in town for free camps
|5 weeks 18 hours ago||Cal Rugby||
They do not give scholarships for rugby at Cal.
|22 weeks 6 days ago||He just did||
He just did. He doesn't like it because of its 'NOT so subtle racism.' He'd prefer the subtle version.
|23 weeks 2 days ago||Michigan's degree||
The Michigan degree has a slight edge over OSU's. I'm fairly certain the Michigan Kinesiology degree doesn't hold any more water than does the OSU Kinesiology degree (or whatever it is that most football players are majoring in these days).
I'm sure many people (athletes or not) regret not taking school more seriously, but as satisfying as it would be, I don't think many with an OSU degree think 'if only I had a Michigan degree.' US News: Michigan 29th, OSU 54th. We're not exactly comparing an Ivy to a Tier 2 school here.
|23 weeks 2 days ago||Softer ball||
Softer ball doesn't travel as far or fast? I'm not so sure, sounds like armchair physics to me.
|24 weeks 6 days ago||16 team playoff||
I'm all for a 16 team playoff. There needs to be an objective way to a national championship to make this a valid competition. Any team should be able to win its way to the title. As long as the lesser conferences are in the same division as the major confernces, those teams need a clear, objective path to the title. So, 10 conference champions plus 6 wild cards. This will effectively put the top 10 in plus the small conference champions. Being top 5 effectively gets you a bye in the first round as you get to play one of the small conference champions. As long as there are 10 conferences, 16 sounds right to me. Forget the bowl games. Home games for the first 2-3 rounds.
Now if we get a split in the top division and just consider the power 5 conferences, then an 8 team playoff sounds better to me. Again, with the idea that an objective path to the title is essential. Let a committee decide your wild cards, but ultimately, winning a conference title is done on the field, so 5 auto qualifiers in this form too.
|28 weeks 4 days ago||Harbaugh in Ann Arbaugh!!!!||
Harbaugh in Ann Arbaugh!!!!
|29 weeks 4 days ago||MS Paint Please||
MS Paint this Please:
"Harbaugh is going to punch Jed York on the field Sunday before escaping in a block M emblazoned helicopter, giving the stadium an epic double bird while laughing maniacally on his way out."
|31 weeks 18 hours ago||Adding a relative stat here:||
Private high schools account for 1/5 high schools in the state. We would expect to see them in just over 1/3 state title games.
|31 weeks 18 hours ago||Finals Count||
2014: 8 Public, 8 Private
2013: 13 Public, 5 Private
This is not of matter of public schools not being able to compete.
|36 weeks 5 days ago||96 OSU?||
I want to say they were a 2 TD favorite.
Edit: OSU was a 17 point favorite according to this recent article: http://www.cleveland.com/osu-michigan/2012/04/osu-michigan_1996_brian_griese.html
|39 weeks 2 days ago||There is a point||
There is a point; it draws emphasis to the fact that they are the same.
Also, if he had just said 'the same,' a reasonable interpretation is that they express the same ideas. By adding exactly, it's more clear that he means verbatim because we use 'exactly the same' to mean specially, the same to the last detail.
|39 weeks 5 days ago||"To improve is to change; to||
"To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often."
|39 weeks 5 days ago||Watch out guys||
Watch out guys, Desmond Howard must be one of those aggressively reasonable people that Brian warned us about.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||You forgot||
Check out number 5. You guys love that photo of Alan Branch dealing a brain injury to Anthony Morelli. 'Killin your doodz' reads the caption. Again and again I see that photo used as something to gloat and to laugh about.
Morris should've been pulled, you're right. However, your righteous indignation sickens me. Hypocrites.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||Welp||
Welp, I was defending what happened based on the fact that he didn't see the hit and so saw the possible concussion symptoms as hurt ankle symptoms.
All he had to do today was say 'I didn't see it in real time, but after watching the film, we should've had him out of there.' Wouldn't have been good enough for some people here, but I would've been ok with that.
Unfortunately, he didn't have it in him to say it.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||The link for those who are interested||
Let's get Dantonio and Meyer into the crossfire while we're at it at least:
Here was the Braxton Miller KO, he starts heaving later. He also comes back out and plays the entire 4th quarter.
He came back into the game as well.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||Honestly||
It is amazing. I see the left should pad going right on Shanes number, center chest. The helmet being up and right on Shane's left shoulder. If the ruling on the field is 'helmet hit the chin' I wouldn't overturn it, but if the ruling on the field was 'helmet didn't contact chin' I wouldn't overturn that either. I swear, I'm not blind, and I'm looking at this same gif.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||Well||
Well I'm not blind, and you can go ahead and check my comments over the past several years I've been on this blog if you want to see if I'm dumb or just a dick who disagrees with everybody. I'm not. So is there an option 4?
|39 weeks 6 days ago||I appreciate||
I appreciate the apology. I understand your take, and I just have a different take on it. At this point, Hoke says he didn't see the hit. I have no reason to doubt it and I don't think it shows incompetence. It was away from the play.
I agree teat we've got clear evidence of a partial head injury, so I'll retract that. However, the stumble and teammate support only become relevant evidence if we've seen the hit. Otherwise, they're just further evidence of a hurt ankle. Hoke says he didn't see the hit. I believe him and I don't think it makes him incompetent.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||I do realize||
I do realize that many concussions occur from whiplash or from impact with the ground. We all remember Jhavid Best's concussion while playing for Cal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msg4Dg2egkI) and maybe others remember a Sophomore Braxton MIller getting knocked out cold when his head hit the turf 2 years ago (can't find a video and don't remember the opponent.. I want to say Purdue, he also began throwing up afterward, another sign of concussion... of course he returned to play the entire second half).
I don't think it was a direct hit the head, I don't see the crown of the helmet contacting Shane's chin. We're looking at the same evidence, so I guess we can leave it that it's not clear.
The whole point isn't really to argue whether he truly did have a concussion or not, but whether Hoke is incompetent for not suspecting a concussion and removing him from the game. To reiterate, it was a hard hit away from the play. Very possible Hoke didn't see it. If he did, the relevance of helmet to helmet is actually important. When coaches see a hit to the head, we definitely should expect them to have concern for a head injury. Without that, Morris has just taken a hard hit. It is possible to get a concussion on a hard hit, that doesn't mean a coach is incompetent for leaving a player in after a hard hit.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||No need to sling||
No need to sling insults. I don't have blinders on. I made pretty serious thoughtful comments on the matter.
Is his head whiplashing at the end as he hits the ground what everyone's talking about? Typically if someone's head hits the ground, people don't call it a 'hit to the helmet.' Heads hit the ground every play.
I'm not saying Morris wasn't concussed, I'm asking if Hoke is incompetent for not seeing warning signs. The wobble, the teammate for support, both can be signs of an ankle injury. The hit was to the chest and away from the play. The head hitting the ground at the end may be evidence that there was in fact a concussion, but not evidence that Hoke is incompetent for failing to notice it.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||Let's look at some pictures||
Look at this picture and tell me Leftwich isn't concussed: http://a.espncdn.com/i/pkg/ncf/100/top_plays_100.jpg
Here's another one http://maizeandgoblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/BranchKnockOutPSU.jpg
I'm watching your gif and I am still looking for the hit to the head.
Ultimately, a Morris had an ankle injury and was hit hard away from the play. Hoke could reasonably be expected to know that Morris had an ankle injury and was wobbling and using a player to support him. Why is it incompetent to leave him in with those facts? After leaving one play later, the staff evaluated him. With the green light, why is it incompetent to let him go back into the game?
