T1B

Didn't see one second of the game as I was in Toronto for a wedding and Canada's idea of Saturday sports television involves soccer, curling, and University Football. I didn't even see the score until this morning in the paper, no box score. From the score I would guess that Sparty destroyed the UM o-line and Gardner was oft sacked and contributed a few turnovers.

So, props to State, the better team won.

I'm not worried about the future just yet. Hoke is a trenches guy and next year his first class (abbreviated cycle as it were) will be seniors and his o-line haul of two years ago will be in their third year of the system with good depth behind them. State looks a lot like Michigan is striving to be. Good running game, pocket passer, and stingy defense. Once the RRod taint is all the way gone we'll have a better idea of where the program is. I still think he's the right guy.

WolverineSteve wrote:I didn't even see the score until this morning in the paper

Must've been one hell of a reception.

P.S. Get a smartphone, bro.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:P.S. Get a smartphone, bro.

:?

If you are a U.S. cellular customer and travel to Canada, you will be paying for roaming voice and data service at a much higher rate than at home. Verizon charges $.69/minute and $2.05/MByte for data. If you have an international data plan on Verizon, as I do, any overage charge ($2.05/Mbyte v. $15 or $20/MByte) costs much less than everywhere else in the world.

AT&T charges $.59/minute if you buy a $5.99/month add-on package. AT&T also has various rate schemes with a prepaid amount that will reduce that rate from $.50/minute to $.25/minute if you intend on using a lot of minutes, otherwise it is not a good deal. Data on AT&T is $30/month for 120 MB, or $.25/ MByte. This is a Global Plan that is good in Canada and anywhere else in the world. You can pay $60/month for 300 Mbytes or $120/month for 800 Mbytes. All of these plans in my view are a rip-off and far more expensive than local alternatives when you arrive in a foreign country.

Sprint offers a $2.99 add-on that allows calls for $.20 per minute within Canada and back to the United States. Otherwise, calls are $.59/minute. Sprint charges $20/MByte on the CDMA network and does not offer GSM roaming service.

Tall order just to follow your team getting boot-stomped by your in-state rival. Think I would've waited for the morning paper, too.

Truman wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:P.S. Get a smartphone, bro.

:?

If you are a U.S. cellular customer and travel to Canada, you will be paying for roaming voice and data service at a much higher rate than at home. Verizon charges $.69/minute and $2.05/MByte for data. If you have an international data plan on Verizon, as I do, any overage charge ($2.05/Mbyte v. $15 or $20/MByte) costs much less than everywhere else in the world.

AT&T charges $.59/minute if you buy a $5.99/month add-on package. AT&T also has various rate schemes with a prepaid amount that will reduce that rate from $.50/minute to $.25/minute if you intend on using a lot of minutes, otherwise it is not a good deal. Data on AT&T is $30/month for 120 MB, or $.25/ MByte. This is a Global Plan that is good in Canada and anywhere else in the world. You can pay $60/month for 300 Mbytes or $120/month for 800 Mbytes. All of these plans in my view are a rip-off and far more expensive than local alternatives when you arrive in a foreign country.

Sprint offers a $2.99 add-on that allows calls for $.20 per minute within Canada and back to the United States. Otherwise, calls are $.59/minute. Sprint charges $20/MByte on the CDMA network and does not offer GSM roaming service.

Tall order just to follow your team getting boot-stomped by your in-state rival. Think I would've waited for the morning paper, too.

Yep, shut the thing off at the bridge. Tried at night to find the score on the tv but the Crown Royal left my eye sight and patience lacking and I knew the paper would be outside the door in the morning. After seeing the score the search for game info was abandoned and the quest for grease took over.

I suppose if taking the 5 seconds to pull up a score on your phone is going to break the bank, then yeah, it's not advisable.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I suppose if taking the 5 seconds to pull up a score on your phone is going to break the bank, then yeah, it's not advisable.

I left the phone in the room, dick nose. Turned out to be a good move as the result would have altered my mood at the reception. I honestly don't know what it would have cost to look it up on the phone, for what a weekend in Toronto costs, a few more bucks couldn't hurt. But I am glad that I didn't have to watch that abortion.

