My oldest is in U8 and I've coached his and now his brother's team for a few years as well as being a life long player myself. As others have said, it's all about skill development at this point.
My recommendation for practices are to focus on drills that involve a lot of movement and high ball-to-player ratios. Things like sharks and minnows or pirate's treasure where there is a ball for everyone and you're maximizing touches so they build skill. Even for the scrimmages we have for the last part of practice, I'll usually play with two balls at a time and two goals at opposite corners for each team to prevent bunching up. Look up youth soccer drills by MOJO on YouTube. They have some good, fun drills.
At U8, I recommend focusing on basic skills like dribble, ball control and striking (shooting and passing). You shouldn't be worrying too much about tactics at this point.
Considering Andrew Gentry as a part of this class, his 2020 rating of 0.9628 would put him at number two on the list of OTs, so that makes things look a little better in the trenches
Interestingly, Perez called for a presidential election this year, and I believe it was earlier than usual. He ran unopposed. It now seems like he wanted to get that done before introducing the league.
I see where you're coming from with questioning a frosh learning two positions, but Diabate will have a lot more familiarity with the responsibilities of the five position, so it might make sense to maximize his time spent there. I also think Houstan could get some minutes at the 4 if there is a foul trouble scenario with the regular 4-5 rotation.
I think it is reasonable to say that Beilein's lack of use of a post-up game would have limited his interest or ability in landing bigs that favored that style (Dickinson is probably a good example, though it would be interesting to know whether Beilein did or planned to offer him). But that is just one style of bigs, and presumably not one anymore likely to be five-stars than other styles.
And another caveat; Beilein did recruit some more paint focused bigs, like Austin Davis and Ricky Doyle, so he wasn't totally against recruiting those style of players.
I would disagree that Beilein's style of play limited his ability to secure the top rated recruits. I think we have some evidence that his recruiting style/method had much to do with it.
First off, Matt D has insinuated a number of times that in his communication with various recruits over a number of years, Beilein's recruiting style didn't resonate with quite a few kids. More evidence is that in Howard's short time at the helm, we've heard numerous recruits discuss their affinity for coach Howard and how he was a big draw to Michigan.
To me it's pretty clear that Coach Howard has the proverbial "Juice" on the recruiting trail and that's what rubbed me the wrong way about yesterday's poster saying that Howard must be engaging in the shadier sides of recruiting. Of course I could be proved wrong, but I think that's BS. We are talking the recruitment of young adults. They're not out there making Pugh charts, optimizing their college choice. They're building relationships with their potential coaches and teammates, and we have tons of evidence that JH is good people, has magnetism, whatever you want to call it. He's able to connect with these young men and get them to believe in what they can achieve at Michigan. In many recruitments, that likely has greater weight than any monetary gains they might realize from other programs.
Beilein was obviously a great coach who we all appreciate and respect. I think people are just excited and maybe a bit surprised that the program likely has an even higher ceiling now than it did under Beilein due to the recruiting advantage. Time will tell if Howard can reach the actual on-court sustained success Beilein did, but so far so good. We can all compare and contrast these two coaches while appreciating both.
Do you have a source for this? I haven't seen an official ruling on that, but obviously that would free up a lot of this scholarship congestion, though it would make for playing time congestion.
I wouldn't be surprised to see one or two guys using that extra year of eligibility. Assuming Livers and Wagner head to the draft, that leaves 10 scholarship players, plus the six signees, so you're three over. That means three of Davis, Brown, Brooks, and Smith would not be able to come back, but you can always expect some other sources of attrition. I believe it was common knowledge that Jace was going to walk-on before scholarships opened up, so maybe that opens up another spot.
I was with you on your point about Mike Smith seeing time at the off guard position, as a four man guard rotation with him, Jackson, Bufkin, and Collins would have some questions about shotmaking. But 10-15 minutes a game for Smith if he returns? Maybe you meant 10-15 minutes at the 2, because he would be playing at least 25-30 a night with that rotation. I love the potential of all those youngsters, but they're just that, and have much to prove that Smith already has shown he can do.
Benz had one of his best seasons this year. His style of play is more technical, so I think he could be effective for another few years, but I'm sure they are looking for a replacement given his age.
