Wolverine Liberation Army » “talent”

COCK OF VICTORY: 2011 Northwestern

Max — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 04:24:20 +0000

MSU, we have our eye on you!

Defender at the Gate: Cameron Gordon

TK-421 — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 18:00:56 +0000

The Free Safety. He is a man of whom much is asked.

He must be the hawk that swoops across large distances to ~~kill a rodent for dinner~~ break up a pass:

He must be the missile that disrupts an enemy air force:

He must be The Wolf that corrects others’ mistakes:

No, not that kind of wolf. This kind of Wolf:

This is what is expected of the free safety. But none of these descriptions fairly applies to Michigan’s free safety this year, because the starting back 7 on Michigan ~~is an unmitigated disaster~~ ~~consists of less than 7 scholarship players~~ will be challenged extensively. Problems loom here, and it is unrealistic to expect greatness from the man who will be forced to deal with those problems.

So, what do we ask of our ~~completely unknown wildcard~~ brand new Free Safety Cameron Gordon? Comrades, Cam Gordon’s job is a bit simpler yet more precarious:

There is a ~~Dutch~~ American legend about a little Dutch boy who noticed a small leak in the dike he was passing. Rather than continue on to school, the little Dutch boy stuck his finger in the dike to stop the leak until help arrived and repairs were made. He acted quickly and decisively, and because of his self-sacrifice he saved his town and the surrounding countryside from ruin.

Can you see the analogy, boys and girls? Cam Gordon should not be expected to be a superb free safety, a ball hawk, a roving missile, or a vaguely menacing cleaner for the Mob, at least not yet. His job is to prevent disaster, and wait for help to arrive (in the next few recruiting classes). His job is to be Not A Catastrophe, and in so doing enable the defense overall to be Not A Catastrophe.

Cam Gordon, Dike Fingerer (swirl that phrase around in your mouth and enjoy). Let us down a shot to honor Cam Gordon in his thankless task as this year’s Defender at the Gate!

We’re Not Getting Him, and Other Cold Hard Realities- a Letter to Asshats

TK-421 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:41:33 +0000

Dear Asshats (aka people who think RichRod should be fired now):

Hello. You don’t know me, but I’m the guy that’s going to tell it like it is. If you’re upset with the direction Rich Rodriguez is taking the Michigan football program and would like to see him fired now, there are some unavoidable realities you need to face.

1. Firing Rich Rodriguez After Two Seasons is an Extremely Bad Idea

I don’t know what your next step would be, so help me walk through the timeline here. First, do you want RichRod to be fired right fucking now, before he’s even allowed to finish his second season? If so, then wow- conceivably, the team could win one of these last two games (unlikely, I know) and go to a bowl game…and you’d still think it wasn’t good enough to stop the termination of the head coach before his second season was finished. Wow.

But suppose we take the more likely finish of 5-7, and you believe he should be fired but only after that’s occurred. Ok, that puts Michigan (back) in a national coaching search in early December, when all the “good” coaches are preparing for bowl games and while several other programs are trying to land those very same “good” coaches, and you know what? We went through this already and it sucked donkey balls. How much confidence do you have that a retiring Bill Martin is going to do a better, more aggressive hiring job now than he did then (back when he barely lumbered up and offered Greg freaking Schiano)? Best case scenario is that Martin finds somebody, anybody by the end of the month. Worst case scenario is, well, worse- we don’t have a coach until mid-January, mere weeks before National Signing Day. Awesome.

Which brings us to the next point about firing RichRod now- the recruiting class will be decimated. Take a look at the verbals- until a coach is landed, none of those guys is a lock because most are a “fit” for RichRod’s system. That goes especially for the best recruit (QB Devin Gardner) who would definitely go to another spread option-based program, no sugarcoat. With all the roster issues Michigan is suffering through now, why would you be eager to inflict even more of that on the program you claim to love so much? Making a coaching change now would haunt the program for at least 3-4 more years- how is that better than sticking with a coach for 2+ more years?

2. Calling for 1 is the Act of an Immature, Delusional Dickbag
I know this from experience. I remember in Lloyd’s first few years as coach, I was an unhappy hater. I called years of 8-4 “unacceptable,” I called for Fred Jackson’s head (weird, huh?), I really wanted somebody else as coach blah blah blah. Most of you already know this story- 1997 happened and I realized that the magical national championship season could have easily been 8-4 and I really really really didn’t know what the hell I was talking about. I chalked that asshole phase of my fandom up to youth and moved along.

You, however, seem to have “grown up” without ever accepting the fact that you don’t know what you’re talking about and therefore you would suck as a football coach. I at least own up to the fact that I don’t know dick about football (latest example). The game is fascinating and entertaining and frustrating, but God help me if I try to pick out some crucial block, double move, head fake, etc. Despite my best efforts to learn more from gsimmons and Steve Sharik and Chris Brown, I’m hopeless. And I think it’s safe to say I’m not the only one. We see the ball, we follow the ball, we love/hate the result of the movement of the ball, and that’s about all we can do.

