Unverified Voracity Wonders About The Bearded Lady?
Last call for XMas tales. PEOPLE OF EARTH: FAILURE IS IMMINENT. No, this isn't about Dave Brandon. This is about YOU. If you order TODAY a copy of Hail To Old Blue will get to its proper location by Christmas.
Or you can pick up a copy at Underground Printing, Literati, or Nicola's. All of them are fine establishments containing our book. Literati also has unauthorized copies of Crag Ross's books. (To be clear: they are unauthorized by Literati, because Craig just signs them and drops them off.)
The inscrutable crocodile. As the kind of person who sits in his bunker and plots various ways to destroy my mortal enemy Instagram whilst almost entirely ignoring the NFL, this insane thing has eluded my attention for far longer than anything that could cause this picture to exist should:
Tom Brady's slow descent into madness is now manifesting itself as a series of bizarre webcomics that involve centaur, jockey, and Captain Planet versions of Brady himself, some sort of pudgy leprechaun who is about to touch his nipples, Walker Space Ranger, a crocodile dressed like Captain Picard during a holodeck episode, several anime animals engaging in some sort of... activity, and—most bizarrely—Gronk in a lab coat pouring what I can only assume is trademarked, patented GronkJuice(tm) onto a chicken wing.
That paragraph was one sentence.
Anyway. This clearly needs a crack investigative team breaking down the ins, outs, what-have-yous, and thoughtcrimes being committed. Charlotte Wilder was born for this job.
- Speaking of lasers, the plans inside the Dolphins’ briefcase appear to be for some sort of giant, inter-galactic laser.
- Oh my god, do you think that because I’ve been imagining that the social media room underneath a TB12 workout facility looks like a lair, they drew a lair?
- Sorry, I know this isn’t about me.
- Is that guy wearing a lab coat by the picture of Ben Steeler Gronk?
- Yes, because in the comic after the Houston win, Gronk showed up wearing that same lab coat. He’s also wearing glasses and says, “the computer data is telling me...”
- Get it? It’s funny because Gronk is not generally seen as a rocket scientist. They were in space then. Now they’re underwater. Or possibly underground.
I think that's a compliment? I don't know. She did a really good job analyzing this nonsense Tom Brady webcomic? Hell, I've covered the last 14 years of Michigan football. I have no room to criticize.
Speaking of NFL things that don't make any sense. This isn't a catch, people! Why are you mad about this?
Steelers potential game winning TD ruled NOT a catch. WOW. pic.twitter.com/cE6lHTnObk
— LeadingNFL ™ (@LeadingNFL) December 18, 2017
Any player that hasn't clearly established themselves as a runner has to maintain control through contact through the ground and this dude certainly did not do that. Even the current 65-page version of the catch rule the NFL deploys isn't at fault here. This particular incident was even explained with poetic beauty!
“The receiver, in the end zone, did not survive the ground,” was the explanation on the field by referee Tony Corrente.
Damn, Tony Corrente.
The problem is nobody knows what a damn catch is. Here's a four part catch rule that is as unambiguous as is possible (for the NFL) and solves many many problems:
- A receiver has to secure the ball and get both feet down in bounds to start the catch process.
- Once he takes a step after both feet come down he is a runner and has caught the ball.
- Receivers who do not take a step between possessing the ball and either going to ground or touching out of bounds must maintain possession through contact with the ground.
- Maintaining possession means the ball does not touch the ground. If the receiver is now out of bounds and he bobbles the ball, forcing the catch process to start over, it's incomplete.
The end. The above-linked SBN article has a controversial Dez Bryant non-catch that this version of the rule makes crystal clear:
Catch, step, runner, complete. No controversy. Steelers' play above: no step, ball touches ground, incomplete, no controversy.
There will of course be edge cases where the situation at the moment of possession makes it unclear whether a catch is a catch, but those four steps are the clearest and least controversial a catch rule can be. If you wanted to go even farther towards clarity you could let a catch stand if 1) the WR got his feet in bounds and 2) the ball never hit the turf even if there was a bobble after the WR went out. I think that's not a catch but if you said it was then it's pretty simple: did you keep the ball off the ground after establishing a foot (or two) in bounds? Yes? Catch.
The quintessential Bush blitz. Blitzology—hey!—breaks it down.
Really interesting and effective pressure concept from Michigan defensive coordinator Don Brown. The Wolverines are in a 3-3 nickel personnel package.
The Rush:
The front slides the 3 down linemen to the strong side and has all 3 LB's walked up to the weak side. The Mike is initially in a 3 point stance.
