After listening to the press conference, I am not really all that excited, and I don't know how any Michigan fan could be. Lots and lots of question marks on defense. The whole d-line situation makes no sense to me, if what Carr is saying is true, we must be switching to a 3-4 again or something, but I doubt that as well. Wow, we have too many players dinged up, hope that doesn't linger to the fall. Brown and Dutch to corner...nice potential I guess with decent size and speed, but can they cover? I fully expect Donovan Warren to start from day one.
A truly dismal press conference.
Two of our best offensive players - Hart and Manningham? Out and limited practice respectively. Our #2 receiver and #1 TE might be dismissed from the team.
Carr's single-answer list of hoped for defensive back improvements dragged on what seemed like an hour, but must have just been mere minutes.
That is not even discussing the fact that we now have only one defensive end, one incoming fullback, and no experienced and uninjured TEs.
Barf.
Is there anything better than this format:
1. List Item A
2. List Item B
3. ???
4. Profit!!
I swear I cry every time I see it.
adrian has to walk to the big house every morning if he wants to stay on the team...and germany and butler are done
Mathews must be a helluva "up-and-comer" if Graham is shifting inside. Other explanation may be more 3-3-5.
Am i the only one NOT worried about injuries? i mean, it's march people. MM & MH don't need more practice snaps. they need to be 100% for fall. if anything, the sudden TE situation is troubling. AA is a loss (Germany was a potential guy), but with MM & the 75 WRs on the roster, we'll be solid. any news on slocum?
Amen Dan --
People are acting like its the week of the Ohio State game, and these people went down in practice. Its March! And as AI said, "we're talkin bout practice!"
The chosen one --
Not switching to a 3-4 (there is LB depth issues too) but maybe a 3-3-5? Of course, we won't know until the fall, but that's the only thing that makes sense to me.
I've been mostly out of the loop for the last month or so; can someone remind me what we know about what exactly the dumbass three did to destroy their futures?
And yes, it's March and these injured guys are in their teens and early twenties. They should be perfectly fine in five months.
In retrospect, the first part of my previous comment makes no sense. I was thinking of Greg Banks, not Greg Mathews.
Any news on Greg Skrepenak?
A move to a 3-3-5 sounds a bit perplexing.
Any defense that puts MORE DBs on the field and LESS DLinemen on the field appears to play to our weaknesses and not our strengths.
I see all the position switches as a good thing. Dutch and C Brown were not getting on the field at their position so they switch to D where we're short. Criswell to TE says that we are looking to use the double tight end or 3 wr as our base package. which truthfully with all the wrs we have, is what we all wanted. you know strech the field.
about graham, i expect to see him back at DE. Carr likes to use the pressers to motivate the team. why play graham at DT when as Brian pointed out our Starting DEs are jamison and ???? being backed up by "Sacks!" if graham can shed some pounds he'll be back at DE.
I gotta believe that Dutch made the move to CB a year too late to make an impact. I know I am extremely glad to see C.Brown move to CB. He was never a RB, simply just a great athlete. I think he can make the transition just as well, if not better than Trent, who I think will surprise people this year.
Clearly, losing Arrington and to a lesser extent Butler and Germany sucks. It boggles the mind the payday Arrington was so close to and may have jeapordized.
I don't get the panic on the bizarre defensive moves. Maybe, I'm an optimist but I think it's more likely English has something up his sleeve than they don't plan on having any DE backups. They may suck at DE or they may be more useful somewhere's else. One may assume you will still need backups. Consequently, it is likely indicative of a use at some other position and not a lack of skill.
On the inujuries, MM and Hart looked plenty good against OSU so unless there's been some catastrophic injury internet rumors color me unconcerned. Both are awfully important to risk if their presence isn't necessary.
I'm not sure I'm going to give Carr the benefit of the doubt on the Spring Game. I think there is ample evidence that he is against it irrespective of a plausible excuse this time. This is one of the areas I am most critical of Carr. The Spring Game is for the fans and for the players to have a good time. Let them. Carr can call Jim Gray a fat hairy toad for all I care (because it's funny) but otherwise the fans and the media are not the enemy.
*panic*
I agree that it is only spring ball. This is a good chance to see if some of the guys who haven't contributed much are going to be able to - and to try out some of the positions switches without the time crunch of the fall (with the season bearing down on you).
It does seem to me that a lot of guys are out though. Lots of nagging injuries it seems at almost every position. Insert many times rehashed "outdated training methods" discussion here.
I think the biggest thing is that you can see how much depth we DON'T really have until the freshmen come in at certain positions, or people come back from injuries (HB, WR, TE), and at others they have a bunch of bodies, but they don't know how they are all going to fit in. (OL, DL, CB)
It will be good for both guys at TB to get more reps, maybe one or both will have a performace that demands more reps situationally and take some pressure off hart in the fall. (which would be a good thing)
At WR, unless I am wrong, we only will have GM, savoy, and a few guys I had to look up on the roster to even know they existed. This should be good to get them some work as well to see if they are going to contribute, or get buried by the incoming freshmen.
