NCAA football rules related to concussions

NCAA football rules related to concussions

Submitted by Bob The Wonder Dog on October 1st, 2014 at 6:21 AM
Useful info to have in hand when debating culpability. 
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Injury Timeout
ARTICLE 5. a. In the event of an injured player(s):
1. An official will declare a timeout and the player(s) must leave the game. He must remain out of the game for at least one down. When in question, officials will take a timeout for an injured player.
2. The player(s) may not return to the game until he receives approval of professional medical personnel designated by his institution.
3. Officials and coaches shall give special attention to players who exhibit signs of a concussion. (See Appendix C).
....
 
 
Appendix C
Concussions
A concussion is a brain injury that may be caused by a blow to the head, face, neck or elsewhere on the body with an “impulsive” force transmitted to the head. Concussions can occur without loss of consciousness or other obvious signs. A repeat concussion that occurs before the brain recovers from the previous one (hours, days or weeks) can slow recovery or increase the likelihood of having long-term problems. In rare cases, repeat concussions can result in brain swelling, permanent brain damage and even death.
Recognize and Refer: To help recognize a concussion, watch for the following two events among your student-athletes during both games and practices:
1. A forceful blow to the head or body that results in rapid movement of the head.
-AND-
2. Any change in the student-athlete’s behavior, thinking or physical functioning 
(see signs and symptoms).
SIGNS AND SYMPTOMS
Signs Observed By Coaching Staff Symptoms Reported By Student-Athlete 
• Appears dazed or stunned. • Headache or “pressure” in head. 
• Is confused about assignment or position. • Nausea or vomiting. 
• Forgets plays. • Balance problems or dizziness. 
• Is unsure of game, score or opponent. • Double or blurry vision. 
• Moves clumsily. • Sensitivity to light. 
• Answers questions slowly. • Sensitivity to noise. 
• Loses consciousness (even briefly). • Feeling sluggish, hazy, foggy or groggy. 
• Shows behavior or personality changes. • Concentration or memory problems. 
• Can’t recall events before hit or fall. • Confusion. 
• Can’t recall events after hit or fall. • Does not “feel right.” 
An athlete who exhibits signs, symptoms or behaviors consistent with a concussion, either at rest or during exertion, should be removed immediately from practice or competition and should not return to play until cleared by an appropriate health care professional. Sports have injury timeouts and player substitutions so that student-athletes can get checked.
IF A CONCUSSION IS SUSPECTED:
1. Remove the student-athlete from play. Look for the signs and symptoms of concussion if your student-athlete has experienced a blow to the head. Do not allow the student-athlete to just “shake it off.” Each individual athlete will respond to concussions differently.
2. Ensure that the student-athlete is evaluated right away by an appropriate health care professional. Do not try to judge the severity of the injury yourself. Immediately refer the student-athlete to the appropriate athletics medical staff, such as a certified athletic trainer, team physician or health care professional experienced in concussion evaluation and management.
3. Allow the student-athlete to return to play only with permission from a health care professional with experience in evaluating for concussion. Allow athletics medical staff to rely on their clinical skills and protocols in evaluating the athlete to establish the appropriate time to return to play. A return-to-play progression should occur in an individualized, step-wise fashion with gradual increments in physical exertion and risk of contact. Follow your 
institution’s physician supervised concussion management protocol.
4. Develop a game plan. Student-athletes should not return to play until cleared by the appropriate athletics medical staff. In fact, as concussion management continues to evolve with new science, the care is becoming more conservative and return-to-play time frames are getting longer. Coaches should have a game plan that accounts for student-athletes to be out for at least the remainder of the day.
 
For further details please refer to the “NCAA Sports Medicine Handbook Guideline on Concussions” or online at www.NCAA.org/health-safety and www.CDC.gov/Concussion.
 

