if you seek an image of the most Wisconsin OL ever, enter here
- Member for
- 6 years 9 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|3 weeks 3 days ago||"The fact that Urbz was able||
"The fact that Urbz was able to do this with a 3rd string QB mind bottling"
That's the part that would scare me as a Michigan fan. Meyer took a 6-6 team in 2011 and has gone 12-0, 12-2, and 13-1. He's playing a 3rd string QB in 11 days for the national championship. If Saban is 1a, he's clearly 1b and I don't think anyone is remotely close to #2.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||DB play||
was a weakness, particularly in 2nd half of the year. Auburn lit these guys up as well, but kept kicking field goals in the red zone.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||That's just not correct||
Alabama has had a great offense the last 6-7 years. They don't have great cumulative stats because they control the clock, but that offense has always been top 10 to top 15 in yards per play. It just gets overshadowed by the defense.
|8 weeks 6 days ago||Donors and bigwigs with money||
Donors and bigwigs with money want it and will help subsidize the losses. "I won't build that new Science Center if we drop football" etc.
Also D-III programs are growing at a pretty good pace (2 to 4 a year for the past half decade plus and will continue going forward). They see it as a chance to bring in more tuition dollars and increase male enrollment.
|8 weeks 6 days ago||Hofstra is a fantastic||
case study. 25 years ago they were a good D-III program. They decided to go more big time and ended up dropping a generation later.
I get Northeastern dropping football. Tough location for football and they wanted to put the extra money in hockey. Similar to St. Mary's (CA) some 10 years ago.
Rule changes over the course of decades forced a lot of Northeastern schools that had good basketball programs to have D-I football as well (a few sports and teams were grandfathered in--Hopkins lax for instance). Canisius, Niagara, Iona, St. John's--all these schools had small school type football and ended up having to drop because of the cost and the fact football couldn't play at a lower level (with less expenses).
|9 weeks 2 days ago||There would be ZERO talk of||
There would be ZERO talk of Bob Stitt as a coaching candidate had it not been mentioned by Brian.
Bob Stitt is a very good coach . . . . along with roughly a dozen other Division II coaches with similar if not better resumes.
Stitt has always been a "cool club" thing among the college football blog cognoscenti--I know an obscure D-II coach therefore I know football sort of thing.
This entire Stitt meme in connection with Michigan is worthy of the Bleacher Report.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||Let me get this straight||
Hoke should have adjusted his offense to Denard and the spread (an offense he's not comfortable with), yet Rodriguez gets a free pass to install HIS offense despite not having the personnel for it.
I'm just amazed Rodriguez supporters continue to go to apologize for him. His tenure was unmitigated disaster. Hoke's isn't going to go down as much, if any, better.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||I believe Brian predicted 7-5 for that 2008 Michigan team||
The amount of memory loss and hindsight reasoning from Rodriguez supporters on this site still continues to amaze.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||What makes||
you think the Podcasters know more than you about the coaching search? For no reason whatsoever other than a Dana Holgorson man crush, Bob Stitt keeps getting brought up by them. I don't know how anyone can take them seriously after that.
|14 weeks 2 days ago||I'm not sure any D-II head coach is a great option||
Annese is among a solid 2 dozen or so coaches at the lower divisions who have at least as much bonafides as Bob Stitt.
The question is why everyone is on the Stitt bandwagon? It's because he got mentioned in an Orange Bowl telecast and the Connelly's and Cook's of the world think he must be good. If we're going to analyze lower level coaches, let's get them all out the woodwork as opposed to just hopping on some Dana Holgorson quote from 3 years ago.
Are we talking about Bob Stitt as a viable head coach at Michigan if he's not mentioned during that game?
|14 weeks 3 days ago||Why Bob Stitt?||
If we're looking at Division II coaches, why not Scott Maxwell at Henderson State who has a better offense by any measure and has completely turned around the fortunes of that program. East Stroudsburg is still moving the ball at will under Denny Douds. There are at least half a dozen offensive-minded coaches at the D-II level (never mind the D-IAA / I-A level) with consistently better offenses than School of Mines.
So why does Bob Still get all the love? Oh that's right--he got mentioned on TV by Holgorson during a bowl game and the hoi polloi of the Internet decided he must be great.
|15 weeks 3 days ago||There is no effing way||
beating a completely overmatched Conference USA team in a de facto home game is Mullen's 4th best win. Almost any SEC win is better than that.
|16 weeks 6 days ago||This is 100% correct||
The head coach should be judged by his wins and losses, not the nuance of coaching a Division I program which very few people truly understand.
Howard's point is correct as well. People don't understand what it's like to coach a Division I program. The whining about punt formations and bad play calls and the like are just that . . . whining from people who don't know what they're talking about, who haven't watched a lick of film and don't understand the basics of football.
You want to argue the Michigan punt team is poor. . . no question about it. Or that Hoke should be fired for the underperformance of Michigan football . . very fair and valid argument (and I think the right decision at this point). But not many are qualified to judge the minutiae of Brady Hoke's detailed coaching.
|17 weeks 6 days ago||Changing the culture||
means squat if you don't end up winning. Randy Shannon changed the culture at Miami. And was fired after 4 years for not winning enough games.
It all sounds good until fans decide they'd rather have wins than choir boys.
|18 weeks 5 days ago||Nothing would help||
defenses more than consistently calling illegal blocking downfield. Why defensive coaches think pace is the problem is beyond me? It's not the pace. It's the blatant disregard of calling the actual rules in the rulebook.
Alabama is playing for the national title (or at least the SEC title) if Auburn's tying TD is nullified. Backside is a WR 5 yards downfield blocking on a run play.