TE just Criswell until fall - FB just Helmuth? Yikes. Time to try out those 4 WR sets - wait, what receivers? (until fall)
LB for some reason I actually am not worried - Crable, Panter, Mouton, and Graham (if he gets it together) sounds okay. What worries me is what is below that on the depth chart, but again, it will be a good chance to see what the younger guys can do, and how bad our need is going into 2008 recruits.
DL/OL it seems will be a lot getting guys work and seeing what happens. How fat is B Graham getting anyway?
The only thing I am really concerned about is CB. (who isn't) With all the position changes we have a ton of guys, some pretty good athletes, I wonder if any of them can cover? (sounds bleak) Hopefully a safety (where we actually have enough guys playing) will show up with a chip on his shoulder to give WRs something to think about other than how to celebrate burning one of our convert-o-CBs. (although I doubt it, this is what I most wish for lately as finding a good/decent corner out of the bunch is less probable) I am sure we will see a lot of 4 and 5 WR sets next year.
Well, lets hope these kids do heal up pretty good and real fast. If the healing continues into summer then they will miss out on conditioning and that does not translate into good things for fall.
Kraus and Massey are pretty important cause quality depth at those positions is a question mark!
So we have one FB, who also happens to be a frosh, does this mean more of the 3 WR stretch runs types??
hart wasn't going to work out a lot in the spring practice even if he is 100% healthy. expect grady and minor to battle for the backup spot.
the DE, patterson, banks, brandon graham will be the DE. brandon graham will play DT when it's an obvious passing down.
too bad that forcier is hurt because that only hurt his chances of becoming a backup QB especially with mallett coming up. we can safely assume that mallett will be the backup QB when the season starts.
as for TE, we expect massey to be the starting TE but he is limited to blocking. We would expect either watson or webb to be the other TE if butler can't come back. webb will play both WR and TE for his freshman year.
If arrington is indeed gone, then matthews is the leading candidate for the #2 spot opposite manningham but i would think that clemons, hemingway will be given a shot to start at #2 eventually.
Lets not panic. That veteran players are missing spring practice is probably a good thing (assuming the injury doesn't linger into the fall). Less injury risk for them, more experience for the underlings.
Do you really think Lloyd would move DE inside if there was no other alternatives at DE? Just because Lloyd isn't sharing doesn't mean the ship is rudderless.
The TE situation IS a concern, but only if Butler is indeed off the team. I'd bet not from what Lloyd said (and what he didn't say).
The WR position is going to be fine w/ or w/o AA. If he has to walk further, I'll call it extra conditioning.
Reading between the lines, I'd say it sounds like AA/CB/andEG will be back. Perhaps those who attended the presser got another impression though. Body language doesn't shine through in the transcript.
I've posted this before so I don't want to beat a dead horse. Bass has NO shot at returnting to the field. He has nerve damage in the knee that they tried to grafed (not sure on spelling) and it didn't take. Someone I've very close to was part of the team treating Bass. Revealing this information is not cool.
You know, considering our personnel, we would be much better off playing in a 5-2 alignment when it comes to putting talent on the field. Of course, I can't remember the last time we played a team that ran anything resembling a wishbone option offense.
More realistically, a 3-3-5 could very well be our base alignment, making the best use of Crable as well as the sheer number of young defensive backs (both Browns, Williams, Chambers, Warren, Harrison, Woolfolk, probably Babb and maybe Horn too), as well as the older guys (Englemon, Adams, Trent, Stewart, Sears, Richards and now Dutch). Pencil in Adams and Trent, and of the remaining 13-ish, pick 3. That looks something like Stevie, Warren, Harrison/Williams. Sheer numbers should produce a useful group, simply because we recruit superior athletes. If the 3 down lineman can take on 5 OL, then we're in good shape. If so, we should have capable blitzers in Harrison, Williams and Crable. Panter takes over the "range in the middle and make every play ever involving a running back" from David Harris. If this is what they've conceived, it make sense, because our depth is at safety and DL.
I think I'm officially concerned for the offense. Manningham's status is officially a little more uncertain. Butler and Arrington were difference makers last season and could have been legitimately all Big 10 this season. We don't have enough TE depth to play a lot of 2-TE sets, but I don't think Matthews is going to be the next Avant, Savoy has gotten no love and I don't know how ready Hemingway is to step in if necessary. Without another receiving threat, Manningham is going to be blanketed and the rest of the opposing defense can key in on the run. Hopefully everything works out, but I think that's reliant on Butler and Arrington coming back. Damnit all.
In a more positive vein, it's cool to hear Moosman's playing well. I really hated my school's football team and it was nice that the crosstown rival was state champ quality my junior and senior years. Libertyville represent!
No problem Mportant, the information you revealed made no medical sense whatsoever.....
Not to mention grammatical sense.
You know, for a school whose basketball team is THIS CLOSE to bathing in the everlasting glow of victory in the National Invitational Tournament, everyone here seems awfully down. Am I the only person excited that we're in the second round of the NIT?!?
What?
Someone had a post up about why our S&C program is outdated.. Maybe that explains why so many players are dinged up. I am not very optimistic about this season - unlike last season - we were 7-5 and had a nothing to lose attitude.
DeBord sucks.!
What did Arrington/Butler/Germany do, anyway? Do we know why they're in trouble?
Dave and Marzzz....bite me! I'm simply trying to pass on info to other fans and I don't need your smug-ass correcting me. Marzzz, do some internet research and you'll find plenty on knee nerve grafts. Dave, don't waste post space on grammer unless it's a Buckeye!
I am interested to see if Mouton is for real (seems like he gets mentioned a lot by LC). If he turns out to be something great, he could open up our possibilities lot on D, both covering and blitzing.
Just because we don't have a lot of strong CBs doesn't mean we will drop back more guys to cover. It is possible English will try to continue to turn up the heat with what we do have...
If we could get a solid tackling 3rd safety out of the group (which might be likely with what we have and what is coming in), we could have varying combinations of crable, mouton and a 3rd safety (with panter in the middle) with either 3 or 4 man fronts depending on down and distance.
You could run a variey of "looks" with that - a base D of a 4-3, a 4-2-5 with crable/mouton or a safety at the nickel spot (I am thinking less coverage, more blitzing role), a 3-3-5 with both crable and mouton at OLB, a 3rd safety up and the SS either up or in coverage, and lastly a 46 with a SS up in the box (and mouton and crable still in). You could have combinations of mouton, crable and the 3rd safety available to blitz in most of those packages, and mouton and the 3rd safety should be able to cover extra receivers decently enough if needed.
You might not be that strong in coverage (we won't see that many good experienced QBs next year), but we would be fast, and QBs would shudder at the thought of speedy LB/Safety types flying in to take someone's head off. And it would put enough guys up near the line to fill gaps and make stops on the run.
Of course this all depends on what we have with Mouton, LOL.
noah: think "Half Baked" and/or perhaps worse.
OK, i sort-of understand the issues about the S&C program, so no one needs to write a thesis to explain it...but I'm still a little tired of EVERY injury being blamed on the S&C philosophy. how'd the conditioning work out in 2006? very well, but i'm sure it was inspite of the S&C philosophy right?
re: 3-3-5...i wouldn't anticipate that being the base, but i'm sure it will be employed more next year based on the success it had situationally in 2006. Grahm & Crable as situational wild card pass rushers could be very effective, if Grahm & Taylor develope closer towards to Woodley & branch quality, resp. they can still play zone in this formation, so 1on1 coverage skills may not inhibit the use of the 3-3-5.
how many fullbacks & TEs do we need in a zone skeme? TE will be a concern regardless, but FB? I also doubt Webb as a True Fr will play much at TE.
My biggest worry is still the O-line. Boren ending up at center is bad because this means that Mitchell and Schilling will start at RG and RT by default. I like some depth/competition for these young linemen and I think Boren can push these two guys (and probably replace Mitchell as a starter). Alternatively, this may mean that the coaches are super confident about Schilling at RT (his injury notwithstanding), which is a good thing.
Carlos Brown and Doug Dutch can be decent cornerbacks with their size and speed. I mean, they are about as fast as and slightly larger than Morgan Trent. It's not like Morgan can cover either.
Not redshirting Carlos Brown makes me even more AARRGGHH!! now. Especially since the move to CB probably did not come out of the blue.
Anyone hear anything on how Slocum's doing, and where he might see time next year?
Dan - things did work out pretty well in 2006, I wasn't trying to blame the S&C, more acknowledging that is the most often cited reason.
though it does seem more than the usual number either:
1)got banged up enough to get some significant treatment over the winter (probably minor surgical fixing-so they will be out for the spring)-this is probably a function of guys playing through stuff at the end of the year due to the season's potential
or
2)are currently dinged up due to offseason injuries (how is this happening?)
people probably worry more than they should because lloyd can't/doesn't say what is wrong ("an OL slipped on a pie and twisted his ankle" would be way less worrying than saying "he is out, I hope we can get him in" not that this happend, LOL)
Of course 3 guys out for other reasons (which is very unusual) probably only amplifies the feeling that guys are missing.
P.J. Hill said please convert to a 3-3-5.....