I believe these things:
There was not clear evidence or partial evidence of a head injury. Morris was hit hard in the chest. He had already been limping and using players for support for his ankle injury. His thought, which I think was and is still reasonable, is that Morris was fighiting a painful ankle injury.
Don't speak for everyone in the stands. They may have booed and wanted Morris out. But for many of them it was because the game was over and he was clearly in pain. Not necessarily because they thought 'concussion.'
I do think the department owes a more detailed account of the events. Once we watch Morris get pulvarized 200 times on infinite loop gif, it's clear he should've gotten checked after such a vicious shot, even though it wasn't to the head. I don't think it makes Hoke incompetent, but some more clear detail about what transpired should be offered.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||Idiot.||
Most of the outrage thus far is about him returning to play, not playing one more play before coming out. I agree that he should've come out immediately. I'm not massivley outragedly upset that there was one play before he was taken out after a non-helmet-to-helmet hit. Idiot.
|40 weeks 51 min ago||Most teams leave their starters in||
Most teams leave their starters in even when they're losing. And if Hoke just wanted the points here, he would've kicked a field goal earlier rather than go for it on 4th down.
It's pile-it-on comments like these that make me feel like a lot of the outrage is really coming from the fact that this team stinks. Why weren't people outraged that Devin played on a broken foot last year?
My thoughts: if a player has a possible head injury, you obviously must take him out... immediately, without question. I've played and coached rugby for 15 years now. I've seen coaches leave concussed players in and it's disgusting.
Blast from the past... when Dantonio played Gholston a couple of plays after this happened, I was absolutely disgusted and have never thought much of Dantonio since: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AZsok00Pio
I watched the Michigan game with no audio and I didn't think Morris was concussed. I really didn't. I saw the huge hit, but it wasn't head to head. The 'wobbly' everyone's talking about seemed like hurt-ankle-wobbly not concussed wobbly. I have a low 'might be a head injury' threshold. If I saw this kind of thing, I would probably talk with the player and have them talk to a trainer. Morris did talk to a trainer. They didn't mention anything to Hoke, so as far as the head goes, why should he think concussion? He did not take a shot to the head, the trainers didn't mention a concussion, and further he hasn't been diagnosed with a concussion since the game.
On the ankle point, it wasn't pretty. But again, I think we're mainly upset that Shane Morris, the future of Michigan football, stunk. It was a sign that not only do we stink now, but we're going to stink in the future too. Playing with a high ankle sprain isn't going to ruin someone like playing through a head injury can. I'm not disgusted by a guy playing through an ankle sprain. Nobody grilled Byron Leftwich's coach when Leftwich played through a broken leg, literally being carried to the line. The difference with Leftwich was success.
|40 weeks 7 hours ago||Where were they?||
Rember when this happened to Gholston and he was back in the game just a few plays later?
|43 weeks 6 days ago||No we shouldn't||
This site is how Brian makes his living. Don't joke about boycotting it over something trivial.
|47 weeks 3 days ago||Agreed||
It is a tired excuse. But 2 empty classes will do that to you.
2 years ago... few 2nd and 3rd year guys (lack of depth)
last year... few 3rd or 4th year guys (depth + youth)
this year... few 4th and 5th year guys (youth)
The majority of guys haven't been here for 3 years by the way.
4 years: 0
3 years: 2
2 years: 4
1 year: 6
just starting: 2
Anyway, there's no excuse for a performance like last year's. However, the conclusion from OP is 'no reason we can't win a B10 title.' This is still a very young line, and just because it's been said before doesn't mean they should age more quickly.
If it makes you feel any better, I promise I will not use it as an excuse next year (and will only use it to excuse a little bit this year)!
|47 weeks 3 days ago||A couple things:||
First: I wouldn't' say we can't win the big 10. But a big reason this offense may have trouble is shown in one of your statistics: Average years in program for the offensive line: 2
A guy going into his 3rd year can be good enough to start, but these guys and their second year counterparts are being forced onto the field. Is it possible a bunch of 2nd and 3rd year highly touted o-lineman can get the job done? Sure. But we've seen how detrimental youth is on the oline (both on the field and through numerous stats shown on this blog). Even if they perform admirably, can they move the ball against MSU? They'll have to if they want the B10 title.
Second: Listing the average star rating for players who've been starting or out of high school for several years is silly. It's like taking the average draft pick number of starters on NFL teams. If I new absolutely nothing about the team, this kind of average coudl give me a general sense of 'upper tier' 'middle tier' or 'lower tier' team, but it's not going to tell us much else. Basically, it's a little annoying. We know we've recruited well for several years now, but let's not go to the 'look at our average star ratings, we're going to be great!' mode every summer.
|1 year 5 weeks ago||USA 7s||
If you're interested in the sport... the US team has a very exciting player right now: Carlin Isles. Ex elite US sprinter now rugby player. Some of his highlights definitely remind me of Denard Robinson's long runs.
Here are two good youtube vids to check out:
7 minute mini doc:
|1 year 5 weeks ago||Another possibility||
There were 6 weeks between those matches, with the latter being played after the school year had ended. Michigan's fitness may have improved over that time (it was a long winter after all) or there may have been key roster changes.
Kevbot is right though, a bit of chance may be all that's needed to explain the different outcomes.
|1 year 5 weeks ago||They definitely go fast||
It wlll depend somewhat on who's running the tournament or agreement between the clubs, but typically, it's actually 7 minute halves. 10 minute halves for tournament championship matches (this is how the International Rugby 7s tour operates at least).
It definitely doesn't feel fast if you're playing it, it's exhausting... full size rugby field with half the player numbers. Spectatorwise... it's exteremely fast and exciting, and I believe easier for a novice to understand and enjoy watching. 7s events tend to be tournaments, so you'll see your team play several times in a day or weekend. Makes up for the short match lengths. I predict an explosion of the sport in the US after people watch it in the 2016 olympics.
|1 year 7 weeks ago||Speight vs Morris?||
Is there a reason we're thinking Morris is the heir apparent to Gardner? I'm expecting a massive qb competition between the 2 going into 2015.
|1 year 11 weeks ago||Looking back at 13||
It's incredible how close so many games were last year, even with the terrible OL. It's amazing how far a solid defense can take you, and I think the UM defense will be better this year. I don't think the OL will be good... at best they'll be average by season's end. But that's all the team needs to have a pretty damn good season.
|1 year 14 weeks ago||Theoretical vs Real Evidence||
In our abstract thoughts, we can imagine how it could possibly be harder for a man without a 4 year degree to convince his players of the importance of a 4 year degree. I would accept it as a possibility, but I think there's so much more to keeping players in college than having a coach who is able to say 'you know, I finished college, look at me now!'
Ultimately, we don't need to sit and wonder if hypothetically one type of degree means this or that and another would mean the other. If someone has real experience, we can look at a man's actual record and interview him to decide if his record meets our standards.
I don't think these colleges made the BA requirement because they thought it was critical or even slightly important to someone being a good college basketball coach and all that it entails. It's a requirement because they don't think it reflects well on the school to have one of their most recognizable figures without a college degree. That's embarrassing to them. It's elitism. Some might argue then that this is a part of the job. Ok, but recognize the requirement for what it is.
P.S. The guy lied, soooo not making an argument that USF should've still hired him. Just hate blanket requirement.
|1 year 14 weeks ago||Ambivalent||
The guy lied, that's not good.
I hate degree and certification requirements. Why does he need a BA? This coach is evidence that you don't need the degree to excel at all of the duties of basketball coaching.
|1 year 14 weeks ago||Not that bad||
I'd agree that it's not that bad of an argument, but I don't agree with it.
Just because you learn from an activity at the school, does that make it part of your formal education at the school? If it does, then is there anything I can do for a university while I'm a student that can be considered employment? If I learned about hard work by serving meals in the cafeteria, am I just a student-cook and not an employee?
Most would agree that there is much to be learned about life through sports. The stretch comes when trying to say that those lessons are part of your degree.
|1 year 15 weeks ago||His limits?||
I think it's a perfectly fine decision. Everyone here is pretty down on his coaching abilities, but I think overly so. Some things to consider:
First, his level wasn't low before. We saw him do an okay job at Michigan... not a bad job. He didn't establish himself as an elite coach, but he was certainly quite capable.
Second, what are his limits? He had 4 years of head coaching experience when he came to Michigan; he has 17 years of coaching experience now. Some men might be born to coach and can win like crazy from day one. However, just because you don't start out your career with headlines doesn't mean you have a low limit.
I agree that Harvard is probably a low pressure job that has a lot of advantages, but he's taking a step up to a program that has a higher bar. Many of us would leave a low pressure job for a promotion to a higher pressure, more responsibility, and higher pay job. Let's not forget, BC is in the same town... he's not uprooting his entire life to do this. Pretty ideal situation really.
Ultimately, I think he's probably a much better coach now than he was while at Michigan and will do a great job with BC.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||Regional games are meaningless||
I don't really get the regional games. Regardless of their outcomes, we get semifinals on day one between UM, Oregon, Villanova, and VCU. Finals and Conlolations on day 2. The regional stuff is irrelevant basically. So each day's ticket is good for two games, one of which will feature Michigan. The actual semifinal matchups among the four teams hasn't actually been set.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||Could it get better?||
Could it get better? No, this is an awesome fun team that is a national contender. It cannot get any better than this. It will hopefully continue to be great.
And no team is a likely national champion. 1/3 chance is as good as you can get I'd say, and that's after a dominant season and heading into the tournament. Preseason, even the most elite returning roster I'd say no more than 10%.
Not trying to be a downer, just trying to keep things realistic. Ultimately, Beilein looks capable of keeping this show running. I don't think he needs 5-star studs to do it either.
|1 year 17 weeks ago||I think what he meant||
Could the fab 5 win a championship? Even with Beilein as coach, these guys are 40 now... way past their prime.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||People said||
People said they could understand him shoving a fan if the fan used the n-word. Nobody said he or anybody else has a free pass to do anything they want.
I don't know why people think being a fan gives them a free pass to heckle without consequence.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||You forgot this breakdown||
I'd say this is another important stat (especially in the line). At least according to your starting picks:
|1 year 29 weeks ago||Your logic is faulty||
One team has Hand, no other team does. This is the only part that matters as far as impact on Michigan (other impacts may exist, but they're pretty debatable). Which hats were on the table has no bearing on what he'll add to one team and won't add to the 119 others. Having the hat on the table may feel like more of a loss because hopes were higher, but that's it.
|1 year 33 weeks ago||I remember playing against||
I remember playing against Muskegon Orchard View in 1999. That season, they scored the seventh most points in a season in the history of high school football in the country (not sure where it stands now)! They never punted and they onside kicked every time as well. They also always went for two. Their coach was Shilito who coaches Zeeland West now. I think it's important to take into account that these kind of decisions are affected by the abilities of your kickers too.
|1 year 33 weeks ago||I think it's funny||
I think it's funny because she has a huge apple in her mouth while banging cymbols.
|1 year 37 weeks ago||If it's ruining nights||
If it's ruining nights, then step away. The reason all of us got into this is because it's supposed to fun. Unfortunately, for many, it seems only to be fun when Michigan plays perfectly. However, it is quite possible to be a big fan and not let your mood be tanked by poor play or poor decisions or any of the other negative things that happen when a bunch of people play a game. I can't say I had a big smile on my face at the end of the PSU game, but I was able to turn off the game once it was over and enjoy the rest of my weekend.
I know that people make these comments regularly and typically people are quite defensive in response. I'll just surmise by saying that placing your emotional state in the hands of something so far beyond your control is unwise.
|1 year 38 weeks ago||Yes||
If it was played the first week, before school started, it would be a fantastic experience for the players. I think it'd be great. It is a bit odd though, nobody cares about football abroad.
|1 year 38 weeks ago||Ya I do||
I remember how they benefited from hyping the guy up a ton and now are benefiting from his demise.
|1 year 41 weeks ago||Agreed||
Agreed, I think the Oline is a problem. And I think Brian and others predicted this back in the spring. I also think that when the problem is lack of experience (like this year probably is) instead of lack of talent (like last year probably was), you can reasonably hope that there will be improvement as the season moves along.
Looking forward, they'll end up with 2-4 new starters next year as well, so this problem may not be going away until 2015 when the line depth chart finally matures.
|1 year 42 weeks ago||Seeing #98||
Seeing #98 on the field was awesome. I think it speaks to the history of the program. A qb in #98, what's that about? It's cool. This idea that defining yourself needs to include your number just doesn't make any sense to me. I'll remember players for their names and deeds. If anything, I think wearing a legends jersey makes them more memorable. Sort of like how the #1 has been. Wearing a well known number doesn't take away from the player, it adds to them.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||#77, #7, and #2 are not||
#77, #7, and #2 are not legends numbers (though they are obviously legendary).
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Love the legends numbers||
Love the legends numbers. Hoke seems to want to make them positional (87 stayed tight end, 11 stayed dback), and those positions dont correspond to the legend's position. Olineman cant wear 98 and typically qbs and other backs dont wear it either. On defense, we already have 47 and 48 for linebackers and 11 for dbacks. This leads me to believe old 98 will be worn by a dlineman. My money is on pipkins.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Deux||
|1 year 44 weeks ago||Legends and Offense||
I like the legends jerseys. I'll remember the players and their great moments regardless of what number or numbers they wear. Yes, looking at anumber and remembering somebody or multiple people who wore it is cool, but I think the legends numbers are cool too and doesn't take away from it (Jake Ryan... he wore the 47 jersey... Oosterbaan). I think it's awesome that we can connect modern players with the past. I see the drawbacks, but the complaining is getting a little tired. Funchess will wear 87. If he's awesome, we'll think 87... Kramer, Funchess, future greats. I like it. Kovacs... he wore the Wistert jersey his senior year. That's cool. It's like the yellow jersey in the Tour de France.
I find it a bit unfair and inconsistant that with RR Brian had the tone of 'this kind of sucks, but just wait until he has his guys' but with Borges it's much more of a 'you're not using our guys how you're supposed to.'
