|06/18/2018 - 4:41pm||"Fully expected this to be a…||
"Fully expected this to be a Maizen/Bluey post to balance out his more negative posts"
- No one ever
|06/13/2018 - 3:22pm||Why not 6, or 7, or even…||
Why not 6, or 7, or even have a limit? The 4 years is supposed to align with the number of years it takes to get a college degree. The original idea behind FR not being eligible is because they needed to focus on school and weren't ready to compete at that level. That isn't always the case anymore, but often still is. So 4 years of actually playing and regularly contributing still seems quite different than just having 5 years.
I also don't see a hard-and-fast 4-games as a dog-and-pony show. It mitigates the injury dog-and-pony show they had while still retaining the intent of 5 years to play 4.
|06/13/2018 - 1:42pm||The primary difference is…||
The primary difference is that there are guys that are clearly ready to play on teams, that should play because they are the best at their position. But there are also a large group of players that are borderline. That may have some potential but are still figuring things out and you want to see how he performs first before burning his redshirt (Dymonte Thomas comes to mind). There are some guys you just want to give some experience to see how they handle it and because you have snaps to give in a particular game, but have no intention for them to be regular contributors (Higdon), etc.
So the major difference here is that a player isn't punished for a coach/player seeing how a guy performs in a real game and realizing they aren't ready. Because it isn't always immediately apparent in practice, and it isn't immediately known how some guys will improve (or not) throughout their first year, adjusting to the rigors of college football and class, etc.
|06/08/2018 - 10:16am||We've got no food. We got no…||
We've got no food. We got no jobs. Our pets HEADS ARE FALLIN' OFF!
|06/08/2018 - 10:13am||I remember writing a tweet…||
I remember writing a tweet about how I liked what I saw from Peters in the Rutgers game, but people should be careful not to over-hype him early only to dismiss him when he struggles. That tweet got a lot of "we don't do that", "bad take", etc.
This blog is way too quick to dismiss him. The bowl game was bad, particularly once he started facing pressure (he looked shook from the Wisconsin game still). But the guy still has a lot of potential, and if it clicks and if he gets the ghosts out of his head, he has potential to be a very good QB for Michigan. It may or may not happen, and while not exclusive to UM fans, we are some of the worst group about promoting the QBs we haven't seen over the ones we have.
|05/31/2018 - 2:42pm||Besides Decker, OSU was relatively OG heavy as well||
As was Stanford under Harbaugh. I disagree with you a bit in that I think they have de ent tackle numbers, even if most of them come in the form of “swing” players. But with Harbaugh’s scheme, that isn’t necessarily that off. Sure, they’d love some big time OTs, but short of those guys, I think they got two OTs last year and a few swing guys this year.
|05/22/2018 - 12:39pm||I think the DL recruiting is a little overblown around here||
It would have been nice to get a true NT type in last year's class, but Brown hasn't in the past utilized a ton of mass on the inside (rarely did he have interior DL larger than 300 lbs at BC). Brown likes a lot of movement: line stunts, pressure games, etc. He doesn't need a space eater as often as other defenses do.
Two years ago he got Paea, who could grow into that (if he stays on D). They got Solomon and Dwumfour who can both take up snaps at 3T or NT. They got DIB and Jeter who will be a 3T/Anchor. So two years ago you got three guys that could take snaps at NT, and 4 that could take snaps at 3T, and all are still underclassmen.
Last year, they picked up three "DEs", but almost one of Upshaw, Hutchinson, or Welschof will end up inside (my guess would be Welschof, but hard to say, and will depend on how each reacts to the strength program). Hinton could very likely end up inside at 3T as well. So, yes, it would be nice for them to get an additional guy that can play some NT so they don't go two years without one, I think that's a need, but two true NTs isn't really necessary when they have one guy likely to slide into 3T already. This staff likes big guys that can move, not space eaters, because the goal is to let front attack, not sit and react.
|05/04/2018 - 9:50am||Biggest misses||
Bently from South Carolina did little to impress me and be on this list.
That Deondre Francois from FSU (one of the better returning QBs before getting hurt against Bama in the season opener last year) isn't on the list makes it more invalid than anything else.
|05/04/2018 - 9:46am||Off-season content caveats apply||
But I disrespekt folks on this board are playing is a bit unjustified.
