Unverified Voracity Is Like You Didn't But Of Course You Did Comment Count

Brian

How did I miss this? Maize and Blue Nation has a shot of team goals taken from within the locker room onto which he's photoshopped success or failure thus far. As you might imagine, there's a lot of failure. I'm more put off by one of the criteria:

2014 team goals wk9[1]

Time of possession? In 2014? Ugh. Slowness as a virtue.

Sounds familiar. We're going to have to be really nice to Orson for his fundraiser this year because the man followed up Michigan-Penn State by actually attending the Mizzou-Florida game. In person and everything. In the flesh. To watch his team lose 42-13 to a team that gained fewer than 120 yards of offense. The resulting hot take:

4. This was expected, and almost comforting. It's a custom, slow-drip/ slow-pour kind of disaster. At one point in every fan's life there is a team coached by a person who trademarks a specific variation of loss, and then serves it until the Health Department closes it forever for numerous violations of common standards.  For Florida, Will Muschamp is the hardworking barista at the local coffee shop who takes your order, brews your coffee without putting the water through any caffeine of any sort, and then pours it into your cup insisting its coffee. When you point it out, he shakes his head, grimaces, and mutters: "We'll get that sorted out. We're trying, and we'll get that fixed." Then he brews and pours another cup of hot water for you wonder why you keep coming to this stupid fucking coffee shop every time.

Brady Hoke sends you none pizza left beef no matter what you order, and when you call to complain he says it's really all about the kids who are making 8.15, no thanks to you.

Fantastic. Devin Gardner's profiled by Angelique Chengelis and what could make everything worse than it already is?

"I've been called the N-word so many times this year," Gardner said. "One guy told me I was the N-word, and said I know N-words can't play quarterback. And I was like, are we not past this? Say what you want about my skill, but come on."

I'm not surprised, but I'm still surprised. If Dave Brandon wants to fire off "find another team" emails to these gentlemen we are all behind that. I can only hope this is the usual 14-year-old-on-mom's-computer thing and not, like, actual adults, but I am almost certain I heard Dennis Norfleet described thusly by the Cumong Man guys at the 2012 Northwestern game so they're out there, being repulsive.

When Gardner's graduated (again) I hope we all buy him sandwiches and apologize on everyone else's behalf. I want Gardner to have to start his own charity to distribute the sandwiches he cannot eat, and then become such a sandwich expert he gets an honorary PhD in Meat Betwixt Bread. It's the least we can do.

Also in that article. I mean, even beyond the people who get shot into the sun it hasn't been a nice ride:

"It's hard to play effectively when you're continuously getting hit," Gardner said. "But that's the situation we're in. And my guys are trying as hard as they can, so I can't ask for anything else. I've just got to find a way, which I'm trying to do each week, so the stats aren't going to be there sometimes. It's just finding ways to win, that's it."

That's life at the moment, though pass protection has actually been pretty good the last few weeks. Maybe they can protect long enough to get some guys open downfield? Or covered downfield? I'm just asking for some downfield.

Case in point. Big plays: we do not have them.

The 43-yard touchdown connection between Devin Gardner and Devin Funchess in an 18-13 win over Penn State was a rare sight for this year’s Michigan team.

The standout individual effort by Funchess gave the Wolverines their longest completion of the year and the longest play of any kind since a season-opening drubbing of Appalachian State

We seem to have swung too far the other way from Borges here.

And the guy we're not really trying to throw bombs to is… moving up on the SI draft board to 13th. Very frustrating.

THANK YOU BIG DADDY MAY I HAVE ANOTHER.

The race to be SI's most embarrassing employee narrows. The results have come back in the Oklahoma State investigation spurred by the eighty-part investigative piece by Thayer Evans and they are

The NCAA and Oklahoma State announced Tuesday that allegations of widespread misconduct in the football program outlined in a Sports Illustrated expose last year were "fundamentally unfounded.''

…as per usual when a university maniacally checks for ticks, Oklahoma State turned up a few Level II violations. (The NCAA revamped its punishment structure into a four-tier thing a couple years back; levels I and II would have been the "major" violation level, although as Michigan learned your major violations can be not particularly major.) The projected punishment for Thayer's lurid descriptions of cash, grade-fixing and ladyfun distributed willy-nilly: a couple scholarships over a couple years.

Those violations:

The three violations named in the notice of allegations include a failure to follow institutional policy concerning player punishments for positive drug tests; the organization of the "Orange Pride" support program through the football program rather than the university, meaning all campus hosting duties performed for prospective football recruits ran "contrary to NCAA legislation"; and a failure to monitor charge related to the first two violations.

