Mike Lantry, 1972
- Member for
- 2 years 28 weeks
|1 year 15 weeks ago||Why not get upset at Dave||
Why not get upset at Dave Brandon? Michigan is incredibly important to the Big Ten as the co-biggest ticket item with OSU. That means Michigan has a boatload of leverage on things like this, and Brandon did nothing.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||Great stuff. His pocket||
Great stuff. His pocket presence is remarkably good. Also, I'd kill for Denard to scramble as much as Gardner does.
|1 year 16 weeks ago||I don't have any complaints||
I don't have any complaints about the charting of Gardner. I don't think there's any argument that he had a good enough day passing, but not an exceptional one. However, for his first ever start after playing WR all year, I am mentally "rounding up" a bit.
Really though, Gardner's willingness to scramble is what made him more effective IMO in the passing game than Denard. Denard just doesn't scramble, he just doesn't. His worst throws tend to come on plays when he absolutely should be scrambling, whereas Gardner is perfectly happy to tuck and just run somewhere. That's the best way to minimize risk in the passing game really. So to me, that makes Gardner more effective as a passer and makes me optimistic for next year as I think he's a much more natural Borges fit than Denard - Borges will probably be more comfortable next year calling plays with Gardner since passing with Gardner is a bit less risky since he's so willing to just run. I don't think it's dumb for this game to make us optimistic at the thought of a whole spring camp with nothing but Gardner getting reps in an offense Borges is better at managing.
However, there's no doubt that Denard really does an amazing job at masking our terrible, terrible running game. Gardner can't do that - he isn't the natural runner that Denard is. We're just a totally different team with each QB. Saying Gardner should be our starter over healthy Denard is still stupid.
|1 year 18 weeks ago||Logged in just to say this is||
Logged in just to say this is the worst comment I've seen on this board in a long time. I see he has -899825 MGoPoints. My only question is, why isn't it lower? Surely that calls for at least -1million right? Just another thousand or so is needed.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||I'll be much more bummed if||
I'll be much more bummed if we miss out on him than Green or anyone else. It's been way too long since we've had a true elite WR.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||Got it, thanks. Complaint||
Got it, thanks. Complaint redcated then.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||If Saban can produce some||
If Saban can produce some concrete data that shows injuries increase as tempo increases, then I'd be ok with considering something like this. I strongly suspect that will not be possible though, so definitely no, it should not be regulated.
|1 year 21 weeks ago||Why is Thorin a mod here? I||
Why is Thorin a mod here? I don't post much, and the first time I tried to blockquote I messed it up. I edited it, fixed a few, then went back to fix the rest and he locked it so I was unable to edit it. Just seemed so childish, but whatever. Now we're losing a very cool UFR feature because he's whiny.
|1 year 22 weeks ago||I will say, despite how||
I will say, despite how frustrating Borges is with the Denard offense, I am at least encouraged about what things will look like in a few years with Shane Morris slinging the ball downfield to big receivers sprung open by Borges Sorcery. I do believe he'll be a good coordinator once the right personnel is in place, but this stopgap time with such a unique player at QB is so frustrating.
|1 year 23 weeks ago||Good stuff. I'm especially||
Good stuff. I'm especially interested to see Morgan's progression from last year. He struggled a lot last year, but he was the Least Terrible at the weakest position on the field. He seems far more comfortable out there, and he's become a respectable starter now in his 2nd year. This gives me a lot of hope for the upsides of Bolden, Clark, Ross, etc. I feel like the individual position coaching upgrade under this regime is just as noticeable as the scheme upgrade.
|1 year 23 weeks ago||I'm stepping into||
I'm stepping into dangerous territory bringing this up, but did anyone else watch the Oregon/Arizona game and get an enormous sense of deja vu? NOT trying to bring up old debates, and yes I know it's his first year and all that, but I just thought Arizona's performance looked really familiar. In the first half especially they moved the ball at will against Oregon and just couldn't score. I think they were something like 0/6 in the red zone, including weird turnovers, special teams gaffes, failed 4th down conversions, crappy fumble recovery luck, etc. I remember watching the first two drives and being envious of the offense design and thinking how familiar it all looked, and then I saw the repeated collapses and continued lack of points and remembered how familiar that felt too.
