So I was trying to find the Al Pacino pump up video that I watched countless times before the Ohio State game last year but I am having no luck. Does anyone know where I can find it? It ends with the "Hellooooo Heisman" sound clip.
According to MGoComrade SeniorBearcat, Dave Brandon said today that he could see the Big Ten expanding to 14 teams over the next few years:
DB sees the Big 10 at 14 teams in the next couple of years, with 16 teams being possible. Only big name teams that have a large market share / successful in sports and in academics. He did not name names, but mentioned only a few schools fit that profile.
If this is true, what could the teams be? Going by big market share in athletics and academics, and geographic contiguity, other than ND, who makes the cut?
With Nebraska in the fold, the geographically contiguous states are: Wyoming, South Dakota, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York.
Here are the I-A (FBS) teams in each of these contiguous states (I am assuming that the Big Ten will not seek to add a team in an existing Big Ten state, because the idea is to expand the television footprint):
CO: Colorado, Colorado State, Air Force
KS: Kansas, Kansas State
KY: Kentucky, Western Kentucky, Louisville
WV: West Virginia, Marshall
MD: Maryland, Navy
NY: Syracuse, Buffalo, Army
Of these schools, the remotely plausible candidates are Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, and the service academies.
Strong athletics (FB or BB): Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, WVU
Strong academics: Army, Navy, Air Force
Decent TV markets: Missouri, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, Army, Navy, Air Force
Now I know that they don't have the most powerful programs anymore, but how cool would it be to add Army and Navy to the Big Ten? Two old-time college football powers in major East Coast states. Awesome academics and premier research institutions. High-character institutions. Air Force could also fit this bill, but it's a smaller TV market than New York or the DC area.
What say you, Comrades?
“I find that I don't care about Ohio State at all.” (Brian Cook, 11/23/2010)
Has it come to this? That during this week, the week of Thanksgiving and our unity against the common foe of That Team Down South, our esteemed leader can’t bring himself to care about Ohio State?
Cannibalism may be fun for the short term, but in isolation it’s not a viable long-term survival strategy. To repeat the already-repeated obvious – everyone wants Michigan football to be good on the field, good in the classroom, and good in society. That’s the end, upon which we all agree (though likely with different views on the appropriate mix of those three factors). What we can’t agree on is the most effective means to that end.
All this shouting has become tiresome, and it seems like the site has become a perverse echo chamber. Rodriguez has improved in wins every year… he lacks ‘quality’ wins. The offense has improved… the defense has worsened. The cupboard was bare…the pantry was emptied. Inexperience has been exploited and will improve…experienced bad players are still bad players. The coaches demand the most out of the players… the coaches can’t get the most out of the players. It’s GERG’s fault… it’s the guy who hired GERG’s fault. New blood was needed…the old way worked.
One thing we can learn from economics – when there’s only one dimension to consider, there’s generally an optimal position to maximize total happiness (or utility, or whatever). Imagine a single ice cream stand on a beach full of sunbathers – the optimal location of the ice cream stand is the one that minimizes the total distance that the sunbathers have to walk. But when we start adding multiple dimensions – younger customers are willing to walk further, the demand varies by the weather, some customers will walk further for certain flavors but not for others, there’s an Italian ice stand as well, customers have different amounts they can pay, some ingredients are more costly than others, and you have to pay rent for the beach space, etc. – there no longer is a clear optimum. Furthermore, there’s no mathematical solution – you can only simulate and try to find optima.
We’re at the point where there’s no math, no hard and fast truth, that clearly states the right course of action for the program. We are all finding our local optima and arguing from that point. Sure, some points aren’t actually optimal, but there’s so many of points of discussion that it becomes impossible to determine the truth. (Note: Brian, a comp sci guy, would argue that with enough data processing power the truth can be discerned from all but the most random of data points – but we’re not supercomputers).
What’s the way out of this mess? The Founding Fathers had it figured out – representation. We are, collectively, the muddled masses with a multitude of conflicting, confusing opinions. And so we need a representative to sort it all out. In this case our representative wasn’t elected; he was chosen, but he’s ours nevertheless. And while David Brandon may have some flaws, it’s hard to argue that there’s anyone in the world better suited to be Michigan’s Athletic Director. And it’s his call. Will he make the ‘right’ decision? I don’t know. I do know he’ll make the best decision he can, and he’s the best person to make that decision, and what more can you ask for?
