the just released schedules were a flat-out statement that the B10 doesn't believe SOS will matter in playoff selection
- Member for
- 4 years 45 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Current value
|2 days 11 hours ago||This must mean...||
Hoke does not get it. Fire HokeRod!
|2 days 15 hours ago||Except for Mattison||
He says MIKE and WILL are basically the same thing.
|2 days 15 hours ago||Not a bad painting|
|3 days 4 hours ago||aha!||
So you don't live in either LA or Michigan, making both your icon and name incorrect. The jig is up Louisianan!
|3 days 8 hours ago||Ah||
OK, I could see how 6'2 would be more plausible, but still on the short end of what Michigan wants for SAM.
Besides, wasn't it reported from the outset that he wasn't a SAM target? - or maybe that was just speculation
|3 days 8 hours ago||Except when they do||
Some people from NJ do say they are from NY (since the state and the city have the same name, it just depends what you mean).
Plus, he could have moved from one suburb/state to another suburb/state all while being in the same metro area. So for all we know he could be 'from Missouri' even if he currently resides in Illinois. Or Alaska for that matter.
More importantly, the absolute geographic lines are less important than the idea/intent. Someone from Lapeer might describe themselves as being "from Detroit". If your audience isn't familiar with Michigan, it gets the job done.
|3 days 8 hours ago||Has to be more to it.||
So a kid listed a 6' is being recruited for SAM and then it turns out he is 2 inches shorter and the coaches turn him away?
I find that hard to believe. 6' is short for a SAM regardless.
Must be more here than is public for a 6' kid to get an offer and then a few weeks later have it pulled.
|3 days 13 hours ago||Ohio / California||
Even shirtless it's clear who is from where.
Goatee, sneakers with jeans vs. long hair, shorts, skate shoes
|3 days 15 hours ago||Bravo||
Gallon deserves far more praise and adulation than he's gotten so far, and has for a couple years. The narrow-minded tradisionalist views about him being short and a slot are too often repeated.
re: Height: it's nice, but not really important. Jump balls are infrequent and besides, Gallon's very good at them. Rodman was the best rebounder in the NBA. Short WRs abound in the NFL and college, etc.
re: Slot: it's not a Position, but an alignment. People who line up on the inside more often practice just like the WR who line up on the outside more often. Most WR move back and forth. Anyway, Gallon's been lining up on the outside for most of his career. He's not a 'slot'
I don't think he deserves the #1 jersey, but it's an almost entirely subjective argument. It means what you want it to mean.
|6 days 14 hours ago||Didn't Hoke and Mattison move him away from OG?||
It would seem to me that staying at OL would have been better for his pro development.
|1 week 3 days ago||stonum's chances||
1st chance - welcome to Michigan!
2nd chance - you drove drunk but we'll let you back in
3rd chance - you drove drunk again, you'll need to do some things, but you can come back
Stonum messed up (probation violation - driving w/o a license) his 3rd chance at Michigan.
He got a 4th chance at Baylor.
|1 week 3 days ago||of course||
But part of 'molding men' is communicating that sometimes enough is enough. There are consequences.
The kicking a kid off the team argument is the inverse of having a murderer on the team. It is silly.
There are little screwups and there are big screwups. The difficult/interesting question is where you draw the line.
|1 week 3 days ago||Stonum had 2 drunk driving charges while at Michigan||
Then the probation violation. So he was given 3 chances really.
|1 week 3 days ago||trying to limit/reduce drunk driving||
seems like a real world practicality to me
|1 week 3 days ago||pre-judge||
Not sure how I pre-judged Stonum, when a JUDGE has already judged him. Before that I just thought of him as a talented football player.
Stonum showed no indication that he learned from his mistakes.
While you have a point, it seems dangerous to argue 'driving is dangerous either way'. The risk goes up pretty dramatically if you're drunk.
|1 week 3 days ago||I don't think that means what you think it means.||
Other than the setting, this has nothing to do with academia.
|1 week 3 days ago||Did Larry Harrison?||
Wondering how he fits in the argument and where you draw the line for second chances.
|1 week 3 days ago||None of which makes up for what he did||
That's all great I guess, but this is a kid who put others lives at risk repeatedly and was too lazy to walk across campus or arrange a ride in advance to attend a hearing that he couldn't drive to.
Nobody is perfect, but those are more than 'dumb mistakes'.
I have a Michigan degree and like Brady Hoke too - doesn't mean I'm not a bad person.
|1 week 3 days ago||Agree on Hagerup||
Don't agree on Stonum. I don't think you are necessarily giving up on a guy when you tell him some things are simply unacceptable. If he had killed somebody while driving drunk - I don't think anybody would be calling for a second chance.
To fram it another way -- Did Larry Harrison deserve a second chance?
|1 week 3 days ago||You have a point||
I get what you're saying, but ultimately the result is what matters. I don't know if Hoke could have affected Stonum's life otherwise but giving him a second chance with Michigan football clearly didn't help him. It may have enabled him to continue to feel a lack of accountability or respect for others.
Plus, it's not like his life ended after UM football. (i.e., his 'second chance' didn't have to be with Michigan)
Kicking him off the team sooner might have been a bigger wake up call. Probably not - Stonum seems like jerk.
|1 week 3 days ago||OTOH||
Giving Stonum a second chance turned out to be a mistake. It is hard to judge.
|1 week 3 days ago||I hate that Hagerup gets lumped with Stonum||
While I understand the reasons, Stonum gets an F for character for endangering the lives of others. Hagerup just sounds like a knucklehead - harming only himself.
|2 weeks 9 hours ago||"what Borges QB's usually do"||
Is not very clear. He's had diverse and varying performance and production from his QBs, even before Denard Robinson.
