well that's just, like, your opinion, man
- Member for
- 4 years 40 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|11 hours 40 min ago||If we land Browning||
I like him in a robber role.
|20 hours 53 min ago||TBH I'm skeptical||
They were a top 20 team last year; I think they're a top 10 team this year. I hesitate to go beyond that. I mean, that's already very, very good. I think you can bank on 10+ wins and a 2017 bowl game as a floor. But can we take down Alabama or OSU? Ehhhhh. . . a lot would have to go right.
I'm not particularly concerned about any reloading position (QB, FB, LB, P) being a serious liability, though we'll need more of them to be great than adequate to threaten the top 3 teams. My real concern is that our OL is basically an established known at this point and they are. . . OK. They got better over the course of last season but Newsome -- at this point in his career, at least -- is a huge downgrade from Cole at LT and we don't have a reliable 6th guy. If nothing bad happens they'll be good enough to win most of our games, but "good enough to win most" won't cut it. They'll be a very good team, but I think the drop-off from the top 2-4 teams to the rest of the top ten is big enough that Michigan can't close that gap only two years removed from a 5-7 season.
|21 hours 15 min ago||Eh||
They have a problem finishing games.
I'm scared of any game when we get that goddamn crew that officiated both UM-MSU and MSU-Nebraska last year. That's two straight games where they basically dictated who won (no not the muffed punt itself but if they'd called the game fairly it never would've been that close).
And OSU. I hate Urban Meyer with the intensity of a. . . intense, but that program is legit.
|21 hours 23 min ago||Heh||
You must be second to none at timing the markets.
|1 day 20 hours ago||No||
You ran an inner city program to keep kids OUT of trouble, great. I'm not out to diss on what you do. Run 10, 50, 100 youth football programs. But when it comes to money these towns are oh so short on, you can play football with a pigskin and a patch of dirt. Or a sport that doesn't need pads. Football does not have a monopoly on keeping kids out of trouble; anything that has them running around has the same social benefits. We just happen to like football, and that's cool.
But what happens down in the southeast is on a whole 'nother level. We're talking towns that are happy to let their academics and schools deteriorate to crumbling yet approve a bond for a shiny new stadium. At that point it hardly matters how active the students are because they're gaining nothing in the classroom, and that's at best. Pulling kids out of class to practice. Neglecting anyone who isn't an athlete to keep the athletes eligible. Institutional idolatry of the athletes at the expense of anyone who's academically gifted. Intense, immense pressure to succeed. What's football doing for the kids now?
Call them on it and you'll get the noise about how football "does so much" for the school and community. They're literally trying to turn the high school football program into a cash cow, even though there's zero evidence it works that way. This is not the college level. I only picked on UA because the data was easy to find.
|1 day 20 hours ago||You missed the point||
Like I said, I'm all for kids playing football. Kids should be out doing stuff. I went full hyperbole with "500 satellite camps" in my endorsement but that apparently wasn't obvious enough. But way to miss all that because you're wired to take offense.
It's one thing to encourage kids to be active (though it doesn't have to be football -- you're kind of screwing over the kids who don't like sports at that point); it's another to turn them into a money machine. Football economy is stupid. And the numbers are overwhelming. Ridiculously overwhelming. Active kids do better than idle kids, yes. But collectively, turning kids into football players over turning them into students who happen to play football is a horrible, horrible investment.
Which is not only backed up by reams of not-even-close data, but it's just simple common sense. For all the money Alabama pours into football, a whopping 65 of them are pros. That's impressive in a relative context, but as a jobs program that's an atrocious RoI. NFL rosters are fixed in size and there are only so many coaching jobs out there. While individually they make less money, there are probably some offices in Huntsville with more engineers than that, but many of them come from out of state.
|1 day 23 hours ago||Alabama is overrepresented||
Massachusetts is under-represented. Or, more accurate to say, Massachusetts schools are for school.
And the "little dink town" wonders why it's so poor.
Football "brings in so much money" for the school. I hear that a lot. Except Northeastern (to name but one example), which has 12k fewer students, founded 80 years later, has nowhere near the name recognition and lives in the shadow of more prestigious schools, has a larger endowment than the University of Alabama. Alabama's is a meager $680 million. For comparison, UM's endowment is $10 billion. Northwestern, also $10 billion. MSU, $2.3 billion. Alabama? $680 million. Hell, Iowa's is over $1 billion. Now, maybe some of that national title money gets funneled back into the general fund, but endowments are generally good for indicating three things: A) how many students you graduate, B) how (financially) successful they are after college, and C) how much they attribute that success to education. Which means for all of being a household name, Alabama is lacking in all three areas.
