Mike Lantry, 1972
- Member for
- 2 years 21 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|2 days 1 hour ago||Was that||
Was that the strategy of our football offense last season? We can't go forward, so we can't win, so we go negative, and if we get enough negative yards then the loss will turn into a negative loss and flips right around to a net win?
One other thing about the comparison you made: The 86-year-old cuts you off in traffic, damn near kills everyone, has no awareness of the rules but never gets punished because he moves so slowly.
|2 days 2 hours ago||16-2, 13-5||
"There isn’t a single interesting thing about Wisconsin, and there isn’t a single amusing thing about Wisconsin."
I dunno, having only two total losses despite five conference losses is pretty interesting. And amusing.
|2 days 22 hours ago||Waiting?||
MCLordOfTheRings was released first, unless you're referring to the books, in which case both have been available for decades.
Besides, MCHobbit stole his riff from Rick Sackville-James.
/ oh I'm so going to get neg-banged for this one
// I regret nothing
|5 days 1 hour ago||Beeline||
Dude can flat-out coach. I be like dang.
|1 week 2 days ago||This||
Beating either STAEE or Ohio next year will be a major upset. Both programs are much further along so those are unhealthy expectations. Every time people INSIST Hoke beat those teams I grind my teeth -- should we? Yes, in principle because ThisIsMichiganFergadsakes, but last season the team was in no way ready and I don't see how anyone could possibly not see that unless they're flat-out delusional.
HOWEVA, even for all the team's rawness some expectations weren't met: Squeaking by Akron and Connecticut, getting RPS-PWND by depleted Penn State, not merely losing to STAEE but getting curb-stomped, back-to-back negative rushing yardage games, embarrassing turnovers on offense, embarrassing implosions on defense, not showing up for the bowl game (not that I don't empathize).
That's a lot to reverse even without thinking of actually taking down our arch-rivals. I mean, yeesh, let's learn to stop tying our own shoelaces together before we talk of taking down the Rose Bowl Champs. Beat the cupcakes by 2-3 TDs, controlled victory over PSU, not going backwards, top it off with that soul-crushing 1-point loss to OSU and a close loss to K-State and even at 8-5 people would be singing a different tune. The problem was that the team started out bad and only seemed to get worse.
So even if we're looking at another 8-5 season, it's HOW that 8-5 looks that matters. If it's because the QB can't complete a long pass over STAEE because of a trash tornado, that's one thing. If it's because App State controlled the line of scrimmage, Hoke might not even last the season.
|1 week 2 days ago||Argh||
Despite this excellent perspective it otherwise seems people's perceptions are still flipping back and forth between tinkering and panic, as if there's no middle ground. The coaches are making changes. Of course they are. After 2013 I'd panic if they weren't making changes. And these changes are rather significant. Of course they are. Who the hell wants insignficant changes??
This just looks to me like good ol' professional problem-solving.
1) Diagnosis: Your OC is out of control, changing schemes on the fly. Solution: Get a new OC that excels at installing a base scheme.
2) Your DT-dependent 4-3 under isn't getting pressure, your linebackers are eating blocks, and the soft middle is being exploited. Solution: Change the scheme and move your best playmaker to emphasize interior linebacker play.
Will these work? Who knows? But it's not like Hoke is chasing ghosts by converting to a wide-open spread because "that's what everyone else is doing" or doubling down on I-form. If I was coach I'd recognize that 2013 called for a thorough review and it looks like they're doing a good job addressing the weaknesses with what they have.
|1 week 2 days ago||I'd say cold & calculating||
The D was going to key on Stauskas. They didn't double-team him (they know this team LOVES to go to the open man for the easy basket), but GR3 was able to sneak away along the baseline. When the pass was launched he was quickly double-teamed, but from there it's about GR3's athleticism. He has the elevation to get to the arm-punt, one dribble to get in position, then elevation again to go above his defender. The baseline jumper off the backboard is a relatively easy shot and difficult to block if you can go above your defender.
This wasn't a Hail Mary; it was a sniper shot Purdue didn't see coming. Coach Beeline knew exactly what he wanted.
