Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
- Member for
- 5 years 34 weeks
|18 weeks 4 days ago||So it Wasn't a Technical Problem, They actually planned this?||
Holy smokes. I didn't get home till half time and figured they had already explained how they were forced to broadcast from ankle level after the normal camera up in the stands let out the magic smoke just before tip off. Guess not. After 10 minutes of UM playing like crap (I knew this only because the score at the bottom of the screen told me) I gave up and shut it off.
|19 weeks 6 days ago||Thank you for finally getting that damn BB score off the top||
I know it is sort of a slow time, but man it was paining me to see that damn BB score every time I checked in.
|22 weeks 2 days ago||It's not title 9||
In the old days, you didn't recruit guys to play for you as much as you recruited guys to NOT play against you. It was as much a defensive move as an offensive move. Those poor kids never had a chance, the big name schools would recruit them just to deplete the available talent pool for everyone else.
|31 weeks 1 day ago||That's Great||
Had to quote you in emails to my favorite OSU friends. Good stuff.
|31 weeks 1 day ago||So What Bowl Now?||
So now that OSU played a hapless game against MSU and lost by a score that was way closer than the game actually was, what happens to us after we beat OSU next week? I'm just assuming that MSU beats PSU at home, though who knows. Do we have any shot at a BCS game at all? I'm thinking if Iowa wins out, they get a top 4 slot and if MSU wins out, there is a pretty good chance they get a top 4 slot. So the Rose Bowl is open. Who goes then? Any other BCS games on the table?
|31 weeks 6 days ago||Great Game for Rudock||
So it is hard to find much fault with Rudock last week. I did watch him throw two screens to guys 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage when they clearly hadn't a snow balls chance in hell of even getting back to the line of scrimmage. It would be nice to see him maybe toss those out of bounds. I guess the likes of Peppers and Chesson could maybe be a miracle snowball, but when three guys are zeroing in on you without a blocker in sight . . . .I'm thinking out of bounds.
|31 weeks 6 days ago||Here is the reporter's wet dream answer||
"Oh, yes thanks so much for asking. You are such an estutue reporter that I would like to give you the scoop. The Colts and I have been in lengthy talks and I have accepted an offer to be their head coach. OK, no more question, I'm going golfing."
|32 weeks 11 hours ago||Crazy like a fox||
Harbaugh sure had the figured out.
|32 weeks 11 hours ago||Well Said||
I'm with you on that. Rooting against MSU is still none the less enjoyable.
|32 weeks 14 hours ago||T-Rex Arms||
After a season of very satisfying solid tackling, I felt like our D was playing with T-rex arms. Elliot is going to have a field day if we tackle like that in 2 weeks. And just to be clear, I will be rooting AGAINST MSU next week, not for OSU.
|34 weeks 1 day ago||Count me in||
I was shocked that they woudn't take overtime. Their kicker was looking great and we were playing a Sophomore QB who before today hadn't completed a pass to anyone. And if memory serves me one or two of those 0 and 4 passes before today were damn near picked off.
|35 weeks 6 days ago||In the NFL and College||
In College Rule 3 Article 3. College rules are simpler than NFL rules here and it would appear to have allowed UM to do what I suggested.
It states that the half may be extended fo an untimed down if a penalty is accepted (offense or defense). Since holding does not involve loss of down, that means 4th down all over. Now you just neal.
I found in the NFL rule book RULE 4, SECTION 8, ARTICLE 2
In the case of a personal foul on 4th down at the end of the half, where the offense fails to make the line to gain, the defense may elect to accept an untimed down (I assume that means where they take the result of the down rather than the penalty/replay down. .. it is not clear).
It also lists "a palpably unfair act". This of course is remarkably vague. Again, it doesn't say if you can accept the result of the down or if you must replay the down to get the untimed down.
I would expect that you would have to take the holding to quite the extreme to be tagged with a personal foul or palpably unfair act penalty.
