i think a lot of us spend more time following michigan football than we would rather admit. AFter all, you are here posting things as well, albeit , in your defense, probably less than I have tonight. You sort of turn self-governance on its head, as it is expressed anyway in regards to free speech. No problem, is is somewhat of an opaque term.
The self governance aspect of free speech goes towards the idea that we think it is a bad idea to suppress criticism by the minority of those who are in the majority. Therefore, self governance may not be one of the tenets of free speech that would be your strongest argument against me. I would probably agree with the notion however that there is a marketplace of ideas (discovering truth) and perhaps it is a viable conclusion that because most of the people posting here on mgoblog believe that the 3-3-5 is the best chance we have to succeed on defense this year, that it in actuality is the best chance we have of succeeding on defense, and therefore free speech has been satisfied in that we have discovered "the truth" that the 3-3-5 is the best defense.
About the name, I mean, I'm not posting to intentionally make people angry, but I guess I could see why my explanation would make you think that. peace.
I agree with you there. Part of the reason I thought going to a solid four man front would be to ease the effect that not having a David Harris on our team would have on our overall defense, as the reads for ezeh would get a lot easier if the potential gaps on running plays were reduced. If we had a kick ass linebacking corps, the 3-3-5 would probably be a more viable option.
There's more than 1 reason to be afraid of me. If you want to find out make the trip down here some time, I'll show you if you like. - the_big_house 500th
David, literally man, I don't think that personal threatening a fellow fan is really in line with the spirit behind being a michgan fan. Sorry I made you that angry man. Go Blue.
1) started an unnecessary new thread (seriously, I think the "don't make new posts" crowd is way too active and even I can tell this would have been better placed in one of a dozen worthy threads),
I agree that starting unnecessary new threads is annoying and I don't like it when other people do this, and I apologize on that point BUT
, In my defense what I am going to say though is that a topic or post that is critical of the 3-3-5, regardless of which thread it is brought up in, is always greeted with the reply that it should have been brought up in another thread and that it shouldn't be discussed because it has been discussed extensively already.
Continuing on that line of reasoning, I thought that what we experienced yesterday during the MSU game brought new relevance to the discussion of the 3-3-5, because yesterday showed us the result of running this scheme against a team who can run the ball, and MSU is really the first good running team we have faced. Up until yesterday, it was arguably "unknown" how the 3-3-5 would fare against a strong running team. Given this fact, I made a new topic.
2) made your argument with inflammatory, hyperbolic, insulting, and occasionally brah-speak riddled posts,
I don't recall or see anywhere in this thread where I was insulting unless someone insulted me first without a good critique of my argument however terrible it may or may not be. When someone insults me or just instructs everyone else to negbang me, my first response is to insult them because I'm thinking, that's just what OSU fans tend to do, not Michigan fans. So I insult them back, at least on mgoboard. If Lamaar Woodley insulted me, I would thank him and run away.
brah-speak
I don't see much Brah-speak in my posts, but then again, this is a site dedicated to football. To the extent that my screenname originates from common law property doctrine, I figure maybe this would absolve me of any dreaded brah-speak were I to have engaged in it but perhaps i that isn't enough I could also include a link in my signature to The Smiths Best II, which I own, for my own mgoenjoyment.
attacked others when they called you on it
The general import of how I speak on blogs is not to attack people unless I feel like they are tryng to incite the collective community against me without providing any concrete reason of why I am wrong. If you look up and down this post, where people bring up relevant issues with my argument I respond to them in a cordial manner.
If you bring up fact a, and fact b, and fact c, I don't respond by calling you an asshole. I respond with what I think may be a follow up to the argument or a comment on what they said. Where people just call me an idiot and they don't explain why they are the ones who are being inflammatory, I get pissed. Granted perhaps I should even concede that even these people deserve cordial responses if the topic Ihave raised is already unpopular, but this behaviour is something I have seen all over the place on this board.
Anyway, thank you for at least not being one of the people who just calls me an idiot but brings some substance to your post. . Go blue!
I see what you are saying. But I guess the spirit of my post is saying is that if Campbell seriously isn't ready to play division 1 football at michigan yet, then stick whoever the next true defensive tackle is into the game next to martin with two true strongside defensive ends next to them in situations where you need to control the line of scrimmage. Personally I think the number 2 defensive tackle is campbell, but if it isn't, then whoever that would be (sagesse maybe).
