that is nice bonus change
- Member for
- 2 years 46 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|7 hours 59 min ago||Thing is||
They're right, though. Experts have long claimed a correlation between smoking pot and violent behavior. McGary smoked pot and we have video evidence that he mauled some helpless players from other schools in the '13 tourney. There were thousands of witnesses -- he carried out his assaults right there on the basketball court. One VCU guy got knocked clean off his feet on national TV. That druggie is a monster. Where's the outcry?
|8 hours 5 min ago||How old is this guy?||
I'm tempted to say something about how they're just not a huge football program so their resources are limited.
Thing is, even back in 2007 it's not like this stuff wasn't all available on the Internet. I knew they were going to run man and I didn't spend a penny. I just watched the scrimmages on MGoVideo.
|8 hours 8 min ago||I'm more leaning borges||
IIRC Omameh did fine under RRod's system. Then Borges started demanding he do things he wasn't good at. He did that a lot.
You can coach a guy to get better at something, but you can't coach a player into a different sort of player.
I will concede the jury's still out, but it's hardly a controversial position. Basically everyone's saying if the O-line doesn't keep pace at improving throughout the season then Funk should go. But everyone deserves a fair shake at a job that's actually possible after failing to do the impossible.
|9 hours 57 min ago||Not without opening up||
Not without opening up something else, anyway. I think Nuss knows what he has (not a TE) and it's clear from this game he's gonna use him all over the field to keep the defense in a bind.
|9 hours 59 min ago||Ballers||
I was impressed by the guy who tackled Funchess on the jump. He could've gotten kicked in the head, legs could've slipped through, and Funchess' legs were moving fast so they couldn't have been easy to grab. He somehow got both arms on 'em and clung.
I mean, overall they were completely outclassed, but on a few occasions they made some plays.
One thing I don't get about the pointing. . . the O-line is facing the opposite direction. Who's looking? Is it for self-reference? Or is it to let the defense know they've been figured out?
|10 hours 46 min ago||Jake the Mike||
You're in UFR-land and I get that, but I'm more referring to his lack of presence. The big plays were largely caused by miscommunication and part of that is on the MLB by default, but that's both fixable and a shared responsibility.
I'll echo Mattison's assessment; he looked so careful out there that he bottled his own thunder. I don't think the biggest busts were purely on him, but he is supposed to be in the thick of things, and he didn't wreak his trademark havoc either. As Mattison said, he needs to take care of his position first. Similarly, I'm not concerned. It's a problem, but as problems go it's one of the easiest ones to fix.
|12 hours 6 min ago||RE: Linebacker play||
He didn't say so and it's kind of unusual but I think Mattison was trying to say that Jake Ryan's play is easy to fix. It's much easier to fix a guy who's trying to do too much than someone who doesn't get it or doesn't want to put in the effort.
|1 day 1 hour ago||No||
YOU EAT THE GODDAMN LEMON LIKE A MAN
|1 day 1 hour ago||Agree||
They might even rotate the line -- not heavily, like in desperation, but see how they hold up against ND's front and move guys around. Glasgow can play either C or guard so he might start the game on the bench and then move in if, say, Miller has problems coping with ND's size. Basically, "best five" is a flexible thing, and it's not a bad thing to have 6-7 co-starters because OL performance can really go south with a key injury.
|1 day 2 hours ago||I smell a rat||
"Morgan was announced as a starter in the stadium (Michigan announced 12 on D)"
Only one reason why they'd announce 12 starters on D.
Brian, your check to Mattison had better be on its way. And good.
For your own sake.
|1 day 2 hours ago||Taco & friends||
Welp, that's one way to win the Michigan drill -- just push the lineman right into the ball carrier and pancake them both.
Hat tip to McElfresh -- dude's a baller. He's welcome to transfer anytime. We've got a crowded receiver corps but we'll find a place for Drew Dileo 2.0. He was also the guy who cut block Peppers (I don't like that he injured his ankle but it was a clean play).