NCAA's role in concussion-gate

NCAA's role in concussion-gate

Submitted by Mr. Elbel on September 30th, 2014 at 12:28 PM

To clarify right off the bat, I do not want to see the NCAA get involved in what is going on right now, because that will only make matters worse for the future. But, I do think that it is pertinent to ask what their role is in this whole ridiculous situation that we now find ourselves in.

Specifically, if the NCAA claims that its focus is on students athletes, their safety, their best interests (which we all know is laughable based on the fact that money > everything else for the NCAA), is there any point at which they could step in and say that the AD, Hoke, and the medical staff at M's handling of the situation on Saturday and thereafter warrants disciplinary action against the university? Again, I don't really want that to happen, because I think that the way that the NCAA hands down discipline does not actually solve any of the actual problems. But even an investigation could prompt the board (which, not sure why they'd need any more reason to be prompted, but at this point I'm not expecting anyone in leadership to step up and make the right decision) to take action against DB/Hoke.

I'm not at all familiar with the NCAA's policies when it comes to student athlete safety, but it would seem that if they are trying to promote their supposed deep concerns for the safety of these kids that they would act when something this outlandish happens.

MGoBlog's First Impression of Brady Hoke

MGoBlog's First Impression of Brady Hoke

Submitted by evenyoubrutus on September 29th, 2014 at 12:33 PM

This seems relevant now.  The first time Brady Hoke appeared on MGoBlog's main page was back in December of 2007, during the first coaching search to replace Lloyd Carr.  It would seem that first impressions are usually correct.

Here's the best part:

Even in the realm of people who Michigan would approach after getting turned down by everyone -- EVERYONE -- there are vastly preferable candidates: Ron English. Mike Trgovic. Glen Mason. Jon Chait. Me. The Golden Retriever from "Air Bud: Golden Receiver." Mussolini, who is dead. Dick Vitale. Sigourney Weaver. Richard Nixon's penis. Sigourney Weaver's penis. All of these people and organs don't have a track record that suggests they are a below average MAC coach. It is in this way they are superior to Brady Hoke.

This is also prophetic:

Overall Attractiveness: Awful. Awful, awful, awful. The worst possible candidate. The mere idea this guy -- who's never even been a coordinator anywhere and has his MAC team performing at a level well below the program's historical baseline -- could get the job is infuriating. Only at Michigan could this happen, and if it does I guarantee you that Bo is going to haunt the mofo that signs the contract.

The Silver Lining: I Have Found It

The Silver Lining: I Have Found It

Submitted by Jon06 on September 28th, 2014 at 11:35 PM

I thought for a while that Brady Hoke's treatment of Shane Morris was without parallel, and then I remembered Lane Kiffin's treatment of Robert Woods against Utah in 2012. And here is the silver lining: there is no record, at least so far as I can find on the internet, of USC fans demanding Kiffin's head for the dangerously poor judgment.

The Michigan Difference is just this: this community actually cares. We care about the safety of our players and the integrity of our coaches. When a coach does not live up to the standard of integrity at Michigan, we demand change. When an athletic director runs a program that does not put the well-being of student-athletes first, we demand change. And when a football player's future is endangered by the incompetence or callousness of a coaching staff entrusted with his development and protection but blinded to the realities of medical science by the mantra of toughness, we demand change. Let there be change. Ensuring that the job not only gets done, but gets done right--that's the Michigan Difference. This time, at least, it has to be.

Sub-snowflake addendum: the main reason I don't like Dave Brandon is that he is the only person I have ever met in the administration at Michigan--and maybe Brady Hoke will turn out to be this kind of person, too--who does not respond to criticism from their Wolverine brethren with an honest attempt to learn from the feedback to do the job at a level that reflects well on an institution that's bigger than all of us. Dave Brandon is the only one who reacts to criticism with sarcastic dismissal, the only one who won't listen to his fellow Wolverine, and the only one who does not do everything he can to do the job at a level Michigan deserves.

Will Brandon Address Morris Topic?

Will Brandon Address Morris Topic?

