But how many of those places you've stayed also have a university with over 40,000 students?
I also think the offensive coaches should have to run laps all week in practice if Curtis Samuel fails to reach 20 touches in a close game. Running QB draws with your only experienced QB against Indiana instead of giving the ball to the best player on the roster a minimum of 20 times is borderline insanity.
This x1000. Curtis was killing it (as evidenced by his ridiculous YPC), and not just on the edge but also in the middle. Why run JT to death when we have Samuel? Let Curt eat!
Not sure why we went away from running Curtis, seemed like he was breaking off big gains every time he touched the ball.
I'm sad that I have but one upvote to give; you are spot on sir!
I think that field position also helped things in the early goings. It seemed like when we punted that we were usually able to pin them deep and flip the field, while they didn't have that same luxury.
This is just one of a list of things we did well last night (and yet, there are still a lot of things to clean up), but this team clearly has the potential to be as good as the 2014 team during the final 3-game-stretch (possibly better, which is amazing).
But what if the Hurricane was named Urban?
In MSU's defense, they had 2 teams pull out during the off-season; which meant they had to scramble to find an opponent.
While some people don't really dig analytics (and they certainly have their limits), the numbers were not very fond of Iowa last year (47th in S&P+ at the end of the year). This provided a slightly more objective measure to compliment the more subjective eye test that said to some (read: me and the few others in my echo chamber) Iowa was not a top tier team.
This isn't to say Iowa was/is hot garbage, rather it's to say that Iowa was mostly a good team that was also rather fortunate. When they ran into a team with superior talent and a bit of time to game plan (i.e. Stanford), they were absolutely boat-raced. I can't get the image of Stanford doing almost anything they wanted with Iowa in the Rose Bowl out of my head.
You couple this with the fact that the best Ferentz coached teams tend to be those no one expects anything from, but when expectations are high his Hawkeyes tend to stumble and have a lack-luster season.
All of that adds up to plenty of reasons to sell Iowa stock.
I think the real thing to pay attention to is how many designed QB runs are called. That's not nearly as easy to track because it won't translate into the game stats.
And with option plays it's tough to predict who the opposing team will try to take away when those plays are called. JT runs the option pretty darn well, which means he puts the ball where the defender dictates (to maximize our gain)--so while Urban can hope JT only needs to keep it 6 times or so, it really depends on what the defense is (or isn't) doing.
All that said, I don't disagree that JT will likely run it 15 times per game (on average; perhaps even more), I just hope Urban sticks to his estimation of designed QB runs.
Man did those 95 and 96 Northwestern teams benefit from not having to play OSU those years. Yes they beat that team up north, but our performance against them was not representative of the team's ability in the Cooper era. I'm of the opinion that OSU would have handled the plucky wildcats both years. Their resurrection was a nice feel-good story (because they were next-level terrible in the 80s, and pretty bad in the 70s and early 90s), but I think us being off their schedule ultimately bolstered their record.
I suspect the Russian diplomat used Sambo, since it's a Russian martial art (whereas Krav Maga is Israeli, and Jujitsu is originally Japanese but has a more modern and better known Brazilian format).
When ESPN low-balled the B1G for their media rights and said take it or leave it, but if you don't take our offer you're rolling the dice. I've always loved Delany's response which was: "Consider them rolled."
EasyE, if you click on the tag (100 teams in 100 days), then it comes up with a chronological list of all of these posts. Here is that link: http://www.elevenwarriors.com/100-teams-in-100-days
While this is true, if you look at the comparison of the teams that both played (USC, MSU, Northwestern) it appears that we were the better team (just came up short in one game). If the playoff had come decades earlier, I have to believe that this team would have done some serious damage and won it all. Shoulda, woulda, coulda...
It's also mine, Nikola Tesla's, Arthur Ashe's, Ronnie James Dio's, and Sofia Vergara's.
Not to mention that he claimed Holmes is our lone returning starter on the D-Line rather than Lewis.
I'm guessing the OSU staff did teach him the proper stance but didn't have the time to go through film of only him to critique him and tell him where, when, and how he's not applying the proper technique.
High 70s I believe.
I agree about the defense, though additional wrinkles aren't a bad thing if the players understand an execute the current schemes properly.
As for the offense, we all saw the difference between the early/mid-season form and the close of the season when it was finally firing on all cylinders (when Warinner moved to the booth). So I think the biggest change is that they've moved Ed up into the booth permanently (and hired Studrawa), which all happened prior to spring ball (i.e. basically after the MSU debacle).
Abe Simpson dropping truth bombs...
F+ is great, and they seem pretty transparent about wanting to both explain and improve their model.
Our 2016 slate of final 2015 F+ rankings:
It's completely unrealistic, but Bosa. Having that sort of freak talent on the DL will always be welcomed. Obviously if you have the potential to be the #1 overall pick, you go. But since you asked...
I have to disagree with the loss to MSU in '13. Our secondary wasn't up to the task that year. They had the talent, but until Chris Ash came to town our D wasn't quite ready to help deliver a Natty (the talent was there, just not appropriately utilized: e.g. Pitt Brown starting over Vonn Bell until the bowl game).
It's plausible, though not likely, that the committee could leave UNC out even if they beat Clemson. While people have (correctly) stated that last year our fate set a precedent (i.e. that conference champions from a conference with a championship game that only have 1 loss will still get in), Baylor's fate from last year is also informative. Baylor was punished last year because of their soft schedule (at least partially). You want a soft schedule, look no further than UNC which boasts 2 victories over FCS squads. In addition they've bested 1 team that was ranked (Pitt was 23rd) when they played and 0 from the current top 25. If you bust out the FEI strength of schedule, they're schedule is 117th most difficult (according to last week's data).
This isn't to say that they'd be left out even if they beat Clemson, but it may be more nuanced than just a binary decision. Did UNC look awful as Clemson managed to finally Clemson themselves into a loss? We probably have good shot. Did UNC look like we did last year against Wisconsin? Then UNC is playoff bound. Somewhere in between? That's where the rubber meets the road, but we'll still have a chance (not a great one, mind you, but a chance).
In the end I doubt it will matter; while Clemson may be more likely to lose than Alabama (against a Florida team sans offense), that isn't saying much.
Came here to say just this, and that Bert is not thinking outside the box. Bert is taking a good idea that someone else developed and claiming it's his.