|10/11/2018 - 11:50am||I do not mean this as a…||
I do not mean this as a criticism but as an observation. The offense worked this game so that is great. I just wonder about the use or non-use of the WR in the passing game. They get the once-a-game post pattern and then seem largely like after thoughts. The other two big plays to the WR were improvs.
This could be a result of the fact that two potential big plays to DPJ didn't make the stat sheet because they were called back or Patterson missed the connection.
But this game they clearly wanted to throw to Gentry. He was the beneficiary of the play action and "special plays." But aside from 3 mundane possession type catches by Perry (who has largely been invisible before now) TWO fullbacks had as many catches as the next WR. And both of those catches were designed where the WR catches were not.
Just weird. You know. They've got these highly touted WR that they don't seem to use.
|10/05/2018 - 10:46am||This piece hits well on the…||
This piece hits well on the two issues that stood out to me with the offense in this game. These are likely related issues.
1. The play action doesn't appear to be working very well. Neither does the passing on early downs. When this offense is working correctly, play action and early down passing is supposed to get easy chunks. That is why they do all the predictable down burning running into stacked lines. Which I think they are still doing a little extra because these are games are supposed to be more easily winnable and that's fine. Say what you want, NW still lost to Akron and Duke. But when they do run the play action and the first down passes those plays are supposed to rip off chunks of yardage and they didn't really.
2. Very little is easy in this offense. Which is likely because of the first point. Good college offenses make things easy so they don't have to rely on back shoulder fades to TE's and when a TE does drop a pass it isn't the end of the world. Too much in this game, small issues loomed large because nothing was easy. Should Nico Collins get that first down? Yes. But in a good offense things are much easier and much less reliant on a young WR making all the right choices.
Maybe there were a thousand tiny cuts that kept the offense down. But to me it is starting to look like the offense is making everything too hard so that one play, one dropped pass, one mistake, becomes huge. They need to have more good plays that can go right. More easy plays that can't go wrong. That is how good college offenses work.
That is how Harbaugh's offenses have worked in the past. Hopefully, this one will start working that way again.
|10/01/2018 - 3:47pm||Well. OK. Mea culpa on that…||
Well. OK. Mea culpa on that one. I presume based on the stats and playing time in this game that Gentry has passed McKeon on the depth chart.
But I did not realize that he had the most receptions last year. My semantic error aside that is not exactly an argument for the productivity of the WR or the "dynamicness" of the offense. Is it.
I mean. The offense had problems last year too.
|10/01/2018 - 3:33pm||This is funny. Because…||
This is funny. Because approximately one million years ago when PSU fans on the internet were suffering from hilarious paranoid delusions about Michigan and the refs (I believe this is when "referines" was originally coined) one of the rants was about about a PSU WR catching the ball going backwards out of bounds. His touched toe in and his heel immediately after was out. I remember dudes typing HEEL TOE HEEL TOE in all caps.
It was not a catch and neither was this one.
But it was funny.
|10/01/2018 - 1:59pm||Up until now, Michigan fans…||
Up until now, Michigan fans may have consoled themselves by believing the offense was hampering itself on purpose and hiding the good plays. I think those days are over.
We can debate if the running game is effective or not (short yardage is clearly an issue excepting the fullback blast) but it won't matter until they can get the passing game worked out. Right now, the passing offense does not make a good deal of sense. The main goal appears to be super slow developing plays that get the ball to a bigger slower guy standing still or running out of bounds. Run after catch? Only on WR screens.
As an example, everyone is upset because the second string TE dropped a ball. Why is the back up TE the recipient of this all important pass? So, he was pulled and the 3rd string TE came in and was subsequently much more productive in the passing game than all but one WR--who had played the entire game. The designated screen WR who was also the lucky recipient of the once-per-game post pattern.
That cannot be how it was planned.
And I'm sure it wasn't because Michigan took the kick. With some kind of a plan. And then went no where for two possessions. Before reverting to the normal plan. Which then took a while to "get going."
So, "effective run game" that was stopped on 4th and 1. WR on 3rd and 2. Can't punch it in on 1st and goal from the 3. And not effective offense.