If you admit that you don’t know jack about football (and you likely don’t), then it follows that you have no special knowledge or information that lends credibility to your judgement that RichRod should be fired. You don’t know football, therefore you also don’t know football coaching, so STFU and try and enjoy yourself. Anything else simply means you judge people and programs solely on outcomes and completely ignore process. I say from personal experience that’s a shitty way to be a fan, and you need to realize that your shitty fandom is making it worse for the non-shitty fans.

3. This Is Not Up to You
How many times must this be explained to you?

4. There Are No Better, Realistic Options Right Now
What kind of message will this program send to hot coaching prospects if Rich Rodriguez is fired after two seasons? A coaching search is a two-way street- Michigan is an attractive job, sure, but we’d presumably be pursuing equally attractive coaches. So what’s our sales pitch here? “We’ll pay you lots of money and you’ll have tremendous prestige and visibility, but only for two years because we ignore the roster-raping that’s been going on for a long time and you’re fucked before you even start- so, how about it?”

Really, you think that sales pitch will fly with Brian Kelly or Les Miles or…anyone else? Get a grip. Giving a coach a quick hook and messing up the roster guarantees that smart coaches will stay the fuck away from that program. See: Notre Dame, Urban Meyer, lolWeis. Fire Rodriguez Now = We’re Not Getting Anyone Good or Smart.

5. Progress Has Been Made
5(+?)>3. Therefore, progress.

2009 Michigan Offense > 2008 Michigan Offense. Therefore, progress.

2009 Michigan Defense = 2008 Michigan Defense. We seem to forget how sucky last year’s defense was, and that was with Brandon Harrison, Morgan Trent, John Thompson, Terrance Taylor, and Will Johnson, contributors all. Yes, this defense is horrible, but unfortunately Horrible =/= Regression.

More wins, better offense, and the same shitty defense…how is that not progress? No, I’m not giving you links to prove any of this, because A) I’m lazy, and B) if you had any interest in facts you probably wouldn’t be calling for RichRod’s head to begin with.

6. This Still is and Always was a Rebuilding Job
Perhaps this is the reality you want to face the least- this team was in shitty shape before RichRod arrived. I know, it sucks to say that out loud, but there it is- Lloyd got tired and sloppy at the end, and the program is a little fucked up as a result. I love him, but bless his heart he didn’t seem to put the required energy into the program after about 2003. He wanted to retire earlier because of this, but Bo convinced him to stick it out for a few more years (again I’m sure there’s a link for this but I’m not going to go get it because I’m lazy). We are paying the price for that fatigue now.

When RichRod arrived in January 2008, there was little offensive line talent, no offensive line depth, no safety talent, no safety depth, little linebacker talent, no linebacker depth, no quarterback talent, no quarterback depth, and little receiver talent. The only position groups ready to go were running back and defensive line, which are arguably being maximized by RichRod right now.

With that roster reality facing RichRod, he deserves time to build the squad back up. Playstation tells me that 2 years is not enough time to rebuild a college roster, so it must be even worse in the real world.

7. If You Choose to Ignore 1-6, then Please Stop Rooting for Michigan

If you’re the type of person that likes to ignore reality just because reality isn’t giving you what you think you’re entitled to, then fuck you and go away from “my” team. You’re obviously not having any fun watching this disaster rise from the ashes, and the rest of us aren’t having any fun trying to get you to stop your whiny bitching. I’m tired of you, you’re tired of me and the program, so let’s just go our separate ways. Seriously, fuck off.

Want to “send a message” to the athletic department that RichRod is UNACCEPTABLE? Stop going to the games, stop watching them on tv, and stop buying M apparel. Trust me, nothing gets the attention of an athletic department like declining ticket, TV, and apparel revenues so if all this is UNACCEPTABLE then do your part, man- go the fuck away and don’t come back until Rich Rodriguez is fired. And if he never gets fired because he actually is a good coach and gets this program back on its feet, well, you made your choice didn’t you?

Just jump already. Stop talking about it and just go away.

…

These are the realities you face, asshats: it’s stupid to fire Rodriguez now, you’re a dick for wanting to do something stupid, it’s not up to you anyway, we’re not getting Brian Kelly or Les Miles right now, progress has been made, rebuilding takes time, and just go the fuck away already. The penis of reality is slapping you in the face right now, and it’s time for you to suck on it.

