I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
- Member for
- 3 years 25 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Karma value
|9 hours 3 min ago||Sure Tim||
Some "magical" life that doesn't determine my happiness/ self worth on a sport/ activity I have no control over.
Although, I have heard of this place called "Outdoors". Not sure if anyone has been there, but I've heard it's gotten ok reviews. Biggest complaints are that it's full of people that you have to talk face to face with. Yeash, could you imagine?
|1 week 1 day ago||Where did he make a personal attack here?||
Nothing in his response to you was personal nor some idiotic name calling.
We get it, you don't like the blog and don't like Brian for banning a poster. The fact that you come here only to complain about the blog and how horrible and draconian it is, while not being banned, seems to go against your argument.
|1 week 1 day ago||Why don't you ask Brian||
if he'd say the same to Brandon and Hoke (the people he is calling out)? I am sure he would absolutely do so if given the opportunity.
|1 week 1 day ago||"comparison is sound"||
|1 week 2 days ago||Peppers is Fast||
I am sure this is a suprise to all.
|1 week 2 days ago||I enjoy your optimism||
|1 week 2 days ago||'"I like you||
just the way you are. You are special just by being you. "
|2 weeks 1 day ago||I only saw the False Start||
(think it was a guard). What was the illeagal shift?
|2 weeks 1 day ago||I was jealous||
of the student section switch when Tommy A came to town. My days as a student were between 98-03. The student section was nowhere near the court. The one time I sat in the lower bowl alumni section was with a family friend and we had plenty of space (and were right behind Tractor Traylor RIP).
We also tried a Blue Out against MSU in 03, that did not due anything, so I also agree that the Maize Rage has made the look of the stadiums better. Hard for me to complain about current conditions when I know how far basketball facilities, student participation and seating, and basketball play has come.
It's amazing how quickly expectations change, as now a tournament bid is no big deal, and the student seating right on the court is not big enough.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||When he calls PA||
I imagine him similar to a child playing hide and seek, giggling madly about their clever hiding place under a rug. Perhaps Mattison (as all good parents do), pretends not to be able to find him under the rug during practice (by allowing the PA to "trick the D") to boost the O's confidence.
|2 weeks 2 days ago||I didn't like the play||
because we have done nothing out of it the whole game and weeks before it. I loved the call to go for it, but could not understand why they did not come out in a shotgun set with Funchess, Dileo, Butt, and Gallon spread out (or switch Kerridge out for Butt) and have Green set up next to Green. The defense then has to defend possible throws to Gallon, Funchess and Butt in the back and corners of the endzones, Green on a draw up the middle, Dileo on a short inside pass right at the goal line, and a scramble/ delayed draw from Gardner.
Oh well, wins are wins. The O looked great in OT. Hopefully we see that against Iowa next week and set up a spoiler game against OSU.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||Sounds like he is electrical engineer||
Fuses are rated for a certain load or current. That rating is based on a constant current, however, can withstand a load greater than the rated load for a short duration. This is what he is stating by the component withstood a load of 300%, he just forgot to add in that there is a time constant.
I suppose this could be related to sports. I can set my 100% speed at a 8 mph run, and say I was at 200% speed cause I was sprinting, although for only 40 meters. Sounds stupid.
I regret having typed this.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||We need another body part||
to break the tie.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||Correct||
on my assumption. I think this is the heart of the disagreement between SC and Brian. Both agree that there are coaching issues. Brian believes they can find success under the right playcalling and scheme, while SC believes that there is no scheme that can be ran because the line shows they can't basic block.
I believe this offense can still be very successful. Despite it being Indiana, this offense can score some points. I believe, if they purely ran out of the spread, and took advantage of more screens to lighten the load on the line, they could find enough offense to win them some more games.
But, as even Brian admitted, we are all just guessing on why the offense is so inept.
|3 weeks 6 hours ago||I fully appreciate his responses||
he is way less snarky then Magnus could be if you disagree with him. His responses are always well thought out, and add value to the blog. Having someone provide that much informed content is not a bad thing for this or any other blog.
