- Member for
- 3 years 14 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- 5/16/11: John Calipari accepts offer to coach Dominican Republic national team.
- June 2011: Karl Towns, a sophomore at St. Joseph HS in Metuchen, NJ whose mother is Dominican, is named to the Dominican Republic U-17 team.
- May 2012: Towns is called up to the Dominican Republic national team for Olympic qualifying.
- 12/4/12: Karl Towns signs LOI with Kentucky.
- December 2012: John Calipari resigns post as Domican Republic national team coach.
- 65-1-2 when not on TV
- 0-6-1 on TV
- 12:00 Jonny Quest
- 12:30 Lancelot Link, Secret Chimp
- 1:00 American Bandstand
- 1:30 World of Sports Illustrated
- 2:00 Wide World of Sports (Highlights of Ali/Mathis, Rugby from England, Preview of Nebraska/Oklahoma.)
- 3:30 FOOTBALL: USC vs. UCLA from Los Angeles
- 7:00 News, William Aylward and Douglas Johnson, Anchormen
- 7:30 EYEWITNESS EXCLUSIVE: Leopold Stokowski interviewed.
- 8:00 College Football Today
- 8:05 FOOTBALL: Notre Dame at LSU
- 11:00 News Reports
- 11:30 MOVIE: Zulu (1964)
- PAC -.285
- B12 -.256
- SEC -.190
- B1G -.136
- ACC -.112
- Illinois #68 (Cincinnati)
- Indiana #48 (Penn St.)
- Iowa #36 (Nebraska)
- Michigan St. #7 (Stanford)
- Minnesota #36 (Nebraska)
- Nebraska #25 (Georgia)
- Northwestern #55 (Syracuse)
- Ohio St. #22 (Wisconsin)
- Penn St. #22 (Wisconsin)
- Purdue #283 (Indiana St.)
- Wisconsin #33 (Iowa)
|17 hours 15 min ago||His defense doesn't go||
His defense doesn't go against the offense's game-tempo, it goes against their practice-tempo.
Which by all accounts is pretty quick, at least by recent Michigan standards.
|17 hours 18 min ago||I'd add a category to your three.||
It seems to me in-house promotions are a separate animal from any of the categories of outside hire. (Maybe within that group there's a distinction to be made between people like Moeller who left for some HC experience and then came back, vs. people like Carr who stayed in the program for life.)
|17 hours 41 min ago||Who knows what's optimal and what isn't?||
There's no control in the experiment. You make your one choice, you see the results, you don't know what would have happened if you'd done something different. You can speculate if you want. You can try to extrapolate from what happens at other programs, running different schemes with different personnel, but there's no way to know if their optimal is your optimal and there's no way to even know if what they're doing was optimal for them.
It's the playcalling grass-grows-greener fallacy writ large. Only the staff has to stand for the exam. Everyone else gets to pretend their choice would have worked out better.
|19 hours 12 min ago||They opened with OSU in '76||
They opened with OSU in '76 and got thrashed. I'm not sure why SI thought it was a big game, but that has to have been the game you're remembering because they didn't play again until the probation was over.
Maybe it was just a bit of hyperbole to help them frame the story on the scandal.
|19 hours 35 min ago||Works OK at Wisconsin.||
They aren't exactly pulling in Alabama-level recruits and they've been to three Rose Bowls out of four.
Stanford's been to four straight BCS bowls. Are they recruiting SEC-style?
|19 hours 39 min ago||I don't know what it is||
I don't know what it is that's causing it but I think that's got to be it.
None of these guys are known for a high-tempo offense but the tempo under Hoke and Borges their last year at SDSU was a lot quicker than it was here. Alabama's tempo under Nussmeier last year was quicker than it is here.
|19 hours 42 min ago||Have you noticed that||
No, I haven't. Michigan hasn't had a losing record since 2009.
|20 hours 5 min ago||He's 6-20 all-time against||
He's 6-20 all-time against the B1G. I think we'd have a chance.
|20 hours 16 min ago||MSP belongs on that list,||
MSP belongs on that list, too, maybe not in the Chi/AA/Madison tier but it's a great place to live.
|20 hours 23 min ago||Yes, that's how it works.||
All just a coincidence of course. As Calipari says, his decision to coach there was really just about whether he could help Dominican basketball improve.
|20 hours 54 min ago||But that's what's interesting.||
I've got a strong suspicion that broken down by region the really poor results are from the southeast, the least "flat and boring" part of the state. Kentucky and West Virginia were the bottom two states; Huntington/Ashland and Charleston among the worst cities. SE Ohio is just an extension of KY/WVa.
