Mike Lantry, 1972
- Member for
- 5 years 35 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|3 weeks 17 hours ago||obviously mental||
His slump is clearly a mental blockage, and not the result of him reaching the limits of his physical abilities. He may just need to play through it, and suddenly the pieces will click.
Or, maybe it's time to call a sports psychologist.
Or, maybe we just need to get him really angry. I suspect our opponents wouldn't like him when he's angry.
|3 weeks 17 hours ago||time||
It seems clear with Coach Beilein that the limiting factor isn't how many sets he can dream up, it's how much practice time he has to install them before the next game. I'm not so sure Beilein is "saving" anything for the tournament, but it may look that way just because it'll take all the practice time between now and then to add new wrinkles to the offense. Remember that this team is still very young -- Morgan and Horford are the only upperclassmen. So each time the coaches want to do something new, the players are probably seeing it for the first time.
To echo an earlier poster, this is probably also where having an experienced scout team really helps you. If the scout team already knows the play you're trying to install, they can be much more effective in helping the starters pick it up. This year, those guys are young too, so the practice time becomes even more critical. Good thing we have lots of it coming down this final stretch.
|5 weeks 3 days ago||boxing||
She's not far off. The premise of Vitale's schtick is essentially to hype college basketball in the style of a boxing promoter.
|5 weeks 6 days ago||Post-doc wages||
Actually, even as an engineer, post-doc wages are only 10k better than the PhD stipend if you stay in academia. It's a little better at a national lab, but still nowhere close to having a "real" job. On a financial and opportunity cost basis, if you want to get paid, getting a PhD is a bad idea; doubly so if you're in a field where you'll end up having to do a post-doc after.
Also, if you think about it, the fact that the position "post-doc" even exists tells you how much of a buyer's market jobs in the sciences are, even for the highly educated.
|6 weeks 17 hours ago||Nice main points||
On a more macro level, it felt like in last night's game, Michigan made a very good Iowa team look pretty ordinary. It didn't look like a battle of two titans, and certainly didn't look like Iowa was a top-ten outfit. It's incredible how totally Michigan dominated the pace and flow of the game. All Hain Beilein. That's a heck of a coaching job.
Also notable: Michigan wasn't really on from three, and yet that didn't mean the offense couldn't put up points (a nice change from, say, 5 years ago when a cold-from-3 night against a good team equalled a loss). This team can score in so many ways, and has so many scorers, that they can weather the loss of Walton and an off night from LeVert and still beat a top-10 team. (Yeah, I realize Iowa may not end up ranked in the top 10 at the end of the year, but still.) Depth: we haz it.
|7 weeks 3 days ago||duplicates||
I assume the duplicate listings for vs. Purdue (3/1 and 3/2) and vs. Illinois (3/8 and 3/9) at the end of the schedule actually mean those games will be in one slot or the other, but the decision as to which hasn't been made yet?
|7 weeks 6 days ago||If p then q||
Your comment touches on the most commonly made logical fallacy: if p then q does not imply if q then p.
If you want to hire or retain the absolute best people, then you must pay them top dollar.
This does not, however, mean that the fact that you're paying people top dollar implies that they're the absolute best people.
That said, it seems that the Nussmeier hire involves paying top dollar because they believe he's a top guy. So I'm not necessarily concerned about his salary (other than in the more general ethics-of-college-football sense). Seems like they're paying him that much because they believe he's worth it, not because they think paying him that much will make him better at his job.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Misopogon||
I nominate this issue for consideration in next week's Hokepoints.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||The Michigan Difference||
You know how childish this sounds, right? "They'd make fun of us; therefore, we should make fun of them." Congrats on ceding the high ground as the "big brother" in that relationship.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Poise||
While we're complaining about Musburger's announcing:
Musburger spent the entire first half talking about how Auburn's defense was rattling Winston. I just didn't see it. Kid looked loose, with a smile on his face even down 18 points. Not the slightest trace of panic. Not even grim determination. Just, hey, let's go play some football. His offensive line looked shaken up, sure, and had a couple of dumb false starts as a result. But Winston? Seems like it never phased him.