1. Shea hasn't played a whole season worth of games yet in his career. He certainly has showed flashes of greatness, but has been very far from perfect. Him being rated 15 is still mostly based on recruiting rankings. It actually feels like a pretty good spot for him IMO.
2. Lewerke is far from without flaws, but he was the primary reason MSU did enough to beat Michigan. MSU's OL got destroyed, repeatedly, all year, and particularly against UM, and he made plays to escape the pocket and made some pin perfect passes. He is a very skilled QB that still makes mistakes, yes, but there is a quite obvious case of "only seeing the negatives" of him on this blog. I'm not yet convinced he's a top 10 QB in college football, but he probably isn't far from it.
3. McSorely is tough, because he's had repeated success doing what he does makes it hard to dock him too much. He lost a lot of skill players around him, has a relatively average arm, is a solid but not great runner, but is a pretty solid package. I don't think he's near the best QBs for the NFL, but he is a dangerous player at the college level and I don't see how you could keep him out of the top 10 at this point.
4. Overall, the list is making some aggressive assumptions about improvement, particularly from the two QBs that finished the national championship game (neither of which, based on their play so far, should be ranked as high). Both have a lot of talent, and both could take Sophomore year jumps. Those are the biggest ones that stick out as could be proven right or way off.
|05/01/2018 - 2:19pm||More than any of that||
Early mock drafts are typically awful. They are some combination of high school rating (especially if it isn't at a position that generates a ton of stats) and large stats more than actual production. Not that Gary and Patterson can't be good or won't be early picks, but their 5 stars are helping them get first round hype as much as anything.
|04/30/2018 - 9:30am||He's almost certainly a camp arm||
NFL teams need camp arms for the summer, and so you see a lot of quite marginal QB prospects get signed to camp contracts for a very low pay. Most likely what is happening here.
|04/26/2018 - 1:20pm||Cali is an extreme example, but it isn’t limited to there||
That said, this move is a bit stuck in the past given how much Ford has invested in future technologies including smart cars, hybrids, and electrics are all better to implement with sedans. Gas prices will rise again, the economy won’t be this strong forever, more and more people are moving to cities where parking smaller vehicles is significantly easier. The US sedan industry failed for way too long and allowed the foreign market to overcome it, but they were clawing their way back and were recapturing some of it since the recession. Now they’re giving it up and the long term impact will be significant. Maybe it’s correct, but it isn’t inappropriate to question this massive move from a long term perspective.
|04/26/2018 - 1:09pm||I get gas prices are down so trucks and SUVs are popular again||
But it won’t stay that way forever. Stopping it all together makes it a years process to ramp back up and seems very short sighted, particularly with how popular the Focus and Fushion are, not just for personal use but government and company use.I know it will cost more per part with the elimination of the other sedans, but a slight price increase wouldn’t stop those from being some of the more popular vehicles on the road and would give them much more market flexibility going forward. Seems very odd
|04/20/2018 - 12:47pm||He's a redshirt SO||
The timing makes sense. If he's an NBA player, it's more than likely this year or next for him. And, as everyone has stated, while he has NBA potential, it doesn't appear high enough to draft now and his skill level also doesn't seem to be high enough to draft this year either. So that basically leaves next year, and the older he gets the more the window closes. He gets one free enter and return. So he might as well use it to get a chance to work on his game and get more feedback on his game.
Being 21 already doesn't give him much room for an NBA dream. He can likely go the Euro route, but the NBA window is very limited, particularly for a guy that almost certainly won't be a lottery pick.
|04/17/2018 - 10:58am||Seahawks are attracted to talent||
And don't care about much more. That's why Frank Clark is still on their team despite all his issues (and was drafted high by them, because he does have a lot of talent, and just as much baggage).
It's worked for them in the past. But like with Miami football back in the day, things can snowball very quickly when you operate that way. This story has been repeated again and again. Iowa made a ton of hay taking at-risk guys, and it paid off for them, until it didn't, and then Ferentz had to change too. Seahawks will have to do something similar, because the leadership doesn't seem to be there throughout to maintain the level of play off the field when taking into account all the issues they are starting to face off of it.
|04/17/2018 - 10:52am||If anything||
The recent Mbem-Bosse thread truly demonstrates how McDowell may have never acted this way had he just come to Michigan...
You can blast MSU for a lot of things lately, and it may in fact be true that MSU was a poor environment for him. It may also in fact be true that McDowell has his own issues and was going to have issues wherever he landed.
