el Tigre
-
Posts
1,036 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by el Tigre
-
-
I didn't see the game,it wasn't shown in my area. It does sound like some boneheaded playcalling. Woudn't that have been on McGee the OC though? Not that it makes much difference at this point. It shoudn't have come down to one series at the end of the game against Toledo. I do believe things will be fine,it's just gonna be a tough couple of years.Rodriguez should be arrested and put in jail this week for taking away the winning tradition that Michigan has had throughout it's history.For those of you who watched today's Toledo game, please answer me this. What the hell was Rodriguez thinking when the Wolverines had the ball on the Rockets' 9 yard line with under a minute to go?
The Wolverines had 2nd & 1, and they throw two passes in the end zone?! They could have gotten a first down, which would have stopped the clock, then they could have spiked the ball once the clock started.
Also in not trying to get the first down, they did'nt attempt to put the ball in the middle of the field, so that if they attempt a FG it would be a straight on kick instead from the far right hashmark.
Yes the Wolverines offense was horrid today, but Rodriguez did not know how to coach on that last drive, which took away any chance of the Wolverines pulling off the win today.
Thanks a lot coach, you really know how to destroy decades of a winning tradition. GO BLUE!!!
-
I was ready for a couple of rough years as Rodriguez tears down and rebuilds the Wolverines roster and installs his system,but I was still surprised we lost to a 1-4 Toledo team. Our offense is BRUTAL. We have nobody to play QB. I still think hiring Rodriguez was a good move. He will recruit for team speed and build the team to win on a national level,not just win the Big Ten. It's just gonna be a tough 2-3 years till we get there. GO BLUE!
-
Offer them Filmel Johnson.
-
I had a buddy suffer from an affliction similar to that. In his case it was caused by some twisted or crimped blood vessels cutting off blood supply. The pain literally brought him to his knees. Very funny for his friends,not so funny for him.
-
I think a Plus One would be a good compromise for now, but I still prefer a playoff system that includes all the BCS conference championship winners- it think that system would leave the least amount of room for complaints, would be the most fair system, and increase the intensity of all conference games, which I agree with you is important. Seeing a Plus One in action, I believe, would be a step in the direction to a larger playoff. I think a Plus One should be instituted, though, if there is trepidation about revamping the whole system to an 8 team playoff.
I don't like the 8 team playoff in most examples I've seen because of the at large bids. A team like USC could lose their conference,possibly have even 2 losses and still make the tournament over,say, the WAC champ. Just to throw an idea out there,why not every 1-A conference champ automatically gets into the tournament? In addition there could be 1 or 2 at large bids. I imagine the problem would be the amount of games that would have to be played. Could anybody come up with way to make that work?
-
I see your point, but the paucity of regular season college football games necessitates a crapload of rivalry games, no? Going by BC's schedule, there are 12 games in the season, 8 of which are conference games. 75% of games would be rivalry games, and if we were to get rid of one out of conference game to make room for the playoffs, then there would be only 3 boring games per year.
Also, you are correct that it would be much less likely an unranked would knock USC, or any big team, out of a playoff, but it would also ratchet up every conference game thereafter- USC would not be able to afford to lose another conference game, lest they miss out on a conference title, therefore keeping them out of the playoffs.
In my mind, the issue for a playoff is that it is the most equitable system when there are so few games played. I feel that the relationship between games and knowing which teams are the best is direct- ie, the fewer games played, the less we know which teams are the best. The more games played, the more we know which teams are the best. Since CFB is the sport with the fewest amount of games, I think it needs a playoff.
You make good points.What do you think of a Plus One type system?
-
I disagree with this. In any tourney system, I assume the polls would be kept intact, a la College Hockey and Bball. The intensity was due to the fact that a #1 team was coming into an opponents' house, always a cause for intensity for the home team. When Duke visits Wake Forest, with Duke being #1 and WF being unranked, there is no doubt an intensity, although a loss for Duke would not knock them out of title contention. I think intense games would remain intense due to the ranking and the rivalry aspects. Also, who's to say a loss wouldn't knock USC out of playoff contention rather than championship? Is that not as important?
It would be much less likely that a loss to an unranked opponent would knock them out of a playoff. As long as they won their conference they would be in,in most playoff models. The comparison to NCAA basketball is a good one. I don't want the football regular season to become like the basketball regular season. With the exception of rivalry games,unless you are a hardcore basketball fan it's pretty boring.We're all just waiting for the tournament. Because of the pressure to win every week the intensity of the NCAA regular season in unmatched.
-
The problem is that if Michigan loses to northwestern in november, their title hopes are shot. But if that same michigan team loses to that same northwestern team in september, all is forgotten by the time november rolls around and michigan is back atop the polls. What sense does that make? Not to mention the discrepancies among the polls, like a ohio st team losing to a #1 USC team and dropping spots, while some big name teams lose last week, yet only drop 6-7 spots. How exactly does previous performance tell us how good a team currently is?