I don't believe this is his first screenname either. Just a feeling.
Actually, your feeling is wrong. This is the only screenname I have used on mgoblog. I signed up on November 12, 2009, and followed the blog long before that, as Brian is has the best content out there. In case you were wondering, Nor will I change my screenname just because I have been negbanged. My screenname is based on the common law property theory of adverse possession, which basically says that you will come to own property that you don't hold legal title to if you act like it is yours and nobody contests it within a given statutory period.
In the mgoblog community, I had the foresight to see that many of my opinions would in fact give me the reputation of being unpopular, so in time, my conduct through posting, would adversely and literally turn me into a villain. I was born in 1977. So I am adversevillain77. Thank you for playing.
I think its obvious to most people that i'm not advocating that i would have a bona fide legal claim under the first admendment for getting negbanged on mgoblog. As I'm sure you know, this would be a moot question and foreclosed in the literal sense because first and foremost I have no injury.
The relevant point is that the sprit behind any blogging community is the same spirit that drives the history of free speech, which is self govenance, discovering truth, self expression, and promoting tolerance. Does that help?
thats great David, so your basic point is that it is better to be popular and wrong rather than being right even if it is unpopular. Cool man. That is a great lesson. Thanks.
So you think that basically it is preferable to give up the line of scrimmage for the advantage that one extra mediocre player gives us in pass coverage?
I didn't say that I know more than him, I in fact, know that I don't. But you have to admit that what I'm suggesting (a traditional defensive line against the heart of the big ten schedule) is really not that crazy, regardless of how bad our defensive backfield is. Teams have to keep Denard off the field, and to do this, they will attempt to establish the run. We can't stop the run against wiscy, iowa, and osu with three defensive lineman and Roh. Thats what yesterday showed us. IF we run that front against any of those three teams, they are going to kill us.
black's frame ultimately will support the weight of about 270. He will for sure be a definitive strong side defensive end in the big ten. Roh is not a strong side defensive end. dude. . We've all seen Roh. Roh is great but he's getting neutralized.
But the opposite of the point you make is the entire point behind my post genius. The conventional argument, as you aptly point out along with your comrades, is that we run the 3-3-5 to compensate for the woes we have in the defensive backfield. Check. But against powerhouse running teams in the big ten the gaping whole we leave in the middle with respect to the run outweighs the risk that the defensive backfield prevents. Would you rather give up the long pass or would you rather have the other team consistently bend us over and control the line of scrimmage? If they complete a long pass for a touchdown we get the ball back immediately. Denard, in most games, can compensate by scoring fast. However, by leaving a hole in the middle with our band-aid defensive line, the other team controls the clock, and thus our destiny. So I would opt for the former situation, where we give up the long pass, but don't give up control of the line of scrimmage, and don't give up time with Denard on the field. Does this make sense to you?
dude check this out. you guys all went to make it so I can't talk here that is fine with me. You all seem to agree with whatever unsuccessful scheme we have because the coaches who are running it are supposedly experts. If free speech is something you guys all want to outlaw, so be it. If you have time to score 10 thousand points here, great. That is sad, but good for you. Cool. But do me one favor. If you have the time post your own thread on why the 3-3-5 is preferable against a traditional big ten powerhouse team. I challenge you to do this. You can silence me that way but no matter how much you guys all neg bang me in your frustration over the loss, its not going to stop Terrell Pryor, its not going to stop Iowa, and it certainly isn't going to stop Wisconsin. I don't mean any disrepsect to Brian, because I think the guy is a genius, and his content is great. But the rest of you are just transplants from rivals and the insiders, coming over here and ruining free dialgoue by silencing anyone that you don't agree with with your moral majority conventional wisdom. As fans, with the likes of you, we all deserve to lose.