Submitted by davidhm on September 28th, 2014 at 5:36 PM

In the wake of yesterday's fiasco, we've obviously heard from Coach Hoke. However, we've not heard from Dave Brandon.  I didn't expect him to necessarily hold a press conference, but I did expect him to release a statement.  

While most are calling for a press conference to announce the firing of Hoke on Monday - which I would not be against - what are the chances we get a statement/release from Brandon on Monday to address the issue with Morris' playing while visibly injured?  

I personally do not expect anything on Monday, but I do expect the silence to reach "deafening" proportions by weeks end and Brandon will have to take to the podium or at least grant an interview with a loal journalist.  Especially as more local journalists criticize Hoke's player management and safety. 

From the Student Section Isn't Going to Take It Anymore

From the Student Section Isn't Going to Take It Anymore

Submitted by SaddestTailgateEver on September 28th, 2014 at 2:59 PM

After a game where just so incredibly many things went wrong, it is a bit of a tall order to sit down and write something coherent about the student experience. The student experience, after all, isn’t so fundamentally different than the experience of most of the rest of the stadium, except perhaps that the viewing angle is increased ever so slightly. Oh and louder, definitely louder. The articles and write-ups note the students growing increasingly upset and starting to chant “Fire Brandon” (not “Brady” as some have noted; at least not from the student section) in the third quarter. This misses something markedly different from this game. In the previous games the students, like the rest of the fans, held their fire until some opportune moment. Last week it was attendance numbers that no one believed. The first notable “boos” came after timeout and clock mismanagement. This week, the students didn’t waste any time. Before the game even started, before anything had actually gone wrong, before we ran out of tires to throw on what little remains of the dumpster/tire hybrid fire, the students started chanting to fire Brandon. It reminds me of the scene from “Network”:

 

The students, the current 20,000 12,000 member block, and future 89,901 75,000 member block of the stadium are as mad as hell and they’re not going to take this anymore. With the “Fire Brandon” chants audible over TV, never mind to everyone in attendance at the game, and, by the third quarter, continuing every time the band stopped playing, it seemed hard to see how this once proud, once great, and once principled program could sink any deeper. But then it did.

For the last two weeks the student section has had the perspective to see the more frightening aspects of the game. Last week, many in my row were convinced we had just watched Utah’s starting quarterback die, or at least become paralyzed, about 20 yards in front of us. It was so shocking that the students immediately stopped celebrating the stop and became deathly silent, at least those close enough to see clearly what had happened. This week we again were witness to one of the more frightening, more horrifying, moments of the game. The students could see immediately after the leg injury that Shane was in no position to continue. We watched, aghast, as he nevertheless did. Then came the late hit and we watched Shane stumble into a lineman, and we watched in horror as a clearly concussed Morris remained on the field. We yelled; we booed; we screamed for him to come out, trying desperately to get someone to hear us and make the only sensible decision. It didn’t work. To leave Shane in like that was reprehensible, irresponsible, and showed such wanton disregard for player safety that it left many of the students angry, confused, and sickened. Whether or not Hoke was being honest when he said that he did not know that Shane looked wobbly is entirely irrelevant. As the head coach, it is his responsibility to know. If he doesn’t or if he can’t, it’s time to move on. Michigan has always been about the players, developing them into young men of class and character, and, if we’re lucky, perhaps some noteworthy football talent as well. What happened today was inexcusable for any team, let alone one that prides itself on what it does for the players.

The game then wound down. The anger and frustration of the last 10 minutes still palpable, but no longer being viscerally screamed at anyone on the field who might hear. Gardner’s solid playing in his time in the game, while helping reduce the ire at the outcome, did nothing to change the conviction that had been burned into those watching. To make matters worse, toward the end of the game two things happened on the sidelines near the student section:

  1. A dramatic increase in police and event staff presence.
  2. A rope being held along the sideline and end zone, presumably to prevent a field rush (??).

