Yea but he was talking about recruiting QBs, not WRs, and responding to a post suggesting pass-heavy offenses won’t win championships. Georgia passed for plenty of yards the last few years. Bowers accounted for maybe 25% of that but they also had good WRs, like Pickens.
True but if you up pace of play, you can increase the number of plays you run on offense overall, and thus not experience quite the same drop off. No idea if it’s a winning strategy but it’s certainly possible.
Lost the mgoblog message board room…? Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think the run-of-the-mill Michigan fan cares or even thinks much of Warde. And I see no indication that he’s lost the faith of the Regents or Ono.
I mean, relative to program baseline, Shaw’s first five years were great. If Moore’s first five years are similar to Shaw’s in that sense it would be great.
I'm sure this is based on well-established facts and not ridiculous internet conjecture. Not to mention, if he hated Jim so much he could have fired him in 2020 and nobody would have had a problem with it.
You answered your own question - for the (you say slim) shot to win a Super Bowl. I happen to think his shot to win a Super Bowl is not nearly as slim as you seem to think, given that he already made it to one Super Bowl and 2 other NFC Championships in only 4 years of coaching in the NFL.
How would staying help his draft prospects given that, like you point out, Michigan just doesn’t throw it a high volume? The offense won’t suddenly transform next year. If we’re being honest, if he really wanted to improve his draft stock he’d transfer to USC or something for a year.
As a fellow alum living abroad in France I can relate to your issue with ESPN highlights in a general sense, I consistently find them to be lacking. Of course, I can’t relate to your specific dilemma because I woke up at 1am to watch the whole game. Paying for it today though. I envy your restraint to not do the same.
The issue is people on this board jump to the conclusion that he picked Bama because he got paid. And not because they have the greatest college coach of all time with a pristine record of getting guys to the pros. You act like it’s inconceivable there are reasons other than money someone would pick Bama.
Not really his “personal standard of excellence,” he said they weren’t as good as the previous years. Which is true. This post seems to be way more intense than the one you’re responding to, so as a neutral observer it actually seems like you’re being more sensitive.
I agree he should have probably been fired after Wisconsin, but what about this is embarrassing for the University? We don't even know yet what this is.
It will be exciting but it's pretty clear that the B10 did everything they could to ensure that Michigan wouldn't 4 peat the B10 Championship- Let's hope the team can beat the conference and the Big10 leadership (again)!
Not sure that this is clear, I think it's more likely they looked to see how they could make the most money. And that's a bunch of marquee matchups for one of their top two marquee schools.
Also, it's worth pointing out that UW, Oregon, and Ohio State will all have new QBs next year, as well as potentially Texas depending on what Ewers decides to do (could hinge on his playoff performance, although he's supposedly leaning towards returning).
I'm all about this new schedule. The regular season was frankly quite boring this year until the last 3 weeks. Plus, we can afford some losses next year with the expanded playoffs, so I'd rather have a lot more competitive and potentially fun games.
Sharps probably aren’t betting a ton yet. They mostly place bets right before the game when they’ve gathered as much info as possible, plus the limits are lower now. We’ll know more about what the sharps think within 24 hours of kickoff.
It’s the same coaches though, and Saban has a long history of doing this with his different teams year after year. Not to mention that for Michigan, most of the key players on the team are the same ones who didn’t show up last year against TCU. Not saying I agree with the logic or not but we should be realistic about Saban’s track record, especially with 3+ weeks to prepare.
Lately I’ve started to wonder if it actually makes sense for JJ to go pro now and not actually improve his draft stock. If he gets drafted later in the first round, for example, he’s far more likely to end up on a good team where he can develop for a year and has better talent around him.
I asked this very question a few weeks ago on Reddit I think, and the explanation I received (who knows how credible it is) is that it still takes time to figure out who is throwing up the dummy signs and who has the real signs each game. The gist of it is that teams already employ several different people holding up signs, only one of which has the "real" signs, as a countermeasure to prevent teams from stealing. So even if you know the real signs, you don't necessarily know who is holding up the real signs and who is holding up the fake ones and it takes at least several drives to sort that out. Hence the improvement as the game goes on.