No, what the post meant was that you could bring in Roh in some situations on third town as a fifth defensive lineman against heavy run packages. we used to do this all of the time with crable. That is what Roh is. he is not a defensive lineman. I don't care if you all think I'm wrong because I'm not wrong. I guarantee you before the end of the year you will see Campbell and Martin out there at the same time, with two other traditional defensive ends. Watch.
what, and you do because you have three thousand points on your mgoblog account? My position is simple, it advocates putting players on teh field to take away either the run or the pass, but not both. Right now we are giving up both. It may take someone who knows jack shit about football to actually be able to suggest something that might help us win, because right now our defensive experts are riding our team into a dungeon that is irretrievably crippling.. Certainly GERG is reputed to know more than jack shit about football yet look how bad his defense is. Its last in the country. Are any of you watching these games?
dude, i love roh but he really hasn't done much this season. No matter who you have in at linebacker, even if it is ezeh, he doesn't have to guess each time about which wide open hold the running back is going to hit (like he had to yesterday on each of their long td runs that demoralized the team. With a four man front, Ezeh probably would improve twice as much. Roh, up to this point, despite his popularity, has been neutralized and simply isn't big enough to play defensive end in the big ten.
the 4-2-5 is not a 4-2-5 when roh is one of the defensive lineman. The 4-2-5, by definition, has to have at least four defensive lineman that could at least potentially draw a double team. I'm saying four actual defensive lineman.
but there is a difference. The million posts about the 3-3-5 all came before yesterday, when it was proven to be absolutely the worst possible defense we can be running against a big ten team that can run the ball, the category of which at iowa, ohio state, and wisconsin fall into. We know now that it can't possibly work and it has to change. Unless of course you like losing to these freaking rummy teams every year that we used to beat.
My solution is to put anyone on the field rather than Ezeh in his spot.. I didn't advocate running a five man defensive line if you read the post, call it what you will, or maybe just tell me i'm wrong when iowa brings in two tight ends and a fullback next week and runs it down our throats. If you think I'm wrong, maybe you should be down there on the field with Gerg commandeering our next big ten ass-handed loss.
Here is all I am saying. You can't give this kind of power to a player who has left the program. I was at the 2004 michigan state game and I love braylon as much as the next michigan fan but isn't this year just as much about new beginnings as it is about anything? If Richrod takes this team to a new direction why should he have to listen to freaking braylon edwards about who gets to wear what jersey? Should Braylon next be deciding who the starters should be because he gives money to the university? Edwards has shown a lot of bad and unsober judgment in my opinion and I don't think we owe him any present control over the program, especially given the fact that the guy continuously embarrasses himself in the public eye lately. Neg bang away bitches....
not that I'm agreeing with you because I got negbanged to all hell for starting the number 1 jersey denard thread, but most people would probably say that you are just trying to start a flame war, and there are already msu hate threads for that down the board.
to me this all seems like a clear case that hart hasn't really decided yet, the orlando sentinel knows that, but prints this bullshit article anyway in an attempt to influence the kid to go to bama. you have to wonder....
our coaches can give the number 1 jersey to whoever they want, a former player can't dictate who gets what. We gave the number 1 jersey to just about anyone before Edwards came along and made it into a self-congratulatory ode-to-braylon. And are we really going to let someone who is stupid enough to have millions of dollars at their disposal yet still get a DUI at 5am when they could have called a cab dictate what we do with our program going forward? Give me a break.
SOS is completely subjective. college football rankings don't account for how in the last 10 years, the difference in the level of talent between traditional powerhouses and no-name teams has become far narrower than it has ever been. nobody doubts osu is a top 10 team.
The actual rankings as i look at them are more like groupings, like a grading curve. What this means is that anyone within a class has the ability to beat another member of its class at least half of the times they would hypothetically play each other, or the scores would be close every time they played. a hypothetical 10 games.
Group A (teams in the top 5) These teams beat B and C teams 9/10 times where the wins are decisive but they split games amongst each other 5/5)
Group B(teams below the top 5 but in the top 40) These teams beat A teams 1/5 or m times and lose no less than 4 out of 10 games to any other team in group B)
Group C(Teams starting at the 15th actual best team all the way down to the 100th actual best team) these teams lose 10/10 games against top 5 teams and lose more than 5 to Group B teams, while splitting amongst each other 3 out of 10 to 7 out of 10)
So basically it goes like this. if your team is in group c you are among the third echelon of teams but you might be ranked in the polls as high as 15 or you could be temple or toledo or umass. you are in group c becasue hypothetically if you play a group B team 10 times, you lose more than 5 times, or on average, lose by more than a touchdown. example: FSU 2009 loses more than 5/10 times to cincinatti 2009, iowa 2009 beats slippery rock more than 5/10 times.