So that’s how I’ve learned to stop worrying and love the pimp (hand). I hope that MGoBlog can remain the blog for many Michigan fans, one that educates, informs, considers, and most importantly has fun in the process. Fight amongst yourselves if you must, but remember that we ALL agree on the end, and it’s OK to disagree on the means. Remember that all but the lamest of arguments have some good points to consider. And remember that if your side ‘loses’, suck it up and move on. Besides, we always have women’s softball. Or is there a firecarolhutchins.com site?
IMO thanks to the video footage from WolverineHistorian, it has me visualizing a special game from Michigan football. So why can't we see a double reverse? Or maybe a Denard pass to Daryl Stonum then back to Denard for a td! Just like Woodson to Griese! Clearly this team came close of recovering two on side kicks vs Wiscy. So my question is will we see a trick play from RR or an onside kick? Go Blue! (sorry been watching footage from '88 to '00 games)
Ball State fired coach Stan Parrish on Tuesday after two lackluster seasons with the Cardinals.
Athletic director Tom Collins said in a statement, "As we evaluated the on-field performance and the football program in its entirety, we decided it was time for a change in direction in the leadership of the program." Sources told Joe Schad of ESPN.com on Monday night that Parrish would not return.
Ball State went 12-2 and won the MAC West in 2008 under then-coach Brady Hoke. But after he left for San Diego State, Parrish was promoted from assistant head coach to head coach.
Ball State just finished up a 2-10 season. In two years as head coach, Parrish went 6-18. Parrish was on the MAC football conference call on Monday, but his future was never addressed. He said this about his team:
"We had two games in hand that we gave away. I thought we could have been a six-win team," Parrish said. "We did not take that step defensively I thought we were going to take. We have a lot of very good skill players. The key is to develop that toughness and get better and move forward from here."
Offensive coordinator Eddie Faulkner will serve as interim head coach.
Parrish is the second MAC coach who will not return to his team next season. Kent State coach Doug Martin announced Sunday night he was resigning after the season finale Friday night.
Doc Sat's take on Auburn. Auburn, has a great O and a very mediocre D, and will be playing in the SEC title game. But can they win a national title?
It may not be a block buster, but it is football. I will be rooting for Temple since Miami is in Ohio. Also Al Golden is a rumored outsider to fill JoePa's shoes after the 2034 season.
It actually makes me feel even more confident in the future of this program under Rich Rod when I see the trolling going on here by fans of other teams wanting and encouraging the dismissal of RR. The fear level of our opponents is climbing even with things still not firing on all cylinders. When we field a midling defense in the next year or two there is going to be a lot of crying in the Midwest....I doubt they will come back here and admit it though.
Thank you kind trolls for your fear----it brings warm feelings to my heart.
College Football News compares "Player A" and "Player B" and says the Heisman race should be closer than people are giving credit for should Michigan pull off the upset over OSU.
Player A’s résumé: 1) Ranks third in the nation in rushing. 2) Ranks second in the nation in total offense. 3) Is the first player in the history of college football to be in the 2,000 passing-yard, 1,500 rushing-yard in one season club. 4) Is 16th in the nation in passing efficiency. 5) Has completed 63% of his passes with 16 touchdowns, ten interceptions, and averages 6.8 yards per carry with 14 touchdowns despite missing a good portion of several games hurt. 6) He has accounted for 3,767 of his team’s 5,660 yards, or 67% of his team’s production.
Player B’s résumé: 1) Ranks ninth in the nation in rushing. 2) Ranks tenth in the nation in total offense. 3) Is 203 rushing yards away from being the second player in the history of college football to be in the 2,000 passing-yard, 1,500 rushing-yard in one season club. 4) Is second in the nation in passing efficiency. 5) Has completed 68% of his passes with 21 touchdowns and six interceptions, but ten of those scoring strikes came against Arkansas State, ULM, and Chattanooga. He averages 6.3 yards per carry with 17 touchdown runs. 6) He has accounted for 3,335 of his team’s 5,557 yards, or 60% of his team’s production.
I hope Denard at least gets the recognition of being invited to New York for the Heisman ceremony for having one of the greatest seasons in the history of college football.
Here's this week's update to The Michigan Difference, updated with stats from this week's games.
