|1 week 23 hours ago||Why don't people get fired or...?||
Craig James, Ron Franklin, Jay Mariotti, Rob Dibble, Jason Whitlock...
Holtz didn't get fired because he was the right kind of awful, creating buzz without backlash. Awful's not so bad from the network's perspective; what they can't have in that spot is bland...which it's kind of degenerated into, now that the shtick's gotten old (Corso's probably getting to that point too and I won't be surprised if he also doesn't get renewed the next time his contract is up).
|1 week 1 day ago||Quality of coaching aside...||
...the point of the D-league is personal development and showcasing. The goal isn't winning a championship, it's landing a ten-day contract. A demanding coach can make some progress with the teamplay aspects, just like a good AAU coach can, but the environment doesn't foster it.
|1 week 1 day ago||You're probably right, and||
You're probably right, and that's sad.
But to me the real chasm in life is between having a net under you, vs. always being a crisis away from catastrophe. Knowing you can fix your car if it breaks down, knowing you'll be able to make your rent/mortgage at the end of the month and that the food money won't run out--that's the truly life-changing experience, no matter how much money you make the rest of your life.
It makes complete sense to me that someone that's been on the wrong side of that line would want to optimize the chance at the first million or two, instead of the $30 million. These long-term rational-choice exercises are a luxury that comes with comfort. Most of us here are pretty comfortable; it's easy to forget that some of the players we're talking about aren't.
|1 week 1 day ago||That comment got me thinking...||
In the NBA, teams like the Mavs have a coach hired specifically for each player...
There was an interesting article in the print SI a few weeks ago on Jeff Teague, how the basketball his father taught him when he was young got transformed in AAU ball, where he learned the importance of showcasing his own talents and "consciously morphed into an Iversonian gunner." When the new staff took over in Atlanta, Teague would get pissed when teammates made cuts or set screens because it was just somebody in his way. You can see the results after they finally got through to him.
I think the primary need of a lot of NBA prospects these days isn't personal skill development, it's learning to play with the other four guys on the floor. Teague was unusual because he'd learned it the other way first, but some of these guys have spent their entire careers in environments where the only expectation is that they'll show off their stuff.
You can't learn that riding the pines in the NBA no matter how much attention you get from your individual coach. The only way to learn it is to play, for coaches and with teammates that demand that you play as a team.
(And in passing it occurs to me that maybe this is one of the drawbacks of being a one-sport athlete; maybe it's an advantage to have spent some time playing a sport that wasn't quite as perfect a match to your abilities, to not be the star three months of the year?)
|1 week 2 days ago||This sort of depends on where you're coming from.||
In a comfortable middle-class household that's true. For a child of a single parent making, say, $15/hr., $1.2 million is pretty close to the parent's lifetime income. Even after taxes and agent cut we're still talking about a couple of decades of income at least. If your family's barely treading water, or worse, that can be life-changing.
|1 week 3 days ago||See a non-media college game sometime.||
There's no such thing in D1 any more, but drive over to Hope or Calvin during basketball season and see how fast two 20-minute halves fly by when there aren't any media timeouts.
D3 is all I watch in person these days. And high school. Coaches' timeouts don't bother me at all--they happen when the game flow demands them. But there's something about having the flow stopped by an outside force that irritates me, to the point that I've stopped going to D1 games altogether.
|1 week 3 days ago||http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/|
|1 week 3 days ago||Absolutely right.||
Linc Darner's record:
He's won the conference 6 times, won the conference tournament 6 times, gone to the NCAAs 7 times. And since year 2 he's won 80% of his games.
Green Bay's a good job, they interviewed quality coaches, they chose one. Everybody moves on.
|1 week 3 days ago||Looking at the same drafts I quoted for Dekker...||
I think that's probably about right. Johnson's size will get him drafted somewhere, it's the Harrison twins that are the question. You can count me among the people that don't think anyone's going to use a pick on Aaron.
|1 week 3 days ago||You expected higher than that, even?||
I mean, that's eight of nine mocks that have him going in the top 18. Some have him ahead of Kaminsky.
Of course he's coming out. He was already easily first round before the tournament; now he's moved up another 5-10 slots.
To answer your question, I just noted that one of the CBS guys hasn't updated his mock since the end of January (and of course that's the one that has Dekker the lowest). Of the others, 7 are current and one was done after the regionals but before last weekend.
|1 week 3 days ago||Other than Harris...||
...have they ever had a player faced with the choice before?
Here's a list of their first-rounders since 1990:
Dekker's borderline lottery; they've only had one junior rank as high, ever, and he came out. Kaminsky last year was "25 to 45".
What they don't ever have happen, except for Rashard Griffith, is for someone to come out before he's ready. Nobody comes out and goes undrafted, as is about to happen at Kentucky. But you can't expect a lottery pick to stay in school.
|1 week 3 days ago||A random selection of mocks...||
I don't vouch for any of these individually, but there seems to be a consensus here.
It's not just the tournament; he's been moving up these lists since last summer. I'm surprised there was anyone that thought he might come back.
|1 week 4 days ago||No, there wouldn't be any push-back on that one.||
I can certainly see how giving each team five timeouts per game instead of the current five timeouts per game is a no-brainer and will improve the game right away.
|1 week 6 days ago||Not sure why people want a lane-clogging big.||
Beilein's offense runs best with bigs who can shoot and can pull the other teams rim protectors out of the lane.
A 20-year-old Arvydas Sabonis probably means a championship.
Bird would work, too.
|2 weeks 13 hours ago||All-time college football winning percentages...||
...as of the end of the 1941 season:
Army was 13th, Ohio St. was 29th.
|2 weeks 13 hours ago||Wisconsin.||
But I still can't win--I had Virginia on the other side.
|2 weeks 19 hours ago||A lot of really good players grew up in Wisconsin.||
Off the top of my head:
Maybe Porter doesn't belong on the list because he wasn't heavily recruited by any means, but he's exactly the kind of player Ryan looks for (he played for Bennett, after all).
I'm sure I'm missing some people.
Dekker's a good player but he isn't historically unique--except that he went to UW instead of leaving the state or going to Marquette like everyone else.
|2 weeks 23 hours ago||Fans are never happy.||
I remember people being pissed about the one-loss seasons in the 70s.
|2 weeks 23 hours ago||I think what I'm really trying to say is this||
I basically agree with your assessment of Calipari. He's never been known as a teacher of the game, his game management isn't that great, the only schematic advance he's got to his name is that 1-4 iso play you're describing that's been a staple of AAU offenses since forever. From a pure basketball standpoint you could count on one hand the number of coaches in the tournament I'd put him ahead of (and yes my hand has room for Rick Barnes).
So maybe it's worth thinking through why the best talent in the country keeps coming to play for him. It's not bribery. I can see how people might have interpreted some of what I've written on this thread that way, and I should have been more careful.
He comes highly recommended by people that are likely to have a hand in the future income of a top prospect. He offers a comfortable one-and-done year (or two, if necessary). He's not particularly demanding, nobody's checking to see if you showed up for your 8am class, he won't do anything that might embarrass you and threaten your future career, he can be counted on not to ask any questions if you need some extra assistance with your eligibility like Rose or have some unusual personal requirements like Camby. He understands a player's need for media exposure, won't get too upset if you piss away a possession trying to get yourself on that night's Top Ten.
He's trustworthy, from their perspective, like few other coaches are, so the Worldwides of the basketball world are happy to refer future stars to his care for a year. The player knows he'll be taken care of in return, won't drop too far in the draft if he gets hurt for example (Nerlens).
It's successful. It wins. It's self-perpetuating. The looking-the-other-way part can be problematic in the long run but nobody much cares at the time.
The question is: is it a reason to put somebody in the Hall of Fame?
And it probably is. It's the essence of college basketball now. Calipari to the Hall, Ryan and Beilein to a museum--I'm grudgingly learning to accept that that's where we've come to.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||I'm absolutely certain he's||
I'm absolutely certain he's got the basketball knowledge to make it work. I just don't know if he'd put up with it for a whole season--I think he much prefers what he does now.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||It's funny...||
I've never found Wisconsin basketball particularly ugly. It's basketball the way I was taught it, something there isn't a lot left of these days. Every pass, every pick, every boxout I find myself remembering some coach back in high school or grade school, thinking "yep, that's the way he said it should be done."