Jovic was young enough that a back up role for a year or two before a transition to starting made sense, but that particular option looks dicey after this year at least. There is speculation they are open to selling him. I think their ultimate plan is Mbappe in 2021. Or maybe they make a run at Haaland, but Mbappe in particular seems like he is interested in a move to Madrid, if the rumblings are to be believed.
I get those souring feelings (Wales, Golf, Madrid...) but he also contributed a lot more than James ever did at Madrid. The BBC front line was pretty successful for a number of years, and Bale had the winning goal in two of the four champions league titles. His fee wasn't that much higher than James, either.
I think that signing has worrying signs of failure, but I'm also hesitant to judge after only a year. He had a big season (20+ goals) the year before for Frankfurt at age 21, so I think it's early to write him off.
That is certainly one of their worst signings, but it was six years ago, so I'm not sure how representative it is of their current approach. They also signed Toni Kroos that same summer for 25M euros, which triple stamps your double stamp.
Eh, I don't agree with lumping Madrid in with Barca in your comparison to the Yankees, though as a Madridista, this could be bias talking. I think generally Madrid fans feel pretty good about the approach they have taken with talent acquisition in the last few years. And to say that Madrid is crumbling with their recent champions league success is a bit premature.
Madrid's only big outlay in the last several years was Hazard. Obviously that didn't pan out so far, but time will tell. Other than that, they have for the most part pursued more modest acquisitions, with a focus on young players. They have aging players for sure (Benz, Modric, Kroos, Ramos) but also appear to have some younger players primed to step in. It could be the end of their high point, but I think it is too early to tell.
Arguably not the case for Barcelona, whom seem more concretely on a downward trajectory. They have a few more higher profile swing and misses like Coutinho and maybe Dembele/Griezmann, though it might be early to judge those latter two signings. And they're still judged against their golden age, so it will always to hard to live up to those expectations.
I brewed a trappist single last weekend as the German pils keg just kicked. My brewing has slowed to a trickle over the last year or two, so it has been nice to brew a couple batches over the last few months.
For both batches I've split it over two days, mashing in the evening and boiling the next day. Makes it easier to find time to do it around the family schedule, and for the Pils at least I saw no ill effects.
It's an interesting question. I wonder if you could get a better sample size if you used college or NFL data for 4th down and goal conversions from the 2, 5, and 10 yard lines. You would have to think someone did that analysis for the XFL when they went about picking those yard lines, but maybe not.
It didn't really sink in until now, but the Lance Ware bullet made me realize that we will likely see a dramatically different style of play from the hoops team moving forward. For years I've incredulously mocked the evergreen notion that "this will be the year" where Beilein uses a line up with two bigs. "If only he would put (McGary, Donnal, Wagner, etc.) at the four, we could rebound better!" they would say. Maybe we will finally see it after all these years.
I think whether we pick up a late 2019 big man recruit will tell us a lot about the generally held assumption that Johns started as a 5 but will eventually move full time to the 4. Specifically, in 2020, we project to have Davis, Livers, Castleton and Johns capable of playing the 5 without such a late addition (not including any potential 2020 recruits as contributors, which seems practical at this position). Davis may or may not get his 5th year, so you really need to consider either Livers or Johns as part of the rotation at the 5.
I think Beilein views Johns as a DJ Wilson type 4/5 flex player and may be depending on him to get some minutes as the back-up 5 throughout his Michigan career.
I will offer a bit of cold water; I think it is possible that we are a bit flattered by our resume so far. Purdue and Villanova both lost four of their top players from last season. They've also both struggled some this year, so those wins might not end up looking as good at the end of the season. UNC seems like a good win, but it was at home.
I am as pumped with how the team is playing as anyone, but we are still in small sample size territory at this point, and college hoops is unpredictable. I think we have a great shot to win the Big Ten, but that will not be an easy feat.
The returning players from last year combined for 31.6% from three last year (the team was 35.2%), so I think it is fair to assume that it will be a bit of a weakness. I don't think the current 22.6% rate is representative either, though, so I wouldn't say it "can't be fixed". Also consider that about half of the 3P shots by returning players were taken by freshman last year, which means that we should assume improvement is likely.
I'm hoping we can get up to around 33 or 34% as a team, which would be serviceable when paired with our defense and interior offense.