He didn't have to watch the game...he wins.

WolverineSteve wrote:I left the phone in the room, dick nose.

Well, sorry you missed the game, good buddy. Here's the highlight to get you up to speed.

Check out Dick Rod at 1:49, still a true and blue Michigan man.

edit- PW, 4th and 48 was a bad snap from center (20 yard loss over QB head), followed by 2 sacks (if I recall correctly).

Sudden Sam wrote:I didn't watch the game, but a good friend who played and coached college ball told me MSU's defense was damn good. This guy's a huge Bama guy, not a B1G fan at all and he insisted the Spartans were for real.

I reminded him that Alabama has dominated both MSU and UM in recent years and he said this MSU defense would be tough to beat.

The 2010 - 2012 defenses were good, but this defense is on another level. Definitely passes the eye test, but I would like to see how it measures up against an elite offense. OSU would be a good test, but gotta take care of business still. Technically, Nebraska still controls their own destiny and MSU goes to Lincoln in a couple weeks, but if Michigan knocks them off this Saturday, which I think they will, then MSU could afford to lose to Nebraska and still win the division. But Nebraska has QB issues right now, and if they start an inexperienced signal caller, MSU will feast on his mistakes. It would not be a question of if, but how often.

Definitely think this D could hold their own against Bama, but the offense wouldn't be able to score enough to win. I think Bama would win something like 21-6. It would be a poor man's Bama/LSU tilt.

I think we both know the "3-loss" Bama thing is overblown since you guys had a lot of injuries that year, and got everybody back healthy for the bowl game, but yeah, compared to this year's unit, that defense does not measure up.

FLW Buckeye wrote:Check out Dick Rod at 1:49, still a true and blue Michigan man.

edit- PW, 4th and 48 was a bad snap from center (20 yard loss over QB head), followed by 2 sacks (if I recall correctly).

Looks like 77 was called for an unsportsmanlike foul as part of that 4th and 48.

Yeah, I believe on that drive there was a bad snap making it 2nd and 30, then a sack on the next play plus a 15 yard penalty tacked onto that. Michigan had other drives that ended in: 4th and 20, 4th and 21, 4th and 24, 4th and 31, and then a host of 4th and 8, 4th and 9, etc.

Even though UM ended up with -48 yards rushing, I always thought it was kind of silly to include loss of yards on a designed pass play into a team's rushing totals. I dunno, but I think it should be its own stat or something. But if you take out the sacks, UM still only had 20 yards on the ground on 8 carries from their tailback.

I see what you are saying about sacks coming off of the rushing totals, but there isn't a really clean way to do it otherwise.

With so many teams running out of shotgun formations all the time would we expect the official statistician to make a determination of the intent of the QB? Take a play like a zone read where the QB pulls the ball and throws down field. If he is sacked after pulling the ball is it a run or a pass play?

It's a pass play. On a bootleg, if the QB decides to tuck it and run it isn't added to the passing yards. Same with a scramble.

The NFL counts sacks against passing totals, I don't see a reason why the NCAA can't do the same.

Killian wrote:It's a pass play. On a bootleg, if the QB decides to tuck it and run it isn't added to the passing yards. Same with a scramble.

The NFL counts sacks against passing totals, I don't see a reason why the NCAA can't do the same.

There is actually a discussion going on in NFL circles about what exactly to do with sacks today. Up until a few years ago QBs used 5 and 7 step drops. There was a clear division between a run and pass. If dude dropped back it was to throw. If he had to then run it was because no one was open. Not nearly so clear cut today. Further the NFL used to do it the college way as well, but the QBs, who make the most on any roster, didn't like always finishing with negative yards. Plus calling it a sack helps the DL inflate their stats as well.

