You are Al Borges for this week. What is your game plan to beat Ohio State?

Submitted by M-Dog on November 24th, 2013 at 12:19 PM
In a bizarre College Football Kafkaesque twist, you wake up not as a giant cockroach, but as Al Borges.(Do NOT go there.)
 
Your season is shot, your program is reeling, and your job is in the crosshairs.  The Game is your last desperate chance at redemption before the long cold winter sets in.
 
Forget about what you want the offense to be in the future or what you wanted it to be in the past, how are you going to beat Ohio State this week with these players?
 
You are not going to beat them straight up.  You will have to think outside the (9 men in the) box.  There is no point in any risk aversion at this juncture.
 
Do you roll the dice, spread 'em out, and go NASCAR, ala the first half of the CMU game?  Do you try to run Devin to put pressure on their D knowing that he may be injured?  Do you cross your fingers and hope that Green and the OL have made enough progress to fall forward for 2 yards at a time and keep Devin out of third and long?  Do dare give Morris some reps?
 
None of these are very good options, most of them are a little desperate, but desperate is all you've got at this point in time.  You won't beat Ohio State without doing something risky and imaginative.
 
What's your plan, Al?  
 

Comments

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 12:57 PM ^

You can actually sit there and say with a straight face that this fan base would do a better job of play calling than a professional? Especially in light of the totally insane comments that are posted here in an endless stream?

If you say "Yes," then you've lost all credibility in my eyes, and no one (save for the troglodytes who populate sports talk radio) can take your opinions seriously any longer.

Mr. Carson

November 24th, 2013 at 1:09 PM ^

Yeah, you're probably right.   I bet the fans might go an entire half without having the offense score.  If it went REALLY badly, maybe the offense would even have 5 consecutive three and outs.  And if it went absolutely horribly, I'll bet the fans couldn't even call four first downs in one half.  You know, I wonder if the offense would even cross the 50 yard line in the second half.

Kermits Blue Key

November 24th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^

The thing about your inane argument is that the fans MIGHT do what you suggest. What you're failing to grasp is that Borges, who gets paid millions of $'s, DID do it. Your schtick is getting lamer by the day, and you are simply outgunned. Borges is a disaster, and you seem to be the only guy who doesn't realize this.

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 1:30 PM ^

So this is Small Potatoes' alt?

Also, let's get one thing straight, seeing as you love to pop in any time I post a comment about the coaches and utter a bunch of inane bullshit...

Here has been my position all along and this is from a much earlier post I made with regard to Borges:

The problem is this.

Here is the Al Borges defend-o-meter:

 

Al is the best! Middle ground FIRE BORGES!

-----------------------------------------------------

 

I have been here from the start of the season:

 

Al is the best! Middle ground  FIRE BORGES!

----------------------------X--------------------------

A lot of you have been here:

Al is the best! Middle ground  FIRE BORGES!

----------------------------------------------------X

You're all stupidly trying to make it out like I've been here:

 

Al is the best! Middle ground FIRE BORGES!

X-------------------------------------------------

Which is patently untrue. Myself, Space Coyote and others have been defending only so much as we've been saying, "There are plenty of valid criticisms, but your critcisim is incorrect and stupid."

Seriously, does no one actually read what I write, or do you just blink at the text for a couple of minutes before attempting to surmise what I wrote?

I've said all along that the lack of development along the offensive line has to be put directly on the coaches. A lot of peoples' criticisms of playcalling have been off base, because if your offensive line can't block they're aren't a whole lot of plays that you can run with a great deal of success. Your offense will also be incredibly inconsistent, especially when you combine poor blocking, with an erratic QB. 

But I guess in whatever weird paradigm a lot of you subscribe to, not shouting "FIRE BORGES!" every 5 minutes, and being a bit more thoughtful and nuanced, means you think he is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^

umm no bro.

You're so defeated in your arguments that you're willing to attack your detractors' credibility.  The definition of ad hominem remarks.  Real civil and intelligent man.  

What would it take to prove that we are not?  Maybe ask Brian; he can see our IP addresses I think and ask him to compare the two.  I assure you they are different.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^

I haven't presented any arguments other than short remarks.  However, other posters have been able to cogently defeat you in discussion.

So, now you have resorted to ad hominem attacks (e.g. calling me a sockpuppet when I clearly am not, I hope you have realized you are wrong here) to try to defeat those who don't conform to your point of view.

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 2:15 PM ^

Which other posters? Where?

Kermit? He didn't present any arguments either.

Mr. Carson actually thinking that the fans would do a better job than our offensive coordinator? That's not an argument, it's a ridiculous statement with no merit that can be dismissed outright.

So what else have you got? All I've seen is you complaining while admittedly not saying anything of merit.

