This is maaaaybe premature there, ESPN. Maryland #1 FWIW.
- Member for
- 6 years 34 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|8 hours 17 min ago||Hmmm||
|1 day 8 hours ago||Well, then, I missed it||
At least I quantified it by "not sure if serious"? No, no, that doesn't make it any better.
I'll hang my head in shame and go to the corner now.
|1 day 8 hours ago||Bowl game location is my biggest issue||
Big Ten teams have to design their teams to be able to withstand November weather in the B1G. That means outside. Yet, you'll never see a bowl game, much less a playoff college football game, at Soldier Field or Lambo. Southern teams can design their playbook and teams based on optimal weather throughout the year and never have to concern themselves with cold and snow (rain, yes, but that's a different animal).
Come to Chicago and play Michigan or OSU or MSU in December. See how they handle it. I wish the B1G had the clout to say "we're going to demand an even share in playoff game locations with every other region" and actually have it come to fruition.
|1 day 8 hours ago||I kind of disagree||
I absolutely believe Harbaugh wants the opportunity to teach more kids the game of football. Exposure to high level coaches, both college and high school coaches, to teach football I think is a significant goal of him doing satellite camps. In my opinion, Harbaugh would like to do that every year if he could.
And I believe that that's an appropriate way to look at it. It's just when you have to attend multiple team's camps if you want to be evaluated for an offer that it becomes an obligation for kids as well as the coaches. But if teams still aren't performing satellite camps next year, I absolutely expect and agree that Harbaugh should do another tour, because that goal is still an achievable objective that these kids wouldn't otherwise get.
For the record, I think Harbaugh should continue to do a tour until he isn't allowed to anymore. I have absolutely zero issue with Harbaugh doing as many satellite camps as he wants until he's no longer allowed to do so.
|1 day 9 hours ago||That in and of itself is not a bad thing||
But when you have Alabama, Texas, Michigan, USC, OSU, PSU, Maryland, Florida, etc rolling into town, it becomes a bit of an obligation to the kids. Yes, it is an opportunity to show your stuff, no doubt, but it begins to take up all their time. It is a slippery slope once all schools start to do it, which they will. Currently, there is no issue, because so few teams are doing it. But I think it'd make sense to draw the line somewhere.
I think, in general, satellite camps are good. They do give kids free exposure to top notch coaching. The issue is lessened if coaching staffs are working together at the same camps (such as Sound Mind, Sound Body). So I'm all for the idea of satellite camps in a vacuum. But if each team is holding their own camps, and each is doing their own tour, etc, etc, it becomes a bit of an obligation to kids.
That's my only issue and why maybe there should be some limiting number. By no means should that number be zero.
|1 day 9 hours ago||Not sure if serious||
But beside the point that these guys aren't just spending time working out (they aren't in contact with their S&C programs), any team can take Morman players that go on missions (I believe MSU had one join the team this spring, for instance). Any team can take guys that are older than 18. I think most prefer the way they are currently operating though.
|1 day 9 hours ago||I can kind of understand them being against satellite camps||
I'm not against them, though I do think there should be a rule to limit them in some capacity so that kids don't just get bombarded millions of them (say, 3-5 per team).
But complaining about this is stupid. Pretty much every spring sport spends time down south during the winter/early spring because it's warmer. Every other sport is allowed to travel to some extent for practice. Football shouldn't be any different. Spending a week in Florida practicing hurts absolutely no body in any way what so ever.
|1 day 13 hours ago||Man, Rivals is gonna look really stupid||
When he plays DE.
|2 days 13 hours ago||That's my pick as well||
Those are my favorites as well, though it's clear that they sometimes get some pre-game talking points and talk to them multiple times a game, regardless of what happens on the field sometimes.
I also like Tirico, and while Gruden is all over the place, he is at least entertaining, optimistic, and every once and a while drops knowledge (not nearly enough, but at least it's evident he knows what he's talking about).
And while Al Michaels is getting up there in age, his voice is iconic. I can easily put up with Michaels/Collinsworth compared to most other teams. I'll throw Jim Nantz in as solid as well.