Anyway, who knows if the above is true, but it at least seemed like a credible explanation to me. The sad/frustrating part about about all this is it seems quite clear that we didn't need to do this to win most, if not all, of the games we won.
I mean, everyone is at risk of getting injured whenever they play football. But do you know for a fact that he's more at risk than he otherwise would be? Or are you just saying that?
I think the question is about whether he actually possessed it. While I believe he did, there's a slightly bobble there after a step or two which leaves it open to argument about whether he truly had possession when he crossed the plane.
I'm sure I'll get downvoted, but he didn't really cause the harm he only uncovered it. The harm was all self-inflicted by Stalions (hopefully only Stalions).
Yea it was still a shitty thing to do. But at the end of the day if there was nothing shady going on it wouldn't have mattered.
I just can't see a universe where a 1-loss SEC gets left out of a playoff. I understand Texas fans would freak out though, which would be hilarious to me.
At this point it feels like there won't be a contract extension signed until the NCAA issues its findings and any potential penalties. We keep hearing that an extension will be signed "any day now" and it never is. I'll believe it when I see it.
Playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but two things about this have always bothered me:
1. The rule change was resoundingly voted down, which suggests that most did not agree with removing the rule. Whether that means they disagreed specifically with the "minimal competitive advantage" is unclear, but it's not a leap to think that at least some of those that voted this down did so because they disagreed with the idea that the minimal competitive advantage was minimal.
2. I've seen people twist this "minimal competitive advantage" point to say that having all of another team's signs in advance is a minimal advantage. Unfortunately, that's kind of taking the quote of context. The quote is about the advantage gained from advanced scouting. You could of course argue that a byproduct of advanced scouting is knowing all of a team's signs, but that's easy to say with hindsight now that Stalions' scheme is known to all. It's not clear to me that at the time they wrote this language they were even considering a sign-decoding scheme such as what Stalions was doing. It seems far more likely to me they were thinking about more traditional advantages gained from scouting--learning opponents tendencies, strengths, weaknesses, etc. Maybe they did have sign-decoding in mind, maybe they didn't, we really have no idea one way or another because there's no further context provided.
Anyway, in the end in my mind this "minimal competitive advantage" language should not be given much weight for these reasons.
This strategy might pay off long term though as The Game loses relevance in terms of which team gets into the playoffs. If Ohio State’s goal is to win championships and they were set up better to beat Georgia than Michigan that’s probably ultimately better in terms of winning it all.
note that Texas, Mizzou and Louisville had similar games versus similar caliber opponents
To be fair, none of those teams were nearly the favorite we were. Louisville I think was a 1 point dog at kickoff, Texas around -7, and Mizzou -12. That being said, none of them will jump us obviously.
I think we may fall to 4 because Washington beat the 11th ranked team despite being slight underdogs, whereas we had our worse game of the year.
Yea. Maybe in retrospect running it 30 straight times against Penn State wasn’t smart. Or at least including JJ in those runs, because that’s when he got banged up.
I’m not sure it’s much better. The logical response an investigator might have to coaching is that you’re doing it because you have something to hide. If there was nothing to hide why coach the players on their responses?
Recent Comments
I mean this has to be hyperbole because Scottie is definitely more than “1/4 as good as peak Tiger.” Frankly he’s probably 2/3 or 3/4 the way there.
The GOAT may very well have been playing. At this rate, at least, it seems possible.
Remember when Urban was super successful in Jacksonville?
Oh wait, he failed miserably (and hilariously).
Maybe Jim doesn’t wanna be like Urban. And that’s a good thing.
Yea but he was talking about recruiting QBs, not WRs, and responding to a post suggesting pass-heavy offenses won’t win championships. Georgia passed for plenty of yards the last few years. Bowers accounted for maybe 25% of that but they also had good WRs, like Pickens.
True but if you up pace of play, you can increase the number of plays you run on offense overall, and thus not experience quite the same drop off. No idea if it’s a winning strategy but it’s certainly possible.
Lost the mgoblog message board room…? Maybe I’m wrong but I don’t think the run-of-the-mill Michigan fan cares or even thinks much of Warde. And I see no indication that he’s lost the faith of the Regents or Ono.
