- Member for
- 6 years 35 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|1 week 19 hours ago||Matthieu vs. Peppers||
Both are athletic and natural read & react players. Jabrill is about 30 lbs heavier and a few inches taller. From what I've heard they both probably correlate best to safety/nickel in the NFL. But, my impression was that Matthieu was much better in coverage than Jabrill while he was in college. If I remember correctly Matthiu was a turnover machine, although I think he forced more fumbles than interceptions I still think he was much better in coverage than Jabrill at this point in both their careers.
|1 week 21 hours ago||We hope for a true rivalry close to 50/50||
It's been so long since we've beaten OSU with any regularity, and so much has changed in college football since 2000 that it's hard to pinpoint the specifics as to why OSU is so much better than UM. But, from my perspective the main change is in recruiting as the dawn of the internet age, recruiting websites, social media, and 4 & 5-star HS football recruits becoming semi famous that has most changed. I feel like there was a time when a name brand school like UM could go into places like CA, TX, FL, AL, OH and recruit top 150-type kids. I think it has gotten much harder to do that than it used to be. That gives OSU a significant geographical advantage over UM in that there is more in-state talent in OH than in MI. Now, why is OSU so successful at pulling kids out of TX and UM is not? I don't have an answer for that. Obviously Meyer is a great coach and great recruiter, but so it Harbaugh, so why can Meyer do it, but Harbaugh can't? Not sure other than recent success. So, that part may take time. Saban can do it too, but Saban probably has the best recruiting we've ever seen since recruiting rankings became a thing.
Back to the original question...how often does Michigan have to beat OSU for you to be satisfied? I think they have be competitive every game, so no blowouts. They should be able to hover at .500 in home games against OSU and they should be able to hover at .250 when playing in Columbus. So, if they win 1 out of every 2 home games and 1 out of every 4 away games over the course of a 10 year span that would equate roughly 4 wins.
My hunch is although we will continue to recruit similarly to OSU, they will continue to slightly out-recruit UM. Over time UM will close the gap, but OSU will likely remain slightly more talented. That means UM will have to be significantly better at coaching and development in order to win more games. Since both programs have great coaching that seems unlikely. So, my guess is as long as these two coaches remain in their current positions starting in 2018, OSU will remain slightly more talented, will recruit slightly better, and OSU will retain a better winning percentage. So, I'd be happy if we get around .400 against them and it becomes a true rivalry. I don't see another win streak like we had in the 90s as long as OSU has a coach like Meyer in place.
|1 week 1 day ago||I know I get pissed when my||
I know I get pissed when my girlfriend leaves the lights on and doesn't leave enough money in the joint account! Doesn't she know I pay the bills???
In all seriousness, it's funny how such little things like preferenes over room temperature, lights being left on/off, or the dishes can be such challenging things to comprimise. We've had plenty of fights about all of them, although never with physical contact.
|1 week 1 day ago||C'mon man that was a great game that could have gone either way||
It was an amazing game with two really good teams, both of which also had some weaknesses. Both teams were very evenly matched and ultimately UM came up short. That's sports. You don't win every game you're supposed to. Could UM have won that game?...of course. Does that make JH any less of a coach becasue they lost a close game on the road with really bad officiating?...I don't see how.
|1 week 1 day ago||Sometime in the late 2000s||
I guess sometime in the late 2000s (late Carr/early RR) when it had gone a stretch of 8-10 years and we had only beaten them once. It has only gotten worse over time.
I think if Hoke continued to produce 9+ win seasons as he did in his first year he would not have gotten fired. Hoke probably had a better first year than JH, but his W/L record got worse each year. JH's 2nd year team showed improvement over his first. Based on the roster you'd expect a slightly down year in 2017 by no fault of JH, but still probably 9ish wins. So, the difference so far between Hoke and JH is an upward trend with JH. RR is another story with lots of factors all over the map, but he probably just wasn't a good fit.