I honestly don't mind most announcing teams. I think every team tends to hate each one because at some point or another they talk up an opponent and talk down their team. My biggest problem is that I feel like if most of them actually put in the amount of work that should be expected from major media types, then they could be great. The collective knowledge at places like ESPN, CBS Sports, NBC Sports, etc. is crazy. Yet they come at us with hot takes. But I guess hot takes sell, so...
|5 days 11 hours ago||Concern for Peppers would be his lack of size||
He can knife through and beat blocks that way, but I'm not really sure his length allows him to be a player that consistently sets the edge. Think you still want him a little more split from the LOS or at the DB level.
|5 days 15 hours ago||It's the same principles||
It's just sometimes a guy will have his hand in the dirt and sometimes he'll be more of a standup guy, depending on his strengths and situation. FWIW, the WILL position is more of the DE/LB hybrid type, the SAM position is more of the Stevie Brown type.
|6 days 5 hours ago||Alright, last one||
1) Concerning this Swenson situation: either it was not adequately communicated and that led to what happened (which by the way, doesn't require ill intentions; no one is claiming Harbaugh wanted to ruin Swenson's dream) or it was effectively communicated and Swenson, his family, and his coaches are flat out liars, for no benefit for themselves. The former seems far, far more plausible. The latter involves logic that Judge Judy would have a field day with. But if the latter holds up, then anyone can plead the 5th and be not guilty.
2) The coaching staff doesn't need to overhaul everything they do. They need to be more effective in their communication with recruits to avoid misunderstandings and therefore bad press and leaving kids feeling they've been essentially lied to.
3) Multiple recruits have brought it up, back to the Stanford days. Whether all were as upset as Swenson or not isn't the point, the point is it can be improved. Be better tomorrow than today.
4) Being offered a week trip to Disney World and being sent to Michigan Adventure doesn't make things equal because they're both theme parks. Being offered a job at NASA and being forced to work at GM doesn't mean the same thing because they're both big places for engineers to work. Where he ended up is immaterial.
5) Several people negged me in this thread. Unless somehow they all came from you, it means they disagreed with me. Oh yeah, that's what they're for. And because I can't exchange points for goods and services, I'm not that concerned about it. But by the way, you didn't get negged by me until you claimed I was changing my argument by claiming being more straightforward, honest, and clear didn't have to do with communication; at that point it was clear we weren't just disagreeing, but that you were being dense.
6) Your first response to me was a snarky attack trying to negatively label me. You can't come back and play the respectfully disagree card.
|6 days 6 hours ago||Apology accepted||
|6 days 6 hours ago||Wow||
Being "straight forward, honest, and upfront with recruits in a timely manner" is "communicating better". If you can't comprehend that, well, now I understand this conversation we're having.
And I do have an idea of how many of these offers go out. They typically only go out to players the coaches have evaluated and are willing to take. They usually contain some outs (grades, position being filled, etc). They don't tend to go out "pending our evaluation or lack thereof" because the players have already been evaluated, because you don't send out written offers to guys you haven't evaluated or have evaluated and have deemed not good enough.
Saying "we will not consider you a commit unless we can evaluate you" is more straight forward, honest, and upfront - it's better communication - with a recruit then sending him a written offer and then urging him to also look at other schools. Because the latter is open to interpretation or, worse, misinterpretation. Pretty simple, and you have to be fairly dense not to understand that.
|6 days 6 hours ago||You give a kid a written offer later in the year||
You don't have to send him one in August. And just because a kid decommits, doesn't mean you can't still recruit him. There is nothing preventing the staff from still considering him based on his senior film, why would have have to be removed from consideration?
1. You camp, we evaluate you, and if we like you, we send you a written offer.
2. You don't camp, you're no longer considered a commit, we'll evaluate you on your SR year, we may send you a written offer pending your film.
With two choices, you have been clear with the kid regarding where he stands.
|6 days 6 hours ago||McKeon||
I appreciate not waking up a 6am for high school, but... welcome to winter conditioning, when waking up at 6am is sleeping in.
Also, I feel old with the "first album you bought with your own money". I mean, the actual albums make me feel old (The Carter III was listed by three players?). The fact that several list "none" makes me feel older. Yeesh
|6 days 8 hours ago||For the record||
I don't think Harbaugh speaks poorly. I just think he's eccentric in his speach because he's a bit all over the place with his thoughts, which to me doesn't equate to the tradional way I interpret "well spoken".
|6 days 8 hours ago||All these guys know their stuff||
They aren't buffoons. So excuse me if I don't put much credence into "guy who never played or coached football was impressed by how much guy who coached football for 20 years knew".
