- Member for
- 7 years 32 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|5 years 17 weeks ago||You two are definitely||
You two are definitely correct about what the more consistent titles would be, but I don't think it's useful from an information perspective to assign the development/deploy outcomes of the defense to Rodriguez. What part of the development and deployment was he involved in? He's responsible for it yes. His defensive coordinator decisions got Michigan there yes. But he didn't do it himself. He did do the offense himself. If Michigan was more of a Mack Brown CEO type head coach, the rampant delegation would make me not even bother to mention his offenses or defenses as Mack Brown's. It would certainly explain their recent collapse despite Mack Brown still being there, being responsible, and having great recruiting.
I guess my point is you can be technical and make sure you blame the man at the top which is reasonable, but if you're looking for the guy who did the job (chosen to do it by rodriguez), you go for the highest guy who's actively involved and has the real power to make it work. For offense that's Rodriguez, for Defense it was GERG (Nothwithstanding Rodriguez insisting on 3-3-5's at inopportune times, or other bad veto's he might have made. He's not showing the DL how to take a step or calling blitzes here).
|5 years 25 weeks ago||I hope I'm not echoing anyone||
I hope I'm not echoing anyone else in this thread, as there seems to be many long responses not available to a quick skim haha but I would like to say that the OP's CMO's idea of basing your understanding of the market on your competition is probably the most offensively angering thing I've ever heard about marketing haha. It doesn't matter what your competitors are doing, it matters what the customer wants. Focusing on the competition instead of the customer for what you should do is the shortcut to A) guaranteeing you're always behind the curve, since you only understand something once they do it and they make the rules and B) ruins the marketplace because you teach customers what they want making it riskier to give them what they really want if by total accident you figured it out. I cannot believe any chief marketing officer would genuinely believe that maxim even in a mature or declining market. It might be okay as a rule of thumb for people just starting out but as a way to inform your marketing strategy even medium term it's like focusing on the "what" instead of the "why". And marketing so desperately needs an understanding of the why because of how indirect its methods and effects are.
Sort of beside the point with respect to Michigan, but I fear for said CMO and whoever made him CMO with those kinds of attitudes. Yikes.
|5 years 52 weeks ago||Definitely Starcraft, not||
Definitely Starcraft, not Warcraft 2 or 3.
|6 years 2 days ago||If "getting it" is spending||
If "getting it" is spending your time fretting over the trivia of the past and gargling past players' members, no wonder Michigan has been in trouble for so long. They do realize football is still played at michigan? Michigan hasn't "won" football once and for all yet, or maybe hoke doesn't "get that". Tradition and all that but damn.
This kinda stuff being accepted as obviously the way Michigan is and needs to be treated is kind of disappointing.
No more missed tackles is good though. Not that most coaches don't subscribe to the "tackling" school of stopping ballcarriers. But you know.
|6 years 12 weeks ago||Those caveats about this are||
Those caveats about this are ridiculous. They have extra time to prepare... being small? The Wisconsin O destroyed them on thier first drive with enormous holes just like anyone would predict. Wisconsin's size mattered and in a big way. Except that it stopped mattering after that first drive and speed from massively smaller defensive linemen won our enormously. They were tons bigger and made enormous holes early on, and then they scored 11 points in the final 55 minutes. Speed can and does beat size on the defensive line. No caveats required. "can it be sustained" is pretty dumb too. They do it in the NFL for a 20 game season in indianapolis and whatnot. Why can't they do it with an 8 game conference slate?
TCU's defense was first in the nation, it demolished wisconsins 50-80 point scoring offense for the whole game after getting pushed around early, and there are no redeeming caveats to dissuage saying that speed can definitively beat size and experience on the offensive line, in any league and locale.
|6 years 12 weeks ago||I was going to ask the same||
I was going to ask the same thing. Haven't we suffered enough? Well, besides that we don't have to run gassers and get our bodies caved in while also suffering the losses. But besides that.
|6 years 17 weeks ago||One Year does not define a||
One Year does not define a rivalry, no matter how much MSU would want it to.