Who was that guy who chased down Green on his big run? He chased down Green from the opposite side of the field! App State's secondary was questionable but that guy had some serious speed.
The linemen blocks 20 yards downfield were just ridiculous in a good way.
No comment on Funchess because that monster speaks for himself. I mean, what do you say about Godzilla? You just yell "GOJIRAAAA" and point in stunned awe at the destruction.
|2 days 27 min ago||Lies, damn lies and statistics||
The average got dragged way down because in the 2nd half they kept running zone stretch while CMU's safeties had completely sold out so the play was only getting 2-4 yards/carry. They were asking to have a pass thrown over their heads but no point with the game out of reach.
Yes, for a glorious fleeting moment of the season, we were running into stacked boxes for positive yardage. Of course once we ran into even semi-half-sorta-meh run defenses the positive yardage evaporated but we kept running into stacked boxes. Hope that changes this year.
|2 days 1 hour ago||CMU was a team effort||
Last year's opener, the offense ran a clinic on zone stretch. It was very much a team effort. It just wasn't part of a coherent offense so it stopped working the next week.
|2 days 8 hours ago||Few thoughts||
Well, we're still running the waggle with a mobile QB. The spy always took a beeline for the QB but at least there was always a hot route and App. State's D consistently got burned for it.
D looked good, although JMFR still seems to be figuring things out. I chalk up the 2nd half drives to the difficulty in maintaining intensity with a five TD lead, but even then nothing came easy for App. State. Their tailbacks broke a few tackles, their receivers made some really good catches and even then they had to grind out almost every yard.
Smith looks more reliable than Green. Both sprung big runs but those won't come as easy against better tacklers, and in the cases where App State's D was more sound, Smith was tougher to stop.
What I liked most is that while the offense ran a bunch of different plays, these are plays you WANT opposing defenses to catch on tape. Unlike Borges' "a-ha! SIKE" plays that are unstoppable for one game and then dead, these plays were far less surprising but spread the defense out and that will remain effective throughout the season. I'll note the biggest plays of the day were all huge runs after the passing game established Funchess as a terror.
|3 days 4 hours ago||Score vs. how||
Last year's opener: 59-9. The score means nothing (well except, you know, that we won).
How, though, was encouraging. They said they'd run inside zone and they did. They ran constraint plays that complemented IZ. Mattison said the D would be aggressive and it was. None of this zone stretch clinic silliness without anything to complement it.
The approach promises to hold up better when the competition gets tough.
|5 days 1 hour ago||We got corners yo||
We got more deadly corners than the bad side of Chicago.
|5 days 2 hours ago||The articles turn green,||
The articles turn green, large and violent?
|5 days 4 hours ago||No||
You'll want to hedge a prediction for a guy who hasn't played a single down of college football. I'd rather err on the side of under-hyped, which is damn near impossible for Peppers unless he's Charles Woodson 2.0 this season. Which he won't, if only because not even Charles Woodson was Charles Woodson as a freshman.
Mind you he hasn't yet given us a reason to think he'll be anything worse than good, but. . . he is a true freshman.
|5 days 7 hours ago||Dammit||
Hurry up and get football season started so I can see these barbarians destroy people and hear the lamentations of their women
|5 days 9 hours ago||MY fear level is 10||
Just based on the combination of experience and talent on defense we should crush the OOC schedule but I'm so scarred by the last decade that no game feels safe.
I feel this team should win 8-9 games, and is ready to. We've gone over the two-deep. We've seen them play. We analyzed Nuss' resume. This team has the pieces. . . not to dominate, but to at least take care of business. There should only be 2-3 games on the schedule that make us sweat.
And yet, I'm still scared. The dark is creeping up and enveloping me, threatening to snuff out my
|6 days 34 min ago||Second.|
|6 days 2 hours ago||Point taken||
Severity aside, one of the biggest issues with back injuries is that it's almost impossible to compensate for one without getting further injured. You can walk with crutches or put an arm in a sling but unless you don't get out of bed you'll have to use your back. Unless you stay in bed 24x7 but then yay muscle atrophy. There's just no easy way to heal an injured back. And well, if you're a 300-pound man-giant, that goes double.