Details on the drug policy:

Finding: On four occasions, the applicable penalty for failed drug tests was not applied, but TCG concluded athletic ability was not the reason.

The NCAA's notice of allegations says the school failed to follow policies regarding athlete drug use. It said five athletes from January 2008 and October 2012 tested positive for banned substances and were allowed to play without the required corrective or disciplinary action. In one case, the notice says an athlete was not dismissed after a fourth failed test and allowed the athlete to compete during the first half of the season. This would be an infraction.

That doesn't move my "you can't hire THAT guy" needle since I've heard tell of schools closer to home doing similar things, and nothing else in the lurid story Evans published was substantiated. Evans went full Rosenberg here.

If you're wondering about Mike Gundy's viability: if he's leavin' he's viable.

So with that in mind. Evans combines with similarly dubious Pete Thamel—he of the dead Manti Te'o girlfriend story—to project what might happen at Michigan and Florida. While they get off a depressingly accurate zinger by describing the handling of the Shane Morris concussion as "straight out of the Julie Hermann p.r. playbook" they burn everything to the ground by swinging wildly at coaching candidates like

GREG SCHIANO, who is hated by the entire NFL and couldn't get a job last year; in his two years in Tampa he managed to make Tom Coughlin a hero for chewing him out after he instructed his players to go after the opposition QB as he kneeled to see the game out.

JERRY KILL, who would be coming off one good(?) season in the watered-down Big Ten in which he lost 30-7 to TCU and beat Purdue by a point. Plus the whole seizure thing makes him a risk.

BRET BIELEMA… which… no. Jeff Long has reportedly done a fantastic job of reining in Bielema's fratty tendencies, but this one fails on legit cultural grounds.

They also say Mississippi State has nicer facilities than Michigan, to which I say YES, they may be more stable and YES their athletic department is not run like a crappy Domino's franchise but dammit we have shiny buildings that will go toe to toe with anyone's.

It's coming down for the CHL, too. Actual law talkin' guy Chris Heisenberg writes on the recently-filed lawsuit against the CHL that seeks minimum wage for players. They currently receive 50 dollars a week plus the vague promise of a scholarship down the road that evaporates if you play pro hockey for any appreciable length of time (including the AHL and below); makes you wonder why anyone would pick the CHL over the NCAA… oh right large under the table payments to top players.

Heisenberg forsees the CHL losing this battle as they are no longer even vaguely credible as non-profit-ish enterprises. CHL franchises are now worth millions. If that in fact happens the trickle-down effects are going to be considerable, and hard to project. Some of them:

  • There won't be any more crocodile tears from the CHL about how the big bad NCAA makes their players ineligible despite being amateurs.
  • Mid-tier players with options in both leagues might be more inclined to go junior. Hard to see this being a large effect since a lot of these guys are overagers in the NCAA and that group doesn't have a lot of overlap with 16-year old CHL draftees.
  • Top players might be more inclined to go NCAA. The Big Ten has implemented a bunch of scholarship improvements and if the CHL has to play everyone down to the fourth line that would drain resources currently used to woo big stars.
  • US CHL teams might be under threat. Nobody cares about the Plymouth Whalers and they are probably relocating to Canada; increased expenses for dubiously profitable enterprises may force the CHL's US outposts relocate to various Canadian suburbs.
  • SALT. Any present cracks against Michigan State are inappropriate, so let's take the long view from a salty Henry Phillip Tappan:

“It is better to have one great institution than half a dozen abortions,” proclaimed U-M’s first president. “One institution must be located somewhere because we cannot locate everywhere; let us not split it into little pieces which shall have no strength and value anywhere.”

I think I saw that guy yelling that Christian Hackenberg was a bum a couple weeks ago.

Comments

BlueinOK

October 22nd, 2014 at 12:18 PM ^

The goals are so 1990s football. I'm surprised there isn't anything about the running game. I'm sure Baylor has something like this and it just has a column for win. 

JeepinBen

October 22nd, 2014 at 12:45 PM ^

A smart team would just have "Score every drive" without worrying about TOP. Or "End every drive with a kick" as an old coach mantra - but then you're back to turnovers, and things that data says correlate with success, as opposed to what your "gut" says wins games.

aplatypus

October 22nd, 2014 at 1:10 PM ^

it can demonstrate a good offense at conversions that controls the ball. Teams that typically have done well in that stat: Louisville lead the nation last 2 years thanks to Teddy Bridgewater completing every 3rd down pass ever, Georgia Tech because triple option just gets 4 yards at a time, MSU/Wisc/Alabama successful power runners, Virginia Tech Beamers. All usually pretty decent offenses. OSU is top 25 with their spread stuff. 