EDIT: Just want to add that I am giddy as hell about seeing Old 98 on the field. What are we thinking? D-Lineman?
|1 year 45 weeks ago||Hoke pattern?||
I believe there's a bit of a pattern in Hoke preseason depth charts (someone want to confirm). They tend t o heavily favor the older more veteran players in places with position battles. I get a sense he has the philosophy that 'the best players will play, but the young guys need to prove themselves first." Ultimately, i think this is more about Hoke leadership style than about Green's ability.
|2 years 2 weeks ago||It bothers me||
It bothers me not because it's cheesy. In fact, I thought it was generally good natured and fun (if not a little too long). What bothers me is the single minded attention on the coaches. RR seems to demand credit and delegate blame (talking about not having good players, etc.); Hoke does exactly the opposite (it's always about how the players succeeded after a win and how the coaches failed after a loss). That's why I think none of us can imagine Hoke doing a bit like this... ok maybe the cigar and sherriffs badge have something to do with it too.
|2 years 3 weeks ago||Bryant?||
Noticed he didn't mention Bryant in that race. A little surprising to me; did we learn anything in the spring hinted toward that?
|2 years 12 weeks ago||I agree entirely. I'm all||
I agree entirely. I'm all for taking the piss out of someone losing their perspective on sports. However, somehow I get the feeling that many of the people who post the schadenfreude threads here take things just as seriously and are often just taking delight in others misery.
|2 years 12 weeks ago||I am interested in one||
I am interested in one particular piece you mentioned. Is there any correlation between time spent in college before turning pro and likelihood of 'going broke' at some point. Would be interesting to see.
|2 years 12 weeks ago||true||
true, they're different calls. But what Michigan fans have in the 'call was 100% wrong' category, Syracuse fans have in the 'this call very clearly decided the game' category. If I'm watching each of those calls go against my team in their respective situations, I think my negative responses would be comparable. I guess that's subjective though.
I'll add to this that it's a bit of a pattern for the basketball fans here. Seems like just about every Michigan loss this season was put on the terrible b10 refs.
|2 years 12 weeks ago||if you want to vent about refs||
if you want to vent about refs there's a thread already in existence for that. And that thread is one too many, you all sound like the Syracuse fans that so many UM fans were bashing last week because of the charge call gripe (not to mention the questionable blocking foul called on Syracuse moments before).
It was a bad call, but guess what? Burke wouldn't have needed to make that play if they hadn't just squandered their own possession and set up the fast break. After the play, UM had the ball down 5 with 5 minutes remaining. Plenty of time and plenty of opportunity to take the game. All the focus on the 2 points the ref cost them (in a 6 point loss) and not on the fact that UM couldn't get a body on the hot shooter.
To be clear, I loved this UM team and am not disappointed at all in their performance (though obiously I'm really disappointed in the outcome). I think it takes away from what was a great game and is incorrect to be putting so much of the outcome on the refs.
I'm glad I'm abroad and was watching ESPN International with Vitale announcing. He never gets on the refs; focusing on the players makes the game much more enjoyable.
|2 years 12 weeks ago||Games at 3:30am for me.||
Games at 3:30am for me. Trying to decide whether to stay up late or wake up early.
|2 years 12 weeks ago||Happy to see||
how many minds think the same here.... I had UM over OSU in the final. Need Michigan to beat Louisville to win my pool (and to experince extreme endorphin release).
|2 years 17 weeks ago||Oh ya||
Oh ya, shit tons of St. Emilion red wine already down the hatch as I go to bed here in Bordeaux. Pick up the pace ladies!
|2 years 17 weeks ago||The news here||
The news here is that USA Today thought that this was news.
|2 years 20 weeks ago||sounds like||
If the clock ticks to '2' before the ball is snapped, spiking it will end the game. If there's 3 on the clock when the ball is snapped and you spike, you'll get another play. I bet it will result in a replay or 2 each year, but at least it's an objective rule.
|2 years 20 weeks ago||Nice||
Nice to see that 2-second spike rule. It affirms the 1998-Rose-Bowl-End-Of-Game-Ryan-Leaf-Spike decision.
|2 years 20 weeks ago||Urban||
Urban Meyer's an asshole, to be sure. But... this was a joke, with a puchline and everything. The delievery was actually pretty good. I laughed. There's a lot of reasons to call this guy a lot of things, but calling him a liar over this is... some sort of negative adjective that I can't be bothered to think of, how bout lame.
|2 years 24 weeks ago||If he starts as a walk-on||
If he starts as a walk-on and then is offered a scholarship later, it will only count against the 85 max scholarship limit. It won't be part of a class year limit.
|2 years 24 weeks ago||Do you actually mean greyshirt?||
Greyshirting means he won't be enrolling fulltime next year. Is that the case? I'm thinking you meant he'll be a walkon until a scholarship opens up.
|2 years 24 weeks ago||An underrating bias||
Really great work.
However, I think there's one piece that needs a more precise look. You've stated that the %starting stat in actuality means 'number who are starting/total in class year.' However, you've read the %starting stat to mean 'number who are CAPABLE of starting/total in class year.' So though you've concluded from the low percentage that 'redshirt freshmen and redshirt sophomores aren't typically capable or ready to start,' I don't think we can say that. We can only say 'redshirt freshmen and redshirt sophomores typically don't start.'
Why aren't they starting? As you stated, for some it's because they aren't capable of starting... they just shouldn't be on the field. But there's another group of folks that wasn't starting that has been ignored the redshirt freshmen and redshirt sophomores on those past teams who could've started and done fine... they were just stuck behind better more experienced redshirt juniors and redshirt seniors.
Ultimately... pretty cool stat about the true freshmen. They don't start, period. But I think there's a little hope that the 2nd and 3rd year guys can fill in more capably than you've concluded.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||Maybe||
Maybe if you do it to your friend, then you can just be considered a huge asshole playing a stupid prank (and hopefully have a friendship terminated). However, I agree with the decision that putting your balls on a stranger's face should result in jail time.... though 2 years does seem excessive.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||Fire Meyer?||
So should the OSU faithful call for Meyer's head since their offense was stimied in the second half too?
|2 years 31 weeks ago||Great experience||
I'm a 20 something guy in Michigan gear... A prime target. Had some students swearing at me, but not in my face, on the walk to the stadium. Aside from that, friendly people and a great atmosphere.
|2 years 32 weeks ago||OSU and Michigan in same division this time please||
West: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State
East: Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers
Btw, from a competitive standpoint and from a fan standpoint, this truly sucks for football in the big 10.
|2 years 34 weeks ago||Just for argument's sake.||
Items 1-3 were his conclusions, not his assumptions.
His assumption was that all of the things in your second paragraph weren't the reason for his decommitment.
|2 years 34 weeks ago||DC Talent||
Currently, DC talent tends to go to the private schools in the area. Anacostia has a couple players to be sure, but nobody on Anacostia looks like D1 level.* However there is quite a bit of talent in the area, and an improved PSL could see more talent staying public.
*Disclaimer: I've watched them play a couple of times, but am no scout.
|2 years 34 weeks ago||People moving||
We are no more likely to see NFL talent flood those states than we are to see americans in general move en masse to those states.
|2 years 37 weeks ago||No Touchdowns for MSU||
UM: 17 MSU: 9
|2 years 37 weeks ago||DC Prospects||
They had a couple of players; their running back was solid. No jaw droppers from what I saw... However, I'm no scout.
There are certainly some great prospects in the area. However, DC prospects currently tend to leave the PSL and attend private schools (like Good Counsel). A strong PSL or at least a couple of strong programs in the PSL(akin to Cass Tech in Detroit) could see that change somewhat in the future.
|2 years 39 weeks ago||Woot!||
Happy to see the patriot league get mentioned on this blog! Go gate!
|2 years 39 weeks ago||Here's the evidence we have:||
1. Took a massive hit to head
2. Laid completely motionless and limp for close to a minute
3. Stumbled to get to his feet
4. Repeatedly shook his head and looked like he was attempting to get the cobwebs out as he waked off the field.
The simplest explanation here is that he was knocked out cold, regained consciousness and then demanded he was fine, and taken at his word. He could be seen alone on the sideline just a couple of minutes later with no trainers around him. The 'wind knocked out of him' story is plainly BS.
|2 years 41 weeks ago||Next year is a transition year||
1) We get 3 months of football and 9 months of no football... enjoy 2012 right now.