Musburger's call seemed like the announcing equivalent of a sportswriter writing his column in advance, and then trying to find ways to fit the facts on the field into his pre-chosen narrative. That goes for Winston being rattled as microcosm, and the SEC being dominant as macrocosm. When you've called as many games as Musburger has, why do you need to stick to a narrative? What's so hard about calling the game as it happens in front of you?
|8 weeks 2 days ago||A timeless MGoReminder||
|11 weeks 6 days ago||So what makes more sense||
So if you're Dave Brandon, what makes more sense: heavily marketing the football and to some extent basketball teams to milk a little more cash for the swim team? Or just marketing the swim team directly? Hiring / creating the position of marketing director for the athletics department to increase publicity for the excellent things Michigan athletes are doing in non-revenue sports makes a lot of sense to me. I think part of what rankles so much is that it seems like that's not what the marketing department's job is. Instead, the AD's marketing team focuses on (seemingly unnecessarily) marketing the crap out of the football team, and squeezing every dime out of it that they can. Maybe that does make more money for the athletic department as a whole than direct marketing of soccer, volleyball, field hockey, etc. would have. Maybe the MBAs in charge have looked at trying to build enough interest in gymnastics that they could charge real money and make real revenue for tickets to gymnastics events, and decided it wasn't realistic. Maybe they're even right about that. But if they really are focused on making the revenue sports the WOW EXPERIENCEs that pay every other sport's bills, then doesn't it make sense to make sure the pep band IS at the basketball and hockey games? Isn't that part of what makes the ticket price worth paying?
|11 weeks 6 days ago||Elitists||
One could argue that what Brandon is doing is also consistent with the character of our institution. I mean, we are elitists, right? Pretty sure I've heard that someplace.
EDIT: beaten to the punch by the old guy with the hot wife.
|12 weeks 7 hours ago||Tinkering on D||
This is an under-discussed facet of the past season. The tinkering on the O-line is easy to rationalize. One can argue about the individual iterations, but certainly the need to try something was justified. The late season tinkering on D, particularly when it seemed like the defense was actually playing reasonably well, is harder to understand. And it really did seem like tinkering to try to get something to work better, rather than just getting a few deserving guys a few more snaps. Anyone have any insight here? Were certain players not playing because they were actually on double-secret probation? Were there coverage breakdowns or run game weaknesses that didn't actually get exploited to the point where the fans noticed them, but that the coaches saw on film and worried about? Were the coaches just desperate to upgrade the defense from an overall "B" grade to an overall "A" to compensate the inconsistency of the offense? Anyone have any insights here?
|12 weeks 2 days ago||Emerald Bowl||
I'll insert here my yearly plug for referring to the Fight Hunger/San Francisco bowl as the Emerald Bowl (as it was from 2004-2009). This fits in the same category as "Outback" in that it's ultimately a corporate sponsorship (Emerald Nuts, owned by then-sponsor Diamond of California), but at least it's one that evokes an image (San Francisco as the Emerald City, an image I rather like) as much as an oversalted food.
The Bay Bowl would of course also be acceptable, both for accuracy and for sheer alliterative appeal.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||NO||
Would you boo the players? If you are not the kind of scummy person who would boo the players themselves, then you should not boo the team, period. Because the players are not going to think "Oh, I hear boos, but they're directed at the coaches, not me." They're going to think "Oh, our fans have turned on us, our fans suck." And perceived hostility between players and fans can only serve to poison the program, long term (would you as a recruit sign up to play at a school where you thought the fans would turn on you?).
Also, think of the question this way: you're basically asking "should I be an asshole?" Your mileage may vary, but really, how many times in life should the answer to that question EVER be "yes"?
|14 weeks 4 days ago||Grasping at straws||
I think part of what makes the constraint plays feel "gimmicky" is that they're grasping at straws to see what works. I diagnose it as follows:
Plays A and B are base plays, with constraints C, D, and E
Plays P and Q are base plays, with constraints R, S, and T
Prior to the season, the staff tried to install an A-Z offense, the young players couldn't get good enough at all of the plays A-Z, and as a result, you ended up with a team that can execute A, S, and T, but not B-E or P and Q. So the constraint plays aren't consistent with the base plays, not because Borges doesn't want to call C, D, and E when the defense adjusts to A, but because the players can't do C, D, and E. (Witness two FAILED bubble screens yesterday! Why did they go half the season without calling the bubble? Because this team can't execute it!) So Borges has to call S and T to counter the defense adjusting to A, whether or not that actually makes sense.