Did either of these things directly impact my, or really any other students’ lives? Not really. Nevertheless, the symbolism remains. One needs look little further than this to get a good grasp on why the students are so upset with the athletic department. Is the department so distrustful of the students that they want to keep them in line by show of force? Are they so delusional to think that the students would rush the field after a loss? After even a win over Minnesota? over Utah? over literally any home game this season? They’ve taken our water bottles so that they can sell water for $5; they’ve prohibited numerous innocuous items from entering the stadium; three separate event staff members tried to tell me I wouldn’t be allowed to bring a cowbell into the stadium; you can’t bring bags; you can’t bring food. And yet after all of this, they expect us to keep paying such exorbitant prices for tickets? To keep showing up? Don’t get me wrong, I love Michigan Football, I love the Michigan Stadium experience; it’s just that, under Dave Brandon I have yet to really experience either at the Big House.

How much influence does Hoke have on the OC?

How much influence does Hoke have on the OC?

Submitted by Yeoman on September 28th, 2014 at 11:22 AM

Some comments on the locker room issues thread got me thinking. Or datamining, anyway, I don't know how much thinking was involved.

RockinLoud and Johnvand suggested Hoke might be forcing Nussmeier to play a style he didn't necessarily want to play, the offensive problems now being "eerily reminiscent" of the defense under RR.

Of course with RR we had clear evidence that this was happening because they were running a 3-3-5 that neither of the coordinators ever ran before or since. I didn't see anything similar happening now but Gobgoblue pointed out that Alabama had more of a vertical passing game last year than Michigan has now.

Well, that's something that might leave a tangible mark in the box score, so I pulled some stats from Nussmeier's offenses since he became an OC: the percentage of play calls that are runs (sacks are included here of course but they don't impact the percentages all that much), and yards per completion, which might serve as a measure of route depth. Anything over 13 is a pretty big number; over 15 is mad-bomber territory unless you're running a triple option and only throwing a few times per game.

  run % ypc
2008 Fresno St. 56.3% 12.1
2009 Washington 49.6% 12.3
2010 Washington 56.1% 12.1
2011 Washington 52.7% 12.4
2012 Alabama 63.5% 13.9
2013 Alabama 55.8% 13.2
2014 Michigan 56.8% 11.3

The run/pass mix hasn't changed, but yards per completion are definitely down.

The problem is, YPC only measures the ones you catch. Are we not throwing the ball downfield, or are we just not completing the downfield balls we throw? That's impossible to tell from the box scores, we'd need charts of Alabama's offense to know.

The next chart's more interesting. Here's Al Borges's career:

  run % ypc
1995 Oregon 49.6% 12.1
1996 UCLA 56.4% 14.0
1997 UCLA 60.7% 16.6
1998 UCLA 57.6% 16.7
1999 UCLA 52.8% 13.4
2000 UCLA 53.9% 14.8
2001 California 47.8% 12.4
2002 Indiana 49.3% 13.2
2003 Indiana 62.7% 11.5
2004 Auburn 64.2% 14.6
2005 Auburn 58.7% 13.3
2006 Auburn 62.5% 13.1
2007 Auburn 60.4% 11.4
2009 SDSU 42.3% 12.9
2010 SDSU 50.8% 15.7
2011 Michigan 66.4% 15.3
2012 Michigan 61.2% 15.3
2013 Michigan 55.8% 13.6

When Borges and Hoke first hooked up, Al passed more than he ever had before. Even the second year when they had Ronnie Hillman running rampant the run/pass mix was still at the low end of Borges's career numbers.

And then they came to Michigan and it turned upside down.

Yes. Denard. True. But in 2013 when Denard was gone and the run game had collapsed they were still running the ball more than they had with Hillman.

Something happened between 2010 and 2011 and it wasn't Brady Hoke because, thankfully, the experiment was constructed so that variable was held constant.

What changed was the move from San Diego to Ann Arbor, not the coaches. And my unfounded suspicion is that a decision was taken to rebrand Michigan football.

We can change coaches all we want. As long as the brand is more important than the product, this isn't going to get fixed.

