March 25th, 2011 at 8:07 PM ^

What is this comment must be approved bullshit?  That's weaksauce, at least on this blog you can write whatever you want, you'll pay the price, but you can do it. Seems like your trying to control what people say and what gets posted, where's my right to FREE SPEECH dammit! 


March 25th, 2011 at 10:46 AM ^

I'd love to read this but I have other, more pressing threads that require my attention:

  • Football Myths
  • Vinopal didn't leave because of family issues
  • Section 1 = Most pompous, arrogant member?
  • Ralph Nader wants to get rid of athletic scholarships

And those are just on PAGE 1.


March 25th, 2011 at 10:49 AM ^

out on Hoke a little bit, which he shouldn't do. His frustration seems to be born from the hypocracy of the administrators,  media, and fans surrounding Hoke, not Hoke himself.


March 25th, 2011 at 10:58 AM ^

Seems to be repeating all the reflexively negative behavior he eplored in the MSM during the RR era. I was a pro-RR guy, but last year we embarassed a lot of bad teams and were equally embarassed by the good ones. Our offense did squat against our best opponents, and the things that did seem to work early in the season, like having Denard take a step and then rifle a quick pass, were not part of our gameplan late in the year. It was frustrating and made no sense.


March 25th, 2011 at 12:24 PM ^

What bothers me a little about Brian's posts about Hoke's offense is it seems like he hasn't made a lot of effort to actually watch/break down what SDSU did offensively.  He constantly cites his concern about Denard being under center, without seeming to understand or acknowledge that SDSU often operated out of the gun last season.  His "analysis" seems to be based more on soundbites than actual film review.  That's pretty lazy on his part.


March 25th, 2011 at 1:05 PM ^

Not only that, but the quotes that he takes specifically allude to the fact that we are going to do more than just power running. The quote that started the MANBALL meme specifically says he doesn't want to solely run zone plays because it doesn't prepare the defense for power plays. That implies that he wants to run a lot of different offensive looks to prepare the defense for what it will see on the field, including zone blocking. I try telling Brian this and his response is that teams either zone block or don't, which isn't necessarily true.

This quote says we are going to work on the power run game, then move on to other things. How does that in any way imply that we will be running under center for an entire game? It doesn't. It actually states the exact opposite, which is the part that frustrates me the most about all of this.


March 25th, 2011 at 9:03 PM ^

And lack of football analysis was due to site repairs. But it's been months and the site infrastructure is still a shell of what it used to be. Maybe waiting till after spring ball, but I do wonder what all has been getting done the last few months. Other than the pouting.

MI Expat NY

March 25th, 2011 at 11:35 AM ^

That's most of it, no doubt.  But, if we're being honest with ourselves, we have to be at least a little worried that the offensive transition is going to have a negative impact on what is an extremely important season.  The 2012 schedule is absolutely brutal, and unless we're up to the level of dominating michigan teams of the past, it's hard to see doing any better than 8-4, and even that might be a stretch.  Brian's frustration is that we have the talent to win 9-10 games next season, and if we don't due to a desire to return to manball, it might be a 2-3 more years before a season up to Michigan's expectations is even a possibility again.  And guess what, that makes us Notre Dame, returning to glory since 2006...

Dark Blue

March 25th, 2011 at 10:50 AM ^

What the fuck is going on here? Is it bring your kid to work week and everyone is letting their kids post for them on the mgoboard? 


My solution is to pee in some butts