Weird. Very weird.
|09/20/2018 - 12:28pm||Maybe this is one of those…||
Maybe this is one of those games that you have to wait and see what happens next to know if this was a good offense shackling itself and having some bad luck (as suggested here) or a struggling offense deluding itself with what ifs. There are definitely a lot of what ifs and if only's in this article.
It felt to me like the game was on a knife edge when Michigan went for it on 4th and 1 from midfield tied 7-7. SMU had just ripped through the Michigan D for a long TD and the Michigan offense was clearly scuffling.
Michigan WAS FORTUNATE to get that first down and scored a TD on the next play which they followed up with a pick 6 on an otherwise promising drive by SMU and the rout was on. There was a good bit of luck of Michigan in that turn of events.
It is the struggling to run in short yardage that concerns me the most. This piece wants to remove those runs and have them not matter when I think they are the most important plays of all. A good running team can confidently run on 3rd and 2 and get it. Just bash the D into submission. Maybe even 3rd and 3, in college against a cupcake. Michigan failed on short yardage far too often. Only the quick FB hand off worked with any consistency in that situation.
In my opinion, if you can't run for short yardage against a good D then you aren't much of a running team. You're just running to bide time until you pass.
Michigan could not run consistently on short yardage, at least with their RB rather than the FB, on Saturday. That is a bad sign. If they don't get that kind spot on the critical 4th down, we're looking at a white knuckle second half.
|09/18/2018 - 8:18pm||Yes. I guess we agree. They…||
Yes. I guess we agree. They are doing this thing on purpose. The question is why? Those who are old enough went through all of this with Carr on this blog. What will getting good at this play do for them against a good team? It seems unlikely that running this play will be consequential in big games. MSU and OSU will stop this play and its variants dead. As we've seen repeatedly over the last decade or two. And then what? Try to "establish the run." Fail. Fall behind. What is the end goal of all this block headed predictability? To fool everyone into thinking you are predictable? By being predictable...
So we must assume that they do this thing that looks stupid to do something that does not look stupid that they are largely refusing to do at all so far at some future point.
The fly in that ointment is that they already lost to ND doing this same stupid looking thing without any of the successful not stupid looking thing.
So we have to wait and hope that this time it will be different. This time they will do something that looks smart against a rival. And it will work. And they will win.
Except for the one data point we already have where that did not happen.
The thing is they aren't stupid... So... I hope this time it works. But right now it looks as if you blitz the shit out of the Michigan offense and they fall apart. The MSU game looms to test that hypothesis.
Would the world end if they ran some power then ran a good play to get a first down so they could run some more power? Yes. Apparently, that would ruin everything. The good plays. More than one a game or half. Does wanting that make me a bad person? Yes. It seems so.
|09/07/2018 - 5:10pm||Originally, I posted this in…||
Originally, I posted this in a post that was immediately buried and forgotten so I moved it here. My apologies if you read it twice and hate me.
I'm not tryna be an ass. I don’t know shit about football like in a real sense. I just believe in using pa
st performance to predict future events.
My prediction for this game is frustration for at least 3 quarters.
I've watched a good deal of Michigan football but have no memory of watching any WMU football so I'm going with what was written here for that part.
Michigan is going to want to "establish the run." Michigan always wants to "establish the run" against MAC schools or any school really. Even more so when they're coming off a disappointing performance. "Establishing the run" is manly and demonstrates dominance and football coaches in the Michigan mold prefer to run. Passing is not manly and reeks of socialism.
"Establishing the run" is frustrating. Doubly so when the defense stacks the LOS as we've been told WMU does. In the last decade or two, Michigan has struggled "establishing the run" against more or less everyone.
When Michigan tries to pass short, it will be hard because the entire D is at the LOS. Michigan will try to pass short because it seems they prefer (attempts at) "efficiency" over (trying to score) making big plays. But it will be long passes that are open . Trying to pass will therefore be frustrating. When Michigan does try to go long, it will be extra frustrating because they can't pass block and the D's best player is a DE and the Michigan tackles are the worst of the lot. And WMU likes to blitz. A lot.
On the other side of the ball we have a similar situation. WMU runs a wacky bombs away offense. Michigan stop everything except is susceptible to long passes when bad things happen. Expect some long passes to work early. We've seen it before. We'll see it again.
