Unverified Voracity Pulls Out The Durr Sharks Comment Count

Brian

Too busy to read the message board? Watch it. So this happened. It is a NSFW postmodern message board conversation verbalized by xtranormal:

Listen to the British woman.

Lord of the flies. An injury update from Penn State has more bad news for the Nittany Lions:

"Latimore, I'd be doubtful if we get anything out of Eric the rest of the year, although he may be ready for a game or two. Crawford has not done anything yet. ... I doubt if he'd be ready this week. Crawford might be ready next week."

That would be Eric Latimore and Jack Crawford, the nominal starting defensive ends. Latimore will be out for Michigan, with Crawford either on the bench or gamely giving it a go. Sean Stanley's status is still up in the air after it was revealed his violation of team rules was a marijuana arrest. He's practicing with the team and I'd be shocked if a simple possession charge would keep Stanley out four games. He's already missed two. Unless there's something else going on he'll probably start in Latimore's place, with either Crawford or unimpressive journeyman Kevion Latham on the other side of the line.

If Michigan held Iowa's DEs in check, the rag-tag PSU DEs shouldn't be a problem. Michigan will have a test against Still and Ogbu on the interior.

Penn State has a bunch of walking wounded they hope to get back for Minnesota; we'll see how many do.

And now a random dumb thing a Penn State blogger said. Take it away, Some Guy At BSD:

I hope that Denard Robinson gets healthy during Michigan's bye week and starts at QB in Happy Valley Halloween weekend. Choir boy / line-dancer Tate Forcier may provide more visual fodder for the blog, but I think he's a bigger threat at QB than Robinson. Denard Robinson can run all over weak competition, but in the Big Ten, where every defense is designed to stop the run, a competent passer like Tate Forcier is actually more deadly.

This is not factually wrong so it's not Fiutakin' it, but good God. This is the worst bit about turning it over seven times in two weeks while racking up 900 yards of total offense against the #28 and #13 defenses in the country:

shark_derp_durr_hurr

"It doesn't work in the Big Ten" cannot die soon enough.

This is a disturbing indictment of nothing in particular. Will Campbell is going to get a look at guard:

“He may be better-suited to play guard,” Rodriguez said.

No decision had been made, but Rodriguez said he’d convene with his coaches tonight to discuss possible position changes.  …

“He’s not playing much on defense,” Rodriguez said. “I don’t know if it’s possibly to switch and learn a position that quickly, but we’ll probably talk about him tomorrow. He’s got a good attitude. He’s working hard and is willing to do whatever’s best for the team.”

What does it mean? It means that ESPN was right to be skeptical of Campbell, who has a ridiculous physical package but doesn't play football very well. It was apparent to me the first time he got on the field against Iowa and immediately got gashed; freshman or not the passivity and inability to get under anyone's pads was alarming. This would be no big deal if Michigan had gotten either or both of Pearlie Graves and DeQuinta Jones a couple years ago, but since they whiffed on both the depth chart at DT is thin enough that one guy not working out leaves you a big hole after Martin.

It does not mean that Bruce Tall is an idiot who can't coach—Mike Martin and Ryan Van Bergen say STFU, please. Also Brandon Graham.

Not their fault, except for that one guy. The BCS computers come in for another round of bashing, this one in the New York Times. At least this time there are quotes from the guys who run the things complaining about the What About The Children decision to remove margin of victory from the metrics. That is a major source of computer rankings DERP. And this is a delightfully blunt assessment of Richard Billingsley:

“I’m not a mathematician,” Billingsley said. “I’m not even a highly educated man, to tell you the truth. I don’t even have a degree. I have a high school education. I never had calculus. I don’t even remember much about algebra. I think everyone questions everything I do. Why is he doing that? Does he know what he’s doing, a crazy kook in Oklahoma?”

The short answer is no. Billingsley’s ranking system is vilified by professional mathematicians and a subculture of amateur computer rankers.

I'm not either but I've already got my vilification in. Any attention Billingsley's inane system gets that might get it booted is welcome. I mean: "It is a simple formula, he said, because he is a simple man." This guy isn't fit to decide what to eat for breakfast, let alone who should be playing in the national title game.

Just a love machine. The MZone highlights a program from 1978 featuring the sex machine that is Mike Gittleson:

78 staff

You have to admire that dedication to facial hair: 32 years without even thinking about a change. Also, yes, that Jack Harbaugh.

Hail Zoltan! Zoltan just launched the punt of the year, nay the punt of the decade:

During the Patriots OT struggle with the Ravens last Sunday, punter Zoltan Mesko may have made the punt of the year. Facing a 4th and 6 from their own 16, Mekso was called in try to bail out the Patriots.

Typically, punts from that region of the field net about 39 yards, putting the Ravens at their own 45, and it looked like the Ravens were going to win the field position battle. From there, it only takes one or two first downs to move into striking distance for a game winning FG attempt. When Mesko trotted onto the field, the Patriots' win probability (WP) was 0.33.

Mesko’s punt went for 65 yards, aided by wind and by poor fielding by the Ravens returner. When the ball came to rest on the Baltimore 19 yard line, the Patriots had gained the upper hand with a 0.54 WP. The punt was worth +0.21 Win Probability Added (WPA), an impact extremely rare for a punt that neither results in a long return nor a fumble.

Hagerup did something similar—though it wasn't in such a high-leverage situation—when he bombed one past the Iowa returner midway through Saturday's game.