It's Kentucky I find ugly, despite all the talent. It's all iso and dribble-drive and throwing the ball at the hoop; when they try to run some stuff it's so clunky. There's something unnaturally self-conscious about the way they set an off-ball screen, like it's something none of them had ever been asked to do before.
It's hard to watch. And I think it was harder this year, because I've had the painful experience of watching my own former high school transition from one to the other. They hired an AAU guy as head coach and the focus now is on advancing potential careers by enhancing stats and creating highlight-reel moments.
But that's what people seem to like--if I hate it, well, too bad for me. It's what the media like, for sure, and understandably so. A solid 35-second defensive stand doesn't do much for Sportscenter after all.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||It's a really interesting thought experiment||
and I'm not quite sure what would happen if you gave Ryan UK's roster. He has certain expectations about how players should practice and prepare (and play for that matter) and he's carefully managed his program to make sure he always has players who will perpetuate that environment.
I don't know what happens if you toss a lot of freshman McDonald's all-Americans into that. Do they buy in? Do they walk? Does he?
And not just any freshmen, but the particular group of freshmen that in real life chose to play for the guy that "throws the ball out and hopes," instead of plausible alternatives like Krzyszewski. I think it would be a disaster.
Give Ryan Duke's roster and he's probably unbeatable. Force Kentucky's roster on him and you've probably got his resignation by the end of the week.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||"Worldwide"???||
Please tell me your screen name is an attempt at irony, because damnit I haven't laughed so hard at anything on this board in at least two years.
I really wish it was your first post, so I'd know you made it up just for this topic. But no....
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Well, no.||
I don't know anything about Saban or Meyer's programs. But we know quite a bit about who's on Calipari's rolodex, and that network has moved with him from job to job.
And as I've said frequently elsewhere, even on this thread, it's quite possible that the network's now able to stand down as far as immediate stuff is concerned because it can be safely left to the locals at UK, where improper benefits have been a very poorly kept secret for longer than I've been alive. Nobody really knows whether they need to do it or not, because nobody around here can remember a time when they weren't.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||To be fair...||
...it's not clear how much of that is due to Calipari's fixers and bagmen and how much of it is simply the infrastructure UK already had in place before he got there.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Point taken.||
I think you can make a legit argument that it would be an insult to Ryan to put him in the HOF and lump him with those guys.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||They'll just change the plaque again.||
Coach John Calipari
|2 weeks 1 day ago||If William Wesley doesn't get inducted someday...||
...the basketball HOF really is a joke.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Damn straight.||
And 50% of a college coach's job is to get the bagmen.
Although in this case I think the bagmen are running the show and the coach is along for the ride.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Agreed.||
He didn't personally deliver the whores to Camby's hotel rooms; he didn't personally take Rose's board exams. Isn't that enough to completely exonerate him?
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Wish we could have seen more of him when he was young||
His legs were gone by the time he came to the US and I think people here think of him as a plodder, but he was athletic when his knees were still intact. "Larry Bird with hops" is how I've heard him described by people that saw him earlier.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||Nobody beats Kentucky by||
Nobody beats Kentucky by winning the matchups--that's suicide. Whoever beats Kentucky does it by avoiding the high ball screen (UK's far and away the best at defending that, which is a big advantage since it's all a lot of teams seem to run) and running off-ball stuff that's harder for them to defend. You have to have shooters and you have to know how to get them open looks.
That could be Wisconsin, although they've run more ball-screen this year than I can ever remember (it's effective with Kaminsky, obvously). Iowa State would be perfect but it would have to be the final.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Young Navarre "wasn't anything special"?||
Physically, maybe. But mentally?
He took more undeserved shit than anyone I can think of here, shit that should properly have been directed at Henson for leaving to play baseball, or the coaching staff for promising Henson they wouldn't recruit a QB. It wasn't his fault he was on the field before he was ready, but if the crap from the fans ever got to him he didn't show it. There aren't a lot of freshmen that could have seen that through.
I've got as much respect for Navarre as anyone that ever played football at Michigan. He wasn't the best player by a long shot but he maxed out what he had and he never got credit for it.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Maybe track?||
|6 weeks 4 days ago||I'm confused.||
Have we reached the point where, when there's a conflict between Henson's "insiders" and other "insiders", we automatically assume Henson's version is correct?
|7 weeks 22 hours ago||It wasn't an idle week.||
The conferences that didn't have a tournament played regular season games while the tournaments were going on. Michigan's last game in '89 (to take an example) was March 11, the same Saturday the ACC was playing their semifinals.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||You're blaming the staff for||
You're blaming the staff for that?
With the problems we've had with the offensive line the last two years we didn't have the luxury of using non-blocking tight ends, and I for one am damn glad Funchess didn't take playing time away from Jake Butt so we could get one more of the receivers on our bench onto the field.
When tackle was the relative strength of the line it made some sense to use Funchess as a nominal TE. Last year, when tackle was a relative weakness, it would have made no sense at all.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Root against the bubble teams?||
Michigan is currently #94 at Massey (pick your ranking system of choice, it doesn't much matter). The cut-off for an at-large bid is #48.
That means there are 45 teams ahead of Michigan for that last pick. One of them is Syracuse who doesn't count, 4-6 of them will win conference tournaments and thus won't need at at-large. That still leaves a bubble of around 40 teams.
I'm not going into each evening with a list of 40 teams I hope lose.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Rodgers's 4.71 was pretty||
Rodgers's 4.71 was pretty quick, in its time. If you look at your list you'll notice a steady drop in times year-to-year; for the first three years nobody beat that 4.71.
The game has changed. All you've really shown--and this is not a surprise--is that most of the best quarterbacks are veterans that have proven themselves and kept their jobs for a decade or more. They were slower than the guys coming out now; that doesn't mean they were slower than the guys they competed with, and beat out for jobs, back then. Brady's the only one of the group that was slow.
If you do a true apples-to-apples comparison, look at the group coming out each year and compare fast to slow, the fast QBs are consistently better on average.
And that seems to be true of the pocket passers, too. Mobility's an advantage; there's a positive (though imperfect) correlation of mobility to speed.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Rice's 40.||
It was reported as a 4.59 or 4.6 back then, but I suppose it makes sense that he's getting slower with age.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||1. No Bleacher Report. 2.||
1. No Bleacher Report.
2. Picking only two running backs out of the many who have passed through the combine is already some seriously silly cherry-picking...then the two guys you pick are only .03 apart? That's pathetic, and probably the reason for #3...
3. No Bleacher Report.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Appreciate the list...||
...but don't know how you got to your conclusion.
By your own metric the most successful QB here is Wilson (he's had fewer years to collect rings than Flacco so he has the edge), who ran the third fastest time of the 31 on your list.
Looking at everyone on the list under 4.6 we have Wilson, Luck, Kaepernick, Geno Smith, Newton, Locker, RG III.
The slow list, over 4.9, is Henne, Sanchez, Freeman, Mallett, Foles, Bortles.
There are successes and busts in both lists, of course, but on the whole I don't have any trouble choosing the fast list over the slow. Am I wrong?
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Because within the walls of Schembechler WE BELIEVE!!|
|9 weeks 4 days ago||Mentioned upthread but I'll||
Mentioned upthread but I'll put it here too--their fee table is confusingly worded and it looks like whoever put together the NCES stats misread it and double-counted the tuition (it isn't clear that the "total" line includes tuition, but if you do the math it's in every case precisely the total of all the other lines, including tuition).
Total tuition, fees, room, board and books are a bit under $20k/year in-state, not $30k.
|9 weeks 4 days ago||Why I think it (other than the reasons you suggest).||
When state budgets were tight in 2009, here's what the legislature decided to do with the 2010 budgets for each of the state's universities:
Never let a good crisis go to waste.
Except for the flagship school, which has access to some private funds and grant money and the like, all of these schools are dependent on state funds and student tuition.