97, my comment wasn't necessarily at you, but the general "all injuries = gittleson is a boner" - mentallity.
same goes for the "any meh offensive performance = MDB is a boner" stuff too, btw.
97, you seem to have lots to say (which is good & informed, imo)...what do you think of the zone blocking thing? I'm not quite sold on it- even before Brian put that analysis re: 3rd & short. also, i'm not too worried about losing AA...as long as someone can catch the ball we'll be OK given Henne & hart in the backfield.
Son of Jorel:
Unlike OSU, we don't seem to have too much trouble with Wisconsin. My recollection is that UW is 1 for its last 9 versus UM. There have been some close games, but only one win.
S&C is not something that has received much attention in the past. Now with blogs and message boards and what not, more average Joes are getting access to info, so....
There are some (who are in the business, both as athletes and coaches) who have been ranting about this for sometime now. Even SI ran its thing about schools (very few of them) which follow our S&C philosophy and high injury rates a few years back (searching for that link). So the point is it has been in the backstage, but is slowly coming into focus!!!
Carr stated C.Brown would return kicks and still see some work on offense.
The move to the 3-3-5 makes sense against most of the schedule, except against teams like Wisconsin. The sun even shines on a dogs arse on some days, so I guess SOJ can actually make a decent point once every millinium or so.
None of the injuries appear that serious, so it might work out well for M that they can get some of the newer talent some reps. Mallet is going to get plenty of reps this spring. I also believe AA and Butler will be back in the fall, not so sure about Germany.
Crable will have to play down on certain plays as a DE in 3-3-5, not sure if that is something he will do well. Figure the DBs will be Trent, Sears, Adams, S.Brown and Harrison. C.Brown, Warren, Englemon and Williams will probably play too. That's a lot of athleticsm back there, should be optimistic that M can find the right combo.
But all of this - putting more speed on the field, using more 3 wide sets, is exactly what most fans have been crying for. Now that it appears to be happening many of those same people go into panic mode.
Michigan is still odds on favorite to win the B10 in '07, I see zero reason to suspect otherwise.
The C. Brown situation worries me. I feel like Carr has had trouble with finding productive roles for faster, smaller running backs. Justin Fargas ended up leaving to become immediately productive at USC (although the knee injury was not Carr's fault) and Charles Drake spent his years lost somewhere in the defensive backfield.
Mportant- or is it Anon 5:29? No really, you are truly utterly clueless regarding what you are talking about. btw- speaking of internet searches, do one regarding "HIPAA."
I agree with SOJs comment that going to a 3-3-5 base package would be a mistake. I got to see Arizona State run it for a year or two and everyone and their grandmother ran for at least 200 yards on them. Yeah sure, ASU sucks and all that, but in the big ten it would be a disaster. I see it more as a package to get guys on the field and to disguise blitzes on passing downs.
Dan- Thanks.
RE the zone scheme thing: I went back and looked at the PSU game quick to see what happened when the running game got shut down.
When it didn't work: 1)defenders defeat blocks at the POA/OL just plain missing blocks 2)RB cuts back into backside defenders who pursue correctly and who were not finished by blockers that were assigned to them (hart looked most pissed when this happened, btw) 3)too many defenders for available blockers
LOL, the first two sound like everything any coach I ever had ever bitched about. Those will kill any blocking scheme. Take your pick as to the reason (guys that are too much on the fast side and maybe not big enough, bad technique, bad execution) The third more like defenses sending extra guys and being too predictable on offense (michigan predictable? never!). Of course sometimes you will run into a well disguised blitz. It happens.
I think it can work. Any blocking scheme is defeatable. (why I like defense more) The key is adjusting to what the defense is doing. (unfortunately we don't adjust well-see USC game) Hopefully we just need a little time with it.
As far as AA goes, unless GM breaks out, or one of these frosh is declared a for sure phenom ready to play straight out of the box, I am worried. But then I worry a lot.
Marzz - that last comment was hilarious. Nothing like the threat of a privacy-violation prosecution to shut up leakers.
Since I am no longer enamored with the 3-3-5, behold! Photoshop! Now with possibly glaring errors!
Projected D vs 3 Wide
Projected D vs 2 Wide
I wouldn't sleep on Ortmann at RT just yet. Also, with Thomas gone and based on previous year's experience against RBs of his ilk, I'm not too worried about PJ Hill. Maybe if I was a coney dog I'd be more concerned.
The only way to know for sure about what was happening on 3rd and less than 5, would be to go back and see 1)what we actually ran over the course of the year on 3rd and less than 5 and 2)what the results were... (87 plays of 3rd and 5 or less over the season according to graph 3 on Brian's 3rd down comparison post)
If we ran, 1)what play was it/did it succeed, and if not then did we 2)run blindly into obvious blitzes 3)run into well disguised blitzes 4)miss blocks at the POA (really just the right or left, where ever it was intended to go) 5)miss backside blocks where it killed the cutback 6)if a block was missed, who missed it.