Is this spate of transfers an unintended consequence of the new rule about maintaining the ability to redshirt if playing in four or fewer games or was there another rule change allowing this? If it is the former, something tells me that rule is going to be removed or at least tweaked in the offseason. I hope they keep it mostly intact as it seems like a great way to get young guys experience while doing away with the "injury" redshirt shenanigans.
I don't think that's accurate. For this year, we appear to have three quality outside receiver options (DPJ, Black, Collins) and some quality slot options (Perry, Martin, to a lesser degree Schoenle). For an offense that runs a lot of 12 or 21 personnel, that seems like sufficient depth.
For next year, Perry is the only guy who would leave via graduation or draft, as the others are 2nd year players.
Not worried about WR unless we get 2-3 injuries, but what team wouldn't be in trouble with that?
I think we just need to have more moms and dads who have played the game. This is related to the "lack of development" argument that comes up a lot, but I think it is important to start that development even earlier. Like learning a language, the younger you learn, the more natural it is.
When a parent has played the game, they are more likely to put a ball at their young child's feet, and better equipped to show them the intricacies of the game and foster skill building. Since parents are usually the volunteer coaches for our youngest players, having more of them with familiarity with the game will further help development. Parents are also the first line of scouting: if they know the game, they are better able to identify their child or their child's teammate as exceptionally talented, increasing the chance that those type of players filter into the higher level development stream.
Soccer being low scoring may be something that a very casual fan finds frustrating, but why change a game so drastically for those people when for millions (billions?) of people already find it exciting. As a person comes to follow and understand the game better, they find all the other elements that are worth watching.
I will say that the predominance of ties in soccer, and the less than ideal method of resolving those ties, does present some downsides in a tournament format, but not enough so to upend things drastically.
I find your dedication to stanning for Cowherd amusing and bewildering. He makes his living in this arena of punditry and trash talking so I don't see why you feel the need to defend his honor so strongly. Probably best to sit this thread out.
I think folks are overstating the effect that the change from Moe to Teske will have on offensive spacing. Beilein's offense is based on motion sets with the 5 in the high post plus lots of 1-5 or 2-5 ball screens. They aren't all of a sudden going to have Teske posting up in the low block.
There will likely be less pick and pop and more pick and roll with Teske, but that would only effect how a defense defends ball screen action. It wouldn't allow a rim protector to sit in the paint and clog things up.
This isn't to say that there there will be no offensive downgrade (maybe someone with access to Synergy could provide comparitive stats on PnR/PnP action of Moe vs Teske to give us a flavor), just that the "spacing" commentary is a bit off.
I'm not citing this specific penalty as an example where the punishment doesn't fit the crime. It was a bit soft, but it was definitely towards the "clear goal scoring opportunity" side of the spectrum. Plenty more come from way less dangerous of positions.
The penalty kick is easily the worst rule in sports. It is nearly a guaranteed goal, awarded so frequently in cases that are no where near a guaranteed scoring opportunity, in a sport where goals are at a premium.
That said, loved this particular case. Hala Madrid!
I think your prediction that Simpson will not improve his 3P% significantly is likely to be accurate, and highlighting the FT% differential between Simpson and MAAR puts a jsutifiable hole in that line of thinking. However, we just finished as a Top 10 team in overall efficiency (Top 3 after Simpson took over?), so you cannot make a good case that Simpson's offensive shortcomings override his defensive contribution to the point where he can't be the starter.
Citing the poor offense during the tourney as further reason for benching him is also off base. He certainly contributes to it, but the team collectively shot poorly, and I would contend that that had little to do with any effects of a sagging defense.
The portion of your argument that does have some merit to me is highlighting the need for shooters around him. With the presumed loss of Wagner, I think there could be an issue there but there are other work arounds besides benching an all-conference defender in favor of unproven options.
Eh, I'm not sure you want both Teske and Wagner in a 2-3 zone. That puts one of them on the perimeter which seems like a recipe for them to get blown by on a close out, breaking down the defense.
I can't claim any more authority than you in analyzing his form, but I was curious about your observation. I looked at a few clips of some prolific shooters (Kyle Korver, Reggie Miller, Ray Allen), and they all start their jump shots with the ball around the waist.
I think the key to their success, and what it looks like Nunez does pretty well too, is the quickness in their movements and the lift they generate.
If you are contesting my evaluation of Livers' defense, check the 5th clip from Five Key Plays over at umhoops. At about 2:30 and 3:15 in that clip, Livers gets blown by by Luke Maye.