A lot of people around here do act like these guys are buffoons, and that they know better. It is exceedingly rare that anyone on here knows more than any of the coaches on any of Michigan's staffs know. That absolutely includes me. But that's not the issue, the issue is how they are relative to their counterparts, and that's where I think Funk failed.
Now, I think inexperience on the line did hurt Funk. I don't believe Molk or Lewan progressed a ton under Funk - they were already good - but they did improve a bit. So did other guys. I think Funk's biggest issue was teaching the fundamentals, and that showed. He didn't coach in a way to get across to inexperienced guys. He couldn't get guys from a 0 or a 3 to a 5. But he could get a guy from a 8 to a 9. When Michigan got really inexperienced on the OL, he didn't communicate effectively with them, and the OL failed.
So I agree with the poster above me, it was far less Hoke or Borges failing Funk than the other way around. Now, it's Hoke's fault he stuck with him, but the OL play was absolutely an issue first and foremost, and while youth and inexperience is a legit excuse, it only goes so far (and unfortunately for Funk, not far enough).
|6 days 9 hours ago||Yes, there were reports he should camp||
And he should have camped if he wanted to be in the class. But until that point, Michigan's staff hadn't evaluated him, so they shouldn't have given him a written offer. That's the point. Don't offer a formal scholarship in written form unless you have evaluated a player and are going to accept his committment.
It's not idle speculation. In this best case that has been presented for Michigan (the other side of the story), Michigan still should have communicated better. Which is why Brian's least favorite thing about this class or whatever was "Pick up the phone".
You're asking for more information then you will get in almost any situation; i.e. no one can be critical about anything. In the best case situation, Michigan wasn't clear enough, because we know they sent him a written offer.
|6 days 9 hours ago||I'm familiar with the situation||
At worst (Swenson's version), it's really bad. At best (the version the guy at Rivals reported a few others), it's still not good enough. The truth is likely somewhere in the middle.
That's why everyone from Brian to Harbaugh are saying it needs to be handled better. Swenson and his family may have been dense, that's why you leave no ambiguity. You don't offer a written scholarship to a kid you haven't evaluated. That simple. If he didn't want to come to camp, you tell him "you either camp and we evaluate you or we can no longer consider you a commit." That's direct, straightforward, and honest, so that it cannot be misinterpreted.
|6 days 9 hours ago||At least Purdue is almost all zone based||
They run a little power, but at least they are vast majority zone, which is what Funk was known for prior to being at Michigan.
Still, not sure it's a great hire for dying coaching staff.
|6 days 10 hours ago||Swenson had a written offer before he was evaluated||
That's poor communication. It should be cleaned up. Then this situation doesn't happen again.
That's straight forward, honest, and upfront with recruits in a timely manner. Hinting they should look elsewhere, no matter how strongly, starting at some point after the written offer has been given, isn't clear enough, because it leaves you open to what happened, and therefore criticism.
|6 days 10 hours ago||My guess would be David handles kickoffs||
David had a big leg in high school too, and that's a place where accuracy is a bit easier on a kicker (much fewer variables to deal with than FG kicking). Allen was very consistent as a kicker last year, and assuming he is next year (not always safe), you're not going to do much better. Maybe if they also want a long FG kicker (Allen has a strong leg at punting, not as much as a FG kicker) they go to a backup, but again, leg strength is not where David stuggles.
So I would also guess Nordin gets a RS, David takes over kickoffs and maybe longer FGs, and then we see Nordin as the primary kicker in '17. Really don't think anyone is close to Allen as a punter at the moment.
Also, has a kicker ever been a 4 star on any recruiting service? I knew Nordin was generally a 3 star, but was shocked to see him as a 4 star on scout.
|6 days 10 hours ago||Except I'm for the cause||
The cause being a better Michigan program. I'm critical, yes, but I'm not expressing concern just to be a critic. I express concern because I actually care, both for the program and for the kids (and I understand some are happy to kick kids to the curb once they no longer are associated with Michigan; but as someone who has coached a lot of kids that have ended up in a lot of places, I don't feel that way, it's personal to me).