Maybe Corley doesn't screw up if he goes to Michigan, because he is put in a different situation. Maybe Boubacar Cissoko reaches his potential outside of football if he leaves a lot of his bad influences behind. Certainly, circumstances can change an outcome, but it's often extremely difficult to know what those circumstances are before you're in them. McDowell would have been closer to a lot of his poor influences at Michigan, even if there were other reasons his mom supposedly didn't like him at MSU.
But to act like he would have been a Rhodes Scholar because he went to UM is just being blinded. This guy had issues at MSU, he had issues after he left MSU (when this accident happened). He ended up doing him and his family no favors, which is a damn shame, in my opinion, because he had a ton of talent.
|04/17/2018 - 10:42am||I like your last idea quite a bit||
I think a major flow problem towards the end of games in the 3 major sports (baseball, football, and basketball) is really impacting things. It happens more towards the end of seasons, but the basketball foul rule, the baseball changing of relievers every batter, expanded reviews towards the end of the games in football and basketball, all hurt the product on the field to a degree.
I also think limiting the reliever options (force them to face a couple batters or get a couple outs) would also (perhaps articifially) result in more runs/comebacks. People want runs, that means not having the perfect pitching matchup. That means someone who isn't on has to stay out there and tough it out. Could make end of games more interesting.
|04/17/2018 - 10:37am||Baseball is a bit different||
Because it's deliberate pace is also part of the feature. So I get to a degree having a "pitch clock", and part of that may help, but you also don't want to fundamentally change the game. It isn't intended to be a fast paced game, don't shoe horn it into trying to be one, because then it will be the worst of both worlds.
Those are more focused on fixing sports for those in attendance rather than the sport itself. But I don't personally feel like any of the sports need major overhauls in game play for me to enjoy them, it's how they are structured within TV that makes it difficult to justify some of the time/money. And the overall cost, as I discussed above.
|04/17/2018 - 10:30am||People are getting priced out for attendance||
Tickets for tonight's game against the Orioles are like $16 for upper deck way down the baseline. To even get into the lower deck, you are looking at $26 a ticket. And before someone starts, I know you can buy tickets and move down during the game, but that's not the overall point.
Put people in the seats. It may not be the way to make the most immediate profit, but it brings a family to the game. RIght now, a family of 3 is going to the game for ~$70 once you factor in parking and no food and the cheapest seats. A family of 4, with parking and some food in lower level seats and you're looking at over $150, which is going to keep a lot of people away because a lot of people aren't just going to pick up and go and drop that kind of money when one of their kids may throw a huge fit in the 2nd inning.
Let people buy tickets for a crappy team and have their family have good seats to watch. And let them grab a meal affordably so the kids are happy. Now you have a happy family having a good time and enjoying a game together, even on a cold, crappy night. You start selling packages for <$50 all included, you will see attendance go back up.
And that's just for baseball. Can do similar things for bad NBA teams and hockey teams (yay Detroit!). Football is just going to suffer. All sports are getting priced out for attending in person, and football is the worst because of the limited number of games. Reducing prices may not turn the most immediate profit, but in 20 years when the kids of today are adults and only a limited number of kids of the thrill of tradition and tailgating and seeing games with their family and all the rest don't have that so don't really care about going to the games or not (or may have those traditions, but those traditions were always at home in front of the TV), then who was to blame?
|04/16/2018 - 2:08pm||Other than the Iowa QB who ended up their punter||
I don't think that's a fair description of what Carr did or what Bacon said he did. Carr offered to sign transfer papers if any of the players wanted to come speak to him about transferring. But he wasn't just going to sign papers. He wasn't encouraging players to transfer. He was willing to talk with them about it, why they may want to transfer, and if they really wanted out, he wasn't going to stop them. Carr genuinelly cared about his players, I don't blame him for that part of the saga.
As for being around the program once Rich Rod took over, I think it's pretty layered. But 1) I don't think Carr wanted to hang over the program, particularly when it wasn't a guy from his tree because he understood the next guy needed to own the program for it to be success; 2) after lobbying for Rich Rod, I personally don't think he really liked Rich Rod, particularly after Rich Rod said some fairly critical things about Carr's program. So I don't think he was going to be particularly around anyway (Carr had a lot of interests outside coaching), and then basically determined he was going to stay completely out of it once he felt slighted.
|04/12/2018 - 9:41am||Situations dictate a lot as well||
Moeller was terrible at Illinois. He was pretty good at Michigan. Pete Carroll was mediocre in New York and New England, but has been a great coach since. Bill Walsh is known as one of the great coaches of all time, was relatively successful in his first stint as Stanford head coach, but could be seen as downright bad in his second stint.