Eh, Livers didn't make much of an impression for me. He was OK offensively, but I felt like he was exposed defensively. He is high effort, but seems a step slow at this point. The 4 could be a weak spot, at least until Livers settles in.
I was really impressed with Poole's defense. Got his hands on a few balls and made some nice rotations. He also did some nice things on the offensive end. I think he might have a Caris like Freshman season.
Some nice clips of Matthews game. I think he ends up having a monster year.
The combination of his speed and vision is stellar. I don't remember which Maui game it was, but on one play he drove hard from around the right elbow and because he was coming so fast, 1 or 2 off ball defenders had to quickly help but he still was able to smoothly drop a pass through a tight window to a cutting Robinson (I think) who finished at the hoop.
Very well put by Seth. And it bums me out, because I'd like to be able to come here after a game and see insiteful comments about what went right or wrong. Instead it is thread after thread that devolves into the "UNACCEPTABLE" argument and counterarguments. Pretty much unreadable.
not sure if serious...
I'm thinking more of a play like the roll out where Gentry broke open deep. Peters was late with his throw, and taking that extra beat got him a good shot. that's not on the OL.
I guess it is just me, but some of the blame for Peters getting clobbered seems to be his own. He really holds onto the ball for a long time and his internal clock seems to react a bit slow in terms of getting the ball out on time.
I don't think the vanilla passing offense can be attributed to holding back any of the playbook to preserve the element of surprise. I think it has more to do with some combination of preventing sacks to keep Peters healthy and limit mistakes (of Peters, WRs, OL) so that we can win games.
I think the injury prevention is a reasonable goal, but I wonder whether the potential growth of our passing game is being limited by not pushing its bounderies, which could harm us against Wiscy and OSU. Tough to say that definitively though, when every game counts and you don't want to risk dropping one to Minnesota with a bunch of turnovers.
this may be wrong, but I believe it has something to do with wearing an eligible number when playing as the sixth OL, which is often in an eligible position. That's why he switched back to 72 when he played in the actual line in mop up time.
Is Devin Bush to this year's defense the same as Jabrill Peppers to last year's defense? In other words, a guy that is a special talent that Don Brown identified as someone he wanted to build the defense around?
Maybe more went into the decision to move to the 3-3-5, but I like the idea that DB is just an expert at leveraging the skills of the real difference makers available to him.
Recent Comments
My oldest is in U8 and I've coached his and now his brother's team for a few years as well as being a life long player myself. As others have said, it's all about skill development at this point.
My recommendation for practices are to focus on drills that involve a lot of movement and high ball-to-player ratios. Things like sharks and minnows or pirate's treasure where there is a ball for everyone and you're maximizing touches so they build skill. Even for the scrimmages we have for the last part of practice, I'll usually play with two balls at a time and two goals at opposite corners for each team to prevent bunching up. Look up youth soccer drills by MOJO on YouTube. They have some good, fun drills.
At U8, I recommend focusing on basic skills like dribble, ball control and striking (shooting and passing). You shouldn't be worrying too much about tactics at this point.
Considering Andrew Gentry as a part of this class, his 2020 rating of 0.9628 would put him at number two on the list of OTs, so that makes things look a little better in the trenches
No, it's the Bro!
Interestingly, Perez called for a presidential election this year, and I believe it was earlier than usual. He ran unopposed. It now seems like he wanted to get that done before introducing the league.
I see where you're coming from with questioning a frosh learning two positions, but Diabate will have a lot more familiarity with the responsibilities of the five position, so it might make sense to maximize his time spent there. I also think Houstan could get some minutes at the 4 if there is a foul trouble scenario with the regular 4-5 rotation.
I think it is reasonable to say that Beilein's lack of use of a post-up game would have limited his interest or ability in landing bigs that favored that style (Dickinson is probably a good example, though it would be interesting to know whether Beilein did or planned to offer him). But that is just one style of bigs, and presumably not one anymore likely to be five-stars than other styles.
And another caveat; Beilein did recruit some more paint focused bigs, like Austin Davis and Ricky Doyle, so he wasn't totally against recruiting those style of players.
I would disagree that Beilein's style of play limited his ability to secure the top rated recruits. I think we have some evidence that his recruiting style/method had much to do with it.