So, to go point by point through their situation:
a) They're in debt because the state cut their revenues in half.
b) Their enrollment has dropped because they could not maintain their enrollment in the face of the revenue cut.
c) Their graduation rates are above average, not below, if you take into account the demographics they serve. If anything, I think it's a sign of health that they were able to maintain this despite the loss of nearly half their income.
The problem is really quite simple, and there are only two plausible solutions: restore the school's funding, or admit that you don't want to have an institution with the mission of providing undergraduation education to the black people of the state and close the school.
They've never been able to pull the votes together to shut it down tout court--the PR hit of closing an HBU for no reason would be enormous. But they might be able to sway some votes their way if they can present the school as a failure. That's why it's been forced into debt; that's why we're being offered context-free statistics that look terrible to anyone not familiar with working-class undergraduate education.
From the reaction here, it seems to be working pretty well. But they've still only gotten it through one committee; there's a long way to go.
|9 weeks 4 days ago||No problem, I knew it wasn't||
No problem, I knew it wasn't intentional, I just wanted to make sure we had the right facts out there. They worded that table badly and I misread it the first time too.
I just don't understand why people see this as an unhealthy institution. It doesn't really have any direct peers in-state (it's the only HBU), but it's one of the cheapest 4-year colleges in the state and its graduation rates are better than any of the alternatives. Nationally, its graduation rates are better than average for the demographic (black students, almost-open enrollment), as good or better than the most comparable schools I could think of in Michigan that aren't primarily black (the government doesn't track students by class, just by race, so I can't do a national comparison). The criticisms leveled against SCSU could be leveled, with equal justification, against every working-class school in the country.
The only thing different about SCSU is their debt, and that's a direct result of the state slashing their budget in half. They're being strangled, and now the people with their hands around their neck are shouting "Look! He can't breathe! He must be sick, call the surgeons!"
OK, I'll be blunt--we're talking about a state that still flies a Confederate flag in front of their state house, and this how they treat their HBU. It's not hard to figure out what's probably going on here, and I'm not playing along.
|9 weeks 4 days ago||Thanks for the perspective.||
Way too intimidating for him, and you had his back. Imagine a case like this where the parents may have been involved too...a 12-year old is going to pick up the phone, call Williamsport, and turn in just about every adult in his life? His parents, the parents of the kids he plays with, his coaches, the people that administer the league?
I wouldn't wish the consequences of that on any child; it's hard to believe people wish it had been done.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Did Brian write critically?||
Did Brian write critically? I missed that.
Ace did, and it was a fine piece. All I saw from Brian were some boxed quotes from the Daily, some slightly altered quotes from a movie, and an unboxed two-word quote from the Daily piece that was meaningless without context. And the picture, whose intent wasn't hard to figure.
And the headline, addressing the kid as if he were a dog.
There wasn't any content at all, just a sarcastic nudge to put the mob into motion. Comment or caption would have been an improvement. Hell, for that matter, it's not at all what I'm hoping for but even straight-up ridicule would have been better than this.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||It's probably less||
It's probably less susceptible to abuse than using the regular season teams would be. This way it's simply a matter of age and residency. Using regular season teams brings in the process of selecting the teams--some jurisdictions would go on dividing the players evenly, but others would see a chance for LLWS success and stock one of the teams with all the best players (ruining the local regular season in the process).
They could have a rule against it, but it'd be hard to enforce.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Whether the kids knew it or||
Whether the kids knew it or not, it sure as hell wasn't the kids that arranged it.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||I think you misread their fee||
I think you misread their fee schedule and double-counted the tuition. If you add it up, the "total for each semester" line is precisely the sum of tuition, fees, room and board. Tuition and fees are $10k for the year, room and board runs from $7600 to $9400 depending on which building you're in.
That's basically the same as at the USC satellites (Aiken, Upstate, Beaufort) and SCSU's graduation rates are better than any of the three. Should the state close them too, or they are right to only consider closing the HBU?
There's really nothing exceptional about this school, nationally or locally, except that their budget's been throttled by the state and they've had to take on debt to compensate. Why is it being singled out?
|9 weeks 5 days ago||I get what you mean about the joke.||
I didn't like the joke, but I understand the problem you're outlining.
But the picture is a different animal entirely. I'm guessing most of us have gotten through our entire adult lives without ever trawling through somebody's twitter and facebook looking for an embarrassing picture we can post. Honestly, the thought's never occurred to me to do that to anyone, no matter how pissed off I was at them.
It's probably the same for you, yes? You might be tempted to tell a joke and decide to avoid it because you don't want to offend someone, but I'll bet you've never been tempted to hold up embarrassing photos of someone during your sermon to shame them in front of the congregation.
It's very hard to get through life without offending anyone. It's not at all hard to avoid behaving like a tabloid publisher.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Run the ball clear round Chicago?||
I despise exceptionalism, but never mind that...
"Frank Kaminsky looks too weird to be a basketball star" is the kind of crap we're now faced with because the blog's been overrun by people that like posts like the o.p. here. The datbull picture pages a couple of years ago were the tipping point for me; apparently little has changed in the meantime.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Agree completely.||
Let him know how and why the idea is batshit retarded.
But if that goes here, you're doing it wrong.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Were you here for the great||
Were you here for the great purge of 2013?
I'm not sure what else there is to say.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||I think there's a fair number||
I think there's a fair number of people here who knew it was a joke and didn't think it was funny. Or, maybe more to the point, didn't care whether it was funny because they thought it was wrong.
I don't know why I happened to make an exception today, but I pretty much stopped reading the front page here when Heiko left, and this post has reminded me why. Brian likes to think of his writing as a sort of Michigan-themed version of David Foster Wallace, but it doesn't have the humanity or sensitivity that came through clearly in everything Wallace wrote, and in every Wallace interview.
And without it, the sarcasm is just mean.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||"Anything" is a big universe.||
It encompasses stuff like the Auburn tree-poisoning, or the lunatic that stabbed Monica Seles, or the people that covered up for Jerry Sandusky. People who would literally "do anything" would be willing to do all that and more.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||People that will "do||
People that will "do anything" are always a negative. Always.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||It doesn't matter to me if||
It doesn't matter to me if they have the best intentions or not. "I'm going to kill your career prospects" is the wrong response, period.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||A basic principle.||
People are responsible for the foreseeable consequences of their own actions.
(Which in no way subtracts from the responsibility of the "circlejerkers" for their actions.)
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Are you sure?||
Come back in a day or so and see where the thread has gone.
I'm pretty sure this would have been deleted within the hour if it had been posted by anyone other than the proprietor.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||I think you've hit the nail on the head here.||
Quoting the same poster upthread: "The idea that college is for everyone is ridiculous and there are way too many colleges and universities."
That's the entire issue in a nutshell. College is not for these people. That's why South Carolina decided to defund its only HBU.
(The precise definition of "these people" varies from person to person of course. It probably tends to be tinted a bit differently in South Carolina.)
|9 weeks 5 days ago||The drop since 2010 may not be statistically significant...||
...but there have been significant changes there since 2010. According to the Chronicle, the state slashed the school's budget that year by 44%. This is a school with almost no endowment ($2.5 million, I think it is) that's very dependent on state funding; it's not surprising they're now suffering from debt.
It probably says something about the legislature's priorities that the other schools in the state system also had their budgets cut that year, but only by 5%. This wasn't simply a response to tough economic times.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Why compare them to the national average?||
Their mission, historically and currently, is a bit different from the typical public university. This isn't a land-grant institution, it certainly isn't an elite flagship school. It was founded, and still exists, to provide undergraduate education to black South Carolinians. Admissions are all but open; their demographic is disadvantaged both educationally and financially.
If you want to know how they're doing, why not compare them to their own cohort?
As mentioned downthread, the 6-year graduation rate for black students at schools most similar to SCSU, public institutions admitting more than 90% of those applying, is 28.8%.
35% doesn't seem all that bad, in comparison.
I wish these numbers were higher. I wish it were easier for black students--for working-class students of any race for that matter--to finish their degrees. But I don't see anything here that indicates SCSU is the problem, and I don't think closing the schools that do give those students an opportunity is the answer.
|9 weeks 5 days ago||"A thinning of the herd would||
"A thinning of the herd would be beneficial."