IF your team is in group B you may be ranked very high or you might not be in the top 25 at all. Group A teams beat you 4/5 games and consistently win by more than one score. I. Either way, Group A teams beat B teams like you 9/10 times whereas you beat those B teams only 5/10 times. example: Florida 2010 beats Cincinatti. 9/10 times | Florida's single 2009 loss was roughly 1 in 2 odds to alabama , another group A team from 2009) Cincinnatti was 12-0 prior to the loss on wins over group B and group C teams (very close wins over Pitt, Uconn)
So the basic premise behind this system is that there are no such thing as rankings as the media portrays them. ohio state is probably a top five team but the fact they beat miami (who is either a B but could be a C team) means no more than if they would have beaten Notre Dame (who could be a B team or a C team)... However, if OSU goes undefeated in the big ten, that would be huge for them only if one of the teams they beat only lost to osu (which would be evidence that that team was in fact also a group A team)
becuase if you kick a field goal close to the end zone when you are killing the other team at the end of the game, it looks like you are taking the sure points rather than running the risk of not scoring. This in turn makes it look like you are trying to run up the score and rub it in more.
I never said it wasn't true. The point is is that the media can choose to spin a game multiple ways. The story could have just as easily been that "Michigan shredded UMASS for over 500 yards" and "Wisconsin struggled at home against an Arizona State team that went 4-8 in 2009, raising questions that Wisconsin is a slow, lumbering team," yet they didn't say that, because today they are reporting bias against michigan. And yes, really. UMASS and arizona state would probably be a close game. UMASS offensive line averages like 6 foot 6 310.
even assuming that he isn't ready its not like they are not going to not run a four man front simply because campbell isn't ready to play. If he isn't ready a four man front with a player from the sagesse / banks / patterson platoon + martin + van bergen + roh would still be more viable than the three man front we saw today. And since campbell is a natural nose he isn't going to be an option on any team that runs a three man front + has mike martin on their defense.
yeah dude, a joke that includes 1) inventing a dirty play that our defender didn't commit and 2) our best player in the last 20 years getting deliberately injured is f - - - - - - hilarious. I just can't stop laughing.
Recent Comments
haha
yeah legal theory seems vastly unpopular. should have known...
well hopefully I can recover by the end of the year. I am getting smoked though thats for sure.
my bad, now i feel stupid.
i think a lot of us spend more time following michigan football than we would rather admit. AFter all, you are here posting things as well, albeit , in your defense, probably less than I have tonight. You sort of turn self-governance on its head, as it is expressed anyway in regards to free speech. No problem, is is somewhat of an opaque term.
The self governance aspect of free speech goes towards the idea that we think it is a bad idea to suppress criticism by the minority of those who are in the majority. Therefore, self governance may not be one of the tenets of free speech that would be your strongest argument against me. I would probably agree with the notion however that there is a marketplace of ideas (discovering truth) and perhaps it is a viable conclusion that because most of the people posting here on mgoblog believe that the 3-3-5 is the best chance we have to succeed on defense this year, that it in actuality is the best chance we have of succeeding on defense, and therefore free speech has been satisfied in that we have discovered "the truth" that the 3-3-5 is the best defense.
About the name, I mean, I'm not posting to intentionally make people angry, but I guess I could see why my explanation would make you think that. peace.
I agree with you there. Part of the reason I thought going to a solid four man front would be to ease the effect that not having a David Harris on our team would have on our overall defense, as the reads for ezeh would get a lot easier if the potential gaps on running plays were reduced. If we had a kick ass linebacking corps, the 3-3-5 would probably be a more viable option.
David, literally man, I don't think that personal threatening a fellow fan is really in line with the spirit behind being a michgan fan. Sorry I made you that angry man. Go Blue.
I agree that starting unnecessary new threads is annoying and I don't like it when other people do this, and I apologize on that point BUT
, In my defense what I am going to say though is that a topic or post that is critical of the 3-3-5, regardless of which thread it is brought up in, is always greeted with the reply that it should have been brought up in another thread and that it shouldn't be discussed because it has been discussed extensively already.
Continuing on that line of reasoning, I thought that what we experienced yesterday during the MSU game brought new relevance to the discussion of the 3-3-5, because yesterday showed us the result of running this scheme against a team who can run the ball, and MSU is really the first good running team we have faced. Up until yesterday, it was arguably "unknown" how the 3-3-5 would fare against a strong running team. Given this fact, I made a new topic.
I don't recall or see anywhere in this thread where I was insulting unless someone insulted me first without a good critique of my argument however terrible it may or may not be. When someone insults me or just instructs everyone else to negbang me, my first response is to insult them because I'm thinking, that's just what OSU fans tend to do, not Michigan fans. So I insult them back, at least on mgoboard. If Lamaar Woodley insulted me, I would thank him and run away.