The downside is, like the play the football team wasted on Akron, this is a play that probably only works once, so using it here means they can't save it for the tournament. Oh well. . . time for the offensive whiz to draw up something else simple & brilliant.
|1 week 2 days ago||No time||
The shot barely made it in. One pass was all the time they had for.
|1 week 2 days ago||I'm OK with this.||
I'm OK with this.
|1 week 2 days ago||What is this?! A defensive||
What is this?! A defensive line for ants?!?
|1 week 2 days ago||Question, I don't speak zebra||
On the broadcast view, what's the referee at the bottom of the screen motioning for, and what exactly is he calling? On the video clip in the prior thread I even hear whistles.
|1 week 2 days ago||I didn't realize||
I dunno. He just didn't seem all that quick or powerful. That CAN be a technique thing, and I'll admit my eyes can fool me if it was that. The way I saw it wasn't so much he was a super-freak athlete that was too raw, but a guy trying various moves but lacking the power or speed to beat his man. A raw athlete will do things like that one DL guy we had who often just stood up at the snap but one time literally grabbed his blocker and tossed him aside. That's a raw athlete with huge upside. With Clark, I saw a guy moving pretty well, but his blockers just didn't seem to have too much trouble staying in front of him and holding ground. I'm concerned that he's not nearly as athletic as advertised (for an FBS DE).
Again, before I get negged into oblivion, I'm not a brawler so I don't trust my own assessment. I'm just being honest about what I saw, and concerned because I think for all the hype he's rapidly reaching his ceiling as a mediocre FBS DE, and I in fact suspect that's why they're moving Jake Ryan inside.
|1 week 2 days ago||It shouldn't||
286 to 298 is a 4% change. Most of the weight changes are downright negligible. At 303, Glasgow could gain those 5 pounds with a bad case of constipation.
|1 week 2 days ago||Beyond a certain point it's||
Beyond a certain point it's not about pure weight, or even "good" weight vs. "bad" weight. It's about how the weight moves.
The weight's there for obvious p=mv physics, but that's just the 19th century level of the equation -- if the guy opposite you outweighs you by 50 pounds, odds are you're gonna get pushed back if you take a bull rush square. Air Force can only do so much with their weight restrictions, for example.
But in the case of Frank Clark, his weight isn't what concerns me. DEs in a 4-3 need to be very athletic, both powerful AND quick. But while as the season wore on he got better and evolved into one of the better pass rushers, despite being called a "freak" he wasn't really blowing back anyone with lower-body explosion, running past pass blockers with raw speed or breaking ankles with quickness. Mind you he was very athletic by any objective standard, but (and my memory may be fuzzy here) I don't remember seeing O-lines motion like "oh shit Frank Clark" and scheme to stop the guy. That's a concern that's related to his weight but only partially.
Clark could be 260 or 280, hell, 250 or 290 even; what he needs is not a weight target but the ability to beat a block consistently and he can't even do that as well as JFMR -- a linebacker, yes our best linebacker but still a linebacker -- despite the block-beating expectations of the position. Maybe it's a technique thing, I dunno, someone else has to explain why because I'm much more of a run-around-in-space guy than a brawler.
|1 week 2 days ago||Yeah, yikes||
There's a ratio thing at work here. I often think too much is made of (relatively minor) weight differences between linemen; someone at 280 could be far stronger and tougher than someone at 300. If neither has bad weight it's not likely, don't get me wrong 20 pounds ain't nothing to sneeze at, but factor stuff like length, build, speed, etc. and it's not like the 300 guy's a sure thing. But 170 vs. 190 is a whopping 12% difference in mass.
6'0" and 170 and his pride is his quick feet. That's. . . yo, that's me (although perhaps 1/475th as athletic), and you wouldn't want to see me in pads against FBS competition unless you like snuff film (or hate me that much). I'd want to add at least 15 pounds of muscle and would prefer to be up to 190.
|1 week 2 days ago||All good||
What's little known is that this is Brian's way of justifying his own weight gains over the winter.
But we're not supposed to discuss that.
All weight change is good.
All weight change is good.
All weight change is good.
|1 week 3 days ago||I don't find it odd||
You play to your strengths, not to your desires. Mattison is showing the flexibility Borges didn't have, albeit maybe a full season too late.
In terms of concepts "4-3" is generally associated with a disrupting DL and clean-up LBs wheras 3-4 is a "two-gap" system where the DL eats space and the LBs make plays. I want to say that's "outdated", but it's really inaccurate to begin with. It's better to go with Space Coyote's concepts of "inside out" and "outside in". Mattison's preferred mode is "outside in", where the DEs and SLB hold the edge and DTs get push to squeeze the play until there's nowhere to go. But that requires stout DTs and playmaking DEs and Michigan currently has neither. If blockers are getting to the second level, the execution has already failed. 3-4 is typically known for having a huge space-eating DL, but this is also not always accurate IMHO. A 3-4 can also be deployed with swarming blitz packages that don't expect the DL to do it all themselves. They shoot the gaps and force the ball outside, where the corners and OLBs chase. That's "inside out", and Michigan has the personnel to do that. Again -- the 4-3 vs. 3-4 isn't important; the key here is where the disruption is going to come from. In 2014, it's going to be the linebackers.