So. When all this come to pass and Michigan finally puts WMU away in the 4th quarter. Please remain calm. This is normal. It was expected. We've seen it before. After the game, everyone can argue about if it was a bad win or if any win is a good win. We’ve got a lot of practice doing that.
Maybe we'll get lucky and a Michigan WR will catch a TD pass. But don't count on it. Because that IS something we haven't seen recently.
If I am wrong. Fabulous. I’ve done it before.
|09/07/2018 - 4:04pm||I'm not tryna be an ass. I…||
I moved this comment to an active thread.
|09/04/2018 - 12:34pm||Watching the offense, I…||
Watching the offense, I thought how "undangerous" every play looked. It reminded me of Nussmeier's offense inching down the field 3 plays and 10 yards until they screw up. At half, something like Michigan had 90 yards and 7 first downs. I think people are putting that too much on bad OL play--ND's tackles weren't stopping anyone either and they managed to gash Michigans defense.
Michigans WR only caught 3 TDs last year. And this Saturday will make one year since Michigan has had a WR catch a TD (Black had one against Florida and Crawford and Perry each had one against Cinci.) That is a design flaw in the offense. It is anti-dynamic and undangerous. It is plodding. They set up play action to throw a 3 yard TE drag.
Since Fisch left, the offensive coaches have been unable to dial up dangerous passing plays for the WR. Despite having a stable of highly recruited options.
It isn't the OL. It isn't the QB. It is the offensive design.
|12/28/2016 - 4:27pm||Florida wasn't able to test||
Florida wasn't able to test FSU's safeties at all in the passing game;
Did they even try? I don't recall testing the safeties, at least deep, being something that Nussmeier was at all interested in doing when he was calling plays at Michigan.
|12/21/2016 - 1:55pm||It is also true that losing||
It is also true that losing on a Hail Mary and losing on a blocked FG for a TD are very different.
So. I guess you are correct. My bad. The games were totally different.
But you appear to support my original point that Borges' awful gameplan was good enough to win a conference road game at night. Which suggests that it probably wasn't the worst gameplan in history despite an unfortunate stat.
|12/21/2016 - 1:37pm||I meant it was the same in||
I meant it was the same in the way that both games were at night in Happy Valley and both Michigan and OSU had the game won until the wackiness ensued at the end. Not that individual stats were similar.
|12/21/2016 - 12:57pm||Look. I know that 27/27 has||
Look. I know that 27/27 has become a thing. A thing, I might add blown completely out of perspective, for whatever reason. Personally, I don't even think it was the worst Borges game. it was just the one with the easy stat to mock. Those weren't even Michigans final rushing stats. They were Fitz Toussaint's rushing stats. That was a game that Michigan should have won without several flucky things. It was basically the same result OSU got when they went to Happy Valley for a night game this year.
But enough of that dead horse. And I hope this will make everyone feel better. My personal bete noir, Doug Nussmeier, out did Borges in the SEC championship game this year. Florida ran 30 times for 0 yards which works out to a 0.0 YPC.
So. That is bad.
Personally, I would look at the defensive side in some late era Carr games for worst ever candidates. Chris Graham on the slot WR. Or shit, any number of defensive gems from the RichRod Era. Like PSU 2009 when they made a third string RB look like Joe Montana.
|12/13/2016 - 10:16am||Not to switch the topic to||
Not to switch the topic to other backs but I don't think that the absence of Perry or the A-Train on that list can be solely attributed to the Carr offense. Both of those backs took time to develop and only became stars in their final year.
One thing consistent about most of the backs on the list is that they were good immediately. If you look at Wheatley's and Biakabatuka's stats you will see that their averages were pretty consistently good from the beginning. The same cannot be said for Perry or Thomas. In 1999, Thomas had 283 carries and a 4.4 YPC. Previous years have fewer carries but the same uninspiring average. In 2000, the carries remained similar at 287 but the average jumped to 5.4 YPC. The same is true for Perry who had 267 carries in 20002 and a 4.2 YPC. That YPC jumped in 2003 to 5.0 YPC on 338 carries.
Mike Hart is a little different. He was pretty uniform, with a dip in 2005 when he got hurt and offense was really bad. But he was what he was which was not quite enough to get him on this list.
|12/08/2016 - 10:42am||Clearly, the coaches have||
Clearly, the coaches have found an angle that allows for more blocked punts.
