i find this extremely interesting
- Member for
- 3 years 48 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- Current value
|31 min 17 sec ago||Devin got his own spotlight||
Devin got his own spotlight piece last week
|4 weeks 2 days ago||I Dig it too||
That track is definately reminiscent of A Tribe Called Quest and Gang Starr. More Gang Starr than Tribe, though. Not a bad pair to cue off of...
|4 weeks 5 days ago||It also reminded me of one of||
It also reminded me of one of my favorite movies ever: Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back.
"YOU are the ones who are the ball lickers!"
Movie is gold from start to finish. I probably should have outgrown it by now but I'm glad I haven't.
|8 weeks 5 days ago||Here we go...(re: 4 year schollies)||
If I'm a 17-year old high school kid and I'm negotiating with 50-something year old businessmen, I'd like some representation. Ditto if my kid were in that position.Just sayin'...
Count me solidly in the 'bout-damned-time camp of the green-lighting of four year scholarships and even some level of I-can-buy-a-car-with-it-tomorrow compensation for players, but let's just cut to the chase of making men's college football and basketball a straight up minor league system with contractual agreements and stipulations and the whole shebang.
The emperor has no clothes; its not ameteur sports.
Finally, I apparently love me some hyphens today. Carry on.
|25 weeks 5 days ago||With all due respect, this is||
With all due respect, this is a pretty dumb thing to say. Especially when quoting the ever so wise "they".
What? I said with all due respect....
|35 weeks 6 days ago||Is it me, or did Brian just||
Is it me, or did Brian just say that Jake Ryan is Greg Mattison's wang? It's me, isn't it?
|38 weeks 11 hours ago||Most TOM conversations have||
Most TOM conversations have an underlying asupmtion that the turnovers will come evenly distributed. That is, that a team that ends up at +24 accumulates them at a rate of 2 per game. We know this isn't the case. So, a team can have a bad turnover ratio and a good record if they're neutral in their wins and heavily negative in their losses. This describes Michigan to a T so far this year.
Denards issues feel correctable to me so I'm optimistic there. All's we gotta do is keep pressure off of him and brainwash him into tucking and running. Totally doable. The bigger frustration to me is the lack of turnover production from the defense. But, again, it seems like they're getting their legs and I'm optimistic that they'll start trending back toward average.
Also, random. (I just can't help myself...)
|38 weeks 1 day ago||This will sound ridiculous||
This will sound ridiculous but, Central Florida, Ohio U, and LaTech are actually pretty good squads this year. Beyond that, I can't really muster beef for losing to/being challenged by AQ BCS level competition. Having said all that, the B1G is perty terrible.
|38 weeks 2 days ago||As supreme universal||
As supreme universal authority of football judginess I hereby still render judgment against the professionals (read: coaches) rather than the Denard. It seems to me that the vast majority of Denard’s picks are a result of him forcing the ball into a window any college QB would struggle to fit into. His judgment under pressure is terrible and has always been so. What’s even more frustrating is that he is his own check down. I can’t imagine why it has not yet been drilled into his head that if it’s not there, he needs to scramble.
It’s this simple, really:
Sub Make1Read() If IsOpen(Guy) then ThrowTo(Guy, SetFeet=True); else Goto Run_It(Dilithium=10); End If End Sub
I think the groundhog's day feeling of it all is on the coaches. I assume they’ve had that discussion but it keeps happening. So, either the coaches don’t care (doubtful), Denard isn’t listening (unlikely), or they haven’t gotten through to him. Yeah, Denard should probably know better by now but he’s a valiant and flawed champion with almost nothing but flaws surrounding him, and hey, it's worked twice before. If he doesn’t make a play, who will?
|38 weeks 3 days ago||careful, Notre dame's offense||
careful, Notre dame's offense may just be bad. The defense held its end of the bargain, I think. but nd wasn't all that.
also, you don't need to extrapolate on Denard. he has alwaus been an interception machine. H is what he is; take it or leave it.
|39 weeks 8 hours ago||See, I just dont see a crisis||
See, I just dont see a crisis in that description of the scenario. The institutions are choosing to run deficits based on complicated tradeoffs, that's they're problem not the athlete's...I dont care if South Alabama (just a random example) is successful as a "D1" university or not. I care that some Universities are successful, but I dont think it'd be such a tragedy if there were a moderate consilidation in "Division 1" institutions.
Title IX? Cool...85 football scholarships = 85 *(women's basketball + softball + track +crew + etc) scholarships? Hell, recruit hot cheerleaders and Dance Team members and give them scholarships...why not? Where does "the pressures of running a successful institution means having a football program means Title IX" meet "and we need a Lacross team, too" ? Why do you need an athletic scholarship at all? Just give 85 lucky women a full ride.