Whatever defensive coaches have been in the rules committee for the last 10-15 years should be shot and banned from ever doing anything involved with football again.
|24 weeks 3 days ago||It goes deeper than that||
The original WAC (now roughly the Mountain West) universally hated BYU. And not just because of their outsized success in football at the time. All of the exceptions that came with a Mormon school pissed off the rest of the conference. The mission exception allowed a lot of 25 year old BYU kids to play against 18 and 19 year old WAC kids. Not playing competitions on Sundays. This all added headaches to the rest of the conference members.
|25 weeks 10 hours ago||Purdue's one win||
was against a 1-11 FCS team by 6 points. They don't win 4 games against that schedule.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||I'm not sure what the takeaway from this article is||
MSU runs two unique concepts: A 4-3 Cover 4 Press look and a truly revolutionary zone blitz package.
The corners have to play outside leverage in the Cover 4 Press look because they still have run support responsibilities. How Narduzzi coaches those corners to be able to get off for run to their side while pressed is remarkable. They are able to differentiate between a block on the safety, a short drag, and a deeper route all with similar stems. And they almost never make a mistake in those reads. An example of a mistake was the 50 yard run in the first quarter by Stanford in the Rose Bowl. CB came inside just 1 step too many and it was off to the races.
The blitz 6 and drop 5 into zone is revolutionary and they rarely got burned in this package. Ohio State's big pass play right before halftime of the Big Ten title game is the only play that comes to mind. And it's less the pass rush and more the way they teach the 5 guys still in coverage. I've never seen it run as much as they do it and more teams will incorporate it quickly.
They dabble in other coverages like all teams, but it's the Cover 4 Press and zone blitz packages that separate them from everyone else.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||Considering the play side is Cover 4||
I'm not convinced the TE-Wing side is Cover 2, especially since you can't see any routes over there. It's pretty easy for the backside safety to get involved in the seam route when it's a 2 man route.
FWIW, it's actually a good concept by Borges. Max protect in case you get the zone blitz stuff. You have a way to beat the Cover 4 Press with the corner route to Funchess.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||Coaching dirty?||
Talk about sour grapes. The corners press and press well. Give me an example of dirty?
|28 weeks 5 days ago||If you're going to||
remove sacks, you should remove QB scrambles as well.
|28 weeks 5 days ago||I like your stuff Coyote||
I happened to have just watched a boatload of MSU film and EVERYTHING depends on their corners being able to press and play man in their scheme. Losing any of those guys, whether to eligibility, graduation, or injury brings an unknown into the equation. So yes, I could see the deep ball being a bigger problem this year. That being stated, who is the great throwing QB in the Big Ten that can hurt them?
Losing Bullough is a gain in my opinion. Vastly overrated. Losing #28, don't know his name, however is a big loss. Great college player.
|29 weeks 5 days ago||It's less tactical than the||
It's less tactical than the complete lack of high skill by all but a couple of players. Watching the skill level of Belgium and Germany with the ball compared to the United States was like comparing college football to the NFL. It was a wide gulf.
We have very athletic players who work hard and aren't very skilled which is the direct product of how we go about producing soccer players. And that's not a Klinsmann issue or a money issue or a popularity of soccer issue. It's a United States cultural issue that won't go away in our lifetime.
|31 weeks 20 hours ago||I was unaware that the Americans||
had no defenders on the field on the last play of the game. Oh, that's right, they did.
The cross was picture perfect. The header was fine, but was made at about 6 feet. The two Americans around the ball simply didn't defend it.
But I guess that's just your impression of good defense.
|31 weeks 20 hours ago||Is Portugal one of the best teams in the world?||
Certainly not the the banged up team we saw tonight!
And maybe I should be more specific--the "defending" by the US team, midfield included, is subpar. The giveaways in midfield, the gaffes (that apparently don't count as bad defense in your world, but are apparently one-offs), the poor clearances--I've seen them for a long time now and they come with the territory with US soccer. The defending is often mitigated by the fact Tim Howard is an excellent goalkeeper.
So yeah I think the defense overall stinks. 24 World Cup games since 1990, 2 shutouts. Another team that can't defend well, South Korea, has 6 over that exact same time frame.
So where's your knowledge? Your statement is full of blatant falsehoods, misrepresentations, and poor grammar. Portugal isn't one of the best teams in the world. Apparently "cockblock" also includes Tim Howard standing on his head and balls hitting the post.
|31 weeks 21 hours ago||I think you're underestimating||
the chance the US gets blown off the field. I think we can get a goal or two. I think we could give up 3+.
And it's less than I think Germany is 3 goals better than the US and more that their strength (putting the ball in the net) goes directly against our weakness (defending).
|31 weeks 1 day ago||Apparently he||
hasn't watched the US defense.
In all honesty what's that based on? If Germany wants to score 4, don't you think they can do it? I do.
|31 weeks 1 day ago||Freak gaffe?||
These gaffes happen every damn game against teams not from the Caribbean. Our goaltending keeps us from looking like Switzerland against France in every game.
And Cameron didn't cover his man at the end either!
Soccer defense is like playing the secondary in American football. Getting it right 67 out of 70 snaps isn't good enough when the guy is 5 yards behind you on the other 3.
Yes, the offense was good (although how much of that was due to Portugal doing zip until the Jones goal was scored). Who cares when the defense is going to stink game in and game out.
|31 weeks 1 day ago||Cameron||
sucking comes with the territory. Our D stinks. It's stunk for 25 years. Giveaways have happened for 25 years. 2 shutouts in 24 World Cup games since 1990. One of those was Mexico, a team we know well. And we HAVE a great goaltender!!
|31 weeks 1 day ago||This, 100% this||
What's the over/under on goals we give up against Germany? 3? They have guys that can put it in the back of the net . . often.
Our D sucks and it's sucked since 1990. Only Howard keeps us competitive.