If we passed, 1)what patterns did we run and if it succeeded or not and then 2)who caught/dropped the ball
Of course this would probably take way too much time to ask anyone to go through all of those. (this is why coaches have assistants, LOL) But we would actually know exactly what was happening.
Ok someone please answer what the 3 boys did to get thrown off the team? I still can't believe how stupid these kids can be with such a bright future.
Michigan State ran the 3-3-5 under John L. Look how great their defense was. Oh wait...
re: MSU & ASU running the 3-3-5....since M has some players who are....whats the word i'm looking for.....uh "good" , i think they can be successful. Sure, there are questions as to is effectiveness as a base package, but they will use it situationally and i think it will be effective.
Penn State ran the "insert offense here" under Joe Pa. Look how great their offense was. Oh wait...
97: agreed re: 3rd & short. still, based on what Brian showed from 05 to 06, and what i saw of the zone in 06, it just wasn't as effective at 3rd & short. predicability could have benn part of it, but we we're any less predictable in the past.
Another 2007 student t-shirt vote:
http://link.paciolan.com/
index.c...1449453t267o872
Personally, I voted for #1, and #1.
Absent the latest developments, I still think this team is on track for most "overrated" next year. All the experts keep telling us the offense is loaded but that in reality is a joke. Absent the 39 points they scored against OSU (who had a weak defense at best against good competition), the offense struggled all year, and that includes Notre Dame where the offense only scored 33 points (not 47), and 10 of those points came on 20-yard fields or less. Perhaps under the John Navarre theory the offense is loaded - that is, Henne et. al are now seniors and have to improve dramatically by default. Otherwise, I'm not buying "loaded" until I see them put serious points on the board in multiple weeks.
As for defense, who knows but the three anchors from last's years unit are going to be playing on Sunday this fall.
Potentially losing AA and CB doesn't make things any easier.
I think the only question I had on offense (before the no Arrington, no Butler possibility arose) was hoe DeBord could screw things up. It seemed like every time it was asked of him, Chad Henne could make plays. Michael Hart is unquestionably a huge strength. There may have been questions on the o-line, but I wasn't even remotely worried about one offensive skill position at any point after the ND game last year.
Why didn't they beat up on teams? It was the playcalling. How is that even disputable. Even with Manningham out, Arrington emerged and showed himself more than capable of being a very good receiver.
With the possible losses of AA and CB, it's a different monster, but the trio of Henne, Hart and Manningham are in my view, the best players at their respective positions in the entire conference. In fact, looking at last year, I'd say Henne was no. 2, Hart was no. 1 and Manningham was no. 2/3, as good as Ginn but I think a slight step below Anthony Gonzalez.
Off-season fun:
Hey guys, go over to EDSBS and nominate CFB-type folks you'd most like to punch for Orson's Punchout 64 bracket. He even said if there were multiple nominations for Urban Meyer, he'd include him. I posted some obvious choices already.
http://www.everydayshouldbesatur...day.com/?
p=3223
as i understand it, the M offense is structured around being balanced & versatile. the former is obvious. the latter is based on the 16.5 pt line. if they are ahead by 17 or more, they run more to protect the lead & lessen the total # of possesions in the game. if they are down 17 or more they pass more to score quick and get more possesions in the game. anything inbetween, they run the balanced offense (of course the clock is a factor too-IOW, it's a smooth function).
for me, i just want the offense to score more than their offense. there is no set PT/game Number.
kind of like in hockey....the only thing i ask is for the goalie to have a positive +/- every game.
Other internet rumors claiming good pedigree have it that all three suspended-like players are working out hard to make it back on the team.
I wouldn't count any of them in or out at this point, but I think I'd take a straight-up bet that at least 2 will be on the roster in the fall.
side topic: did anyone else feel like stanford is not deserving, in any way, of a spot in the tourney? if you look at thier resume, it's the same as michigans. rediculous. if i were a cuse fan, i'd be pissed big time.
Geez, Dan. We can't even unite in our mockery of Michigan State. You are a true partisan, my friend.
well, i'm just sayin' that the 3-3-5 can work with decent personnel. or at least that it won't not work ever just b/c MSU & ASU suck at it.....lol.
anyway, i don't want to hate on PSU people specifically. i have lots of admiration for PSU. i stopped by the stadium a few summers ago & saw the museum there. pretty nice. However, I am a little worried that many in PA are catching the F-Mich syndrome. i got some funny smirks b/c of my "Harvard: the Michigan of the East" shirt.
However, I am a little worried that many in PA are catching the F-Mich syndrome.
