“On the offense last year, they had great spacing. That’s what I remember. Great spacing, great shooters, like Nik Stauskas, who’s not there right now. But they always have someone to fill the roles. They have a cutting offense, kind of hard to guard.”
- Member for
- 6 years 15 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|11 hours 47 min ago||"Michigan seems to prioritize size above everything else"||
So this. Been that way since Hoke arrived. Everybody, even the NFL, is trending the other way. The irony is at the one position where this could matter (OL) Michigan is just average-sized.
|14 hours 21 min ago||A "good hire" is in the eye of the beholder.||
You don't need "massive" attrition to make a small class into a big class, you just need "normal" transition-situation attrition. Every transition leads to some.
You can't define what a good hire or bad hire is in advance, but the idea that a big name will reduce attrition may have some merit. That said, if we hired Gus Malzhan there would probably be a lot of transition. For a Harbaugh there would probably not be.
We didn't have massive attrition when a good coach (Rodriguez) was hired and we didn't have it when a bad coach (Hoke) was hired. Attrition seemed to be more of an issue for the good coach, which disputes your point. Let's not forget that Rodriguez was one of the biggest names in college football when he was hired. He had turned down Alabama not long before, so you can argue he was a bigger catch than the 2014 version of Miles or Stoops.
If your goal is avoiding attrition, then continuity is the biggest thing. Continuity may or may not be a significant factor in our coaching decision. We don't know yet, so making this assumption is a big leap, IMO.
|15 hours 1 min ago||The thing about the recruiting class size||
"recruiting impact won't be enormous because this class is so small"
That hinges on the assumption that there won't be a significant number of transfers, which -- there probably will be. Not only will you have the younger Mallets and Borens of the world, but some 5th year seniors (e.g., Glasgow, Countess, Hayes) will elect to use their college free agency to get exposure and coaching elsewhere. A coaching change makes a convenient excuse for anyone who is remotely discontent.
How many we don't know, but the second you have a coaching change your attrition rate is going to go way up and your class size will as well.
...Not that it invalidates the conclusion re: Hoke. It WILL affect the recruiting class, but recruiting isn't everything.
|3 days 14 hours ago||Really shouldn't matter much||
I'll take a good football coach over a guy who is loyal to the program. I'm not sure ambition is a bad thing. Sure, it'd be nice if the guy stuck around forever, but I don't think Stanford has any regrets about having Harbaugh around for only a few years or Utah regrets Urban Meyer. At this point we need somebody to right the ship, even if they're only around for 4 or 5 years.
|3 days 15 hours ago||Credit for 2011||
People credit Rodriguez because every player (save for a few '11 Hoke recruits who did not contribute much) were either recruited by Rodriguez or coached by him for 3 seasons. Carr deserves a little bit of credit for the handful of those seniors that stuck through 2 coaching transitions, but mostly THOSE PLAYERS deserve the credit. They were recruited by Carr, coached by Rodriguez and then fine-tuned by Hoke/Mattison/Borges.
The credit needs to be spread around, naturally, but the bulk of credit for 2011 goes to Rodriguez and the top players on that team - most of which were, again, either coached or recruited by Rodriguez. Hoke had spring practice and fall camp with them before the season. Rodriguez had 1-3 seasons.
Dave Brandon's narrative "Carr recruited/Hoke coached" is disrespectful to Rodriguez and, more importantly, disrespectful (if not outright insulting) to the three classes of kids (including Denard, Gallon, Roundtree, etc.) who stuck to their commitment to Michigan through a lot of turmoil. It's one of the most classless things Brandon has said and it shouldn't be repeated or reinforced in any way.
As has been made abundantly clear in the last few years - it's not just the talent you recruit but what you do with them.
|4 days 9 hours ago||It's possible. But I don't think we can assume it||
We don't know if Brandon is gone or who is replacement might be. Michigan hired a spread-oriented guy 7 years ago - it ended badly (for Michigan), but it can happen again. I think a lot of staunch traditionalist are getting religion this year irt to the game changing. The combination of Rich Rod's success at Arizona, Urban Meyer's success at OSU, and the fact that nearly every team in the top 10 is running something other than "pro-style" has to be opening people's minds. Even the Moellers, Borges, and Carrs of the world.