First off, Matt D has insinuated a number of times that in his communication with various recruits over a number of years, Beilein's recruiting style didn't resonate with quite a few kids. More evidence is that in Howard's short time at the helm, we've heard numerous recruits discuss their affinity for coach Howard and how he was a big draw to Michigan.
To me it's pretty clear that Coach Howard has the proverbial "Juice" on the recruiting trail and that's what rubbed me the wrong way about yesterday's poster saying that Howard must be engaging in the shadier sides of recruiting. Of course I could be proved wrong, but I think that's BS. We are talking the recruitment of young adults. They're not out there making Pugh charts, optimizing their college choice. They're building relationships with their potential coaches and teammates, and we have tons of evidence that JH is good people, has magnetism, whatever you want to call it. He's able to connect with these young men and get them to believe in what they can achieve at Michigan. In many recruitments, that likely has greater weight than any monetary gains they might realize from other programs.
Beilein was obviously a great coach who we all appreciate and respect. I think people are just excited and maybe a bit surprised that the program likely has an even higher ceiling now than it did under Beilein due to the recruiting advantage. Time will tell if Howard can reach the actual on-court sustained success Beilein did, but so far so good. We can all compare and contrast these two coaches while appreciating both.
Do you have a source for this? I haven't seen an official ruling on that, but obviously that would free up a lot of this scholarship congestion, though it would make for playing time congestion.
I wouldn't be surprised to see one or two guys using that extra year of eligibility. Assuming Livers and Wagner head to the draft, that leaves 10 scholarship players, plus the six signees, so you're three over. That means three of Davis, Brown, Brooks, and Smith would not be able to come back, but you can always expect some other sources of attrition. I believe it was common knowledge that Jace was going to walk-on before scholarships opened up, so maybe that opens up another spot.
I was with you on your point about Mike Smith seeing time at the off guard position, as a four man guard rotation with him, Jackson, Bufkin, and Collins would have some questions about shotmaking. But 10-15 minutes a game for Smith if he returns? Maybe you meant 10-15 minutes at the 2, because he would be playing at least 25-30 a night with that rotation. I love the potential of all those youngsters, but they're just that, and have much to prove that Smith already has shown he can do.
You are a real degenerate, bud. C'mon, Pop Tarts?! Gross!
And only just now have I realized that I have been mentally pronouncing his name as Schissel this whole time. Mark, I hardly knew ye.
Benz had one of his best seasons this year. His style of play is more technical, so I think he could be effective for another few years, but I'm sure they are looking for a replacement given his age.
Jovic was young enough that a back up role for a year or two before a transition to starting made sense, but that particular option looks dicey after this year at least. There is speculation they are open to selling him. I think their ultimate plan is Mbappe in 2021. Or maybe they make a run at Haaland, but Mbappe in particular seems like he is interested in a move to Madrid, if the rumblings are to be believed.
I get those souring feelings (Wales, Golf, Madrid...) but he also contributed a lot more than James ever did at Madrid. The BBC front line was pretty successful for a number of years, and Bale had the winning goal in two of the four champions league titles. His fee wasn't that much higher than James, either.
I think that signing has worrying signs of failure, but I'm also hesitant to judge after only a year. He had a big season (20+ goals) the year before for Frankfurt at age 21, so I think it's early to write him off.
That is certainly one of their worst signings, but it was six years ago, so I'm not sure how representative it is of their current approach. They also signed Toni Kroos that same summer for 25M euros, which triple stamps your double stamp.
Eh, I don't agree with lumping Madrid in with Barca in your comparison to the Yankees, though as a Madridista, this could be bias talking. I think generally Madrid fans feel pretty good about the approach they have taken with talent acquisition in the last few years. And to say that Madrid is crumbling with their recent champions league success is a bit premature.
Madrid's only big outlay in the last several years was Hazard. Obviously that didn't pan out so far, but time will tell. Other than that, they have for the most part pursued more modest acquisitions, with a focus on young players. They have aging players for sure (Benz, Modric, Kroos, Ramos) but also appear to have some younger players primed to step in. It could be the end of their high point, but I think it is too early to tell.
Arguably not the case for Barcelona, whom seem more concretely on a downward trajectory. They have a few more higher profile swing and misses like Coutinho and maybe Dembele/Griezmann, though it might be early to judge those latter two signings. And they're still judged against their golden age, so it will always to hard to live up to those expectations.
