ADVERTISEMENT

More Trouble Brewing in Ann Arbor?

Does that mean you're finally going to ignore me? That would be phenomenal. You can then only talk about me nonstop and then forget you're ignoring me and still respond like others.
I don't put posters on ignore, but I am done with you. I will read your boring arrogant bs and laugh about what a sad life you must have to spend so much time posting on a PSU football board.
 
Ryan Day changed the complexion of OSU. Even when Meyer has good passers, running the ball was important including the QB running the ball. Day's philosophy was more pure passing. He stopped recruiting run blocking guards and replaced with more agile pass blockers. He left the window open for Harbaugh to make a strategic win. When UM won in 2021, there was no sign stealing. UM ran the ball right down OSU's throat.
Trey Sermon ran for about 200 yards against both Northwestern [big ten West champion] and Clemson in 2020. I believe. What went wrong at Ohio State was hiring Kerry Combs as defensive coordinator. [Legend coaching defensive backs, completely incompetent defensive coordinator] One guy from Oregon State had 2 runs over 50 yards against Ohio State and about 20 the next week. Multiple teams had huge plays against OSU defense.

2021 Michigan win can be ascribed to having to fire Combs about 4 games into the season and having someone who was merely a defensive analyst take over the defensive coordinator position. Michigan took advantage of OSU's disarray, but it was a highly unusual situation. In 2022 a new system not totally absorbed by the players but no excuses for losing to Michigan.
 
I don't put posters on ignore, but I am done with you. I will read your boring arrogant bs and laugh about what a sad life you must have to spend so much time posting on a PSU football board.
We'll see how long that last.
You're also posting on a Penn State football board...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bluehair666
I have engaged the fool on several occasions. Usually when I am bored, have time, and reached a point where I can't tolerate the obvious bs.


I am so glad I put the bozo on ignore months ago but I must say that it is hysterical and gratifying watching multiple posters (yourself included) absolutely own the idiot without seeing a word he/she/it has written.

Bravo to you, UNC and all the others who have turned the tables and exposed the fool.
 
This question has been batted around on this and the previous forum for YEARS. Many of the B10 acolytes have moved on but we were bombarded with how great this conference is for library sharing or some esoteric nonsense. Funny that now that things are getting hot for them UMich is asking the same questions. Welcome to our world.
 
You are just as guilty. You are intelligent and often make good points but you continuously get involved in hours long trivial/insult bullshit.

Be a man….a mature man…. post germane to the topic and ignore the insults and BS.

Soon, I will put you and all the fools that go on long rants all on ignore. It’s disgusting to have to scroll through dozens of immature shut to find a quality post worth reading.
I finally put him on ignore today. It totally cleared up the board for me.
 
You did not comprehend my argument. First, I say that plays are changed up far more frequently than what is claimed. The 2nd is teams always have multiple dummys. Even if the play is known, you don't know which caller is real and which is the fake. Even if you figure out after the fact who the play caller is, you still do not know who the play caller is for the next play. I see no reason why signals can't be changed in game. Most plays have a run/pass option. Flip run and pass. The only advantage I see to knowing signals for a game is the psychology of the staff that did it for that game.
Are you feverish? All that changing you suggested. Do you believe that the majority of players are Mensa members? Half of them can’t remember to run non complex routes or who they’re supposed to block or which way to slant on defense from play to play. That’s why the overwhelming majority of coaches are so upset about UM’s sign stealing escapade. The changes you’re describing are a great deal less encompassing than you imagine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Psubiomed
Now we’re getting somewhere. True or not this is the first affirmative defense for UM in the story. However color me suspicious if the next blurb states that G. Gordon Stalions is just a hologram created by UM haters.
No defense for UM at all. The tweet is just poking fun at a desperate UM message board post claiming AI.
 
No defense for UM at all. The tweet is just poking fun at a desperate UM message board post claiming AI.
Okay it’s really late and I’m tired so I won’t go into full blown assault mode when one of my remarks is misleading. I was being sarcastic, should have appended the proper emoji. As a legitimate defense that would have been really piss pour, but honestly I have seen worse.
 
