Rawls if he can hang onto it, I'd guesss
LesMilesismyhero
History
- Member for
- 2 years 28 weeks
Karma
- Current value
- 1
Recent Comments
| Date | Title | Body |
|---|---|---|
| 22 weeks 2 days ago | Right on the money |
with what Tressel deserves. I guess I haven't kept informed enough on this to know why Smith is getting fired, did he get the info too? The only coach the NCAA punished in the USC case got a one year show cause, I would hope this one is much longer. |
| 22 weeks 2 days ago | Picktown |
Good catch, I misread the link I provided which had it right. I would expect the NCAA to up the probation period for Ohio State. I doubt that will make for a happy mgoboard.
|
| 22 weeks 2 days ago | NCAA and Ohio State |
There is no punishment the NCAA could hand down to Ohio State that would satisfy the MGoUsers. There is no punishment the NCAA could hand down to Ohio State that wouldn't have the Ohio State fanbase crying unfair. USC sanctions: (just listing the relevant football bits, not things like censure or vacated wins or probation that are meaningless, unless you cheat again) Postseason ban for the 2010 and 2011 football seasons. Reduction of football scholarships by 10 for the next three academic years. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun/10/sports/la-sp-0611-usc-sanctions-list-20100611 UM sanctions: Reduction of 130 hours practice time. (This was self imposed not NCAA ordered) http://www.michigandaily.com/content/ncaa-will-not-impose-sanctions-michigan-football-program OSU self imposed penalties: Reduction of 5 football scholarhips fot the next three academic years. Head coach Jim Tressel forced out 1. You are insane if you think Michigan got hit harder by the NCAA for stretchapalooza than Ohio State will get hit for this. Scholarships are the lifeblood of a football program. 2. The Ohio State administration was insane not to take a postseason ban this season. Yeah, next year will hurt them when they try to completely change offensive philosophies with almost complete turnover in the offensive line and no receivers. They aren't going to be competing for a conference title then. But they didn't want any potential post season ban to stretch into the 2013 season when Miller is in year 2 under Meyer. Now that possibility exists.
|
| 22 weeks 3 days ago | Offense may have improved at the end of the season (for 1 game) |
But that defense was positively GERGian at the end of the year giving up 20 points to Penn State (IU only gave up 16) 26 to Purdue (Rice only allowed 22) then 40 to UM (with 4 points of replay help and didn't force a punt in the final 3 quarters of the game). And defense is what he does (or at least should be good at). Couple that with horrid game and clock management that at least played some part in his 2-5 record in 1 score games, and remember that one of those two victories was a hail mary against Wisconsin. |
| 22 weeks 3 days ago | MilkSteak |
I wish I could +1 the pun post, and the name. |
| 23 weeks 4 days ago | I'm confused by your argument |
1. If U of M got the waiver in 2007 then Dave Brandon doesn't have much of a leg to stand on. 2. If U of M didn't get the waiver in 2007 and Lloyd was working with a full staff and RR was recruiting prior to the bowl game then U of M was violating NCAA rules. |
| 34 weeks 1 day ago | Nebraska 54 |
Yeah I wish these guys would let me put some money on the over for the 5.1 projected wins for Nebraska.
Also Kansas State beat Miami who destroyed Ohio State so naturally they are ranked 32 Ohio State 33 Kansas State 52 Miami Sometimes I think the only thing worse than college football polls are the early season computer rankings. |
| 1 year 3 weeks ago | Love the 59Fifty |
The 3930 (batting practice) hats are the most comfortable hats I've ever worn. If they could go back to the 2005 days before New Era began their infatuation with white lines everywhere on those hats I would be a happy man. |
| 1 year 12 weeks ago | The list was for SI's preseason top 25 only |
If UM had been in the preseason top 25, they would have been included. |
| 1 year 12 weeks ago | p value |
Given the 85 man roster and 25 team sample testing whether the true proportion of white football players with a criminal history equals the true proportion of black football players with a criminal history I get a z value of 2.79. For a p value of 0.005.
I used the pooled sample proportion for the calculation of the error term. |