As to the Denard problem, I agree. So, let players hire agents and get endorsements and whatever. Doesn;t hurt the university, doesn't hurt the NCAA. If Denard / Terrelle Pryor / Cam Newton / Tim Tebow / Andrew Luck can cash in, then more power to them. If Roy Roundtree thinks he can cash in, then let him try...what's the problem with that? It would be less expensive to the university to do that than pay the salaries of the coach in prgoram X while also handing out scholarships...no? Boom, deficit improved.
Point Blank: We need to make yet another division: programs that can afford to pay their athletes and programs that can't There is already a not so subtly implied line of demarcation between MAC and the B1G. How would making it a defined line be less fair than drawing a line between FBS programs and FCS / Div / Div 3 programs?
|39 weeks 10 hours ago||A Few things||
When coaches are being paid millions of dollars and then fired/hired despite buyout clauses, the clain of a deficit is just weak. Also, why does Michigan *need* a Lacross program or a Soccer program or whatever? They don't.
Further why does a school like, say, South Alabame *need* a D1 football program? Again, they dont. There are already two classes of program within D1 (AQ vs non-AQ), make the difference officicial.
Lastly, I value education and I'd suppose that you do, too. But why are we forcing other people to value it if they dont? If your employer suddenly decided to compensate your with Oreo cookies you'd likely go find another job. Can Denard Robinson find another "job" with his most valueable skillset?
|39 weeks 12 hours ago||This is all irrelevant and||
This is all irrelevant and colossaly-sized sour grapes. Its really a news flash that some people in society get preferrential treatment based on nearly arbitrary things? Is what it is man, our society rewards pretty people more than ugly people, tall people more than short people, skinny people more than fat people, and so on. Where's the news?
If there were a viable minor leage for football and (to a lesser extent) basketball then yeah, the Demar Dorseys of the world could at least take their chances. But there isn't. Moreover, a player can get cut from Alabama for no reason and not be allowed to transfer without penalty. They aren't even guaranteed an education (NCAA forbids 4 year scholarships), and so on. Moreoverer, the definition of the word education is being stretched by some of these tailored degree programs being offered by essentially all schools. Players cant even sell their own property (gold pants and bowl rings for example). I know why, I just think its a bogus reason.
The gap between athletes and the student body at large brings nothing to bear on this conversation. Revenue sports athletes, especially the elite ones, generate a whole lot of scratch for a whole lot of people and are forbidden from participating in that benefit. The people creating the value are the only one forbidden from benefiting from that value. That's bunk. Pay 'em.
|39 weeks 19 hours ago||Michgan definately won two||
Michgan definately won two more games than the statistics would suggest...not sure I would count Notre Dame and Virginia Tech as repeatable outcomes given the teams overall performance in those games.
|39 weeks 6 days ago||Better Pocket / Protection?||
I think this makes a lot of sense and aligns with some observations people have made in the past. When Denard has the time to set his feet and step into his throw, his accuracy had been fine. On the run or under pressure, he has shown a tendency to throw off his back foot and then well, bad things happen more often. I guess you could say that about any QB though.
So, apparently DR is a more effective passer from under center, but as others have pointed out the more intriguing and harder to answer question is whether or not he is a more effective player from under center. Beyond that, what formation is most effetive for the offense as a whole...etc.
NEvertheless, good stuff for discussion
|39 weeks 6 days ago||Golson did ok, man; 21 of 31||
Golson did ok, man; 21 of 31 for 289 yards with a TD and no interceptions. He ran for another TD but was sacked 5 times. On his 11 non-sack rushing attempts, he rushed for 28 yards. Whether or not those are scrambles, seems like ND's O-line is hurting them more than he is. Riddick only managed 53 yards on 15 carries.
Purdue tied the game at 17 after recovering a fumble on the ND 15 (sacked Golson). Even then, they had to go for the TD on 4th and 10. Score was much closer than the game actaully was.
|40 weeks 10 hours ago||Schedule||
Seems like we're collectively doing a lot of 'splaining away of some concerning defensive performances in the first two games. First we chalked it up to superior talent, now it's Superior scheme / Not enough time to prepare. Dline is getting chewed up and a very plausible explanation for it is the fact that we bled an awful lot of talent from the roster on the Dline.
There are 5 teams remaining on the schedule that make heavy use of the option - Ill, @ NEB, @ Min, NW, @OSU. And this Golson dude at ND ran it 11 times (plus 5 sacks) vs Purdue. As a recruit Golson was a 4 star ATH ranked 154 overall by ESPN in 2011.
Uh...the Air Force game film will be intresting for all of these teams. At least we know Commie Football don't work round these parts...
|40 weeks 5 days ago||See what I'm sayin'?||
That deep pass to Gardner looks terrible. Garbage, I say!
I guess I'd better go ahead and say that this a self-depricating joke lest the infamous THEY get all internety on me.
Chill, babies*. This is s'posed to be fun.