You are correct. Sometimes. It all depends on if others also lose a game or two. Some years undefeated teams meet in the championship game,and any loss,any time sinks you. The late loss compared to the early loss and how that effects the season is definitely one of the flaws of the current system.But do you understand me on the point of my original post? The USC/Ore.St. game,while not a true playoff game,had the intensity of one due to the fact that it MAY kill USC's title chances. The USC fans knew it,the Ore.St. fans knew it, and the atmosphere in that stadium was charged because of it. IMO,a playoff like the one used by 1-AA,would take most of that drama out of the regular season. What about some sort of Plus One? Most years one additional game would pretty much stop the arguing over who should be national champion.
-
If "every game was like a playoff game" then a loss would eliminate said team from title contention, when in fact, it doesn't. Just because teams need to win doesn't make every game "like a playoff game" That is one of the most asinine arguments against a playoff. Tell me, in the other sports, such as NCAA basketball, is the regular season meaningless because they have a playoff?
The regular season means MUCH more in NCAA football than it does in NCAA basketball. That's my whole point. Say Michigan is playing Nortwestern in football,Michigan is 8-0 Northwestern is 3-5. Michigan is highly ranked and recognized as a possble national champion. At 3-5 Nortwestern obviously is not ranked,yet Michigan can't afford a letdown. A loss to Northwestern at this point would probably ruin any title chance. Michigan fans watch the game knowing a loss here is like losing a playoff game. Northwestern fans watch the game knowing even though they're not in title contention, a victory is huge as it knocks Michigan out of the championship picture. Fans on both sides are pumped. In basketball this game is a bore,as fans on both sides know all Michigan has to do is make the tournament and this game is forgotten. The importance of the regular season,on a week to week basis,in college footbal is not matched by any other sport. Every game,every week is important. I know the current system has flaws. Show me a system that corrects those flaws without killing that weekly intensity and I'll agree with you.
-
Scheduling only OOC home games against 1-AA opponents? Sounds an awful lot like the current SEC today.
By giving more credence to the conference games on the schedule, a team would not have to worry about losing a big time game against an out of conference opponent. A team like Texas could play USC, Ohio St, and Georgia as their OOC games, lose all 3, and they still win the Big 12 to make the 1-A playoffs. By awarding the conference title winners a playoff spot, winning all of the conference games would still matter, so your asinine theory of "every game is like a playoff game" would still hold water. It would make the season simpler. Play who you wish in the OOC games, and then win your conference.
As for the spots, you give 6 to the BCS conferences, and maybe give a 7th to the best non-BCS school. For the final playoff spot, i dont know what to do exactly. Perhaps use the same BCS system, just eliminate any outsides polls from being included. Sure there would be fights, like there are in college basketball. But teams have a lot less to stand on when you can tell them, "you should have won your conference," as opposed to "well, ummm, we know you are unbeaten, but you ummm should have been ranked higher by the polls in the preseason," like Auburn in 2003.
As for your every game is a playoff arguement, it holds no water. You lose and you aren't out, because other teams will lose and let you back in. I dont see how you can support as ass backwards system that rewards/punishes teams for not who they lost to, but when they lost. UF lost to ole miss, but they have all the chances in the world to climb back into the title hunt. But, had UF lost to ole miss in november instead of september, their title hopes would be all but dead. How does that make any sense?
As for the money, hat is all that matters. The BCS teams have a strangle hold on the title game, ensuring that 2 of them will always be playing for the title in any given year, thereby maximizing their revenues. It might not be a conscious effort to keep the little school down, but it is a conscious effort to keep their own pockets lined over a fair and just way to determine a winner. Take Boise St a few years back. Everyone in the world would have loved to see them advance and see if they could take out the next team in a playoff. Maybe they continue their run and win the national title. Would have been fun to watch. But, Nope. The BCS conferences don't want the little school anywhere near the top. So they try to placate the small school with a BCS bowl game and some cash, but no real opportunity.
And if you are so concerned with the small schools making it, then expand it to a 16 team playoff and give all 11 conference winners a seed. They the top 5 BCS winners can enjoy an easy first round game against the lower schools.
The "every game is a playoff argument" does hold some water. That was the point of my original post. Ore.St. defeating USC MAY end up knocking them out of a title shot. It may not if others lose,but at this point we don't know that. Watching that game was like watching a playoff game in terms of the intensity. In 1-A college ball you need to win EVERY week to assure your chance at a title. And cool your attitude a little,bro. Nobody ever said they had all the answers. We're all college football fans here just having a little discussion.
-
Will the Bills ever make the standing red Buffalo helmet and the uniforms permanent? The new home and away are hidious.
I like the new blue on blue home uniforms,but I agree the new roadies are terrible. I think I prefer the charging buffalo but the old standing one is OK. The old royal blue is horrible,the standing buffalo and navy uniforms would be cool. Just as long as they don't bring back that sickening old blue.