I think we can all agree now that they should have just installed A-E, gotten good at them, and then maybe learned P and Q during the bye weeks. It also seems that they spent the bye weeks assuming that if they just found the right combination on the OL, they'd be okay to run all of A-Z, still not realizing how screwed they really were. It seems like it took until LAST WEEK for how screwed they really were to sink in -- two weeks in a row of negative rushing yards finally penetrates even the thickest of skulls. But it's too little too late. And when opposing D coordinators know that all you can do is A, S, and T, then you can't do those either. And without P and Q, they can take away S and T and you can't punish them for it. And so the futility continues.
|14 weeks 4 days ago||It really is that simple.||
I think people on this board are getting tired of the explanation that the OL is young and under-talented, as though that explanation somehow becomes less true during the course of the season.
|15 weeks 16 hours ago||kids vs adults||
This isn't by any stretch unique to MGoBlog. I think it's a confusion in general for our entire culture. Are college students kids or adults? Seems like the answer is 'yes'.
|15 weeks 4 days ago||Yeah what happened?||
Yeah, what happened to B-Dubs? Time was when making the pilgrimage to the BW3's in Ypsi was a Tuesday night tradition for delicious wings (25 cents apiece in those days). When they built one on campus, I was ecstatic. After a while, going there got a little less exciting, but for a while I attributed that to the novelty wearing off. But at some point, it became apparent that the quality really was falling. And it's not just in Ann Arbor -- I've been to restaurants from Pleasanton, CA to Naperville, Il in the last year, and they all just seem awful anymore. I've talked to a few other people about this, and apparently I'm not the only one who's noticed. It's gotten to where unless I hear differently from someone with a recent experience, I probably won't be going back to a B-Dubs again. Which is especially disappointing to say about a place I once held in such high esteem. Seriously, what happened?
|16 weeks 5 days ago||+ 1||
Correct use of username
|18 weeks 1 day ago||nah||
yours was way better. Also, now I'll spend all day trying to find an excuse to call someone or something a "taint pustule." So, thanks for that.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||MGOboard vs mgoBOARD||
"I was hoping to generate some like mind discussion or to the contrary..."
Putting aside the grammar, this sentence summarizes surprisingly concisely the frustrations of many long time MGoReaders with the current state of the board.
"I was hoping to generate some discussion..."
Of course you were. It's a message board. That's what message boards on the internet are used for, right? Generating discussion, whether between like-minded individuals, or among those with contrasting opinions. Sounds perfectly reasonable. I'll call this the mgoBOARD perspective.
The thing is, though, that there was a time when posts on this blog, even on the message board section, were not about "generating discussion." They could better be summarized as "I would like to present this analysis." And by analysis, I don't mean a summary of what's been said on talk radio and rival blogs; I mean an insightful look at how our right guard matches up against an opponent's defensive tackle, or how a well-used combination of routes might be particularly effective at countering a double-A-gap blitz frequently deployed by an in-state rival. Such posts are not merely "discussion" in the sense of having a conversation for the sake of talking about it; they are informative, value-added, and help us fans better set our expectations, and better understand what's actually going on in the game. I'll call such contributions MGOboard posts.
There was a time when the frequency of MGOboard posts, and relative paucity of mgoBOARD posts, was what first distinguished MGoBlog as the premiere destination for coverage of Michigan sports. And there are indeed still a good number of such MGOboard posts being posted. But the steady increase in mgoBOARD posts, where people post simply to express an opinion or to stir up conversation without really adding to it, has really diluted the overall quality. And that dilution is what many long-time readers here find frustrating.
And the "if you don't like it, don't read it" response becomes very tiresome too: the reason I read MGoBlog, and not the comments section of MLive, is precisely because I want to avoid reading posts that contribute nothing. When those posts show up on MGoBlog too, it's like advertising in the Big House: yeah, it's not the end of the world, but it's irritating, surprisingly hard to ignore, and undermines a significant piece of what made the Big House special in the first place.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||congrats||
BiSB, it is my honor on behalf of the MGoReadership to award you ONE (1) INTERNET for this comment.
