also duty-free guys falling over and grabbing their shins
- Member for
- 4 years 39 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|21 hours 58 min ago||Mine||
My wife and I had tears streaming down our faces when they carried Lloyd off the field after we won the 2008 Capital One Bowl. That was just awesome.
|3 days 21 hours ago||This is just stupid||
"He just isn't getting it done."
|6 days 12 hours ago||line||
I hate to say it, but that's not a bad starting OL.
At center, Miller is a RS JR who is up to just about 300 lbs. He struggled last year, but a lot of that may be as a result of playing next to two freshmen at times and of Borges over-complexity of scheme. He also has two seasons of playing experience, which might make him a steady presence in the middle.
Cole at LT is worrying, but he certainly has the guru hype and the size. There's a reason that Hoke hasn't stopped raving about this kid.
Mags at LG - also highly rated recruit who has a year of playing experience
Braden at RT - not only was he highly-regarded as a rescuit, but the dude is 322 pounds!!!
Glasgow - while a walk-on, he was still our best interior OL last year. Should only improve this year with a full year of experience playing last season.
Overall, this is a pretty solid line. And, with our still talent (feels good to say that) we don't need this line to be elite - just average - and we will be just fine on offense. As far as I see it, we have one of the top 2 QBs in the conference, are very solid at RB if Green comes close to living up to his hype and have insanely good receivers. Once Butt comes back, we will also have a very good TE. If the OL holds up, we should put up a lot of points.
|1 week 1 day ago||chemistry||
I respectfully disagree with Brian's point on the impact of "chemistry." I know it can't be defined or measured, and that it is not something that is tangible, but anyone who has played a team sport at a fairly high level (or even a not so high level) would likely disagree with Brian's dismissal of the chemistry problems from last season and the potential hugely positive impact removing those problems can have on the OL or on the team, generally.
I certainly never played D1, but I played ice hockey at a very competitive level on long island growing up. I was on some teams with great chemistry and on some teams on which the players hated each other. While I can't quantify the effect, it made a difference on the performance of the team as a whole, and on the players individually. I also have a bunch of friends who played team sports (hockey, football) at various D1 and D1AA schools, and uniformly, they all disagree with Brian's view on the impact of team chemistry.
Definitely not hating on Brian - I usually tend to agree with his views - but on this one, I think that his lack of having played a team sport at a high level may be causing him and many others around here to underestimate the effect of bad team chemistry.
|1 week 3 days ago||Mostly agree||
Except that I think that unless Williams makes a big step forward, Bunting will play ahead of Williams (who just far has been a blocking TE who can't block).
|1 week 3 days ago||7-5||
While I am not disagreeing that 7-5 is a possibility, given the youth in the trenches, don't base your pessimism on stony thing that hoke says in a presser. Ever. The guy gives literally nothing more than the minimum amount of info. And I am just fine with that.
|1 week 4 days ago||Like them||
I hate to say this l, because I am pretty strong against any form of alternative uniforms (I have a nicely manicured lawn that I would really appreciate your whippersnappers staying off of), but these look pretty nice. Not as nice as our traditional home uniforms, but as alternative uniformzzz go, these are the best I have seen.
|1 week 4 days ago||Still stupid||
Your response conflates two separate arguments that you are making. My point about a polo short or other athletic clothing was in direct response to your point that it seems odd to wear football mesh clothing when not playing football. Your comeback taking about kids' numbers (and saying that it is weird for an adult to wear a jersey with a kids number) is a totally different point.
|1 week 4 days ago||Stupid||
Do you wear polo shirts when you are not playing polo? Do you wear athletic pants (mesh, dri fit, sweat, whatever) when you I are not playing sports? How about sneakers when you are not working our or playing sports?
|1 week 4 days ago||Serious answer||
For my jerseys, I just get the number of a player who I like. My favorite is my #2, purchased while I was a student. I also have a #1 and a #16. My wife has a #1, and my older son has #1, #16 and #98. He loves to wear them to school.
|1 week 4 days ago||Your post||
All I got from your post is that you wrote "I am a douche". I agree, you are.
|1 week 4 days ago||Jerseys||
I absolutely hate when people post "I dont wear jerseys because I am xx years old" on these types of threads. I don't care how old you are. If you like jerseys, wear em. If you don't like jerseys, don't. There is no rule that you have to be a certain age to wear jerseys. That is just silly and pretentious. Is my 7 year old son too young to wear a polo shirt if he comes with me to a work event?
|1 week 5 days ago||Go blue||
22 days to go until football.
|1 week 5 days ago||But||
Is he a shooter? Deceptively athletic? Perhaps a great leader?
|2 weeks 6 days ago||My thoughts||
I get that our OL is going to be young an inexperienced. And that it was a tire fire last year. But, while I do not expect an OL that will manhandle opponents on every down, I think that we will see a big jump in production for last year because of the following factors:
|5 weeks 2 min ago||Exactly||
I am getting sick of the anti-Brandon whining. First, people are upset that the ticket prices are so high and the home schedule so crappy. I get it - that's fair. But, now Brandon goes ahead and does something nice for the season ticket holders - those same poor unfortunate souls who are being victimized by high prices and crappy opponents- and that's bad, as well. Gimme a break. Rewarding those who are willing to pony up $$ for a season pass (especially with our poor home schedule) this year is not a bad thing. It's actually a nice gesture that is similar to what many teams do for their season ticket holders.