I think I slightly agree more with Brian here, but both are admitting there is a coaching issue with this offense.
|3 weeks 6 hours ago||Reminds me||
of a story (I think in Bo's lasting Lessons) where Bo had attended a conference where a coach had a brand new offense that was going to take the nation by storm. Afterward, Bo asked the Coach what his record was with the new offense. The coach admitted that their record wasn't good, but it was because the players didn't execute. I believe, Bo found this funny and went back to fundamentals.
I think the disticntion is that Brian is stating that the plays are putting the players in positions to fail, while SC is stating that the failure of the players ability to execute basic plays is the reason for the failure and not the playcall. To me, if you know the players can't execute a play, then you need to make a play call that they can succeed in. Both Brian and SC are saying screens should be used more as contraints. To me, this is playcalling/ scheme. Not using enough constraints is putting the offense in a position to fail. This has been seen in PSU, MSU, and now Nebraska.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I like your responses||
so I don't mind calling out where I am wrong. You know way more than me, so more likely than not, I am. Anyway, I like this play design (minus the funchess ineligibilty) for a lot of reasons. Mainly because it kept Nebraska out of the box, and it appears that the line does ok with this, while putting many options for the offense to run out of. I don't like the I formation at all with this team because, even if it is the same style of blocking, the number of blocking assigments increases the chances of a mistake.
I do feel that there is not enough rythm in the playcalling. I'd still like to see a 2 minute drill that can put pressure on a defense. I think the fact that this team can only run from a huddle hurts and believe it has something to do with the variations in formations being too many. It may be the same type, but it all feels slow. I don't mind that Hoke wants to operate at a slower pace on offense, but all teams should be able to run their offense at different speeds to occasionally stress the defense.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||If they were||
bracketing Funchess, I think an out route would pull the extra defensive player away until he recognizes the run. It atleast would put Gardner or Fitz against a defender in space. I'd take that any day. If the safety or CB started to cheat this, you could hit them over the top. I hope to see this a lot in the future. I htink this offense can be powerful without a huge amount of tweaking.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||I like this base set||
merely for the 7.5 in the box. Michigan's talent resides in the skill positions. Spreading these guys out makes for easier blocking assignments for the line. As many pointed out, this play is close to breaking it big, and still resulted in a positive yard. With as many ways this play can be optioned, this seems like it should be a focus moving forward. I-form/ with play action has not shown any possible big play out of the run, and thus no ability for the playaction to develop. I think the frustration is plenty here. 1. This play was not executed 2. this play left one of our best threats unused as a decoy 3. This play almost worked and we didn't go back to it enough.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Solution||
It seems, as you say, that the scheme is fine, but the execution is horrible (where have I heard this). I hope this means that they shorten the playbook to a smaller subset of base plays and run these until they can run them in their sleep. I think the frustration also stems from the fact that this should have worked, and yet was left out of much of the game for plays that were far from busting open (such as runs out of I-form up the middle). Borges stated after the OSU game last year that they didn't get enough plays in the second half to get the offense moving. I feel like he causes this by not providing a drive chart that has some rythm and speed. There is no 2 minute drill with this team.
I know it is cliche', but the team feels like it is thinking too much and not reacting. This is bigger on the D, but I think this is a major issue with ND's QB's under Brian Kelly. They fear making a mistake, more than just making a play. Repitition is what this team needs. I like the athletes on this team enough to execute. Get these players the ball in space.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Variations||
You could have the option Kerridge as a pass catching FB. It also helps that Gardner is tall so he pass over players. Denard had balls batted at times when he used the throw option. We shouldn't have this issue here.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Your response||
Format is like a freep article.