I mean, relative to program baseline, Shaw’s first five years were great. If Moore’s first five years are similar to Shaw’s in that sense it would be great.
What does this even mean? How do teams court coaches if not by inviting them to interviews?
Also, where did the idea come from that he would only consider jobs is "courted" for?
This is 100% correct, unless Harbaugh leaves. Then we’ll find out pretty quick how good of a coach Moore or whoever replaces him is.
I'm sure this is based on well-established facts and not ridiculous internet conjecture. Not to mention, if he hated Jim so much he could have fired him in 2020 and nobody would have had a problem with it.
You answered your own question - for the (you say slim) shot to win a Super Bowl. I happen to think his shot to win a Super Bowl is not nearly as slim as you seem to think, given that he already made it to one Super Bowl and 2 other NFC Championships in only 4 years of coaching in the NFL.
I'd argue he's already the greatest coach we've ever had after this year.
How would staying help his draft prospects given that, like you point out, Michigan just doesn’t throw it a high volume? The offense won’t suddenly transform next year. If we’re being honest, if he really wanted to improve his draft stock he’d transfer to USC or something for a year.
You’re a real ray of sunshine.
“Intangibles” aka what people say when they want to justify something that flies in the face of all reasonable evidence.
I love JJ but let’s pump the brakes here.
Probably from the smear campaign the Yorks ran after they fired him trying to justify their ridiculous decision.
As a fellow alum living abroad in France I can relate to your issue with ESPN highlights in a general sense, I consistently find them to be lacking. Of course, I can’t relate to your specific dilemma because I woke up at 1am to watch the whole game. Paying for it today though. I envy your restraint to not do the same.
The problem with that is he might not know if Harbaugh is leaving by the time he has to declare (I believe the deadline is January 15).
That’s true in theory, but Day also called tight games against us. It doesn’t seem like DeBoer has the same issue (so far).
Just because our team is good right now doesn’t mean our approach to recruiting is working or better than other teams. That’s confirmation bias.
The issue is people on this board jump to the conclusion that he picked Bama because he got paid. And not because they have the greatest college coach of all time with a pristine record of getting guys to the pros. You act like it’s inconceivable there are reasons other than money someone would pick Bama.
Kind of like… we did?
Not really his “personal standard of excellence,” he said they weren’t as good as the previous years. Which is true. This post seems to be way more intense than the one you’re responding to, so as a neutral observer it actually seems like you’re being more sensitive.
Of course this take is downvoted but I agree.
I agree he should have probably been fired after Wisconsin, but what about this is embarrassing for the University? We don't even know yet what this is.
Not sure that this is clear, I think it's more likely they looked to see how they could make the most money. And that's a bunch of marquee matchups for one of their top two marquee schools.
Also, it's worth pointing out that UW, Oregon, and Ohio State will all have new QBs next year, as well as potentially Texas depending on what Ewers decides to do (could hinge on his playoff performance, although he's supposedly leaning towards returning).
I'm all about this new schedule. The regular season was frankly quite boring this year until the last 3 weeks. Plus, we can afford some losses next year with the expanded playoffs, so I'd rather have a lot more competitive and potentially fun games.
Ha yea, I came here to say the same thing. Imagine if we dug up every negative comment someone made about Michigan, this board would be a mess.
Sharps probably aren’t betting a ton yet. They mostly place bets right before the game when they’ve gathered as much info as possible, plus the limits are lower now. We’ll know more about what the sharps think within 24 hours of kickoff.
It’s the same coaches though, and Saban has a long history of doing this with his different teams year after year. Not to mention that for Michigan, most of the key players on the team are the same ones who didn’t show up last year against TCU. Not saying I agree with the logic or not but we should be realistic about Saban’s track record, especially with 3+ weeks to prepare.
Ah yes, of course those are the only things one could think of when they think of Tebow.
Lately I’ve started to wonder if it actually makes sense for JJ to go pro now and not actually improve his draft stock. If he gets drafted later in the first round, for example, he’s far more likely to end up on a good team where he can develop for a year and has better talent around him.