A lovely comment as we discuss the possible closure of an HBU.
Tone deaf at best.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||I don't know if it's the same in your respective states...||
...but in Ohio school construction and operating expenses are strictly separated by law, with separate funding mechanisms. Construction is funded by bond issuance; operating expenses are funded through property taxes.
They go to the voters separately, and for reasons I'm not sure I entirely understand it seems to be easier to pass a bond issue than a tax levy. Maybe it's because the bond is a one-time event; maybe it's because the results of the construction are visible but operating money is wasted on stuff like books and paper and teacher salaries.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||Some statistics to put this in context.||
The 4-year graduation rate for black students at all 4-year schools in the country was 20.8%; for all 4-year public schools it was 17.4%.
For black males at 4-year public schools the 4-year rate was 12.1%.
The 6-year graduation rate for black students overall was 40.8%, about double the 4-year rate. For public institutions it was 40.3% (interesting, but not surprising, that most of the public/private gap goes away when you look six years out instead of four).
The 6-year graduation rate for black students at schools most similar to SCSU, public institutions admitting more than 90% of those applying, is 28.8%.
According to the O.P., SCSU's most recent 4-year rate was 14%.
The most recent statistics I've found on line are for the (outgoing) SCSU class of 2010, with a 4-year rate of 17.4% and a 6-year rate of 39.3%. Those were slightly above the national average for black students for that year.
They enroll about 1000 per year, so that drop in 4-year rate from 2010 to the o.p.'s most recent number is about 30 students or so. That's probably not even statistically significant; it's certainly not reason to close a school. Something else is going on here.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||Those mid-30s graduation||
Those mid-30s graduation rates you cite are 6-year rates, not 4-year rates.
Here are the 4-year rates (taken from the Chronicle's database) for the Michigan schools you list (plus a few I added):
Still think SCSU's 14% is an abomination deserving of closure?
|9 weeks 6 days ago||A four-year rate is used to||
A four-year rate is used to make a school look bad. There's no other reason--all it does is lump students taking time off for financial or other non-academic reasons into the "failure to graduate" category. At a school like this, taking some time off along the way to earn the money to continue isn't an unusual pattern.
That's not to say that SCSU doesn't have issues, but whoever decided to use that particular statistic had an agenda.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||And that isn't a problem?||
"They can deny another player a scholarship..."
It may not be a problem for Tennessee, but what about the player that's denied the scholarship?
|9 weeks 6 days ago||No, of course it doesn't||
No, of course it doesn't preclude accepting a walk-on, it just means you can't give them a scholarship that first year even if you have one available.
Which of course never happens at an oversigning P5 school. I'm not so sure about the other end, though. Do low-end D2 schools sometimes exit signing day with scholarships still in their pocket? Does this ever happen to Eastern or Incarnate Word?
|9 weeks 6 days ago||We know something Massey's computer doesn't...||
...which is that Michigan is missing two of its best players. Both of them were available for most of the games these projections are based on, so its reasonable to think Massey overstates the win probabilities going forward. Michigan's dropped at least 15 slots in his rankings since Walton went down the last time, something like 25 since LaVert's injury.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||Not sure I'm reading you right...||
...does mandating LOIs mean schools wouldn't be free to award scholarships to anyone that hadn't signed an LOI?
Wouldn't the recruit then just sign and return the LOI on the last possible date, with the financial aid paperwork? Or on arrival on campus?
It's hard to imagine the NCAA establishing a system that would make it impossible to award an athletic scholarship, if one is available, to a walk-on (who by definition wouldn't have signed an LOI). I'm as cynical as the next guy about the NCAA's commitment to its supposed ideal of the student-athlete but they have to at least pay lip service to it.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||Maybe Waveman's post below||
Maybe Waveman's post below put it better than I did, but if you don't see the problems this can cause for lower-tier recruits I don't know what to say. If you don't care about the problems this can cause for lower-tier recruits I really don't know what to say.
Intended or not, the effect of this is exactly the same as oversigning. I want the oversigning problem addressed; whatever the solution is going to be, it has to include some mechanism to allow programs to know who their 85 are in advance. The 85th guy deserves that.
|10 weeks 20 min ago||That's my point.||
Extending the recruiting season puts the guys at the bottom of the list in a worse spot, and especially so if you happen to have committed to a school with a late calendar.
Oversigning now is a choice, and recruits concerned about it have the option of avoiding the worst offenders. Without a fixed, common closing date for recruiting it would be universal, built into the system by design.
I don't think that's an improvement. I'm not defending the current system, just pointing out the need for some system.
|10 weeks 5 hours ago||I hope they're right and this||
I hope they're right and this doesn't drag out too much longer, because whoever's currently been promised Smith's scholarship deserves the chance to make other plans.
The problem with this sort of thing is that it guarantees oversigning. There's nothing the school can do to avoid it, short of telling the late-committing player he's no longer wanted because he waited too long. That would be honorable; it's also very unlikely.
|10 weeks 11 hours ago||You might remember our head coach.||
He used to be with the Raiders.
Just win, baby.
After his overthrow they went all Oregon with the unis, but the old silver and black was a classic look.
|10 weeks 15 hours ago||"this...is being orchestrated by Urbs."||
That Urban Meyer is one clever dude. Arranges to have his recruits show up on the internet working out wearing Michigan gear so the local fans will hate him, because...
...um...it was making sense for a minute there....
|10 weeks 15 hours ago||Is it possible to execute a||
Is it possible to execute a side agreement, along with the LOI release, that makes it conditional? They can't keep him from signing with anyone he wants, of course, but as you say, without the LOI release he has to sit out a year.
I guess what I'm wondering is, is there something in the NCAA regs governing LOI's that specifies proper language for the release?
|10 weeks 15 hours ago||So I guess we didn't get your LOI after all?||
|10 weeks 1 day ago||Best way to explain the game???||
I can't explain anything in 140 characters.
Nothing worth saying, anyway.
|10 weeks 1 day ago||That actually happened at my (then) workplace once.||
One of the bosses set her Diet Coke on a server, gestured a bit overexcitedly and knocked it over. We had to shut the office for two days while we waited for repairs, and even though it was a union shop no one got paid because it was deemed to be an "Act of God".
|10 weeks 1 day ago||Like 73% of the statistics on the internet...||
...the poster made it up.
|10 weeks 1 day ago||He never rescinded an offer, because...||
Hoke's policy wasn't to rescind the offer, it was to ignore the verbal commitment. Players were free to look around; if they did, Hoke considered the position open and continued to recruit it.
And I have no idea where you got the notion that Hoke and his staff stopped recruiting players once they got the verbal. I think somewhere along the way this board spiraled to the point where any fact-challenged BS was fine as long as it disparaged Hoke in some way.
|10 weeks 1 day ago||Didn't this come up last year?||
During the charge/block discussions?
I recall a comment by Adam Silver that implied that the NBA would consider moving to two-and-done if the NCAA moved its rules, and game, in the direction of the NBA. Shorter clock, change in traveling rule, charge/block changes, bigger arc under the hoop.
To my surprise he lost that round and the charge/block rule was changed back to what it always was. But I don't have much hope in the long run.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||I don't actually dislike Jay||
I don't actually dislike Jay Bilas, but virtually everything he says about basketball irritates me. I've come to the conclusion that Jay Bilas's Platonic ideal of basketball and my Platonic basketball are diametrical opposites.
And his side's going to win the argument. I'm resigned to that.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||The shorter the shot clock,||
The shorter the shot clock, the more of each possession is late-clock. There's proportionally less looking for a good shot, more forcing the action to get a shot at a particular point in time.
It's to the disadvantage of any continuity offense (Beilein, Ryan), to the advantage of dribble-drive and high-ball-screen. I'm guessing the most dramatic effect won't be in pace or scoring or even shooting percentages, but in the average number of passes per possession.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Why would they do that?||
Timeouts are when the money is made.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||the absolute worst thing||
Weber to Wisconsin is not the worst possible outcome here.
|10 weeks 3 days ago||Interesting choice of "outliers".||
How about 41 against Ohio State? 41 against Notre Dame?
|10 weeks 4 days ago||And you still get what might be the single most important thing.||
You're part of the rivalry.