Finally, to the best of my knowledge, time is never put back on the clock unless there is an error made by the time keeper. So, I believe, the only way the half would be extended in a penalty situation such is this is for an untimed down. And of course if UM was doing the snapping for that down, they would neal.
|36 weeks 3 hours ago||why||
why wouldn't it work? Just watching the colts/patriots and I timed 5 consecutvie plays from snap to down player. They took about 6 seconds with none of them being anything special (short runs and passes). You only need to buy 4 extra seconds. A 60 yard rainbow will have a good 4 second hang time, but lets say you don't throw the ball till 2 seconds. Hang out in the pocket for 8 seconds. An offensive line, tailbacks, everybody holding can certainly protect the QB 8 seconds. I'm really more interested in knowing if there are any rules that would sabotage this.
|36 weeks 4 hours ago||How to Kill 10 seconds||
So, I've been thinking. It is hard to kill 10 seconds on a 4th down play unless you make it. But, let's say you told your entire offensive team to hold like crazy, tackle, etc. Now the QB has insane proctection and hangs out in the pocket for 6 seconds, then chucks the ball as high and long as he can just out of bounds to eat up 4 more seconds. Clock is now 00:00. Of course you get flagged. If they decline, game over. So they take the penalty. But that means you replay 4th down with no time on the clock. So do you have to snap it? And, even if you do, you just neal. Is there any rule on the books that would put time back on the clock? Or does an offensive penalty on 4th down at the end of the game count as though it were the defense on the field, and the ball goes over on downs and they get one last play?
|36 weeks 1 day ago||Deep Breath, In through the nose out through the mouth.||
|36 weeks 1 day ago||It's not all on the punter||
Yup, O'Neil fumbed the snap, we lost the game, direct line, cause and effect. The slightly less direct line, but I think a more important one, the one that is the difference between 7-0 and 5-2, is Rudock. We have a QB who isn't even average and it's hard to win with that. You only get so many wide open throws for touchdowns in a game and Rudock misses them all, always. Not to mention the rest of what he doesn't do that well. Damn, if we could just have an OK QB in there. How can it be that noone we recruited is any good?
Had we won, it would have been one of those wins that you just sort of see the "W", plug your ears and say "lalalalalala". It wasn't going to feel like a great "W", but wow does this "L" feel like a punch in the nuts.
|2 years 9 weeks ago||Unions Will Be the End||
Anyone who says that the schools are making billions all because of the athletes is sadly mistaken. Try a thought experiment. What if college football went away, versus what if the players were just college version of high school players.
What if college football didn't exist? What we would have then would be minor league football. Players would play for Toledo, or some other podunk market., They would get a couple thousand people showing up to most games. They would never be on TV. Their names would never be in anything but the highly acclaimed Toledo Blade (or similar). They would get paid a salary that would probably be less than what there college education is worth and just cover living expenses in Toledo. They would not get much in the way of health care and they would probably play 20 games or more per year. It is clear, replacing the university with a minor league professional version would be just pathetic (relatively speaking).
Now imagine if college football players were like HS players, recruited from within the school and out there for the love of the game. The talent would be lower for sure, but it would be across the board lower on all teams. The games would still be good because there would be parity. The excitement would still be there because it is the product of rivalry and the sense of belonging that comes with your alma mater. The fans are there because of a loyalty to the school They certainly are not there because of loyalty to some 19-year-old kid. Those kids are all replaceable, and in fact they do get replaced every few years. College football is a personal experience for the audience because of the sense of fan ownership that is completely a product of the university, not the players. You follow a school mostly because you or someone close to you was an alumni. If the players were replaced, even with much lower talent, the game would be largely unchanged.
Colleges have done an amazing thing turning a bunch of non-professional level athletes into a tremendously successful product. How many schools out there have even 10% of their players make the pros? These guys are for the most part getting far more than they would in any other system. Unions are going to benefit a very small number of people (mostly not the athletes) and overall hurt the athletes by destroying the entire scholarship system.
|2 years 12 weeks ago||Not necessarily. It is a||
Not necessarily. It is a simple matter of stats. What percentage of the time does a possession result in 2 or more points. If it is higher than 50%, you should do it. UM scores more than 1.15 points per possession on average for the season. If there were no such thing as a 3 pointer and no such thing as getting fouled and only scoring 1 point on a possession, then a 1.15 ppp would mean you score on more than 50%. Since UM gets a lot of their points from 3's and rarely misses free throws, they probably score a deuce or better less than 50%, but probably not much. I don't have that stat available to me.