You have to expect that when you beat us eight times in a row. I think it's more frustration with Paterno and the coaches than a dislike of Michigan. It doesn't help that PSU has no natural rival since they stopped playing Pitt. PSU fans are desperate for someone to hate. Michigan and Ohio State are the closest we have to a rival, but we're like the third wheel in the group.
Would be good for Penn State to consider Ohio State their most bitter rival.
M already has three rivalry games - ND, Sparty, and OSU. That's already too many.
Ohio State needs another rival and Penn State needs one...the two states share a border and both have great football traditions. Seems a natural fit for a rivalry.
mike, you mean to tell me that PSU doesn't consider MSU a worthy rival? you play them the last week of the season. theres a trophy & everything. i'm shocked. shocked i tell you. maybe sparty doesn't live up to thier end b/c they're focusing on their brass spitoon game vs IU every ye-...ppbbbbbbfffftt i can't even finish that with a straight face... a SPITOON!?! to be honest, i would have expected this as a trophy for OSU, but they actually still use spitoons in Cbus today. i guess it would be like using a common every day item like a hairbrush or cellphone or TV remote as a trophy.
I've never understood why PSU doesn't play Pitt anymore. There has to be politics involved somewhere in there.
I think the Wisky-OSU thing is a budding rivalry... fights and dirty tricks in recent years have sweetened the pot.
But I second the PSU/OSU rivalry. Seems like a better "natural" rivalry than even UM/OSU.
Hmmmm......would Pitt fit in as a 12th team?
better natural rivalry than um-osu? huh?
1. I go to Stanford, and we definitely shouldn't have been in. We sort of got a boost by the SEC argument - we were a mid-pack team in a conference with two/three really strong squads, all of which we had beaten once. Still, watching our losses you knew they basically sucked. (We also went 1-11 in football, but we'll still win the Sears Cup...zzzzzzz...)
2. I don't want some bogus Big Ten championship game, so I'm dead set against a 12th team. That being said, I'd rather it be Pitt than Notre Dame. I'd actually like to see Penn State go into the Big East and quit cross-dressing as a Big Ten team. Then we'd be back to 10 and all would be ok.
You would rather have Pitt than Penn State? Are you serious?
PSU does consider OSU our closest rival only because we beat them sometimes. I miss the Pitt rivalry a lot. Whoever said it is right. There is a lot of politics involved. Hell hath no fury like an 80 year old Italian scorned.
I like BSD Mike, he's a rather rational PSU fan. And coming from a family full of PSU alums, they're hard to find sometimes. No offense, Mike. It's just that those who grew up on PSU in the 60s and 70s grew up on a team that was OMG GREATEST SINCE SLICED BREAD! And OMG! DIDN'T YOU KNOW JOEPA INVENTED SLICED BREAD!? WE'RE TOTALLY AWSUM! As Brian said their fall from "we're going to DOMINATE the Big Ten to WE ARE... essentially Wisconsin" has been a very bitter pill to swallow.
Regarding the Pitt series, the short version of that story is that Pitt tried to charge PSU more for that game when it was played at Pitt. Then Pitt made people order tickets for other Pitt home games in order to get the PSU ticket. PSU asked them to not do that, Pitt told them to f themselves, and Paterno pulled the rug out from under Pitt. Correct me if I'm wrong Mike.
Also, the guy who said PSU/OSU is a better "natural rivalry" than UM/OSU, that's a joke, right? That has to be a joke. You do know the history between the 2 states, right? Please be joking.
"You would rather have Pitt than Penn State? Are you serious?"
I think he ment that if the Big 10 went to 12 teams that he would rather see Pitt than ND. The next point was that he would rather PSU join the Big East and the Big 10 would go back to 10 teams.
Personally, I like Penn State in the Big 10, it means I can see some Big 10 games in Pittsburgh (when not being shown a thrilling Pitt-UConn football game).
i don't mind psu in the B10...they fit in geographically & academically, and are thus essentially wisconsin, ill, minn, NW, et al. i think pitt does not fit in academically (i could be wrong here, please correct), but would make the most geographic sense. the only other 12th teams i've ever heard were:
Mizzou, 'Cuse, ND, IowaST, WMU (seriously), WVU.
out of that sad sack, i'll take ND.
I would be happy with either Mizzou or Syracuse from that group, they're both consistely competitive in the major sports and are good academic schools (especially Syracuse).
still, mizou & cuse would keep company w/ Iowa & OSU academically. cuse isn't that great of a school.
Well, if we were to ever need to add a 12th team, I would rather it not be ND, just to see them wither further from lack of a conference tie-in. They are already half-way into the Big East, anyway.....
MikeBSD can fill this in, but Penn State's fall has been long in coming and complex. One big reason has been the decline of steel country, moving families out of the state - families that bred football players that ended up in Arizona or Florida or wherever but not in State College. (Michigan's sclerotic economy cannot be helping UM recruiting, and I worry that we'll wake up one day and find ourselves desperately short of homegrown talent.)