The effect is a 4 man version of America's Blitz. The Will wraps around to the fill the role of the inside rusher in the America's blitz concept. Because the defense bluffs the weak side overload the protection doesn't identify the concept as America's blitz and pass it off. The RB is forced into a really difficult block, scanning all the way back across the formation to pick up the Will as he wraps around.
Frequently the "N" was actually Noah Furbush, but that wrap blitz was largely responsible for Bush's blazing start to the season. Teams did adapt, but then Michigan threw other stuff—largely Khaleke Hudson—at the opposition.
To be fair, this is correct about 20% of the time. Whoops, Tampa Bay Times:
Although... that appears to be an ad, which means the Outback Bowl itself doesn't know who's in this year's game. Which is fine. I mean. It's the Outback Bowl. No1curr. Except MSU fans.
Good lord, dude. ASU AD Ray Anderson is rapidly charging up the ranks of Most Incompetent AD Ever, and he's got the bravura of a Wall Street trader to go with it:
"The athletic department there is perceived there as a cluster," Sun Devils athletic director Ray Anderson said. "Their athletic director, now Phil Fulmer, in the athletic director's world is a pariah. It is not a good situation."
Their AD is a cluster? Bruh.
Do I hear a senior season? ESPN's latest draft rankings have Mo Wagner #68 despite his clearly improved rebounding and... possibly improved defense. We've seen guys (GRIII most prominently) leave one year after they put their name in but withdrew, and that's always a possibility. But if Wagner's leaving after the year it's probably not for the lottery.
Don't expect Rashan Gary to fall in the same boat, though.
Some bad grades. Since all we get these day from PFF are glimpses you don't get a lot of negatives unless the situation—cough cough, OL—absolutely demands it. South Carolina's 24/7 site is looking for weaknesses in the Michigan D, though, and they came up with:
Defensive end Carlo Kemp (49.9) - A sophomore who is listed as a backup, Kemp has played 367 snaps on defense. He has graded out at 48.2 against the run and 55.6 in pass rush.
Linebacker Noah Furbush (50.6) - Furbush is also listed as a backup and has played 138 snaps this season. He’s performed much better against the run grading out at 64.6 and has struggled in coverage at 45.9.
Two backups. (I think they might have flipped those snap counts, FWIW. Furbush got way more snaps than Kemp this year.) The conceit of this post is "three at the top and three at the bottom," but...
The “Three at the top” needed to be expanded to five as each player listed graded out as “elite,” a designation given to players who achieve an 85.0 or higher. The “Three near the bottom” was cut to two given that no other player with 75 or more snaps played had a grade below 70.
...ain't nobody else at the bottom. The five elite guys are Hurst, Winovich, Hudson, Bush, and Hill, all of whom are at 87 or better.
Yes, this means that PFF is also grading Michigan's safeties well. Metellus's rough OSU game had a lot of internet people waving Brian Smith goodbye happily because they thought Metellus and Kinnel were bad. They were not. They were good. A B+ unit.
Etc.: Ann Arbor average home price went up 8% this year; went up 11% last year. Again, I apologize to Juggalos for comparing them to Michigan State fans. Good luck at the Supreme Court, Juggalos. Harbaugh visits the tiny town of Garber, is greeted like movie star. Pioneer parking makes bank.
December 19th, 2017 at 1:33 PM ^
The Blitzology post is specifically looking at the overload look UM used multiple times last year. In this case the N is Hurst, the E over the nose is actually Winovich, and Gary is the E on the outside. Winovich is on the head up over center for two reasons: 1) if the LBs are coming, you basically have a OG forced to block Hurst and the other side of the line worried about the overload, which means you are taking both OGs away from the Center and forcing a Center to 1v1 block Winovich in a bit of space; 2) If the LBs drop into coverage, that player has to get all the way to the sideline to prevent a quick QB escape (though he has some help from the squatting C who will have some eyes in the backfield). But as Brian noted, they also ran a similar scheme from the 3-3 look where Furbush would attack the same gap as the N above and Bush would loop around (typically from LB depth).
Regarding Furbush's grade to PFF, he was weak in coverage, but was rarely used there because that wasn't generally his role. His role was more or less to occupy blockers to allow other players to get penetration. He was basically the "blow up the shield" guy that used to be deployed on kickoffs. That means he wasn't typically making plays, he wasn't typically in position to make plays, he wasn't typically beating blockers. His job was to set up others to do that. His a role player, and that's fine, he basically did what he was assigned to do without going above and beyond.
Kemp more consistently struggled, unfortunately. But he's still a young player too.