I brewed a trappist single last weekend as the German pils keg just kicked. My brewing has slowed to a trickle over the last year or two, so it has been nice to brew a couple batches over the last few months.
For both batches I've split it over two days, mashing in the evening and boiling the next day. Makes it easier to find time to do it around the family schedule, and for the Pils at least I saw no ill effects.
It's an interesting question. I wonder if you could get a better sample size if you used college or NFL data for 4th down and goal conversions from the 2, 5, and 10 yard lines. You would have to think someone did that analysis for the XFL when they went about picking those yard lines, but maybe not.
Should have added that he is number 14 for the white team.
It didn't really sink in until now, but the Lance Ware bullet made me realize that we will likely see a dramatically different style of play from the hoops team moving forward. For years I've incredulously mocked the evergreen notion that "this will be the year" where Beilein uses a line up with two bigs. "If only he would put (McGary, Donnal, Wagner, etc.) at the four, we could rebound better!" they would say. Maybe we will finally see it after all these years.
I think whether we pick up a late 2019 big man recruit will tell us a lot about the generally held assumption that Johns started as a 5 but will eventually move full time to the 4. Specifically, in 2020, we project to have Davis, Livers, Castleton and Johns capable of playing the 5 without such a late addition (not including any potential 2020 recruits as contributors, which seems practical at this position). Davis may or may not get his 5th year, so you really need to consider either Livers or Johns as part of the rotation at the 5.
I think Beilein views Johns as a DJ Wilson type 4/5 flex player and may be depending on him to get some minutes as the back-up 5 throughout his Michigan career.
Speaking of that questionable moving charge, Brad Davison went for his patented nut shot on Teske on that play. Dude is a scumbag.
I will offer a bit of cold water; I think it is possible that we are a bit flattered by our resume so far. Purdue and Villanova both lost four of their top players from last season. They've also both struggled some this year, so those wins might not end up looking as good at the end of the season. UNC seems like a good win, but it was at home.
I am as pumped with how the team is playing as anyone, but we are still in small sample size territory at this point, and college hoops is unpredictable. I think we have a great shot to win the Big Ten, but that will not be an easy feat.
The returning players from last year combined for 31.6% from three last year (the team was 35.2%), so I think it is fair to assume that it will be a bit of a weakness. I don't think the current 22.6% rate is representative either, though, so I wouldn't say it "can't be fixed". Also consider that about half of the 3P shots by returning players were taken by freshman last year, which means that we should assume improvement is likely.
I'm hoping we can get up to around 33 or 34% as a team, which would be serviceable when paired with our defense and interior offense.
Is this spate of transfers an unintended consequence of the new rule about maintaining the ability to redshirt if playing in four or fewer games or was there another rule change allowing this? If it is the former, something tells me that rule is going to be removed or at least tweaked in the offseason. I hope they keep it mostly intact as it seems like a great way to get young guys experience while doing away with the "injury" redshirt shenanigans.
I don't think that's accurate. For this year, we appear to have three quality outside receiver options (DPJ, Black, Collins) and some quality slot options (Perry, Martin, to a lesser degree Schoenle). For an offense that runs a lot of 12 or 21 personnel, that seems like sufficient depth.
For next year, Perry is the only guy who would leave via graduation or draft, as the others are 2nd year players.
Not worried about WR unless we get 2-3 injuries, but what team wouldn't be in trouble with that?
Fun topic to bloviate on, so here is my take.
I think we just need to have more moms and dads who have played the game. This is related to the "lack of development" argument that comes up a lot, but I think it is important to start that development even earlier. Like learning a language, the younger you learn, the more natural it is.
When a parent has played the game, they are more likely to put a ball at their young child's feet, and better equipped to show them the intricacies of the game and foster skill building. Since parents are usually the volunteer coaches for our youngest players, having more of them with familiarity with the game will further help development. Parents are also the first line of scouting: if they know the game, they are better able to identify their child or their child's teammate as exceptionally talented, increasing the chance that those type of players filter into the higher level development stream.
Soccer being low scoring may be something that a very casual fan finds frustrating, but why change a game so drastically for those people when for millions (billions?) of people already find it exciting. As a person comes to follow and understand the game better, they find all the other elements that are worth watching.