Another has been the rise of coast to coast recruiting, not to mention the Big Ten going into Pennsylvania, and Rutgers and the Florida schools picking New Jersey clean.
And yet another, Penn State is no longer the only team that recruits juniors in high school. Now that everyone is offering up to two years before kids will take the college field, one of Penn State's old advantages is neutralized.
I don't understand why lacking a natural B10 rival they would bag the Pitt series.
The "Sensational Sixties" teams under Rip Engle and Joe Paterno really were great. And Paterno had a lot of great teams going into the 70's and 80's, plus his last top-notch team in 1994. (The '05 team was very good, but in my mind clearly a cut below Texas/USC.) Penn State has a lot of tradition to be proud of, but their days as a power have long since dimmed.
Interestingly, today Joe Paterno is the phlegmatic, avuncular old-man coach. Not so when he was young - he was a firecracker, cocky and brash, and never let people forget it. Even though he was from Brooklyn, he embodied Pennsylvania's proud blue-collar toughness and endurance.
I'm not sure about all of your geographical information, but there may be some truth behind it. As long as high school football is a second religion in these small PA towns, Pennsylvania will keep developing talent. I think it's more likely that with the advent of national recruiting and things like email, affordable commercial flight, and text messaging, Penn State just has a harder time keeping talent within the state border. Paterno is not technically savy and that is where he has let the game pass him by.
It wasn't that long ago we were a national contender. We were ranked #1 at some point during the 1997 and 1999 seasons. I blame the 2000-2004 stretch on bad personnel decisions on the coaching staff. Jay Paterno was a terrible recruiting coordinator. Some coaches like Jerry Sandusky and Fran Ganter I feel got burnt out and tired of waiting for Paterno to retire so they could get "their turn". Major coaching changes were made in 2003 and 2004 that righted the ship. We're back to bringing in top 25 classes every year. Where rebuilding years only saw 3 or 4 wins from 2000-2004, now we manage to get nine wins with a bowl victory during a rebuilding year. I'm quite content with that.
the point about statewide attrition being attributable to economic woes in the rust belt is valid. that is the main reason for the general decline of talent throughout the midwest, especially ohio, and ill. other states have felt this to a lesser extent sice they were light on talent to begin with (Mich, Ind, etc). PA certainly fits this trend that has exsted since the mid 70s or early 80s or so.
i think PSU has felt the brunt of this for all the above reasons plus the 85 s'ship limit- it was a perfect storm, imo. M has fought off this malady (sp?) partly b/c we always needed to be strong in ohio & Ind, since Mich is light on talent to begin with. ND has certainly felt this too. osu has been the most immune since that state has so much talent no matter what.
MikeBSD: how did PSU start out as an INDEP? why no BEast affiliation back in the 70s? iirc, there was no BEast before 78 or so, so what did cuse, psu, rutgers, BC et all do in football? was there no attempt from state coll. to form or join a conf back in the day?
Good question, Dan. You can read some of the story on wikipedia.
The Big East was founded as a basketball only conference. Penn State applied for membership in 1982 but was denied because the member schools didn't want a football conference. The teams that played both remained independant in football. Paterno had a grand vision to set up an Eastern Conference for football that would have included the schools you mention, but he couldn't convince the other schools to go along. Then in the 90's the Big East started accepting football schools like Miami and Virginia Tech and Paterno's vision was officially dead. By that time PSU had already joined or was in negotiations to join the Big Ten.
Some say Paterno's failed Eastern Conference was a big reason why we don't play Pitt anymore out of spite for Pitt's opposition to it. The two teams kept playing every year until 1999, so I'm not sure how much I believe that. But this past year Paterno pretty much said in a press conference that Penn State and Pitt will never play again as long as he is head coach. He's a stubborn mule sometimes.
Regarding economy/geographical shifts- if this has occurred enough to have an effect on PA, I wonder why the AZ teams (ASU and UA) continue to collectively suck? Maybe it is the lack of a real football tradition, but the AZ teams should be able to draw significantly from the state, southern CA, and NV.
I'm the one that said I thought the PSU/OSU matchup would be a better natrual rivalry. I don't feel very strongly about the position, and no- I don't know the history of any Ohio/Michigan disputes. I was under the impression that the whole OSU/UM rivalry was simply a by-product of team history, not state history. UM's bigger "natural" rival would be our in-state brethren, MSU (and if MSU had a history of better football teams, that rivalry would likely eclipse OSU).
My point (and it's a dull one), is that PSU and OSU are very similar in that they are located in traditional HS football hotbeds, share a much larger border, are much closer in political and academic ideology, and most of all, both lack another in-state B10 school.
I'm certainly not disrespecting The Game. I'm simply making a case that OSU and PSU have the raw materials for another genuine intra-league rivalry game.