|6 weeks 19 hours ago||Tragedy||
|12 weeks 1 day ago||Bs||
We totally got screwed. How the hell did Nebraska get a better bowl than us, given our relative records, strength of schedule, quality wins etc. This is total BS and we were screwed as usual.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||Nice job||
I like that you don't have us "beating everyone but ND, PSU, Sparty and Ohio. Many people (including me in my post down thread) take it for granted that we will win all of the games against anyone who is not a big time program. We are not there yet. Losses to Indiana and Northwestern level teams are certainly possible.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||My $.02||
1. Over - we won 7 last year. On defense, where many of our contributors were young, we return pretty much everyone and add some serious talent in the form of Peppers. Another year of playing together and another year of experience and offseason s&c for the younger kids should result in big time improvement. On offense, it is pretty clear that Borges' complicated schemes were a big part of the line problems. That should be corrected by Nuss. Gardner returns with another year of experience, we have a stable of very good backs and a whole bunch of talented (and admittedly young) receivers. In short, all of the tools are there to be great on offense and at a minimum decent on offense. With our weak schedule , there should be 8 wins as a base, and I assume that we win one or two of PsU, ND , Ohio and Sparty. PSU should really be realign the sanctions this year with talent coming in but not much upper class talent on the roster (think us over the past 2 years), ND is pretty loaded so not much to say there, ohio's O-line looks like a potential weakness and Sparty lost a ton of talent this past offseason. So, we should be anywhere from 8-4 to 10-2. I bet on 9 wins.
|12 weeks 4 days ago||Subtle||
What you did there . . . I see it. Well played.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||advantage Michigan||
For those that are complaining about this, keep in mind that for the year that the tourney is played in NYC, this move effectively turns the BTT into a Michigan home game. The reality in NYC and metro-NYC is that of all of the B1G schools, Michigan has by far the largest and most passionate fanbase. I have attended the games that our team played at MSG and Barklays for the past two seasons, and the crowd at both games was heavily weighted with Michigan fans. Other than Rutgers (not exactly a basketball power), I don't see any team taking more than 1/3 of the tickets in a game against Michigan.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||awesome||
So much good stuff in that one. The Punting Laboratory and the Zook dialogue really had me laughing. Well done.
|16 weeks 14 hours ago||Woodson||
Given Brian's YMRMFSPA, the funniness of your comment is enhanced by your avatar.
|16 weeks 1 day ago||agree / disagree||
I totally agree on all of the patience stuff. 100%.
As to the RR firing, I think that RR got something of a raw deal from the start. He didn't have the support of much of the fanbase or the administration, and even so many former players. He also was the victim of the Freep nonsense. Totally agree. Now, if we are being honest, RR did contribute to his own demise in some pretty significant ways. However, regardless of who was to blame in 2010, at the end of that season, it was pretty apparent to everyone that RR as head coach of Michigan football was not tenable going forward. He had lost just about the entire fanbase (even Brian said that he should be fired, I believe), including so many that had previously defended him. Because of so much of the noise surrounding the program, his ability to recruit - which is perhaps the most important responsibility of acoaching staff in terms of setting the program up for future success - was crippled. The media / publicity surrounding the program was resoundingly negative. And, some reports seem to indicate that he lost the team.
So at the end of 2010, what was Brandon going to do? Risk yet another year of all of the above continuiing, further crippling the program, or make a change. Again, I think that RR was on the receiving end of a crappy deal in Ann Arbor, but at the end of 2010, after the embarrassment of a bowl game that we endured, and a complete collapse in recruiting, do either of you really believe that the right move was to keep RR?
|16 weeks 1 day ago||JV squad||
That's a very important point that I think that many of the 10-2 or bust crowd simply don't want to acknowledge. Had we suffered a severe sanction from the NCAA for stretching-gate in which we had to sit out an entire year of recruiting in 2009 and had 15 scholarships taken away in 2010, we would actually be in better shape than we are now. Any program suffering such sanctios would take a decade to climb out of it. It is a testament to this entire coaching staff (ok, Borges may not have been the right guy for such a young roster as his schemes seemed not to take into account the youth and learning curve), that we have done as well as we have.
|16 weeks 1 day ago||stupid post||
That is a ridiculous position. So if Hoke goes 11-1 in the regular season, but loses to OSU in overtime (on the road), as OSU caps an undefeated season and clinches the championship game slot for the division, you would fire Hoke? How about if he goes 10-2 with losses to MSU and and one other team (say NW) but trounces OSU on the road giving OSU their only loss (yet still leaving Michigan left out of the BIG CG)?