Maybe I'm wrong but I always thought that was a big part of McCray's recruitment. He grew up with that rivalry, through his dad, and he was always going to play at one school or the other if it was in any way possible. Now that I think about it, there's been a lot of that, going way back. Coaches, too.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Rehashing the same stories, yes...||
...but isn't that one of the pitfalls of being an embedded reporter? You end up with a limited number of stories, all seen from the same point of view.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||All true, of course...||
...but I figured Bacon's inspiration was Ziggy Stardust.
|10 weeks 4 days ago||Can somebody please make sure...||
...this wiki list gets an update, if the book's ever published under this title?
|10 weeks 4 days ago||He also didn't lose 3/4 of||
He also didn't lose 3/4 of his conference games.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||Somebody can check me on this...||
...but I think in the B1G the prohibition ran from 1906-1972, with a WW2 exception in '43 and '44 and a Korean War exception in the early '50s (not sure how many years, or even if the B1G was one of the conferences with the exception).
|10 weeks 5 days ago||I'm no fan of the RPI.||
Syracuse is 55 at Massey, Michigan is 70.
Syracuse is 74 at Kenpom, Michigan is 79.
The bubble cut is probably 47.
You're right that it might make a difference in NIT seeding or even selection (any school that's ahead of you, no matter how far, and drops out moves you up a slot), but Michigan in particular is a very long way from the NCAA bubble.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||I love quotes like this.||
I think they probably expect the reader to draw the conclusion that there haven't been any violations involving current student athletes, but the only conclusion to be logically drawn is that if they were any such violations they haven't finished investigating them yet (if they've even started).
I'll get a good chuckle out of this if four years from now they again wrap up an investigation that "involved no current student athletes."
|10 weeks 5 days ago||At that level, position on||
At that level, position on the bracketmatrix has very little to do with strength.
Michigan appears on precisely one of the 101 brackets, an anonymous WordPress blog that "uses numbers to predict the NCAA field." What numbers he uses and how, he doesn't even hint at. He also has no track record; if he's ever done this before, his blog had a different name.
Syracuse is a bit more solid--they're on four brackets. One is a guy that's been around for nine years, with results that rank 60th out of 76 (worse than Lunardi and Palm). The second has been around for eight years, ranking 65th of 76. The third's a relative newbie who did well his first two years, and the fourth is bottom-5 of all the newbs after two years.
Michigan appears ahead of all the other bubble teams because they're ranked by average seed position and the one blog that has them at all has them tenth. It probably would have made sense to (1) separate the at-large selections from the non-standard conference championship picks and then (2) sort the teams in (1) by number of appearances, instead of average. He appears to have done exactly this for the first eight teams out--I guess he didn't expect anyone to take the apparent rankings seriously after that point.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||Every year...||
|10 weeks 5 days ago||Terrible at life?||
"I’ve had a good life, I have a great family and I love doing what I’m doing for the Yankees."
Sounds like he's doing OK to me.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||Michigan's last win over an||
Michigan's last win over an EOS top-20 team (in Massey) was January 1, 2008.
Since that day, Georgia has 11 top-20 wins to our zero. They've had nine in the last three years. The last time we had that many in a three-year span was 1997-1999.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||I know a||
I know a preacher/psychologist in Georgia who's worked with some of the football players and he absolutely raves about Richt, says he's the best person he's ever met around an athletic department.
He's old enough to have worked with earlier coaches there and I'm sure he's had contact with players in other sports, but it's only Richt that he goes on about.
OK, that's also just one guy. My one guy and your one guy now make two.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||This meme is starting to annoy me.||
Players matter; they aren't primal Matter waiting to be given shape by an omnipotent coach.
The notion seems to be confined to college athletics. Good teaching is important but you never hear anyone say "she could teach quantum field theory to a rusty wheelbarrow."
The thought has crossed my mind that maybe this is linked somehow to the warped economics of college sports, with all the money funneled to coaches because it has to go somewhere and the players can't be paid. People get conditioned to think markets are free even when they obviously aren't and maybe they unconsciously expect pay to correspond to importance. Sometimes the linkage is explicit: "We're paying him 40 million so he damn well better be able to turn a wheelbarrow into an NFL tight end."
|10 weeks 5 days ago||Bo was never a coordinator||
Bo was never a coordinator either, was he? Went straight from position coach at Ohio to HC at Miami.
I think it's better seen as a division of labor than a hierarchy. Coordinator's a different job requiring different skills. The position coach works with the coordinator, but he works for the head coach.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||I think they're going to shift the staff around a bit.||
A lot of familiar names on that staff--Elston played at Michigan while Hoke was an assistant, Bump's son, Wellman. The DC and the strength coach both went to Wayne State. The whole staff on the defensive side of the ball has some connection to Michigan or Detroit.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Just a guess...|
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Damn.||
I sent one of those to Brandon when he took the job and I knew I'd gotten it wrong somehow...
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Hey, I remember that ad.||
|11 weeks 12 hours ago||These are schedule-adjusted||
These are schedule-adjusted and tempo-adjusted numbers. And the difference wasn't all that great in any case--the offenses Michigan faced in 2010 ranked 56th, the offenses they faced in 2011 ranked 69th. Both schedules were pretty weak. (Fremeau doesn't include games against FCS opponents, or 2010 would probably be even worse than 2011.)
And five players cannot push the equivalent of an 0-11 WAC team into the top 20. This was, by some distance, the biggest one-year improvement on either side of the ball in the Fremeau database. There are 120+ teams in FBS with an enormous gap in quality from top to bottom; nobody goes from the bottom 12 to the top 16 in one year. You probably have to go back to WW2 to find anything similar, back when rosters were totally fluid because players were bouncing from school to school for their officer training.
|11 weeks 18 hours ago||Yep.||
That's the difference between #109 in the country (only Wazzoo was worse among P5 teams) and #16. We all know that a 1-10 or 0-11 team in the MAC or WAC (Akron was #108 in dFEI, San Jose State was #110) is just a couple of injuries and three freshmen away from being in the top 20.
|11 weeks 19 hours ago||Unless this turns him around in miraculous fashion...||
I think his career is already over. The upside is limited--he was completely outmatched on an NFL field, not in the usual game-is-too-fast way a rookie is outmatched but physically outmatched. (As an aside, I suspect the reason he arranged to have his own day instead of appearing at the combine was to avoid any side-by-side comparisons that would make this obvious.) And a team that's looking for a replacement-level QB would probably prefer someone with less baggage.
|11 weeks 20 hours ago||I'm curious about the two||
I'm curious about the two players you know personally--do their on-field (court, whatever) contributions give them leverage?
The Browns could give Manziel his release tomorrow and it wouldn't hurt the team one iota. It's a different ultimatum when you're ready and willing to pull the trigger if you get the finger in response.
|11 weeks 20 hours ago||Who are you recommending be run out of the NFL?||
The owner? Or his adviser?
|11 weeks 21 hours ago||I can't speak for Magnus...||
...but I was thinking more of his future wife and kids.
Especially the kids, who will have had no choice in the matter.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||I agree that he made a great play.||
But I think you have the RPS rules wrong.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||Maybe we didn't really||
Maybe we didn't really understand the phrase yet back in '06, but in the last seven years we've gotten some experience with "absolutely obliterated" and that wasn't it.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||He also had offers from||
He also had offers from Wisconsin and Iowa.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||Pete Elliott is ancient||
Pete Elliott is ancient history and I'm not surprised by the blank looks; I think the hatred is of more recent vintage and I think it was largely focused on Bo and his visible contempt for their program, first because of their treatment of Moeller and then compounded by their shenanigans under Mike White. The only times I can remember Bo truly running up the score were against White--the great 70-21 win in '81 and the 69 we laid on them in '86. He was merciless and it was obvious he was enjoying their humiliation.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||A small quibble...||
...a university doesn't find you guilty of rape, it finds that you've violated the school's code of conduct. I doubt there's a school in the country with a code of conduct that precisely mirrors criminal law, and I don't know why anyone would think a code should.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||Through the end of last season...||
The top two maybe don't really belong here. St. John's routinely turned down NCAA invitations to compete instead in the then-more-prestigious NIT and they won the NIT in '43 and '44. Temple won an NIT before there even was an NCAA tournament.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||That's possibly the strangest argument ever made here.||
If your description were correct it would seem to be a pretty well-controlled experiment. Same players, same starters, same system, nothing changed but the coaching staff...and a team that had lost six of its last eight and suffered some of the worst beatdowns in school history miraculously transformed itself into a Sugar Bowl winner and won as many conference games that first season as they'd won in the prior three seasons combined...
...and this is supposed to be proof that the fired staff could coach rings around the guys that followed them?
You can argue Rodriguez's superiority over Hoke on other grounds. Arguing it on the grounds that Hoke was able to win with Rodriguez's players when Rodriguez himself couldn't is bizarre.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||That's the ultimate rule 34 confirmation.||
And apparently it was true even before the internet.
|11 weeks 3 days ago||You call that winning?||
His best season at UM he was 6--6 against FBS competition and 3-5 in the conference and we closed the season with losses by 48-28, 37-7 and 52-14. He deserved to be fired, and was.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||Is there a single "NFL customer"...||
...that's in it for the interviews?
Take a poll of Seahawk season ticket holders. Do they care whether Lynch talks on media day?
Take a poll of the general Seattle population, ask them if they'd be more likely to buy Seahawk tickets if Lync answered questions at pressers.
NFL stadiums are full because of the football games. There's TV coverage because people want to see the football games. They could stop having pressers altogether, tomorrow, and it wouldn't impact ratings or attendance one iota.
That this is what the fans want is bull. This is about what reporters want. The reporters' point of view gets pawned off as the fans' because all you ever see in the press is the reporters' point of view, not the fans'.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||That's not unusual.||
I don't know how it applies in the present situation--scamming your own family is a bit different from preying on the public--but for professional reasons I spent a chunk of my adult life dealing with people who run scams, and one characteristic almost all of them shared is that they come off as "really nice folks", great to be around.
If they weren't, they couldn't be successful at what they do.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||That's an odd comment.||
He took his team to the state final as a freshman--he was hardly able to "outmuscle kids because of physical maturity" as a ninth-grader.
And I'm not sure I understand why he's going to be less physically mature as a senior than he was in these past years. It's not like his opponents are going to be any older.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||Just leave?||
How about trying to stop the crime? Or reporting it?
You're right of course that leaving is the minimum required to avoid "getting dragged into it," but maybe it isn't unreasonable to expect a bit more out of people.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||It won't happen, but...||
...I'm thinking actually having to perform the reconstruction labor themselves would be fitting. (Unfair to the hotel, though, who deserves experienced labor.)
Tearing stuff apart and paying for the damages (or, worse, having someone else pay for them in your name) doesn't quite send the same message as tearing stuff apart and having to put it back together yourself.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||Their o-line was a sieve last year.||
He's mobile, and he does a good job keeping his eyes downfield when he's forced to scramble (which seemed like all the time). But you're not going to build a zone-read attack around him.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||I've seen him play in person maybe a dozen times...||
...and I've never felt his film does him justice. I think his head's going to take him farther than a lot of QB's who show more physical talent on film.
|12 weeks 18 hours ago||Depends on whether he's on||
Depends on whether he's on campus or off. He can interact with them while they're visiting but not while he's on the road.
|12 weeks 18 hours ago||That would be amazing.||
Leroy Keyes was a first round pick, #3 overall. If he can top that, well, damn.
|12 weeks 18 hours ago||Basketball's different.||
I don't know how common that sort of thing is in football. You can get a lot of work done at a big AAU tournament without talking to anybody--there's a lot of potential recruits in the building at the same time, playing competitive games. There's not really anything similar in football.
|12 weeks 19 hours ago||I have a relative with one of||
I have a relative with one of these non-coaching admin positions in basketball (I assume the rules are the same in both sports)--he makes recruiting trips on occasion but can't interact with the players off campus. He can watch, he can be visible in the gym wearing the school colors so the recruits know they're there and interested, but that's about it.
|12 weeks 19 hours ago||Programs differ in how much||
Programs differ in how much attention they pay to local players they aren't interested in recruiting, who are good but not quite D1 caliber--camp invitations and the like. Michigan had traditionally made this a point of emphasis but RR didn't seem particularly interested in it, which pissed off some coaches.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Let's not kid ourselves...||
...there's a lot of work to be done.
Michigan's record against (using Massey):
The last time Michigan played a top-50 team and didn't lose by double digits was last November.
The best road win is @ #110 Penn State.
They're #95 at KenPom, looking up at such luminaries as N.C. Central, Eastern Ky and Toledo.
That's not a good resume.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||MSU...||
...is #33 at Massey, #23 at KenPom.
That's an 8-seed at worst, for the moment, unless you think their computers have also been programmed with some sort of irrational pro-Sparty bias.
Michigan is #71 at Massey, #95 at KenPom.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Read the blockquote again.||
He didn't say anything at all about waiting until the facts are in. He's saying, quite clearly, that cheating is part of sport as long as it doesn't involve something undetectable by the opposition.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||No.||
They only check the balls if one of the teams requests it, and as far as we know only the Colts made such a request. (What it has to do with Rosenberg, I have no idea.)
It's a bit like checking the curvature of a hockey stick. Well, except that there's no penalty in this case.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||It's the score differential that's irrelevant.||
"I didn't need to plagiarize anything--it would have been a perfectly good paper without those eleven paragraphs I cribbed" is not a defense.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Quick back-of-the-envelope calculation.||
Pressure's proportional to temperature for an ideal gas (a good-enough approximation for our purposes). A drop from 12.5 to 10.5 psi is a 16% drop; we'd need a 16% drop in temperature to explain it. 40 degrees Fahrenheit is 278K, which would be a 16% drop if the temperature of the gas when the pressure was measured was 331K, or 136 degrees Fahrenheit.
Edit: Never mind--like countless before me (I should have read the thread, or just known, that I wouldn't be the first to do the calculation) I forgot about the difference between air pressure and gauge pressure.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||It seems to me...||
...that the issue here isn't the pressure of the balls New England used but the difference in pressure, if any, between the balls used when the Patriots were on offense and the balls used when the Colts were on offense.
If that wasn't checked, WTF was the league doing when it "investigated" this? If it was, why aren't we hearing the results?
|12 weeks 5 days ago||I don't mean to call anyone out...||
...it's a random selection from a lot of similar posts. But I'd have to call this a defense of cheating...
|12 weeks 6 days ago||Corollary.||
There was absolutely nothing wrong with Spartan Bob's shenanigans. After all, we could see that the clock wasn't moving. It wasn't anything the opponent couldn't detect.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||Yes, that's correct. But||
Yes, that's correct.
But those balls go into a single pool, used by both teams. The only way the two teams would be using different balls would be if the ball attendants were feeding particular balls into play depending on which team was on offense.
That would be possible, and it's the crux of the issue here.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||Pre-game, yes, but...||
Just before kickoff, all the balls are delivered to the ball attendants. They could just as easily manipulate the kicking balls as the scrimmage balls (not that there's been any serious suggestion that it happened in this case).
The bottom line is that all the balls are in the possession of employees of the home team throughout the game. They control the balls on the sideline; they're the ones that send the balls onto the field. If the league really wants to make sure stuff like this doesn't happen they either need to supply neutral ball attendants, or make the penalty for manipulation so great that no one would ever risk it.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||Per NFL rules...||
“It is the responsibility of the home team to furnish playable balls at all times by attendants from either side of the playing field.”
Once checked by the officials, the balls are in the custody of ball attendants, who are in the employ of the home team. It wouldn't be that hard to deflate a few balls and make sure those are the balls on the field while the home team is on offense. Except in the event of a turnover, there's always a kicking play between possessions, which means a change of ball. And on a wet day like this the ball's being swapped out all the time.
