Member for

9 years 3 months
Points
29.00

Recent Comments

Date Title Body
09/24/2012 - 5:23pm i agree

corners did need to be exposed, but in the correct manner. having denard in the pocket with 7 rushing and getting in denards face while he throws off balance is not the way.

denard needed to be under center with a 2 step drop throwing to a wide open wr on a quick out. the ND corners were 10-12 yds off the line on almost every play. let our guy make a play one on one with their guy. our guy wins it's a great pick up, their guy wins it's still a positive play of 5-6 yds. MSU beat our heads in with this under RR. it works USE it!

08/16/2010 - 3:26pm TE?

wonder if he has the build to bulk into a sure handed TE?

05/10/2010 - 2:06am Damn Bando

who's side are you on?  "if/when LC ever  issues a statement" . thats the one thing that could take care of the whole mess. just have the most "Saintly" of all fucking college coaches ever" just issue a statement that he backs RR and the Mi. football team and a lot of this stuff will go away. to sit quietly at home and letting your name get used as a way to sabatage your schools program and team? and not say anything? thats just shit LC!

03/17/2010 - 2:36pm no probably

probably wouldn't have believed him either, although i might if he answered straight the first time and seemed credible. as for creepy. what i think is creepy is a guy spending time answering posts with whatever stupid shit comes out of his mouth and believes he is being either funny and cute.

03/17/2010 - 2:20pm nope

not really cuz just because you've now taken your meds and seemed to have calmed a bit, you're just making shit up. which is why in the post i asked for helpful insight. hoping to keep posts that have nothing to do with the topic to a minimum but i guess i asked for too much from the mgocommunity. my mistake, carry on all.

03/17/2010 - 2:08pm did you forget to take your meds dave?

don't remember asking for a minute by minute break down. there have been numerous threads talking about them being "gym rats" work-out warriors" etc. i have not heard about film study so i asked. as for your question i do not know what is normal either but i do know i do want some time spent there.

03/17/2010 - 1:54pm yes!

it really does matter to me personally. i want a smart QB back there reading the defenses and just chewing them up for yards and TDs. i would think that that would matter to all of us.

02/04/2010 - 1:15am very true

+1 to seth. as i have been saying to my friends. i'd love to see an after signing day grading scale kinda like what the NFL has done. they evaluate the draft based on need and pick-ups. we needed a lot and got a lot.while i think ours was a very good class based on need and lack of depth. i will take exception to the fact that osu had a good class also. let's look at a few facts, osu has beaten us for quite a few years, been co or outright big 10 champs the last 4 or so yrs, just won the rose bowl, and this was the best they could do? we on the other hand have gone 3-9 and 5-7 and have pulled this kind of class, needs or no needs. if we can manage a 8-4 season with a good bowl game(win or lose) the recruiting of RR will soon put the big 10 championship in our hands more years than not.

01/23/2010 - 3:17am don't know about you!

but i never forget about mike cox.

01/21/2010 - 6:40pm ok mango66

i understand your concern that maybe we used to "pull" in nothing but 5-4* star recruits. but go look at past yrs with Carr. nothing really great the last 5yrs. also i might ask "what did all these 5-4* fantastic recruits do for us"? that's right NOTHING! pull your head out of your ass and let RR recruit "his" guys and actually give him time to coach them. if at the end of 5 yrs we havn't done any better with RR i'll help you pack his bags and send him on his way, but for now stop whinning!

01/21/2010 - 6:21pm true

all the ncaa(well i'm sure not all) would have to institute is "that if a school where said recruit has previously signed a NLI early. if that school then changes head coaches before the normal NLI day. then recruit can request out of the early NLI with-out penalty. if coaching changes after normal NLI day then all previous rules about recruiting still apply" thank you for your cooperation.
sincerely the NCAA

01/21/2010 - 6:12pm well i would agree magnus

except that it isn't the "school" that produces 1st round talent after 1st round talent. i believe that that has to be put in some part(ok mostly) on the coaches. those coaches are gone(sneaky pete). while lane so far has not shown that same ability as a HC to get the talent to the next level. Tenn IMO under-achieved for the talent level he had.

01/20/2010 - 5:06pm recruiting sites

has anyone ever tried to go back 3-4 yrs and evaluate the sites predictions to see who is the most credible site? instead of just complaining about them. sorry i'm to damn poor to have paid subscriptions and i really don't have the patience to figure it all out.

01/20/2010 - 3:38pm agreed

i'll take RRs and his staffs word over the recruiting sites who only see tape. plus a big problem was all of our early commits. when scout or rivals recieve 5000 highlights of kids and review those commits early and place them somewhere in the top 250 then see the others later, those first reviewed tend to drop as they are not fresh in their minds(Devin) as the ones just reviewed.