Sincerely,

The WLA

We're Not Getting Him, and Other Cold Hard Realities- a Letter to Asshats

TK-421 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:41:33 +0000

Dear Asshats (aka people who think RichRod should be fired now):

1. Firing Rich Rodriguez After Two Seasons is an Extremely Bad Idea

3. This Is Not Up to You
How many times must this be explained to you?

5. Progress Has Been Made
5(+?)>3. Therefore, progress.

2009 Michigan Offense > 2008 Michigan Offense. Therefore, progress.

7. If You Choose to Ignore 1-6, then Please Stop Rooting for Michigan

Just jump already. Stop talking about it and just go away.

…

Sincerely,

The WLA

Throwin Paint

big gay heart — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 08:25:11 +0000

You May Call Him MISTER Cissoko, thankyouverymuch

TK-421 — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 19:33:44 +0000

I really like Boubacar Cissoko. Prior to this season I had no opinion on him, but now I really like him. I like him and am rooting hard for him the rest of the season ~~because his name has the word “boob” in it~~ because he has already demonstrated one of the most-treasured of attributes in football and in life- the ability to deal with and overcome adversity.

Adversity comes in many forms, and he is certainly not the only player on the Michigan team that has faced it (see: Mealer, Elliott). However, when adversity arrives on a player’s doorstep as FIRST HALF FAILURE and that failure becomes visible to many, many people as an unfair and premature judgment of “I don’t think Cissoko is any good, injured shoulder or not”….well, I can’t help but root for the guy, if only to make the people who make those judgments EAT IT.

We’ve all had rough days and we’ve all been put in impossible situations. Our beloved Michigan players are no different, and I love to see these kids grow up in front of our eyes and become MEN. That is something I can and will root for every damn Saturday in the fall. So with that in mind, let’s look at what Boubacar Cissoko dealt with this past weekend, how he responded to it, and then offer a hearty “FUCK YOU” to the haters among our fanbase.

PART 1: FACING ADVERSITY

We begin with some very simple points:

1. Boubacar Cissoko, when compared to Michael Floyd and Golden Tate, is NOT physically gifted. He is shorter than them, he is lighter than them, he is most likely not as strong as them. Floyd and Tate offered a severe matchup problem for Cissoko, and for receivers with the size and bulk of Floyd/Tate that will most likely always be the case. It is unlikely Cissoko will magically grow six inches in height and gain fifty pounds in bulk- Barwis can only do so much here. To penalize Cissoko because he wasn’t born with as many physical gifts as the receivers lining up opposite him is tremendously unfair.

2. Boubacar Cissoko, when compared to Michael Floyd and Golden Tate, does not have much experience. Against Notre Dame, Cissoko was essentially playing only his third college game ever. Yes, he technically played a few snaps here and there in 2008, but what little playing time he got added up to little more than a game (maybe). On the other hand, Golden Tate is a senior with 3 years of starting experience, and Michael Floyd has had 7+ games of starting experience going back to last year. So in addition to a physical matchup problem, Cissoko also offered a significant mental matchup problem. And again- blaming someone for essentially being born later (i.e. being younger) than the receivers lining up opposite him is tremendously unfair.

3. Boubacar Cissoko was most likely asked to sacrifice some of his coverage abilities in order to support an overall defensive gameplan. Based on last year and Week 1 of this year, the Michigan defense had shown a propensity to give up looooong pass plays ending in touchdowns. If you’re the defensive coordinator, knowing that your secondary is somewhat vulnerable to the deep ball, and knowing that you have some talent on the d-line, wouldn’t you rather play with a softer coverage? Wouldn’t you rather try and make Notre Dame march the field in bits and pieces and increase the number of chances for your d-line to score a sack or a fumble? If this was the plan, wouldn’t Cissoko be bailing early and often into deeper coverages, in order to protect against deep balls? Isn’t that what we saw? You cannot blame Cissoko for following the gameplan, and further you cannot blame the defensive coordinator for developing a gameplan that acknowledges the reality of these matchup problems and simply aims to mitigate them.

4. Boubacar Cissoko is hurt. Have we forgotten last year? As a reminder, many people (myself and Brian included) wondered aloud “why hasn’t Donovan Warren improved?” Only a season later do we find out that Warren was injured and it seriously affected his game performances. This time we at least know that Cissoko has hurt his shoulder, but somehow we’re supposed to think it’s not affecting his game performances? If history has taught us anything here, it’s that a lot of these injuries are more serious than the coaches or players are letting on, and they inevitably affect game performance.

5. Notre Dame’s passing offense is good, and good passing offenses will almost always make secondaries look bad. I know we don’t want to hear this, and I hate hate hate saying it, but- Jimmah! has turned a corner and become proficient, that offensive line has finally become competent, and both those receivers and the tight end will be playing on Sundays. By many measures (Completion %, Yards Per Attempt, Yards Per Completion, Sacks, Total Passing Yards, etc.), this Notre Dame passing offense is legit and is markedly better than anything seen from ND the past two years. You cannot “demand” or expect your college secondary to shut down an offense that is “in rhythm,” and also largely composed of NFL talent. You just can’t.