What the Colts and/or the officials should have done--and I'm not sure whether they did or not--is also check some balls in use while the Colts were on offense. If all the balls were similarly deflated there'd be no competitive advantage and there'd be no issue. If there was a systematic difference in pressure depending on which team had the ball, we could be pretty sure the ball boys were up to something.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||I had exactly the opposite reaction to that last stat.||
I agree with the people that say they should have called off the trap, but six fouls in a half isn't a lot.
But no fouls in a half? That goes way beyond physical mismatch--that's a group that's not even trying.
I was on the wrong end of a few of these in IMs. In January there was only one league and my collection of motley misfits had to play a team that had just beaten the varsity, badly, in a scrimmage (that can happen at a D3 school--a few of them had played varsity as freshmen and sophomores but decided basketball was taking too much time from their class work). They whooped us by 80 in a shortened game...but we were still trying to get in their way, trying to box out, and we picked up a few fouls along the way.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||My father went through a season like this.||
He was coaching eighth-grade boys one year and had a really, really good team, and spent the season trying to come up with ways to keep the score down. He'd do things like take away the dribble--nobody's allowed to dribble, at all, unless you need one dribble to get to the basket for an open layup.
Sometimes that didn't even work.
And sometimes the ideas backfired. Once they were up 26-7 at the half. That wasn't quite as bad as some of the games had been, and at some point you have to let your starters get some game experience, right? At that point they'd only had one competitive game all year.
So he split the team into two groups of six, with the best players split between the groups. He took away the dribble, again, and he told the two groups that whichever one gave up more points in their quarter would have to run gassers the next day in practice. (My memory is that he also said whichever group scored fewer would run, too, but it's probably wrong because nobody else remembers it.)
You've probably already figured out the strategy for the third-quarter group--they went out and used up all the fouls, made sure the other team was in the bonus when the 4th quarter started. They won their quarter 16-0 and were pretty pleased with themselves.
The second group went out in a bad mood. No dribble was bad enough, and now a single foul would mean they had to run.
They won their quarter 17-0.
And the other coach was mad. Hell, their scorekeeper was mad, which I remember well because I was keeping our book and got an earful.
What I thought, sitting there at the table watching it all and listening to all the bitching, I couldn't very well say, which was that damn it there's no excuse for being that bad. Their school was twice the size of ours, and they couldn't even put five guys out there that could defend a team that wasn't allowed to dribble??? That wasn't lack of physical talent, that was years of incompetent coaching.
|13 weeks 4 days ago||I'm thinking early to mid '80s for the first usage.||
Jackson didn't get to do many games at Michigan in the '70s--remember, each team was only allowed be on TV once per season then, which basically meant that the only network games from Michigan were the odd-numbered years against OSU. WolverineHistorian would know better, but I think the first game Jackson ever did there was '77 Ohio.
|14 weeks 8 hours ago||Going to be a long week here in Ohio.||
So I think tomorrow I'm going to go out, shake the hand of every OSU fan I can find, look them square in the eye and, without a trace of irony in my voice, offer my heartfelt congratulations.
I have the flu.
|14 weeks 8 hours ago||It's January 1, 1969.||
Embrace the suck.
|14 weeks 8 hours ago||I loved it.||
Too many football fans around the country don't care about Ohio State. Bring back the hate.
And if this really is 1968 all over again, I can deal with that too. That next decade was glorious, if exquisitely painful at times.
|14 weeks 13 hours ago||Fremeau's DYAR is||
Fremeau's DYAR is schedule-adjusted yards-above-replacement, so it gives us a chance to see how much of a difference this actually makes.
On the left is Manning's rank in DYAR for each season, on the right is his rank in the equivalent, non-schedule-adjusted YAR:
That's a hell of a career no matter which column you look at.
And unlike college, SOS is apparently a pretty marginal effect in the NFL. In 12 of his 16 seasons his ranking was the same whether you adjust or not. Twice he was bumped up by a weaker schedule, twice he was bumped down by a stronger schedule, and the movement was never more than two slots.
|14 weeks 14 hours ago||Comments like this...||
...always seem to come from fans of teams that very seldom even make the playoffs.
|14 weeks 3 days ago||So, in this case, he should||
So, in this case, he should have punched himself in the mouth?
I guess that could explain the picture....
|14 weeks 3 days ago||Bowl losses?||
I, for one, would much rather lose a bowl game than not be invited to one.
|14 weeks 3 days ago||It didn't start with Faust's hiring at ND.||
There were already a ton of ND fans here in the '60s and '70s (and probably before but I'm not that old).
I think it's the natural result of the dominance of the four Catholic high schools in football. There are about 30 D1 and D2 high schools in the area and as mentioned above, 19 of the 22 Cincinnati players now in the NFL went to one of those four schools, only 3 came from one of the 27 (I think that's the number) big publics.
There's also, probably for the same reason, a lot of ND resentment here too. I've never met so many people whose favorite team--not even second favorite--is whoever's playing Notre Dame.
|14 weeks 3 days ago||That's not how I remember it.||
Do you honestly think the program was clean under Frieder and the problems suddenly appeared when Fisher took over as HC? We may just have a different definition of "clean".
There was a lot of foul-smelling smoke around the program in the 80s--it's a big reason Bo "didn't fully support basketball", in Frieder's words. I think it's very likely Bo would have cleaned house if the surprise NC hadn't forced his hand.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||I don't think it's a stretch...||
...to suggest that the attitudes of Beilein and Frieder and Fisher towards such matters are not quite the same. We know the program wasn't anywhere close to clean in the 80s and 90s, and as long as you're going back that far for your examples I'm pretty happy.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||Maybe you don't recall it, but...||
And I'm not blaming Gardner either. Or Borges, or Threet, or Rodriguez. It's a natural cost of these repeated 180-degree switches in philosophy--you wind up rosters full of guys you probably wouldn't have recruited and who aren't ideal fits for what you know how to do.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||"What else could it be"||
is a lazy argument.
The natural next step is to isolate the variable you think is responsible and see if the correlation you expect is really there.
And, FWIW, the very fact you mention that "punting is getting better" is a sign that something else has happened over time besides changes in tactics. The punters themselves have changed with time. Average punts (gross, not net) are much longer now than they were 20 years ago. 43 yards/kick was enough to lead the NFL in the early 90s--we've seen several kickers top 50 in the last few years. The ten longest averages in NFL history all happened in the last eight years; 33 of the top 34 happened this century.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||An odd story.||
Was this supposed to have happened before or after Shafer was effectively deposed in the run-up to Purdue? It was already clear at that point that Shafer was done at Michigan, and nothing about the way it went down, then or at the end of the season, makes it seem like any sort of amicable separation.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||If anyone ever gets around to doing one...||
One of the things I'm really curious about is the impact of Aussie punters. If it turns out to be true that the shield-punt is superior, how important is it to have a guy that can kick accurately and on the move?
Maybe we could find a way to separate the "rugby kicks" from the straight shotgun punts. Or maybe the threat of it is important on its own (remember M sending two punt returners back to defend against it?).
Another thing that might be useful is to look at the spectrum of returns, and not just averages. SC's write-up suggests that shield punts might give up more long returns because there's a single wave of coverage. Is it true, in practice? It hasn't been my impression; some data would be nice.
For as much interest as there's been on the topic around here, it seems to me there's a lot we don't know.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||The rules are different.||
In the NFL only eligible receivers can release before the ball is kicked. A shield punt makes no sense if you can't send your linemen downfield.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||Thanks.||
I'd forgotten that O'Brien was a St. X grad too.
Bible went with O'Brien to NCSU and I was a little surprised they didn't have anyone on the list, but I suppose it was a bit easier to get the highest-level players from the local Catholic high schools to B.C. It's the next best thing to Notre Dame and in those days you got to play them every year.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||They're related...||
...but I don't think that's the whole story.
For one thing, crappy opponents have gone up by nearly two per season. Playing one extra game can't be the whole reason, can it?
For another, they don't quite coincide. Michigan's first 12-game season didn't include a single truly bad team; it took three years for an AD to hit on the Delaware State solution. At Alabama it was the other way around--their first bad FCS opponents were before the extra game was added.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||It would take some work to unravel how it impacted their stats.||
But there has been a change in scheduling practices through the years.