I believe that describes most of the others that feel the way I do as well. That's not concern trolling. You labeling it as such is just trying to put a derogatory label on it. It's tu quoque, it's an attempt to attack character (in this case fanhood) rather than the argument. And that's why you're wrong in this instance.
|6 days 10 hours ago||I've only had two real problems with Harbaugh||
The lack of communication in the Swenson situation, and not having a max protect punt installed. The latter is mitigated with a clean snap and catch.
Sometimes I do think the adoration is a bit over the top and effusive. Really, all I was addressing above was "so well spoken, intelligent, godly..." The rest I largely agree with.
I was reading a MSU blog the other day talking about how lucky someone would be to have Dantonio as a mentor and how much better they'd be because of it and how much better off they'd be then with other coaches. That was more than a bit much. But that's how fans feel, I get it. But generally it still feels over the top to me applied to any of these guys. I'm a really, really big Harbaugh fan and I couldn't be happier he's at Michigan. But sometimes the over-the-top praise is just a bit much for me.
Also, in this situation, I like Harbaugh for what Harbaugh is. When Rich Rod was hired I liked some of his relaxed personality with the press, because that's who he was (so did others until he stopped winning). When Hoke was the coach at Michigan, I liked how he handled coach speak, basically saying nothing but having a wry grin (others did at the start and then stopped when he wasn't winning).
But I wouldn't claim Rich Rod or Hoke linguists, nor would I for Harbaugh. I loved the way Carr spoke during press conferences, but I wouldn't want Harbaugh to do that, because that's not who Harbaugh is. I like Harbaugh for what he actually is: a supremely focused, off the wall, intense. It's entertaining. It could go anywhere. But it isn't what the person I responded to described, in my opinion.
And honestly, part of it may be the same reason Brian was guarded against Hoke praise at the start of Hoke's tenure: because he went all in on defending Rich Rod against what were unfair attacks. I believe I did that with Hoke in many ways, and maybe now I'm a bit reluctant to see the same shift from effusive, over-the-top praise to something less than that once a few more losses inevitably occur.
|6 days 10 hours ago||I don't think Gary starts||
1) It doesn't really matter who starts. All guys will get some snaps, those that play better in their early snaps will get more later in the game. For the sake of the program, getting "starts" added to the stat line likely helps the older guys for now.
2) While Gary certainly has high upside, as a young player, he also comes with some downside. Michigan's returning DL can almost always do enough to take momentum to start the game. Michigan doesn't need a spark from someone, because the upside doesn't justify the potential bust that may give the opponent momentum.
3) DL (and really both sides of the LOS) require great technique. Gary has never consistently had to go against college level athletes and consistently utilize his technique. I want players that are more consistent in their technique starting when the opponent is fresh and focused at the start of the game. Let Gary come in when the opponent is more in the redundancy of the game, a little more worn down. At that point he can get by with a little less consistency in technique and utilize his athleticism and size to win match ups (while continually improving technique).
4) Gary can be used in a way like Peppers was used on offense: fit him where you need him. He's a swing guy. Plug him in at any position you want along the DL, depending on match up, scheme, who's playing well, whatever. But get that information first, then put him, as a young player, in a position to have early success.
NT - 1. Glasgow 2. Mone 3. Hurst
3T - 1. Hurst 2. Wormley 3. Gary 4. Godin
SDE - 1. Wormley 2. Taco 3. Gary 4. Godin
WDE - 1. Taco 2. Gary 3. Marshall
Obviously, guys can only play one spot at a time. So that's how you slide Gary in. WDE (I think just called a Backer now) may change depending on specifically what Brown wants to do at the position. May go to more of a LB type, at which point Gary/Taco may plug in there less.
Gary may immediately have a starting role, such as a 3rd down pass rusher either at the 3T or SDE position, but that would leave him on the sideline to start the game technically.
|6 days 12 hours ago||I'd say Harbaugh is much more entertaining||
But I don't know about well spoken. I love Harbaugh, love his mindset, and completely understand it, but what makes his press conferences so entertaining is that he's all over the place. His coach speak is just whatever his first thought is and run with it.
Q: What did you think about that big hit during the game?