There are wrong situations, circumstances, and times for basically every coach. Belichick was solid in Cleveland and not given enough time (and had ownership issues, etc.), but wasn't great. Saban picked up MSU eventually, but had to take a ton of at-risk players to do so, and still left frustrated that the president, in the late 90s, said "No football coach will ever make more money than the president of this university". Meyer, who has basically had immediate success at every stop, even had the WTF 2010 Florida team.
It goes back to finding the right coach, not necessarily the best coach or the splashiest coach. Rich Rod is still a solid coach, not without faults, but a solid coaching mind (if the game hadn't already started to catch up to him at that time). He was never going to be the right fit. It wasn't just scheme, it was personality, it was a lot of things. And then he quickened the failure by not helping himself.
I still think Ron English would have stubbornly maintained the ship and Michigan would have had a bunch of 7-9 win seasons and would have been mediocre. Some fans would take that in retrospect, but if Rich Rod wouldn't have happened, people would have been calling for English in 3 years too. DeBord wasn't getting the job. Hoke was still way too young. Harbaugh still hadn't risen enough and had pissed too many people off. So unless it was Cam Cameron coming fresh off a 1-15 season with the Dolphins, the hire was going to be an outside hire. Who would have been the right fit? That's hard to say.
|04/12/2018 - 8:27am||His dad was also a pretty successful coach||
And while Sheridan was quite a bad player for Michigan, most of that had to do with his actual physical ability, not his understanding of the game, scheme, and techniques. Many, many coaches were pretty awful players. Bill Belichick basically played Center, because in his mind, it was the only way a short, small, relatively unathletic (but smart) kid could have any success. His destination was always coaching too.
|04/10/2018 - 2:50pm||You are very much strawmanning this argument||
I’ve repeatedly said he will get drafted late first to early second. I’ve repeatedly said I think he’s a good pospect. I generally think combine results are over rated but serve a purpose. You are acting like I said he did bad and won’t do well in the NFL. I’m not strictly maintaining my line of thinking, I’m reporting what I’ve read, what you have repeated but are ignoring (guess it doesn't count if you didn't bold it, you keep ignoring the fact that I've brought it up, now, repeatedly), and how the numbers actually compare to other high level DTs in this draft. And don't just say "you shouldn't be comparing to Donald" despite them playing at similar size and with similar styles, I also put Payne up there, who is a very different type of DT, and significantly larger.
Two different coaching staffs (and two of the best DL coaches) kept him around 280 (when they made many surrounding players significantly bigger). Maybe he can add weight and maintain his athleticism, that would be great for him. But if he can't he should keep playing at 280, the point being that the additional 10 lbs don't make up for hurting his overall athleticism. Given his pro day performance, he didn't put up "impressive" athletic numbers for his position given his draft range and size, regardless of how you splice it. I've given my evidence, I've compared the results, I've pointed you in the direction of others with similar opinion (which you supposedly reviewed, who knows who), and all you've done is provide a single quote that generally falls in line with my argument. And I'm the one stubbornly sticking to my line of thinking?
|04/10/2018 - 2:03pm||If you didn't see it labeled anything other than "impressive"||
Then you haven't really been looking.
The part of the article you quoted, but failed to bold, for instance: "However, his results in events like broad jump, short shuttle, and 3-cone drill would have placed him in the middle, or a little below middle, of the combine DTs".
Other places called his overall performance "middling". Draft Twitter, which if you follow the correct people, generally thought the performance was fine but they weren't blown away. His hand-timed 40 likely isn't that fast, because hand-timed is generally faster. So he's left with some good results, and some very middling results, for an undersized DT that relies heavily on athleticism to overcome his lack of size.