01/19/2010 - 12:49am i agree BBR

i also think that 2 losing seasons caused RR to think that findinf recruits willing to commit was gonna be a lil tougher, and offered too quickly and often. but here's to a great close on the recruiting season, a winning record, and our picks of the 2011 athletes.

01/19/2010 - 12:40am sorry!

sorry lil baby impaler! still don't quite get the whole hoopla thing over rushing the court. it's not like it happens all the time. we got excited and worked up over a great athletic win. so what's really the problem? other than being one of the few posters who just like to say crazy shit just to see how many negbangs they can get. i think Dantonio is on the phone for you, thats up his alley.

01/18/2010 - 11:10pm any one else?

any one else but me thinking that a kid 6'6" and only 200-205 running a 4.6 40 hoping to bulk up, can't get barwisized and stay at 200 and drop a few ticks off his 40 and be a tall gifted very physical wr?

01/16/2010 - 1:00am permanant rivalries

so we are giving up the best and most storied rivalry in college football? how isn't OSU-Mich a permanant?

01/16/2010 - 12:54am WOW

i bet that car is worth a lot of money! the IROC Z is a chevy while the Trans Am is the pontiac cousin. but i guess who cares i just drank too much beer and decided to be anal about car models instead of making a decent try at actually commenting on the posts topic.

01/16/2010 - 12:40am tate and devins redshirt

"if at any point he's our best QB option we are in trouble" Not so sure this is a bad thing.
1. didn't Colt almost set a record for wins as a QB starter? only way that couls happen is if he was starting as a freshman.
2. and probably most important, if Tate is only going to improve as a QB in his 2nd yr and Devin beats him out in great competition isn't that a "good" thing?
in a perfect football world yes he redshirts waits 2yrs behind Tate and then dominates the big10 for 2-3yrs, but if he beats Tate in yr 1 then i see it as a positive.

01/08/2010 - 12:51pm stronger big 10?

i'm not real sure how to assess the bowl season, as it relates to big 10 regular season. did the big 10 suck when we were getting our asses spanked in the bowls? of course not. there were all the excuses about the long lay-offs. well maybe, just maybe, we finally used that long lay-off the actually prepare for some of the games. or maybe this year just happened to have better match-ups in terms talent and schemes. while i was very impressed by the play of our big 10 brothers in the bowls, i'm not real sure if we can use it to say how good(or bad) the regular season will be.

01/07/2010 - 1:38am all on defense?

am i missing something? while our defense "blew" quite a bit. our offense with a beat up tate and an ineffective DR who hasn't shown the ability to throw well. i just wonder how much can really be blamed on our defense. i mean as far as everything hinging on our defense. tate not banged up, DR a better passer and our defense hardly ever sees the field to suck at, right?

01/07/2010 - 1:29am thank you!

this is exactly why i come to mgoblog because they have so many paid top college athlete evaluators that i no longer need to trust in RR and his staff or any of the others. mgoblog people are the best.

01/04/2010 - 12:57pm guess i was sleeping

guess i was sleeping through all the holiday(and previous) posts. i missed all the "DG must start and TF and DR are now garbage" posts. the posts that i've seen have been that we really need to redshirt him. his size and talent is great but he really needs a year to get ready for the college game. Tate will be fine this year. although what i really hope is that DG is good enough to move into a back-up role, hoping Tate stays healthy and we can move DR into a percy harvin death machine to opposing defenses.

01/03/2010 - 1:02pm missing the point!

IMHO you guys are missing the point(or at least part of the point) if OSU always gets kids to high draft picks, juniors or seniors, regardless of what they actually do in the NFL. it is a huge recruiting factor for kids who look at an education as secondary thing when going to a college. kids just want to go to the NFL and colleges that do that on a regular basis have a better shot at commitments.

12/29/2009 - 1:28am totally agree

i totally agree with Luginbill, but unfortunately he isn't the arbitor of RR's future. i hope the new AD is mindfull of the time it takes to completely tear down one type of system and install another. Luginbill and us fans might know that RR needs at least 4yrs, but it's not up to us.

12/23/2009 - 12:07am really!?

you? being the one. we were all in breathless anticipation.

12/18/2009 - 12:47am star rankings!

are we evaluating our recruits on their talent or their star rankings before giving out your "grade"? just wondering since the recruiting services(as has been overly discussed here) grade based on more of a pro set and we obviously run a spread our stars aren't gonna be there.
1. our recievers are larger than the previous 3yr
and i really had more thoughts in my head but too much beer tonight and thinking that with the QB spot being more important on the field at the college level than everyone else. i've decided that as long as D Gardner enrolls we have an A- class. thank you very much. crap my beer is empty!