Now, the really important question is did Michigan benefit from the aggressive strategy. Failed blocked punt attempts were critical negative points in both loses. Most of the positive results that I recall were not exactly critical to the outcome of the game. It would be interesting to analyze if the positives of this strategy out weighed the negatives over the course of the season.
Which of course, is only one data point and not conclusive of anything.
|12/06/2016 - 12:25pm||Remembering how the 2006 team||
Remembering how the 2006 team ended the season with the D getting ripped by both OSU and USC is more telling than breaking down individual players. If the pass rush didn't get home the DBs could be abused. The 2006 D got abused twice in ways that the 2016 D has completely avoided.
The 2006 offense was probably more talented but rarely seemed to live up to expectation.
I think the biggest improvement from 2006 to 2016 is in the coaching. The offensive play calling is loads better.
|09/06/2016 - 1:48pm||I think this is a tough one||
I think this is a tough one to evaluate from a defensive perspective and maybe it is just the new reality for Hoke.
Oregon was scoring so fast that they got totally dominated on TOP. They faced 80 plays. The game was 33-7 in the second half before things got a wonky for the D.
How much of that is real and how much is being tired and disinterested because you've won the game?
|08/30/2016 - 5:06pm||This is just one of the odd||
This is just one of the odd mgoblog things, with the wife day stuff and what not, about pretending that wives and families keep men from doing what they really want to do which is watch football all day long.
It's not my thing. It's too Married with Children and retrograde for me. But I have no reason to believe that either Cook or Seth are anything but devoted fathers and husbands and plenty of anectdotal evidence suggesting that they are.
So. No worries. Just jokes.
|08/25/2016 - 1:51pm||The problem with keeping this||
The problem with keeping this debate apolitical is that UC's statement is itself a political statement. Not the part you excerpted but in its entirety.
I think that pretty much everyone agrees that college campuses should be places for "rigorous debate, discussion and even disagreement." So, by making that statement UC is disagreeing with no one. Standing against no one. It is the method of creating and, when necessary, policing the "rigorous debate, discussion and even disagreement" where there is disagreement. And that disagreement is very political. As you can already see in the responses here.
This debate has absolutely nothing to do with late night conversations in dorms and fraternity houses.
|05/24/2016 - 4:16pm||I just watched the highlights||
I just watched the highlights from that Hawai'i game which I had no previous knowledge of and have to say that the rosy impressions I am reading about here in the original post and the comments from that game do not fit with what I just watched.
The game was tied 3-3 at halftime.
Then it was tied 10-10 at least halfway through the 3rd quarter.
Then Michigan finally takes the lead for good with a long punt return TD.
Michigan didn't put it away, with the next TD until well into the 4th quarter.
Sounds like a real frustrating white knuckler to me.
This is nothing new though. Ever since I became a Michigan fan in the 1991, I have had a hard time reconciling the legend of Bo with the more modest records in the history books.
I guess you had to be there.
|05/20/2016 - 2:08pm||I do not agree with Harbaugh||
I do not agree with Harbaugh or anyone else that football is any better a game to play than any other particular team sport. Nor do I agree with the idea that football instills positive qualities of any sort any differently than any other team sport. My children do not play football because neither my wife or I or anyone my kids know play football or suggested they should play football.
I do believe that Harbaugh and anyone else have the right to have whatever opinion they want about football and to act upon it. If a parent wishes to communicate to their son how very important football and playing football is that is their decision. I prefer to stress academics and sports as a leisure activity that is to be enjoyed. Rather than some gladatorial proving ground.
I don't watch pee wee football. I don't watch middle school football. I don't watch HS football. I watch grown men who are being compensated well for playing football--be it with an NFL salary or a college scholarship. And I don't even watch as much of that any more.
I see no hypocrisy. I only see only an attempt to illegitimize a contrary opinion.
|04/27/2016 - 4:19pm||In terms of 180, it is||
In terms of 180, it is totally Nussmeier.
He went from the Alabama golden boy to breaking the no shutout streak with that trip to South Bend. Was he even interested in scoring or was that game just a well attended practice?
That game punctured so many balloons.
|03/15/2016 - 12:49pm||I always look at this type of||
I always look at this type of data with an eye to confirm my disdain for Nussmeier especially in relation to Borges.