I don't know, it was just interesting. I'm vaguely interested in seeing how he does there, but NO please don't schedule Arizona. Please.
|1 year 23 weeks ago||I can't believe Brian hasn't||
I can't believe Brian hasn't seen that and mentioned it.
|1 year 23 weeks ago||Please, please, please some||
Please, please, please some NFL team hire Chip Kelly. I'm dying to see him take a crappy team and try to go all-in and see what happens.
|1 year 24 weeks ago||I've seen no evidence to||
I've seen no evidence to suggest spread punts get blocked more often...
|1 year 25 weeks ago||Heiko keeps transcribing the||
Heiko keeps transcribing the bubble screen banter and insisting it's happening, and we keep seeing videos uploaded without that question present. I keep envisioning the press conference ending and Borges running back to the video guy and slipping him a $20 to make sure the bubble screen stuff gets cut out of the video just to troll us all. I KNOW THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||I don't think any amount of||
I don't think any amount of rationalization will really make me feel better. The only thing that will do that is results against non-Alabama teams.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||Not sure what happened. I||
Not sure what happened. I fixed some of them and tried to fix the rest and now I can't edit it. Oops.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||I don't know, I read it, and||
I don't know, I read it, and sure you're entitled to your opinion, but my opinion is you're wrong. The main issue here is this statement:
The glaring thing is from reading these things you've written, it's pretty obvious your level of knowledge is below Brian's. That's totally fine. However, it doesn't give you great credentials to make that statement. Second, if you're going to say it, it needs to be backed up intelligently. Paragraphs like this:
That's a total mess. Problems with this paragraph alone:
1) It implies Smith is a better runner than Denard and Denard only gets his yards off constraint plays. That is ludicrous.
2) Denard got most of his yards off scrambles/improvisation in this game and not runs. So I'm not even sure where you're getting this point from.
3) The constraint thing is just not even true. What was the defense cheating against exactly?
This is yet another example of a statement that is kind of crazy. Also, your whole premise for this statement was that Alabama was bigger & faster and THAT'S why it didn't work, and therefore that's why it doesn't work in the NFL... Um, in the NFL the teams are pretty much equals. Make up your mind which it is ;). Finally:
STOP NO NO NO PLEASE NOT THIS AGAIN.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||So relieved to hear Lewan is||
So relieved to hear Lewan is fine. Could use some good news.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||Did you miss the 10k+ words||
Did you miss the 10k+ words Brian has written the last few days? Little bit of an unusual week here.
|1 year 26 weeks ago||This actually reads so much||
This actually reads so much like Brian's writing that I assumed the disclaimer at the top meant Brian wrote it but Ace posted it for him. From seeing these comments though it sounds like I'm wrong. Or maybe I'm just whooshing really hard right now.
|1 year 27 weeks ago||I don't see why missing a||
I don't see why missing a game is an absolute necessity as a measure of integrity or something. I get the feeling that around here, the purpose is to maintain a bit of a superiority thing because we feel hypocritical after bashing MSU/ND for letting kids off on similar things. To me, this is a nonstarter. Policy should not be determined by what other schools do, so strike that out immediately.
Anyways, like somebody said, there are more punishments than missing a game. We have no idea what his is. I'm expecting he'll miss the game and I'm 100% behind Hoke if he sits him, but I'm not going to get all self-righteous if he plays either. Hoke has earned my trust to make the right decision here.
|1 year 27 weeks ago||I cheat and take the easy||
I cheat and take the easy way out. If Ohio is in a similar big nonconference game, I just watch without rooting for one team or the other. I try to watch it academically instead. I then conjure up my internal optimist and look at the outcome as a win-win. If Ohio wins, I grit my teeth and look at it as a badly-needed boost for the B1G. If Ohio loses, YESSSS OHIO LOST.
