things go poorly
- Member for
- 6 years 8 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|11 hours 40 min ago||Maybe this is the year we||
Maybe this is the year we finally handle it? Please?!?!
|16 hours 7 min ago||While I agree with you, at||
While I agree with you, at least the answer would demonstrate less contempt for the press. That's the real problem. The press has a job to do as fan interest dictates that reporters gather and report news on the football program. Though it may be debatable how much it matters today in the information age, media has historically helped drive fan interest which has helped turn college sports into the multi-million dollar business it is today. It is not a good look that Hoke shows such contempt for the men and women of the media who are a legitimate cog in the business that has made Hoke a millionaire. It may ultimately cost him if he starts losing games, can't imagine he'll have much good will left with the media.
|17 hours 42 min ago||It probably also has||
It probably also has something to do with MSU just not being built to throw a 66-0 beatdown on an FBS opponent. Not their offensive style. It is absolutely in his interest to point out that Baylor hanging 70 on someone doesn't show a better victory than MSU winning by 40.
|19 hours 33 min ago||I think you have a gap in||
I think you have a gap in James Franklin's experience. He had a stop at KSU and a second stint at Maryland, he was OC in both places. I also believe he was head coach-in-waiting behind Ralph Friedgen.
|1 day 12 hours ago||I think he views it as having||
I think he views it as having a little leeway this year to push these sales and deals without conditioning the buying public to expect it next year. And he's probably right. Next season should reset the picture with a much better home slate. We'll presumably sell more season tickets and be able to package the lesser games in with MSU/OSU for single game tickets. As long as Brandon doesn't jack up prices for next season under the reasoning of "hey, this year's slate is so much better than last year's!!!!", we should be ok. The following season is when it gets interesting again, but Wisconsin coming back onto the schedule helps a bit. PSU presumably will also be really good by then. If Colorado/UCF/Illinois/Indiana/Maryland provide just one reasonably quality opponent, it shouldn't be that hard to sell tickets.
|1 day 15 hours ago||That Loeffler piece may have||
That Loeffler piece may have been a bit premature in declaring Va. Tech offensively competent. They averaged 5.3 YPA and 2.8 YPC. Having watched a decent chunk of that game, those numbers sound about right. I was left wondering how in the world they managed to win at Ohio State.
|1 day 16 hours ago||The time period didn't||
The time period didn't include a KSU team that kicked the ass of a 7-5 mediocre Big Ten team. Again, LSU wins on a beastly defense and has routinely underperformed its talent on the offensive side of the ball. And I said I had no real explanation for Georgia but they do tend to lose to teams they shouldn't on a yearly basis.
|1 day 17 hours ago||We also haven't had the||
We also haven't had the chance to use a 2-minute drill this season, ignoring the fact that we probably should have been doing so at some point against Notre Dame. That and your incompletions statistic should even out through the course of the season. It's why it's silly to put too much stock in this statistic after three weeks.
That being said, with the exception of the triple option teams, I think the plays per minute of game time statistic will give a reasonable look at tempo after a certain number of games. Up-tempo teams don't seem to have an extremely higher number of incompletions than slow-tempo teams. Auburn is averaging 8 through 2 games. A&M is averaging 13 through 3 games.
|1 day 18 hours ago||I must have missed it where||
I must have missed it where up-tempo offenses can only work if they're playing a team that's equally up-tempo.
If we eat up the clock with our possessions and don't score and Utah runs quick possessions and score, I foresee a very rough game for us.
|1 day 18 hours ago||And the fact that those teams||
And the fact that those teams had awful defenses had nothing to do with it? And that they mostly played in the latter half of the season after MSU had gotten their offense into gear? MSU scored 24 points against Stanford who was extremely slow and much, much better on defense than any of those teams you listed. If ball controll mattered much, you think that game would have been a 14-10 affair.
I also find it funny that you can't recognize that tempo impacts those post-snap issues that were the "real problem" and why those up-tempo teams were able to score so often.
|1 day 18 hours ago||I think this just about nails||
I think this just about nails it. How often do you hear an analyst calling the game talk about an offense speeding up tempo for a possession or two in order to "get a rhythm." I've yet to see it happen under Hoke. I don't particularly care if we do it all the time, I just want to be able to do it on occasion. And you're right, the 2 min drill was a continuing disaster under Borges. I'm not going to feel comfortable that we can come back and win a game until I see us actually run a smooth 2-minute drill at some point in the future.
|1 day 18 hours ago||You mean the Kansas State||
You mean the Kansas State program that lost 6 or more games three times in the relevant time period? You mean the LSU program who has pretty much been winning with defense only for the last dozen years (do you remember the Alabama-LSU championship game a couple years ago? LSU barely crossed midfield). You mean the conference that has been turned on its head the last couple seasons by high tempo teams at Auburn, A&M, Missouri and Ole Miss? I got nothing for Georgia, but maybe they're slow tempo is a reason they continue to drop a game or two a season that they shouldn't?