And what does basketball have to do with football? If we're gonna look at more than one sport lets look at the big picture. Let's also look at how many people show up for basketball games. Okay. And how many show up for football games. Alright. Might as well include all the sports if we really want to make a comparison like that. Let's check the director's cup standings. Oh.
|6 years 17 weeks ago||It's sane because it's a||
It's sane because it's a different year. We're not putting quarters in a vending machine here buddy. Lets keep things real and take it easy on the irrelevant non-sequiters.
|6 years 17 weeks ago||I like how you equate||
I like how you equate offensive success to team success there. Didn't we put more points on wisconsin in a half than Michigan's put on them in a decade? Points or no points a young team will win when it has more points than the other team. Just a little football protip for you there.
|6 years 17 weeks ago||Fantastic||
|6 years 18 weeks ago||he used the word "myopic" in||
he used the word "myopic" in there somewhere. That describes you and the childishness with which you evaluate michigan (a team, clearly not your team).
|6 years 19 weeks ago||There's a lot of negativity||
There's a lot of negativity in here over this. It's completely legitimate to see that kind of swing, considering how ridiculously counter-intuitive it is. How many people looked at the line and thought "Almost a touchdown win for Wisconsin? not a chance" and put money on michigan.
It might be based on statistics because Michigan seems to have "lost" via the spread many weeks in a row and they might think that they're "due", especially given wisconsin's history in ann arbor and because the spread allows a field goal win for wisconsin to still be a winning bet on michigan.
Basically a lot of factors that don't pay attention to the intricacies of these exact iterations of the team.
|6 years 19 weeks ago||It's somewhat myopic to||
It's somewhat myopic to suggest that a single arbitrary game's outcome is the definition of that team's ability across a month, let alone a season or between years. Boise State had to squeak by a Virginia Tech team who spotted them 21 points in the first quarter, and that is THIS season. Oh and that same team lost to James Madison. (Side note, purdue SHOULD have beaten oregon last year and lost by 2. Is Boise State = Purdue from last year valid? then again that purdue team dominated OSU so you can see whatever you want)
If we're going to pick arbitrary games. Boise State this season is as good as Virginia Tech. Virginia Tech is somewhere between a good team and an FCS team. We've built up a lot of evidence that teams like that have no shot against Oregon. No problem.
Anything can happen but when both teams have a one-game season instead of just Boise State, considering Oregon has probably beaten more actual teams this year than Boise has in the past 3 years, it's well within reason to think Oregon is going to bury them just like they have everyone else (and if they'd just scored the TD at the end of the Cal Game instead of kneeling it out there'd be less outrage, but the box score makes it look like an escape)
|6 years 19 weeks ago||It's tough to consider||
It's tough to consider yourself little brother when Michigan has been so historically dominant, including recent huge stretches like OSU has right now. I'm pretty sure It's fair game to wish ill on your rivals even when you're not playing them, and the fact is there IS an upside to losing even if it's not as big of an upside as winning. That's sort of what an upside is. If you want to ignore reality and think OSU winning the big ten every year has no bearing on Michigan that's your choice, but there's no need to get on peoples' case for not following your lead.
Wisconsin is damned if we do, OSU is damned if we don't. That's good news all around that's what that is. And if you think talking about it in this manner somehow jinxes the team, that's pretty silly. Those boyos work out and practice for decades and you think message board phantasms are gonna determine the outcome? Focusing on that stuff is... lame.
|6 years 19 weeks ago||Denard didn't lose a step but||
Denard didn't lose a step but it might be the knee brace or something. He banged that knee, got the brace, and then was a little off against Michigan State. If toussaint gets caught from behind by linebackers because of his knee brace, denard might not be invulnerable to its unbalancing effects. Maybe he doesn't wear it anymore but it's a thought since he's been banged up so much.
|6 years 19 weeks ago||Maybe people are more likely||
Maybe people are more likely to want to watch Denard Robinson light things up in a bowl game than the walkon and the wounded of Penn State? I don't think it's unreasonable for Michigan to get a good bump because of the potential offensive fireworks and it being the first in 3 years. People were making a big deal about Notre Dame slithering into BCS bowls at 9-3 because even though they were terrible it's about the money and in this economy they can't afford to take chances with ticket sales and TV eyeballs.
|6 years 19 weeks ago||I'm pretty sure he gave up at||
I'm pretty sure he gave up at least 6 figures to play or keep playing football for RR and then try the NFL.
Pryor really has nothing to offer the NFL besides his name, which is all he's had to show off since high school. He should have gone to Oregon.
|6 years 22 weeks ago||Why don't you go be a fan of||
Why don't you go be a fan of those teams then? Perspective usually extends longer than 1 year, also longer than 5 years.
The more you think of this as Michigan versus every other team in college football combined, the more you'll be disappointed because newsflash Michigan wins the national championships sometimes, the rest of college football wins the national championships the rest of the times. Have some perspective on that.
|6 years 23 weeks ago||The initial linebackers and||
The initial linebackers and defensive coordinator hires were somewhat disastrous for on the field and recruiting and such. If Casteel comes everyone is on the same page from day 1 and things are at least marginally better on defense every year since RR shows up.
Casteel is from there isn't he? He probably wanted someone to stay behind to afford some kind of continuity for the program instead of losing literally the entire coaching staff except their cranially challenged special teams coach/new head coach.
But then if wannstache just hadn't beaten WVU in the last game of that season... oh how the dominos fall.
|6 years 23 weeks ago||21-17 Mich||
|6 years 24 weeks ago||35-31||
|6 years 24 weeks ago||I think the main issue with||
I think the main issue with that is a question of competence or relative competence. Pryor improving relative to himself in the past isn't relevant. Being dominant for stretches "if you really look at it" doesn't help either. If you're the best player and you're at defensive tackle maybe it doesn't show. If you're even a great player at QB it will show. If you're even a good player at QB for ohio state and just let it happen you might win a national championship. There really isn't anything distinctive about him. He's not the best at anything and he's not the best on average. He's played 25 and in his only marquee game the impressive thing that happened on the team was the defense was able to stop oregon.
Also it's worth debating Pryor's merits since his high school hype is having a strange effect several years later, possibly bumping more deserving candidates out of the limelight and away from awards. People whine about the BCS, the guy hasn't done anything spectacular since high school and he was the frontrunner for heisman. Scary stuff.
|6 years 25 weeks ago||Score 30+ and hold on. They||
Score 30+ and hold on. They should put that on a board in the locker room. Very apt at the moment.
|6 years 25 weeks ago||They need to win big games||
They need to win big games against good teams. That's easier with Denard. Much harder than without him.
|6 years 25 weeks ago||Seconded. As far as I could||
Seconded. As far as I could tell it was the 4th quarter before a dropped or errant pass, and lots of floaters and diving grabs that were all made handily. MSU has more running potential than Indiana but as far as passing goes it'll be really hard for them to duplicate.
So Michigan's defense has trouble with senior teams who execute really well? Tough to be mad about that. Football is still football.
|6 years 25 weeks ago||45 completions for 480 yards||
45 completions for 480 yards and... 35 points? Clearly there's more going on here. How many quarterbacks get 45 attempts let alone completions.
|6 years 25 weeks ago||I honestly don't see why||
I honestly don't see why anyone would want to draft Pryor anyway. To do what? He wins at OSU but then he isn't really a standout at anything. He's an athlete but the NFL is full of athletes and the NCAA has much much better actual QBs on offer than Pryor. He couldn't even get drafted as a wildcat Pat-white style experiment, especially after what happened with pat white discouraging it.
What does Pryor offer a team that would make it worth drafting him in the top 3 rounds? Not as a QB, not as an RB, not as a WR. Where would you play him?
|6 years 26 weeks ago||What let us down in the Ohio||
What let us down in the Ohio State game? Oh right.
|6 years 27 weeks ago||having free time = bad thing?||
having free time = bad thing? Live a little boyo. It's good for you. And for us when this is the result.
|6 years 27 weeks ago||I was thinking of being||
I was thinking of being articulate in pointing out how you're factually incorrect, but this is almost troll levels of stupid so this is all you get.