I asked this very question a few weeks ago on Reddit I think, and the explanation I received (who knows how credible it is) is that it still takes time to figure out who is throwing up the dummy signs and who has the real signs each game. The gist of it is that teams already employ several different people holding up signs, only one of which has the "real" signs, as a countermeasure to prevent teams from stealing. So even if you know the real signs, you don't necessarily know who is holding up the real signs and who is holding up the fake ones and it takes at least several drives to sort that out. Hence the improvement as the game goes on.
Anyway, who knows if the above is true, but it at least seemed like a credible explanation to me. The sad/frustrating part about about all this is it seems quite clear that we didn't need to do this to win most, if not all, of the games we won.
I mean, everyone is at risk of getting injured whenever they play football. But do you know for a fact that he's more at risk than he otherwise would be? Or are you just saying that?
I think the question is about whether he actually possessed it. While I believe he did, there's a slightly bobble there after a step or two which leaves it open to argument about whether he truly had possession when he crossed the plane.
FIFY.
I'm sure I'll get downvoted, but he didn't really cause the harm he only uncovered it. The harm was all self-inflicted by Stalions (hopefully only Stalions).
Yea it was still a shitty thing to do. But at the end of the day if there was nothing shady going on it wouldn't have mattered.
I just can't see a universe where a 1-loss SEC gets left out of a playoff. I understand Texas fans would freak out though, which would be hilarious to me.
I don't like Day, at all, but this comment is bad and you should feel bad.
At this point it feels like there won't be a contract extension signed until the NCAA issues its findings and any potential penalties. We keep hearing that an extension will be signed "any day now" and it never is. I'll believe it when I see it.
Playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but two things about this have always bothered me:
1. The rule change was resoundingly voted down, which suggests that most did not agree with removing the rule. Whether that means they disagreed specifically with the "minimal competitive advantage" is unclear, but it's not a leap to think that at least some of those that voted this down did so because they disagreed with the idea that the minimal competitive advantage was minimal.
2. I've seen people twist this "minimal competitive advantage" point to say that having all of another team's signs in advance is a minimal advantage. Unfortunately, that's kind of taking the quote of context. The quote is about the advantage gained from advanced scouting. You could of course argue that a byproduct of advanced scouting is knowing all of a team's signs, but that's easy to say with hindsight now that Stalions' scheme is known to all. It's not clear to me that at the time they wrote this language they were even considering a sign-decoding scheme such as what Stalions was doing. It seems far more likely to me they were thinking about more traditional advantages gained from scouting--learning opponents tendencies, strengths, weaknesses, etc. Maybe they did have sign-decoding in mind, maybe they didn't, we really have no idea one way or another because there's no further context provided.
Anyway, in the end in my mind this "minimal competitive advantage" language should not be given much weight for these reasons.
This strategy might pay off long term though as The Game loses relevance in terms of which team gets into the playoffs. If Ohio State’s goal is to win championships and they were set up better to beat Georgia than Michigan that’s probably ultimately better in terms of winning it all.
They didn’t have Henderson that game.
Shut him down is a little generous, but limited the damage he did for sure. I’m more worried about Henderson though, they didn’t have him last year.
To be fair, none of those teams were nearly the favorite we were. Louisville I think was a 1 point dog at kickoff, Texas around -7, and Mizzou -12. That being said, none of them will jump us obviously.
I think we may fall to 4 because Washington beat the 11th ranked team despite being slight underdogs, whereas we had our worse game of the year.
Yea, DraftKings has -4 now. If I'm being completely honest I wish I had jumped on Ohio State when the line was still -6.5. Maybe BPONE talking.
Weird that this is getting downvoted, I’ve noticed this issue too. I guess any pointing out room for improvement gets downvoted?
Yea. Maybe in retrospect running it 30 straight times against Penn State wasn’t smart. Or at least including JJ in those runs, because that’s when he got banged up.
I’m not sure it’s much better. The logical response an investigator might have to coaching is that you’re doing it because you have something to hide. If there was nothing to hide why coach the players on their responses?
Did you even read the OP? The part where Sam Webb said he didn’t think that happened?
Get a grip. It seems like we need to focus on cleaning up our own house.