2) You're right, next year will be a transition year on offense... it will be young, but that doesn't mean the offense is doomed!
|2 years 43 weeks ago||The true outcome||
Solid run games vs poor run defenses = short games and lower scores.
UM:24 Air Force: 14
UM: 31 UMASS 7
|2 years 43 weeks ago||Could've been called||
But from the replay view, you could see there was at least a receiver running downfield on that side.
|2 years 44 weeks ago||You're correct||
As an experienced separated shoulderman, I can confirm what you're saying.
|2 years 44 weeks ago||You're optimistic||
|2 years 45 weeks ago||Name another game||
Name another college football game being played in 2014 that's being talked about right now. In fact, when was the last time people were talking about a game that was 2+ years out ever? That was Brandon's whole reason for scheduling it. It's a game of interest. People watch games of interest.
|2 years 46 weeks ago||Maybe now||
Maybe now we can put that superstitious bs to rest, huh?
|2 years 47 weeks ago||Anger||
wouldn't factor into my feelings about it. The guy did his best, had some very bright moments, and likely would've eventually coached an elite UM team. However, 15 wins over 3 years and NCAA sanctions is evidence that there were more than Rodriguez that the hiring didn't work out for.
|2 years 47 weeks ago||Truly||
Similarly, I would like people to give up on the bare cupboard argument. Admittedly, this whole sort of speculation isn't worth much, but that's what the article is indulging in, so I'm joining in.
You doubt UM gets 1-2 more wins?
With a 2nd year Mallet, All-America Boren and an offense that the rest of the players are familiar with, I see at least 4 more wins: Utah, Toledo, Purdue, Northwestern, a bowl birth and very little cost down the road, as the 2010 team was almost entirely turned over from the 2008 squad.
Likewise, a Pro-style stubborn Borges would've resulted in many more MSU and Iowa like performances (and possibly a Denard transfer if the coaches had telegraphed the move as Rodriguez did to Mallet). The offense should conform to the personnel, not vice-versa.
|2 years 47 weeks ago||I reject||
I reject the arguments stating we would've been just as bad under many other coaches because of thin talent levels.
I'll give 3 reasons why other coaches might have done better:
1: I don't think key players like Boren and Mallet would've left under other coaches being mentioned.
2: Emphasis on defense... it was more than just coordinators.
3: RR placed installing his offense ahead of winning. For the first two years, that meant square pegs in round holes, and that message probably contributed to the transfer of Mallet. Contrast that to Hoke's mentality: do whatever it takes to win. He's kept Denard and used an unfamilar offense to make it work and get wins.
|2 years 48 weeks ago||A little more info about the infamous vote||
Up until that year, Big 10 teams could not go to the Rose Bowl in consecutive years - a Big 10 rule. Since OSU had gone the year before, people expected UM to be voted in (despite the end of the consecutive years rule). There was a prevailing idea that it was UM's turn.
UM's star QB Dennis Franklin broke his collarbone in the game, and this supposedly played a role in swinging votes to OSU, as they would be better prepared for the Rose Bowl.
MSU's athletic director voted for OSU.
|2 years 48 weeks ago||Correction||
Your calculated odds are close, but only by coincidence, as the methodology is incorrect. You can see this by using your method to calculate the odds of Michigan being mentioned if there were 8 unknown b1g teams with good news (your calculation would show 100%+ odds).
The correct calculation: 1 - (11/12 * 10/11) = 1/6 or 16.67%
Or 1 minus the probability that um is not mentioned.
|3 years 3 weeks ago||There's a chance||
But it will be 7v7 rugby (now an olympic sport).
|3 years 3 weeks ago||Jokes are funnier||
when you don't explain them.
|3 years 4 weeks ago||Just to be clear||
It's awesome that we will eschew a push toward a more legitmate competition because we will have more money and power?
|3 years 7 weeks ago||Playoffs please||
I grew up in Ann Arbor, schooled in the tradition of the rose bowl (and every other Michigan tradition), going to every home game and an away game or two each year since the early 91.
I've been to the Rose Bowl twice (1998 and 2004). Both were great experiences and the Rose Bowl definitely sets itself apart with its college atmosphere.
I graduated from Colgate, a IAA football school. At the time, IAA ran a 16 team playoff... home teams hosting until the final, which was at a neutral site. My senior year, Colgate had a run to the finals, with two home games on the way there. In as few words as possible... I've never enjoyed football as much as I did during those playoffs.
Do we lose something special by giving up the Rose Bowl? Yes.
Do we get something much much more by switching to a playoff (hopefully a 16 team one eventually that will include all conference champions, thus giving every team in IA an objective shot at the playoffs)? Yes.
|3 years 15 weeks ago||Big ten||
He also became the first UM wrestler to win 4 Big Ten championships.
|3 years 21 weeks ago||Objectivity||
College post season is a farce. As long as it's determined by voting, it's not a real competition. Every real competiton must have objective ways of determining its champions. I'm a fan of Wetzel's plan... all conference champions are qualifiers for the playoffs. Conference championships are determined objectively. Teams won't be afraid to schedule great non-conference matchups, and conference play becomes that much more important. Every team can play its way to a national title without worry about strange computer formulas and human voting systems.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||Majority weren't sleepers?||
Sure 7/11 weren't sleepers, but you defined sleepers as being as being ranked in the bottom quarter of their recruiting class (or unranked). That means you've got a group comprising 25% of the team... the least talented 1/4 by scout rankings... taking 36% of the starting spots.
Yes, the substantial majority of starters aren't sleepers, but that's only because by your definition, the substantial majority of the players aren't sleeprs.
|3 years 22 weeks ago||This man is right!||
Check this out: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news;_ylt=Ai4a_Ifqj0wnzdHwOPw1fkIcvrYF?slug=mh-huguenin_how_top_teams_fared_recruiting_012912
Recruiting is fun to follow, and clearly it can give a general sense of the future. However, judging from this, it seems to have a fairly low correlation with wins. If even a 5 year recruiting average doesn't seem to correlate much, how much can the difference in a couple of stars on a couple of players make as far as predicting the future?
When OSU beats UM for a recruit, it sucks, but only because losing to OSU in anything anywhere sucks. If you think it sucks because it has increased their chances of beating us down the road, you're out of line. Their chances of success of increased so infinitesmally, it's not worth worrying about.