I'm all for a football program, Hoke/Harbaugh style. As in, if you're here to play football, OK, but you're gonna get your degree. This stuff. . . I don't know whether to seethe or shake my head. I love the game. But in the big scheme of things, it DOES. NOT. MATTER. It's great to have insane passion for the game and 500 satellite camps, but a football-based economy is shit. I love that Harbaugh not only gets it, the players get it too.
When it comes to investing in youngsters, education>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>football.
|2 days 18 hours ago||Kickers are like insurance policies||
I'm never excited about signing an insurance policy. Nobody's excited about kickers until they need 4-5 FGs to beat a team with a stingy red zone defense. But having that option means all the difference when you need it.
|2 days 18 hours ago||Huh, I figured it was this||
n/m, didn't work dammit. . .
|3 days 17 hours ago||". . . Brandon Peters is going. . . Brandon Peters"||
- Michigan Arrogance, 2016
|3 days 17 hours ago||Ehhh||
Nothing against Pritchard but he was inherited from pre-Harbaugh Stanford. In 2017 Peters is going up against the rest of Harbaugh's QB farm, two full years into the operation. That's much more of an uphill climb.
That's not a bad thing; far from it. In most cases Peters could probably play decently as a RS FR and I'm not ruling out that he might. But the real takeaway here is that whoever's the starting QB in 2017 is going to have to claw their way through the gauntlet, and for the others that includes staying ahead of. . . RS FR Peters. So whoever's starting is going to be at least good.
|4 days 11 hours ago||Fair enough||
Half the time, he wasn't within 10 yards of the ball anyway.
|4 days 16 hours ago||I won't "oh well it"||
I got real tired of defenders mauling Rudock's noggin and getting away with it. That better not carry into this season's QB but I fear the worst.
I don't suspect an anti-Michigan or pro-whoever bias so much as I susect the refs HATE Harbaugh. He's verbally abusive to them, that's not good but he's hardly the only one, but he's usually right, and refs -- like most proud folk -- don't like being shown up. But the answer here isn't to literally put players in danger, because by swallowing their whistles that's basically declaring open season on winged helmets. I mean for fuck's sake the UM Athletic Department took a well-deserved grilling for their incompetence in keeping Shane Morris safe (which, BTW, that hit wasn't called for targeting either but IIRC that game otherwise wasn't out of whack). Well, the refs are culpable if we have a targeting rule but they only use it to stick it to Harbaugh by ejecting his middle linebacker.
The targeting rule may be stupid, but it's punitive for a reason, and I don't see anything remotely professional about how it's used.
|4 days 16 hours ago||If the QB sees it's there||
Agreed, but the OC & HC have to be comfortable with the QB looking to that side of the field. I love me a QB that can read the entire field, but that's not something to take for granted at the college level (hell, I swear some pro QBs drop reads off their radar). Just because they can see the backside doesn't mean their brain's there. It looks to me they just glance (if they glance at all), see a "covered" receiver (never mind that's a 5'8" CB covering a 6'7" TE) and forget the backside entirely. Probably shy about resetting their feet for that lone receiver in case a DE's about to break through the pocket. Defenses will roll with a mismatch precisely because they can sometimes get away with it.
But yeah, if you've got a QB who can exploit the iso -- and Harbaugh will always want that guy -- then yeah, let's make the defense feel some pain.
|4 days 17 hours ago||Won't really impact us||
"Err on the side of player protection"?
I get the general point, but it's kind of hard for me to give any farts about the change. Rudock couldn't get a targeting call if a defender swung a sledgehammer at his head. And that was our QB. Smith's unlikely to slide ever, but even if he did it'd take someone running him over with a cement mixer to get a targeting call.
Then again, come to think of it our linebackers will now probably have to play two-hand touch to avoid getting ejected.
|4 days 17 hours ago||Shazor < Wilson, Wilson < Kovacs||
I'll take any of Wilson, Kovacs or Gordon over Shazor; all were boring, all were good.
But of those three, Kovacs was the least boring in a good way.
|1 week 18 hours ago||I winced when I heard "Sandusky's defense"||
That's right, he was their DC at the time.
I doubt anyone in the state of Michigan knew what was going on back in '97, but as sweet as the moment was, in hindsight I'm doubly happy that we shredded that defense with all of Happy Valley watching.
|1 week 19 hours ago||Thing is||
Michigan had been a second half team up to that point. I was in the MMB at the time and none of my friends were intimidated by Penn State, but we expected we'd have to wear them down like we'd done to everyone else. Many expected to win, but nobody expected a blowout by halftime.