I think as long as any coach keeps the floor at 8 wins and hits the 10+ mark every once in a while, beats MSU, remains competitive with OSU, and recruits well it's unlikely the coach would get fired. Hoke couldn't keep that going, so far JH has. FWIW JH has a track record at a higher level than Hoke did which also gives him more credibility.
|1 week 1 day ago||Ingore||
|1 week 1 day ago||Only an observation||
Did you mistake my observation for an argument in favor of something?
|1 week 1 day ago||Highly unlikely we beat OSU in 2017||
Do you know what our and OSU rosters look like? It was unlikely we'd beat OSU 2 years ago. It's also unlikely looking at our rosters that we'll beat OSU next year. Our opportunity was last year, and we came darned close. It's hard to argue that UM wasn't at least as good as OSU last year.
But, if we are going to have a rebuilding year, it's likely going to be next year. So, considering that and the way the recruiting classes went in Hoke's last full year and the year he got fired you'd assume this year will the year where there's a lot of young guys playing. So, based on how both OSU and UM have recruited it would be unfair to judge Harbaugh on beating OSU or winning a B1G title next season.
I think it's fair to look at 2018 and 2019 and expect him to at least split. But, IMHO the best one can expect is to start to split 50/50 with OSU going forward starting in 2018. FWIW 2019 will probably be the first season with a Harbaugh recruited QB.
|1 week 1 day ago||Shelton Johnson et. al||
Is it just me or are an abnormally high percentage of transfers and/or guys that break team rules and are no longer with the program seem to be very talented kids (Brian Cole, Amir Mitchell, Devin Asiasi, Shelton Johnson)? Maybe I'm only remembering the ones that got recruiting publicity, but that seems like a bunch of talent I'd still like to have on the team.
|1 week 1 day ago||USC & UCLA are blue blood in different sports||
I'd consider USC a blue blood football program and UCLA a blue blood basketball program, but USC is not a blue blood basketball program and UCLA is not a blue blood football program. They might be the closest match though.
(Sorry, I originally posted this somewhere else before USC (Trojans) lost, but they are now out so it's down to UM & Wiscy.)
|1 week 1 day ago||Correct, USC no longer in||
Good call. I posted this somewhere else before USC (Trojans) lost, but they are now out so it's down to UM & Wiscy.
|1 week 1 day ago||IMO UM is not a blue blood, but are in that second tier||
Agreed, but only having one NC IMO does not qualify a team as a "blue blood" program when looking at their historic record (.584 winning percentage). For example if you compare football, UM is #1 all time in wins. Basketball is not even in the top 50.
|1 week 2 days ago||Potential to be in Top 10 in both sports||
Interestingly there are only 3 teams that finished in the Top 10 post-season rankings in football that are still in the basketball bracket: Michigan, Wisconsin, and USC. Only time will tell if they will finish in the Top 10 in basketball. None of their rivals are still in this year's bracket and none of them are really blue blood basketball programs. Wiscy is usually solid and UM has had it's ups and downs and obviously has the notoriety of the Fab Five, but only has one NC to it's name, although they did lose in the NC game 4 additional times.
The blue blood football programs like Bama, Florida, FSU, Miami, Texas, Oklahoma, USC, OSU, UM, ND, etc. aren't really blue blood blood basketball programs for the most part. And the blue blood basketball programs like UNC, Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, UCLA, Indiana, Syracuse, UCONN, etc. don't really have great football programs. There are a handfull that are pretty good at both for periods of time like UM, MSU, OSU, UCLA, USC, Florida, Syracuse, but none that have really stood the test the time, even over say the past 25 years.
The two sports generally don't tend to match up. It's really hard to be good at both for an extended period of time.
|1 week 6 days ago||DPJ is an athletic freak||
Caveot: As Stu McGill said "The best athletes rarely outperform their peers in pre-season testing like bench pressing and squatting. Their distinguishing qualities are motor control. The ability to exert strength quickly, deactivate muscle quickly, and optimally project forces throughout the body linkage is characteristic of this skill."
That being said, DPJ has some amazing athletic qualities to build from and I'm excited to see what he can do.
|2 weeks 6 days ago||You're probably right, it's unlikely||
You're probably right, which is why I think it's still unlikely. But, Oregon probably already lost their window. Louisville may have a shot...they've got the QB. But, FSU & Clemson will be difficult games next year. If Wiscy had a Lamar Jackson type player they'd be my pick. But, they did have R. Wilson and still couldn't get there, which is why all these are unlikely.