You did not comprehend my argument. First, I say that plays are changed up far more frequently than what is claimed. The 2nd is teams always have multiple dummys. Even if the play is known, you don't know which caller is real and which is the fake. Even if you figure out after the fact who the play caller is, you still do not know who the play caller is for the next play. I see no reason why signals can't be changed in game. Most plays have a run/pass option. Flip run and pass. The only advantage I see to knowing signals for a game is the psychology of the staff that did it for that game.
Apparently, I understood your argument just fine. Read your own last sentence: "The only advantage I see to knowing signals for a game the psychology the staff that did it for that game." That is really close to saying that you think that knowing the plays has no impact on the game with the caveat that it may help the psychology of the staff that is doing it. They know the plays and that allows them to eliminate the other plays and the myriad of options that go with them, but that doesn't matter because the play they know is being called has options within it. Limiting possibilities and things that the defense has to account for doesn't help the defense other than giving them a mental edge. Besides, once the other team knows that their opponent is stealing their signs and therefore, knows what plays are coming, they change their signals, and eliminate any advantage, which, as we have already established, is purely psychological. Got it.
 
Last edited:
No matter what, After this year, Michigan is a 6-6 program for the next 3 years.

I respectfully disagree. They’re a good program with lots of talent. They may revert more to the mean if Harbs leaves but they’ll still be decent in that 8-4 to 10-2 range most years with the occasional 11-1. Very similar to Penn State in many ways.
 
In 2015-2019, UM and PSU had essentially the same conference record. UM was generally playing for the Big10 East championship going into the OSU game. If UM was a middling program, so was PSU. If UM stunk in 2020, so did PSU. PSU had a losing record also. You also do not pay attention to games. Hutchinson and Paye both had season ending injuries early. David Obayo was a project still trying to figure what football was. Everything was messed up in 2020.

You also fail to account for changes in OSU's program. Ryan Day changed the complexion of OSU. Even when Meyer has good passers, running the ball was important including the QB running the ball. Day's philosophy was more pure passing. He stopped recruiting run blocking guards and replaced with more agile pass blockers. He left the window open for Harbaugh to make a strategic win. When UM won in 2021, there was no sign stealing. UM ran the ball right down OSU's throat. The 2nd half was one of the most transparent halves I have watched. What was there like four passes? In 2022, OSU was the better team but Day panicked. If there is any conclusion to make is Meyer is a better in game head coach than Day. Does not help that McNamera and McCarthy made plays previous QB's could not.
I think you need to pay attention to games as well. Hutchinson did not play but Paye was credited with tackles against PSU in 2020. The point is that UM had alot of NFL caliber talent and suddenly switched gears after years of mediocrity. Of course PSU was middling as well. We got trounced with scholarship reductions that decimated program for years. UM should have as well as Bo/Anderson molestation scandal was horrendous yet swept under rug by media and UM (who did not do true investigation and settled for 1/2 billion with victims like Bo's son). OSU has nothing to do with this. When talent is somewhat even, then several plays basically decide outcome. UM obviously engaged in illegal tactics to gain any advantage possible. We lost to UM in 2021 late in the 4th. Have to wonder if sign-stealing impacted those plays.
 
In 2015-2019, UM and PSU had essentially the same conference record. UM was generally playing for the Big10 East championship going into the OSU game.

They weren’t playing for a division title against osu in 2015 (msu won the division), 2017 (Michigan already had 3 losses prior to the game), or 2019 (Michigan already had 2 losses). Twice in five years is “generally”?

I’d say they generally weren’t playing for jack in the game over that time period.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister
Now that I'm thinking about it, how do you forensic analysis without a baseline? You can't use previous years since the players on the teams are different. Wouldn't you have to have a sample from when signs weren't being stolen and a sample when they were? Would the TCU game count as a possible sample for when they weren't or would the fact that UM and TCU didn't play a game where UM could steal the signs rule it out?
You do not need any past games. Just ask the question who had the right play call. If what you say is true, Michigan linebackers will be crashing the line if a run, and dropping back if a pass, and/or a run blitz will be on, or a pass blitz. Count up RPS. If what you say is true, it should obvious.

Michigan lost to TCU because McCarthy threw 2 pick sixs, there was fumble on 1st and one, and Harbaugh made a questionable play call on 4th down. That is a 28 point swing.
 
