Phutatorius's picture


Member since 13 May 2011 | Blog

Recent Activity

Comment 01 Feb 2016

True, but there are other pathways to money besides cable markets.  The B1G took Nebraska, after all, when on home gamedays Memorial Stadium is the third largest city in the state.  My sense of the expansion was that Maryland and Rutgers were a cable-market counterweight for what was entirely a football-based add in bringing in Huskers.  But they were willing to swallow the small market in order to bring in a brand-name football team, because a brand-name football team brings eyes to television sets in a different way — i.e., by being watchable, rather than just located near a big metro area.  Of course, the jury's out on whether Nebraska will be watchable in the long term.  In a way, that makes Maryland and Rutgers "safer" choices from a money standpoint: the teams may perennially suck, but those cities aren't going anywhere.  (Or if they are, we've all got bigger problems ...)

Oklahoma presents a different profile — more of a sure thing, football-wise, than UNL, because it can tap into Texas recruits.  But they're pretty far off B1G standards from an academic standpoint, and the OK legislature would probably hold up a move unless the poaching conference took Okie State.  That other OSU has played well recently, but it's not a perennial power, its academics don't cry out for B1G membership, either, and they don't add to the footprint.

Ideally you add a school that hits all three buttons: football blue-blood, big TV markets, B1G-level academics.  Hello, Texas.  Problem was we were willing to swallow A&M to get Texas, but the Texas lawmakers were insisting on Texas Tech, too.  (The "tech problem" Gordon Gee was hinting at in his email.)  Now that the SEC has broken the Texas-A&M axis, I wonder if the B1G would take Texas and Texas Tech.  There's the grant of rights to overcome, though, and Nebraska's aversion to being back in a conference with Texas.  And the Longhorn Network.  But it's such a good fit, it really should happen, once the dust has settled. 

Comment 25 Jan 2016

Look: message boards are social settings, and all social settings have a shared baseline dynamic, where folks establish a hierarchy and try to climb to the top.  There's a formal hierarchy here and an informal one.  The formal one has the 11W crew at the top, mods just below them, and then the rest of us.  Some of the rest of us get tapped by the 11W crew to be mods and contributors, based on what we write here.  The informal hierarchy is established in the usual way, through relationships, which we manage through communications friendly and unfriendly.  And of course we can measure influence with upvotes and downvotes, which isn't ordinary offline.

How do you climb the social ladder?  How do you establish influence?  How do you -- gasp! -- get upvotes?  One obvious way is to be clever.  Another is to kick someone others don't seem to like.  A third way is to appeal to the folks on the top of the hierarchy (and an obvious way to do that is to enforce the norms they've established for the site: e.g., don't open an unnecessary thread).  If you're really slick, you can do all three at once.  So, a new person comes to the site and posts a duplicative thread.  Naturally, a free-for-all follows.

It all makes sense.  It's frickin' programmed into us, as a matter of evolution, to seek to be included in the favored group, to dominate over others, to be celebrated, to score points.  And yeah, it sort of sucks, because it means the discourse deteriorates, some people feel less welcome than others, we spend more time going meta about the discussion than about why we're all here, which is that we're Buckeye fans (which means that TOGETHER we are in a favored group, we dominate over others, we are celebrated, and we score points: and for me that's good enough).  Not sure what can be done about it.  You can say you don't like it, as the OP did.  But he got picked apart -- admittedly in part over how he said it, which opened the door to another free-for-all.

Still, I can see his point.  I, too, am here more for the information than for the community.  So I come looking for information and only participate in the community from time to time.  And that's fine -- the site's very good at providing both.  I might participate more in the community if it was more my kind of community.  But it's not, so fine.  I fully expect the first reply to my post to say something along the lines of (1) Nerd, or (2) TL;DR (and I realize by saying so I've pretty much guaranteed it will happen).  So have at it, people.  We don't have to be friends.  We're all aligned on Saturdays, and that's what counts.

Comment 06 Dec 2015

It's the same as the Coach of the Year vote: when an Iowa team that's not supposed to win 10 games goes 12-1, it's "more impressive" than an OSU team that's supposed to win 13 games going 11-1.

Our close loss to MSU "exposed" us.  Theirs "validated" them.  I'd call bullshit on that, except that Iowa went down swinging in its close loss, whereas in ours we politely declined to play offense and wished MSU the best.

Comment 18 Nov 2015

Years and years ago I was just out of college and working as a paralegal in New York City.  The law firm's managing partner was your classic stereotype of a terrifying boss.  Huge, bald, cigar-smoking.  Had a hand grenade on his desk for a paperweight that he said was live.  He hunted lions in Africa and signed memos "P.O.D." for "Prince of Darkness."

One day he took us all out to lunch in Midtown to chew us out.  Extreme upscale Italian restaurant with zebra skins on the walls.  After we order, my boss launches into an extended lecture.  About ten minutes into this my eye wanders off him and I see James Hetfield sitting two tables over.  I must have made a face or something, because my boss looks at me and says, "You, what?"

"That's James Hetfield over there."


"He's the lead singer for Metallica."

"I don't know what that is."

"That guy should be gnawing on the haunches of a dead ox or something.  And he's here eating pasta primavera."

Boss looks away from me in disgust and resumes his lecture.

Comment 14 Oct 2015

Hey 11W:

Any hope you all could kill the "17 Horribly Aged Celebrities" link (and more importantly, the photo) that's at the foot of each page?


Comment 03 Oct 2015

A few observations:

(1) QB draws don't play to Cardale's strengths.  He's a bulldozer when he gets moving, but he has to get moving.  On these designed QB runs they're giving him, he's not even in first gear when he hits the line.  It's setting him up to fail.  It's not a surprise to see an LB dump him at the line of scrimmage.  Roll him out, get him a head of steam — or get him scrambling — and look out.

(2) On these obvious running downs — say, when we're up a TD with 6:00 left — they COULD line Braxton up at QB with Zeke in the backfield.  They could read option or run a play with Zeke as lead blocker.  Also, I'm seeing a lot of fakes to the jet sweep, but not any actual jet sweeps.  If you don't have to respect the fake, there's no point.  

(3) (Sort of) Relatedly, Samuel got the ball once.  Once, with Elliott leading him toward the sideline.  That play works and plays to our strengths.  Lately, it seems like if Samuel's gonna get the ball, he has to come across the field and pick off a pass thrown to someone else.  That worked last week; this week not so much.

(4) When was the last time we ran play action?  A screen pass?

They stack the box, we don't even try to go deep.  We run QB draws, and we hope EZE can break through and get behind the cheating defenders.  That's really about it, and thank God he did, three times today.  We don't use play action to set up the pass.  We don't run read option (and to be fair, after the one time we tried, I could see why).  Jet sweeps are off the table.

I feel like the offense is transitioning away from our bread and butter over the last three years.  I'm fine with that.  I'd just like to understand better what we're transitioning to.

Comment 28 Sep 2015

So the penalties were appropriate -- they just didn't call them by the right name.

I can live with that.  Gamble was held in the Fiesta Bowl, after all.

Comment 28 Sep 2015

Maybe that's why I wasn't plugged in to the rule.  I don't watch a lot of football on Sundays ...