Also, this needs to be on a T-Shirt.
|21 weeks 6 days ago||Subterfuge||
Allow me to place my tinfoil hat firmly upon my head. Okay, ready:
If you were running a program in which players were getting paid serious cash, whether from boosters, coaches, agents, or the Honorable Robert J Bentley himself, what would you do to lower the suspicions of outsiders? I think you'd actually WANT to get "caught" for a very minor violation with a very small sum of money, given to a player in a context different from your normal payment scheme, every now and then. Especially if it were something stupid, like "I took a small loan from a coach and paid him back later." That way, you can talk tough, suspend a player, get some quotes in the media about how "we're disappointed, and will work to make sure this never happens again." You give people the expectation that, yeah, there's a small problem here and we know that, but we're working to clean it up. This keeps people from digging as hard to find the true, massive extent of it, because they think they already know what your dirty laundry is. Our favorite pastor from Duluth made an excellent point yesterday about how you know at stereoid use is actually worse in the NBA than in the NFL, because in the NBA, no one ever gets caught. The NFL takes the position "we know it happens a litte, and we're working to correct it," which makes it seem like stereoid use is limited to a few individuals, and not a systemic issue. Whereas the NBA's total lack of real enforcement suggests that EVERYONE is using. If I'm the NBA, what I want to do to make it seem less like a massive cover-up is let a few people get caught, yell at them, and make it appear that it's just a few bad apples and you're working to weed them out. And if I'm a conspiracy theorist, I might say Alabama is doing exactly that, more or less to throw us off the scent.
/removes tinfoil hat
That said, Alabama is one of the few schools that actually doesn't "need" to pay players right now to be competitive. Not saying they do or don't, but right now Alabama has enough recruiting cachet that throwing a few $$ here or there is probably not that important for them. It's the Old Miss's of the world where the "need" to cheat is greater, because they can't compete with Alabama for recruits on a level playing field.
|22 weeks 17 hours ago||it gets better||
You're going to be disappointed to learn that the answer is still "infinity."
But if the two infinities you're multiplying are the same size of infinities, then the result is also that same size. Whereas if one of the starting infinities is "bigger" than the other, then the result is the "same size" as whichever one was bigger to start with.
As to what "infinity plus one" means, that leads us into ordinal numbers, which are a different kind of infinity entirely. And at this point, my head explodes too.
(Also, a quick plug for the book Everything And More, by Our Fearless Leader's favorite DFW, from which I learned all this. An easy, enjoyable, and informative read.)
|22 weeks 1 day ago||worth saying again||
This is worth saying again! The tight ends have been just as culpable for the run game struggles as the middle of the offensive line has been. And if you can't run to the middle, and you can't run to the outside, and pulling your tackles hasn't really worked either, what else do you do? More fullbacks? Point being, there's been more discussion of the middle of the O-line than the TE's, but the TE's are worth analyzing too. Jake Butt getting so much time so early in his career, for instance, is probably not only because he's already showing flashes -- it's also because they need him. Funchess has the physical tools, he just needs the light to go on. That could happen tomorrow; it might never happen. AJ Williams has been hurt, and he and Funchess are both also still young guys, all things considered (as are Kalis, and Glasgow), but they can only grow up at one day per day*, so improvement with age doesn't get us much for this season. Add it all up, and I'm becoming ever more convinced that it's time to give Kerridge and Houma some more snaps. Though again, that's no cure-all either.
Bottom line is, we probably just need to be patient this year. Which, if the tunnel-vision of mid-season hasn't blinded us, is exactly what we already knew before this year began.
*or less as one approaches light speed, depending on your frame of reference. /PhysicsPedantry
|22 weeks 6 days ago||through the tunnel in Being Tim Tebow||
|23 weeks 1 day ago||On this one I see us almost||
And perhaps this is what we all need to see right now. Take a deep breath: it's been a struggle, but they're actually almost there.
Also, very much co-signed on your question as to how this play resembles the Fitz TD.
|23 weeks 1 day ago||On both sides too||
Amazing how generally applicable the "they" in that statement is, too. It's true on both sides of the ball, and for every position group. And it's not necessarily surprising either, for (all together now) such a young team. After all, it's hard enough to learn your own job, let alone learning what everyone else around you is doing on top of that. Luckily, the more starts these guys get together, the more cohesion should start to develop.