I will say that the predominance of ties in soccer, and the less than ideal method of resolving those ties, does present some downsides in a tournament format, but not enough so to upend things drastically.
My fav: "The doctor said I wouldn't get so many nose bleeds if I just kept my finger out of there."
I don't usually troll, but when I do...
I find your dedication to stanning for Cowherd amusing and bewildering. He makes his living in this arena of punditry and trash talking so I don't see why you feel the need to defend his honor so strongly. Probably best to sit this thread out.
I think folks are overstating the effect that the change from Moe to Teske will have on offensive spacing. Beilein's offense is based on motion sets with the 5 in the high post plus lots of 1-5 or 2-5 ball screens. They aren't all of a sudden going to have Teske posting up in the low block.
There will likely be less pick and pop and more pick and roll with Teske, but that would only effect how a defense defends ball screen action. It wouldn't allow a rim protector to sit in the paint and clog things up.
This isn't to say that there there will be no offensive downgrade (maybe someone with access to Synergy could provide comparitive stats on PnR/PnP action of Moe vs Teske to give us a flavor), just that the "spacing" commentary is a bit off.
I think your prediction that Simpson will not improve his 3P% significantly is likely to be accurate, and highlighting the FT% differential between Simpson and MAAR puts a jsutifiable hole in that line of thinking. However, we just finished as a Top 10 team in overall efficiency (Top 3 after Simpson took over?), so you cannot make a good case that Simpson's offensive shortcomings override his defensive contribution to the point where he can't be the starter.
Citing the poor offense during the tourney as further reason for benching him is also off base. He certainly contributes to it, but the team collectively shot poorly, and I would contend that that had little to do with any effects of a sagging defense.
The portion of your argument that does have some merit to me is highlighting the need for shooters around him. With the presumed loss of Wagner, I think there could be an issue there but there are other work arounds besides benching an all-conference defender in favor of unproven options.
Neutral gym, yes, but we will have played the day before so they would still have the fresh legs advantage.
Eh, I'm not sure you want both Teske and Wagner in a 2-3 zone. That puts one of them on the perimeter which seems like a recipe for them to get blown by on a close out, breaking down the defense.
According to Torvik, Young is in the 54th percentile in terms of turnovers per 100 possesions, so he's pretty average when you factor in usage.
You're lazy, OP!
I can't claim any more authority than you in analyzing his form, but I was curious about your observation. I looked at a few clips of some prolific shooters (Kyle Korver, Reggie Miller, Ray Allen), and they all start their jump shots with the ball around the waist.
I think the key to their success, and what it looks like Nunez does pretty well too, is the quickness in their movements and the lift they generate.
If you are contesting my evaluation of Livers' defense, check the 5th clip from Five Key Plays over at umhoops. At about 2:30 and 3:15 in that clip, Livers gets blown by by Luke Maye.
Some nice clips of Matthews game. I think he ends up having a monster year.
The combination of his speed and vision is stellar. I don't remember which Maui game it was, but on one play he drove hard from around the right elbow and because he was coming so fast, 1 or 2 off ball defenders had to quickly help but he still was able to smoothly drop a pass through a tight window to a cutting Robinson (I think) who finished at the hoop.
Very well put by Seth. And it bums me out, because I'd like to be able to come here after a game and see insiteful comments about what went right or wrong. Instead it is thread after thread that devolves into the "UNACCEPTABLE" argument and counterarguments. Pretty much unreadable.
I don't think the vanilla passing offense can be attributed to holding back any of the playbook to preserve the element of surprise. I think it has more to do with some combination of preventing sacks to keep Peters healthy and limit mistakes (of Peters, WRs, OL) so that we can win games.
I think the injury prevention is a reasonable goal, but I wonder whether the potential growth of our passing game is being limited by not pushing its bounderies, which could harm us against Wiscy and OSU. Tough to say that definitively though, when every game counts and you don't want to risk dropping one to Minnesota with a bunch of turnovers.
Is Devin Bush to this year's defense the same as Jabrill Peppers to last year's defense? In other words, a guy that is a special talent that Don Brown identified as someone he wanted to build the defense around?
Maybe more went into the decision to move to the 3-3-5, but I like the idea that DB is just an expert at leveraging the skills of the real difference makers available to him.