It is interesting to see in the "Spreadiness" figure how much variability from game to game there was under Borges. Particularly in 2013 when he was really changing his approach week to week either out of desperation or in response to the opponent. But then in the one year under Nuss the game to game numbers are pretty flat and similar. Nuss seems to have used the same approach with regards to personnel regardless of opponent. I always wondered when Nuss talked about watching video and gameplanning from week to week what exactly he was doing. To my eyes, it looked like nothing ever changed.
If you look at the bubble figures (yards per play by formation), you can see what we already knew about the 2014 offense. Nothing worked particularly well. Not passing. Not running. They all sucked equally. Nothing was particularly explosive.
With the Harbz data, you can see what your eye balls already told you. Harbz swung between modest gains and chunk plays.I'm sure that was by design and someone with more time and knowledge could explain it quite simply.
Unlike the Nuss offense which appears to be based on small incremental gains on most plays rather than explosive plays (regardless of how much he talked about explosive plays), the Harbz offense is about purposefully creating situations and matchups for exploitation and explosive plays. Borges believed more in this approach but was clearly not as good at it as Harbz.
I think it is pretty clear which approach I prefer.
|02/02/2016 - 2:13pm||Infinite Jest has so many||
Infinite Jest has so many different vignettes and side stories that reading a sample is not going to be particularly helpful.
The book is full of awesome sections that would read really well as a sample. Then it has just as many bewildering or not so awesome sections.
I read it. I'm glad I read it. I doubt I'll read it again. There's some really great stuff and lots of stuff that makes you want to strangle the author or at the very least wonder if he had any editor at all.
In particular, I am not fond of the assbackwards way stuff gets explained in IJ. DFW goes on for hundreds of pages about stuff that you cannot possibly understand--only to explain it on page 510. I am not fond of authors being so purposefully non-understanable.
I'd say give it a shot but be prepared to power through it. There are some real gems in there. Including a very real discussion of addiction, depression, and overcoming both.
I have read and heard various people, including the author, explain what IJ is about. For me, it is a book about addiction. We know now, what we didn't know before, that all of the rehab and halfway house stuff comes from DFW's personal life.
If you want to work up to IJ, which I didn't, you might start with A Supposedly Fun Thing I will Never Do Again. It is just the vignettes, non-fiction though, without all the purposeful confusion and plot.
|01/29/2016 - 1:25pm||It was Urban Meyer who had||
It was Urban Meyer who had "one good year at BGSU."
Chalk up another win for the tiny little baby. The kid is killing it, no doubt.
|01/20/2016 - 12:09pm||I don't realize that. I||
I don't realize that. I wondered that but I have no way of knowing if it is true. That information is not contained within the tweet.
Given my age, I assume that any meme viral enough for me to know is also well known to most teenagers.
Maybe that assumption was incorrect. But without more information, neither you nor I can know that.
(edit for clarity, it is agreed that maybe Pepto Bismol does not understand what netflix and chill means--and if so I apologize for the misunderstanding. It seem likely to me that Connor Murphy knows what it means though.)
|01/20/2016 - 11:11am||A recruit just suggested that||
A recruit just suggested that he had sex with Jim Harbaugh when he slept over at his house.
None of that seems weird to you?
|12/16/2015 - 12:25pm||The comments about how||
The comments about how vertical Florida's offense is and about how they like to take shots downfield (echoed by Glasgow) suggest this offense is nothing like what we saw from Nuss last year.
|11/05/2015 - 1:29pm||This is one of those things||
This is one of those things that Brain Cook built a narrative around and then blew completely out of proportion. In my experience teams either like to use play action or they do not. If a team uses it then you will notice, if you pay attention, that they do it at times that one might assume it will fool no one. Frequently, you will see QBs faking a hand off to no one and not just because the RB went the wrong way.
There are a number of possible explanations--some presented here. The least likely of which is that the coach is a stupid idiot.
I also think there are several misconceptions implicit in this thread.
1. The defenders are out there thinking about everything before they do it and remembering everything their coaches told them. A lot of this stuff is instinctual and based on muscle memory and training--especially the initial reaction. If your best friend came up to you and pretended to punch you in the face, you might flinch, but did you really think your best friend was going to punch you in the face? How stupid are you?