Hurst is often compared to Donald as a benchmark, because their styles are similar, even if Donald is an extremely high benchmark to compare to. Nevertheless:
Hurst - Donald - Payne:
Bench: 29 - 35 - 27
40: 4.97 - 4.65 - 4.95
Vertical: 31" - 32" - 28.5"
Broad Jump: 8'8" - 9'8" - 8'11"
3-Cone: 7.74 - 7.11 - 7.58
Short Shuttle: 4.62 - 4.39 - 4.71
Arm: 32" - 33" - 33"
Weight: 292 - 284 - 311
For an undersized DT, Hurst's pro day wasn't bad, but it certainly wasn't great either (and the difference between Hurst and Donald is significant, not just marginal). It was in between. It was fine. It didn't move him up or down really. Athletically, he was much more closer to maybe a little below Da'Ron Payne, who is nearly 20 lbs heavier and more scheme flexible.
So if you only read "impressive", you are reading flawed articles or reading into it what you want. Hurst is a late 1st to early 2nd type pick, with great film, some size concerns, and at least at 292 lbs, not great athleticism.
|04/10/2018 - 12:32pm||His (hand-timed) 40 would have been 4th||
His vertical 5th. Those are good results. He's seen as an undersized DT, and at 290, is still undersized. That his other drills were middle of the pack or worse for all DTs at the combine isn't great, especially when you're undersized for the position. You can't just ignore those because he was top of hsi group for a 40 time, which has limited importance for a DT (his splits are much more important), and vertical (which is good to see, but somewhat expected given his weight). You also can't just ignore all the other drills that happened (it's not all running drills).
He had a generally "meh" performance, which is why he's still predicted late first or early 2nd. It wasn't a bad performance, just generally average. I'm telling you, scouts love his tape, if he would have put up a good showing, he would have moved to the early to middle of the first. It is what it is. There is speculation his additional mass hurt his generally "meh" performance. And if that is accurate, he should go back to his natural playing weight, that he essentially played at for four years at Michigan (almost certainly for a reason).
I like Hurst, I like his as a prospect. I'm just telling you how his pro day was actually perceived. It wasn't perceived as great just because of two drills.
If he's more athletic at 280 than 290, he should play at 280, because his tape shows really well at that playing weight. Not sure how it got turned into something more than that comment.
|04/10/2018 - 12:14pm||Donald is the exception, not the rule||
And Donald was ridiculously productive in college, well beyond what even Hurst has done.
Look, if Hurst wasn't as talented as he was, at his size (he's also shorter than Donald, though I'm not sure how arm length compares which is much more important than height, but often correlates), there is no way he would be a potential first round pick. That speaks to his tape and his talent. But he's still undersized. It's still a legit concern and criticism, even if he has other talents to overcome it. If Donald could do what he does at 300 lbs, he'd be even better. He'd be able to do even more that you could ask out of a DT. Donald was a great talent, high production, and is in a perfect scheme for him. But he will face the same questions if he enters free agency because his size may limit his scheme fit, and that's even after being ridiculously productive at the NFL level.
So yes, Hurst can play at 280, and in fact, I'd rather he play at 280 than 290 if that extra 10 lbs impacts his strengths, because it's his strengths that make him such an appealing talent; he isn't better off marginalizing those strengths to slightly improve other parts of his game. Michael Bennett in Seattle also showed you could be even more undersized and extremely effective on the inside (both at 3T and NT; though he moved all over, including outside, but was also 270). It's not impossible, but it doesn't make it not a legit criticism or concern.
|04/10/2018 - 11:57am||I mean, you answered it in your own quote||
His (hand-timed) 40 was good, as was his vertical, but he underperformed ("middle, or a little below middle") in other drills, including one that is primarily measured for explosiveness. The drills you expect your undersized DT to be good at, he wasn't necessarily good at.
He's fine, he's still a late 1st to early 2nd pick most likely. But these drills combined with his performance in other drills were not as strong as anticipated by many scouts. And many that viewed him as a high 1st rounder were unispired by the performance. It wasn't a bad performance that will tank him, it just wasn't outstanding, like his tape shows.