Continuity, establishing an identity, that I understand. These 180-degree turnarounds in philosophy are damaging; you want the players you recruit to get to play in a system that works for them. But if the managing of public perceptions starts influencing coaching decisions, it's a problem.

Best and Worst: Minnesota

Best and Worst: Minnesota

Submitted by bronxblue on September 27th, 2014 at 10:12 PM

This is going to be a little shorter than normal for a variety of reasons.  Mostly because I have better things to do than rehash another ass-kicking, but also because I have a half-marathon on Sunday that I decided would be a good idea not training for and I want to enjoy my last couple of hours with functioning calves.

Worst:  Caring is Creepy

I want to care.  I really do.  I want to look at barely 100 yards of total offense against Minnesota through 3 quarters, giving up 30 straight points, the pick-six, the continued dumb punting, everything and care.  And the fact I'm going to write over 3,000 words about it probably means I still do in some way.  But right now, man, I just don't know why I keep watching this team.  I get that Brian and co. need to because this site pays the bills, but what's in it for fans like me who are supposed to derive pleasure from watching their alma mater line up every Saturday?  As I've mentioned before, I have a young daughter, a beautiful wife, good health, and enough hobbies to keep me busy most weekends.  And yet, even after Notre Dame.  Even after Utah.  Even after the last x number of years of watching Michigan football screw it up more times than not, in ever-more-agonizing fashion, I keep coming back.  

I don't know anymore.  I might keep writing these columns out of force of habit, but I don't know why it matters.  Michigan is poofarting its way toward its 4th coach in 7 years, another 2 months of talk radio complaining, former players calling out the current administration, anonymous sources reporting Dave Brandon is out, is getting a raise, is wandering around Meijers at 2 in the morning trying to Synergize with valued consumers about their love for Michigan and Dr. Pepper.  

This season is 5 games in and it feels like it's been going on 40 years, the saddest carousel just spinning around and around while little kids are bored and everyone just wants to get off and get on some other ride.  Somebody commented in my last post that they wish I showed more emotion in these posts, that I write them about passion but don't display it.  Well, this is what ennui looks and writes like.  It's a broken guy who is looking at the screen and looking forward to apple picking next weekend with his family over watching his favorite team in the whole f'ing world get worked over by a commuter school in NJ because it means Cablevision might carry the B1G Network on its basic package instead of the extra "sports" one I pay for.  

Ugh.

 

Worst:  Compounded Stupidity

Shane Morris is trying his best out there, so I want it to be clear that I am not questioning him.  But there is no reason in the world why he should have started this game if Gardner was even remotely healthy, and nothing in this game dispelled the notion for all of his failings, Gardner is the better QB for this particular team right now.  Morris threw one pick-6 that was a combination of poor blocking and staring down a receiver as soon as they broke the huddle, but he also threw 2-3 more passes that probably should have been picked off.  He also fumbled a ball for no particular reason, and after being injured early in the 3rd quarter was clearly moving in pain.  Morris may be the answer, but certainly not to the questions surrounding this putrid offense.

(I'll leave claims of Morris possibly being concussed and still on the field for those with more information, because I wasn't there and we've seen many players take shots and bounce back up.  Not to play devil's advocate, but it looked as much like Morris had the wind knocked out of him by that hit than he was concussed, and the fact he was taken out 2 plays later felt like a coaching staff realizing something more was up than a hit.  Putting him in a couple of plays later for that handoff is obviously bad, and his fumbling with a response in the postgame didn't help anything.  [EDIT] That said, Brady Hoke is many things, but it takes a pretty extreme jump in logic [admittedly, one that a certain subset of the fanbase is dying to make] to claim that he would knowingly endanger the health of one of his players in a game.  But as more information comes out, that could obviously change the story.  I'm just wary of the reactionary tone that took over immediately following the game, especially by [mostly] uninvolved third parties).