12/16/2009 - 12:23am funny

+ 100 to you sir! just made me fall out of my chair! i just wonder if all those tutors Hankins was talking about isn't coloring their paperwork for them.

12/16/2009 - 12:18am balance

while your overall thoughts may be correct. i think the problem occurs from the belief(mine and obviously others) that while a nebraska might once in a while provide a great game for texas. the weaker division is nothing but a whipping boy for the other and that is never any good. i say somehow use a very complicated system based on the last 15 yrs and divide the conf. based on strength of team. that way each conference has a shot every yr not just that once in a blue moon that someone other than Mi, OSU, Penn. have a remote shot.

12/12/2009 - 9:53am what about????

what about Miami(yes that Miami) or Fla St.? i know sounds crazy but IIRC didn't a Fla. team join the MAC for a few years? then we coild have the conf. championship at a neutral site in Fla. and not have to worry about snow like a lot of big 10 AD's.

12/12/2009 - 9:47am i think

i think i'd rather see Mich and OSU on back to back weekends than i would Penn St. in the championship every year. if Mi,OSU, Mi.St were all in the same div. based on "most" years who would compete with Penn. although splitting Mi and OSU the reduces the aura of "the game" if both are already conf champs. i say get rid of 1 team go back to a traditional "10" teams and add in a bye week,like they did for 2010, and play "the game" 1-2 weeks after thanksgiving to match up with the rest of the country.

12/09/2009 - 6:25pm salary cap?

there's no way you need a salary cap til you get the teams to spend the money they get from profit sharing and luxury taxes.
the 2008 Marlins(per S. philips, who used to be the mets G.M) recieved over $60 mil. with the fire sale they had their team salary was under $12 mil. while i agree some teams spend more than others there are more team owners in the smaller market teams that are just pocketing the money they get from MLB instead of spending it on their team.

12/05/2009 - 10:02am so true

somethings gotta be said for recruiting guys who have actually played the position they are being recruited for. instead of wasting a yr trying to teach them a new position. i'd much rather have this kid than some of the tweeners we have. are they gonna bulk up and be DE can we slim them down and make them fast enough for LB or are we gonna have an over stock of the Quick position?

12/05/2009 - 9:32am amen!

the situation requires we take who we have a real shot of getting. also if this guy after his "junior" tape is evaluated and only given a meh 2* why would all the top schools be all over his ass?, thats right they wouldn't. so either(like chitown and myself) shrug your shoulders and welcome the kid and believe RR and Co. have seen something they like or just keep being miserable.

12/05/2009 - 9:11am dahblue!

while i agree that competing with mac teams does not seem like a good idea. i just want to ask a few questions that with your vast and superior knowledge can certainly clear up for us.
1. excactly how many kids play highschool football?
2. do 2/3 of the college programs really care about Oh. football when they can recruit from Tx, Fla, Ca.?
3. how long would it take to watch film on all those high school athletes?
4. is it possible that given his junior tape where the evaluation wasn't so high, that unless you "knew" about him that he might have been passed up?

12/05/2009 - 8:44am honestly

honestly i'm not sure of the get either. but i do have one question. when was the kid evaluated? ok 2 questions. has he been re-evaluated? from his junior tape the services decided he was a 2* since he had no real offers they did not go back to look at senior film. his season just finished with no new updates on him,so as of yet no new evaluation of his senior year. let's just reserve judgement til the last re-rankings. with the MIch. offer the services will most likely go look at some senior tape and re-evaluate. for crying out loud at the beginning of the season they had ESPN 150 watchlisters that was from watching soph. tape of the kids. if they get good offers they watch more film if not they get pushed to the back burnner. so here's to RR and co. actually going out there watching these kids and talking to these kids. so let's all say welcome Ray, welcome to the big house.

12/03/2009 - 5:52pm LMAO!

thanks dude! (Mrs. Lincoln bit) laughed my ass off! sorry about the dyslexia about the pur score. kinda kills the argument huh? oh well i guess i'll use as some sportscasters call the eyeball test or maybe even the beer goggles and just believe that or offense was better and will continue to get better. better by the leaps and bounds some believe? no, but better.
("can someone clean that up the second show will start soon")

12/03/2009 - 5:38pm well at least

well at least your making me laugh. using a drunk as an analogy for pointing out negatives in what most people are trying to find some or any positives is stupid! did our offense improve yes. is 2 more wins evidence, yes! data and statistics can be used for anything you wanna show. in the end it's wins that count. FLA's offense is probably down this year, but does it matter? not to the team and the won loss record. was the season a big disappointment? for me? hell yeah! but i'm sure not gonna dwell on all the negatives. like teams and coaches they try to "build" on the positives and just "limit" they negatives. not try and find ways in which the positives aren't really positive. besides isn't the world flat and at the center of the universe?