But at its core the NFL counting sacks against passing totals is stupid. There never was a pass, yet they call it a pass and subtract the yards from the passing column. The NFL also does different things one the same formation but with a different down. For example if the QB is seven yards or more behind the center on 3rd and 5 and the snap goes over the QBs head and he runs back and falls on it, it will count as a sack and that yardage then comes off the passing totals. But take the same formation and call it 4th and 5 with the QB seven or more yards behind the center and the snap goes over his head and he runs back and falls on it, that will come off of the rushing totals only because of the down.

Sudden Sam wrote:

Killian wrote: The NFL counts sacks against passing totals, I don't see a reason why the NCAA can't do the same.

On that subject, why is there a difference as far as catching the ball inbounds? Make the rule the same in college and the NFL...either one foot in or both feet in.

Why the difference?

How about the NCAA keeps its rules, and the candy-ass NFL can do whatever the fuck they want?

Should we move the hash marks to the middle of the field and make them meaningless to the strategy of the game, like the candy-ass league too?

Sudden Sam wrote:

Killian wrote: The NFL counts sacks against passing totals, I don't see a reason why the NCAA can't do the same.

On that subject, why is there a difference as far as catching the ball inbounds? Make the rule the same in college and the NFL...either one foot in or both feet in.

Why the difference?

Lots of differences in the NFL and NCAA rules. The one foot vs two is one of the 5 most obvious. The reason they are different is that the NFL competition committee made up of owners sets the NFL rules and a panel of college coaches set the NCAA rules.

Left Seater wrote:Lots of differences in the NFL and NCAA rules. The one foot vs two is one of the 5 most obvious.

Hmmmmm....

1.) 1 foot vs 2 feet for a catch
2.) No need to touch a runner down (i.e., down as soon as his knee hits)
3.) Clock stops on first down
4.)No two minute warning in college
5.) PI is 15 yards (if play is greater than 15 yards) vs. spot foul

Are these considered the 5 most obvious, or were you just throwing the #5 out there?

You pretty much nailed it.

Funny thing is the NFL follows some NCAA changes and the NCAA follows the NFL on others. Can't say one is leading the way.

I agree they should unify the rules. The NFL should adopt NCAA rules, except for the lame auto-ejection for targeting (good rule on paper, but seems to become a travesty in actual use, and is way too random - not blaming the officials, it just becomes a little too subjective to give players the boot over).

Sudden Sam wrote:I don't see any safety issues involved in any of the differences. Just seems like it's be simpler to match the rules.

Can you imagine the minor leagues in baseball playing by different rules than the majors?

Shocker, they do.

See designated hitter, see double headers, see the baseballs themselves, see unearned runs becoming earned, see substitutions in rookie and single A ball, etc, etc, etc.

Killian wrote:

Left Seater wrote:Lots of differences in the NFL and NCAA rules. The one foot vs two is one of the 5 most obvious.

Hmmmmm....

1.) 1 foot vs 2 feet for a catch
2.) No need to touch a runner down (i.e., down as soon as his knee hits)
3.) Clock stops on first down
4.)No two minute warning in college
5.) PI is 15 yards (if play is greater than 15 yards) vs. spot foul

Are these considered the 5 most obvious, or were you just throwing the #5 out there?

One of the obvious ones is the ball placement after a touchback on kickoffs.

Mikey you are correct and we could add to that the restraining line for kickoffs.

And the spotting of the ball on a PAT/2 point try.

True.

Kicking in the NFL is much easier than it is in the NCAA game with the wider hashes.

Papa Willie wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I think we both know the "3-loss" Bama thing is overblown since you guys had a lot of injuries that year, and got everybody back healthy for the bowl game, but yeah, compared to this year's unit, that defense does not measure up.

But you got beat by an SEC team. How in the fuck could that have happened?

Go peddle that boolsheet somewhere else, Tubby.

#1 I never thought MSU would win that game.
#2 MSU beat the last SEC team they played; a team that returned the bulk of those same players and was literally one play away at Bama's goal line from playing for an MNC.
#3 I'm not anti-SEC guy. At least, not to the extent I don't recognize it as the best conference. I think my posting history reflects that.
#4 Can't we just have ONE thread that doesn't degenerate into an SEC slurp fest? We get it already, you're good at football. So much so, you're willing to suck at everything else in life.