Would you care to disagree with my "Borges defend-o-meter" post, or are you just going to keep whining while admittedly saying nothing of substance?

mastodon

November 24th, 2013 at 2:56 PM ^

The point is, it's the same story too often.  Play-calling to date = embarrassing offense.  How many times would the crowd run power up the midde?  Right there is improvement.  But then we non-professionals would not be setting up the PA, and all the success it has garnered.  Damn, we're so short-sighted.

tbeindit

November 25th, 2013 at 10:15 AM ^

It's pretty clear that the fans could not call a better offense than somebody who is an offensive coordinator at the collegiate level.  However, I'm not really convinced that the outcome would have been that much worse than what we have seen the last few weeks.  I mean, the only way to get below 0 points in a half offensively is to turn over the ball.  Plus, if that happened, the fans could just point to a lack of execution.

I can't say with a straight face I would rather have a texting vote or something that Borges, but it is pretty telling to actually believe the outcome would probably not be that much worse.  Very likely things like yardage would go down, but how much has this offense really created for itself in recent weeks?  They scored 14 points total against Iowa and 0 in the 2nd half.  They didn't even score a touchdown for 6 quarters a few weeks ago.  It's not like the standard of production has really been anything special.  Michigan is 12/60 on 3rd down in November and is currently 98th in yards.  I do not believe the fans would do better, but when the offense is struggling so mightly, it really isn't that crazy to think the fans (random selection) could equal that production , which is a scary thought.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 12:49 PM ^

If he crowdsourced the ohio state fans could see the calls and relay them to Urban Meyer if the results of voting were shown.  On the other hand, if they were to be voted on without shown results and all, he would still have to keep the play selections down to a minimum because you can't vote on 80 different options.

Meyer would be able to look on that site, see the different options, compare it to the formation on the field, and immediately know the play.

So, TheLastHoke, you are a seer of great prescience.  I would have been for such a thing, but because of your foresight I understand the logistics would not work out.

Thank you for educating me.  After all, knowledge is power.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:45 PM ^

You were attempting to distort my position.  Is your ego so inflated with long battles against the posters on this board that you seriously think you were refuting my position?  Please.

The facts:

1) The post I used to respond to myself had a lot more to it than just "thank you for the warning"

2) "Thank you for the warning" was directed towards you sarcastically.

3) You said in your post that you could believe that I would edit just to put "thank you for the warning"

4) I clearly had more than that

Your conclusion:

IT'S NOT A STRAW MAN

My conclusion:

It's clearly a straw man...read

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 1:55 PM ^

I didn't attempt to distort your position that you edited your post. 

I outright disagree with it entirely.

Therefore it is not a a straw man argument.

I've explained this twice now, but apparently you don't understand what a straw man argument is, and that's fine.

Edit: OK, I'll explain this to you as succinctly as possible.

Let's say your name is Max, and you come to me and say, "My name is Dave."

I say, "No, your name is Max, I've seen your identification and it said your name is Max. I also know your parents and they say your name is Max. Your name is not Dave. Your name is Max."

You say, "No. My name is not Max, it is Dave. You're distorting my name, stop straw manning me."

I respond, "I'm not straw manning you, I simply don't believe you when you say your name is Dave, because I'm certain that it is Max based on all of the available evidence."

That is essentially the discussion that is being had here. If I outright refute your original premise because I think you are lying, I'm not constructing a straw man argument with which to refute your statements.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:58 PM ^

"So I'm assuming you wanted to hit edit so that you could say, "Thank you for your warning"" to yourself."

To you, here I am saying that I wanted to edit and post "thank you for your warning". In my original post.

In reality, I am saying that I wanted to add on to my post.

strawman - a weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted

To me, it looks like you took my argument and chopped it down to say that I only wanted to add "thank you for your warning", while in reality my argument was that I wanted to add a little substance to my post.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^

Here, let me explain this succinctly as well:

I post.  I post another post underneath it to add on. 

You say, "You're a sockpuppet.  Clearly you are trying to give yourself a pat on the back."

I say, "No, I have never done something like this. It was an edit."

You say, "But, look at the post that you replied to yourself!  It's so short and undeserving of an edit.  Therefore, the evidence points to you being a sockpuppet."

I say, "Look at the post above.  Clearly I meant to add more.  It could be an edit.  Do you know that at other message boards that replying to your own post is an acceptable way to edit because at boards like SBnation the editing time is limited?  You set up a straw man: clearly I am saying that it was deserving of an edit because it was worth it, while you argue I say that I wanted to edit something so undeserving."

You say, "You don't understand what a straw man is." (Thank god, another ad hominem attack)

If you seriously believe I'm a sock puppet, just ask Brian or something.  Email him.  Ask him if this account is the only one from this IP address, I think he can see these things.  Or maybe I can do it.  Whatever.  Your choice.

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 2:18 PM ^

I think you are lying.

I am not swayed by your arguments.

Because I flat out believe your original premise is a lie, I'm not presenting a straw man argument in dismissing your subsequent justifications for what I think is a lie.

What do you not get about that?

You say, "You don't understand what a straw man is." (Thank god, another ad hominem attack)

That about sums up our "disucssion."