PART 2: OVERCOMING ADVERSITY
So, with all those factors going against Cissoko, and with the results basically going to plan in the first half of play (i.e. a burnt to a crisp Boubacar Cissoko), how did Cissoko respond? Well, let’s consult Brian’s second half UFR to see (emphasis mine):

Cissoko, petrified, is ten yards deep and moving backwards at the snap; “duh” read for ND. (result 9 yd pass)

Cissoko is running with Tate along the sideline, looking for the ball. It falls incomplete, and the guy staring right at it says incomplete. Five seconds later the back judge, who was 30 yards away, throws a flag. This is super ticky-tack, because Cissoko is arm-fighting with Tate. (result penalty 15 yd)

I still fail to see why the coverage is shaded towards Warren all day and Cissoko is just left to rot against Floyd. This is way open but it’s hard to blame a guy on an island with Mike Floyd. (result 12 yd pass)

This appears to be on Floyd for being a wuss, as Michigan drops Mouton into a zone over the slant and he just pulls up on it instead of take a chance of getting lit up. As a result, it goes directly to Cissoko, who drops it. I won’t minus him but here’s a stern look. (result incomplete near int)

Well-executed in front of Cissoko and behind Herron in what looks like zone. This is the “headless Graham” play, which does not get flagged. (result 10 yd pass)

Just a straight fly Cissoko gets smoked on. Tate catches it but it pops out when he hits the ground for an incompletion. Roh would have gotten to Clausen on the backside if not for the LT holding him around the corner. On replay it looks like Cissoko may have had some small impact on the drop so I’ll bump him up. (result incomplete)

Easy pitch and catch in front of that guy again, and this time it’s not even one of the big stars, it’s a freshman. Blitz came but Clausen was clean. (result 8 yd pass)

All, all, all day as Michigan rushes three and drops a couple DEs, including Graham, into coverage. Doesn’t matter. Tate gets Cissoko to turn his hips and then breaks off a hitch just past the sticks; Cissoko recovers and actually makes his best break on the ball of the day, coming an inch away from getting a PBU. He doesn’t, and he doesn’t make a tackle, and Tate walks into the endzone. (result 21 yd TD)

Just chuckin’ it deep on Cissoko again; this time he’s actually got good position and can get himself between Floyd and his route, which he does… and then flagrantly bumps him, drawing a flag that’s deserved, then waved off because the throw was yards out of bounds. Michigan sent a blitz and this is another Jimmah chuck special. (result incomplete)

Blitz gets Ezeh through clean and Graham beats his guy. Jimmah: chuck. Cissoko is in good position; the ball drags Floyd out of the endzone with help from Cissoko. We should just be sending guys in waves. (result incomplete)

Bring the house and Clausen throws it wide. This one, I think, is on Jimmah. Cissoko beat…on third and ten in this situation when you know Michigan is bringing the house. That’s just dumb. (result incomplete)

In the second half, this small, inexperienced, injured, and (most likely) gameplan-following cornerback facing off against NFL talent was thrown at eleven times, and had the following results: sixty yards of offense for a 5.4 Yards Per Attempt, six incompletions, 1 touchdown, 1 near interception, 1 ticky-tacky pass interference call, and 1-2 pass breakups. You’ll also note that the last three times Cissoko was thrown at were all incompletions.

Strictly on results we may argue whether this constitutes “good” play by Cissoko, but I think we can agree that this is not catastrophic or Johnny Sears-like (CAW!). And in context of everything else, I think we can all agree that Cissoko improved in the second half- in other words, he successfully responded to adversity.

SUMMARY: YOU MAY CALL HIM MISTER CISSOKO FROM NOW ON

Five very good reasons to tone down the expectations on Cissoko’s performance going into the Notre Dame game, and eleven examples of Cissoko managing to deal with and even overcome the problems that arose. All in all, a day of facing and successfully responding to adversity. A day where a coach and fan should feel happy with Cissoko, because: the gameplan was followed; the gameplan succeeded; Cissoko didn’t jeopardize the gameplan with catastrophically bad play; and Cissoko can and will improve off of this challenging day.

And this is what is pooped out of the Defensive UFR:

“I don’t think Cissoko is any good, injured shoulder or not.”

Well, right back at you Brian- I don’t think “judgment” like that is any good, partial retraction or not. That is an unfair and extremely premature assessment of a 19 year old who has a lot of time left in his career, an injury to overcome, and better techniques that he most likely will learn as this and future seasons go along. That assessment of Cissoko sucks ass.