"i think pitt does not fit in academically (i could be wrong here, please correct)"
In the US News rankings, Pitt would be right in the middle of the Big 10. It is an Association of American Universities member, a reseach consortum meaning that so much of a University's focus must be dedicated to research. It is an invite only association. All Big 10 schools are members and I believe Mizzou, Syracuse, and Rutgers are members too. It also has a top 15 med school. They'd fit.
ColoradoBlue, you're forgetting that Michigan State didn't join the Big Ten until 1950, so that set up OSU as the big rivalry game back in Yost's day. You may have heard about a couple of guys named Bo and Woody... they put the rivalry on the national map for good. The few times that State has had a solid team (see Duffy Daugherty) have invariably been down years for Michigan.
If you want to get old school, Michigan and Ohio have been feuding since Ohio took the land that became Toledo. We lost a punchline, but that's why the western UP is part of Michigan, instead of being the northern reaches of Wisconsin.
The Big East would be a very interesting conference with PSU. Since the football members are state schools (except for Syracuse), it's a natural move.
I wouldn't mind seeing Pitt join the BT. That would give PSU someone to feud with. Not that I don't enjoy the excitement that their focus on us brings to the game... ND probably wouldn't be bad either.
I don't really care for Mizzou, Syracuse or Iowa State.
**************************
"I wonder why the AZ teams (ASU and UA) continue to collectively suck?"
This was a real up year for Arizona in terms of recruiting. I think they had two 5 star and six 4 star star guys. A LOT more than usual (like 3x as many). There are a couple high schools that are becoming pretty consistent manufacturers of talent. Overall there are some things going for the state and some things going against it.
Going for them:
*Large positive population flux, a majority of the people in the state live either in the PHX or Tucson (lots of competition close geographically), I think PHX is the 5th largest city/metro area
*Weather (year round possibilities)
*Lots of current/former athletes live there at least part of the year (kids of pro athletes are pretty common place there)
Going against them:
*Still only about half the total population of a typical midwestern state
*California schools are more established, more prestigious and close by-they can easily pick the cream of the crop.
*Nebraska football has a HUGE following there. What California doesn't get it seems Nebraska picks up.
*A majority of the people there are transplants (a lot of the kids growing up there don't have strong ties to the state's schools)
*The weather-it is 100+ or close there from early May until the end of September (and it doesn't drop off quickly after). Playing on a field that is like moss (special grass that takes less water) with rocks under it at those temps sucks.
*Baseball IS the sport of choice there, it is well entrenched with tons of leagues and travelling teams, a lot of the best athletes in the area seem to play baseball year round.
*There is a huge inconsistency of programs there. A number of good ones and a LOT of bad ones. (Quite a few of the HSs there play terrible football-I mean like throw the ball down the sideline as far as you can nearly every play-it is like watching playstation-I can't see how talent develops like that)
*A lot of the people that have moved there in recent years are a little more on the affluent side, rather than working class (make your own conclusions as to what I am saying). There isn't a whole lot of sustainable industry (as the housing boom seems to be flattening/receeding), so I don't see a large flux of working class types moving there anytime soon.
Those are just my impressions from living out there for several (5+) years. Some of you might have different observations.
That said, I think it is a growing talent area due to the large population flux, and if a school hasn't laid groundwork there, it probably would be prudent to do so before patterns get too established.
97Alumni - I agree that Arizona is in a permanent state of blowin' up, but that's also what Bill Frieder thought and the only thing anyone knows about him is that he got fired by Bo.
I wanted to change what I said earlier, I went back and checked and there were only 2 5stars and 2 4stars out of HS this year there - the others were JUCOs... still a substantially bigger group than usual.
Topher- That is why my negatives outnumber the positives. It seems a lot of the hyped kids from there never really pan out, or are terribly overrated. (effects of terrible HS programs?)
Arizona is a weird place, it looks like a utopia on the surface but underneath there isn't a whole lot of substance. That goes for the football there as well.
Every once in a while a Todd Heap comes along though. A couple other highly recruited names that come to mind are Kyle Caldwell (DE) and Zach Miller (TE). Both were monsters in HS, decided to go to ASU, and had awesome freshman years. Then Caldwell fell victim to injury/crappy defensive schemes, while Miller just never developed. I believe the coaching there had something to do with both-wasted potential if you ask me.
It will be interesting to see how Griffen turns out. He seemed to tear up the OT that was commited to UF at the Army game (I think that kid later cut bait and commited somewhere else). He just ran around him all day. Hopefully for his sake he can learn a few pass rush techniques and has some talent in the weight room as well. Of course that OT looked so slow, I kind of think maybe he just wasn't very good in pass protection.
On average I think every other year a potential gem comes along. With the weak programs in state, it can't be too hard to steal them away.
Commenting by HaloScan