Edit: If it turned out that you are not a sock puppet then I would apologize and call myself a huge asshole, but I don't believe that to be true, so until then I'm in my camp and you are in yours.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 2:21 PM ^

Let's not argue on semantics.  

You are arguing against me by misrepresenting evidence.  That's not a straw man, you're right.  I got caught up in defending my "honor" on this board.  I panicked and used the name of a fallacy I knew the best.  Sorry about that.

What you did wasn't a straw man.  However, you did misrepresent evidence: you mentioned that I replied to myself to give myself a pat on the back on the false notion that my post was just "thanks for the warning".  It was not that; it had more.  

Alright, that's over with.  Happy?  Sorry for being ineducated.

Let both of us email Brian.  

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:23 PM ^

Let me break down my post for you:

1) It was in response to your post that says that the fanbase is uneducated and would not be able to call plays better than Borges in the Iowa second half

2) I sarcastically agree with you by saying that I agree with you but with ridiculous reasons.  Basically I am saying that "hey, the fanbase is a little smarter than you think, and I'm tired of your arrogant comments against the section of the fanbase that is a little tired of Borges".  

Get it?  It's not that difficult.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:31 PM ^

WTF?????  Seriously, are you trolling me?  Because if you are, great job because it succeeded.  You seriously believe that what I posted above is less likely than "attempted to agree with yourself via an alt, failed miserably"?  My lord, either you are a clever troll or an idiot.  

My god.  Read my posts again.  You can't see the meaning there?  

Let me break down what you're saying:

Me trying to agree with myself with a sockpuppet while forgetting to log off (more likely to you)

Me saying that you are mistaken in your assessment of the intelligence of the fanbase (less likely to you)

Do you see just how ridiculous you are?

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 1:35 PM ^

Yeah, I read what you wrote and the second post which you're claiming was your failed attempt as an edit, makes absolutely no sense as an edit. I mean, I wasn't "warning" anyone of anything, so it doesn't fit in at all what-so-ever as an edit.

Who thanks themselves at the end of their post? 

Thank you for calling out this posters' ridiculousness, TheLastHoke. 

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:41 PM ^

WHAT????

The "thanks" was to you, sarcastically.  The earlier part of that same post was meant to add on to the post that replied to it.  READDDDDDDDDDD goddamn it.  

If you've ever been on a message board that doesn't allow unlimited edit time, then you would know that that is an accepted way to add on to a post.  

Seriously, get your head out of your ass.

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 1:43 PM ^

I don't think you know what trolling is, because if anyone's doing it, by evidence of your posting history, it's you.

Have you ever been a part of any sort of cogent discussion or back and forth on this board? No.

All of your posts are either accusing someone of trolling while trolling yourself, or insulting another user by calling them "a fucking idiot," or some other such nonsense.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 1:47 PM ^

And you spent the better part of this season posting stupid gif's to "refute" those whose views did not agree with yours.  Clearly, you are the troll.

I have never seen you engage in a "cogent" discussion with another poster other than to participate in a circlejerk over how the board has "gone to shit" or something with the proliferation of those who dislike Borges.

 

TheLastHarbaugh

November 24th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^

Yeah, because responding with an eye roll gif to posters who say shit like this (actual posts taken from the latest open threads):

 

 

Courntey Avery He is a garbage as bitch go back to warming the bench u piece of shit

We have A sloppy piece of shit oc and fat sloppy head coach that won't tell al what to do. Grow a sack Brady u fucking dumbfuck

This football Sucks dick. We are the laughing stock of the whole country. We average 200 yards a game we fucking suck go hire cam Cameron or someone that knows how to coach offense

New Thread. Same shitty product.

Fuck him and this staff. Nice 2nd half adjustments.

Fuck Borges It is going to be a slaughter next Saturday....And, half the stadium will be Buckeyes. I hope they choke on their 15 dollar hot dogs and 9 dollar cokes..

Just said the same thing. I hope a guy like Peppers wont waste 3-4 yrs of his life in that shit storm

I'm to the point where if I saw borges on the street I would punch him in the face

FUCK SHIT STUPID FIRE

Go Hawkeyes. Anything to get rid of the steaming pile of shit we call Borges.

Gardner sucks!!!

LOL At this whole fucking team. They suck.

Holy fuck Wile

Borges you are a fucking moron.

Fuck Borges.

Borges is still a fucking idiot.

Fuck Al Borges.

AVERY!!!! WTF?! I can play the ball better than that!

Poorly defended by Avery. Can we release him?

Avery is Ass

....makes me the troll.

PrincetonBlue

November 24th, 2013 at 2:16 PM ^

Why do you blame them for being a little incoherent?  Their points are clear: Borges is not competent and needs to be replaced.  You're a lot like those people that ridicule those who aren't articulate.  It's not their fault; either they did not have the education or they have enough of a life not to try on a message board (like us).  

You can see their arguments.  How about, instead of putting up stupids gifs that slow down my browser, you ignore them or give them good discussion?  Attacking someone for being inarticulate is one of the most cruel things that someone can do in my opinion.