And excuse me, misopogon, you had something to say about second year cornerbacks? (paraphrase)

I compared the tackle stats of entire careers of previous cornerbacks to the tackle stats of a cornerback who has played a mere two games into his sophomore year. Then I projected that out to 2 years into the future based on nothing more than my gut. But I have charts!

Well, gee that’s fucking great. And by “fucking great,” I mean “fucking useless.”

Now as I said, Brian has somewhat backed away from his original asshattery…somewhat. But I think it’s important to understand one of the reasons why Brian was an asshat on Cissoko to begin with- his “results-based charting” philosophy. I understand why Brian likes to chart out a player’s performance based on results and ignore context, but you can only go so far on this analysis. A results-based charting philosophy will never take into account the expectation of a matchup, will never judge a player based on effort or technique, will unfairly trash players put in bad situations, and finally, will not reward players for responding to a problem. While analysis strictly based on “outcomes” is nice, I prefer analysis that delves far more deeply into “process.”

This is why the reactions and analyses from coaches (such as gsimmons85 and Steve Sharik) will always be vastly different from what Brian sees- coaches understand that the game and the players are organic, fluid entities that constantly change. The injured, inexperienced, and small Boubacar Cissoko is not someone to hand out (-1, -1) to all freaking day long- he is a kid that can and should be worked with over time to develop into a serviceable or even a lockdown corner.

There are limitations to any kind of analysis done on paper without context. While it may help to review what exactly happened, no one should EVER be so cocksure on this paper analysis as to project on whether a young kid will be “any good” or not. This is not and never will be ok. Brian (and misopogon and all you BooBoo haters out there), Boubacar Cissoko has worked hard to overcome the challenges he’s faced and will continue to face. And taking everything into account, his results on the field demand your respect. YOU MAY CALL HIM MISTER CISSOKO, from now on, thank you very much.

BOOM FISK’D

Self-Test: Recruiting

ShockFX — Wed, 06 May 2009 02:37:29 +0000

Multiple Choice (Choose all the apply)

Question 1: How do I deal with Michigan recruits dropping places in the rankings?
A) Bitch about them dropping for being already committed.
B) Fret about not having any top 100 recruits in May.
C) Get enraged that Rivals sucks at ranking players and isn’t fair, then shamefully realize my last post was demeaning Rich Rod for offering ‘middle of road’ WRs, where middle of the road is determined using rankings like Rivals. Oops.
D) Point out RR track record in excelling with recruits that are low ranked, and hell, it’s only fucking May, these kids are juniors in high school and this addiction is borderline pedophilia even to the greeks/spartans (the ancient ones, not the rollerbladin’ brahs in the EL).
E) Just D.

Question 2: How do I communicate my feelings about reduced rankings to said recruits?
A) MySpace. Immediately. I’m friends with them all.
B) Facebook wallposts. It makes me feel connected to 16/17 year old freak athletes I have nothing in common with.
C) What are MySpace and Facebook?
D) Whooaa, people actually friend recruits and then talk to them? That’s really fucking creepy.
E) http://pedobear.org/
F) Do I get extra credit for interviewing recruits?

Question 3: My next post on recruiting will be about -
A) How Scout is better than Rivals because they rank current Michigan recruits higher.
B) How Star Ratings don’t matter because Pat White.
C) How Star Ratings don’t matter because Kevin Grady.
D) OMG 2 mny slot recevers!!11!!!!
E) I recruit “Talent”, if you know what I mean (/wink /ninjafootball).

True/False

Question 4: I spend too much time following recruiting.
A) True
B) False

Question 5: My wife would divorce me if she knew how much time I dedicated to 17 year old boys.
A) True
B) True

Question 6: I am aware that Michigan is at a huge disadvantage in recruiting to the Southern schools, and at a smaller disadvantage to OSU.
A) True
B) Fal$e

Question 7: I now realize how much better my life was before I followed recruiting. Finding out about who was recruited to Michigan only when they hit the field was much less involved.
A) True
B) I’m in Denial.

Short Answer

Question 8: In 54.7 words or less, justify how questioning Michigan’s recruiting strategy (eg, questioning if RR knows he needs defensive recruits) two months into the first full cycle RR is part of (among other evidence proving it’s not RRs first rodeo) does not make you some kind of reverse sycophant that is still 100% pure fail.

Kirby Line Breaks
t(‘.’t)
(>’.')>
<(‘.’<)

Answer Key

1. D or E. We would also have accepted “I’m so sorry. I didn’t realize.”
2. C (half credit) or D (full credit)
3. Kate Beckinsale, Rachel McAdams, or Elisha Cuthbert.
4. A. We also would have accepted “I spend too much time criticizing people for following recruiting.”
5. A or B.
6. Answering E$$-EEE-CEE, O$UCK$, or U$C results in immediate death by harpoon.
7. A, or if you opened up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve-step_program immediately after.
8.

quitter, NO sugarCOAT.

chitownblue — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:56:30 +0000

This morning, the Go Blue Michigan Wolverine’s main contributor, Erocwolverine wrote:

“We are fine with people not agreeing with us. This deal would not be fun if everybody always agreed with everything we had to say. We like a friendly, vigorous debate with fans of different opinions. Isn’t that one of the things that makes sports so fun? This is why this blog was created.”

Thus, the intention of the following isn’t to “start a slap-fight” or “refusing to allow people to disagree with us” – this is, in the writer’s words, a “vigorous debate”.

This weekend, the site’s technical “expert”, coachBT penned a self-described “rant”regarding various things, including the team’s effort, Rich Rodriguez, and the existence of the “RR Mafia”, a group we suppose to which we belong. On to the fisking! If you’re even vaguely familiar with their blog, you know that all typos, mis-spellings, and grammatical prat-falls are sic.

After stating their belief that Shafer’s tenure was bungled by Rodriguez (a point on which I happen to agree), and a meandering, non-controversial blurb about Rodriguez and attrition, Coach’s angst gets turned up slightly:

“Nobody, not Coach Rod, Coach Carr, Coach Bo, nor CoachVince Lombardi-on-steroids could’ve gone 13-0 with this group of players. There was not enough talent, nor depth at any position, for this to happen. However, in saying that there is no way this team could have gone 13-0 and won a National Championship, doesn’t mean I look kindly on going 3-9 either. While there was not enough talent to be 13-0, there was too much talent to justify a 3-9 season. For this, Coach Rod needs to be held accountable. The buck, but unfortunately not yet The Buckeyes, stops with him.”

Coach seems unable to realize that showing reasonsfor things is not the same thing as offering excuses. In the previous few years, Michigan had lost an entire starting offensive line via attrition (Zirbel, Boren, Mitchell, Schifano, Gallimore), and thus started a young, in experienced group. They endured the defections of two quarterbacks (Jason Forcier, Ryan Mallett) who would have been higher on the depth chart than either quarterback who played last year. These inexperienced players were forced into an extremely different offensive system to the one they had been recruiting for and trained in. The defense returned an intact defensive line (a unit that played fairly well during the season), a raw linebacking corps, two veteran corners, and a safety who had a history of allowing big plays. Stating these facts isn’t an attempt to shield Rodriguez from criticism – it’s being honest.

Coach is correct – nobody expected 3-9, and no one particularly enjoyed the results. So he declares the need to hold Rodriguez ACCOUNTABLE. How on earth do we do this? By telling him we don’t like 3-9? I’m sure he’s aware of that. GBMW seems to believe that they can hold Rodriguez accountable by shouting from the roof-tops how Rodriguez failed at any given opportunity. This isn’t constructive, useful, or illuminating.

“The Loses:

Losing to Toledo, Purdue, and Northwestern — without their best player — was unacceptable. Michigan had more talent and should never have lost to these teams.

Same thought with respect to Appalachian State — losing was simply unacceptable. This has nothing to do with who was head coach.

Come on, Michigan without a proper quarterback still should’ve had enough talent to beat a three-win MAC school. Holding the staff accountable for losing these games that we should have won was proper, no part of some evil propoganda campaign.”

The “unacceptable” argument rears its head. The problem with the “unacceptable” line of reasoning is that it is based much more on reputation than it is on any empirical observation or measurable fact – it is, in other words, based on the fact that the person is used to seeing people wearing Michigan uniforms beat people wearing Toledo or Northwestern uniforms. First of all, Northwestern was a top-25 team that went 9-4, 5-3 in the Big 10, and nearly vanquished Missouri, who played in the Big 12 Championship game. To pretend that 3-9 Michigan was a fundamentally superior team is to ignore every single shred of evidence at our disposal, and instead concentrating on the general reputations of the school’s football programs. Purdue was 4-8, and played in the Big 10, and thus, likely, of similar quality to Michigan.

Further, the argument assumes that CoachBT’s opinion is a more accurate gauge of the team’s talent level than their actual performance on the field. If the talent was of 8-win quality, why did they only win 3 games? Is it because Rich Rodriguez, 32-5 in the previous three seasons with five Big East Championships in seven seasons, is a miserable coach, or because CoachBT’s opinion of the talent, after watching a few practices from the sidelines, isn’t 100% accurate? How can someone watch this team fumble and mis-tackle their way to three wins turn around and claim that the talent level was superior to their opposition? CoachBT wants to live in a world where the results on the field aren’t a measure of the team’s quality – just his personal epinion. Clearly, coaching can influence wins or losses, but, as our own resident coaching expert, Gsimms, says, “it’s jimmy’s and joe’s, not x’s and o’s” that win games - superbly talented teams don’t go 3-9.

How Michigan lost:

No head coach with this group of players was going to beat Ohio State. It wasn’t so much the loss, as HOW Michigan lost that PISSED people off. Michigan showed no fight. They just shrugged their shoulder and benover. That was an unacceptable showing for players and coaches alike. We saw the same think when OSU beat us in 2007. It stunk then. It stunk last year. There’s no reason to keep quite about it.

The most discouraging aspect was that not one player stepped up to say “Enough is enough” and went out ro rip a Buckeye’s head off. What’s going here? Is someone putting Prozac in the Gatorade? This was inexcusable. Are we The Wolverines or the Wooly Lambs? Did the whole team develop acute testoserone-deficiency syndrome?

No, don’t have an agenda. JUST PISSED AND WASN’T GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE! Sooner or later, the head coach has to take the heat.

We have no problem with objective evaluations of a player – “Stevie Brown isn’t a very good tackler”, “Nick Sheridan doesn’t have a strong arm”, and “John Thompson isn’t a good linebacker” don’t bother us. What we do have a problem with, no to sugar-coat it, is baseless accusations of a lack of effort, and, further, questioning the manhood of the players involved. Michigan stayed in the game against a vastly superior opponent for the entire first half, going to the locker room trailing by seven points.

What would “ripping a Buckeye’s head off” look like? Did he want a fist fight? What’s more likely, that the defense, which had been horrible all season, continued to be horrible, or that they suddenly “quit”? That Nick Sheridan, who had thoroughly demonstrated his problems throwing the ball already this season continued to have those problems, or that he’s a girl? That Justin Feagin is actually Vince Young – a super-talented stud who has emotional problems, or that he’s a true freshman with a weak arm who had practiced as a QB for two weeks? Leveling ad hominem attacks on college athletes is, in our opinion, one of the most reprehensible sins of football fandom. Calling these players, essentially, girls, because they failed to bestow upon coach his accustomed level of reflected glory is completely unacceptable for an adult.

CoachBT lays the blame on Rodriguez’s coaching and the player’s effort and manliness because he can’t wrap is head around the fact that, for the first time in decades, Michigan football just wasn’t good. No coaching or effort-level would have turned Nick Sheridan into a great quarterback, no testosterone shot will make Stevie Brown take better angles, and no desire “rip a Buckeye’s head off” would have helped David Molk block defensive linemen 40 pounds heavier than himself. Due to attrition and a new system, Michigan played a slew of players who wouldn’t have played at all, or not this early in their career at any other point in their history. Rather than accepting this mind-numbingly obvious fact, people prefer someone to blame.

I’ve Got A Lot Problems With You People.

big gay heart — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:56:17 +0000

Lane Kiffin: Everybody knows that Tennessee fans are lowdown, dirty snitches, Knoxville possesses the city planning reminiscent of a concentration camp, and Rocky Top sounds like two feral hogs draggin’ their balls on the ce-meant. These are facts, heavily burdened realities that weigh upon the human construct of objectivity. Disregarding this, however, newly minted Tennessee head coach Lane Kiffin spent the past week poppin’ off like Elliot Spitzer in a den of iniquity. Ridiculous. Earth to Kiffin, you’re stupid. Pope Urban’s cardinal teachings are simple in nature and threefold in quantity:

Thou shalt Not Insult thy Brilliant Pope.
Thou shalt not insult The Son of God and The King of Men and Of Circumcising Young Filipino Children and Patching Together their Foreskin Remnants to Make a Supple Pair of Hand Crafted Moccasins which are a Handsome and Functional Alternative to Crocs.
Randy Shannon sucks balls.

I’ve got a good feeling that Kiffin’s punishment for breaking the glorious Pope’s First Commandment is going to be 40 point loss in September. To further belabor the Kiffin is cognitively challenged meme, consider Kiffin’s bizarre insinuation that Pahokee, FL educators were going to somehow alter Nu’Keese “New Keys” Richardson’s letter of intent and the school’s self-disclosure of recruitment violations for the following actions:

Nine prospects in Knoxville for an official visit on Jan. 16 participated in a mock press conference in Neyland Stadium’s media center after touring the stadium. Coaches asked the prospects questions while they were being filmed…Also included in UT’s letter, obtained by the News Sentinel through an open records request, was a previously reported violation that occurred when UT used a fog machine as a recruit entered the field in Neyland Stadium during his official visit Jan. 9.

A fog machine? Really? I was unaware that Dee Snider was a UT recruit.