All this is true when UM snags a recruit over OSU as well. However, nieve negativity seems more important to stamp out than nieve wishfulness.
|3 years 24 weeks ago||Wetzel||
I'm sold on Wetzel's 16 team format. Mainly because I agree with the principle that every FBS team should be able to win its way to a national championship. Conference championships are objective, so if you win your conference you're in. That leaves a few at large pics. Certainly there would still be debate about who deserves the at larges, but debate is okay. Those teams had a chance to objectively make the playoffs by winning their conferences. Until every team has objective access to the national title, it's not a real national title.
|3 years 32 weeks ago||Back in the day||
Every win over OSU at home featured fans taking the field. Then they lowered the field and I've only seen it in 1997 since then.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Remember this one?||
Go to the 2:45 mark.
|3 years 40 weeks ago||I agree||
Fitz has that rare quality: the ability to have a little shake and a dance, yet somehow always be getting upfield well doing it. It forces the defense to react to you, rather than vice-versa (as seen with the NT in the play you highlighted). It's the Biakabatuka quality, and if the guy can stay health and get some traction, I see him doing great things for Michigan.
|3 years 45 weeks ago||East||
Walk east of the zoo to mt pleasant st between irving and park. Pick a place, all great for brunch. Do not eat jumbo slice.
|3 years 46 weeks ago||furthermore||
It isn't even their top story within the NCAAF section of the site!
|3 years 48 weeks ago||Hatch||
Somehow it doesn't feel right to read that the most likely outcome is that Hatch can't play college basketball anymore. I know that his injuries are severe, but I haven't read anything saying that he can't recover 100%. I haven't even read anything saying that such a recovery isn't likely!
|3 years 49 weeks ago||Let's look a little deeper||
Here's why people are happy with Hoke's recruiting:
RR's first partial class is more of an indicator of the quality of Michigan's recruiting at the time he took over (End of LC era) - Avg: 3.66
Hoke's first partial class is an indicator of the quality of Michigan recruiting when he took over (end of RR era) - Avg: 3.2
RR maintained the standard of UM recruiting for one year before falling off considerably - a fact that is critical to people sense of satisfaction with Hoke's current class, and one that you didn't mention. Hoke has immediately reversed the drop off and returned it back to the former standard.
I am not a RR hater, but I think that your presented comparison is missing some honest assessment.
|3 years 50 weeks ago||I suppose||
It's just a matter of if you'd like to know what's likely or what's possible!
|3 years 50 weeks ago||yep||
Looks like some pretty sizable average jumps there.
|3 years 50 weeks ago||A 1-1 line would be nice||
The graphs make it easy to compare 90th place to 91st place, but that's not what I want to look at. I want to quickly compare year 1 results to year 2 results for all of those spots. A y=x line would make that a little easier.
|3 years 50 weeks ago||Lost TWO!||
Hart actually lost 2 fumbles that game (having only lost one other as a freshman).
|3 years 51 weeks ago||family values?||
I was always under the impression that Justin cited a lack of family values due to the fact that Rich Rod refused to offer his younger brother Zach a scholarship. The swearing was not the main issue.
|3 years 51 weeks ago||family values?||
I was always under the impression that Justin cited a lack of family values due to the fact that Rich Rod refused to offer his younger brother Zach a scholarship. The swearing was not the main issue.
|4 years 16 weeks ago||minor point||
Union was not swept by Colgate, they lost 2 games to 1. On that note, Colgate became the first 12 seed ever to advance to the semifinals of the ECAC tournament.
|4 years 18 weeks ago||2 Categories||
Any athlete: Jim Brown @ Syracuse
Michigan Athlete: Tom Harmon
|4 years 20 weeks ago||Excuses||
Tate was in his fourth semester at UM, not his first.
|4 years 25 weeks ago||Rodriguez||
He didn't come to Michigan to win games, he came to Michigan to put in his offense, which would supposedly win games. The point is his focus was to do things his way with his offense above everything else. That is why he failed.
|4 years 29 weeks ago||Looks like||
January 9th at 2:32 pm
|4 years 29 weeks ago||Tell me||
When the wave-coach functions collapse.
|4 years 29 weeks ago||Here's a possible reason:||
If Brandon had hired Rodriguez back right after a nasty loss to OSU, a lot more people would've been upset because they were still fully pissed off about the loss. The season ended poorly, so it felt worse that in it really was. As a few weeks go by, people can get a little perspective about the accomplishments in the season as a whole.
However, I agree with the majority that Brandon has Harbaugh #1 and Rodriguez #2 and is delaying to keep his options open.
|4 years 30 weeks ago||UM's problems||
are with the defense. Losing a recruit of that stature stinks no matter what postion they play. However, I'd rather UM lose its best offensive recruit than even a mediocre defensive recruit at this point (if I had to choose).
|4 years 30 weeks ago||That places them||
10th out of 11 (Illinois had 7).
|4 years 31 weeks ago||it shows||
that people have a certain conception of what a qb is. They think denard is really good, but even though he plays qb, they don't think he's a qb unless he can drop back and pass.
|4 years 34 weeks ago||2nd November win||
First win in November since 2008 against Minnesota.
|4 years 34 weeks ago||2nd November win||
First win in November since 2008 against Minnesota.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||Gardner Medical Redshirt||
I'd rather RR not ever be taking advantage of the system in this manner. I'd say there are 2 possibilites:
1) Gardner is actually hurt.
2) Gardner is not actually hurt and is only saying he is so that he can get his redshirt.
Considering people were discussing the possibility of the second situation before any news of his injury was disclosed, the situation is slightly suspicious. I hope it's the first situation (not that I want Gardner to be hurt or anything). If it's the second, I would think considerably less of RR as it means he is asking players to lie.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||The message board||
is not a single entity that must maintain consistancy. Posts are by individuals with individual opinions.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||SAT||
Scores from the most recent test will be available to students on October 28th (next Thursday). There are 2 more tests following that, on November 6th and December 4th.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||Addressing that issue||
It's not our business. He can use his scholarship money how he sees fit. This is a private issue that cannot have anything to do with playing time. I'm disapointed that it's left the board and now entered main page material at this site.
|4 years 36 weeks ago||My opinion||
Is that a person's financial matters are private. I've coached at the collegiate level before and would never consider a player to be in the dog house if he were having money issues. Honestly, I think it's shameful that they're talking about it in the ann arbor news and I don't think it's an appropriate board discussion.
|4 years 37 weeks ago||Rugby||
Has many rules addressing contact and tackles. It all happens fast and there is one referee, yet illegal hits are caught pretty consistantly. Rules take time to have the desired effect. The first effect will be more penalties. Eventually coaching and player development will catch up and players just won't be making the illegal hits anymore. This will likely be the first of many rules designed to protect players in contact situations.
I am all for it.
|4 years 37 weeks ago||After 2008||
Most had a sense that there was a long road ahead because the offense was just plain awful and there were no qbs in sight. The team has provided excitement and promise and a couple of nice wins in the last couple of years. What will remedy many persons' fears is a quality big 10 win. I think there is a sense that teams that are destined to be great but aren't great yet should play above their level in big games. This team isn't better than Wisconsin or Iowa or OSU at this point, but taking one of these teams down would strongly affect UM's perceived future... a breakthrough game if you will.
|4 years 37 weeks ago||Hey!||
That's my score!
|4 years 37 weeks ago||Iowa 38 UM 28||
UM's offense puts a very impressive 28 points up on a top defense; however, UM's defense is a known quantity at this point, and that quantity is not much.
|4 years 39 weeks ago||i'll add||
That 4th down attempts happen most often in the 4th quarters of contestable games. UM so happens to have been in 3 games already that were still in the air late in the game. A more interesting stat would be number of times teams are going for it in the first 3 quarters.
|4 years 39 weeks ago||It's always true||
It's given that teams are going to be fired up for UM. However, how about a few more years of data to show that teams are always going for it on 4th down against UM more than other opponents. I have a hunch the data won't show that. It's a nice thought, but teams are going for it more against UM simply because they've got better odds than usual against the UM defense.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||It's a half rebuttal||
Half of the point of a person making this comment is that DRob is the linchpin of the offense. The rebuttal rebuts that part of their point, as it makes clear that the qb is the linchpin of a great many offenses.
However, the other part of the point of a person making that comment is that Robinson takes more hits and so an injury to him is a more likely scenario than an injury to qbs with less of a workload.
This may actually be the truth, but here's how one would have to analyze it. How many hits do other qbs take in a game. Statistically, what are the odds of a football player being injured in a contact situation. From those two statistics, one should be able to obtain the likelyhood of any given qb getting injured during a season and compare.
Pocket qbs take hits as well; RR claims that in a lot of ways, they're more dangerous hits (blindside, defenseless).
My gut tells me that DRob is no more likely to get injured, but is more likely to get hurt or dinged. My differentiation being that an injury keeps you out for a week or more, a ding keeps you out for a drive or two.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||
"Offensive lineman Mark Ortmann stated that so many players are close to Barwis that they have started attending his church, Keystone Community Church in Saline, as a group."
A quote from this article:
|4 years 40 weeks ago||OSU?||
You've already counted UM out this year? And you're already counting this team out in 2012 if they don't win in 2011? That is ridiculous.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Agreed||
In the hypothetical situation where there was one schollarship left and it can either go to Dee Hart or a similarly rated defensive player, then you give it to the defensive player. Or you're Nick Saban and you give it to both and tell some other player to grey shirt when he gets to campus. The running backs are capable, deep, and young. If Dee plays as well as projected, he would improve the postion from solid to strong. It's a diminishing returns area though. Going from weak and shallow to capable and deep will improve a team more than going from capable and deep to strong and deep. Defense needs players. However, there are enough schollies to get everything we need.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||It looked like||
that first tackle brough him down pretty hard on that shoulder. One tackle, one injury... tough luck for the kid.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||That's right||
There'd be home games for the first 2-3 rounds and a neutral site for the finals. I think that would be great. I'd love a post season home game against Oklahoma. Wanting to cling to a terrible competitive system because it's unique? I don't agree with that. Outside of the Rose Bowl, the rest of the bowls don't look like college football at all. They have huge concerts at half time with smoke and fireworks (much like the Super Bowl) and many are even played in NFL stadiums! Home games on college campuses are more college football than neutral games in NFL stadiums with fireworks and Ashlee Simpson.
I will concede that the Rose Bowl is a significant casualty of a switch.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||They are:||
Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, SEC, ACC, Big East, MAC, Mountain West, WAC, Sun Belt, and Conf USA. Think what this would mean... winning the Big 10 would give you a first round home matchup against Conf. USA champion or the Sun Belt champion... a gimmee. However, getting a wild card from the Big 10 might pit you against a major conference champion. The small conference teams can't complain about not getting a shot. The best teams get an advantage because they have an easier first round game. From a purely competitive standpoint, I don't think a lot of teams would complain about this.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||There needs to be room||
for independents (like ND). Every team must have an opportunity to win the National title. So maybe the 11 conference champs plus one wild card... top 4 seeds get a bye, sort of like NFL. I'd rather 16. Just think of all of the great matchups! I'll make a mock 16-team playoff at the close of this season so people can see what they're missing out on.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||I don't||
see it happening any time soon. I think growth of the post season is inevitable and 16 teams is a likely outcome. It's what should happen from a competitive standpoint. And that's ultimately what college football is... a competition.
Currently the other divisions:
II: 24 teams
III 32 teams
I wouldn't say ever.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Conference Championships||
Are objective. What's missing today and what must be corrected is the ability to play your way to a National Championship (otherwise it isn't a real national championship). Having to be voted in is garbage. Win your conference and get a chance at the national title. This makes sense. As long as there's the potential to have teams out of the running for the national title before the season even begins, it's a farce. In a 16 team playoff, there's room for 11 conference champions, the 5 wild cards spots can be debated, but if you're 2nd in your conference, you don't have a lot to stand on when arguing for a shot at the national title.
All of the compromises... the +1 systems... they still leave room for exclusion of teams that have earned a right to play for the national title. There isn't a single other sport with a postseason in which a division 1 conference champion doesn't get a shot at the national title.
The BCS title game is nothing more than an exhibition between two very good teams a few weeks after the season. The fact that everyone belives it's an actual championship game is beyond me.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||The Rose Bowl||
is an amazing competition. I see two choices...
1) forget about national championships in DI college football, play a season and preserve the bowl tradition. Vote on a national champion afterwards. Accept that national championships shouldn't be a focus.
2) Decide that crowning a real national champion is important and accept that the bowl system works against that. It hurts to let go of tradition, but if we want to see a real national championship, it just isn't compatible with the bowls.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Lloyd Carr||
did away with them. I think it was to foster more of a team spirit. The stickers focused on individual achievement and LC wasn't a fan of that.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Home games||
I'd much rather see Florida or USC types have to travel to Big 10 country in November to play a post season away game.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||it's t rue||
He is a very good qb and I wouldn't begrudge him if he did transfer. The nice thing is that if he does, it looks like it will be on good terms.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Protecting players||
is a balogna argument. 35 years ago, almost every team played 10 games and that was that. Now, teams play 13-14 games in a season! Cut the season down to 11 and have an 16 team playoff. All 11 conference champions and 5 wild cards. Small conference teams can't gripe anymore, and teams in difficult conferences will get their fair due. Since the focus will be on conference play, teams will be brave enough to schedule challenging nonconference games. I went to a IAA school for undergrad... there's just no way around it, playoffs are exciting and would make college football so much better. The Rose Bowl would be a casualty, and that's no small loss, but it'd be worth it.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Hagerup||
C. Hagerup is Will Hagerup's older brother. They both trained extensively as kickers growing up, though Will is the better kicker.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Demons in HS||
I watched him play in HS and if there was one thing that stood out it was his tackling. He was a very sure and solid tackler.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||2nd team||
It seems to me that Tate is the true second string qb on the team at this point. A quote from RR:
"Tate has showed he can play. We wouldn't be playing Devin if we didn't think he was ready. Is he as ready as Denard or Tate? Maybe not yet because he's just a first-year player."
I get the impression that this staff wanted 3 qbs ready to go and has been playing Devin more only because they know Tate's ready anyway (and maybe because Tate had to pay his dues a bit). If they're in a close game and Denard goes down, my money is on Tate getting the nod.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||We won't know||
How good this team is for a couple more weeks. We'll get a good idea at the MSU game and know for sure after Iowa/@PSU.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Meltdown?||
The 6-6 scenario means going 2-6 to close out the season. I said 50/50 because even with that meltdown, you're right that they have shown improvement. 50 yes job because maybe they get some tough luck, lose 3 or 4 close ones to end up with that record and it looks nothing like last year's 2-6 close out. If the 2-6 is ugly though, well that's 50 no job. I'm not arguing what should happen, I'm arguing what I think will happen. Anyway, hopefully this can remain hypothetical and they can finish 8-4 or better!
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Flipping Tails||
The author is invoking Karma, in which case getting unlucky 10 times in a row makes it more likely that you will be lucky on the next go.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Relaxed?||
First, let's not forget who ended up playing the majority of the snaps yesterday... Tate! I think what RR wants is 3 qbs ready to play. Devon needs pt and so he has been getting snaps. Tate also had to grow up a little bit. I think really there was still an open competition for the 2nd spot and Devon had it by default to start things off. I'd say Tate has now earned the 2nd spot with that game.
As far as on the field, Tate looked intense, disciplined, and focused. And I get the feeling that he acts that way off the field these days as well.
|4 years 40 weeks ago||Indiana and RR's Job||
With a suspect defense, no game is a lock. Traveling well is also still going to be a challenge for this young team.