December 19th, 2017 at 6:27 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 1:37 PM ^
Brian, completely agree with your rule. But in that case, doesn't this make Dez's play incomplete as well? He jumps, catches, and gets 2 feet down. After his second foot touches, he starts to fall to the ground meaning he'd have to survive the ground which he doesn't. I don't find his 3rd point of contact which is basically his toe dragging the ground to be a move towards running
December 19th, 2017 at 1:43 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 2:47 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 3:17 PM ^
"Harbaugh at Garber five times fast"
that was even easier....
December 19th, 2017 at 1:48 PM ^
i dont understand why the NFL rule cant just be like the college rule only two feet instead of one? instead we have this confusing crap
December 19th, 2017 at 2:22 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 1:48 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 3:00 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 3:22 PM ^
He got drafted in the first round. Anyone 'questioning' that is not doing so for rational reasons.
December 19th, 2017 at 2:05 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 2:46 PM ^
But, I have to say that RedZone can be downright addicting. Especially in the second halves of the early and late afternoon windows.
It’s almost like watching the first few days of the NCAA tournament. 6 games on at once, 3 or so are close, with almost constant action. It’s the best way to watch IMO.
December 19th, 2017 at 8:50 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 2:11 PM ^
Being in the business, I thought I would splain a little about that Outback Bowl screwup.
First, I think it's likely the ad is coming from Ticketmaster, not the OB itself.
Second, what the paper ran is referred to as a "pickup", meaning an instruction to the paper to pickup the creative materials that remain on file from the last time this advertiser ran with this paper. So, somebody at Ticketmaster's agency made the mistake of filling out the "materials" column with "pickup" instead of "new". Often, the order is placed well in advance of having materials ready. "New" would have told the paper to wait for materials before running anything. And, to be fair, somebody at the paper didn't bother to double check what they were putting into production, but that person might have been football-ignorant anyway.
Third, I would hate to be Ticketmaster's agency, what with hundreds if not thousands of different ads running in different markets every day. They're going to make mistakes and the tedium of dollar-a-holler insertion ordering would drive us crazy.
December 19th, 2017 at 2:16 PM ^
informative and cool information!! :) :)
December 19th, 2017 at 3:00 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 8:47 PM ^
That sounds like a euphemism for the world's oldest profession.
December 19th, 2017 at 2:14 PM ^
1. Ball secure
2. Both feet down.
Catch.
If he falls out of bounds and bobbles it, who cares. He had it with both feet down before. Still a catch. If he hits the ground in bounds and loses it, fumble.
These nuances they use are just crazy and way too subjective.
December 19th, 2017 at 2:32 PM ^
The problem with the catch rule isn't that it's incomprehensible, or can't be parsed. The problem is that it doesn't align with people's expectations of what should be a catch.
If a guy catches the ball in his hands, turns, lunges, and extends, like both James and Bryant did, just about anyone who isn't aware of the intricacies of the rule would say that should be a catch. But the rule doesn't align with that.
My simple suggestion is to consider an intentional extension of the ball to be a "football move," in addition to what currently constitutes a football move. That would seem to fix this issue to everyone's satisfaction.
December 19th, 2017 at 2:33 PM ^
My concern with "ball touching ground" rules (control, contact, whatever) is that this has resulted in the lion's share of reviews because the receiver will land on it with a forearms-under-the-ball form they're all coached to have and then everyone spends the next ten damn minutes squinting at the shaded area under the player's torso from different angles to see if the ball wiggled a bit, and then making a near-arbitrary decision. It's maddening.
My change is this: You need to be in bounds, in control, and if prone, UNDER THE BALL. If you land on it, we're not going to review it -- it's incomplete. Done, move on. Learn to keep the ball up or twist your body underneath it but stop the damn cheating by tucking it in your arms and then landing on it and hoping the ref doesn't notice that you literally just sandwiched the ball between your chestplate and the turf.
Yes, it fundamentally changes what people traditionally perceive as a catch. Yes, it makes catches more difficult. But it does make it much easier to officiate consistently, the rule affects everyone equally, and it will end at least half of these stupid reviews.
December 19th, 2017 at 9:16 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 2:34 PM ^
The Dez play should not be ruled a catch using Brian's rules. He catches the ball in the air and then takes two steps which count towards getting two feet down. He then goes to the ground and the ball is knocked loose. There is no step between getting both feet down and going to the ground.
December 19th, 2017 at 5:11 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 2:38 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 8:14 PM ^
December 19th, 2017 at 2:44 PM ^
Brian, I may have missed this back at the beginning of the year, but was there a specific reason you guys stopped subscribing to PFF? Seems good to have more data points than less when making an analysis.
Comments