Corn's not so bad. Flat's not so bad. Not having a job, or a doctor, or a decent public library...that stuff sucks.
|21 hours 46 min ago||Spam alert.||
There's something so magnificent about an ad for a service that provides students with "plagiarism-free" papers they can submit as their own work showing up on the Ace Williams Is In High School thread that I think you should leave this last one up.
|22 hours 17 min ago||1976-1978||
Three-year bowl and television ban, 20 scholarships docked.
I'd forgotten the details but found a brief newpaper account online: giving athletes spending money, having knowledge of a booster letting recruits use his credit card, promising a recruit an apartment for his girlfriend, etc. 70 violations total. Most of it happened in Ohio; OSU presumably turned them in.
The allegations were "typical of what happens when a young program becomes successful," said Coach Stolz.
True that, alas.
|22 hours 35 min ago||A question you might be able to answer...||
Were any Michigan games broadcast in the 1969-1976 period other than OSU and bowl games? That seems unlikely, if there was a rule that each team could only appear once.
If it's true, and if the 1971 OSU game wasn't on, it means that Michigan did not win a televised game between OSU '69 and OSU '76. During that stretch:
The loss was to Purdue two weeks before the '76 OSU game.
Which would mean 66 consecutive games without a loss when not televised, seven consecutive games without a win when televised.
Perceptions of that period must be very different between those privileged to see games in person vs. those of us that could only see games on TV.
|1 day 7 hours ago||I was a sixth-grader.||
I have no memory of seeing the game, but I also don't have a vivid memory of the disappointment of not seeing it and you'd think I would.
One of the reasons I think I didn't is that my memory of Hayes ripping into the down markers is in color, which means it's from magazine pictures. That was years before we had a color TV; the first OSU game I saw in color was '76.
I'm still going to pull the TV listings from that day's Enquirer when I can. Or a Dispatch, if I can find it. They might have blacked it out in Michigan but if the game wasn't broadcast in Columbus, it wasn't on anywhere.
|1 day 8 hours ago||Thought I could settle this once and for all...||
...by pulling a TV listing from one of our local papers. If Ohio St. at Michigan wasn't shown in Ohio, it probably wasn't shown anywhere.
But our library's online newspaper archives only go back to the 80s--I'll have to check the microfilm sometime when I'm downtown. The best I could do from here is look up the listings in the New York Times. Here's the afternoon and evening on WABC/NY (the only network broadcasting college games at the time):
There was a Rangers game on another station that night; that was your Saturday of sports on television.
It was a different world.
|1 day 12 hours ago||Indeed.||
In this particular case it's almost like somebody trying to get worked up over the exchanges between Heiko and Borges.
|1 day 12 hours ago||Here you go.||
or the version you might know better...
Still brings a tear to the eye. Thanks for the bump; I hadn't listened to this for at least two years.
|1 day 14 hours ago||Yep.||
Some of this is just tempo. Michigan plays shorter games than the average FBS team; the defense is always going to be worse than the raw per-game stats and the offense better.
|1 day 15 hours ago||There was a choice here, yes.||
Respect the players by acknowledging a common concern, then talk them off the ledge.
Or ignore their concerns and give them a sales talk.
I know which approach I prefer.
|1 day 17 hours ago||"Leaving his motive aside"||
I doubt that there was a single player on the offense that wasn't aware that transferring was a possibility. Every single player on that side of the ball must have wondered if he'd still have a role going forward, in a completely different offense, and at least had some concerns about what was best for his career.
And the reports have never been that he reminded the players of a fact they were well aware of anyway, the reports were that he reminded them that he wasn't leaving and would still be around to sign the papers later.
As in: there's no need for a hasty decision.
Which would make it a supportive act. Which would be consistent with the fact that RR was Carr's idea. And with their public appeances around that time. And with the fact that not a single player took Carr up on his supposed offer.
|1 day 17 hours ago||It's funny how perceptions and expectations differ.||
You're surprised by today's piece; I expect every column to be about Hoke and/or Brandon and was surprised and pleased when last week's UFRs focused on the game.
|1 day 17 hours ago||We'd seen a half of football||
We'd seen a half of football at that point, and 17-10 wasn't a fair reflection of the difference between the two teams. By that point against Akron I was thinking "these guys aren't nearly as bad as I thought." Not that they were good, but they were mid-level MAC at least. Miami isn't. They couldn't string two first downs, they had no big-play capability. They're an EMU-level punching bag and Hoke has no history of going on fourth-and-long against those teams. Neither does any other Michigan coach in my memory.