If he can gain weight and maintain his athleticism and effort, then great, he should try to get up to 300 lbs (or at least 295). But I question that's the case, because a) his frame isn't necessarily great for a bunch more weight; b) he never did in the last three years at Michigan, likely for a reason.
|04/10/2018 - 11:37am||He was weighed at the combine||
I'm well aware he didn't participate at the combine, but his pro day wasn't up to expectations. His times weren't up to expectations. He looked more sluggish than he does on tape. It is speculated that the extra weight may have been part of the problem, because he wasn't at his true playing weight. But his pro day performance (in runs and in drills), for whatever reason (weight, the heart issue causing him to be out of shape, etc.) was much more "meh" than expected given how explosive he is on tape.
|04/10/2018 - 11:11am||His actual playing weight was closer to 282||
He added weight for the combine and pro day, and there were many complaints that it negatively impacted his performance. He should play at his true playing weight if he can perform up to the same level. He's a better DT at 282 than he is at 292, even if it isn't the typical DT size.
|04/10/2018 - 11:06am||White's breakdowns have always been hit or miss to me||
He nailed some things with Lewan, and also spent and exorbitant amount of time complaining that sometimes a TE lined up to his side.
For Hurst, the size thing is a complaint. The lack of a consistent second move is a complaint. The lack of scheme versitility is a complaint. I don't think "effort" is a complaint that sticks for as much as he talked about it. And, in fact, I think the plays he clipped that "lacked effort" generally saw Hurst do enough to get his job done.
Yes, he needs to get his eyes to the ball carrier faster (that would help him redirect on draws and finish more plays), but to me it was never a full-fledged effort issue other than, ok, he didn't go balls out every second of every snap (which you wouldn't want because it wouldn't be an efficient use of his energy or a controlled style of play).
I like other posts from White well enough, but he wouldn't be my go-to for draft takes.
|04/09/2018 - 5:46pm||They used to||
They still run it, and ran more of it as the year went on, but Schiano himself is more of a single-high coach at heart. The new guy they brought in is likely to implement more quarters schemes though, similar but not identical to what Ash ran.
|04/04/2018 - 2:35pm||I think Edwards was a bad hire||
I think there has been proof of that in multiple instances. I don't think this instance is really one of them. In this case, I think it's more or less Edwards speaking the truth. People have turned a blind eye to it, but Harbaugh has said on numerous occassions that people have to battle through things. If you are legit injured, ok, then you're injured. If you are "banged up", well, everyone is banged up, it's football. This happens everywhere, because it's a part of football.
I get that there is a tide change with how people perceive injuries in football and football in general. SOME of that is appropriate. Playing guys who are legit hurt leads to further injuries and potentially to injuries that have more of a lasting impact.
But this is also still a violent game, that is as much about mental toughness as it is physical toughness. If guys aren't willing to be mentally tough, if they aren't willing to show some pride, some perseverance, and tenacity, if they aren't willing to get a little steel in their spines, then they aren't helping the football team. If they aren't doing what it takes off the field (class work, rehab, etc.) to get on the field, that's not going to cut it. If they aren't getting on the field because they think they're set more than they they're actually injured, that's not going to cut it.
So yeah, saying, you have a scholarship to this university, but you're too injured to keep on the team (medical redshirt), or you need to focus on the classroom, or you aren't benefitting this program, then fine, you have a scholarship to this university but not an obligation by this staff to be a part of this football program. You can stay on scholarship here or you can transfer. This happens everyone, Edwards is just speaking some truth. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. That does get guys to perk up a bit, it does get guys to focus, and sometimes that attitude change is needed, whether you perceive it as old school nonsense or not.
|04/04/2018 - 10:31am||I was a bit surprised||
Simpson in strong, but the first two possession of the game demonstrated that Brunson could get the ball in the post and get it over Simpson due to his lack of height... and then they mostly went away from it.
Yes, Michigan made some adjustments with help side, but the one weakness of Simpson's game defensively is simply the fact that he's short, and guys can shoot over top of him. When Villinova was struggling early, it seemed weird that they rarely went back to Brunson in the post. That was the one area it seemed like they had a very clear advantage they could work with high efficiency. Though they ended up finding another area in long, contested, pull-up 3s that I'm pretty sure never event hit the rim...
|04/03/2018 - 3:41pm||He'd mostly be a terrible fit for the Pats||
And I'm not sure the story is as good as you've made it out, given the (unfortunate lack of) relationship he has with his dad.
|03/27/2018 - 2:01pm||His handle is a bit better than Mo||
It looks like he has better ball handling, but he may be caught a little bit in no man's land. Remember, Mo also played on the wing a lot in Germany and got away with it, not so much here. Athletically, I think they are similar, but at only 6'7" and not built like a bull, that leaves him more as a classic stretch 4, whereas at Michigan the 4 is essentially a wing. Not sure he's the best fit at that spot in Michigan's system, whereas in some other systems he may be better suited.
|03/26/2018 - 1:50pm||Depends what is being asked of you||
Hurst was about 280 last year and played both NT and 3T. He was a penetrater, and was fine at that weight in that role. Black, IMO, was a bit miscast as an interior player and grew beyond his athleticism. So just piling weight on him didn't necessarily help, but it was a way to get him on the field and contributing, and as a 3T in an Under front it hid some of his weaknesses.