The 2011 defense was very good because all the tools GERG badly misused were in place -- Mattison wanted the DL making plays and RVB and Mike Martin were up to the task. The linebackers were a weakness then. In 2013, the linebackers were deep and the DL thin. Pass rush and run stuff just weren't coming from the DL and that looks to be even more lopsided next season. In that situation, sticking to a concept where the DL has to make plays and your best player just contains one side is madness.
The 2014 defense has quick CBs and LBs, so it makes more sense to put your block-beating linebacker on the inside, and a bunch of killer bees like Ross and Peppers to the outside. The pre-snap reads and formations won't change dramatically from the 4-3 under; this is really just a personnel adjustment vs. spread teams that option off JMFR. Instead of a slot receiver drawing our best pass rusher away from the play while the LBs eat blocks, JMFR can beat blocks on the inside and flush the ball toward guys like Countess, Ross and Peppers. Against sets featuring a TE, we can always move him back out to SAM.
This is just how I see it, anyway. That said, I have no idea why they're shuffling the coaches so dramatically.
|1 week 4 days ago||Problem||
Long snapping is like 99% technique and my knowledge of it is limited to, "Chuck the football between your legs really hard." Probably doesn't help a kid much.
As for this guy being OK at 215, I didn't know about the 1-second rule. At least the crow pie tasted good. Mmmmm, pie. . .
|1 week 4 days ago||Butthead||
This ith the cooleth thing the Internet hath ever theen.
|1 week 4 days ago||Trick shots||
Yes you can try as many times as you like with a trick shot, but many of those are the sorts I'd never be able to do in a hundred tries, at which point the camera's out of batteries, my arms are dead and my friends have said "eff it" and gone home. Point is, I doubt he did any of those on one try, but they get the point across.
At 215 pounds, though, the guy's as much OL as I am a mysterious rich playboy billionaire moonlighting as a superhero but I think the idea here is that's much easier to fix at Michigan than a long snapper who can't snap. Compete for the starting job, though? This guy has redshirt written all over him. I get that long snappers aren't really expected to hold a block but DTs look at long snappers with blood in their eyes and at his current weight he's going to get annihilated.
|1 week 5 days ago||It's better than expected but||
It's better than expected but from the NFL's point of view only validates that he was a legit college receiver. There are enough kids in the Combine to fill several teams top-to-bottom and they're all rookies. Gallon wasn't a top performer in any category.
I expect him to go in the 6th round, if he's drafted at all. Why? Because I'm a hater? No, because ironically of ALL the things the NFL looks at in the draft, the LAST one is the ability to play football. It's why Ryan Leaf went #2 and Tom Brady fell to the 6th round (no, I still haven't forgotten that). The draft isn't about who's the best baller but who has the highest ceiling, and Gallon's physical limitations are obvious. He already plays way above his size but that means he's not expected to get much better. Gallon isn't a high draft pick or even 2nd day pick because he's like 98% baller and 2% talent. He just plays some goddamned football.
I see him more as a late-round pick that everyone expects to see cut in camp, and winds up having a 12-year career because after all the beautiful physical specimens have washed out, the smart hardworking guy who shows up early every day to study tape and memorizes the 500-page playbook by the first day of camp outworks everyone to a starting job. He won't be breaking any records but there are places in the league for a guy like Gallon after the coach has lost patience with all the prima donnas with scout-seducing talent that won't run a crisp route even after a hundred reps.
|2 weeks 20 hours ago||I think you saw the same||
I think you saw the same things the coaches did but are looking at it too hindsight-y. We all saw the LBs eat blocks because of our undersized D-line, but I don't think the coaches moved Ryan to MLB for him to do the same. He's the one linebacker we have who can beat a block. Moving Ryan to MLB takes pressure OFF the D-line.
To kind of dumb down that over-vs.-under exchange upthread, with this move "strong side linebacker" becomes a bit of a misnomer. Under last year's scheme, the SAM had a responsibility to hold the edge; Ryan was great at that (and even caused havoc at times from the edge), but the problem was that there really wasn't any way to get to the ball without blitzing. The last two years Mattison tried to implement a disciplined, no-weak-spots "beat your man" concept that, unfortunately, the young defense wasn't up to the task. The traditional 4-3 concept is for the DTs to get some interior push while the DEs make plays but the D-line was too small to execute that. As an offense, if you take Jake Ryan out of the play by spreading, you now have all day to set up because the D-line takes forever.