In the end though, my preference is always that Ohio plays really well and just barely loses at the very end of the game, preferably as painfully as possible. That way they lose (I'm happy) but the B1G team still "showed up" which spares us the embarassment we've gotten in recent years. I don't think there's really a right answer though.
|1 year 27 weeks ago||One request - if using the||
One request - if using the jump to break up articles is going to become a normal thing, is it possible to make the "read more" link jump to the spot you were reading? That's how most sites work, but this always returns me to the top, and I have to scroll or ctrl+f to find my place again. It's a minor thing so I don't care that much, but it would be a nice feature.
|1 year 27 weeks ago||It sounds like this is||
It sounds like this is against protocol, but it's been brought up here, so I'll ask. Can I get a brief explanation of who he-who-shall-not-be-named is and what he's done to gain so much infamy? Yes I plugged his name into the search bar and all I got was a bunch of threads where people were scolded for talking about him. Much appreciated.
|1 year 30 weeks ago||Nobody wants Kovacs?||
Nobody wants Kovacs?
|1 year 31 weeks ago||I don't think I really||
I don't think I really understand the stance of most people here on this kind of thing. I didn't understand the outrage over the Michael Floyd thing, and I don't understand the "he MUST miss several weeks" thing for this. Why is it a necessity that he must miss games for this? You have to consider the following things when determining a punishment:
1) Is this a first offense?
2) How did he respond when confronted, punished, etc?
3) What were the circumstances surrounding the incident?
4) How strong of a punishment is necessary to sufficiently communicate that this can never happen again?
If you get the answer to #1-3 and you feel the answer to #4 is something less severe than missing a game, then that's fine with me. Hoke seems like a very smart guy who handles his players well, so I'd trust his judgment. He's a nice blend between no-nonsense but also very human. If he thinks game suspension, great, if not, that's fine with me too because I trust hiim to do the due diligence on the above things. Shrug.
|1 year 41 weeks ago||I would say they definitely||
I would say they definitely sell Michigan, but there's an art to selling something without it necessarily appearing that you are selling it. You don't pull in the kind of recruiting classes Hoke and company have been doing without being a very sharp salesman. That doesn't mean those kids are lying, but it means Hoke and company are doing THAT good of a job that it doesn't feel like a sales pitch to the kids.
|1 year 43 weeks ago||Someone will give Denard a||
Someone will give Denard a shot at QB. I think people forget that Denard's numbers in college are actually much more impressive than Vick's ever were at Virginia Tech. Granted, Denard is in an offense that suits him more than VT's suited Vick, but it's not ludicrous for a team to seriously draft him as a QB. Drafting him in the first round to be a QB is probably silly, but given his sheer athleticism I wouldn't be shocked at all to see him go in the 2nd.
Even if he doesn't work out at QB, anyone with his level of disgusting athleticism will get him a shot as a WR/CB/return specialist. It's the same reason why teams like to draft stud OTs in the first round - even if they "bust" you just move them inside and they're fine. It's low-risk. Denard becomes low risk to some extent in the 2nd round and definitely in the 3rd because if he busts out at QB, you can always have him return punts and try to teach him WR/CB. He'll probably be the fastest guy on your team the moment you draft him, and that's always worth something in the NFL.
|2 years 1 week ago||Exactly||
I think a lot of commenters here are missing the point. The author is conceding that D/ST was horrific and the main problem. That said, if the offense was more efficient it might have been able to better overcome the defense, and it didn't. It's overall a pretty fair article, though I also think it's a bit short-sighted given I think it's safe to assume the offense would diversify a bit in year 2 of Denard (kinda like it did this year adding the veer and such).