Thanks for the info Buck. It's too bad to see him gone. He had already made his point multiple times and probably should have dropped it since he obviously wasn't going to change anyones mind. Oh well.
I guess I missed that. How did M Man end up getting banned? What happened?
The Virginia Tech game was his official visit.
Edit: Also in other news Harris is unofficially visiting Alabama this weekend, and it appears he will also be taking an official visit there Nov. 29th, so that makes two visits to Alabama in a short time. Are they trending up in his recruitment?
I think you are confusing the two running backs. Harris is the one that said he wants to be "the guy" at RB wherever he ends up and wants to be the only RB in his recruiting class. Having followed both recruitments, I have only ever seen Weber say that he isn't afraid to compete and isn't afraid of having another RB in his class. I think it was Harris' insistence on being the lone back and being a strong lean to tOSU that helped close the door on Weber earlier.
You are right, even though Michigan wasn't overly supportive during his tenure, that could have been turned around with better results on the field. Rich Rod made his defensive coordinators at Michigan run his preferred 3-3-5 defense without either of them having any experience in it (extremely frustrating watching a defense consistenly on. Rich Rod either had to get out of his own way and let his DC's play the defensive systems they were familiar with or done a better job convincing the administration to pay enough to Bring Jeff Casteel to Michigan. You can see he learned his lesson since one of the first things he did when he got to Arizona was go out and get Jeff Casteel.
Just so you guys know, LSU's numbers are inflated with Livingsocial deals up to this point. I've already gone to two games this year at $15 per ticket. No free cokes though.
I agree. I've been to both and LSU wins hands down. I've never seen anything like it. You know you are on to something when people contemplate staying at their tailgate instead of actually going into the stadium to watch the game.
M Man, I agree with you. I think early in his tenure, Brandon wasn't shy about saying he would try to maximize the revenue for the department, and that the enormous season ticket waiting list was a sign that the price of the tickets was too low. A shrinking waiting list was meant to be a sign that they were near maximizing that revenue stream. The problem is, once you approach that line, it only takes a few issues (really bad home schedule and degrading product on the field) to fall off, and then the promotions kick in to recapture some of that lost revenue (granted the coke promotion was less about revenue and more about preserving the 100k attendance streak).
You are right, Kurt Coleman did get suspended in 2009 for his helmet-to-helmet hit, but apparently things have changed since the addition of the targeting rule.
The Big Ten reviews every play as part of the officiating review program," Chipman told MLive. "In regards to targeting, that's an on-the-field call handled through game rules by the officials. There is no postgame review process for targeting."
That quote is from Scott Chipman, the Big Ten associate commissioner of communications. You can see what is written up about it from MLIVE. I don't know why you would neuter the ability to dish out a post game suspension from a review unless it was given up as some sort of compromise for the ability to be able to automatically dish out an ejection and 1 game suspension in-game. Either way, in my opinion, they need to fix that.
What makes it worse is that there is no way to correct the error made by the officials as. The B1G isn't allowed to come in after the fact and suspend him a game for targeting since it wasn't called on the field. What is that? This probably needs to change if the refs are going to blow these calls.
It depends on the timeline of things and this is where Hoke's communication skills or the media's portrayal probably isn't doing him any favors. My guess is that he didn't see the hit live, but given the targeting comment was a couple days after the game, that assessment was probably made after seeing the game film. So my opinion, this doesn't necessarily make him a liar about it. I have a hard time thinking a coach on a hot seat (or any coach) would purposely make it even hotter by knowingly playing a concussed player. This screams incompetence in my opinion, and his inability to articulate what happened makes it worse. It also appears that Hoke is being hung out to dry on this one and isn't getting any support from the athletic department on this. Brandon sees the writing on the wall and is attempting to distance himself from it. I would have to think potential coaching candidates can see this, and it is going to make it harder for them to get someone good to replace hoke. The only way you can sell this position to an elite candidate now is if you clean house and get rid of Brandon as well. They both are going to have to go.
Something else I want to quickly touch on are the GIFs of bouncing lady parts.