I do agree though. I'm fine with plays not working, as long as it sets up another play later that busts a large net gain. i.e. a 1 yard gain with a 10 yard gain out of the same set, is a net of 5.5 yards/ attempt. I also believe the play calling, with a mixed bags, is part of the reason they have to go to the huddle and the plays get in so late. If the offense was working with a smaller base set to run out of, then the players would know where they need to go and only need the variation call.
the lack of 2 minute drill type drives is disturbing, and makes me think the playbook is too big.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Or||
Kerridge feints the block and heads out for a short pass. I thought we brought in Kerridge and Houma for stuff like that.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Hoke Doesn't have to say anything||
but then the fans are allowed to not like what he does or does not say. He is the CEO of the football program and the buck stops with him. I have been part of a couple of companies that have gone through tough times. One CEO did a great job of rallying the troups (fans) to get us through it, without having to throw any management under the bus. The other CEO did not, and we lost a lot of great talent through the transition.
I think it is frustrating as a fan to watch two games with historically bad rushing, and not admitting there was anything wrong with the game plan. I know RR got a lot of heat for saying you can't fix youth in regards to his defense. Michigan has plenty of talent on offense that should be enough to hide the youth. Saying he doesn't owe the fans anything, is not understanding that his product is fully supported because of the fans.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||Hockey Parents||
Don't remember a carrot on the stick but do remember the following;
Mrs Cockburn - After chanting "Cockburn" over and over again, a Northern Michigan Mom stood up and just started shouting "Shutup! Shutup! Shutup!". Amazingly the students were silented for a moment, before quickly turning in a "Mrs Cockburn" chant.
Fighting Parent - A rousing "Jersey Chasers" chant led some opposing girls to leave early. Before one did, she ran up and slapped a Michigan Student in the face, who pushed her away and down a few roles. An opposing parent went after the Student who had stood up by this time. Unfortunetly for the parent, he was a head shorter than the student and fell into a headlock. Amazingly the girl and parent were sent away, and the student got to come back to an applause.
Sign Guy - Way more tame and less cool, but a Notre Dame parent brought some sheets of paper and had written stuff on them like "basketball" and some other clever one liners. My friends and I kept prompting him to hold up the signs for the first two periods. We were dissapointed when he didn't return for the third, only to find joy again that he had moved to the west side of the stadium where we continued to chant out his signs
Probably not cool stories, but as Brian said, it was a bold choice to surround the opposing fans with the student section.
For one game, I also had to sit under the second ier. It was horrible. I couldn't hear anything and felt like I was missing action.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||My Opinion ( i know another)||
I think RR had to go, because there was just too much momentum against him. There was no real honeymoon period and things just continued to pile on. Despite a few poor game outings, Hoke pooped a lot of gold in that first season, and has shown a lot of momentum in the recruiting trail. While RR had lost a lot of his own recruits in the 3 years, Hoke has kept his recruits intact.
I generally agree with the 5 year plan, but I think RR just had too much going against him. I hadn't heard about the rebellion thing, but could definitley tell the players quit in the bowl game.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||I enjoy||
a can of cheese and box of wine as much as anyone, but I don't think us classy folk should be offended by this.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||Devin reminds me of||
Arrested Development when George Michael does his Charlie Brown impression.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||Agree||
Averages are not a good measuring point as they skew the results weirdly. Example, on average, our population has one boob and one testicle, yet that is not an accurate description of what the population is.
I'd say our interior is younger than almost any in the country. I also expect more out of this unit. I really believe that Borges and Funke should have developed a simpler blocking scheme for this unit. Keep them lined up in the same 5 all year, and focus on getting the first level. It seemed the team did this two years ago.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||McGary's contributions||
cannot be undersold. As you said, he is a major upgrade. His ability to get boards and transition from D to O through both ball handling and crazy outlet passing, creates a lot of the fast break scoring for this team.
I also like having Lavert on the point, especially on defense. It will be fun to see if his length causes issues for PGs trying to pass around him. I think this also means full court press is not an issue, as Spike, Walton, Lavert, Stauskas, and even McGary can all handle the ball.