I don't see much Brah-speak in my posts, but then again, this is a site dedicated to football. To the extent that my screenname originates from common law property doctrine, I figure maybe this would absolve me of any dreaded brah-speak were I to have engaged in it but perhaps i that isn't enough I could also include a link in my signature to The Smiths Best II, which I own, for my own mgoenjoyment.
The general import of how I speak on blogs is not to attack people unless I feel like they are tryng to incite the collective community against me without providing any concrete reason of why I am wrong. If you look up and down this post, where people bring up relevant issues with my argument I respond to them in a cordial manner.
If you bring up fact a, and fact b, and fact c, I don't respond by calling you an asshole. I respond with what I think may be a follow up to the argument or a comment on what they said. Where people just call me an idiot and they don't explain why they are the ones who are being inflammatory, I get pissed. Granted perhaps I should even concede that even these people deserve cordial responses if the topic Ihave raised is already unpopular, but this behaviour is something I have seen all over the place on this board.
Anyway, thank you for at least not being one of the people who just calls me an idiot but brings some substance to your post. . Go blue!
the plane comment was sarcastic but my original post isn't.
I see what you are saying. But I guess the spirit of my post is saying is that if Campbell seriously isn't ready to play division 1 football at michigan yet, then stick whoever the next true defensive tackle is into the game next to martin with two true strongside defensive ends next to them in situations where you need to control the line of scrimmage. Personally I think the number 2 defensive tackle is campbell, but if it isn't, then whoever that would be (sagesse maybe).
Actually, your feeling is wrong. This is the only screenname I have used on mgoblog. I signed up on November 12, 2009, and followed the blog long before that, as Brian is has the best content out there. In case you were wondering, Nor will I change my screenname just because I have been negbanged. My screenname is based on the common law property theory of adverse possession, which basically says that you will come to own property that you don't hold legal title to if you act like it is yours and nobody contests it within a given statutory period.
In the mgoblog community, I had the foresight to see that many of my opinions would in fact give me the reputation of being unpopular, so in time, my conduct through posting, would adversely and literally turn me into a villain. I was born in 1977. So I am adversevillain77. Thank you for playing.
I think its obvious to most people that i'm not advocating that i would have a bona fide legal claim under the first admendment for getting negbanged on mgoblog. As I'm sure you know, this would be a moot question and foreclosed in the literal sense because first and foremost I have no injury.
The relevant point is that the sprit behind any blogging community is the same spirit that drives the history of free speech, which is self govenance, discovering truth, self expression, and promoting tolerance. Does that help?
thats great David, so your basic point is that it is better to be popular and wrong rather than being right even if it is unpopular. Cool man. That is a great lesson. Thanks.
...
So you think that basically it is preferable to give up the line of scrimmage for the advantage that one extra mediocre player gives us in pass coverage?
I didn't say that I know more than him, I in fact, know that I don't. But you have to admit that what I'm suggesting (a traditional defensive line against the heart of the big ten schedule) is really not that crazy, regardless of how bad our defensive backfield is. Teams have to keep Denard off the field, and to do this, they will attempt to establish the run. We can't stop the run against wiscy, iowa, and osu with three defensive lineman and Roh. Thats what yesterday showed us. IF we run that front against any of those three teams, they are going to kill us.
black's frame ultimately will support the weight of about 270. He will for sure be a definitive strong side defensive end in the big ten. Roh is not a strong side defensive end. dude. . We've all seen Roh. Roh is great but he's getting neutralized.
they are a problem agreed. But we have multiple problems and my aim is to point out which problem is worst problem.
But the opposite of the point you make is the entire point behind my post genius. The conventional argument, as you aptly point out along with your comrades, is that we run the 3-3-5 to compensate for the woes we have in the defensive backfield. Check. But against powerhouse running teams in the big ten the gaping whole we leave in the middle with respect to the run outweighs the risk that the defensive backfield prevents. Would you rather give up the long pass or would you rather have the other team consistently bend us over and control the line of scrimmage? If they complete a long pass for a touchdown we get the ball back immediately. Denard, in most games, can compensate by scoring fast. However, by leaving a hole in the middle with our band-aid defensive line, the other team controls the clock, and thus our destiny. So I would opt for the former situation, where we give up the long pass, but don't give up control of the line of scrimmage, and don't give up time with Denard on the field. Does this make sense to you?
cool dude, maybe I'll be next to you on the plane
but dude I am advocating that we move Big Will in alongside Martin / patterson, thats the whole point of my much-maligned post.