JH: Well, it was big, yeah. I remember back in '86, with Bo, ya know, he liked to make sure people were tough, really drinking their milk. And I remember Billy, Billy Harris - he was a mean son of a gun - he didn't get picked up on a little inside stunt. POW! Hardest hit I ever felt. So I, yeah, you know, it's football. The hits come fast and they come hard. Have to be a football player out there. Onto the next play. It's a physical sport.
It's great, because you get wild stories. Instead of the story above it might be about how hard America hit the Nazis on some bombing run, or about how hard Cecil Fielder hit a home run, or it might be about all those things. It's going to get weird. It's going to be sporadic, rapid fire thoughts and sentences. It's great. It's entertaining. But he's not speaking Lloyd Carr poetry up there.
|6 days 13 hours ago||I think this is why Michigan fans brought up Swenson||
First full year of recruiting in a while now. Did you learn anything you’d want to do differently the second year around, whether it’s communicating things or your approach to the way you handle different recruiting situations?
“Yeah. Like in anything, we want to be better today than we were yesterday, better tomorrow than we were today. I can say this: we did our best. There were mistakes made. I take full accountability for them, but I don’t apologize and we’ll keep forging on.”
People want to label fans that brought up the Swenson situation "bad fans" or "concern trolls" or some other name that is supposed to be derogatory. And I understand, Harbaugh has a chance to win, he's currently on the right path to win a lot, so it's "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" and act like you have to be happy with everything going on in the program. And if not, then you're a bad fan, you're contaminating the program, you're driving the outside media to discuss Michigan in a negative light.
I disagree with that. Harbaugh gains media attention, positive and negative, regardless of the fan reaction. Fans just have the opportunity to voice their concern or lack of concern, which has the opportunity to maintain the program as is or make changes with the program. Outside perception may cause harm in some ways, but it's inside perception that can make real change and improve upon the program that we care about.
Yesterday, someone posted a thread about how Bama was grayshirting some kids, and more than half the posts were related to "Michigan fans would burn the coach for this" or other things that related that situation to the Swenson situation. To me, that's the problem. I don't want to be at the same level as Bama's recruiting tactics, I don't want to be in the same breath as their recruiting tactics. I understand it isn't exactly the same, but even the fans railing against what happened being a bad thing are bringing it up in the same breath. Rivals and the outside media are of course going to do at least that. It's a perception, whether people like it or not.
And it can be improved upon. It can improve the program. The negative perception can be mitigated to essentially negligible. And I understand the Swenson situation is unlikely to consistently have a huge impact. But in recruiting, it's the small impacts that sway recruits many times, when all else is near or at equalilty. And beyond that, I just want to be better. I want the program to improve, to meet what I believe are the expectations for the program. And that means being straight forward, honest, and upfront with recruits in a timely manner. That means doing better next year than they did this year. And it's not very difficult for this staff to do that.
So call it "concern trolling", call out people that point to it as "bad fans" or hurting the program. I don't remember many people making that argument during the Shane Morris concussion saga, but that was a dead staff walking that everyone had already turned against, so they didn't even earn one side of the story to tell, much less two. But it comes down to wins, I get that. Some were already fed up with Hoke during the Gibbons things, more were fed up with him by the Morris thing, and the amount of people that were willing to burn him at the stake increased as the losses increased. That's the reality.
The reality for me is that I want this program to continue to get better. I think being better at communication on the recruiting front is a part of that. I'd bet Harbaugh agrees.
|1 week 2 days ago||My hoops knowledge||
Runs as deep as the average person that played high school basketball. In other words, not very deep. But I try to keep up with it.
By the way, as for Duke, things ease up over the next week with games against G-Tech and BC (remember when these were good teams?), but then they go Louisville, UVA, @UNC, @Louiville, FSU, @Pitt, Wake, UNC to finish. They got lucky not having to play @UVA, Pitt at home, Virginia at home, and @ND too. Those would likely be four more losses for them.
|1 week 2 days ago||Should have been out last week||
They were living on rep for a while there, but they have not been good this year. Outside an early season win against Indiana when Indiana hadn't clicked yet, they basically have little of value on their schedule, lost to Utah and Kentucky, and haven't beat any good ACC teams. They've beat Wake (2nd worst), BC (worst), NC State (3rd worst), and VT (5th worst).
So yeah, they were living on reputation and probably should have been out sooner.