2. It didn't work for Borges. He had a lot of problems but creating big plays was not one of them. Especially relative to his successor, Borges was really good at creating big plays. It was the everything else that was the problem.
I suggest that as you watch other teams--college and NFL--that you look for this kind of thing. I predict you will find lots of teams doing it at seemingly nonsensical times.
In conclusion, why does it matter? Faking the hand off isn't a major thing and only seemed like one when it was normal for defenders to treat the OL like a turnstyle. When that happens, everything seems stupid and impossible.
|09/09/2015 - 1:31pm||Do you not recall in 3 and||
Do you not recall in 3 and Out when JUB basically said, without actually saying it so he could say he never said it, that Lloyd Carr was actively undermining RichRod and telling players to transfer? And JUB did this without a single attributed quote--except a widely reported quote from a friend of Ryan Mallett's about what Mallett had told him.
When questioned about this JUB would simply respond that Carr had refused repeated requests to be interviewed for the book.
So. I think Seth has probably, potentially unintentionally, given you the correct impression.
|08/31/2015 - 11:45am||I do think that OL has gotten||
I do think that OL has gotten better. However, I suspect that some of that apparent improvement from 2013 to 2014 (especially in the running game) is a mirage created by a decrease in sacks (sacks are counted against the running game) which was created by a fear of allowing the QB to spend any time in the pocket with the ball which lead to a flat line of the offenses ability to move the ball and score. No downfield passing. No explosive plays. No scoring.
Quite clearly, the running yards went up, the sacks went down, and the offense still got much worse.
But that is more about my dislike of the last OC than it is about things moving forward.
One can reasonably expect that worst is behind us with regards to the OL
|08/27/2015 - 3:57pm||Until Iowa was in trouble,||
Until Iowa was in trouble, Rudock's first down passes were five yard outs as the Hawkeyes endeavored to put together the world's longest drives.
Change "first down passes" to "all passes" and Rudock would have really shined in the Nussmeier offense. He could do that all day and never be asked to throw the ball down field. Ever.
|08/26/2015 - 3:11pm||Having this discussion with||
Having this discussion with you is difficult because you have such strongly held non-mainstream views so I cannot assume basic things.
For instance, do you believe in any mental illness? Can they all be cured by "the force of one's own will" in every case? Are you under the impression that alcoholism can always be cured by force of will?
Do you believe in any addiction? Can they all be cured by force of will? Does it matter to you that withdrawal, even from alcohol, can have concrete clinical symptoms not limited to or controlled by the force of one's will?
Is anorexia an illness? Can it be cured for force of will? All you have to do is eat! Everyone likes to eat!
Do you believe that all addicts or mentally ill people are actually just people of weak will and weak character?
Probably this is a pointless conversation.
|08/26/2015 - 2:28pm||I don't know what to||
I don't know what to say.
Both of your statements are incorrect.
Section 952 of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act states the universities are allowed but not required to notify parents in these types of situations. You may disagree but that's the law.
And the medical community (and society) very much disagrees with your opinions on alcoholism and addiction. You may disagree but they are the experts not you.
But fine. Go on the internet and state your opinions as strongly as you like.
|08/26/2015 - 1:06pm||This is not a matter of||
This is not a matter of getting in trouble with your parents, or privacy, or being able to fight in a war, or not being responsible for your actions (clearly anyone getting busted TWICE in one academic year is NOT responsible for themselves), or being a regular college student just having fun.
It is a matter of needing help and from where is that help going to come.
If we agree that drinking is a problem in colleges and all the stats suggest that drinking is way up from previous generations then it is not unreasonable that a university would take action to help and educate their students. Especially students that are at risk and could clearly use help.
I was an RA in an all male freshman hall. I never gave out a single alcohol or drug violation. They were very rare and usually limited to extremely intoxicated or disruptive students. Anyone that managed to get two probably had a problem. Referring that person to a conselling or rehab program would be perfectly reasonable. As would informing their parents of the problem that their child is dealing with.
Drinking can be fun but when your drinking continues to lead to run ins with the authorities or others then you have a problem.