The New Math: College football’s recently emergent calculus is trending disturbingly towards running aground on the already less than rigid shoals of ethical common sense. Yes, you guessed it. Oversigning sunk to a new low this year:

Ole Miss signed 38 football players Wednesday on National Signing Day. A year after signing 32 players, Alabama signed 27 or 28 this year, depending on whom you believe. North Carolina signed 29.

Additionally, Troy signed – get this – 40 recruits. There’s a picture floating around the Interfunnels that depicts a family photograph of one of those backwater Christian families whose idea of family planning is raw dog ’til your heart stops. Beneath the photograph, there is a line of text with a simple, albeit sage, proclamation: vagina, it’s not a clown car. Earth to Houston Nutts: your 2009 recruiting class isn’t a clown car.

Fundamentally, oversigning is wrong for a variety of reasons which have been covered ad nauseum. But – and this is worth pointing out - there is a cardinally serious problem with a society that allows grown men to make scapegoats out of 18 year old kids. Nick Saban, we’re looking at you. If you recruit a kid to represent your university and he doesn’t perform at the level to which you may have previously hoped, you, Mr. Head Coach, were ultimately the one who scouted, evaluated, and offered that young man a scholarship. Not only does offering an athletic non-factor the Bear Bryant “Scholarship” reek of moral bankruptcy, it gives you an undeserved tactical advantage. Oversigning simply isn’t fair to anyone, anywhere.

Matt Damon: Actually, the only time that I have a problem with Matt Damon is on opposite day. Once upon a time, Matt Damon took a stand against men with ponytails. After a heated battle for the heart of a sultry and foreign exchange student, Matt Damon looks his felled opponent in the eyes and says “how do you like them apples?” And the man with the ponytail says nothing. He has been defeated and exposed for what he is: a fucking herb with an unstylish haircut. And, he obviously does not like them apples. Matt Damon is a dream boat and a social warrior and if you disagree, well, that says more about you than it does about me. Specifically, that you probably have a man tail. Go tell your barber that you’re sick of looking like an asshole.

Ponies: A unicorn is everything that a pony isn’t: magical, fleet of foot, ruggedly handsome. Out of context, ponies compare to unicorns in the same way that the gargoyle woman compares to Emma Andersson. One is an obtuse, ideologically flaccid beast with an oily mane while the other is an exotic, voluptuously breasted slice o’ heaven. I support a world where ponies are summarily executed, mechanically separated, and used to feed the hungry, destitute canines that wander our cities’ streets. Fuck ponies, ponies suck.

Adults Who Social Network: Facebook stalking, befriending, and otherwise contacting 17 year old high school juniors via social networking sites is ridiculously sad and it should go without saying that this is creepy. Get a grip, please. These kids have had pubic hair for, like, three years. You are a 32 year old staff accountant. I mean, really? This whole scenario comes dangerously close to sounding like the misadventures of Mark Foley.

Mark Dantonio: Mark Dantonio looks like Shredder. But instead of leading a remarkably well trained squad of oversized snapping turtles into hand-to-hand combat, he leads a team of middling recruits to 35 point losses at the hands of Penn State. Nice job, guy. Also, someone should tell Dantonio that drinking semen from a wine glass doesn’t give you magical recruiting powers, it just gives you an especially shameful case of fetor oris.

Notre Dame: At no point in my life will I ever see Notre Dame as possessing even a single redeeming value. Earth to Notre Dame: You have ugly co-eds. You don’t support America’s veterans. Your head coach looks like a giant zebra cake. I wouldn’t take a dump on the Notre Dame campus. True story – in my youth, I once wrote a letter that began “Dear Jerome Bettis, asthma is for pussies.” Hatred for Notre Dame notwithstanding, the news isn’t all bad. Charlie Weis has finally found his schematic advantage in the battle against the cardiovascular rigors of walking: the golf cart. Atta boy.

I've Got A Lot Problems With You People.

big gay heart — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:56:17 +0000

Thou shalt Not Insult thy Brilliant Pope.
Thou shalt not insult The Son of God and The King of Men and Of Circumcising Young Filipino Children and Patching Together their Foreskin Remnants to Make a Supple Pair of Hand Crafted Moccasins which are a Handsome and Functional Alternative to Crocs.
Randy Shannon sucks balls.

Nine prospects in Knoxville for an official visit on Jan. 16 participated in a mock press conference in Neyland Stadium’s media center after touring the stadium. Coaches asked the prospects questions while they were being filmed…Also included in UT’s letter, obtained by the News Sentinel through an open records request, was a previously reported violation that occurred when UT used a fog machine as a recruit entered the field in Neyland Stadium during his official visit Jan. 9.

A fog machine? Really? I was unaware that Dee Snider was a UT recruit.

Ole Miss signed 38 football players Wednesday on National Signing Day. A year after signing 32 players, Alabama signed 27 or 28 this year, depending on whom you believe. North Carolina signed 29.