It takes an initial leap of faith to assume a coaching change is going to happen in the first place. I get your skepticism, and if I had to bet on it, I'd say "pro-style" is the most likely outcome...but in a world where we are talking about Shaw/Mullen/Harbaugh...it's a relatively consideration.
|4 days 9 hours ago||If the wagon's are circled...||
Hoke could easily be back. So, offensive style doesn't even matter in that case.
|4 days 11 hours ago||word clouds?||
There's a lot more damning commentary and data in there than the student word clouds.
|4 days 11 hours ago||Inherent to CC||
a coaching changes means an attitude adjustment in the program. May not mean anything for offensive philosophy but we can't rule it out.
|4 days 11 hours ago||This right here||
I kept scrolling down waiting for someone to have rung the SAMPLE SIZE bell. FEI at this stage should be taken with a grain of salt.
FEI after 12 games is A LOT more meaningful than FEI after 6 (especially since it includes all those cupcake game outliers).
I would wager a large amount we finisher higher than 50th. Still outside the top 20, presumably, but I bet we keep OSU (for example) in check relative to most teams. This is a case where you have to trust your eyes a little bit. Rutgers was bad (as Mattison addmitted), ND was bad, everything else seems pretty on par with last year.
Still, the "mediocre" label isn't entirely off base. It's just an exaggeration.
|4 days 12 hours ago||I think the point is that calling out size is a misdiagnosis.||
Sure, if Spike was 6'7 he would be less of a liability (and more of an NBA prospect) but his biggest defensive issue is athleticism, not size, otherwise Derrick and Trey would have the same defensive issues. He's not 5'6.
I think you are dead-on with mentioning his defensive limitations (not playing against Kentucky). That's why Beilein is calling on him to be so aggressive. He can't just sit back and be a 3&D guy because that's not where his value is. He has to force himself into being an offensive threat whenever he's on the floor because he gives up so much on the other end.
|4 days 12 hours ago||Spike/Walton backcourt||
I think this will work against a lot of our oppoenents. I think Spike would get the off-ball role though. Walton is a far bigger threat with the ball in his hands.
Either way -- what a luxury to have these two. It doesn't get much better.
|4 days 13 hours ago||Yeah but||
It's not enough to excuse the defensive issues. These guys are all in the same ballpark of size. Size isn't why Spike is a defensive liability.
There's a bit of a double standard here, in part because of recruiting rankings. Which is interesting because that kind of stuff doesn't happen in football for 3-star types like Drake Johnson or Thomas Rawls or AJ Williams or Russel Bellomy.
|4 days 13 hours ago||22||
Having the oldest player be 22 is probably pretty typical for most teams in the country. Having no seniors is unusual but Beilein is making a habit of grabbing the prep school 5th-year kids.
|4 days 13 hours ago||Why not Morris?||
I don't know if there's any basis in fact to the assertion that Morris would not take the Michigan job (and I'm a guy who has repeatedly poopooed the idea that we have a shot at Mullen, Shaw, Graham, etc.).
His roots are all in the south, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't come to Michigan. He'd just be a flight risk whenever the next big southern job opened up. So what!, I say. Morris' profile is very Malzhanian.
Morris is not going to happen, but it's more realistic than a lot of the names being thrown out there.
In other news -- nobody's offense is a good fit for our offensive "talent" so it shouldn't be a big factor. Funchess is probably gone regardless - our OL should be OK with decent coaching with either a zone or man scheme - our QBs are not good in any system - skill positions need to be recruited either way.
|4 days 14 hours ago||What do you guys think about Rich Rod?||
Fire him or hire him?
|4 days 14 hours ago||"the only case that could justify the timeout" (at the half)||
I actually think Hoke assumed they would punt, not that they'd be able to pick off a pass.
|5 days 9 hours ago||Isn't it?||
The M job is more prestegious and has probably (but arguably) a higher ceiling. The ASU job is significantly easier.