I'm good, i think my free speech reading went to my head...
go blue...
dude check this out. you guys all went to make it so I can't talk here that is fine with me. You all seem to agree with whatever unsuccessful scheme we have because the coaches who are running it are supposedly experts. If free speech is something you guys all want to outlaw, so be it. If you have time to score 10 thousand points here, great. That is sad, but good for you. Cool. But do me one favor. If you have the time post your own thread on why the 3-3-5 is preferable against a traditional big ten powerhouse team. I challenge you to do this. You can silence me that way but no matter how much you guys all neg bang me in your frustration over the loss, its not going to stop Terrell Pryor, its not going to stop Iowa, and it certainly isn't going to stop Wisconsin. I don't mean any disrepsect to Brian, because I think the guy is a genius, and his content is great. But the rest of you are just transplants from rivals and the insiders, coming over here and ruining free dialgoue by silencing anyone that you don't agree with with your moral majority conventional wisdom. As fans, with the likes of you, we all deserve to lose.
-The Vill
No, what the post meant was that you could bring in Roh in some situations on third town as a fifth defensive lineman against heavy run packages. we used to do this all of the time with crable. That is what Roh is. he is not a defensive lineman. I don't care if you all think I'm wrong because I'm not wrong. I guarantee you before the end of the year you will see Campbell and Martin out there at the same time, with two other traditional defensive ends. Watch.
what, and you do because you have three thousand points on your mgoblog account? My position is simple, it advocates putting players on teh field to take away either the run or the pass, but not both. Right now we are giving up both. It may take someone who knows jack shit about football to actually be able to suggest something that might help us win, because right now our defensive experts are riding our team into a dungeon that is irretrievably crippling.. Certainly GERG is reputed to know more than jack shit about football yet look how bad his defense is. Its last in the country. Are any of you watching these games?
dude, i love roh but he really hasn't done much this season. No matter who you have in at linebacker, even if it is ezeh, he doesn't have to guess each time about which wide open hold the running back is going to hit (like he had to yesterday on each of their long td runs that demoralized the team. With a four man front, Ezeh probably would improve twice as much. Roh, up to this point, despite his popularity, has been neutralized and simply isn't big enough to play defensive end in the big ten.
the 4-2-5 is not a 4-2-5 when roh is one of the defensive lineman. The 4-2-5, by definition, has to have at least four defensive lineman that could at least potentially draw a double team. I'm saying four actual defensive lineman.
but there is a difference. The million posts about the 3-3-5 all came before yesterday, when it was proven to be absolutely the worst possible defense we can be running against a big ten team that can run the ball, the category of which at iowa, ohio state, and wisconsin fall into. We know now that it can't possibly work and it has to change. Unless of course you like losing to these freaking rummy teams every year that we used to beat.
My solution is to put anyone on the field rather than Ezeh in his spot.. I didn't advocate running a five man defensive line if you read the post, call it what you will, or maybe just tell me i'm wrong when iowa brings in two tight ends and a fullback next week and runs it down our throats. If you think I'm wrong, maybe you should be down there on the field with Gerg commandeering our next big ten ass-handed loss.
Yeah? You care to tell me why a$$shole? Prove me wrong rather than just calling me an idiot otherwise shut the F-ck up.
michigan 49
msu 21
michigan 49
msu 21
michigan 49
msu 21
michigan 49
msu 21
i mean of course he can. Dilithium can go 200/200 against anyone. I think he will as long as he doesn't get injured.