 

It's not a meaningful stat in itself either, as someone else pointed out score % on drives is far more important; but I don't see why there has to be something wrong with it. I'd rather my team be good at 8 minute TD drives than specialize in 2 minute speed drives assuming both score on the same % of their drives. 

Michigan Arrogance

October 22nd, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^

the problem is this: TOP is, at best, a symptom of having a good offense. It's putting the cart before the horse if that goes up on a board like that.

The goals on a board like that should be: 4 yards or greater on all or most 1st downs, 3rd conversion % greater than X% (60, 70=x? IDK), Redzone conversion effeciency, among others.

 

MI Expat NY

October 22nd, 2014 at 3:55 PM ^

It really depends on your approach to wanting a good TOP.  If it's a substitute for winning third downs, not turning the ball over and staying ahead of the chains, then, yes, it's a reasonable strategy to want to do well with it.  If winning TOP is the goal in and of itself, then that is dinosaur 1990s ball, especially if it means a slow manner in which play calls are made and relayed to the field.  

Michigan Arrogance

October 22nd, 2014 at 4:01 PM ^

well, easier to chart or track should be an issue, IMO. Track w/e CAUSES having the most points on O and allowing the fewest points on D - which should be a CAUSE for winning.

Success on 1st down: 4+ ypp some % of the time

Success on 3rd down: conversion %

RZ Scoring effeciency

etc

matty blue

October 22nd, 2014 at 4:01 PM ^

also an admirable goal.  so, since we are currently EIGHTH IN THE COUNTRY (right behind florida and 2-6 new mexico state) we should be good to go, right?

http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/offense/split01/categ…

FWIW,  i generally agree with what i take as your main point, that there are probably more-significant factors to track on a game-by-game basis.  but time of possession is also not completely meaningless, either.  in our case, time of possession was predictive in 4 of our games, only slightly better than flipping a coin, but i suspect that the actual correlation is higher than that.  i'd love to see actual numbers nationwide.

 

 

Michigan Arrogance

October 22nd, 2014 at 4:14 PM ^

well sure, none of the items ALONE will perfectly predict winning (or having a good offense) but breaking them down into these should tell you 2 things:

1) if we are successful at ALL of them in a single game, we are 95%+ to win the game.

2) if we don't win the game, we can point to say ONE specific  metric (or more, sure) that we failed in and target corrections for that specifically.

EX: We were great at 3rd down conversion %(80% say), yards on 1st down (avg 6.6 say, got 4+ 90% of the time) and sucked in the RZ only scoring 24 of 42 available pts. Well, that chart would tell me that the offense was fine most of the time, but stalled in the RZ- so let's target what happened on those plays and diagnose playcalling tendencies, spacing of WR routes in the short field there, whatever the problem was on those plays in the RZ.

pointing to TOP is just dumb. EX: if we lose a game and the only metric that was a failure was TOP, WTF do you do? Say: well, if we could have just possesed the ball for more time, we would have won? It doesn't help narrow down what ACTUALLY caused the offense to be less successful- so what's the fucking point?

matty blue

October 22nd, 2014 at 3:06 PM ^

...so 90s.  who cares about wins or turnovers or kicking game or winning the 4th quarter or...i'm sorry, what was i saying?  i think my brain just melted, trying to pretend those things don't matter.

i'm sure there's absolutely no correlation between time of possession and wins, either.

Sac Fly

October 22nd, 2014 at 12:32 PM ^

I think the players will lose. Right now there is overwhelming support for the CHL.

There's a lot of player bashing, the "It's a right to play in the OHL", "That's how we've always done it", "You just couldn't make it pro" lemmings have started to come out because there are a lot of worries that the restitution the players are asking for will be too much and smaller teams won't be able to pay it.

Another huge issue is that it seems the Gumbley brothers are behind this. When the CHL players tried to unionize, the league found out that Randy Gumbley, who was convicted of defrauding jr hockey players a few years ago, was behind the union and it fell apart.

If that's true I don't think there's any way they can win.

CR

October 22nd, 2014 at 12:34 PM ^

  That's pretty interesting to me since Borges was a hugeTime of Possession believer but Nussmeier has discounted it as (more or less) "not particularly relevant" to winning or losing games. My guess is this isn't Nuss's chart.  