If UM is picking up it's 6th win against Purdue and fiinishes 6-6, RR's job would definitely not safe. I would put the odds at 50/50 at best (depending on the nature of the losses). That would mean a 5-19 Big 10 record over 3 years, a 4-20 October/November record, and another downward trend to end the seaon. 8 wins or 7 wins + OSU is the definite safe point for RR. They already proved they can win in September. This year they need to show they can win in the big 10 and that means 4-4 or better.
|4 years 41 weeks ago||Assumption||
I think everyone would be relieved if Denard was getting 20 carries/game. But your assumption kind of misses the whole point. He's getting way more than 20 carriers/game... almost 50% more! 20 carries is a significant improvement over 28 carries.
|4 years 42 weeks ago||S&P||
It'd be nice to know exactly what that is. That way the slope of that line would have a little more meaning. And we could have a better sense of the variance between defenses of teams in the top 20. Anyways, this is not a surprising finding. I would expect that weight means something. Holding all else equal... more weight means more size and strength, which is a plus for defensive capability.
The other 84% comes from so many other things. There is technique, speed, field sense, quickness, tenacity, etc. Let's also not forget that there is a huge variable that unarguably has a huge factor in the S&P value and that is the quality of the secondary. Let's throw in the defensive coach and scheming into the mix as well. It'd be interesting to do a multivariate analysis on all of the variables and see what sort of variability we can explain.
|4 years 42 weeks ago||tacopants?||
I swear I'm seeing this term more and more. Can somebody please tell me what the hell tacopants means? Seriously!
|4 years 42 weeks ago||KSU||
Won by only 4 pts against UMASS last year. RR teams play hard, and as long as they maintain that mentality, UMASS won't pose a problem.
|4 years 42 weeks ago||they'll happen||
I think players will wait out the season before they commit to UM. They aren't in a hurry. They can then see the final fallout of the NCAA violations and be sure that RR's job is secure. Those are the big questions they have and they won't all officially be answered until December.
|4 years 45 weeks ago||Can't wait for the season||
I have a feeling UCONN is overrated and Notre Dame is underrated. I see a convincing win against UCONN. Playing well on the road is always tough for young teams, ND will be a litmus test for the season as a whole. If they travel well against what will be a strong ND team, I see a good season for these guys. A bad loss to ND and this could be a long season.
|4 years 45 weeks ago||Wisconsin?||
Why does Wisconsin have to be in that division? I'd say that Wisconsin and Iowa will intentionally be split as they are seen as the top two teams outside of the big 4. Flip Wisconsin with Northwestern in your scheme and you get much more competitive balance - the named priority in the alignment.
I will add that splitting UM and OSU is a travesty. We can only hope that 13th and 14th teams are added soon and they adjust the alignment in the near future. Wetzel's article sums it all up nicely:
|4 years 45 weeks ago||Red shirt||
We have 3 qbs without a redshirt. I would hope we could manage to reshirt one of these guys this year. There's really no reason to be tossing 3 qbs onto the field (assuming no injuries).
|5 years 7 weeks ago||original argument||
Well, we have strayed a bit from what i was originally responding to, which was the sense of urgency to this team becoming varsity. The only real argument made for urgency is that we want to be 'leaders and best,' which could probably be made for about any new program of any kind at Michigan, and probably often is. If the growth continues, the move to varsity will happen eventually. It's not a one time shot like the article suggests.
Side discussion about rugby and the NCAA: I was under the impression that any team that is varsity at an NCAA instution falls under NCAA general guidelines (when more specific ones haven't been made for that particular sport). A sport needs a certian number of teams for the NCAA to host a chapionship. USA Rugby lists those 5 women's clubs on their site as 'NCAA Teams.'
|5 years 7 weeks ago||redirect||
You're right on Hobart... here's my excuse: http://www.lax.com/stories/2051
The main arguments are about the popularity of the sport and potential for growth in the midwest. If it's growing at the high school level as fast as you suggest, well that's a strong argument to consider... without any specifics or statistics, I can't really argue for against.
The fact that east coast conferences like the ECAC and Big East have picked up the sport basically enforces the idea that this sport is only strong in the east (and getting stronger), and that UM will have little company in the midwest. That UM is similar to schools like UVA and UNC doesn't change the fact that it is located in Michigan, where the interest in lacrosse is minute in comparison to the midatlantic and northeast. Is the Michigan brand 'east coast private school?' Well if that's the case, then lacrosse does fit the brand. I think it's too early to tell what Brandon will be selling as the UM brand. Even accepting that assumption, the brand is only helped if UM has a good lacrosse team! How can UM compete for east coast talent against top notch east coast schools? Could UM possibly become an elite lacrosse team? I don't see all the benefits - outside of those to the lacrosse team itself - for the university.
The comparison to rugby was merely in reference to the 'stagnation' argument in the article. I could compare it to pretty much any other sport, DI, pro, or club and find examples of teams that are able to maintain dominance without upping the level of their opponents (rugby seemed an apt comparison to the Michigan club team because of the club nature of its championship). And, fyi, as there are varsity rugby teams, NCAA rugby does exist. However, it is true that the NCAA does not host a championship for rugby.
|5 years 7 weeks ago||Varsity?||
Congrats to the lacrosse team on an incredibly impressive feat. However, I must say that the arguments for adding them to the varsity roster aren't impressive. First of all, their dominance at the club level is not an indicator of potential to be dominate at the varsity level. They are showing that they a group that takes their sport seriously and are dedicated to success, but successfully finding good players from your student body is different than successfully recruiting the best talent to your school to compete.
Varsity or risk stagnation? Look at other club leagues (eg rugby). The same teams manage to be the best for decades sometimes.
As far as the makeup and growth of lacrosse... Ohio State is the lone example of a non east coast public school having varsity lacrosse. Penn State is in the east, where all but 6 varsity teams reside. 4/6 teams were named in the article, as if they were an example of a broader reality. (Detroit Mercy, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Denver, Air Force, and Bellarmine are all 6). 47/60 varsity teams are private schools. Out of the 13 public institutions with varsity lacrosse teams, only one resides outside of the Midatlantic/Northeast regions... Ohio State. While Notre Dame and UDM recently gained lacrosse teams, Butler in Indianapolis recently disbanded its team and Hobart College in New York recently dropped to Division III. The Great Western Lacrosse League just disbanded as well.
I don't think that it is the right atmosphere for Michigan to create a varsity team. It appears that the club is very well supported by a group of alumni, and there is no reason that will change anytime soon. Congrats on a great season.
|5 years 30 weeks ago||What record gets RR fired next year||
First, record alone does not determine how a coach is doing. So there will be a lot more factors that determine if RR keeps his job. I'd say for him to keep his job, the team has to continue improvement on the field. It doesn't need to equate to a bunch of wins just. I'd say he has one more "free" year in which he can get away with just about any record. 6-6 (3-5) would most likely buy him another year. Below that, and depending on the new AD, he's fair game.
As far as your other comments. 1) Cinci, just like 115/120 Bowl Division teams did not start a true freshman qb. Youth is a real problem in the short term. If my only goal was to win tomorrow, I'd take a 4th and 5th year laden team of 2 and 3 star recruits over a 1st and 2nd year laden team of 4 and 5 star recruits. 2) Your big qualm is apparently with RR's system, which is just so specific that it can't work without precise players. Well it seemed apparent to me that the offense - his system, and operated by a true freshman qb - was not and won't be the main problem on the team. The main problem is the defense.