You also have to look at what the odds of the other team scoring per possession. If it is higher than 50% you should also foul, since odds are that they will score and if you leave it to them, then they will score on their time, not yours, leaving you with no time . . . which is what happened.
|2 years 13 weeks ago||To your point, there have||
To your point, there have been plenty of guys who simply showed up to an NFL team's open tryouts and made the cut, or got drafted out of the cfl or semi-pro leagues. Guys who never saw the inside of a college locker room. The nfl states you have to be 3 years out of HS to qualify, which I don't quite understand. It would make more sense if they had a minimum age. You can understand the argument of not being physically developed enough until you are 21 or so, but being 3 years out of high school doesn't exactly correspond to an age or level of phsycial development.
|2 years 13 weeks ago||Wrong||
"To be an employee you have to be involved in economic activity, and most NCAA schools are spending, not making money"
Wrong! That would be like saying Amazon is not engaged in economic activity. In case you didn't know this, Amazon has never turned a profit, but guess what, that doesn't matter as far as labor law is concerned. If you sell your product, even at a loss, you are engaged in economic activity. So any school that sells tickets at any price, sells game advertising at any price, or in any way sells anything that is tied to those guys playing ball on the field, then your school is affected.
Hell, for that matter you could apply this to any amatuer event where tickets are sold. I see no reason why this wouldn't apply just the same to high school ball. Even your high school musical if they sell tickets.
|2 years 13 weeks ago||Do you really think this is||
Do you really think this is about health insurance? If so, I've got a bridge to sell you. Sure, this is the line now, but the union bosses don't give a rats fat ass about health insurance. They want a cut of something, and health insurance isn't it.
|2 years 16 weeks ago||I was a sophomore . . . .AT UM||
But there is still work to be done.
|2 years 18 weeks ago||Is it wrong that I had no||
Is it wrong that I had no idea what the heck 7na was? Thanks for spelling it out so I could google it. Got it, bummmmmmm bum bum bum bummmmm . . . bum. OK, that is 7na. So, I think that this is the most generic, trite, contrived, and pathetic thing to play at any point during a football game. Hats off to the first guy who thought it was a great motivator song because at that time it was, until everyone else ruined it by playing it until our brains metled into a bummm bum bum bum mess. It really would be cool if it were actually our thing, but it is not.
When I was a student ('91), we went from bringing in cases of beer openly to damn near getting kicked out of UM for a little booze on the breath. The student section was full and we had fun.
It isn't rocket science.
Have fun at game = go to game.
Not having fun = not going to game
People not going game = not having fun at game
7na = not that much fun
beer and throwing marshmellows = more fun than 7na and sober non-throwing marshmellows.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||Field Goal||
I think we need to kick all of our field goals that way. It was high, straight, long, and down the middle. Gibbons typically only gets 3 out of 4 of those precious qualities. I do think we got a bit lucky with not getting an illegal procedure. It looked to me like the right guard wasn't set.
|2 years 31 weeks ago||It was all part of the plan||
The plan, of course, was to NOT score on that 4th and 2. You see, by not scoring and leaving NW with the lead, UM tricks NW into playing prevent, which of course, as we all know, only prevents you from winning. NW falls for the diabolic plan and UM gets the ball last, marches down the field with no time outs and only 2 minutes to play. Just for fun, they run it out to 4th down a couple times and make a 44 yard field goal with only only 8 seconds to get the kicking squad on the field. Genious that Borges, I say, Genious! I can see him up in the booth twiddling his fingers together and lauging Waaaaaaahahaha Waaaahahahaha as his plan falls perfectly into place.
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Robinson Injury||
Speaking as a physician and surgeon, it would appear that denard came down on his ulnar nerve. In other words, he hit his funny bone. It is quite clear from the video that his elbow hits the turf first on the insdie edge where the ulnar nerve runs in a very exposed location. Next you see him grab the pinky side of his hand as his face goes into an ugly expression of pain.
If the nerve is lightly struck, you get that funny bone tingling, but if the nerve is pinched hard between the bone and something else (the field), it produces excrutiating pain that can last for days or longer. It feels like the little finger and half of the ring finger are being torched. In addition to the pain, you lose the sense of touch on those same fingers. In other words, the only sensation that comes from there is burning pain. There is no weakness from this because the nerve is not used for the muscles. But the numbness cause issues with your grip as you might imagine. You can also experience hyperesthesia, which means that touching the fingers hurts, like anyone who has had shingles can tell you about. None of this is good news for the throwing hand of a quarterback.
It also seems as though this is at least the scond time he has done this in a game this season. I wonder if it has happened in practice as well. The more times you do this, the more sensitive the nerve becomes. After repeated trauma, it takes less and less of a pinch on the nerve to cause the same symptoms.
The elbow can certainly be padded and I hope they do this. Since it would seem that this is a recurrent problem, I would think that Denard may consider a surgery which moves the nerve into a less vulnerable spot. Certainly this would not happen until after the season.