That said, that he's going full speed is encouraging for precisely the reasons outlined above. They probably want to avoid aggravating it with uncontrolled contact, but if they're not afraid of working him then it's probably not causing him any pain.
|6 days 8 hours ago||Quiet isn't bad||
I don't think we need an impact player at SDE for this defense to work. We need consistency, so Beyer will be fine. In the over he'll be going up against TEs with Ross on the boundary (seems kinda small for strong side but it just works out that way I guess) so he just needs to hold his own. The guy that takes on the RG and RT is the over is (I believe) the 3-tech. This is. . . a question mark.
We're deep and the DTs have some experience but they're relatively inconsistent and unproven. Chalk some of that to injury, it happens, and in the under (which we'll probably still see some of) I'm OK, but this "pinch the play from the outside in" approach the over is designed for only works if the DTs can handle ALL OF TEH BLOCKS and the 3-tech's job is a lot tougher this season.
|6 days 8 hours ago||Raw Taco||
The hype train hasn't left; it's just recovering from a bit of e.coli. The evidence we have says this Taco was very raw. Heinenger Certainty Principle applies (he'll be fine) and physically he's a monster (he'll be better than fine), but the fact that he's second on the depth chart indicates his playmaking is still not quite enough to beat out Beyer's consistency.
How far behind Beyer is a mystery to me. These coaches place a premium on consistency so Beyer starting surprises exactly no one, but as fall camp winds down is Taco making 2 out of 3 plays correctly or 9/10 and just behind Beyer because Beyer's up to 49/50? The scrimmage isn't enough to tell us this so we'll just have to see.
|6 days 10 hours ago||It depends||
To clarify, I don't envision 15-6 where we pull all the stops. Again, a lot of MGoContributors intend to measure this season based on how the team plays, not the outcome. I'm in that camp, is what I mean by it.
I said I'd be "happy" with 15-6 if it becomes quickly evident that our defense is not only deep but able to keep a mediocre FCS team from moving the ball. Recent history acknowledged, but I maintain that's not a tall order. The defense is almost 3-deep so they're in no danger of wearing out. Those conditions in mind, this would allow Nuss to stick to base plays that -- hey, let's be honest -- still need work. They could go 30-40 yards a drive and settle for field goals all game as long as A) the OL makes the most of the experience and B) we win without using the back pages of the playbook. If we meet those goals I don't really care about the points. I'm happy with 40 but beyond wins I want to see progress, not desperation. If we score only 15 points with Nuss showing all his cards I'll be very upset.
The Akron game didn't piss me off because of the score, per se. It pissed me off because the O-line regressed and Mattison had to use one of his trump cards on the last play to seal the win. It was an aggressive called play. I'm sure he wanted to save it for later, but using that play was a symptom of a bigger issue. Ditto with UConn. I'm all for linebackers making circus catch interceptions in any situation but that we needed a circus catch interception to win the game was a bad sign. Replace the urgency with control and I'm happy to let the OL improve at whatever pace doesn't compromise the D's efforts.
|6 days 10 hours ago||I.e.||
To reconcile the two, the peak of Michigan's win distribution curve is lower (fewer wins) than MSU's, but the distribution itself is flatter. Lower projection, higher ceiling (but also equally higher chance of another unfortunate implosion)?
Michigan is, to be blunt, more unpredictable. Predictions vary wildly between 6-6 and 10-2, with most hedging at 8-4. The team is super talented and could threaten a NC if it all comes together, but too much needs to go right to expect that just yet.
|6 days 11 hours ago||Sad STAEE of affairs?||
Looking at that graph, I would love to see our offense progress like MSU's did last season. It can even start out every bit as bad as long as the improvement's there. I'd love a good offense as well but I'm gonna protect my heart against a true frosh starting LT.
