Bad News Magnus

Submitted by Ziff72 on February 1st, 2010 at 9:05 PM

Looks like the boys at GBMW agree with you (I think they are still trying to figure out their new formatting it's all jumbled and a brutal read.) Their depth chart for the secondary has Woolfolk as the starter at FS. I assume they don't know that Woolfolk would be playing the SS(ya know being insiders and all) but I get the point. They think he'll be the deep safety. Good luck Magnus, but your confidence in your prediction has to be shaken a little after seing that.

Comments

TIMMMAAY

February 2nd, 2010 at 6:19 PM ^

You give them far too much credit my friend. NO SUGARCOAT. I used to read that site once a week or so, and if you can get past the "grammatical holocaust" that is GBMW they actually have decent info on occasion. Unless they don't, 50/50.

NHWolverine

February 1st, 2010 at 9:57 PM ^

Where else in the Michigan blogosphere can you get your emailed question about Michigan football answered, the schedules and results for all major athletics, a TV schedule, a doppler radar, videos on recruits, a picture slideshow, links to get some Michigan gear, a poll and countdown to the upcoming football season IN A SINGLE CLICK?

NHWolverine

February 1st, 2010 at 10:14 PM ^

They used to. Apparently with the site revamp they removed it.

My comment above is a bit crass, I'll admit. Maybe it needs a little qualification.

I actually like GBMW's content and their Q&A format is neat, but they need to prioritize the parts of the site that add value to the blogosphere and remove all the stuff that's redundant or can be found through a normal channel like MGoBlue.com (IMHO).

NHWolverine

February 1st, 2010 at 10:30 PM ^

I know the WLA suggests the Q&A is fake, and maybe there's some evidence out there I missed, but I guess I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm a nice enough guy.

If it is real GBMW is at least providing something different. Granted it's not really the bag that people in their 20's like to read but it has an outside appeal.

Logan88

February 2nd, 2010 at 9:49 AM ^

and here's why:

I read an e-mail to that site a few months ago that was signed "Ted D."; well that is MY first name and MY last initial (My full name is Ted Dunn, in case you were waiting with baited breath) and I don't recall ever sending in an e-mail to GBMW.

The guy who runs GBMW, ErocWolverine, used to be a mod at GBW (Scout.com's UM site) and I suspect that he had access to premium members REAL names and used mine (I used to be a premium member at that site) for one of his e-mail questions. In fact, when Eroc had a "falling out" with GBW and left the site, I got an inbox message from him trying to "recruit" me to his site.

Of course, it IS possible that someone who has the same first name and last initial that I do sent in an e-mail to GBMW, but I think it's a pretty big coincidence.

Magnus

February 1st, 2010 at 10:06 PM ^

I refuse to give any traffic to their site, so I guess I'll just stew over here.

Those guys are morons. How did they convince so many people that their information and knowledge might be useful?

Leviathan

February 1st, 2010 at 11:24 PM ^

Strong Safety lines up on the strong side of the offense (TE side if they use a TE), free safety on the weak side. So, generally, but not necessarily, the SS does more run support and the FS more pass coverage.

In our defense the SS still lines up on the strong side and the FS on the weak, we just reverse their roles.

Leviathan

February 1st, 2010 at 11:45 PM ^

haha right, for whatever reason Gerg feels that the strong side safety should roam deep, and the weak side should be up in run support.

Possibly/probably because the SLB (stevie brown this year) in our system functions closely to what the SS would do and covers the area the SS normally would, and so our actual SS plays deep.