Alcoholism is a disease. There is no reason why someone has to "work it out themselves" when there are organizations that can help.
|08/25/2015 - 11:16am||They lost but 2002 OSU should||
They lost but 2002 OSU should also be a triumph for Navarre. He played an amazing game. Good enough to win and maybe they would have had Braylon not been called for OPI in the endzone. The INT he did throw came on the last play of the game.
|08/25/2015 - 11:04am||John Navarre is probably the||
John Navarre is probably the greatest player to ever play at Michigan.
God bless you for doing this.
|08/04/2015 - 2:42pm||Unfortunately, because I was||
Unfortunately, because I was hoping to read a book about football. A book behind the scenes with Hoke and Borges and Nussmeier. Details about the Borges/Nussmeier transition and the Gardner/Morris QB controversy, the Jake Ryan position switch etc.
I feel like we already pretty much know that Brandon was terrible and everything he did was terrible and he was terrible. And it isn't football.
But, as you say, to each his own.
|08/04/2015 - 2:04pm||Is this what the book is||
Is this what the book is really about? Not about football but yet another anti-Brandon screed?
Unfortunately, I cannot say that interests me at all. Wasn't his last book basically that?
The hate is strong with this one.
|08/03/2015 - 10:17am||I understand the reasoning||
I understand the reasoning behind saying all of these 2016 recruits are going to red shirt. The reason is often because they need to red shirt. I haven't been keeping track of how many of these recruits are predicted to red shirt but it seems like most of them.
Unfortunately, common sense and recent trends suggest that a new coach taking over a bad team is not going to be able to red shirt most of his first recruiting class.
Something is going to have to give. Either the older players on the two deep are going to have to get a whole lot better or Harbz is going to have to get "his guys" on the field early.
|07/23/2015 - 9:20am||I was at a party once, well||
I was at a party once, well into my cups, and saw Chuck Winters--the guy who didn't bat the ball down. I told my friend that I was going to ask him about that. She told me, if I did that he would kick the shit out of me and no one would help me. So, now we will never know.
|07/22/2015 - 11:14am||With 5th years there is||
With 5th years there is always the possibility of the firm handshake.
We will always have this play.
|07/08/2015 - 12:25pm||This is a classic. The type||
This is a classic. The type of game that lead to the pining for RichRod.
Michigan got up 2 scores in the first half and then played fiddle faddle missing FGs and running the clock. The defense throttled Utah until late in the 4th quarter when they finally broke through for the inevitable TD. So a game that Michigan seemed to dominate was suddenly very close. Then the offense couldn't finish the game and it was white knuckle time until the final INT.
I especialy love this post game quote from Carr.
"I'm very concerned,'' Carr said. "I don't know what else to
|05/22/2015 - 2:26pm||Every time I watch one of||
Every time I watch one of these Rudock videos I marvel that this guy has been criticized for checking down and dinking and dunking.
Iowa fans needs to watch a Nussmeier offense if they think this is dink and dunk. I've seen more balls over the top from Rudock in the few videos I've watched than Michigan attempted all of last year.
It is sad that any downfield passing amazes me now.
|05/21/2015 - 11:03pm||Of course you are right that||
Of course you are right that one season is too small of a sample size to judge from. But this is the internet where instant judgements are made. People were already complaining about Borges after his second game. Which Michigan won.
I will say this. If either Hoke or Nuss thought that installing inside zone was going to revert the offense to near 2008 levels of incompetence--with all that experience--then hiring him or taking the job was a horrible decision. Both of them had to think it was going to work pretty well because otherwise everyone gets fired.
I am sure if given enough time, Nuss could have developed an offense that could actually get into the redzone and not look completely ridiculous. But reading what Alabama fans were saying when he was there and after he left and observing him in 2014, I get the impression that if his base running plays don't get 4-5 yards routinely and the play action isn't working really well there is no Plan B. Without the awesome play action, he has no way to create explosive plays and is content to inch down the field hoping to get 10 yards every 3 plays.
Which is exactly what we saw in 2014. Just look at the OSU game--inarguably Nuss' best game and a pretty good one. Michigan had 27 first downs but only 370 yards. That's 13.4 yards per first down. OSU and Michigan in 2013, for comparison, had 20 yards per first down. That comes out to 5.2 YPP, which oddly enough was also their season average and ranked them at 72.