Tempo isn't a panacea for all teams. It certainly isn't one of the main contributors to team success (talent and coaching acumen are way above everything else). But you can't deny that college football is in an offensive boom largely driven by high-tempo offenses.
The more reasonable criticism of the tweet is that it's sort of silly to measure tempo after 3 games. Not that outdated data shows some teams with success despite being low-tempo offenses.
|2 days 11 hours ago||And like I said, I'm not||
And like I said, I'm not asking for definitive statements. He can't hide the fact that both guys missed time the week before. He can't hide the fact that Funchess obviously left the ND game with an injury. He can't hide the fact that Wilson didn't suit up this week. Simply acknowledging that these guys have injuries or "boo boos" or whater is the reasonable course of action. Doing so would not tell opposing coaches anything they don't already know. And again, I highly doubt that any opposing coach is going to take what is said at a press conference as gospel.
So saying it with a smirk is good? I think most feel that a good portion of why it's annoying is because it IS said with a smirk.
|2 days 13 hours ago||Not saying he has to say on||
Not saying he has to say on tuesday "so and so won't play." But it was no secret that Taylor left the ND game and that Peppers didn't play. You really think that Miami is going to be any more fooled if Hoke had said following the ND game that those guys are injured and we'll check on their status as the week progresses? Maybe this happens somewhat with star players, but what kind of coach completely alters a game plan based on dodgy injury information?
My only argument is that it seems silly for Hoke to take it to such an extreme. He's not really gaining anything. Instead, he's just coming across and prickly and annoying to everyone outside of the program for a slight minscule of an advantage. I don't think it's worth it.
|2 days 15 hours ago||It does seem like he has to||
It does seem like he has to put in at least some effort to keep this whole thing going rather than just be as forthcoming as everyone would rightly expect a college coach to be. Nobody expects him to say, "well, Funchess went through 20% of reps today, which is slightly better than yesterday." But when he has that coversation in the post-game presser regarding Wilson in which he would only say "something was wrong with him," because he doesn't discuss injuries, it becomes silly. Just say, "Wilson banged up his ankle," hope to have him back soon. There's a way to answer the question in a way that isn't necesserily completely forthright for competitive reasons without going to the extreme that Hoke has decided on this year.
From a selfish standpoint, I'd like to know more about the injured players. I know there's no right to the information, but it royally sucks finding out 30 minutes before kickoff that guys you expected to play or had no idea were even injured were out. That being said, don't any of these reporters have sources? Can you guys not get anyone to leak you an injury report?
|2 days 16 hours ago||Funchess, without question.||
Funchess, without question. Taylor and Wilson are key contributors, but the drop-off from them to Lewis/Peppers/Countess and Hill/Thomas is far smaller than the dropoff from Funchess to any other receiver on the roster.
|4 days 6 hours ago||the transitive property||
the transitive property doesnt work in college football...
|4 days 7 hours ago||I'm beginning to come around||
I'm beginning to come around to this view. I think Gardner gives us the greatest upside,which is why I thought the idea of a QB controversy in the preseason was silly. But the longer this season goes on the less I'm convinced that Gardner can reach that upside again in his time at Michigan. He just looks mentally shot. Meanwhile, we're not even really using Gardner's athletic upside in the offense. Given all that, Morris might give us a better typical QB performance from week to week. Plus, if a QB is going to give us turnovers week-in and week-out, I'd rather have the guy that can learn from them and build towards the future.
I'd give Gardner one more week, maybe two, to see if he can pull it back together. Otherwise we need to give Morris at least one start before the trip to East Lansing.
|4 days 7 hours ago||I thought a good portion of||
I thought a good portion of the reason we looked like crap is because we coached like we were ok with being predictable and we woule work on our running game. Miami coached like that's what they expected us to do and adjusted accordingly. That and some fluky TOs made this a close game at the half. I'm going to wait and see what we look like next week before making any definitive statements about the future of this season.