Each pro in M's favor is offset by con. Advantage M: prestige, tradition, stadium size, national recruiting appeal. Advantage ASU: weather, supportive media/fans, local recruiting base, academic obstacles, better conference
I don't think an M coach would jump ship to ASU (though Bill Freider did, it was a while ago) and I don't think an ASU coach would jump ship to UM. The jobs are on par with each other. That said, an individual's preference may break what is otherwise a tie due to weather, family, or fame.
In Graham's case - I see no reason to draw him to Ann Arbor. He has a better situation there right now and there's no reason for him to take on a higher level of difficulty in AA and leave sunny AZ. The only reason I can think of is $. And with how much we are going to be paying Brandon and Hoke to not work here, I don't know that MIchigan will elect the outpay route. Michigan's not the only school with a lot of football revenue right now.
|5 days 13 hours ago||Beilein's priorities||
I didn't mean to imply that OSU would not have recruited those guys but neither Tate nor Bates-Diop were considered 5-star recruits when Beilein first recruited them. They were both some of the earliest and highest priority recruits on JB's list. So, it's not that it's a surprise OSU recruited these guys, it just an affirmation that they are probably legit.
|5 days 13 hours ago||Beilein seal of approval||
5-star Beilein recruits > 5-star Beilein does not
|5 days 13 hours ago||No||
But it has next to nothing to do with accent/religion.
|5 days 13 hours ago||Agreed||
We should stop fantasizing about SEC and Pac12 coaches whose programs are in far better places than Michigan's.
We've been turned down by head coaches at Stanford and Rutgers and got WVU's coach only becuase he was having a fight with his AD. Our head coaches have come from San Diego State, N/A, Illinois, Miami.
There is no good reason for Graham to leave unless he wants to make life harder on himself.
|5 days 14 hours ago||Fantastic News||
Bosch is probably one of our 5 best linemen if he can get back on track.
Things always look good 2 years from now, but really/seriously/imeanit, our OL has excellent potential in 2016 for whatever coach/scheme we have.
|5 days 16 hours ago||Good sign for OSU/MSU: grabbing Beilein recruits||
We all know JB is pretty fantastic at uncovering talent, but other Big 10 coaches have taken notice too, and that's bad news for Michigan.
Bates-Diop and Tate were 5-star guys Beilein targeted very early on but OSU stole away. They will probably be very good. They have a couple other very good freshman and had a top 5 recruiting class. OSU may not be a top 10 team just yet, but they have more talent than Michigan (albeit young talent) and they're a legit conference title contender. Don't sleep on them. Their floor is a lot higher than 7th.
MSU: I agree we are better than right now. BUT, they took Jevon Bess well after Beilein was sniffing around. This wasn't a big deal (3-star recruit not offered), but he'll probably be good. It does indicate that Izzo is watching Beilein very closely. As does the fact he took two shooters that Beilein wanted (Aherns and McQuaid) for the '16 class. Also, Nairn is going to be very good and may end up being the conference freshman of the year. Still, I'm surprised they are ranked above Michigan.
|1 week 1 day ago||BS||
If they win a national title or even come close they will pony up. Football is pretty popular in the south.
|1 week 3 days ago||Speaking of bad arguments||
It seems like your arguments are either strawmen (trust all authority! protests mean you don't care!) or you admit that the 'bad' arguments are valid. E.g., "First, the bad arguments: A protest will hurt the players Yep, it will a bit."
So...good argument then?
“hurting the players” means not supporting them to the best of one’s abilities."
No, it doesn't. It's one thing to lessen or even withdraw your support (do nothing) and another to actively do harm. One is natural and expected, the other borders on treason. I admit the difference between not going and pocketing your ticket vs not going and selling your ticket is a fine line, but the difference is in the intent. In the later, you are trying to create an embarrasing situation at a Michigan athletic event. That is hurtful to some people and your victim(s) may not [read: are likely not to] be your target. Your's is a lawyer's view, mine a doctor's. [Note: not a doctor but I play one on the internet.]