Here is all I am saying. You can't give this kind of power to a player who has left the program. I was at the 2004 michigan state game and I love braylon as much as the next michigan fan but isn't this year just as much about new beginnings as it is about anything? If Richrod takes this team to a new direction why should he have to listen to freaking braylon edwards about who gets to wear what jersey? Should Braylon next be deciding who the starters should be because he gives money to the university? Edwards has shown a lot of bad and unsober judgment in my opinion and I don't think we owe him any present control over the program, especially given the fact that the guy continuously embarrasses himself in the public eye lately. Neg bang away bitches....
not that I'm agreeing with you because I got negbanged to all hell for starting the number 1 jersey denard thread, but most people would probably say that you are just trying to start a flame war, and there are already msu hate threads for that down the board.
oh yeah i forgot tyrone butterfield is the most storied reciever in michigan history
to me this all seems like a clear case that hart hasn't really decided yet, the orlando sentinel knows that, but prints this bullshit article anyway in an attempt to influence the kid to go to bama. you have to wonder....
who made up the name lloyd brady? ode to that guy.
our coaches can give the number 1 jersey to whoever they want, a former player can't dictate who gets what. We gave the number 1 jersey to just about anyone before Edwards came along and made it into a self-congratulatory ode-to-braylon. And are we really going to let someone who is stupid enough to have millions of dollars at their disposal yet still get a DUI at 5am when they could have called a cab dictate what we do with our program going forward? Give me a break.
I think we are a top 5 team even with our defense. sorry for the long post below!
SOS is completely subjective. college football rankings don't account for how in the last 10 years, the difference in the level of talent between traditional powerhouses and no-name teams has become far narrower than it has ever been. nobody doubts osu is a top 10 team.
The actual rankings as i look at them are more like groupings, like a grading curve. What this means is that anyone within a class has the ability to beat another member of its class at least half of the times they would hypothetically play each other, or the scores would be close every time they played. a hypothetical 10 games.
Group A (teams in the top 5) These teams beat B and C teams 9/10 times where the wins are decisive but they split games amongst each other 5/5)
Group B(teams below the top 5 but in the top 40) These teams beat A teams 1/5 or m times and lose no less than 4 out of 10 games to any other team in group B)
Group C(Teams starting at the 15th actual best team all the way down to the 100th actual best team) these teams lose 10/10 games against top 5 teams and lose more than 5 to Group B teams, while splitting amongst each other 3 out of 10 to 7 out of 10)
So basically it goes like this. if your team is in group c you are among the third echelon of teams but you might be ranked in the polls as high as 15 or you could be temple or toledo or umass. you are in group c becasue hypothetically if you play a group B team 10 times, you lose more than 5 times, or on average, lose by more than a touchdown. example: FSU 2009 loses more than 5/10 times to cincinatti 2009, iowa 2009 beats slippery rock more than 5/10 times.
IF your team is in group B you may be ranked very high or you might not be in the top 25 at all. Group A teams beat you 4/5 games and consistently win by more than one score. I. Either way, Group A teams beat B teams like you 9/10 times whereas you beat those B teams only 5/10 times. example: Florida 2010 beats Cincinatti. 9/10 times | Florida's single 2009 loss was roughly 1 in 2 odds to alabama , another group A team from 2009) Cincinnatti was 12-0 prior to the loss on wins over group B and group C teams (very close wins over Pitt, Uconn)
So the basic premise behind this system is that there are no such thing as rankings as the media portrays them. ohio state is probably a top five team but the fact they beat miami (who is either a B but could be a C team) means no more than if they would have beaten Notre Dame (who could be a B team or a C team)... However, if OSU goes undefeated in the big ten, that would be huge for them only if one of the teams they beat only lost to osu (which would be evidence that that team was in fact also a group A team)
they all tie for last
becuase if you kick a field goal close to the end zone when you are killing the other team at the end of the game, it looks like you are taking the sure points rather than running the risk of not scoring. This in turn makes it look like you are trying to run up the score and rub it in more.
I never said it wasn't true. The point is is that the media can choose to spin a game multiple ways. The story could have just as easily been that "Michigan shredded UMASS for over 500 yards" and "Wisconsin struggled at home against an Arizona State team that went 4-8 in 2009, raising questions that Wisconsin is a slow, lumbering team," yet they didn't say that, because today they are reporting bias against michigan. And yes, really. UMASS and arizona state would probably be a close game. UMASS offensive line averages like 6 foot 6 310.
even assuming that he isn't ready its not like they are not going to not run a four man front simply because campbell isn't ready to play. If he isn't ready a four man front with a player from the sagesse / banks / patterson platoon + martin + van bergen + roh would still be more viable than the three man front we saw today. And since campbell is a natural nose he isn't going to be an option on any team that runs a three man front + has mike martin on their defense.
yeah dude, a joke that includes 1) inventing a dirty play that our defender didn't commit and 2) our best player in the last 20 years getting deliberately injured is f - - - - - - hilarious. I just can't stop laughing.
thats a wicked picture