I stopped reading at that point because the statement seemed self-explanatory and any additional context would be unimportant. Hopefully I didn't miss anything good.
It always cracks me up when Michigan people make the comments and don't look at their own modern era (that they've lived through) that is littered with losses at home to powerhouses like Appalachian State, Toledo and Utah.
I hope you aren't talking about me. Appalachian State will always equal a bad loss. Toledo will always equal a bad loss. Utah, however, I’m glad you brought them up, because it helps to prove my point on context. You look at the name Utah and assume it was a bad loss, but if you look at what that Utah team did that season, it is hard to say it was embarrassing at all. That year, Utah eked out a 25 to 23 victory over Michigan, ended the season undefeated, ranked as the #2 team in the country by the AP, #4 by the Coaches, and beat then #4 Alabama 31 to 17 in the Sugar Bowl. Again, if you just look at the name, you might think it was bad, but that is why you always have to look at the context.
The same Ohio Conference that produced the likes of John Heisman
This statement simply isn’t true. The Ohio Conference did not produce John Heisman. Ignoring the fact that the Ohio Conference didn’t exist until 1902, Heisman played for Brown (1887-1889) and Penn (1890-1891). He then had what I would call a coaching blip at Oberlin in 1892 and then in 1894. Oberlin would later become a founding member of the Ohio Conference in 1902 along with Ohio State. Since he only coached 2 of the 36 years he coached (15 out of his 274 games) at an institution that would later become a member of the Ohio Conference… that just isn’t enough to say the Ohio Conference produced him, especially since he started as a player in the Ivy League.
They are all legit, against legit competition at the time, I've confirmed it with a number of drunken tailgate historical scholars.
You have me here. I can’t beat the opinion of drunken tailgate historical scholars, but I do have a couple questions to ask them if you could pass them along. If the Ohio Conference was so legit, then why did Ohio state jump ship to the Western Conference (Big Ten) only 10 years after helping to found it? The Western Conference was founded in 1896, so why not join it then? Also, how come none of the Ohio Conference teams ever really were noticed on the national scene? None of them ever really made the rankings of their day. Can you explain this?
However, I do completely discount victories that Michigan tries to claim over such entities as: American Medical, Ann Arbor High School, Camp Grant, U Club, Cleveland AA, Detroit AC, Detroit Industial, Havard Club Chicago, Iowa Pre Flight, Michigan AA, Michigan MA, P&S Chicago and Quantico Marines - to name a few.
I’m not really going to defend any of these. What is the point, I’m not really qualified to talk about whether some of these wins are quality or not, nor will I question the wins Ohio State counts over Ohio Medical, the Dayton YMCA, the 17th Regiment, Columbus Barracks, Camp Sherman, Iowa Pre-Flight, Fort Knox, and the Great Lakes NAS. It really only amounts to 25 victories for Michigan, 13 for Ohio State, 31 for Texas, 50+ for Notre Dame (Stopped counting at 50, but saw more I think would meet your criteria). I would say though, you may be underestimating the difficulty of those games. Alabama only has a 4-3 record versus Birmingham High School. Essentially, every school counts these victories, so really nothing to see here.
I will say though that it is rather unpatriotic of you to criticize teams such as Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Texas, and all the others for playing the different military service teams like Iowa Pre Flight, Quantico Marines, the 17th Regiment, Camp Sherman, Fort Knox, and the Great Lakes NAS. These were great moral boosters for the war time effort and many college players were on these teams when they joined the military to serve their country.
The rule just means he's ineligible to play in games, but says nothing about having to kick a player off the team and/or not letting them practice with the team. Teams typically don't keep players on their team that aren't eligible to play. What is the point? They will just take practice time away from the people who can play. Well in this scenario, they are probably trying to position themselves to be able to still help Spence. That is my guess. Besides, he can probably give the starting oline one heck of a workout at practice.
Don't forget he also had an assist from Lloyd Carr as well.
they count a victory
iesover a HIGH SCHOOL S, YMCAs, and others over various mens clubs.