And yet, Hoke just kept running him out there, giving him the "game experience" of having 300 pound men land on his injured leg and forcing bad throws into bad coverage while the line crumbles around him.  Mercifully he was pulled late in the 4th quarter, his ankle clearly ravaged and immediately bound up in bags of ice, and then Gardner was sent in to, I don't know, try to move the offense after being put so far behind the 8-ball that he was basically playing Snooker.  After the first sustained scoring drive of the day gave the fans a slight bit of hope, the offense again became bogged down after poor field position and that was the game.

Sadly, this is becoming a running theme with Hoke.  Like his QBs after one too many sacks, he locks onto a single target and just won't let go even when it is clearly futile.  In his mind, Shane Morris starting was the decision Brady Hoke, the head coach of Michigan, made, and come hell, high water, or complete scuttling of the offense he was going to play every down possible goddamnit.  As with the continued stupidity surrounding the punting formation (which cost them another 66 yards after last week's debacle) and his clear preference for a slowed-down, huddling offense, Hoke seems unwilling or unable to look at the current situation and reassess his options; like the mark at a Poker table, he can't read the table one bit and just keeps raising on his 2-7 because there's the possibility he'll hit a flush.  All coaches have their blind spots (RR was vilified for not changing his offense when he arrived at UM given the talent available, and the less we talk about GERG the better) but Hoke's seem so wide that we should probably just take his keys away.

Worst:  Tough Enough

One of the hottest of #HOTTAKES going on these past couple of weeks has been the railing against the "toughness" of the players the coaching staff.  Everywhere you go, you hear and read people questioning the heart and desire of this team, about its willingness to do "what is necessary" to win, to be great, and every other insipid sports cliche uttered by screenlight coaches and players.  Amplifying this mentality has been former players calling out the program and players, questioning their abilities and lobbying for the removal of the coaches and Dave Brandon.  The general sentiment on the always-reliable internet is that the program is rudderless and that the players have given up as a result, or at the very least aren't able to put the effort forth necessary to win.

I know last week I described the death of my optimism about this season, so this might sound a bit hypocritical to then attack others for voicing their own displeasure, but I am profoundly, mind-numbingly tired of people questioning the desire of college players and the people who have dedicated their lives to making them better.  Now, I'm not defending the results so far on the scoreboard, nor am I saying that I believe guys like Hoke, Funk, Ferrigno, etc. are the best choices for the jobs the currently inhabit.  I still believe that Hoke should be gone, as the number of boneheaded decisions (the punting formation fiasco and the lack of anything resembling tempo or urgency on offense being prime examples) has only increased since he's been at the helm.  But I absolutely believe that he cares about Michigan football and is trying his best to make it a winner, just like everyone else involved with the program; to question the effort and desire put forth by the players and coaches is asinine.

But caring about results is only part of the equation; you need to be able to perform well to achieve them, and obviously that is where the team has fallen short.  And some of that is maybe due to "mental toughness", though I guess I read that as more to do with lagging preparation and compounded mistakes than the idea that the players are too "dumb"/easily manipulated by bad circumstances and just mentally check out.  Nobody is happy with the season thus far in toto, but the reductiveness displayed by a portion of the fanbase that conflates this objective outcome with subjective interpretations of how much college-aged kids care about their performance is even worse.

It highlights the disconnect and, frankly, the gladiatorial "are you not entertained"-ness of how fans view most athletes, but it is especially disheartening when we treat college athletes, many of whom are juggling lives far more complicated and strained compared to their peers, as pawns for our entertainment.  When they succeed, we tend to imprint those successes on ourselves, taking pride in accomplishments we have no connection to beyond the fact that we root for the name on their jersies.  And when they inevitably fail to meet our expectations, we bristle at the equally-absurd insinuation that this reflects poorly on ourselves and our passion, resulting in questions of manhood and effort being put forth by people who are, with few exceptions, infinitely better at the sport they play than anyone reading about them is, was, or ever will be at it.