Another bipolar game against Wisconsin. The final offensive output was pretty good, but the defense couldn't stand up to their rushing attack. We remain #5 in Total Offense (TO) and are now #112 in Total Defense (TD).
Disclaimer: The NCAA stats are not linear, of course, and a difference of 1 yd/gm can be a large or small difference in rankings depending on how closely spaced everyone is. So as I cautioned, this isn't a hard-core statistical exercise. This analysis is pretty one-dimensional because it's long and complicated enough as it is.
I think the greatest value in this is to look back at the early games and see how well we did in comparison to what other teams ended up doing against them - what seemed like a good or bad performance at the time may look different in retrospect.
Part the First: Offense
We know our offense is great, but what kind of damage has it done to the Total Defense (TD) ratings of our opponents? Here they are thus far:
|Opponent||Games||Yards Yielded||Yds/gm||NCAA Rank|
What would these guys' defensive stats look like if they hadn't played Michigan?
|Opponent||Total Offense, M||
Opp. Avg - M,
M Total Offense,
*Opponents' average Total Defense yards per game, minus the Michigan game
**Michigan's Total Offense in game as a % of the opponent's average TD minus the Michigan game
Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin's defenses really wish they hadn't played us. They'd be in the top 20 nationally but for one game. Michigan has gained above our opponents' average yardage yielded in every game thus far, and their Total Defense rankings have suffered as a result. What's the damage?
|Opponent||TD Rank With M||TD Rank Without M||Difference|
Average change in Total Defense ranking for all opponents: -10.1 places.
Looking at the offensive performance versus the quality of the defense:
There is little correlation between Michigan's Total Offense for a game and their opponent's average Total Defense (minus M). Whatever is limiting our offense's output in a game, it is not directly related to the number of yards the opponent usually gives up. This would suggest that the offense tends to be limited by itself, rather than the opponent.
Part the Second, Defense
So the flipside of this, then, is how much has our defensive suckitude helped out our opponents stat sheet? Where would they rank in Total Offense without having played us? We'll run the same tables again, but from the opposite tack:
|Opponent||Games||Yards Gained||Yds/gm||NCAA Rank|
Wisconsin is easily the strongest offensive team we've faced thus far. The results of the game show that. MSU was pretty good, the rest varying degrees of average to bad.
|Total Defense, M||
Opp. Avg - M,
Opp Total Offense,
% of Opp Avg - M**
* Opponents' average Total Offensive performance, minus the Michigan game
** Opponents' Total Offense as a percentage of their average offensive performance, minus the Michigan game
Here's a nifty graph of our opponents' Total Offense against Michigan, versus their average Total Offense per game without the Michigan game:
In this case, we do have a reasonably good correlation. Our defense does worse against better offenses. That would suggest that we're talent-limited somewhere (either coaches or players) and the opponents' offenses tend to have their way with us. In other words, our defense doesn't shut anybody down. The more yards our opponents average per game, the better they'll do against us.
|Opponent||TO Rank With M||TO Rank Without M||Difference|
Average boost to opponents' Total Offense NCAA ranking: +5.9 places
From this perspective, the Wisconsin game was our 4th worst defensive performance of the year. As bad as we looked, three other games were worse. We were up against a very good offense, and it showed.
Part the Third: Summary
Michigan's O Difference
on Opp TD Ranking
Michigan's D Difference
on Opp TO Ranking
|Connecticut||-12||+1||W: Good O, OK D|
|Notre Dame||-15||+11||W: Good O, Terrible D|
|Bowling Green||-20||0||W: Awesome O, OK D|
|Indiana||-8||+14||W: Good O, Terrible D|
|Michigan State||-1||+10||L: OK O, Terrible D|
|Iowa||-8||0||L: Good O, OK D|
|Penn State||-4||+6||L:Good O, Bad D|
|Illinois||-22||+9||W:, Awesome O, Terrible D|
|Purdue||-1||--1||W: OK O, OK D|
|Wisconsin||-10||+9||L: Good O, Terrible D|
In subtly maize-and-blue graphical form:
New observations for this week:
Many of our previous opponents had good weeks offensively, making our defense look a bit
betterless bad in those previous games.
- Wisconsin is easily the best team we've faced yet. Offensive and defensive performances were close to mid-pack, but we got our butts kicked.
- Our offense remains impressive and will keep getting better.
- Our defense is terrible and had better get a lot better.
- Winning is still a lot more fun than losing.