It's like you didn't even read Brian's post - the point of the post is that Hoke is still dealing with a roster that has gaping holes as a result of numerous factors that can be attributed in varying percentages to numerous people / circumstances, but for which Hoke has zero responsibility. Unless you expect hoke to get out on the firld and play RG, there is a limit on how much a coach can do with a roster that is just broken.
One my hypothetical question. If Devin Gardner decides that he would rather play water polo than football and Shane Morris is injured in the first game of the season, do you still ascribe to your CG or die view for Hoke?
|16 weeks 1 day ago||context||
I think that this post gives great context that needs to be kept in mind when eveluating Hoke's tenure so far. Hoke's success to date has roughly tracked the number of upperclassmen contributing to the roster. Thus, in 2011, Hoke had great success with a team made up of seniors and juniors from Carr's last class and RR's first. In 2012, as those seniors graduated, we were forced to play far more younger players, and started to experience depth issues at several positions. By 2013, the effect of this was at its greatest, as our roster was amongst the youngest in the league.
I know that many on this blog like to refer to the youth explanation for the past 2 season's struggles as an "excuse," but it is a valid excuse. There is a real physical difference between an 18-19 year old kid and a 22-23 year old man. Similarly, experience and continuity does make a difference. For those who doubt the effect of upperclassmen, experience and continuity, take a look at the player retention rate at MSU - towards the top of the conference. In his first three years, Dantonio had 7 wins, 9 wins and 6(!!) wins. Certainly worse than Hoke. It wasn't until his 4th year when the rubber really hit the road for him. Had MSU fans over-reacted and canned him after 3 years, they would certainly have missed out on success that they are currently enjoying. Wisconsin is another example of a program that has historically had greater success than their recruiting ranking because of stability.
While 2014 is Hoke's 4th year, given the crater that he inherited, especially at OL (one F'ing recruit over a 2-year span is unheard of), a real argument can be made that he is entitled to get to 2015 if this next season is anything better than a total disaster. What our program need most not is not a hot, splashy coach. It needs spability so that the craters in the roster caused by 2009-10 are completely filled.
|16 weeks 2 days ago||Optimism||
My optimism beanie must be working overtime, but I am actually looking forward to this season. Why, you ask? Some thoughts:
1. The defense. Even playing a ton of underclassmen, our defense was solidly average. The problem was the because of our youth, we were forced (or GMAT felt it best) to play a very non-aggressive style of play. Fortunately, we lose virtually nobody of any significance, meaning that we should see a better, older, more experienced version of last year's D. And spring buzz seems to indicate that we will be playing a more aggressive style of play, which should provide even further benefit. If the defense goes to solidly above average (not great), we should be able to contain everyone on the schedule that is not MSU, OSU, ND and throw in one other game here.
2. The OL. Last year was a shit show, and most people are expecting further regression because we lose both tackles to the NFL. Without opening a big debate on Lewan's character or Borges, I think that it is safe to say that anyone watching Michigan football last year could figure out that something more was going on with the line than youth, crappy players, lack of experience, lack of execution or some other quantifiable metric. Something was really off. Practice quotes seem to indicate the Borges was running a scheme that was just too complex for young players to quickly pick up, lead to frequent missed assignments. Nuss seems like he is doing the opposite.
3. QB - While Devin has been with the program forever, people forget that last year was his first as the starting QB from day 1. The prior season, he came in 2/3 of the way through and ran an offense designed for Denard. You can really look at last year as his redshirt freshman or sophmore campaign. This season, he comes in with another full offseason of practice as QB and a full season and a half as starting QB under his belt. I expect an even better Devin.
4. RB - I liked Fitz as much as anyone, but he was just a poor fit for the offense that we ran. And he couldn't pick up a blitz to save his life. If we even get to approaching competency from the OL, I expect Green, Hayes and Smith to be a huge upgrade at the RB spot.
5. Overall team chemistry - Seems like Hoke aluded to the fact (and numerous posters on here seem to indicate) that Lewan was a crappy leader, and that there was some friction on the line and with the team. Hopefully, regardless of whether it was Lewan or some other seniors on the team, we are entering a phase where Hoke's "character" recruits take over leading the team and the team can gel as a cohesive unit. Lack of locker room chemistry is not uncommon in years 2 and 3 of a coaching change as the kids from the prior regime begin to feel left out of the center as their playing time is eaten up by younger players who committed to the new staff. This problem should largely be gone this year.
So, will we win a National Championship? Likely not even close, but I do expect improvement.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||media||
While I personally like the Carr mentality of never speaking to the press except when required to, Hoke is kind of damned either way. When he speaks to the press, even when he accepts responsibility and doesn't blame a single other individual, he is called out for "throwing people under the bus." When he doesn't address issues with the press or provide insight, he is accused of "hating the fans" or refusing to acknowledge the problem.
Personally, I don't think that he said a thing wrong - he accepted a lot of blame and didn't call out a single member of this or last year's team. The fact is that anyone watching could see that the team lacked chemistry, cohesiveness and leadership. Many on this blog noticed it. Hoke is simply conceding that there was a problem and discussing a method that he has employed to fix it.