It always cracks me up when the people that make these comments don't look at their own history and what wins their school's record is littered with. Who are you to discount a tOSU victory over the Dayton YMCA or the fact that the first 25 years of tOSU football was spent playing mostly other Ohio schools? (Even though Michigan began playing the Ivy League powerhouses of the day on their own turf in only their 3rd year). Enough with that though, the real question is, are all schools' being measured by the same criteria? The answer is yes, including tOSU's storied past. (National championships are a different story though. I'm waiting for Auburn to discover some more any day now)
If we don't look at the context of the history, who is to say future generations won't discount our own teams we've lived through up to now because there wasn't a playoff, or because the players weren't paid (except the SEC, because they will have a leg to stand on with this one), or because the games were played on earth and not in zero gravity stadiums across the galaxy, or insert potential reason here that may diminish our day and age (no.... really, I would like others to post some other reasons. Could be fun)
Edit: None of this means I'm for the whole, "Oh yeah, well we own the overall record" weak argument after a loss. One should respect those that came before us, but we still need to live in the present.
This is kind of what I'm thinking. It was mentioned that the medical staff was helping him, something they probably can't do if he is off the team and no longer a student at the university. I am thinking he finishes this semester while the school helps him and then transfers someplace he will be able to play or goes into the draft. If this is what is happening, kudos to the program for seeking the path that ensures he gets the help he needs and better sets him up for success if he has to leave.
A scholarship based on athletics shouldn't be a guaranteed four year reward for having had a nice HS career.
My question to this is why not? Isn't this basically how academic scholarships work? You don't need to excel above your peers to keep it, you just need need to stay in good standing and maintain a minimum gpa.
As long as Dave Brandon is still the AD, it won't be Miles.
My vote is for M Man to be the next University of Michigan J. Ira and Nicki Harris Family Head Football Coach.
OhioState Leads the Country in Multi-Year Scholarships
DJ, I fixed your title for you since the article you cited only covered a smattering of schools and Fresno State's policy after multi-year scholarships were allowed (2011) changed to give all their incoming athletes 4 year scholarships, and they actually extended it to their current athletes as well, meaning they have around 316 athletes on four year scholarships. (Link) (Illinois has approx. 293 to lead the B1G) If a school such as Fresno can go all in on their "student-athletes" then there is no reason schools like Michigan, tOSU, Texas, Alabama, ...... can't as well.
The article linked above also comments on the potential reason as to why the NCAA chose to remove the ban on multi-year scholarships in 2011. Shocker .... apparently it was meant to be a self-serving tactical move for legal reasons (which DJ alluded to).
Last Summer, as a true freshman, he reported to school at 248 lbs with 27% body fat. This year he is at 220 lbs and 9% body fat. So he obviously has bought into the S&C program, now we'll see if it makes a difference on the field (if the OL performance is good enough that is).
A couple days ago Hoke did have Smith first. I think at varying times over camp every running back spent some time at the top of the depth chart. I guess its the whole "everyones a winner" approach.
They play MSU, so the requisite coach speak applies.
Team [Next Opponent] is the best opponent we play all year. [Next Opponent] is a well coached, fundamentilly sound, awesomest team out there. They are who you think of as the ideal football team. If there is anything else you can think of that I can say to kiss their tookis even more, please let me know.
Unfortunately, MSU has been more relevant in the last couple years. Hopefully that changes quickly.
A side note: the theory that these numbers are skewed by blowouts in which the Buckeyes used backups in the fourth quarter doesn't explain away the disparity.
No, but a change in offensive philosophy due to a blowout may. If you are winning in the fourth quarter, you usually become more concerned with running the clock out over scoring points. If you are losing, you are going to gamble and pass more. (opponents).
It should also be noted that Ohio State actually had the ball more in the second half.
The above statement and the statistics provided would seem to lend credibility to the possibility of changing the offensive philosophy in the second half to run the clock and protecting the lead. A statistic that should be looked at to see if this could in fact be the case would be the offense's run/pass splits for each quarter. If tOSU went noticibly run heavy in the 4th quarter, that would probably be indicative of an attempt to run out the clock and would probably lead to less points being scored.