Really? Iowa guy who looks at a lot of film says this:

A couple of times Iowa made good audibles and a couple of others they missed their chance to hit Michigan where it hurt. It definitely seemed the crowd noise was a factor late in this one and it made it hard to change calls at the line. I would guess they'll make some tweaks to their audible calls this week, especially on their scripted series calls.

That would be something close to unprecedented. Woo luxury boxes?

Etc.: Entertaining WSJ piece on alumni cheerleaders focuses on Michigan's homecoming festivities. Hey let's fire Turner Gill already! (Note: it took all of two months for Gill to go from a molder of men to a "Victorian-era" fuddy duddy what with his rules against ladies and cell phones. Rich Rodriguez should start a support group.) Twelve pictures to sum up TRY FIGHT WIN. One of these five men will be Minnesota's next coach. (HT: Eleven Warriors.)

Comments

wolfman81

October 20th, 2010 at 11:38 AM ^

That meme will die when Michigan beats a team in the Big 10 with a decent defense.  (Read:  Anyone but Indiana). 

It will fade if they beat PSU.  It will fade a little more if they beat Illinois.  We won't hear much grumbling if they beat Wisconsin.  And nobody will care about it any more if they beat OSU because we will all be drunk with happiness.

jlvanals

October 20th, 2010 at 1:34 PM ^

Not turning the ball over and the ability to kill clock to protect the defense and close out games is really underrated by people in these parts (most notably Brian). If your defense sucks, the best way to protect it is to increase variance, giving it fewer plays to suck on. High/low variance strategies cut both ways and while it might make sense to decrease variance for a Very good offense (via a hurry-up), right now our offense is consistently putting the defense in bad positions, demoralizing that unit by setting them up to fail with bad field position and short times to rest a very depleted depth chart. Personally, I think there is something to this because in just about every game, our defense has gotten significantly worse as the game wore on. We are not a good enough offense that 2-3 extra offensive possessions can negate the damage done by the 2-3 extra times our defense is forced back on the field.
<br>
<br>My personal strategy: we run the clock down to 10 or lower on every offensive snap and go for it on every 4th down and short-medium (5 yds on our side of the field, 7-10 on the opponent's). That makes more sense than trying to score quickly and giving the other team more time to rape the Defense. And to respond to an obvious criticism: the short field here is worth the risk here because we are wagering that our offense is good enough to get 5ish yards AND run another few minutes off the clock so that our defense won't have a chance to screw up. The yards of field position don't matter as much with this defense as does the time they have to spend on the field (because of the lack of depth and it gives more chances for the opposing offense to exploit weaknesses).
<br>

wolfman81

October 20th, 2010 at 2:39 PM ^

Losing 52-49 isn't on the offense.  Seriously...if the offense is scoring more than 40, that isn't on them.  But they haven't scored 40 since they beat IU.  We probably wouldn't be having this discussion if we had lost to MSU 42-38 and Denard played the whole game.  We are having this discussion because the offense only scored 17 against MSU.  (I know, 2 picks in the end-zone...but Denard throwing picks in the end-zone is part of the complaint.)  We are having this discussion because of the 28 points scored against Iowa, Tate was on the field for 21 of them. 

What is clear:  Sophomore Denard >> Freshman Tate

What is unclear:  Sophomore Denard > Sophomore Tate

I'm not trying to say that RR is making a bad decision here...I'm just asking the question (which could be heresy in these parts) because I don't understand RR position here*.  Maybe with a better running threat we aren't having this discussion.  But MSU had figured out how to stop the offense in the second half.  Is that all on the QB?  No, but some of it is.  Iowa held Michigan to 7 points until Tate came in and led the offense to 21 more points.  Yes, this is only one data point (but last year "healthy Tate" did fairly well) and one anecdote does not an entire history make.  [And Tate was at least 2 INTs away from being perfect.  But he was making throws that Denard simply can't make right now.]

I don't think that "dual starters" is a bad idea.  These QBs are different enough that they will effectively make defenses have 2 game plans.  I don't think that either is head and shoulders above the other in terms of readiness.  (Both make boneheaded mistakes.)  Remembering 2007, nobody was saying that Mallett was a better QB than Henne (see 2008 Citrus Bowl), but some wondered if a healthy Mallett would have been more effective than an injured Henne for some of those games (like OSU when Henne couldn't make all of his throws).  I'm just saying that in some situatons one of the current QBs might be better than the other.

*I'm not a football coach and I don't watch these guys on film and in practice nearly as much as RR.  I'm just stating my opinion.  I'm sure that if RR were reading this** he'd have an explaination ready. 

**Yes, I know that RR has more important things to do than read the incoherent ramblings of a physicist.

Feat of Clay

October 20th, 2010 at 2:29 PM ^

Ooh, I'd forgotten about this...

During that late rally during the Iowa game, it looked pretty clear to me that the Iowa players were having trouble with the noise (from where I was watching on my Couch of Infinite Sadness).  The camera caught an Iowa player hollering into the helmet of one of his fellow players and I was gleefully thinking "They can't hear each other!  HA!"

That satisfying moment was forgotten in (a) the disappointing finish and (b) the soul-crushing and ill-advised browse through the post-game MGoBlog forum.

In other news, I cannot foresee a time when I do NOT enjoy a well-deployed shark DERP meme.   I just wish I had it tattooed on my hand so I could whip it out in conversation.