4.
I realize that playing two bigs is not how Beilein rolls, but he has shown that one of his greatest strengths is his flexibility. And with our roster construction if GR3 and THJ leave it is something you have to consider. Would help with rebounding though obviously there are a lot of other downsides. Overall, seems like we need another 2/3 type for depth. Then you can go both big or small at the 4. A stretch 4 with ball skills would be great of course but those are not easy to find. Hardaway seems more replaceable but it seems GR3 leaving poses more problems. Although if Hardaway stays and GR3 goes then I guess that raises the question of whether Irvin becomes the 4 or...?
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Today||
I guess there is half of a generation for which M basketball is an afterthought and football (and perhaps hockey) is all that matters. But seriously, the Citrus Bowl win to cap off a 9-4 season vs a 9-4 Florida team or a win to go to the first Final Four in 20 years? It's not really very close.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||UCLA||
He probably needed to go. I just think the two will always be linked and compared and so if you are the AD you better make sure that Alford is a guy who will (and has) gotten it done. If they don't make the tourney it will be "At least Howland got to the tourney before losing to MN" or if they don't make the Final Four it will be "Even freaking Howland made the Final Four 3 times" etc. It's only natural to compare the two and the AD needs the guy he hired to look better. Not convinced that Alford will come out looking better than Howland in 5 years...but we'll see. And I think if Howland needs to go because the fans are not behind him after this article etc then why are you hiring a guy who will also not make your fanbase excited?
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Alford||
To some extent that is true as you have to have the support of the fans or it doesn't really work. But the A.D. also has to ask himself who is the better coach too. If you've fired a guy and you hire someone who is not any better then either your hiring process is flawed or you overestimated the attractiveness of the job or both. And you've released the current fan/media pressure but you haven't upgraded the program. Alford certainly lost the Iowa fanbase himself which is why he had to jump to NM. Certainly the job is a pretty good one but UCLA fans think that the job is the pinnacle of college basketball coaching based on some stuff that happened 40-50 years ago. They haven't figured out that the playing field is much more level and things like facilities, budgets, $, fan support etc matter too and UCLA. And this hire is not going to make the Bruin alums/boosters happy at all. He has no particular UCLA ties and this looks like settling rather than making a splashy hire. The fanbase will not be in love with him from day 1 by any means.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Alford||
Alford is a pretty good coach but he's clearly a notch below the really elite coaches like Roy Williams, Izzo, Self, Coach K, Pitino etc. Can't imagine that he is the sort of coach who would get fans excited and his resume is no better than Howland's. It's UCLA and the PAC12 is pretty weak right now so I wouldn't be surprised if they turn in a bunch of 25 win seasons but I also have a hard time imagining them becoming a perennial top 5 team like Duke.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Kansas||
The thing is that if you lose the football game it is a loss and then you move on to the next week's game. The 2011 football team was never going to win a national championship anyway so there were no bigger implications other than just that one loss if we lose to ND. In the tourney, you get the loss but it is not just a loss. It is win or go home. Football occasionally has games that are effectively elimination games for the national championship but that wasn't really in play at UTL. The magnitude of continuing your season, or not, makes this the greater game.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Fuck Yeah||
That was awesome. Improbable, and fucking awesome.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Jersey||
I hear ya. Hard to pull off that look for those of us old enough to remember 89. You can always put the T-Shirt underneath to mitigate the visual; as a bonus in this case it is also an authentic style since that is how Rice used to do it.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Agreed||
Yep, look at Gonzaga for a contrast in two approaches to a coaching career. Dan Monson has two excellent seasons at Gonzaga culminating in an Elite 8 run in 99. He leaves for the Minnesota job which is a mediocre major conference job in general and a total dumpster fire after Clem Haskins' shenanigans. He does OK and gets to just 1 NCAA tourney and quits/gets canned after 7 years. Now at Long Beach State and no one is talking about Dan Monson as a hot coach.
On the other hand, Mark Few follows him up at Gonzaga and has similar success but continues to stay at the school. And while they have come up a little short in the NCAAs lately, they continue to have a ton of success overall. Plus they have enough of a rep now that they can get games like Oklahoma, Butler, Illinois, WVU, Clemson, Baylor, OK State that help keep them on TV and in the spotlight. He can win 30 games a year. They've been to the tourney 14 straight years which is a longer streak than anyone but Duke, Kansas and MSU. His total compensation is less than it would be at say Indiana but he is still making around 1 million/year. And he could still jump to a major job at another school if he really wanted to.
I think increasingly you see other coaches at these other schools trying to do the same thing. Not everyone, but some. A place like Kansas will always get great coaches but the gap between a school like Illinois or Minnesota to that of a Butler or a VCU is smaller now. More parity in talent, more TV programming to fill with mid-major teams and more TV money to pay mid-major coaches. Really this is sort of the Jerry Tarkanian UNLV model which is that if you can establish yourself, prove that you can repeat success at small conference schools and build up enough of a brand w/ recognition then you can have sustainable success outside of the major conference schools. There is still good money, way more job security, less pressure and easier competition. Makes Butler or VCU or Gonzaga more of a possible destination than a stepping stone.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Hardaway||
I don't agree with that take on Hardaway. He shoots 39%/50%/70%. He doesn't get to the line much. His handle is improving but is still not that good for an NBA prospect. He's OK as a defender but not much more than OK. He's not a particularly good passer and has more turnovers than assists. His freshman and junior years he put up ORtings of 108 and was worse his sophomore year. Seems like a good kid and has the intangibles in that he wants the shot and is a bit of a leader on the team. But overall he's basically a streaky shooting high usage above average college SG with NBA size. That's a skillset that generally winds up in being a 2nd round pick and being a backup in the NBA. That is pretty damn good overall as that is not a bad life to live but it doesn't make him worthy of a high draft pick. He needs to either improve his game all around by making another step forward next year to build on what he did this year. Or he needs to simply make more shoots and in particular become better at creating his own shot.
No way he has better physical tools than Oladipo. Vitale's comparison of Oladipo to Jordan is over the top but Oladipo can still jump out of the gym and is way better off the bounce than Hardaway.