So as a fanbase, I would love nothing more than the bulk of people (because there are going to be mouthbreathers who stopped reading this post at the hashtag and will continue to perpetuate this behavior) stopped wondering about whether or not kids and coaches who represent Michigan care about putting forth the best effort possible (they do) and instead focus on how to support them while also fixing the MANY institutional and administrative issues that have lingered with this team through its various permutations.

Or, to put more succinctly, stop shitting on college kids because you don't like your team losing and need to rationalize that sad feeling in your stomach away by questioning the character of other people.

Best:  Fire Brandon

That's it.  Oh, you want something more?

Okay, Fire Everyone.

I'm fine with the fans chanting.  Might as well direct it toward something reasonable.  While I am loathe to believe it matters much to the people in control, the complete clusterf*ck that has been the athletic department these past couple of weeks might as well be highlighted by the brave souls who actually watched the game this week in person.  

Best:  Former Players Having Opinions
Worst:  Needing to Share Those Opinions Every Chance They Get

On one hand, I absolutely believe that fans of this team should voice their opinions, and that former players and others involved in the program have a unique perspective on how the team is being run and what should be its future.  I'm just a guy who sits on his couch 13 times a year watching Michigan football and remembers how it felt sitting in the stands over a decade ago watching them play under Lloyd Carr.  Like the overwhelming majority of fans, my involvement with the team began and ended when I paid for tickets, and even as an alum I don't feel any great connection to the program beyond the unhealthy obsession fostered by this site and the internet more generally.  So guys who bled for this team, who sat through the two-a-days, the tough losses, the long trips and the late-night study tables, and performed admirably for my entertainment should absolutely be allowed to hold their own opinions and, in certain contexts, feel free to voice them much in the same way I do here.

That said, there is a fine line between voicing your displeasure and piling on, and when you step over that line you are simply providing even more distractions for a program that doesn't need them.  When someone like me writes a couple thousand words bitching about the team, nobody puts a microphone in front of me or plasters it on the front page of the sports section, and that's probably for the best because I'm kind of an idiot.  But former players aren't nameless, faceless goobers; they are "important people" who "speak for the fans", and so their words are given extra meaning when they are probably based on the same raw emotions and frayed nerves that swell in most UM fans' hearts right now.  They aren't pointing out something new or unknown; to continue my analogy from last week regarding the Titanic, everyone's seen the f'ing iceberg and the ship ain't getting out of the way.  

Brady Hoke should be gone; full stop.  The likelihood of him surviving has moved from the nearly-impossible (beat OSU and/or MSU and win a bowl game) to non-existent; even with two upsets over the rivals I can't see the toxicity surrounding him to dissipate enough.  Wins will be treated as blind squirrels finding long-forgotten nuts; the core problems people have with him aren't going to change and, frankly, they would only become more calcified if Hoke could pull off a couple of wins to validate them.  

It may be counter-intuitive, but I think far volumes would be spoken by former players simply remaining silent through this whole process.  Brady Hoke isn't a bad guy (sure he's ornery with the press but that's the nature of any antagonistic relationship) and his love for the University is true and, sadly, unrequited right now.  But we've already seen with RR how a toxic environment, fostered in part by former players speaking out against him in the press with nothing more than poorly-thought-out rants and references to a fabricated "way we used to do things", can submarine a program when it is already floundering, and both for this team as well the next coach coming in, it would be a positive for everyone if the vitriol was dialed down.  I don't expect that to happen, but it would definitely help.

Meh:  70

That's the number of plays Minnesota ran against Michigan, including 40 in the first half.  For comparison, Michigan ran 53 plays all game.  I thought the defense held up reasonably well in the first half despite UM having only 1 drive in that first half that lasted more than about 2 minutes and change.  It felt a bit like watching the MSU game from last year, where the defense tried to hold the fort against a bruising team while the offense sputtered pretty spectacularly.  Even Smith's TD was mostly a short-field drive helped by a single long-ish run.  There was no sustained offensive playcalling, and it left the defense facing a rush-first team going downhill at halftime, especially after Minnesota worked their way down the field for a FG to end the half.  After stoning Minnesota on the first drive of the second half and holding them to a long FG after a bad punt gave the Gophers great field position, you had a sense that the defense desperately needed the offense to do something, anything to keep the floodgates from opening.  Of course, Morris then threw his pick-six and the game was effectively over.