I think Kemp has a natural build for an interior DL. He's got a thick bottom. You'd like him to be 280+, probably closer to 300 eventually if he maintains his athleticism. 280-285 would be fine for limited snaps this year (the extra weight is often as much about not wearing down). But I think from a build standpoint, he fits much better on the inside then Black ever did.
|03/26/2018 - 1:37pm||Thanks for pulling this together||
Been a bit starved of football content lately. Glad to see Kemp moving inside. I always thought that was the best spot for him ultimately once he could gain the mass, and think he can be a very good player there.
I've said before, but I think people often overlook it, a major aspect in coaching is "season planning". You plan for something, you plan for certain schemes and bases and you plan how to best prepare your players. I still think, more than play-to-play play calls, that the season planning hurt Michigan (same thing happened in 2013). Michigan went in with a plan, repped it, and it got blown up. It didn't work, and dozens of practice reps lose their potence, and it really hurts your success in the season, because you can only start over so much, you can only recapture so much, and you can only press ahead so much. It really sounds like that was Harbaugh's biggest issue as well.
Hopefully they have it better figured out this year, understand their limitations and strengths and better allocate their time and better plan for going into the season. That alone could be the shift in a couple games and a much more consistent and dangerous offense.
Regarding the Nick B article on DPJ. I know he's looking for examples (which takes time, and he found fine ones that tell his point), but MSU presses and jams at the LOS. While Wisconsin presses quite often, they very rarely jam, so it is easier for DPJ to work vertical and inside off the snap. But his overall point is correct. Most FR that have success have limited roles, they are only asked to learn certain things really well and they do that within the frame of the offense as a whole (including other WRs that draw attention and do things correctly on the outside). DPJ had to do it all because he was forced into that position. An off season is huge for him to be better rounded, and the improvement of the guys around him will only make his job easier as well. He may not be WR1 this year like last year and may be significantly better because of those facts.
|03/26/2018 - 1:25pm||One clarification||
Ed Warinner was never a Tressel/Dantonio coach. He coached under Meyer and before that was the de facto "RGC" under Brian Kelly. He has been given the "OC" title several times without having much of it for the past decade or so (Beck was probably the more primary playcaller at OSU, Kelly obviously at ND).
He was at MSU previously, because for some reason nearly all the coaches we were interested in this year had some early tenure at MSU.
I think you are thinking Jim Bollman (who is currently MSU's TE coach but helps with the OL, and is a good OL coach as well)
|03/26/2018 - 9:15am||You can be both a slimy coach||
And still genuinely care to some extent about players or people that were a part of your program. The two are not mutually exclusive.
|03/20/2018 - 11:24am||I'm not saying his style of play now is Lebron||
I'm saying his build and athletic ability are in the same way as Lebron, and that's how he should focus his style of play. He needs to improve a lot as a player, and he'll never be as good as Lebron (not athletically or technically), but right now he's basically like a guy with similar tools as Lebron physically just wanted to shoot jump shots. If all less athletic Lebron did was shoot jump shots, every defense would be mostly fine with that, because it's not at all taking advantage of his physical abilities.
|03/20/2018 - 11:05am||Was talking more his build/physical tools||
Than style of play. And don't get me wrong, I don't think he's Lebron in that way either (no one is). Just that his game should be more like a Lebron than Nik Stauskas. I think he is more refined with his shot and technique than Green, but don't think he has either than handle or passing vision that Green does (or Lebron for that matter).
In the NBA, his role needs to be as a guy who can threaten from 3 and slash. More of a Jason Richardson type if we are using MSU comparables.
|03/20/2018 - 10:53am||Like Last Chance U||
The focus is likely to be more on the product off the field than on it. The on the field part will be a part of the weaving narrative, but this looks like it will give a lot of fans a good perspective of the daily lives of a lot of these players. And that it's with players at a major program, and not necessarily on their last chance, may in some ways make it a bit more optimistic and feel quite different than Last Chance U.