One thing about Prescott, despite the fact that we're realizing now that he's in the NFL that he's probably better than we though in college, he doesn't really use his legs that much even though he's mobile. Guys like Jackson, Newton, and Vick did so much more. One of the things these types of QBs would have to do to beat a superior team like a Bama, FSU, OSU, etc. is use their legs to make plays when the play breaks down. That's what makes them so hard to defend. They can compensate for their team not being as good. And, a QB can do that when other positions can't because they get the ball in their hands every play. It's easier than a RB who really only has one option...run. A QB can run or throw on every play making them harder to defend. I think that is probably required for one of these teams to make a NC run.
|3 weeks 12 hours ago||One QB away (Miss St.?)||
A number of all around quality teams, none of which compete with the likes of OSU, Bama, FSU, or USC in recruiting are just one underrated or second chance dynamic QB away. Take a Vick, Newton, or Watson and put him on a Va. Tech, Oregon, Wisconsin, or Louisville on a good year with some luck and they can do it. It's not likely, but certainly possible.
If I had to pick one, unfortunatley Miss St. as the only SEC team without one probably has the most liklihood to pull that dynamic QB out of their backyard.
|3 weeks 22 hours ago||I'm not sure the burden of proof is that high to||
I'm not sure the burden of proof is that high to kick a kid out of the dorms. I was an RA and it happened all the time. If there is anyone other than the one victim that can attest to the potential crime, the head of housing might meet with all parties and ask the alleged perps to leave pending investigation. They have the responsibility of protecting the rest of the dorms population at the same time balancing the alleged perps rights.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Lets not oversimplify this||
When it comes down to understanding mechanistic factors in an applied science such as exercise is that it’s extremely difficult to tease out the variables so you can draw cause/effect conclusions. There are a few things we should clarify that seem to be thrown around right now. One is weight gain, another is hypertrophy, and a third is how college football S&C programs are designed.
The topic of hypertrophy (building lean mass as an adaptation to resistance training) is much more complex than some are making it out to be. First, if one cares enough to pay attention and track their macronutrients & calories, one can fairly easily within several weeks figure out what their maintenance calories are (how much they can eat based on their current activity levels without gaining or losing weight) and then either add or subtract calories to gain or lose weight. There are all kinds of apps these days that let you do this fairly easily by simply scanning in the food you eat into a database. However, the theory of eating to a plan is simple. Carrying out the plan in real life, especially for college kids is difficult. This means you have to track everything you eat and drink (except water). This takes quite a time commitment. Trying to get 18-22 year olds in a college environment to eat a structured nutrition plan is near impossible even for motivated athletes due to the nature of being in college and the kind of social/cultural things that happen there.
Second, hypertrophy, is not the same as weight gain and there is no guarantee that simply adding calories over maintenance while participating in strength training regimen will produce gains in lean mass. The ability to hypertrophy is just as much of a genetic predisposition as naturally being muscular is. Some people got it and some don't. And, to even further muddy the waters those with a high natural amount of muscle without ever weight training also don't necessarily correlate to the ability to grow more muscle as a response to weight training. The discrepancy between high responders to weight training and low/no responders is significant. There is even evidence of folks that lose muscle mass despite being in a caloric surplus while resistance training.
My hunch is guys like Stribling or Terry Richardson are low responders and will likely always struggle to build muscle in response to resistance training unlike guys like Peppers or Frank Clark. Now, does that mean they can't grow? Only a research study which controls for other variables could tell us that. It’s not fair to judge a guy’s effort based purely on results because some could get better results with less effort and/or less adherence to a plan and just be a high responder while a low responder could potentially working their tail off and just not have the genetics for it.
Lastly, a college football S&C program doesn't really focus on hypertrophy. The way an athlete trains and a bodybuilder trains for example are quite different. Things like joint balance, core stability, agility, coordination, explosiveness, etc. are important to any athlete or football player. So, a football player has to spend a small amount of time working on improving a lot of different athletic traits. Hypertrophy training, the way a bodybuilder trains, is solely focused on building lean mass. They don't necessarily have to waste time doing all the other stuff. So, to make a long story short, while most athletes will add lean mass over the course of their college S&C training careers, they aren't training specifically for that alone and could likely put on way more if that's all they had to worry about. So, a guy that doesn’t put on much lean mass over his career may or may not be working hard & eating right (and the environment he’s in is not ideal for doing so). We don’t know.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||I’m not sure what that has to do with my point I guess||
So, if I’m understanding you right (and correct me if I’m wrong), your counter to my point that the test is not valid (and even counterproductive) and shouldn’t be included or should be replaced with another test is that regardless it’s still something to prepare for and not doing so or doing so poorly is in some way indicative of how one might prepare to play football?