With Robinson and Gardner transitioning to Bellomy, Morris, and Speight that variance is likely to continue.
That's why the identity is in question. Until Michigan has the same offense year in and year out their identity won't be established relative to programs that have been stable over the last 5-10 years.
|2 weeks 11 hours ago||sanity checks||
This isn't really true. When models get calibrated and validated any professional modelers will look at the outliers to try to determine what might be missing.
That doesn't mean models are perfect, but if by sanity check you mean they need a subjective adjustment factor - that's exactly the kind of thing Brian has been railing against in the computer formulas. No place for that.
For anecdotal evidence - people were arguing Kenpoms model needed to do the same thing for Wisconsin and they ended up a pretty good team. Models are worthless if they are just putting numbers to our opinions. Unexpected outcomes to question our thinking is precisely the point.
|2 weeks 11 hours ago||"average players"||
Mostly agree but Roh and Campbell had good to very good talent and were experienced seniors. Typically your 'average' senior is going to be better than an above average sophomore.
|2 weeks 12 hours ago||A very optimistic view||
I can't believe it coming from you LA2!
My point is that a subjective view/model is justified in projecting a decline where you lose that kind of production.
To your points:
Mostly I agree. I'm very high on Black and I agree that he replaces Campbell albeit with a different skill set (more pass rush, less run-stopping). More importantly, we'll have better depth from WDE to NT. Also agree Roh was overrated, but he was productive and didn't mess up. If Heitzman is the replacement it's probably a wash at best. Still - WDE will be better and QWash may play a little better with Pipkins taking on a bigger role behind him. There's enough talent and coaching for a reasonable fan to expect us to outperform a modeled outcome here.
Ryan and Countess - I wouldn't bet against them, but you have to acknowledge the uncertainty of them coming back to full strength with those severe injuries. Countess - OK, I'm with you but Ryan coming back to full strength (even if he does return midseason) is unlikely.
Agree replacing Kovacs is the toughest part -- but I'm pretty optimistic about Wilson. A freshman who passed some serviceable vets to get playing time so early in his career usually ends up having a nice career. With the way the schedule lays out (most important games in November) a young kid like that could be very very good by the end of the year.
|2 weeks 12 hours ago||offseason reports are always glowing||
I think Gardner's going to be great, but that's really beside the point. The offense strategy the last 2 season and the players they're recruiting don't fit each other. I don't know why anyone would dispute that the offense is still in transition. A transition that won't be complete probably until Gardner (and the rest of the Rodriguez guys) graduate.
I don't read it as "wandering in the wilderness". The coaches have a very clear vision of what they want but they have yet to translate it onto the field - hence the "seeking an identity" comment. Maybe it would have been better to say "seeking to establish an identity" since they do not what they want, but that seems nit-picky. The point is, they're not a well-oiled machine where young guys are replacing veterans seemlessly the way that Wisconsin, Oregon, and USC have mostly been the last 5-10 years.
The defense - yeah, the changes were pretty immediate, but they're still trying to get bigger. The identity is already there. There wasn't much to build off of on D (incoherent system/scheme), unlike the O (Denard, faster/lighter linemen, 'space' players at skill positions)
|2 weeks 13 hours ago||Defensive Personnel||
Key Losses: Kovacs, Floyd, Demens, Ryan, Campbell, Roh
I agree that Countess and Ross should offset Demens and Floyd, but that leaves Ryan, Campbell, Roh, and Kovacs. That's 4 starters we have to replace, at a minimum.
Campbell - we can probably replace him with Pipkins or Henry and some other kids, but going from a talented senior to a fresh or soph is usually a downgrade. Roh to Heitzman or Wormley - same story. DL may take a step back but it should be small, especially considering our coaches and accounting for improvement from WDE.
Ryan was our best defensive player and is irreplaceable. I like Cam too but he obviously isn't the same player. LB corps will probably take a step back too, unless Ross is the all-conference player Ryan looked like.
Kovacs will be missed. Here were asking Wilson to fill big shoes. Will improvement from Countess, Taylor, Avery, Gordon offset Kovacs departure? - it's possible but the model is probably accurate in predicting decline for a secondary losing a productive player like Kovacs.
|2 weeks 13 hours ago||with RR's players||
I don't think any sane Michigan fan is going to argue with "seeking identity" on offense. Even the coaches would admit they trying to get to a place where they want to be and haven't been there so far.
Even next year, you have a Rodriguez-recruit at QB whose legs are one of his greatest (if not THE greatest) attribute he brings to the position.
|2 weeks 13 hours ago||A subjective take||
The algorithm doesn't account for things like "but we think Kalis is really good", "Borges gets to run his scheme", and "our WRs are gonna be taller". Rightfully so - 3 fresh newbs along the OL is a big thing to overcome.
Our hope is that there will be run game improvement enough to offset pass pro issues (Vincent Smith will be missed there too), but every team has similar hopes of tough-to-quantify effects offsetting the obvious issues.
One area I'd hypothesize the model underrates us is TE. I expect Funchess and Williams to be much better at both blocking and catching as sophs. Given how (unusually) important TEs are in Borges scheme, I think that will benefit our team more than the model would consider.
Losing Jake Ryan's production, along with the other seniors, it makes sense to doubt defensive improvement - but this is one area where we probably have a right to be more optimistic. I'd be willing to bet our D has outperformed FEI projections every year under Hoke.