You might wish Brady Hoke were John Jenkins, but he isn't. If there's a continuing pattern of aggressive playcalling in these situations against good teams but it doesn't carry over against patsies, that's probably your answer, like it or not.
And the field goal's a different situation altogether. We're talking about punting or going from the 40-ish here, not whether you take points closer in.
|1 day 18 hours ago||I was thinking the same thing.||
In retrospect, that first game against Utah was one of the best results of the three years. But at the time nobody knew they were an undefeated Sugar Bowl winner; it was just a home loss to a MWC team.
And after that it was a large stone rolling downhill. It probably would be fair to call that season "before mediocrity", because it didn't measure up to that standard.
|1 day 18 hours ago||Has it occurred to anyone...||
...that the relevant distinction here might be between games against real teams that are likely to beat you vs. games against punching bags that you risk unnecessarily humiliating if things go right (or do I mean wrong?)? I don't remember any fourth-down goes against Eastern or UMass, either. The gloves stay on against the MAC and Sun Belt unless the other guys demonstrate themselves capable (which Miami clearly wasn't).
|1 day 21 hours ago||That all sounds right. But||
That all sounds right.
But what I think is nagging at me is a plausible, to me, alternative history:
Hoke and Borges make the other choice in 2011, and install Borges's offense on the spot, without any modifications for the talent on hand. Denard is given a chance to compete at QB but he isn't a good fit for a true WCO and he winds up moving to WR or RB, where he's going to end up playing in the pros after all and where he would have been all along if he'd played for anyone but RR.
Mattison/Hoke/Hecklinski et al work the same magic with the defense they did in real life. The offense sputters, like Borges's offenses always do in his first year. We go 8-5, people are sad about Denard but damn, look at that defense, that feels like Michigan again, maybe we're on the right track.
The second year there's still some mismatch of talent/scheme but people are starting to learn the offense and fit into the new roles. By year 3 the thing's fully installed and it looks like last year but with some better run blocking and with a more experienced Gardner. Hoke's first three years are 8-5, 8-5, 9-4.
And everyone's basically happy. Or, to quote Harbaugh, at least they're the least unhappy.
The weird part is: given the choice between the two scenarios, nobody would choose that over 11-2, Sugar Bowl, Denard. But giving us what we wanted is what has Hoke's seat warm. It got hopes too high too fast; it flipped the trend line the wrong way. And the transition that would have been seen as a valid excuse in '11, just like it was in '08, wasn't seen that way when it was put off by two years.
|2 days 5 hours ago||"a lot of those [Big 12] teams dont play defense either"||
I think that impression is an artefact of tempo.
Here's the average defensive FEI for the five power conferences last year (negative is good, zero is FBS-average, and these numbers are tempo- and schedule-adjusted):
The worst defense in the Big 12 was ISU at #76. Each of the other five conferences had at least two teams worse than that; the SEC had three.
The SEC's usually at the top of this list but they had a really bad defensive year last year, collectively. They didn't have anyone in the top 6 (every conference had a team rank ahead of the SEC's best) and Kentucky was the worst power-conference defense in the country.
|2 days 11 hours ago||What I think I don't quite||
What I think I don't quite understand is: why are people mad precisely now? What makes winning most of your games, but not as convincingly as we'd like, worse than the actual losing was? Why is 15-9 worse than 6-18?
A lot of posts here, reaching back for a time when things were as bad as they are now, reach for '07. That's weird.
|2 days 11 hours ago||Wins against good teams.||
I can think of a couple of ways to tackle that one. I'm not sure what I'll find but here goes with the first and quicker of the two.
Using Massey as always (unlike the other computer services he has a free and functional website), Michigan's best win last year was over ND, who finished #29.
Here's the best win of the other conference schools:
Four of the other eleven conference teams had better wins than Michigan's best, seven did not. That's above conference average, in what I think we probably all agree was by some distance Hoke's worst season of the three.
That analysis is crude and not very enlightening, but I think the point is that top-20 wins are rare and Michigan's six-year drought (the last was Carr's last game) isn't as unusual as we think. The entire conference only had one top-20 win last year.
|2 days 11 hours ago||To play devil's advocate for a minute||
I think the counterargument would be that Michigan has institutional and structural advantages that mean that an average FBS coach should be able to do better than average there. That's fair as far as it goes--Indiana hasn't been at the basement of the conference for decades just because they've had a long, long parade of terrible coaches. Some situations are better than others.
But that's why I brought up the comparison to the prior period.