So I don't care if we can't even muster a TD against App. State as long as we win. I don't see their offense getting in the end zone against our back seven even if their veteran OL fights our three-deep DL to a stalemate. I know I know, complacency, Akron, Toledo, Teh Horror, etc., but FFS there's jinx and then there's reality. Mattison has the first two-deep defense since he arrived and this ain't the same App. State that came to Michigan off back-to-back national titles. If we win 15-6 but get a ton of IZ reps against a D-line that isn't wearing winged helmets I'll be happy as long as we get that sharp upward trajectory from WMU to Indiana that Sparty fans saw last season. Their first few games were so awful it dragged down their stats but they won most of them, over the last few games they held their own, and they wound up winning the Rose Bowl. I'll take that.
As for STAEE, I wouldn't count them out. I doubt they'll repeat a one-loss season but they're not replacing last year's defense with freshmen. The new group is probably just as coached up as the last, so I see them picking up another 1-2 losses not because of genuine issues so much as regression to the mean.
|1 week 1 hour ago||A few reasons for optimism||
1) Don't put much stock in the "we lost two NFL tackles" thing. In fact I'm dead sick of it and disappointed it showed up again. O-line is like a fort; as the quote indicated you attack the weak point and that was our awful, awful guards. Our most experienced lineman is far less experienced than either of last year's tackles, but our least experienced lineman is. . . um. . . a true freshman. But one that beat out some with game experience. OK, I'm not selling this well, but it's not the experience we're losing that was the make-or-break. DCs were scheming around the tackles to the point that half the time Lewan was standing around looking for someone to block.
2) Simplified scheme. Last year's smorgasBorges had to have caused mass confusion.
3) Chemistry? We'll see.
4) Constraint theory. For all the plays we were running terribly, a lot of them were telegraphed with sub packages or counters to plays we don't run. This put more pressure on the O-line than a coherent offense would've.
5) If we don't keep tinkering with the plays or lineup they'll get better as the season progresses.
6) Hopefully Nuss will have the O-line execute plays they can execute, at least physically. One of my biggest beefs with Borges is that he kept having players do things they couldn't do (Funchess as a TE, for example).
Some of these are hopes, but that's all we got at this point.
|1 week 1 hour ago||It's actually hard||
My guess. . . it's really, really hard.
Height actually isn't an advantage by itself. The reason why O-linemen are tall are because A) tall men have bigger frames to pack on more weight, and B) they have longer arms, giving them reach (very important when you're trying to get your hands on a DT).
To knock a guy off his feet you have to get under him (PAD LEVEL), and the taller you are, the more you have to coil into the proper stance, i.e., very low. But you can't get chopped down either, so your burst has to be quick, well-timed and at the right angle.
So while his ceiling is much higher, he's inherently more raw because he's gotta have polished form to make the most of his huge frame. If his pad level is bad I can imagine a guy 3" shorter and 30 pounds lighter winning the battle just by having a quicker first step and lower center of gravity.
|1 week 1 hour ago||Yeah||
I'm a work-in-space guy so line play ain't my thing, but I'll echo the layman's thought for others to correct here: OK they're raw but the're consensus 4- and 5-stars; at some point why not just pack 'em together and bull rush the D-line?* You won't get more than a couple yards without a crease, but at least you'll go forward. Maybe it's harder to run a counter but we weren't running counters to plays we were running anyway. It still baffles me that the base play they rolled out (against CMU) was zone stretch. Zone stretch! I remember a bunch here on MGoBlog equally baffled by that. Try to finesse a bunch of freshmen and the only thing going through the crease will be a DT.
I honestly don't know about Funk. The guy has to teach what the OC calls, and Borges kept asking the players to do things they couldn't do. Last year was such a mess it's hard to pinpoint a single cause of failure and we're not going to see much, if any, improvement this year but the one thing I ask for out of Nuss is coherence. I don't expect the OL to be good but I expect to understand what the plan is to fix that. If what he's calling makes sense and the O-line still doesn't improve, then we can put the noose on Funk's neck.
*Yeah, I know: pad level, pad level, pad level.