From 2004-2007 Michigan played a total of three teams that were outside the top 100 at Massey: Illinois '04, EMU and Minnesota '07. EMU was the worst at #135.
From 2009-2012 Michigan played ten teams outside the top 100. Four were outside the top 200, Delaware State wasn't even in the top 300.
It hasn't gotten much better, either--there were five more >100 opponents in 2013-2014, though at least we haven't gone above 200 again.
This really shouldn't be a surprise--Brian's been rightfully grousing about the crappy home schedules for years now. And it's by choice--in the Henne era all but one of the bad opponents were conference foes that had to be scheduled. Only 2 of the 17 since '08 were in conference; the other 15 were optional.
This isn't peculiar to Michigan of course--it's pretty much universal among power-conference teams. I just ran the same numbers for Alabama and they're playing the same volume of crappy opponents that Michigan does. The only difference is that Alabama started doing this in '04 instead of '08 or '09.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||The study linked in this thread...||
...does not compare teams running the two schemes. It contains charts of average yards per return, and % of punts returned, for all teams regardless of scheme.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||Can anyone link to a study...||
...that demonstrates this statistical superiority? I can't even find a study that systematically compares teams running the two schemes.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||That's the reverse of the usual Borges pattern.||
It usually takes him a year to get the thing installed; the first year can be pretty rough.
Michigan was the outlier, probably because he put off installation.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||But he wasn't the #5 pocket||
But he wasn't the #5 pocket QB. He fit Borges's WCO about as well as Steven Threet fit RR's spread.
To Borges's (and Gardner's) credit, he tried to find ways to make it work and sometimes succeeded. But it was always a bad fit.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||Bellomy...||
...was a desperation Hail Mary thrown in the dying seconds of a transition recruiting class.
No serious person thinks Bellomy was Al Borges's ideal QB protege.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||That would be the Franklin spread...||
...that was winning games 3-2 the following season and getting Franklin fired halfway through.
You're probably the only person that remembers the Tony Franklin era at Auburn as a success. He lasted seven games and put up something like 13 ppg if you don't count the cupcake games.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||Robinson was excellent at Texas.||
He came in mid-season when they were in total disarray--they'd just given up 550 yards rushing to BYU the week before he was hired--and by year's end he'd somehow lifted them to #31 in dFEI.
And SJSU's defense last year was a great improvement over the year prior. They were #115 out of 125 in 2013, #74 last year. 74 may not seem all that great but it's better than anyone in their division except SDSU.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||That's not true.||
It's about 50/50 in FBS right now.
(There's also some confusion about terminology--"spread" is usually used to describe the NFL-style punt referred to here as "dinosaur", with "shield" used for what here is referred to as "spread".
|14 weeks 5 days ago||That's the kind of signing we||
That's the kind of signing we need more of. Etcheverry was in his prime when he came.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||Maybe I just have a different perspective on this...||
...because I grew up in a soccer community?
Friday nights at my high school, the stadium was empty after halftime because the band parents had all gone home. But on Saturdays, for soccer, you couldn't park within half a mile of the stadium and if you weren't there half an hour before game time you weren't finding a seat. Soccer was the sport for kids there, had been since the late '60s. It wasn't until I went away for college that I realized how unusual it all was.
It's still unusual--I don't suppose that sort of Saturday Night Lights atmosphere exists anywhere in the US (the luster's faded in my town, too, the demographics are different now--the school's about 1/3 the size it was--and the community doesn't support HS sports of any kind). But the rest of it? Kids playing soccer in every park? Organized youth leagues every bit as big and important as Pop Warner and Knothole? Seems to be everywhere.
We had a three-decade head start on the rest of the country, and it makes it hard to be patient. It seems like we should be there by now...and here's MLS, still trying to make money off big names instead of maximizing the product on the field. I have the same reaction to the European clubs coming over here for their pre-season friendlies. I don't want to see an exhibition--I want to see soccer.
It's frustrating. And it could be so much better. And it will...but I'm starting to worry that I won't live to see it.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||Hristo Stoichkov, too.||
No Pele, Beckenbauer or Cruyff, of course, but in his prime I'd probably have taken him over any one else we've mentioned here. I think Beckenbauer, Cruyff, Kaka and Stoichkov are the only Ballon d'Or winners on the list.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||I see it differently.||
I don't know what you get out of playing with or against players that can no longer play. It's like thinking you're going to get more out of playing in a master-series tennis exhibition than you'd get out of a real tournament.
I don't see that it raises the profile of the league, either, at least among soccer people. To me it reinforces the impression that it's a third-tier league, at best, with more money than it can find a use for. Still have some skills but can't run any more? We pay a lot better than League Two and you'll be just as successful here...and the best part is that the fans won't even notice that you aren't any good.
|14 weeks 5 days ago||I wish it were otherwise...||
...but I'd take Moeller's list of D-1 talent over Colerain's without any question, and that's tbeen true for at least 50 years now. Who, before Bolden, has been a success at power-conference level from Colerain? B.J. Askew and Eric Kattus, but that was a long time ago.
Here's an interesting (perhaps not complete) list of former Cincinnati HS players now in the NFL. Totals by college:
I wonder if Dana Bible is largely responsible for that BC total. Four of the five were from his era--Kuechly is the only more recent player.
19 of the 22 went to one of the four big Catholic high schools.
|14 weeks 6 days ago||"Who are we to question anything [the head coach] does."||
Not sure if serious.
|14 weeks 6 days ago||That makes more sense...||
...but considering the magnitude of the change in approach on the offensive side of the ball, I don't think there were all that many transfers then either. It might have seemed like a lot because it had been so long since Michigan had been through a change in regime, but compared with a typical coaching change (and not a promotion-from-within) it wasn't that bad. It certainly was nothing like what happened when Bo arrived.
|14 weeks 6 days ago||I'm going to make a prediction here.||
Charlie Strong will end his career at Texas:
Let's come back in a decade and compare.
|14 weeks 6 days ago||"Carr-level"?||
Were there a lot of transfers out in 1995? I don't remember that.
|14 weeks 6 days ago||Texas/Charlie Strong in the coming year?||
I hope it doesn't also come with a losing record and 5+ losses by 20+ points like it did there.
Of course the cynical view is that that would probably be for the best, for Harbaugh. Set the bar low, establish your upward trend early.
|15 weeks 21 hours ago||Here's a seldom-observed fact...||
Here are all Michigan's 20th century coaches, ranked by the difference between their winning percentage at Michigan and their predecessor's.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||That's what it was.||
Hackett commented about the bags under Minick's eyes; that's why Harbaugh makes the sleep comment.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Gunner Kiel was "last minute"?||
As I recall, Reggie Germany thought about doing this after his sophomore year.
|15 weeks 3 days ago||Like Mexican?||
The moles at Red Iguana are outstanding.
|15 weeks 3 days ago||Bars in England...||
...are accustomed to closing quite early. Even in London, most close at the traditional 11pm.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||SEC West||
That's a crapload of points given up.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||There wasn't any way to leave them out...||
...but they were:
I don't think any team with power rankings that low has been in the national championship conversation on New Years Day since SMU in 1982. I'd have made them double-digit underdogs to any of the other three.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||The all-important halftime line...||
...is Oregon -5 1/2.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||Let's not assume the high ground here.||
If we had a mascot there'd be no shortage of vulgar complaints.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||It's been more mixed than that.||
Going into yesterday, wasn't the B12 0-3? Texas and Oklahoma were hammered; WVU also lost.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||This should be a Festivus event.||
The Exposing of the Blowhards. Every arrogant and authoritative but fictitious statement from the coaching search is posted for ten minutes of public ridicule, then we move on to the next.
Probably still be at it this time next year.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||Win #119 for Alvarez.||
Hope he's around a good long time and has a chance to make it 120 someday.
One of the all-time greats as far as I'm concerned. There's turnaround jobs, and then there's what Alvarez did at Wisconsin. He didn't just win with a bottomdweller, he turned them into a permanent power.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||Doug Baldwin? Richard Sherman?||
Nobody's going to put it that way: "he was too hard on me".
Baldwin has softened; Sherman hasn't.
Harbaugh's probably mellowed a bit since then, too.