I will say that I would like to see Gardner be sharper.
|4 days 11 hours ago||I'm interested, what do you||
I'm interested, what do you call this? I certainly don't think it's fun...
|4 days 13 hours ago||I think we're going to need||
I think we're going to need those guys to beat Utah next week.
|6 days 13 hours ago||To be fair to you, it would||
To be fair to you, it would be hard to look at trends if you cut off a significant chunk of data for 3 of the 5 coaches.
I'm not sure 5 game rolling averages would be that helpful since it's easy for a lot of these coaches to run through 4 non-conference games and one conference games and only break a sweat once. 10 game rolling average could be interesting.
|6 days 15 hours ago||Of course, but the point||
Of course, but the point isn't to be kind, it's to be accurate. Looking at the chart, Kelly, Dantonio and Rodriguez all had rough first seasons that seem to be out of line with the rest of their performance. Urban Meyer's first year or two may similarly end up looking ouf of line.
The most accurate thing to do is probably start with year three or four for all coaches and say that's when you can determine the "norm," but that would make for awfully poor samples as you would only really have "good" coaches to choose from. Thus, I'd start after year one. For coaches starting over in a bad situation, it gives one year to install a new system/change attitudes and maybe get a few players in. For coaches stepping into good situations, it could clear out a season that was destined to be good regardless. Would it be fair to every single coach in every situation? Probably not, but I think it would give a more accurate reflection of what a coach is bringing to the table in terms of W's and L's.
|6 days 16 hours ago||I'd be interested to see your||
I'd be interested to see your first chart but dropping the first year. I think it can be argued that a coach's first year is unlikely to be entirely reflective of his long term success at a program. It has the potential to be an outlier for any coach as you're almost entirely playing with someone else's talent.
|1 week 11 hours ago||I have no doubt he isn't||
I have no doubt he isn't terrible and may even be a first-round level pick (mostly because I think this year's QB class is pretty shallow), but several places have him rated above Winston and to a lesser degree above Mariota? If so, I find those places less than credible at this stage.
|1 week 13 hours ago||On the other hand, ND only||
On the other hand, ND only ran 65 plays and held the ball for just under 27 minutes without running much up-tempo offense. Was there really that big of a need to rotate extensively? The front 7 played well in the second half, there's no sign they were winded. You don't rotate just for rotation's sake. I assume when we play Indiana you'll see a lot more rotation.
|1 week 16 hours ago||When you look at the drive||
When you look at the drive chart, you realize how much special teams hurt us. In addition to the two missed Field Goals, short net punts set up two ND touchdown drives. The first punt at the end of the first half had a net of 31 yards and set up ND at their own 44 with 1:24 left. They scored the killer TD that must have really deflated the team at the half. Change those three first half special teams plays and it's not unreasonable to go into the half trailing 14-6 or 17-6. A far different game.
The final TD was set up by a 29 yard net punt which forced ND to only go 61 yards for the TD that erased what little doubt was left.
I don't recall the punts, but the box score says they travelled 43 yards and 38 yards respectively and were returned for 12 and 9 yards. A punter isn't going to get a good one on every kick, but it's troubling that the shorter kicks could see pretty good returns. When you put the punts in perspective of the entire game, you see how punt coverage is truly costing the team.
|1 week 1 day ago||That's not exactly a fair||
That's not exactly a fair statement. Thanks to the timing of firing Rodriguez, we had self-limited the pool. The two big names from in the coaching search world that year had already been hired (Al Golden and Will Muschamp) and everyone else that may have considered moving to Michigan had to weight the additional consideration that he was going to walk into a serious disadvantage for the very first recruiting cycle. Who knows who would have been interested had we proceeded in early December like a normal program. All we really know about that coaching search was that Harbaugh and Miles were not interested and I'm not sure that's any fault of Michigan's. Nobody else even rose above whispers.
If we're coach less in early December, we'll see some reasonable names with real interest in the Michigan job.
|1 week 1 day ago||Is it really another 180||
Is it really another 180 change? Aren't we currently running a lot of spread formation with inside zone, and even zone reads? Is it really all that different to go from what we're doing a lot of now to what Wilson is doing? Wilson's also coached statuesqe QBs such as Jason White and Sam Bradford. I think he would be just peachy with the offensive talent we've accumulated.
To me, Wilson is exactly the kind of offensive mind we should be looking at. He's flexible with his system and adjusts so that he can play the best possible talent he can put on the field. If he can get IU to 7 or 8 wins in the regular season this year, I could get on the Wilson bandwagon.
|1 week 2 days ago||In this day and age of||
In this day and age of college football, if you can't run a good chunk of your offense competently from the no-huddle you have a coaching problem. I bet 95% of FBS can do it and some of them even have new coordinators.