The main concern is whether media is going to pressure CMU. The AD had plenty of time to respond if person was someone else. The limit is 50 passes for that type of sideline access. Nearly all go to HC, assistant coaches, trainers, equipment, medical staff etc. Can't be more than 5 leftover. This is not difficult. On Chippewas forum, they are fearful that AD knows CMU coaches were complicit with UM staff. They are trying to delay and hope it goes away. They are trying to come up with a defense if that does not work. Hope the media stays vigilant.
 
So, in baseball "pitching is about deception" and knowing what was coming helped the batters. The same concept applies to football, but you don't seem to agree with that. The Astros didn't "know the breaking ball wasn't going to be a strike." Breaking balls are thrown for strikes all the time. The Astro batters knew by the beats on the can what pitch was coming - fastball, breaking pitch, change-up, etc. and sat on the pitch. The case against the Astros went far beyond statistical analysis and included a lot of evidence on how they did it, so any suggestion that the case was made by statistical analysis is simply wrong. Some statistical evidence was available after the fact because the Astros were only able to steal signs at home. One could compare home/road stats for the batters then at how specific batters performed against specific pitchers in similar situations. Any attempt at analyzing the effectiveness of the Astros cheating against generic statistics for all of baseball would have been worthless since you wouldn't be comparing like samples. For example, I would expect Jose Altuve to hit better than most MLB 2B; it's only when you compare Altuve against Altuve that you get any meaningful information. That said, none of it mattered because, even without any statistical support, the evidence showed that committed serious violations. Whether their efforts resulted in tangible benefits was and is irrelevant.

You want some analysis of whether UM's performance is statistically possible, but that can only be determined by looking at UM, not analysis of other teams. Like the Astros, UM is very good, so one would expect them to be better than most other teams. You can't say they did benefit by looking at Purdue or Rutgers data and can't say they didn't by looking at UGA. The question, to the degree that's even relevant, is "how much better did they do by knowing the opponent's plays than they would have if they didn't" and there's no way to learn that by looking at any team other than UM.
In the specific case of 2017 Game 7, Yu Darvish was perplexed how the Astro hitters were able to lay off his breaking pitch. What makes a great breaking ball pitcher is not whether he can throw for a strike, but he can make his breaking pitch look like a fastball. They look foolish swinging for something way out. Its the same with a split fingered fastball. The best way to get a hitter out is not throwing strikes but inducing a hitter to swing at a pitch out of the strike zone. Watch Games 3 and 7 of the World Series and count the number of times Astro hitters lay off.

You can do the same thing in football. If UM knows its run, are they run blitzing? If its a pass on attempted PA are they pass blitzing or dropping linebackers into coverage? Is the primary target bracketed? You can count RPS by looking at the formation. Just like we can count the times Astro hitters laid off a pitch that should look like a strike, we should be able to count the times Michigan has defensive players in strangely the right place.

It is the same as card counting in black jack. If you are the dealer and I ask for a hit on 18, and it comes up 3, you are going to know I'm counting.
 
On Chippewas forum, they are fearful that AD knows CMU coaches were complicit with UM staff. They are trying to delay and hope it goes away. They are trying to come up with a defense if that does not work.
This is exactly why they aren't saying much
He didn't just randomly end up on their sideline
CMU shouldn't disclose anything until forced to by the NCAA as they have nothing to gain by talking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bluehair666
Devastating reporting from Bruce Feldman. Said that he and other reporters at the Athletic asked coaches how much of a difference this cheating made to the outcome and for them to rate it on a scale of 1 to 5. 95% of the coaches rated it as a 3 or above. Some coaches said it could given the cheaters a 21 point advantage in a game. Most of the coaches thought the cheating was very serious. Starts at minute 3 of Youtube video.

The spread is UM by 2.5. Using your logic you are save at PSU by 18.5. Let's play it safe and call it PSU by 14. You have an opportunity to be a very wealthy person.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bluehair666
The main concern is whether media is going to pressure CMU. The AD had plenty of time to respond if person was someone else. The limit is 50 passes for that type of sideline access. Nearly all go to HC, assistant coaches, trainers, equipment, medical staff etc. Can't be more than 5 leftover. This is not difficult. On Chippewas forum, they are fearful that AD knows CMU coaches were complicit with UM staff. They are trying to delay and hope it goes away. They are trying to come up with a defense if that does not work. Hope the media stays vigilant.

Even if they were, I’m not sure what rule they would have broken. Is it an actually written in the rule book you’re not allowed to have given a field pass to someone on the staff at another school?
 