I know it is popular to complain about every completion or positive run as if the defense is falling apart, but at some point you can't expect a defense to shut down a competent offense for 4 quarters.  Minnesota's offense isn't amazing by any stretch, but it knows what it's good at and when Mitch Leidner is hitting Maxxxxxxx Williams down the sideline for one-handed grabs, there's not much else you can do.  The corners, especially without Peppers and a still-slow Taylor, didn't look great, and the front seven played well but failed the dominate the line of scrimmage, which was going to be necessary to keep the game close.  Yet despite the offense's ineptitude, this was a game late into the 3rd quarter, and in another world with a different offense Michigan still could have pulled this game out.  I don't believe the defense is dominant, but it wasn't "exposed" here any more than most defenses are "exposed" when they are left out there far too long and without any real hope.

Worst:  The Offensive Line, Again

After a couple-game reprieve to start the year, the offensive line has been downright porous the last two weeks.  It's clearly a young unit trying to figure it out on the fly, and that obviously isn't conducive to keeping everyone healthy and upright.  That said, Minnesota was credited with 6 TFLs, but it felt like double, and this a week after Utah recorded double-digit TFLs and seemed to be living in the backfield.  The running game seemed marginally better with Smith in there, but outside of that one TD drive the rushing attack never got on track.  That, plus the mounting point differential, let Minnesota pin its ears back even more.  Tight end blocking remains a major issue, as Morris's near-safety in the endzone was only "saved" by Williams starting his hold outside of the endzone.  Neither side of the line seemed particularly sturdy, though with Morris as a lefty it will be interesting to see if that adversely affected blocking a bit more than usual.

As people have said, competency is the shining beacon at the top of the hill for this year, and right now that feels like it is miles away.

Worst:  Gotta (Get) Some Separation

I mentioned this a couple of weeks ago against Miami, but without Devin Funchess at full speed it doesn't feel like any of the other WRs can get consistent separation from opposing corners and open up the types of windows a QB needs to hit.  Given how bad Funchess has looked in the weeks since he picked up the most important 4 yards in the history of UM football against Notre Dame (hear those echoes), someone else in the receiving core needs to step up and provide an open target, and in this game it rarely seemed like anyone was doing that downfield.  True, Morris didn't help the matter by consistently throwing behind, ahead, around, etc. his receivers, but when your QB's long completion is 14 yards and it's to the guy with a gimpy ankle, you are in trouble.  It does feel like the team might be overflowing with possession receivers, which is great if you have other options but deadly when the defense can sit on them without fear of being burned deep.  Minnesota does have a good secondary and Morris was, again, pretty erratic, but if this team has any hope of moving the ball going forward somebody is going to have to start catching the ball downfield.

Worst:  Next Week

I keep saying it couldn't be worse but it still does.  Rutgers should be a very winnable game, but who the heck knows anymore.  I presume Gardner will get the start so that will help, and Gary Nova may just be inept enough that Michigan can pull out a win.  But I'm finally ready to accept that Michigan is going to probably blow this game, and it might get ugly at the end.  I hope I'm proven wrong, but I'm definitely not going to worry about it either way.

NEW Gregg Henson article alleges ex-players signed petition to fire Brandon

NEW Gregg Henson article alleges ex-players signed petition to fire Brandon

Submitted by FabFiver5 on September 25th, 2014 at 11:11 PM

Gregg Henson has published a new article on his website alleging that more than 450 former football players signed a petition and presented it to the Regents to have Dave Brandon removed. 

Among other things, there's an alleged email exceprt from a "former football captain" that lists all the things the players can't stand about Brandon. If you like juicy info and potentional conspiracy theories, this piece is chock-full.

If any or all of this is true, look out, fireworks may actually start happening around the Big House.

READ HERE