Turns out that Penn State team was overrated; Florida dominated them as well. It actually kind of sucked that none of Michigan's conference opponents won their bowl games that season; the coaches were gonna give Osbourne his gold watch but it didn't help to give them excuses.
|1 week 1 day ago||Norovirus||
I can't even joke about it. The first few hours, you're afraid you're gonna die. After that, you're afraid you won't. If you can't hydrate and wait long enough, you will.
|1 week 2 days ago||Good||
We need a fullback.
|1 week 3 days ago||My dice were on fire!||
I swear! You should've seen it!
|1 week 3 days ago||Hey Rashan||
It's 4d6 drop lowest.
|1 week 4 days ago||Sounds like a real win||
They've dramatically cut costs without impacting (long-term) revenue. 21st century business brilliance at its finest!
|2 weeks 11 hours ago||D'oh!||
I triple-checked that and still got it backwards, apparently.
|2 weeks 15 hours ago||Unlikely||
Odds are that's just insecure adolescents lacking the courage to approach each other like they're human beings. If Christian McCaffrey's a Harbaugh recruit at all then he's already a baller, so it's likely his brother gets similar requests.
I'm the kind of guy that got friendzoned all the time, but that's a natural outcome of the fact that I didn't accomplish squat as a student.
|2 weeks 18 hours ago||Did you watch last season?||
Like, any of it?
In 2013 they beat Michigan by 23, OSU by 10, held 6 opponents to under a TD, won the Rose Bowl by beating post-Harbaugh Stanford and two of the more successful days offenses had against them were Indiana's espresso offense and a blowout against Youngstown State. I hate that you make me say this but Dantonio had a very legit team there. They were as dirty as an old diaper but they were unquestionably dominating.
Last season they squeaked past six opponents by >1 TD margins including Rutgers (!), Purdue (!!), Michigan on a fluke play after monumentally atrocious officiating, Ohio "rain makes us forget what a forward pass is" State and an Iowa team that everyone expected to be demolished by whoever won the East. They lost to Nebraska on a complete horseshit call but A) Nebraska, and B) it wound up not hurting their standing. Alabama was the outlier only in that they finally played to their actual level. In terms of talent (as opposed to luck) they were, at best, the 3rd-best team in the B1G last season and that was with the Cook-Burbridge connection. This year I feel they slipped behind Iowa but you're free to disagree with me there; it doesn't undermine the point.
None of what I'm explaining now is in the least bit complicated or controversial to anyone who paid any attention to last season's conference play. If you can read a UFR you should already know most of this. I'm well aware of their record, and well aware of why they did so well. They were good, nowhere near dominating, and insanely lucky. If they needed a call against Michigan they got it; if they needed bad weather against OSU they got it; if they needed a loss to not matter they got it. And don't give me that "winners know how to win" crap; they didn't will a victory in Ann Arbor or Columbus; Michigan got screwed and OSU choked and Alabama ate them.
Yes, they ARE on the decline; the record just doesn't show it. It's also possible to have decent grades weeks before bombing the final because you stopped studying, and for an imploding business to have an overvalued stock. Not that I think Dantionio's any less competent -- he's a dick but unquestionably good --but this level of success was never sustainable and somehow lasted longer than it should've. This is not a mind-blowing concept to anyone who isn't an idiot.
Where MSU is right now is nice compared to where we've been, but I'd rather keep what we have now than be where they are now.
|2 weeks 21 hours ago||Yeah but||
honestly, even if we have leverage, do we NEED it? I think it's silly to play both rivals at home or away in the same season (DB SMH), so let's fix that, but as far as STAEE goes I'm willing to be easy if it gives Dantonio one less thing to whine about.
STAEE is on a downward trend. They're still running quarters but without the safeties to replicate their 2013 dominance, and last season they were so ridiculously lucky you'd think the whole season was a setup for divine retribution in the form of a CFP curb-stomping. They probably have the fourth-best B1G roster at best, and if we assume best-case that the officiating was an anomaly, then next season we're heading for a blowout.
I wouldn't want to play @OSU two years in a row, but I'm not scared of playing at East Lansing nearly as much as the officiating horror of last season, which was at home.
|2 weeks 21 hours ago||For||
when you just can't push those babies out!
|2 weeks 23 hours ago||Uh||
Who wants to break it to Hatter that he's been doing lines of baby powder?
|2 weeks 1 day ago||It's tho cold in the D||
huh huh huh huh