I'm personally pretty excited after seeing the trailer.
|03/20/2018 - 10:48am||Because if his mentality "clicks"||
He has all the physical tools to be great. He's explosive, he actually has a really nice looking shot that can be consistent in the NBA, he's not just tall and long, but also well built. He needs to improve his handle a bit, but he has a lot of tools to be a great NBA player. But he needs his mentality to click, otherwise he's a poor man's jump shooting Lebron. Coming back ain't gonna help him one iota.
If a poor man's Lebron wants to take the easy (and not often best) shots over and over, teams will gladly let him.
|03/20/2018 - 10:45am||Agree||
A lot of Michigan fans are worried about the NBA draft, but Mo can put his hat in the mix, and if he doesn't make can easily fall back in Europe, where he's comfortable and his game fits quite well.
I don't think borderline 1st/2nd, 2nd, or undrafted is really going to be the catalyst of Mo's decision, it's going to be if he wants to play one more year at Michigan or if he wants to start his pro career. And honesly, he's improved as a rebounder, he's rounded out some rough edges, but I don't think in his SR year he's going to improve to a 1st round pick. It may be in his best interests to go back to Europe. But I'd certainly love for him to stay.
|03/20/2018 - 10:22am||It's expensive to implement||
There is a reason a lot of the best zone defenses are typically mediocre on offense, it's because it needs to be repped to death. Like in football, a half-assed zone and essentially free offense. So being Syracuse, which has had a lot of success, means taking away what most coaches have had success with. And frankly, many programs aren't patient enough to give a coach the time to make it fully functioning, because it is going to be rough early.
All good defense is expensive to a degree. It all takes time to rep the different techniques for each scheme. But some you be "good" at while it being less expensive, especially if you haven't before made it your bread and butter. Some will play different styles of zones as a change-up, but it's only intended for that, because as a base they don't rep it enough.
The parallels exist to football. MSU's Cover 4 scheme was an expensive install. It paid off for them. It requires teams to do repeatedly do something difficult to be successful, but there is high risk/reward. MSU installed their D to adjust to anything the offense threw at it so they could simplify things for their players overall and increase just how difficult it was for the offense. But not every team runs MSU's defense. After MSU's success, a lot of teams tried to replicate it, and a lot of teams failed doing so. Narduzzi, the man himself, has had difficult replicating it even at another program. Other implemented and modified when they realized just how hard it was to implement.
It's generally the same with doing what Syracuse does.
|03/19/2018 - 11:53am||A handful of days to practice and regroup||
New arena with new sight lines, plenty of opportunity to get back on track.
Not saying it will automatically happen, but the first two games don't really hold much weight for going forward, other than the potential concern about Michigan facing extended defenses (which we knew prior to the tournament).
I actually don't mind the article (Michigan played very poorly on offense and hit a buzzer beater to advance; we don't need to take offense to this). I don't mind the idea of the article (think it's an interesting way to summarize the events on the first weekend). But survive and advance, Michigan did that.
|03/14/2018 - 4:55pm||The reality is||
He "averaged" to be a pretty average starting TE, and his highs didn't make up for his lows. He really isn't bad, he's just not what you aim for with a 1st round pick and he isn't worth the money he was set to make. If the Lions could bring him back $4M a year, that would be a pretty solid FA move.
|03/05/2018 - 10:58am||The aspect of this that's difficult||
Is how good would Winston be under Beilein. Winston's biggest short coming is his D, something that I'm not sure he would have been to mitigate largely at Michigan (and something he should be able to improve under Izzo, but hasn't yet). But his offense is legit, how incredible could it have been under Beilein?
|02/28/2018 - 8:32am||All but one of these were very easy||
But to be completely fair, diffin-, defen-, definate-, mmm, yeah, that word is "absolutely" impossible to spell.
|02/23/2018 - 2:42pm||Part of the issue is standing contracts with mid-majors||
Detroit hosts Horizon League. Cleveland hosts MAC. It's not to say it can't work with the B1G, but without facing the same issue that the B1G is facing in NY this year, it's hard to work around those issues (without I assume the B1G paying those tournaments to go elsewhere).
I know there is a ton of B1G representation in Chicago, but Indy really is the best. It's a small big city, and because it doesn't have so much else, they really dedicate the downtown to the tournament. I know I had fun there whenever I've gone