"dissent creates disorder."
What disorder is created by walking out or boycotting? I don't think any. It's just manufacturing especially dark cloud in a stormy season. There is always a cost, yes, but order isn't always diminished, sometimes it's just honor, integrity, honesty, whatever. While your larger point is true wrt:cost, it's poorly argued. There is a cost, maybe it is good maybe it is bad.
I don't feel strongly about this boycott, but I'm annoyed by people not just admitting they are bad fans for not supporting the team when they are down. It's very convenient. Brian Cook, for example, openly expresses his disdain for attending games when the team is bad. The team is very bad, so he doesn't want to go. Feeling mad and upset? Hey, show Dave Brandon by doing the thing you feel like doing anyway because you're mad.
To me it's about unintended consequences. You embarass Dave Brandon, you embarass Hoke, you hurt the program, the players, and you make it a less attractive place. Maybe that's necessary to get Brandon out, maybe not. We have no idea what's going through the decision-makers heads. You're taking a risk.
The simplest thing here is this: being negative at a Michigan football game has negative consequences for Michigan football. Since we don't get lottery picks like the NBA, there is no benefit to pushing deeper into the depths of despair.
|1 week 3 days ago||You're conflating two issues||
Nobody said confidence doesn't matter. The question is if it fluctuates enough from person to person when pressure is applied to be deemed significant. Some people might not feel the pressure at all, other might feel it but have it not alter their confidence, reaction times, or any other aspect of their performance at all. Some may be affected, but it's not significant enough to be proveable.
Otherwise, you make great points about the studies not being 100% definitive. I should correct my statement to say MOST studies show that the clutch stuff is BS.
Someone earlier brought up human nature and one thing that is consistently found in many areas, including sports but going way beyond to religion and many other relms -- it's human nature to ascribe a rational explanation for things that we can not explain. This is the foundation of religions going back to ancient times. You don't have to watch a lot of sports to hear announcers saying absolutely non-sensical things as ways to explain what just happened. Sometimes there is no explanation needed, the thing just happened.
The argument for this boils down to "I don't believe the scientific evidence". Which, OK - sometimes science is wrong or too primitive to be meaningful - but most of the time it's right, IMO.
|1 week 3 days ago||They got him the ball||
because people were freaking out about the guy who was the better player. It's the same reason Derek Fisher and Steve Kerr were clutch. There are countless times that Horry did NOT get the ball. The vast majority of the time. Parker, Ginobili, Duncan got the ball first. Rasheed Wallace freaks and leaves Robert Horry open. Ball rotates and there it is...
People trusted these guys to be in at clutch time because they were good players for those situations (i.e., they could hit an open shot). They are RELIABLE complementary players - not just in the clutch, but always.
Yes - Miller and MJ and Lebron ARE "merely" good shooters. They didn't have better numbers in the clutch over their career.
"The vast majority of people fail when the pressure is on" -- something you just made up.
I'm sure there are cases where some guys can't handle the stress or thrive in it, but the majority of people are who they and we make up narratives to justify randomness.
|1 week 3 days ago||Unlike Titanic||
Michigan football does not end when Hoke is fired.
|1 week 3 days ago||enough for what||
I get the issues and I'm not making a pro-Hoke stance here. Fire errrbody.
My point is that the news stories tend to get boiled down to simple headlines. If you polled people around the country and asked them "what is this protest about?" very few are going to get that it's about the Athletic Director's policies, actions, and general detestibility because that's a wonky local issue. I think you can see from Mgoblog that a lot of alumni (especially out of state) don't think whatever Brandon is doing is that bad (see: all the "if we were 5-0" arguments).
Your post, like the whole protest thing, seems like misplaced anger at the football program's general and comprehensive incompetance.