Dizzo

October 22nd, 2014 at 12:36 PM ^

He sure is at the wrong place at the right times recently.  He sent out the pics of the Coke promotion and now sends out pics from the Diag painted green?  Hmm.  Coincidence?  Or master saboteur? 

MGoBlue-querque

October 22nd, 2014 at 12:36 PM ^

I know basketball season hasn't started yet, but I miss Stauskas and McGary so much already. They were super fun to watch and root for. I'm looking forward to finding a new man-crush or two on this year's team.

 

 

JeepinBen

October 22nd, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^

Someone in an earlier thread asked how Hoke could have handcuffed Nuss's playcalling - this board is exactly how! Demanding a huddle is how. Starting Morris is how (The DG story says Brady told him, and repped Morris with the 1s all week).

Doing what you want to work =/= doing what you are good at, what will work, etc.

ImLawBoy

October 22nd, 2014 at 1:23 PM ^

As the father to a child with epilepsy, it's very discouraging to see that people consider a managable condition to be a "risk" for a football coach hire.  I don't think Kill is the right choice for Michigan, but his epilepsy should have nothing to do with it.

gbdub

October 22nd, 2014 at 2:04 PM ^

That's kind of the thing. Epilepsy is definitely manageable, and shouldn't carry the stigma it sometimes does, but college football is a job that requires 100% availability on 12-15 specific days a year. Unfortunately Kill's condition appears to be such that it doesn't allow that, or at least really risks allowing that.

It doesn't make him less of a person or anything like that, but it's a real, physical limitation that needs to be considered.

gbdub

October 22nd, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^

Business meetings can (usually) be delayed for a CEO. Games can't. And the best head coaches tend to be dictatorial (and cult-of-personality) leaders in a way that CEOs generally are not (Dave brandon possibly excepted). Corporate CEOs are used to delegating most of their authority - they have to in a company of thousands. Head coaches rarely delegate authority to that extent - their company is < 200, and they are almost always right over the shoulders of everyone during "company" activities.

If you have a head coach who isn't personally essential to successful gameday operations, such that they could be simply replaced on zero notice without significant performance degradation, then a) you've hired Brady Hoke and b) I'd question whether that coach is the best man for the job. This is particularly important at the NCAA level, where you are limited in the number of coaches you can have on staff. If someone has to constantly prepare to be "backup" head coach, then that person is not doing their day job 100%.

If the guy has other qualities that put him head-and-shoulders above every other candidate, then sure. But it would be foolish to not consider health implications on job performance at all. For Minnesota, Kill fits: he's already established, and may indeed be much better than anyone else Minny could hope to draw. For Michigan, he'd be a new hire (hopefully) competing against guys with the same or better resumes but without the potential health issues.  

ImLawBoy

October 22nd, 2014 at 3:25 PM ^

Minnesota managed quite nicely in Kill's absence last year.  Sure, they got rolled at Michigan, but still finished 8-5 (with Minnesota's talent, no small thing).  I don't think that makes Kill ineffective on game day - he's got a long-time, loyal staff.  They know, more or less, what he's going to do on gameday.  That's part of the key of managing his epilepsy - he has the proper support system.

The same would happen in the corporate world.  You have to have a succession plan in place if your CEO is incapacitated (whether from seizures or anything else), and delaying meetings is not a good succession plan.  If you've done your job right, as a head coach or as a CEO, you can handle a temporary setback like missing a meeting or a game.

Now again, I'm not arguing that Michigan should hire Jerry Kill - I don't think that's the right play.  I'm arguing that his epilepsy shouldn't be considered a risk factor in determining whether to hire him.  In his case, even more than others, since he's shown his program can successfully cope if seizures were to arise again.

JeepinBen

October 22nd, 2014 at 1:34 PM ^

I don't believe the fact that Coach Kill's disease is epilepsy so much as Coach X - who has missed multiple games with a well publicized health condition - would be a risk. I think it's the same reason that age comes up when discussing coaching candidates.

That said, if we hired Kill would he bring the Jug with him?

evenyoubrutus

October 22nd, 2014 at 2:47 PM ^

I thought he was not epilectic; my understanding was that he had kidney cancer that is in remission (?) and seizures are a side effect of the medication he is currently taking as a result of the cancer (or something of that nature).

Yinka Double Dare

October 22nd, 2014 at 2:53 PM ^

Manageable, except  triggers such as "not getting remotely enough sleep" and "high levels of stress" are kind of endemic to the Michigan coaching job. If he's had trouble managing his condition at Minnesota, I don't really want to think about the result of him in the Michigan job.