-
... Unless you're Michigan (they went to the Rose Bowl last year. Seriously!) or one of the other perennial favorites that depend on historical performance rather than current year performance. If you're not one of the teams everybody always has a crush on, you have no chance.
An 8-team playoff, as many propose, still means that most teams have no chance, but it can ensure that the best of those 8 teams wins, rather than the best of the top two whom the media / vague computer formula hearts.
Michigan went to the Capital One Bowl and beat Florida last year. An 8 team playoff wouldn't cut it,IMO. As you say,most teams would still have no chance and we would lose the weekly drama that we now have. I'm open to alternatives to the current bowl system,but I've yet to hear one that is better than what we have now. Maybe a plus one?
-
Watching Ore.St. upset USC last night got me thinking about the current BCS system versus a playoff like 1-AA has. I was on the edge of my seat as the Beavers held onto their lead going into the final minutes. If I knew there was going to be a playoff and all USC had to do was get in and THEN turn it up a notch,it wouldn't have been nearly as exciting.You knew a loss to Ore.St. could end USC's chance at a national title,even though it was an early season game against a non-ranked opponent. That's one of the things I love about college football,the whole regular season is a playoff. It's the only sport like that. I know the BCS system isn't perfect,but I would miss that weekly intensity if they ever go to a playoff.
-
me too.....lol
but gosh what a pretentious windbag the guy is...
I heard the interview too. He went into a long winded explanation about how he played in a 3-4 defense and how that hurt his sack numbers as compared to the guys who played in a 4-3. He used alot of big words and had kind of a condesending tone. He clearly has a huge ego,but he was actually right on with everything he said.
-
USA Todays Sports Weekly is also picking the Jags in a blowout. I just don't see a blowout in either direction. I think it will be a defensive battle. Jags 17-13.
-
Hardy is trouble. I was pissed that we drafted Hardy instead of Sweed because I was afraid of crap like this. Lynch is starting to look like a lowlife as well. It's bad enough he ran from the scene of the accident,but now because of his refusal to fess up,he's dragging his team into his mess.
-
Somebody close to him(family member or friend) was driving,and Lynch doesn't want to snitch him out. Judging by his actions,that's what it looks like to me. Just my opinion.
-
The Club - our 100 Senators - are whores. They will always go down - it's just a matter of negotiating price.
They may be whores, but I'd still like to see the NFL investigated. Football fans spend millions of dollars every year on gear,tickets,betting,etc. If league officials are tilting the playing field to favor certain franchises we should know. The NFL is supposed to be a true,honest competition,not a WWE type exhibition.
-
This kind of sh-- makes the NFL look like professional wrestling. It honestly seems that the NFL favors some teams,like the Patriots and Cowboys,and consistently screws others like the Bills and Raiders. I know that Senator Spector took alot of crap from most fans,but I think he was right to investigate this.
-
The only team I root against is the USC Trojans. Too many bandwagon fans. When the Trojans are doing well they are obnoxious,but when they are not doing so well they desert their their team. 49er fans used to be the same way,but their lack of success on the field has kept most of them dormant for now.
-
nice post.....I really think they did a nice job of getting quality ST players.....I for one liked the draft, other than the fact I wish they would have taken another G and C for depth down the road!
I read that the Bills signed G Robert Felton out of Arkansas as a UDFA. He was pretty well regarded by many,and projected to be a mid-round pick.
-
I think it would be a good idea to bring in a veteran reciever to compete for a spot. Maybe Eddie Kennison or Joe Horn or some other name we haven't heard yet. He wouldn't have to come in and try to be the man,just line up opposite Evans and take a little pressure off him. As long as we don't overpay,I'm all for it.
-
Yeah, let's pretend that "student" athletics is even important to all but a handful of Division I football schools (ND, BC, Service Academies, Stanford, Northwestern, Ivy League). Look at the grad rates for the football factories and tell me just how important education really is.
The NCAA is all about money and there isn't a single decision that I can think of in the last 20 years that is an exception to that.
What a kid does with his or her scholarship is up to them. If they choose to waste it, it's not the universities fault. I have a niece and a nephew who both got athletic scholarships and graduated on time. I have several friends who did the same. To get a free education in exchange for playing a sport is a great opportunity,and I don't think the colleges owe the kids anything more than that. If the colleges make money off of the athletic programs good for them.
-
:lol:
If the NCAA gave 2 ***** about the student athletes, they'd either 1) pay the players for making the universities billions, and 2)give the athletes a fill scholarship that can be used AFTER they finish up their eligibility. Athletes "earning" degrees while playing division 1 football is a complete joke.
I don't think getting a free education by playing a sport is a joke. I wish I would have been offered a full ride,and I hope my kids can get one.
Michael Huff on a short lease
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
True,and the Raiders also gave a big free agent contract to Gibril Wilson. Wilson is a physical SS who's strong in run support,no way Huff takes his job.