It's not a huge overhaul, but I see a timing element to it. Basically the risk is that teams will look at Ross and MANBALL to that side, but it's not like Mattison sticks with one formation all game. This is an anti-spread look where Ross is more expected to chase the ball like a retriever than eat a TE, or maybe cover a slot or jump a screen. Jake Ryan is in a better position to get to the ball, but now he HAS to get to the ball because Ross can't hold the edge as well as Jake Ryan.
We'll see how it works.
|2 weeks 1 day ago||Denard is fast but his speed||
Denard is fast but his speed wasn't what made him lethal. His speed in college was elite but he had on occasion been chased down from behind and guys who can keep up with him are everywhere in the NFL.
Denard and Hemingway were also very quick, as evidenced by every Denard highlight reel and Hemingway's shocking 3-cone result at the Combine. But again, ankle-breaking cuts and "knack for YAC" still don't give me the feeling the full story's been told.
It seems to me that RichRod was great at finding guys who have 360-degree quickness. A lot of guys are great at side-to-side cuts, but Denard's quick cuts were made in every possible direction. He'd juke, sure, but he could also stop on a dime and follow with a one-step burst that would completely throw off a tackler's timing. It also forced some less disciplined/decisive defenders to instinctively hedge. If his quickness was limited to two directions, a skilled defender can position & time himself in such a way that he won't miss (or at least bottle up the motion until the cavalry arrives), but not with 360. I couldn't count the number of times Denard would milk another 5 yards untouched with a defender right next to him because the poor guy was terrified of committing to a direction.
Getting back on track, it looks like Canteen has the same quality thanks to his obsessively practiced footwork. He doesn't need to blow by his guy; a few Gallon-esque feints and he's got separation. The challenge will be on the QB to time and locate the throw.
|2 weeks 3 days ago||Ugh||
It's me. Carry on.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||I'd say so||
No one around here seems to be saying she doesn't deserve a shot because she's a woman, per se. Rather, she's a 5'3", 130-pound 36-year-old. I'd expect the same results if it was Tom Cruise out there, though that would probably be more funny.
Honestly, there are women out there that could probably do better (Abby Wambach comes to mind, or Sue Bird if she was younger), but odds are they're not as foolish. Frankly it rather grates on my nerves when a lesser female athlete is trotted out to get annihilated -- not that even a 22-year-old Bird would do well, just at least not that -- but she could well be the only one dumb enough to take the job.
Women in general aren't going to succeed in most sports compared to men because sports are structured to favor the Y-chromosome. That's really what they're about. If a woman has the athleticism necessary to make it, sure, give her a shot, but if that's the case then don't waste my time putting a middle-aged buck-thirty at tailback.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Sounds like an impasse||
He needs his mother to sign. If he's waiting it's because she's not doing it, otherwise this would be a done deal by now.
Not that this changes anything, but even if his chances of going to Michigan were higher than 0%, family politics is something to stay out of. Way, WAY out of.
|2 weeks 4 days ago||Good||
This team could use a SPARQ
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Wait, taking notes here||
So we're going after the Messiah, Prince, "Shoeless" Joe Jackson and STERRRRLIIIING JENKIIIINS?
|3 weeks 1 day ago||'Cuz why the fark not||
Half a knee, philosophically,
But can a knee be said to be
La dee dee, one two three,
I love this sophomore TE,
He loves him carnally,
Russell Bellomy. . .
/ with apologies to Monty Python
|3 weeks 3 days ago||One would think||
But again, when it comes to wideout or corner, they first gotta have speed. There's a reason why Kovacs went undrafted and it sure wasn't his brain. On the flip side, the NFL will take a chance at the dumbest corner if the draft if the guy can run a 4.3. The guy may wash out in a year for lack of willingness to study the game, but they'll take the chance every time. It's annoying, but I get it.
Mind you I ain't presenting Sherman's 24 as evidence he's smart, per se. But it's evidence he's not stupid (nor do I think Tebow is necessarily dumb -- his problem is that he's a mama's boy who lacks independent thought, but that's another conversation entirely).
To put it another way. . . it's possible for a smart guy to score a 6 on purpose, but it's less likely for the dumb guy to get a high score by accident. And while I'd expect the occasional free-thinker to boycott the test, I'd look closely at the guy who bothered to take it but didn't bother to prepare. NFL hours can get brutal yo. It's like, what am I gonna make of a guy who shows up for the interview having not even spent a half an hour checking out the company website? It may work out but I want to hear how from someone trying to convince me s/he's the best candidate for 240 hours/month and starts off by blowing off thirty minutes of proactive work. Because it's dumb bullshit? OK, if you can convince me, call me out and I'll actually accept that. Again, this stuff is a holy grail by no means. But often. . . it's because they're lazy.