ImLawBoy

October 22nd, 2014 at 3:15 PM ^

First, he's made a lot of changes since last year's episode.  This is a long article, but it contains a lot of details:  http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2014/10/us/epilepsy-football-coach/index…; (Warning:  It also contains a picture of him hoisting the jug.)

Second, the same issues with sleep and stress are endemic to many (most?) high powered executive jobs.  Would you argue that a person with epilepsy should not be considered for those jobs?

gbdub

October 22nd, 2014 at 5:50 PM ^

Should a person with epilepsy be disqualified from those jobs? Possibly yes, if their condition posed a substantial risk to the success of the company.

Would you hire Jerry Kill to fly an airliner? Of course not, not because of prejudice but because, realistically, the risks of his management plan failing are too severe, and the costs of planning for the contingency would be impractical. Now obviously losing a football game is less critical than crashing a plane, but the point is that realistically you need to consider if the risks associated with Kill's condition and the coats of planning for his absence are outweighed by the upside of what he brings to the table.

ImLawBoy

October 22nd, 2014 at 6:18 PM ^

Comparing flying a plane to coaching a football team is not really productive - the activities are far too disparate to provide a solid analogy.  Keeping a plane in the air is hardly the same thing as calling plays.

And again, people seem to be overlooking the fact that Kill and Minnesota are successfully running a major (well, Big Ten) college football program, and with great success, when you consider Minnesota's recent history, all while dealing with Kill's epilepsy.  All this talk about having epilepsy posing a "substantial risk to the success" of the team (if I may paraphrase) is pretty much obviated by the success Kill is having running his team.

FWIW, the ADA does prohibit discrimination for conditions like epilepsy, and would require an employer to make reasonable accommodations if possible.  The way that Minnsota has dealt with Kill's epilepsy shows that such accommodations are not really that big of a deal.  I know that this discussion really didn't start from a legal perspective, but it's worth noting.

I really do admire the way the Minnesota fan base has for the most part embraced Kill and realized that his epilepsy is not an impediment to being a successful coach.  I like to think the Michigan fan base would react the same way if we hired a coach with epilepsy.

Surveillance Doe

October 22nd, 2014 at 1:30 PM ^

Isn't it sad that the team that got our "revenge" against App State would get absolutely waxed by the team that lost to App State in 2007? Thank goodness App State is abysmal this year. We were much more vulnerable to epic levels of embarassment than I think any of us had realized.

Maximumblue

October 22nd, 2014 at 1:25 PM ^

Rules make sense for Brian in his never ending slams on the CHL. Why is not okay for young teenagers to make some minor pocket change for living expenses, fifty a week makes you not an amateur? The rules on this make no sense, as do many of the current rules for football, which he agrees with full throated. These kids ar 16 and 17 when they need to make a choice. How about letting them play in the NCAA after three or four years of major junior? Problem solved.

Brian

October 22nd, 2014 at 2:26 PM ^

The NCAA's ban on CHL players has always been contrived, sure. I don't think it matters much now that the USHL is such a good league. Neither the NCAA ban or CHL tears about "choice" (in a league that has a draft for 16 year olds!) are principled stances. 

Maximumblue

October 22nd, 2014 at 3:59 PM ^

to make regarding choice, a draft when dealing with professionals is of course a different thing, with unfettered choice, the league would soon eat itself as a handful of teams would dominate. When dealing with young people at those ages, they should not be put into a situation where they have to decide between one or the other, theyshould be free to choose both. The NCAA has finally begun to unravel and the sooner the better, their nefarious schemes have embroiled to many lives. But does the CHL have that same burden of deceit and self serving history? I would argue no. Although it is true that a handful of teams are worth money now, many others are small town, municipally owned entities, like the Petes, that are not money making machines, but provide a real service to the towns they play in. The education package is not ideal, it needs to be for a set amount of years regardless if you take a shot at higher hockey. I'm just not sure that blaming the CHL for the actions of a handful of teams ( Windsor, London, Portland etc) is completely fair anymore then blaming the NCAA for Miss St is fair. It's the rules in place that are the issue. I just can't help but think how much better the NCAA teams would be if they had more CHL vets in it cause say what you will, the CHL is one heck of a hockey league and those boys are the result of years of hard work, sacrifice and money from a lot of families around here. They should be able to experience both.

readyourguard

October 22nd, 2014 at 1:28 PM ^

We won't throw down field until our receiver's start coming off the line with some authority. i gave Hecklinski a pass on Devin's shitty blocking because it appeared he coached Darboh to block very well. But now I see another craptastic effort and that falls on the coach's shoulders for allowing it to continue.