Well, OK I guess, but I’m not sure what that has to do with my point. It seems like we are “arguing” different things.
I’m not arguing in favor of nothing, just a different more useful model, or a more limited set of tests that have more application to the job.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||Is the bench press important||
That does not give any validity to the test itself as it’s presented by the NFL nor provide any rationale for people to argue in favor of using it (over other tests or ommitting it).
If the BP is not valid (test what it’s intended to test) then it should be replaced or removed. Couldn't the NFL evaluate preperation in a way that in a more useful way (I’d prefer a back squat) or wouldn’t the other tests do that while simply omitting the BP?
It's one thing to put in a random test just to see how people respond & prepare. It's quite another to put in a test that being successful at leads people into a false understanding/belief of what being successful at the job requires.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||what the bench press tells||
I’m not sure how doing the bench on one day tells you how often you went to the college weight room. Wouldn’t you need a pretest, a period of training, then a post test to tell that? Plus, I’m pretty sure they're required to attend S&C workouts the same amount for every player on the team unless they’re injured. It just doesn’t make much sense.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||In another thread I posted||
In another thread I posted some points about why I don’t like the bench press of how different biomechanically pushing strength is and what muscle groups are most important during a standing dynamic movement like blocking or coming off the line and pushing a guy versus that of a stationary lying supine position as in a bench press.
I don’t think it has any validity for any position personally and if that’s the case why not replace with something more useful? I’m a little baffled why so many seem to want to argue in favor of it.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Another reason the bench sucks to evaluate football players||
Another reason why I dislike this test for football players. Having long arms is a desirable trait for almost every position in football, yet it’s detrimental for the bench press.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Some are more valuable than others||
As a fan I love it and as an avid trainee I love it even more considering I can probably only do 225 for 10-12 reps at 190 lbs. But, I believe it’s pretty meaningless to evaluating a football player.
Don’t get me wrong as a strength coach I did all these test with our college players. It’s a great way internally to evaluate if an S&C program is working. But, that doesn’t tell us anything about their sport playing ability. It’s the S&C coaches job to keep the players healthy, get them bigger, faster, stronger, more agile, improve fitness, etc. It’s the position coach’s job to take those increased traits of athleticism and turn them into better football players.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||Skill set was not the||
Skill set was not the question, size was.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||How do you know I’m not?||
How do you know I’m not?
|3 weeks 4 days ago||That’s a great bench press||
That’s a great bench press and yet tells us nothing of his football playing ability...love it! Seriously though, I really do.
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Ed Reed turned out OK||
Ed Reed was 5’11” 205 lbs
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Me too, but I'd love to have him||
Me too, but lets not kid ourselves that we would have loved to have him. Imagine going Charlton, Glasgow, McDowell, and Wormley together?
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Yes, but not the athleticism drills||
If I was an NFL scout would I want it?...hard to say. Sometimes I think the results of the combine muddy the waters of what really matters, watching them play football. There are dozens of players that test great with athleticism at The Combine that aren't great NFL football players and vice versa. Sometimes I think it tricks us into valuing the wrong things or as you say differentiating between two similar players when it shouldn’t.
I think I'd prefer to focus on the important stuff of watching them play. This is kinda like the idea of the movie Moneyball where scouts over value guys with big arms, have power, are tall, hit the ball a long way, are fast, etc. And, they forget about the more important stuff like can they use those attributes to actually be successful at baseball by getting on base and scoring runs. We get seduced by a jacked guy with a big bench, great 40 time, and great measurables that gets outplayed on the field by a better football player that is smaller, slower, and not as strong, but is better at playing the game. But, we’re supposed to be evaluating football & not general athleticism and the difference between the two is significant.
I think size is probably more important in football than baseball so I do like the idea of getting official height/weights because schools are notorious for over-listing heights particularly. And, I like the idea of the interviews. But, the athleticism drills like a 40 yard dash, 3-cone drill, vertical jump, bench press, etc. are pretty worthless for scouting.