But anyway. Good talk.
|05/21/2015 - 9:36pm||It was just an example but||
It was just an example but Denard's troubles with the zone read did not start with Borges. RichRod had 2 seasons to teach it to Denard (2010 was Denard's sophomore year) and for whatever reason it just never worked. As you noted, the 2010 offense moved away from the zone read to QB draws and off tackle and what not. At that point, mgo conventional wisdom was that Denard was not good at the zone read. It was all over the UFRs.
It does not invalidate the dragonchild's original point, but I do not think you can blame Borges for Denard's issues with the zone read.
|05/21/2015 - 2:25pm||Selfishly, I was hoping this||
Selfishly, I was hoping this would have a strong dose of Nussmeier hatin.
Because, I am honestly over hating on RichRod for his time at Michigan. I have pretty much forgotten most of the crazy-making stuff he did but not quite enough to wish him back. My interest in Borges hate was exhausted long ago.
What Mgoblog has really lacked was any real Nussmeier hate--possibly because everyone was so focused on hating Hoke and Brandon and why can't the running backs hit the proper holes. It seems to me that the really truly stupid offense arrived with Nussmeier. This is backed up by various stats both here and found elsewhere. At least Borges looked interested in scoring and even did so occassionally. Even the gains in the running game under Nuss were inflated by the decrease in lost yardage from sacks which was caused by avoiding spending any time in the pocket which meant no long passing. Which meant a lack of explosiveness and no scoring but OK stats. Whatever improvement there was in the running game never lead to an improved result.
I guess I may have to follow some Florida blogs to get my fill of Nuss hatin.
|04/03/2015 - 3:23pm||While I am totally||
While I am totally flabbergasted that Tennessee hired DeBord as their OC. I am LOVING it.
Because. If I had to choose a disgraced, National Championship winning Michigan OC to watch again, I would take DeBord over Nussmeier every day of the week.
AND NOW I CAN WATCH THEM FLAIL AWAY AT EACH OTHER SAFELY IN ANOTHER CONFERENCE THAT I DO NOT LIKE.
The only way this could get better would be if one of those teams got paired with Arizona in a bowl.
|03/10/2015 - 10:08am||The first thing you have to||
The first thing you have to do is learn styles and breweries.
From scanning this thread, it sounds like you like IPAs and hoppier stuff rather than roasty or malty stuff. So, start with those. Church Key has a listing of "hoppy" to make it easy.
Walking into a bottle shop or beer bar can be very confusing because there are so many options. Truthfully, a great many of those options aren't very good and you will be fooled by marketting. Gravitate towards certain breweries (suggestions below) and ignore ones you don't know. Or better yet, remember the name and look them up later.
I use beer advocate to look up beers and breweries. I rarely buy anything w/o knowing about it first. My rule of thumb is if it is not close to a 90 (like 88 and up) on the 100 scale or a 4 on the 5 point scale then I will ignore it unless there is some other reason for buying it. Tons of breweries make beers that rate in the mid 3's or low 80s. Ignore those breweries until you know more.
There is a ton of beer and breweries that you can and should just ignore.
Price is not a reliable indicator of quality.
Luckily for you, there are two local-ish breweries that do great things with hops. DC Brau is in the District and has four great beers with increasing taste--The Public, The Citizen, Corruption, and then the famous rain maker On the Wings of Armagedon (OTOWA is the shorthand). All of those but the OTOWA are readily available in cans around the District. Three Stars Brewing is also local and good but they don't do hops as well as DC Brau. They have a beer called Madness out right now that is awesome. But it is dark and silky and maybe not what you prefer. Right Proper Brewing is not far from DuPont and good. It is a destination place. I don't think they sell beer in stores yet.
The other suggestion I have is Dogfish Head. It is easily available. Again in increasing flavor, 60 Minute, 75 Minute, 90 Minute, and then the weirdo 120 Minute. You can use those as a scale to see what you like. The Dogfish Head IPAs have more of a malty backbone than some others that increases with the number so you can use that to rate your interest in malts.
If you got to Nats games, they have stands that sell beers from all the local breweries (DC Brau, 3 Stars, the Fox one--Sly or Mad?--Port City, etc.) Try those.
Other breweries that are easily available and pretty reliable are Founders, Bells, Lagunitas, and Stone. That should get you started.