12/03/2009 - 4:51pm ok fuzzy!

your it's hard to compare the teams but we can look at the same teams they played from 2008-2009.

2008 2009
ND 35-17 L ND 38-34 W
wisc 27-25 W wisc 45-24 L
ill 45-20 L ill 38-13 L
penn 46-17 L penn 35-10 L
msu 35-21 L msu 26-20 L OT
pur 48-24 L pur 38-36 L

while the over all records are the same. i think if you look at the win over ND the closer losses to msu and pur i think you can reasonably say we improved. plus just to counter a point made previously. in 2008 against these same 6 opponents we scored 126 pts in 2009 we scored 141 pts. and maybe i am "grasping at straws" but at least i'm not wallowing in shit wondering where my team went.

12/03/2009 - 4:16pm i'm not saying!

"i'm not saying we didn't improve". kinda funny,fuzzy cuz then all your arguments point to the fact that it wasn't us who improved, it was our competition that got worse. when i look back on the season i think about the games we were in on and had a chance to win. just look at the 2008 MSU game vs this years game. yes we improved.

12/03/2009 - 12:54pm coach speak

all coaches lie if their team is doing well.

"i have removed my name from consideration" usually means. "i wanted the job but they really didn't want me so i'm removing my name so i'm not embarrassed later when i get turned down"

"i'm staying at(any school)" usually means. "why the hell are you asking me that. can't you see i'm trying to get my team ready for the biggest game of the season, and l'm gonna lie my ass off so the team stays focused and doesn't quit just because i'm gonna take the job after the game"

until the AD at ND holds a press conference introducing the new coach all names are probably still in play.

12/02/2009 - 2:45pm lol

sorry about my lack of ejukation and typing scills! but i draw the line at being called kanadian!

12/02/2009 - 2:39pm simply moronic!

Sharp ends the article by saying MI. has to "re-invent itself".
hmmmmm isn't that what we did by bringing in RR and going to the spread option?

12/02/2009 - 2:21pm also remember

the recruiting services are geared for more of a pro-style offensive attack. (yes i know carvin is on defence) most of the 2* studs you guys use as "see the sites screwed up" are offensive players in more spread styles so will not recieve higher rankings. so i guess what i'm trying to say is evaluate each player for the role and type of offence and defence he will be fitting into. i for one will trust RR and his coaches and then laugh after we beat the buckeyes by 13 in the shoe next year.

12/02/2009 - 1:56am thats interesting!

i guess we will really have to see! i called the NCAA on mon. 11/30 and talked with Kelly from membership services(thats where they sent my call as i wasn't affiliated with schools or an athlete.) i asked her about the change in rules and after being put on hold(so she could check the manual) she came back and read me this.

15.5.6.3.2 Recruited Student-Athlete Entering after Fall Term, Aided in First Year. [FBS/FCS] A student-athlete recruited by the awarding institution who enters after the first term of the academic year and immediately receives institutional financial aid (based in any degree on athletics ability) shall be an initial counter for either the current academic year (if the institution’s annual limit has not been reached) or the next academic year. The student-athlete shall be included in the institution’s total counter limit during the academic year in which the aid was first received.

any rules changes would be brought up at the Jan. meeting and she was not aware of any changes being discussed. most of the rule changes in the upcoming meeting will deal with womens volleyball. so i guess we will have to wait and see.

12/01/2009 - 12:23pm AR?

anal redundancy!

11/27/2009 - 8:47pm well shit, zippy!

i guess we should just fire all the guys at the elite 11 and let you evaluate the recruits from now on.

11/26/2009 - 10:15pm depth!

cuz we all know how much depth sucks!

11/26/2009 - 9:11pm yea especially

yea especially on a previous post someone mentioned how OSU had a dominating defense with only one all-big 10! those lower rated guys just suck and those 5*-4*'s that OSU gets are great right? lol. 1 thing to remember when evaluating our recruits and looking at stars, is that the evaluation sites are mostly set up to evaluate more of a pro style play. so the smaller fast OL and SR that we get will never, i repeat, never get the rankings a bruising OL that doesn't have the speed and athleticism to be in our system.