T1B

Killian wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:BTW, what’s the deal on this Beluga kid the Packers drafted? How come he dropped so far in the first round? Report on him is that he’s slow, has short arms and small hands. And that he’ll probably never make it at left tackle and might even wind up at guard. Another of Ted Thompson’s genius picks.

See: Gallery, Robert.

RACK

M Club wrote:you sound a bit too sensitive considering this thread echoes every umich/msu discussion i've had since i was 4.

Sensitive? You're the guy rushing to a post that wasn't even addressed to you. Anyway, this is what we do in here. If we meet for a beer and I storm outta the bar cuz of a ski mask reference, then you can accuse me of sensitivity.

there's no admission to a looming staff overhaul.

Ugh...ok. He thinks the chances of DickRod getting canned is pretty damn likely. Happy now?

pretty basic capitalist endeavor here: win or lose your job.

Exactly, and since DickRod is losing at a pretty high clip which will result in another regime change, it's pretty tough for me to buy into this optimistic outlook. Unless one's sole reason for optimism is based on the fact RR will be gone, but even then, one can't really gage the direction of their program until a new coach is hired.

depletions everywhere else? since you already mentioned the scrub defense, i'm sure you're talking about the offense, which means you don't really know what you're talking about. unless you meant zoltan, of course.

I guess the offense is serviceable enough for UMICH not to lose by 30 ppg. They also looked pretty sweet against one of the worst MSU defenses ever assembled in my lifetime.

i didn't realize two inches shorter and a split second off in the 40 made you a poor man's version of terrell pryor. i'll trade those metrics in for the fact his passing abilities graded out very high at the qb camps he attended last year and that he doesn't come off as a complete moron when responding to basic interview questions.

That's fine. I still don't see how Gardner changes the entire direction of the program, especially when we don't even know what he can do yet. Tater Tot looked pretty solid last year at times. Didn't really matter though when the opposition got the ball back and scored in about 7 seconds.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: Sensitive? You're the guy rushing to a post that wasn't even addressed to you. Anyway, this is what we do in here. If we meet for a beer and I storm outta the bar cuz of a ski mask reference, then you can accuse me of sensitivity.

ja, it's what we do in here. so why are you boo hoo'ing because i brought up your insecurities re: umich/msu? oh, wah, steve, cheapshot, no fair.

Ugh...ok. He thinks the chances of DickRod getting canned is pretty damn likely. Happy now?

no, you're still letting your insecurities translate things for you. let's see:

steve wrote:I like the direction of the team right now. The peices are coming together and (if RR can keep his job long enough, we all know that's a big "if") by the time Devin Gardner is running the show UM will be back atop the Big16 and competing for bcs coin.

optimism, optimism, and a caveat. you're still wrong.

Exactly, and since DickRod is losing at a pretty high clip which will result in another regime change, it's pretty tough for me to buy into this optimistic outlook. Unless one's sole reason for optimism is based on the fact RR will be gone, but even then, one can't really gage the direction of their program until a new coach is hired.

probably because you don't actually follow the program.

I guess the offense is serviceable enough for UMICH not to lose by 30 ppg. They also looked pretty sweet against one of the worst MSU defenses ever assembled in my lifetime.

every msu defense is nearly the worst assembled in your lifetime. to flip the script, michigan's run the worst two teams of my lifetime out the last two years and state's barely scraped by. so once again, your success is a byproduct of michigan's struggles and not anything your program can string together by itself.

That's fine. I still don't see how Gardner changes the entire direction of the program, especially when we don't even know what he can do yet. Tater Tot looked pretty solid last year at times. Didn't really matter though when the opposition got the ball back and scored in about 7 seconds.

true. i obviously don't know how gardner will pan out, just that his recruiting profile isn't any worse than pryor's save those two inches. the idea is that the offense will be a lot more potent with someone running the offense who can actually make the zone read + see over any lineman over 5'7" (tater's big issues last year, plus the running around once his first receiver was locked up).

M Club wrote:ja, it's what we do in here. so why are you boo hoo'ing because i brought up your insecurities re: umich/msu? oh, wah, steve, cheapshot, no fair.

So now you're a message board psychologist? Cool. I called Steve a hypocrite. If that makes me "insecure," chalk it up I guess. What label do you have for a guy that rushes to the defense of another poster?

optimism, optimism, and a caveat. you're still wrong.

How am I wrong? His caveat can't just be brushed under the rug. It implies that the chances of all that awesome stuff happening aren't very good. Hence the "BIG IF".

probably because you don't actually follow the program.

You don't need mgoblog in your favorites to decipher that the direction of UofM's program isn't heading north. Best case scenario, it's stagnant.

every msu defense is nearly the worst assembled in your lifetime.

No, usually just the secondary. Funny though.

michigan's run the worst two teams of my lifetime out the last two years

Right. So I guess we agree about those depletions then, eh?

and state's barely scraped by. so once again, your success is a byproduct of michigan's struggles and not anything your program can string together by itself.

Yes, and plenty of nationally ranked Michigan teams have "barely scraped by" some pretty mediocre MSU teams. What does any of that have to do with re: Michigan's current offensive personnel ?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: So now you're a message board psychologist? Cool. I called Steve a hypocrite. If that makes me "insecure," chalk it up I guess. What label do you have for a guy that rushes to the defense of another poster?

you've mistaken defending someone else for simply telling you you're wrong. put your blanket down and stop sucking your thumb.

How am I wrong? His caveat can't just be brushed under the rug. It implies that the chances of all that awesome stuff happening aren't very good. Hence the "BIG IF".

i like the direction the team is going in...the pieces are coming together...michigan will be big 16 champs... all you michigan haters go on and on about arrogant asses and the second someone's all 'i think we're going to be good though i can't be certain till they actually are' and you're jumping a m'fucker.

You don't need mgoblog in your favorites to decipher that the direction of UofM's program isn't heading north. Best case scenario, it's stagnant.

michigan's been stagnant since george steinbrenner bought drew henson. michigan had no offensive line dickrod year one, a decent line second year though nothing past its sixth lineman, and actually has depth this year. they had nick sheridan starting against osu year one, a freshman midget last year, and who knows this year since denard's apparently learned how to throw. the trajectory's up. how about the line graph at your school?

michigan's run the worst two teams of my lifetime out the last two years

Right. So I guess we agree about those depletions then, eh?

if you were talking to me in 2008, though i would have only admitted as much in hindsight.

Yes, and plenty of nationally ranked Michigan teams have "barely scraped by" some pretty mediocre MSU teams. What does any of that have to do with re: Michigan's current offensive personnel ?

uh..

point wrote:I guess the offense is serviceable enough for UMICH not to lose by 30 ppg. They also looked pretty sweet against one of the worst MSU defenses ever assembled in my lifetime.

counterpoint wrote:michigan's run the worst two teams of my lifetime out the last two years and state's barely scraped by. so once again, your success is a byproduct of michigan's struggles and not anything your program can string together by itself.

huh, whuh? wrote:Yes, and plenty of nationally ranked Michigan teams have "barely scraped by" some pretty mediocre MSU teams. What does any of that have to do with re: Michigan's current offensive personnel ?

since i'm message board psychologist, i'll diagnose you with whatever affliction van seems to have.

Can we have an Iowa football FAQ? or maybe a template that we can just fill in the blanks with the yearly Jonspeak.

___________best team in the_____________. ___________will never come into Kinnick and win. (W)_________and (L)_____________ against Iowa over the last 19 years. ___________________wearing Drew Tate's game jock over my head. The Big XII sucks and the Big Ten is awesome. Team speed in the Big 10 is _______________ SEC.

that kind of thing.....

King Crimson wrote:Can we have an Iowa football FAQ? or maybe a template that we can just fill in the blanks with the yearly Jonspeak.

___________best team in the_____________. ___________will never come into Kinnick and win. (W)_________and (L)_____________ against Iowa over the last 19 years. ___________________wearing Drew Tate's game jock over my head. The Big XII sucks and the Big Ten is awesome. Team speed in the Big 10 is _______________ SEC.

that kind of thing.....

Could you make shit up about what I say anymore? Just curious.

Goober McTuber wrote:

TheJON wrote:

Of course it does. We're due. Owned? Last 15 years you're 8-7 against Wisconsin. Prior to that, you were dead even. Owned? Nice try, corky.

21-7 in the last 28. Won the last 2 by double digits. In my lifetime............Wisconsin is Iowa's easiest win.

The day Wisconsin comes into Kinnick and beats a good Iowa team will be the first. You only beat us when we suck.

Well, then you must suck about 50% of the time. You only got back to .500 against Wisconsin because of the Don Morton era. All-time, it’s 42-41-2.

BTW, what’s the deal on this Beluga kid the Packers drafted? How come he dropped so far in the first round? Report on him is that he’s slow, has short arms and small hands. And that he’ll probably never make it at left tackle and might even wind up at guard. Another of Ted Thompson’s genius picks.

I just hope Bulaga can be as big of a star in the NFL as Ron Dayne.

Bulaga was a Top 10-12 pick in everyone's mock drafts and you're crying about getting him at #23? Hilarious. Jesus Christ, no wonder Screwball likes to smack you around.

Why do you think they call them "mock" drafts, you fucking simpleton. I'm just trying to figure out how big a bust this guy might be.

The odds are definitely in favor of him being a bust simply because it's a rarity that a Ferentz player becomes a bust.

Sincerely,
Your logic

Ron Dayne, Wendell Bryant, Jamar Fletcher, Aaron Gibson, Michael Bennett, etc all think you need to shut the fuck up.

Bulaga will be a solid lineman in Green Bay for a long time. You'll be happy to have him on your team, Goobs.

Mace wrote:Bulaga will be a solid lineman in Green Bay for a long time. You'll be happy to have him on your team, Goobs.

Bulaga is dead to me. Kampman just got brought back to life.

TheJON wrote:The odds are definitely in favor of him being a bust simply because it's a rarity that a Ferentz player becomes a bust.

Sincerely,
Your logic

Hey, I just want to know that he's not the next Robert Gallery. I'm a bit worried about his T-Rex arms.

Well he can't really be the next Gallery because he Gallery was the number 2 pick in the draft and Bulaga doesn't come into the NFL with nearly as much hype as Gallery did.

But there are potential similarities in that it's possible Bulaga is better suited to play guard in the NFL. Gallery actually became a quality O-lineman for Oakland once he moved to guard.

To be honest, Bulaga was probably the most overrated player in the country last year. When he was injured/sick, the line play was so much better because Riley Reiff moved to left tackle and was dominating. Bulaga was getting owned quite often. I laughed when I saw he became all-american and voted top offensive lineman in the Big-10. He didn't even come close to deserving that.

However, I do believe his struggles were due to not being healthy. In 2008, he actually was one of the top lineman in the country. He shut down defensive ends. I will say this, Bryan started showing his old form late in the season and then had a great Orange Bowl, dominating GT's star end who was also a high draft pick. So if I were a Packer fan, I would be encouraged with that.

But the truth is, Bulaga's awards last season came because of the hype he got after his 2008 season. Those who vote for all-conference clearly didn't watch him play all season. Every draft expert had him listed as the top tackle for this year's draft after last season.

He's a guy I could see being a bust or an all-pro type. it's just too early to tell.