*that's the affecctionate version not the descriptive one...oy, this is markedly not fun.
|41 weeks 9 min ago||How DARE you, sir.||
I will not stand idly by and have my credibility on the internet, of all places, called into question.The nerve. If you must know, I have been a member of the premier sports blog in the history of history for not one, not two, but three--count 'em, three--years....and 7 weeks! In that time I have amassed nearly two thousand one hundred and seventy points on that blog. The valuableness of my opinion is beyond reproach. You are the one who should be banned. YOU!
Phew! I gotta tell ya. That is fun.
Relax, homie. It's just a shtick.
|41 weeks 3 hours ago||well, well, well||
This doesn't justify my trepidation whenever Denard starts looking to go deep, ergo I will simply write this UFR off as some nerdy failed computer engineer's, like, opinion, man. I mean, he critiques Borges criticises Brandon. He's a computer enginerd. Nope, no insight here.
Anyway, the DSR is encourging. I guess I'm just a beaten dog, or something. The picks though, ugh. Fine, he was trying to make a play to get us back in it. I look forward to less of those going forward.
Then again, were hoping that CB is the bulk of the gap between DSR and the completion rate. I suppose it's possible. God, I hope so.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||chill dude||
Gary Moeller is going to start a free blog where he breaks down Michigan games every week with UFR / picture page resolution any day now...
|41 weeks 1 day ago||Yeah, man, we're all amateurs||
Yeah, man, we're all amateurs and I dont think anyone has made a claim to the contrary; certainly not me. In fact I explicity said that in my original comment. Denard's has bad games when defenses are able to force him into beating them with his arm. It's Borges's job to put him in situations where he can make defenses pay for cheating on him, he hasn't done that against good defenses and it;s fair to criticize him for it.
Hopefully the return of Toussaint will continue to take some heat off Denard as it seemed to during the last half of last season. As to the WR scenario, we dont appear to have that on our roster this year (I guess we'll see about Gardner, Darboh, and Chesson). So, in lieu of that, I'd like Borges to figure our a schematic solution to sheild Denard's weaknesses. You know, what he's paid to do.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||Hang on.||
Yeah, Denard did make some nice throws, no question. But he also made some really bad decisions, no doubt about it. Both picks should not have been thrown and he should know better by know. On the Roundtree pick we have two options (probably more, lest the rhetoric police lock me up again). Either the ref missed an illegal contact call (ball was in the air prior to the ragdoll episode) or the contact was legal and Denard threw the ball without realizing that Roundtree was 5 rows into the stands. Regardless, Denard shouldn't have thrown that ball. On the other one he was throwing into a best a tight window, at worst it was double coverage. Sorry, that's not his game.
The main thrust of my point despite the rhetoical boondoggle above was that I think Borges can put Denard in passing scenarios that play more to his strengths than he has in the last two games we've watched...against "good" defenses.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||OK, so, what's the problem as||
OK, so, what's the problem as you see it? How should Borges utilize Denard so that we can avoid games like Notre Dame 2011 (yes, I remember how it ended; no, I dont want to retry it), MSU 2011, Iowa 2011, Virginia Tech 2011? Should we not have Denard throw at all? I know, I know that's NOT what you said...
Asking Denard to throw the ball down field is asking for trouble. Particularly against the "good" defenses people like to single out. Call me crazy, I think we should play to Denards strenghts rather than his weaknesses.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||I stand by it.||
Yes, 2 of his 11 completions were long passes. And yes, 115 of his 200 yards came on those 2 completions. Should we just ignore the rest of the incompletions and the open receivers he flat missed because of those two passes hit?
If you trust him to connect on the long ball, good on you. I dont.
|41 weeks 1 day ago||I think its fair minded to||
I think its fair minded to give Borges a break on not being a spread option guru. But, I cannot give him a break for asking Denard to do things he proves time and time again that he just cant do. Asking him to throw a touch pass 30 yds down field is...unwise. Nah, eff it, it's dumb. It needs to stop.
The other thing I think Borges can influence is Denard's apparent propensity to force the throw (as in the pick 6 he threw straight to the defender). Denard should have 1 read on a combo route or something, and if its covered it's scramble time.
Despite my lack of knowledge in exactly how it might be done, I dont think Denard is being put in the best possible position to succeed, despite the mismatch in styles.
|41 weeks 5 days ago||dude, keep writing. I want to||
dude, keep writing. I want to keep reading
|41 weeks 5 days ago||pathetic||
Brian F. Cook fishin for mgopoints... tsk, tsk, tsk.
|41 weeks 5 days ago||oof||
I'm'a say it: if we lose to State, the year will be a disappointment. Hard to see us winning the division without beating them. Plus, you know, 5 years and isht. it's a bigger game than The Game this year.
|41 weeks 5 days ago||uh, oops.||