The spread is UM by 2.5. Using your logic you are save at PSU by 18.5. Let's play it safe and call it PSU by 14. You have an opportunity to be a very wealthy person.
Nice deflection. I was just quoting others (coaches) who were saying that Michigan's cheating provided a significant advantage. How much I don't know, but it being signifcant, Michigan should be penalized substantially.
 
Are you feverish? All that changing you suggested. Do you believe that the majority of players are Mensa members? Half of them can’t remember to run non complex routes or who they’re supposed to block or which way to slant on defense from play to play. That’s why the overwhelming majority of coaches are so upset about UM’s sign stealing escapade. The changes you’re describing are a great deal less encompassing than you imagine.
You only need one individual to know the sign. I think it is straight forward for a P5 QB to memorize a new set of signs.
 
They weren’t playing for a division title against osu in 2015 (msu won the division), 2017 (Michigan already had 3 losses prior to the game), or 2019 (Michigan already had 2 losses). Twice in five years is “generally”?

I’d say they generally weren’t playing for jack in the game over that time period.
The 2015 season was a play for away from going into the OSU undefeated in the Big10. They were certainly comparable to PSU. Yes OSU was the toast of the Big10. But your adjective of middling is a bit of an overreaction. It pretty much means the only non-middling Big10 team was OSU.
 
Apparently, I understood your argument just fine. Read your own last sentence: "The only advantage I see to knowing signals for a game the psychology the staff that did it for that game." That is really close to saying that you think that knowing the plays has no impact on the game with the caveat that it may help the psychology of the staff that is doing it. They know the plays and that allows them to eliminate the other plays and the myriad of options that go with them, but that doesn't matter because the play they know is being called has options within it. Limiting possibilities and things that the defense has to account for doesn't help the defense other than giving them a mental edge. Besides, once the other team knows that their opponent is stealing their signs and therefore, knows what plays are coming, they change their signals, and eliminate any advantage, which, as we have already established, is purely psychological. Got it.
The psychology is in attempting to figure out patterns in how signs might be constructed. I am of the opinion that P5 colleges change up at least some of their signs every week. Even if you know the sign, which of the three play callers is the right one? I am saying that if someone watches a game, tapes the signs, they might see patterns from game to game. It does not help. You could even mess with a team by the call being brought in by the new personal and none of them are right.
 
The 2015 season was a play for away from going into the OSU undefeated in the Big10. They were certainly comparable to PSU. Yes OSU was the toast of the Big10. But your adjective of middling is a bit of an overreaction. It pretty much means the only non-middling Big10 team was OSU.

Where did I use the word middling? I took exception with you saying the game was generally a de facto big ten east championship game when more often than not Michigan would not have won the division regardless of outcome…
 
Nice deflection. I was just quoting others (coaches) who were saying that Michigan's cheating provided a significant advantage. How much I don't know, but it being signifcant, Michigan should be penalized substantially.
The coaches know best. Don't worry about Michigan being penalized. Make your money.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bluehair666
I respectfully disagree. They’re a good program with lots of talent. They may revert more to the mean if Harbs leaves but they’ll still be decent in that 8-4 to 10-2 range most years with the occasional 11-1. Very similar to Penn State in many ways.
Maybe...the scholarship losses will kill them in many ways but if enough players stay you might be on point
 
Nice deflection. I was just quoting others (coaches) who were saying that Michigan's cheating provided a significant advantage. How much I don't know, but it being signifcant, Michigan should be penalized substantially.
Penn State can win the game by simply playing up to the talent level of it's team. That's not false.
 
The coaches know best. Don't worry about Michigan being penalized. Make your money.
Make excuses and deflect from the blatant and systemic cheating of your Michigan man. Who incidentally claimed that he had no knowledge (lied about) of what was going on about 3 weeks ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Psubiomed
Even if they were, I’m not sure what rule they would have broken. Is it an actually written in the rule book you’re not allowed to have given a field pass to someone on the staff at another school?
Um, he was not officially invited and was dressed in CMU coaching costume. There is video of a blue light on his sunglasses which indicates a recording device was used. No rule violated? Why do all that? Even better, why can't CJF go stand on Purdue sideline openly if this is above board? Perhaps he can catch flight after Terp game
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT