text:
Did they got rid of wobbling? I'm somehow reluctant to turn those videos on otherwise.
Really, this was one thing destroying the immersion for me, when I watched EVE videos the last time - really nice views generally, but eventually some massive object showing up that inevitably wobbles when hit, when it couldn't possibly wobble like that. If you want to, have in the close-up view a visible blastwave going through the structure (could be merely approximate), jets of plasma and debris through ports of presuma
I was thinking more about the "shake" of gargantuan vessels...
It's especially funny when you consider that according to their canon, each one of those ships is crewed by hundreds of people.
One thing that I find extremely irritating is how much TV time is spent televising sports - half the news programs here are about sports, there are many hours of TV time dedicated to sorts, not to mention whole free to air sports channels.
After discussing this sad fact with my girlfriend just this weekend, we came to the conclusion that the reason why there is so much sport on TV versus say, coverage of computer games etc, is that of course sports events offer advertising agencies huge amounts of revenue, w
I'm surprised more game companies aren't taking advantage of streaming and even static online video. If you look around youtube, most of the game videos are "Let's Play's" or other fan material, not official content. Maybe they don't think it's worth the effort.
Check out the Just Cause 2 "Anatomy of a Stunt" videos:
#1 of the series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gc38RBNz0xI [youtube.com]
Just Cause 2 user channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/OfficialJustCause2 [youtube.com]
I'm glad to see this. I've been playing EVE lately, but I just can't get into it. The things that make EVE stand out to me are the single player-controlled universe and the lack of XP grinding. But (and I'm not trying to troll, here) I find the user interface to be excruciatingly bad, and most of the time I am wondering what I should be doing. You could argue that a user interface and having a supply of fun stuff to do are two cardinal properties of a good game. It seems EVE is calibrated for players that h
It's lots and lots of grinding for money so you can experience a battle for a few minutes and then you're back to 10h of grinding. It's hard to find a fair player, most of them will try to scam you in any way possible. Honorable players are rare. It's next to impossible to [find] a fair fight. There are definitely great moments in game, but the amount of negativity is overwhelming and that is the reason so many people leave after trial runs out. Even those who have full accounts take breaks and often complain of boredom. It has a very low ratio of fun/"time invested".
sounds strikingly similar to my life.
It's lots and lots of grinding for money so you can experience a battle for a few minutes and then you're back to 10h of grinding.
Then you're doing at wrong. When your character is still young and you're still inexperienced you should be flying cheap crap. Especially if you join a corp(like mine) that specializes in pvp you can still make a contribution even in a simple rifter with a total cost of less than 1 million, and any corpmate can have a 100 of those for you in 2 mouse clicks.
One mistake a lot of EVE players make is to assume that bigger is better. Each and every ship in the game fills a particular niche, and the tournament shows this off quite well.
Still, in my line of work we sit on gates for hours waiting for someone we don't know is actually at his computer to undock his ship. I guess you could call that grinding as well
> Still, in my line of work we sit on gates for hours waiting for someone we don't know is actually at his computer to undock his ship. I guess you could call that grinding as well
As someone who does not play EVE, I don't even know if you mean real work or EVE stuff.
> People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Pro tip: Delete your sig.
Still, in my line of work we sit on gates for hours waiting for someone we don't know is actually at his computer to undock his ship. I guess you could call that grinding as well
IRL, I used to fly hang gliders. The problem was the "hang waiting" where you sat on a cliff and stared at the sky for hours, waiting for the wind to turn. It was much like playing Eve: sitting at a gate waiting, like you say. The first few times it was exciting - a real battle, real money at stake. Then... time to go to bed. It's 3am and I just wasted my evening for nothing.
Don't run highsec missions unless you like doing them. Get into a corp asap. Personally I'm loving living in wormholes.
Perhaps check out Red vs Blue, Eve Uni or Faction Warfare for fights asap in cheap fun ships.
I'm glad to see this. I've been playing EVE lately, but I just can't get into it. [...] When you get a fresh WoW account you're off to the woods killing Kobolds or whatever right away, and maybe it is not totally challenging, but there's always something to do, somewhere to go, and pretty things to look at. But in EVE the first few *days* are mostly doing boring agent missions where you don't really even do anything (at least in WoW you have to click on the damned Kobold) except fly around and learn to use
Check out PlanetSide:
Pure PvP FPS
133 vs. 133 vs. 133 players per continent. There are several continents.
No grinding, you fight for something and level up as a result.
No economy, trading or currency (thus no gold farmers, no twinking, no gold selling, no economy to corrupt)
Cert systems means no noobstomping and shallow power curve (my 6 year character can't just one click kill your 1 day character)
Huge maps, but not huge in the same sense as EVE. You can get from anywhere to anywhere else in a few minutes
The UI is horribly bad. This is universally accepted by the player base. When in doubt right click.
"So find a drink, whip up some snacks, watch the shiny explosions, and listen to the soothing words of player experts as they walk you through the action!"
You mean I actually have to play the game? No, thanks. The only thing better than playing a MMORPG like Eve is watching someone else play it. Better yet, anyone have a live stream of themselves watching the live stream? Don't want to get too close to the action my heart may explode LOL!
They at least need to be tested to see if they know how to pronounce the ship model names... no, you don't pronounce the 'C' in Scimitar!
If you don't play the game, the commentary is hilariously incomprehensible. If your drink is alcoholic, or your snack is pot brownies, that alone is pretty entertaining. It's also done over some sub-Skype crappy VOIP system.
Of course the images are equally incomprehensible.
And the commentary is even more incomprehensible if you do play the game... wtf these player 'experts' came from is beyond me and anyone I know in-game...
I agree. I watched the commentary and I expected a lot more then just describing what I could see with my eyes.
Rather then describing the action, "Oh that Scimitar is taking damage." "The Scimitar is down."
How about why it is taking damage, what is being used to make it take damage, and how is it part of the teams strategy to go after that ship first? How about a description of the abilities? How about anything besides what a 6 year old could tell me by looking at the health bars?
It left a bad taste in my m
EVE online has many critics with very valid points, but never in my life have I had a PvP experience like in EVE. I've been gaming for over 20 years and never before EVE had I had a genuine fight-or-flight adrenaline rush. The terror of combat and the thrill of victory are unmatched outside actual combat. I've since quit the game, but I always look forward to watching the 10 man tournaments.
For those of you unfamiliar with the epic scale combat can reach, I suggest you look at the EVE Dominion trailer [youtube.com].
CCP are doing their best to prevent the lag or failures of nodes when big battles happen. For one, you can send them a message ingame ahead of time saying "In system XYZ we will be attacking the other faction tomorrow." and CCP then dedicate a much stronger server for that time to this system. Then you can have battles of 500+ ships with moderate success. For spontaneous events I believe battles of under 200 do not cause much problems anymore.(apart from some lag)
And before before that spontaneous battles of 100 players were unplayable. Yes, it is a step back, but it's not like over two hundred people fighting at once is something to be sneezed at. Cut CCP some slack or just don't play the game if it's so bad. I'm sure dozens of new players will happily fill in the void your corp leaves after you go away in protest.
I think this video gives a better flavour of EVE Online: The Butterfly Effect [youtube.com]
If you think it's fun slash nailbiting to watch, try participating!
(Dystopia Alliance)
If you change your user agent string accordingly, you'll see that most of the examples work fine in Chrome, just not the first (video doesn't play) or the VR one.
Damn... I blame Slashdot RSS/Google Reader for that.
When you die, you lose your ship right? What on earth would compel a team to enter a tournament unless they were sure they were in range of the top 4 spots?
Ships are not irreplaceable. If you play Eve, you WILL lose ships.
How isolated are these tournaments? Can random people just fly in and start messing stuff up? Can you run away if you're about to be killed?
The GMs move the teams to a specially isolated system where there is no way in and no way out. If you leave a certain radius from the center of the arena you are automatically destroyed. You can't return to the field after fleeing, so there's never anything to gain from running before doing as much damage as you can.
What are the limitations of the team? What's to stop a really rich team from having a better loadout? Or a really big team? Can you have a large team of cheap ships?
Different ships are assigned a point value, with a hard point limit imposed on each team. You can have a few expensive ships, q
When you die, you lose your ship right? What on earth would compel a team to enter a tournament unless they were sure they were in range of the top 4 spots?
The point of an alliance tournament is not to make a lot of money. It is to show yourself and prove yourself in the eyes of the community, to earn some respect and achieve something only a few people have achieved before. The prices for the top 3 are very high this time, but I am quite sure that the alliance tournament would not be less popular if there were no other prices than just the title itself.
How isolated are these tournaments? Can random people just fly in and start messing stuff up? Can you run away if you're about to be killed?
The arena is in an isolated area of space, unaccessible to normal players. Running away is not an option, th
These would be fun to watch if they had decent announcers. They are just saying "Team A is doing a lot of damage to Team B's (insert ship name)" and stuff like that. Even someone who has never played the game could look at the screen and tell you that. I wouldn't listen to a baseball announcer who just said "It's the 3rd inning, and the guy in the middle is throwing a ball at someone holding a bat. Look! He hit it! Now the scoreboard shows Team A scored."
Instead, they need to be informed of the loadouts ahead of time so they can say "Team A is using speed tanking to prevent missile damage by the (insert ship type here). This loadout is weak against smart bombs but works great against Team B's choice of long range missile damage."
I haven't played in years, and it is hard to make the action of a bunch of icons interesting without someone giving relevant background. It's too bad: the game is so highly tactical it really would add a lot of value to have people who know what they are talking about.
Too bad they're not showing the hundreds or even thousands of hours worth of mining that went into making the largest ships.
Or the 2 years worth of subscription that went into getting the ability to pilot the more advanced ones (learning skills is on a clock using real life time).
Yes, I've played EVE in the past: left when I came to the conclusion it's too much like work, only slower.
EVE has a lot of grassroots advertising above and beyond what it's size would seem to justify because it is fun for the small group you've been there for a long time and belong to one of the player Alliances that control the space with the rarest minerals. It's not really fun for newer players - addictive perhaps, but not fun.
Because of how skills are learned over a period using real-life time (u need not be logged-in for the time to count) a new player can never catch up on an older player.
Also the economy is based around the mining of minerals (used for making ships), the most common (least valueable and used in larger quantities for ship making) are found in safe NPC controlled space while the least common are found only in player controlled space (where if you don't belong to the right group you'll be shot on sight).
Somebody has to spend hours and hours mining all those low level minerals needed for making the largest ships for the players in those player Alliances that control "unsafe" space and who beter than newer players (who cannot go outside safe space without being shot) who are suppose to "work" before they get to have fun in PvP?
It is in the best interest of the estabilished players to get as much fresh meat as possible into the game to do the mining.
If you have several years of EVE under your belt and are in a player Alliance you're probably having some fun fights once in a while (a lot of time is wasted in other things and you still have to do some mining of higher level minerals), but if you're not one of those then the game is much lot less interesting than the fanboys portray it.
God, again with the complaints about mining!
I have 4 eve chars, totaling almost 200 million skill points, and I've mined a total of 3 hours in over 4 years of playing.
The oldest, richest characters in Eve make their money on industrial stuff: Purchasing, trading, producing from valuable blueprints, etc. Value added kinds of stuff.
A lot of people (me, in my earlier days) just went killing NPC pirates for bounties. You can make enough to buy even the most expensive ship fielded in the tournament (probably o
Because of how skills are learned over a period using real-life time (u need not be logged-in for the time to count) a new player can never catch up on an older player.
This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of EVE game mechanics. It's either complete ignorance or pure slander.
All skills in EVE are on a 1 to 5 scale. For example you can train Large Projectile Turrets to level 5 in a month. You can train it to 4 in about 6 days. Training from 1 to 4 takes 20% of the time as training from 1 to 5. In 20% of the time you can be 80% as good as that multi-year player.
This isn't a traditional MMPOG like progression where a level 30 is completely incapable of touching a level 60. A one month old character can take out a multi-year player no problem.
Old characters aren't better they're simply more versatile. Say you can max your projectile skills in 4 months. They're maxed. They don't get any better. If you're 4 months old with maxed projectile and they're 24 months old with the same exact projectile skills how exactly did you not catch them?
Sure that 24 month old player can also use lasers really well. But that just gives him options. It doesn't make him better. You have the exact same skills. You're just as good.
Forty two.


text:
On Christmas Eve, friends made a beautiful traditional turkey dinner. We took a magnum of Pol Roger Cuvee de Reserve and 750 ml Krug Grand Cuvee, both of which showed nicely esp. after a glass of less than stellar prosecco.
We took my wife's mother to a fabulous but stupidly overpriced Christmas brunch yesterday. I was offered a mimosa when we arrived, and I guess our server thought I really like it because she kept replacing my empty glass.
Tbird would have been proud of me.
Really well, although I've had better vintages. The nose was somewhat muted (at least compared to the 1991 that I had several months ago), but the palate was beautiful. Ripe fruit, slightly expansive, good balancing acidity. A very nice wine, but not the best I've had from LdH.
Over the three days with the family (Christmas Eve through Boxing Day), in no particular order:
2009 Radio Coteau Savoy Chardonney
2009 Grochau Cellars Sauvignon Blanc Upper Five Vineyard
2003 E. Guigal CNdP
2005 Karl Lawrence Napa Cabernet Sauvignon
2010 Ayres Willamette Valley Pinot Noir
2010 Bogle Phantom (had to have one cellar protector opened)
1996 Bodegas LAN Rioja Gran Reserva Viña Lanciano
1996 Graham Beck Rose
2007 Loring Cargasacchi Vineyard Pinot Noir
2007 Stephania Haut Tubee
2000 Chateau St. Michelle Meritage
2007 Dain Svage Juliet Pinot Noir
2001 diStefano Meritage Columbia valley
2006 Pali Durell Vineyard Pinot Noir
When in doubt, open another bottle.
|Powered by Social Strata
|Page 1 2

subset: commoncrawl


text:
and the part of the day i expected to suck hasn't arrived yet, and it's already this kinda day:
the store for all your blade, costuming (in any regard), leather (also in any regard), and steel craft needs.www.facebook.com/tdhshop
yes, this really is how we make our living.
In the days of my youth... played lotsa metal in bands. Sharing a video from those days. The older Iron Maiden fans might recognize this song from their Piece of Mind album. WARNING: One bad word in the middle of the song (darn singer lol).
Small market fan... always hoping, but never expecting.
Sadly Clive Burr of Iron Maiden and Samson fame passed away.
I will have to give Number of the Beast, Burr's last Maiden album, a good listening tonight. It is overdue for a turn in the CD player anyway.
What if this is as good as it gets?
Two classics off Number of the Beast
Children of the Damned
Run to the Hills
I know that Run to the Hills seems to obvious, but it is one of my favorite songs. Not just Maiden, not just metal, one of my favorite songs. Period.
What if this is as good as it gets?
RIP, Clive Burr. The lineup that recorded the Number of the Beast album will always be my favorite. I hope Clive is now jamming with Keith Moon and John Bonham.
Small market fan... always hoping, but never expecting.
Find the live version of Phantom of the Opera from the Maiden Japan EP. Burr kills it on that. Of course I'm biased because that's my favorite IM song.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Here's another early Iron Maiden classic that fits in well as a fitting tribute to Clive Burr.
As an aside, this track used to garner significant radio airplay before suits controlled everything. IMHO, one of the very best of the Paul Di'Anno/Clive Burr era.
Iron Maiden - Sanctuary (1980)
There are two types of people in this world:
1)Morning people
2)Normal people
Small market fan... always hoping, but never expecting.
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.


text:
The massive (1,584 players from 92 countries) 2012 World Youth Tournament held in Maribor, Slovenia, has come to a close and the US made a major effort to claim a good share of victories for its team of 89 players and 12 coaches.
In various parts of the US, fans were cheering for their local favorites. Here in New England, we were watching the fortunes of Carissa Yip of Lexington in the "Under 10 Girls" section. Girls had the choice of entering either the Open section for various ages or one of six sections ranging from U18 to U8 for girls. The boys did not have the choice of entering the girls sections. With no prior FIDE rating, Carissa was rated 124th in her group. Her score reflected a seesaw performance, as she first posted a minus score and then, toward the end, a plus score. She ended with an even score, ranking 64th, well above her starting position. She was apparently not humbled by the tournament according to her father, Percy Yip, who reported back on her games and supplied all the anxiety. He says that he and Carissa will try to be back next year.
In other parts of the country, fans had much to cheer about for their favorites. Kayden Troff, from West Jordan, Utah, is a member of a chess-playing family. He won a silver medal in the "Under 14 Open" section in 2010 and this time he moved even higher, emerging with the gold medal. In his last game, he maneuvered to a winning position against an Indian youngster, who overlooked a mate in one.
Two other American players achieved fame, both from California. Samuel Sevian won the gold in a tiebreak against Cameron Wheeler in the "Under 12 Open" section. Sam started his chess career in Orlando but moved to Santa Clara, Calif., at the age of 7 and, at just short of 10 years, he became the youngest American Master ever. He drew a Chinese player in the last round to lead the pack. Cameron has been sort of a dark horse in this tournament. He is from Cupertino, in Santa Clara, and was rated 12th in his group. He lost to Sevian in the 10th round but drew even with him after winning a marathon 98-move game against an Iranian player in the last round.
Another achiever was Christopher Shen of Columbus, Ohio. His handlers had lost track of him and were pleased to see him step forward to accept the bronze in the "Under 8 Open" section.
Robert Perez of Miami, Boylston CC's Blitz Champion and an MIT student, came up short in the "Under 18 Open" with a 7-4 score.
Brevity: P. Vaitonis vs. E. Eliskases (1933) 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c6 3.e4 d5 4.e5 d4 5.exf6 dxc3 6.fxg7 cxd2+ 7.Bxd2 Bxg7 8.Qc2 Nd7 9.Nf3 Qc7 10.0–0–0 b6 11.g3 Bb7 12.Bg2 0–0–0 13.Ng5 Ne5 14.Bc3 e6 15.f4 h6 16.Nh3 f5 17.fxe5; 0–1
Winners: BCC Elaine Kahn Memorial — 1st, David Vigorito, 4-0, 2d-3d, Eric Godin and Farzad Abdi, 3-0; MACA 2013 Spiegel Scholastic First Qualifiers — 14 and under, Evan Myer (playoff winner) 3-1, 11 and under, Alex Fauman, 4-0, 8 and under, Luke Randolph, 3.5-.5.
Coming Events: BCC Thursday Night Swiss Dec. 6, 13, 20, 27 and Dec. 8, $10 Open; both 240B Elm St., Somerville; www.boylstonchess
club.org ; Billerica Friday Night Swiss Dec.7, 14, 21, 28, Billerica Chess Club (Council on Aging), 25 Concord Road, Billerica, e-mail: email@example.com


text:
Put in Park, Students Grow Fast
- 10-17-2012
- By Joshua E. Brown
Jillian Spies, UVM class of 2013, sits at a desk on the third floor of UVM's Aiken Center, copying responses off a paper survey and entering them into a computer. It seems another world from the nearly million acres of wilderness that make up the Olympic National Park on the coast of Washington, a place where she plunged into rainforest with her backpack last summer, looking for hikers.
"But now I see how they're connected," she says.
Kai Parker, UVM class of 2013, stands in the rain outside Woodstock, Vt. He's waiting for a shuttle bus with Laura Anderson, a post-doctoral researcher. They want to ask riders what they think of the "cow-powered" electric trolley that ferries people from the village out to Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller National Historic Park: Is it useful? Why are you riding today?
A one-bus experiment in Woodstock, population 900 — using electricity generated by methane from local dairy farms — may not seem an obvious place to look for lessons on how the National Park Service might manage, say, the millions of people who pour in to see the Grand Canyon, or bumper-to-bumper traffic in California's Yosemite Valley.
But Kai Parker can see how they are connected.
Hitting the data trail
Both students have had internships and work-study jobs in UVM's Park Studies Laboratory run by professor Robert Manning. The lab plays a significant role in helping the National Park Service (and other land managers, like state governments) better understand what park visitors' experiences are like — and what people want from visits to a park. "Their parks," Manning says.
Both Spies and Parker have put in many hours at the lab over the last few years. And both got plum summer jobs — paid internships — working for the UVM lab at Olympic National Park last summer.
"The trees are twice as big around as in Vermont," Parker says, with amazement, of his first-ever trip West. "I was not expecting to see snow-capped mountains in summer."
Jill Spies saw a listing for a work-study job: "enter research survey data into the computer,'" and was skeptical, she says, "but then at the end: might get a chance to go to national park over the summer." And she thought: "I want to do that! I want the job!"
Each summer day at Olympic, the students would fill their packs with "a stack of surveys, print-outs, log sheets, and clip boards," Spies says — and strap on a lawn chair and a poster tube filled with six oversized photographs.
Then they'd head out, alone, onto trails across the park, sit down in their chair in one of the most beautiful places in the world — and wait for other hikers to come along.
"Hi, my name is Jill. I'm here with the Park Service today surveying hikers about their experience," was the standard opener, Spies recalls. And most people were "really friendly," she says, "even if they'd just finished thirty miles."
The goal: to ask hikers about their perceptions of crowding and access in the park's many wilderness areas. In addition to the standard sociological questions on the survey, the students would show the hikers a series of Photoshop-altered images of places in the park. These would range from empty, to a few people visible, to a "ridiculous crowd," Spies says. The hikers would be asked to score their feelings about how acceptable they found the differing levels of crowding, along with a host of other questions.
The data the students collected — the same information they painstakingly enter into spreadsheets as their work-study jobs back in Vermont — helps form a quantitative foundation for one of the lab's many research projects on behalf of the National Park Service.
About ninety-five percent of Olympic National Park is designated wilderness — and the NPS is developing a new plan to guide its management. The visitor surveys collected by the students inform this planning work.
Bus route
Olympic National Park is not the only popular one: last year there were about 300 million visits to the U.S. national parks. "That's a wonderful thing," Bob Manning says. "But it presents challenges: how do you accommodate 4.5 million visitors to Yosemite National Park, squeezed into just a few months?"
Maybe with buses. The Park Studies Lab has led a series of studies of transportation issues in parks, including ones at Acadia National Park, Cape Cod National Seashore and Yosemite.
And one small study in Woodstock, at Vermont's only national park unit — the 643-acre Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller National Historical Park — is exploring the value of a electric trolley from town out to the park. The goal: reduce automobile traffic while powering the trolley with Cow Power electricity made by Green Mountain Power from manure digesters that produce methane at ten Vermont dairy farms.
It's a demonstration project called Transit in Parks, supported by the US Department of Transportation, and run by the Park Service to explore alternative ways to move people to and from parks that sometimes face limited parking, winding roads and overcrowded attractions.
Over the summer, the UVM park lab collected more than a hundred surveys from people who had ridden the trolley. But as Kai Parker stands near the bus stop, waiting in a pouring rain, no one gets off. Apparently, Vermont's national park season is winding down. When the last trolley of the day pulls through the parking lot, it's empty too. For Parker, who was hoping to talk with a few more riders, it's a bit disappointing — but both Olympic glory and cold rain are educational.
Hard decisions
"When the National Park Service makes decisions about access it can be contentious," Bob Manning says. "These are the icons of our country, and we all own them together." So, a basic tenet of American democracy suggests, the managers' decisions should be informed by the owners.
Which is why Manning and his students help turn the sometimes-vague, narrative opinions of people into hard scientific data. And it's this data, earned with student boot-leather, that park managers can use to shape plans for, say, where and when to run busses, or how many wilderness camping permits to issue.
On your own
And the students, in return, have a better sense of how their academic training — in courses like Recreation Management and Introduction to GIS — connects to real-world management decisions and life after college.
"It's one thing to sit in a classroom and learn facts, but it's another to have someone push you out in the woods and say: you're on your own for four days with no cell service," Spies says. "Figure stuff out on your own."
"We have so many people who are book smart," Spies says. "I learned to be trail smart."
Ethan Meginnes
Dozens of UVM students — many of whom are Parks, Recreation and Tourism (PRT) majors — have had internships over the years working in the Park Studies Lab with Manning. He's been a professor in the Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources since 1976.
One of the students who came through the PRT Program was Ethan Meginnes, UVM class of 1989. "He was a shy, reserved young man," Manning recalls. "But he blossomed during his internship. It seems to have been a formative experience for him."
And now Meginnes gives back. He and his wife, Alexandra Loeb, have established a foundation that, among other gifts, has provided annual funding, for more than a decade, to support undergraduate interns, many of whom work in the Park Studies Lab and in the national parks.
The students' experience seems to be changing their lives and getting them to think more deeply about conservation. "I'm seriously considering a career with the Park Service," Spies says, "I'm not exactly sure what direction this will lead but I'm really interested in the question, 'What are we going to do with our land?'"


text:
Citizen Oath Keepers
We ARE Citizen Oath KeepersCITIZEN OATHI, [name] Citizen Oath Keeper, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will
We ARE Citizen Oath KeepersCITIZEN OATHI, [name] Citizen Oath Keeper, do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will
http://www.leapingbunnypledge.org/pledge.aspx (http://www.leapingbunnypledge.org/pledge.aspx)
To Stop Animal Abuse Animals don't deserve to be abused! 1. Animals don't have to live in these Harsh environments 2.
AboutPetition the Wisconsin Indian tribes and the Center for Biological Diversity to file lawsuits to stop the
Kitson, has refused to remove apparel that glamorizes prescription drug abuse.
Help sustain and expand free dental care to the uninsured. Delta Dental is proud to sponsor America's Mission of Mercy,
National Stop the Violence Alliance, Inc.'s (NSTVA) mission is to help heal our communities through the principles of
Thousands of Hoosiers ride bikes on Indiana roads each day. Let's pledge to raise awareness of those riders.
Take a pledge to Quit Tobacco - "Tobacco has no place in my life." Also win some exciting prizes by joining us and
This is a pledge to help especially, teeenagers, to be drug free. Help spread the word, it is not cool to use drugs &


text:
Friday, November 16, 2007
Silky Pumpkin Soup
The Chef: Jenny
The Menu: You'd think Jenny's life depended on her cooking because every time she enters the kitchen (well, it's really a kichenette) she creates something extraordinarily delicious. Today was no exception. She used her instinctual creativity to make a simply divine soup using butternut squash, potatoes, nutmeg, and—here's where she gets inventive—a healthy, but not too healthy, dose of Silk's Pumpkin Spice Soymilk. In addition to the soup, Jenny prepared a rich couscous with faux bleu cheese and a refreshing salad with bell peppers, avocado, carrots, celery, and walnuts. She rounded out the meal with Asian dumplings filled with mushrooms and greens. Jenny might not really be cooking to save her life, but she sure saved our day with this warm, yummy dish.
The Goods: The fog never lifted today, so soup was just the solution to put some warmth back into our bones and bellies. We are enjoying our fresh, weekly produce box and are always looking for an excuse to make hearty, winter vegetables into warm, silky soups.
Posted by VegNews Magazine at 1:44 PM
Labels: couscous, dumpling, Pumpkin soup
2 comments:
- Melisser; the Urban Housewife said...
Soup season is here! yum yum.
- November 16, 2007 at 5:24 PM
- VeggieGirl said...
what a fun dish to incorporate that new holiday Silk flavor - such a lovely autumn soup!
- November 17, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)


text: According to sources a Senior Acer Executive said that Acer plans to follow-up their inexpensive Iconia B1 7-inch Android tablet with even more affordably priced options. There are no real details available at this time other than size and potential pricing. Here's what the intel suggests, 8-inch variant of the Iconia B1 = $203 USD 10-inch variants of the Incona B1 = $237 USD If these prices are accurate, they would be very competitive, especially in the 10-inch series. Of course, they have to save money somewhere to get those insanely cheap prices, and it looks like the plan is to offer the same 1.2GHz Mediatek dual-core processor currently in the 7-inch model. Do you think these ultra-cheap prices would entice you to try one of Acer's offerings over the bigger name brands in the Android world? Source: AndroidAuthority


text:
Portions of the following information are based on facts provided by the arrested individuals. Those individuals have been booked with, not convicted of, the offenses shown. All accused should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Portions of the following information are based on facts provided by the arrested individuals. Those individuals have been booked with, not convicted of, the offenses shown. All accused should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Terrebonne Sheriff's Office
Lester Deville Jr., 18, 462 Rose Marie Lane, Thibodaux, failure to appear.
Simon Paul Pellegrin, 25, 312 Christine St., Chauvin, failure to appear, simple burglary inhabited dwelling, possession of stolen things.
Luis Enrique Guitierrez, 24, 122 Nicole St., Houma, failure to appear.
Renard Williams, 55, 218 Santa Monica Drive, Houma, two counts failure to appear, domestic abuse battery (strangulation).
Jovan Mosely, 32, 120 Bernard St., Patterson, hit and run.
Robert Lee Quiroz, 26, 411 Hibernia Place, Houma, simple burglary of inhabited dwelling, nine counts simple burglary, possession of stolen things.
Jason Wayne Pierce, 32, 315 Venture Blvd., Houma, 17 counts simple burglary.
Jason Paul Vitrano 37, 4412 La. 24, Bourg, attempted theft less than $500.
Travelyn Warren Gims, 26, 103 Tulane St., Houma, simple battery.
Ben Paul Denham, 24, 133 Pecan St., Thibodaux, holding for other agency.
Houma City Police
Marion Joyce Hughes, 58, 1403 Maxine St., Houma, failure to appear, simple battery.
Louisiana State Police
Joseph Mike Frederick, 23, 108 Hingle Court, Schriever, aggravated flight from officer, speeding, vehicle license violation, driving under suspension, reckless operation, criminal trespass.
District and City Courts
The individuals whose names follow were incarcerated on the order of a court or processed following a judicial determination.
Brody Steven Albert, 30, 5467 West Park Ave., No. 252, Houma, contempt of court.
Thibodaux Police Department
Torrance Flakes, 25, 118 Iris St., Thibodaux, resisting an officer, pedestrians on highway, criminal trespassing.
Malik Workman, 17, 200 Winder Rd., Thibodaux, disturbing the peace by fighting.
Louisiana Department of Justice
Ronald Breaux, 66, 2165 Hwy. 182, Raceland, possession of pornography involving juveniles.
Lafourche Parish Sheriff's Office
Dwayne Chiasson, 42, 436 Church St., Raceland, simple assault, criminal trespassing, disturbing the peace.
David Glaspell, 44, 145 Linda St., Lockport, contempt.
Donovan Johnson, 18, 1507 Bell St., Thibodaux, contempt.
Joshua Lefort, 27, 135 Cherokee Dr., Galliano, contempt.
Adam Benoit, 26, 128 Adams St., Raceland, simple criminal damage to property, domestic abuse battery with child endangerment.
Kay Guidry, 57, 105 W. 11th St., Larose, contempt.
Angelina Dupre, 45, 7 Kristy St., Houma, fugitive of Terrebonne Parish.
Penny Vasquez, 44, 218 W. 164th St., Galliano, contempt.
Joyce Lochrico, 50, 115 W. 6th St., Larose, contempt.
Justin Kraemer, 24, 5423 Bayouside Dr., Chauvin, possession with intent to deliver marijuana, possession of Hydrocodone, possession drug paraphernalia, driving on roadway laned for traffic.
Lafourche Parish Sheriff's Office
Patrick Terrebonne, 46, 542 W. 107th St., Cut Off, 3 counts contempt.
Kerry Chauvin, 48, Ashley Motel Room 1, Lockport, contempt.
Jeremy Trahan , 27, 191 Cypress Court Trailer Pk., Gray, contempt.
Jane Medeiros, 55, 402 Marietta Pl., Gray, fugitive, contempt.
Thibodaux Police Department
Andre Danos, 33, 102 Webre Dr., Thibodaux, possession or distribution of drug paraphernalia, possession of Valium (Diazepam), possession of marijuana, 3rd DWI.
Raymond Johnson, 32, 316 E. 12th St., Thibodaux, no driver's license on person, careless operation, contempt.


text:
4 days to go, $4.1 million raised in 2012!
2012 is drawing quickly to a close and it's been an incredible year - with four days left, the gaming community has picked up even more steam and raised $4.1 million dollars for children in hospitals around the world. Through gifts on Amazon.com, support of our incredible community events, Humble Bundle purchases, and generous donations from people around the world we'll be able to provide our 90 network hospitals with video games, books, toys and more. These donations make an amazing impact for children who are in a scary, painful situation. Jessica wrote us to share her story:
Like a lot of people, I was a kid in the hospital. Mine was for a major surgery on my chest. It was frightening and painful, and nobody wanted to explain anything to a 5-year old. The thing that changed me forever, though, wasn't the surgery, it was the game cart. My uncle had already put the whisper of King's Quest in my ear, so I was primed and ready to go when Mario rolled into my room and he quickly became my escape from the dark. Every time I had to get up for physical therapy, I knew the Nintendo would be my reward when I returned. I've been a gamer ever since. Now, I get to see the other side of the hospital room as a doctor, and watch my patients find the same window out of the hospital I found when I was small, and I know that Child's Play is a part of that where I work and in many other hospitals. Patients sometimes play with their parents, and sometimes play alone, but in my opinion, the best days are the days we get to play together. Thank you for helping to make that possible.


text:
Long and Lewan look like identical twins in those photos...
Hokepoints: Would Bill Walsh Draft This Team?
I'm trying out a new feature of mouse-over tags so readers who don't get some of our references can get caught up. Underlined text has a tag. If the tag is a link then you've found a link. I appreciate any feedback on its deployment.
Left: Young Wolverines some of whom were recruited for power (Upchurch). Right: Power.
Chris Brown's recent article on Smart Football included a link to a 1997-vintage article by Bill Walsh (YTBW). Chris included it as a way of crediting Walsh for correctly predicting Tony Gonzalez would become a great NFL tight end. With Michigan transitioning further toward a Walsh-ian offense, I thought I'd appropriate the whole article to see how well Michigan's 2013 offensive roster matches Walsh-ian archetypes.
Before we jump in, you'll recognize a lot of what's said here from like every NFL draft report ever. Walsh's coaching tree perforated the league for years, and that meant the things he tended to look for in players became what most of the people making draft decisions were looking for. They've been repeated so often as to become memes, however I still think going back to the source can provide some insight into how Michigan's players and recruits are being evaluated.
This is all intended to help you do your own scouting when we publish things like Hello posts (lots of those coming up) and positional previews.
Tom Brady prototype, Tom Brady, Tom Brady with legs? --Bryan Fuller
Walsh Says: 6'3, 210. Having a strong arm isn't as important as an "inventory" of passes, although decent arm strength is a necessity:
"Arm strength is somewhat misleading. Some players can throw 80 yards, but they aren't good passers. Good passing has to do with accuracy, timing, and throwing a ball with touch so it is catchable…
"Remember, the goal of passing a ball is to make sure it is caught ... by your intended receiver."
The most important characteristic for a quarterback is intuition/instincts. He has to be able to sense the rush, make the right decision quickly and get the ball "up and gone," and handle progressions and broken plays with grace as opposed to a sense of urgency.
"The single trait that separates great quarterbacks from good quarterbacks is the ability to make the great, spontaneous decision, especially at a crucial time."
Walsh wants his quarterback to be "courageous and intensely competitive." He also wants them mobile and defines it thus:
Mobility and an ability to avoid a pass rush are crucial. Some quarterbacks use this mobility within the pocket just enough so they are able to move and pass when they "feel" a rush. But overall quickness and agility can make a remarkable difference. As an example, there were some very quick boxers in Sugar Ray Leonard's era, but he was quicker than they were and because of that he became a great champ.
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Tom Brady, obviously. Tate Forcier.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: High accuracy plus high YPA. "Makes things happen."
What you can learn on film: Doesn't make you nervous. Escapes from pressure then seems calm, not rushed. Sees something and reacts quickly. Receivers aren't making tough catches or breaking stride.
What could signal bust potential: First a warning on this part not to take it as "anyone who exhibits this trait will bust." What I'm saying is beware a guy ranked highly because this feature he possesses, which is a good thing to possess, may be overrated. Here it's arm strength—more an NFL problem than college since college QBs can learn systems and Navarre their way to great college careers with only one type of pass. Arm strength with no accuracy and a terrible delivery can turn into a great player if he's got an innate sense (think Stafford), but more often a coach will try to fix it and end up with a Dontrelle Willis.
How our guys compare: So far only Devin Gardner has seen substantial play against college defenses but we've gotten about a game's worth of Russell Bellomy too. Gardner's inventory has passes for finding Gallon 40 yards downfield, zips that only Dileo can get to, and even that Stafford-y thing he flipped to Dileo in the Outback Bowl. He has ideal size, and wins the mobility category over everybody not named Denard Robinson. If you give him a lane to pick up yards with his legs he will take it. And he MAKES PLAYS, those coming first to mind being where he runs around in the backfield defying sack attempts until something worthy of forward progress appears.
His weakness so far has been in that crucial "up and gone" aspect. His delivery has a long wind-up and that exacerbates a medium-to-mediocre diagnosis-reaction speed. Previous spring games when Devin looked really bad at this suggest it wasn't a few months as a receiver to blame, although that obviously didn't help. Gardner will live and die by his scrambling and ability to make linebackers freeze in coverage when he takes a step forward. He's not Tom Brady, but Gardner's package can equal a helluvah good college QB. An offseason as quarterback in a system designed to his strengths puts the ceiling high for 2013, and off the charts if there ends up being a 2014.
Russell Bellomy (right-Upchurch) in his few appearances last year—mostly the 2nd half against Nebraska—gave us a fairly strong indication of his abilities. He wins Walsh points by having a catchable ball, but there it ends. His apparent lack of arm strength severely limits the inventory, his agility isn't anything special vs. Big Ten defenders, and while you can forgive a freshman thrust into starting for this, he showed a lot of panic. I am skeptical that he can contribute on this level unless his arm strength improves as much as I expect his comfort will.
Shane Morris, now. Other than every scouting thing they can do with high schoolers, it's hard to say what he will turn out to be. The senior year performance and the thing that guy said in the Elite 11 about his primary read being taken away are marks against the Walsh archetype, but the size and arm and full inventory are there. He's too young to know if he will develop the rest.
Running Back
Terrance Flagler, A-Train, Toussaint –Upchurch
Walsh Says: Needs to be big enough to take punishment and always fall forward, but "some smaller runners play big." He uses James Brooks but of course we've got our own exempli gratia. The 1B for backs is again, instincts, though he emphasizes getting "the first four yards within the scheme and then rely on instincts to take it beyond that."
Walsh puts a high value on durability, which maybe isn't as important in college where the hits are lighter and the roster is deeper. The other thing he harps on is instinct, mentioning he got burned on this with Terrance Flagler. This is the difference between Michael Shaw and Mike Hart.
After that he goes into bonus features. If he can block he doesn't have to come off the field in passing situations. He has to be able to catch a screen and the further down the field he can threaten as a receiver the more "dimensional" the offense becomes.
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Anthony Thomas. Always falling forward, instinctual enough to be a kick returner before becoming the feature back.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: At least 185 lbs., thick and squat. Numbers don't tank against high-level competition.
What you can learn on film: Defenders look like bad tacklers (subtle movements by the RB make him tough to set up on). Falling forward, durability, operating in small spaces. Lots of D-I ticketed RBs will run sweeps all the time because their speed is just unfair against high school DEs. Watch the inside and zone running.
What could signal bust potential: Beware the big backs who wrack up huge high school yardage by running through terrible tacklers. It's hard to tell the guys who can subtly shift their bodies to make themselves difficult to bring down from the ones who just truck over a division full of future doctors and lawyers. One strong attribute can sometimes dominate a bad high school league, but D-I football requires several working together.
How our guys compare: Toussaint has shown the instincts and "plays big" at near the extreme for smallness. He looked on his way toward being a zone-style feature complement until having the unluckiest year in recent Michigan RB history. Justice Hayes is like Toussaint except he's yet to show those instincts. Dennis Norfleet has the playmaker thing down but there's a major difference in size between him and the other guys. Norfleet was listed at 5'7/161 last year, and Vincent Smith was put at 5'6/175. Hayes was 5'10/183 and Toussaint 5'10/202. Norfleet/Smith and Toussaint/Hayes are different tiers.
Among the plowshares, thick-trunked Thomas Rawls saw extensive action last year. The difference between him and Mark Ingram is Rawls seems to miss his hole a lot—that "first four yards" thing is a problem. I haven't seen enough of Drake Johnson yet to know if he brings anything different. None of the above (who are still on the roster) have yet to demonstrate they're any better than mediocre blockers.
Two incoming running backs come with the Walsh stamp of approval. Green is already 220 lbs. and his senior highlight reel shows him doing a lot of inside power running and finding his extra yards. Deveon Smith is already Toussaint-sized and seems to have that micro-instinctual quality that Hart had. No idea if either of these guys can block.
[The rest of the offense after you JUMP]
Fullback & U-Back
Tim Rathman, Aaron Shea, Joe Kerridge
Walsh Says: 6'1, 245. The NFL's limited roster meant Walsh kind of had to make his offense fit what kind of weapons he had at the hybrid blocker positions. When he had Roger Craig (think B.J. Askew) he got away with worse blocking to have a second RB in the backfield. When he had Tom Rathman (think Kevin Dudley) that worked too. Here's what he had to say on blocking types:
"This type fullback must be able to focus on a specific defender, find him and take him. It could be an inside linebacker, an outside linebacker or a defensive lineman. But he must know how to find him, know how to read what happens and make the play.
"That means he must be functionally intelligent enough to handle the variables that occur in order to be a consistent blocker."
Smart, girthy, compact, doesn't need to be very fast. However all fullbacks in this system had to be outlet receivers who get the ball clear of defenders. Here the job description starts to overlap with that of of the Michigan U-Back.
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Aaron Shea. Devastating blocker, effective runner, good receiver in the open field, etc. etc. etc.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: Girthy, weirdly high receiving YPC stats.
What you can learn on film: Ignore middle linebackers who stand still (high school is filled with Obi Ezehs) and see what he does against a defensive end trying to seal the corner.
What could signal bust potential: Overhyping a size-speed combination. Being able to move is secondary to knowing where to go. Massive high school running backs who obviously aren't college running backs sometimes get slotted as fullbacks because they've said they won't move to defense. Change of direction is a big deal (unless he's going to be a DE) that seems to get overlooked.
How our guys compare: The last Roger Craig-type was Stephen Hopkins but he's gone. The remainder are on a sliding scale of squat dedicated blocker to U-back tight end-ish receiver guy. Joe Kerridge and Sione Houma are the just-the-blocks-ma'am types; Kerridge was effective enough to dislodge Hopkins and hold scholarship freshman Houma to scant appearances. Hoke likes to joke that his blocking fullbacks will end their careers shorter than they arrived, and as of this writing Houma's height is not listed on the official roster.
Khalid Hill was brought in specifically for the U-spot and he even kinda looks like Kevin Dudley and Kevin Koger had a baby. Your ideal blocking fullback is 6'0/240 and your typical tight end maybe comes in at 6'4/220; Khalid Hill is 6'2/230. He looks like a big running back but his junior highlight reel is lots of catch-and-runs across the middle.
Wyatt Shallman is a different type of player. He's taller and bigger and more Shea-like. As a runner he kind of hops down the field so he can have his massive upper body hit the defense with maximum impact; that probably won't work so well against Big Ten linebackers.
Y-Tight End
Brent Jones, Ron Kramer, The Funchise --Upchurch
Brent Jones, Ron Kramer, The Funchise --Upchurch
Walsh Says: 6'4-1/2, 245. Yes he actually is getting into half-inch increments. More so than the fullback, the "line" (as opposed to "move") tight end to Walsh should be a specialist. Type A is an extremely good blocker who can dominate a defensive end and give you a consistent running game. His receiving skills have to be serviceable enough that you're not tipping away one of your eligible receivers every time he goes in. Walsh wants him to have soft hands and be able to catch the ball while being hit by a linebacker, since he'll be operating as a dump-off option no further than their level. Give up all the speed for better blocking.
Type B is the opposite: a receiver who's big enough that you can teach him enough technique to be a serviceable blocker (otherwise just bring in a receiver and spread the field). On the non-receiver part of the job:
"Now when you get to blocking with this person it will be all technique. He is going to have to develop those techniques that he can use with reasonable effectiveness against defensive linemen and linebackers. His ability to absorb and learn technique is critical because he is not going to be able to play mass against mass."
There's a Type C: a guy who can be all of those things (insert Tony Gonzalez prediction). An A+ receiver/A+ blocker would be sweet, but not having that Walsh seems to prefer a guy who's an A+ in one aspect and a C in another to a guy who gets all B's.
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Ron Kramer's your first Type C. Jim Mandich is another. Great Type B's would be Joppru, Tuman, Clancy if you're into that sort of thing, Riemersma. Type A's are Mark Campbell, Eric Kattus, Derrick Walker, Martell Webb.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: In a blocker, good receiving stats; in a receiving type "coachability."
What you can learn on film: Can he catch the ball and take a hit? Tight ends are more likely than other guys to be getting those quick outlet passes where a linebacker arrives at the same time as the ball.
What could signal bust potential: The polymaths seem to do worse than their rankings here. Coaches will have patience with an outstanding receiver who needs time to learn blocking technique, or devastating blockers who need to develop their receiving skills. Not so much with a kid who is just okay at both. On the other hand the masters of one craft who cannot become proficient in the other also bust out.
How our guys compare: Walsh would enjoy these weapons. I'm going to ignore Paskorz because he's a converted DE who was passed by two freshmen last year and start with our Type A.J. Williams (pictured at right by Bryan Fuller catching a pass I don't remember). Guys his size usually play offensive tackle and that's where scouts had him ticketed, but Michigan for now has plenty of linemen and just one real blocking type tight end on the roster. In his debut season at this A.J. was disappointing. Here's one example of many biffed blocks chosen because you get to watch some Denard & Stuff after. He did well against slower guys and when doubling, but the agile DEs spun around his blocks; he probably could have used a redshirt to work on technique before being responsible for the edge. He was rarely targeted as a receiver—Michigan kind of telegraphed its intentions when Williams was in.
The other side of that coin was Funchess and he impressed enough at the thing he's a natural at to chart as a blocker with a lot to learn. He's got the A+ receiver part down; he needs to get that D-minus in blocking up a few grades. Magnus and the one coach who tells me stuff both say he's among the team's all-stars in work ethic and coachability, which suggests he's got a ceiling above the Tim Massaquoi line. Another 10 lbs. of muscle over the next two or three years gets him to the Walsh ideal.
The guy with Type C potential is incoming freshman Jake Butt. He's already 6'6-235 and enrolled early so we'll see in Spring ball if he can seize either or both roles from the sophomores. He probably leans toward Funchess's extreme and made his high school career by being a matchup nightmare—way bigger than a defensive back and way more athletic than the linebackers they could put on him. That all said I wouldn't expect him to be a Kramer right away. The ceiling for this year is probably B receiver/C blocker.
Rice, Carter, Gallon (Upchurch|MGoBlog)
Walsh Says: 6'3, 210. That was big then and big now. This is a position you're more born into than any other. Most plays a receiver is involved in have the outcome decided by a matter of inches. If you can consistently get higher than the guy defending you, you're unstoppable. College receivers are an even greater mismatch because you kind of get to pick your matchup if you're the offense and few teams have one, let two defensive backs who can match up with an elite receiver.
That said, the first thing Walsh looks for is agility and body control—the great receivers are great mid-air contortionists. Just under that is strength—that was Roundtree's problem. The great ones also have supreme focus. "Running routes well" is a byword everyone picked up from Walsh but he doesn't mention it here—rather he talks about how receivers need to be in peak physical form. They need full-stride speed—if they get ahead of a guy they can't get caught or else the quarterback will start shorting the ball and the defense has a better shot at it. Jerry Rice wasn't the fastest guy but he wouldn't get caught once he reached his stride. Route running, it seems, is a subtlety picked up over time in an offense, not an innate ability.
Walsh almost makes a big deal about conditioning and durability—a receiver who's slowed or hurt or stiff or gasping for air gives up that all-important inch he operates in. That's a bigger deal in the NFL because teams only carry like five receivers; college teams can rotate up to seven, often have nine or so on scholarship, and always have like six walk-ons standing by just in case.
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Pick a #1. I went with Carter over Edwards because Anthony was the more innately talented and had that focus that Bill Walshes crave.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: Size, 40 time, vertical…here's a spot where you can actually care about the metrics scouting services can get their hands on.
What you can learn on film: Ignore the wide open stuff and see what happens when he's up against a defender. That body control is the key.
What could signal bust potential: Specialists. It seems counter-intuitive but the "possession" receivers are notorious for never managing to extend many possessions. Oh and spindly guys do well in offenses made to get them open in space but fare poorly on contested throws, which is most throws. The talent scouts tend to get this position right most of the time.
How our guys compare: Jeremy Gallon can make any molecule in his body twitch to a new position so fast it has to be measured in space-time. Unfortunately he only possesses three atoms and a couple of neutrinos, however because of the gravity field created by his near-light-speed movements, Jeremy Gallon is secretly 8 feet tall. Both of last year's freshmen (Darboh is a sophomore, Chesson a RS frosh) are pretty tall and pretty strong and pretty fast; coaches say they both still need to work on blocking. With apologies to Fred Jackson, I'm not a fan of Jeremy Jackson, who is tall but doesn't have great focus, isn't very athletic, and certainly isn't any kind of fast. The incoming freshmen are tall, not super-athletic. The coaches have struck out with some top targets for various reasons, and the kids they're bringing in this year are going to stretch Brian's YMRMFSPA creativity.
Dwight Stephenson, David Molk and Protégé by Heiko|MGoBlog
Walsh Says: 6'2, 290. And thank you Bill Walsh for providing some clarity to an ongoing argument among Michigan fans as to why certain guys among the last two OL hauls are ticketed for center and others wasted there. The center is supposed to be smart enough to call the blocking assignments for the line—though a guard sometimes does that. Here's the money part:
"Centers don't often have to block one-on-one with the nose tackle, but if they can it is a great advantage. You typically slide a lineman or find a way to help the center. Or he finds a way to help someone else. Now if you have a center who can isolate one-on-one with a nose tackle, it takes tremendous pressure off your guards and everyone else."
He likes a shorter center with girth because the center needs to operate through small spaces and if he loses leverage the whole offence crinkles. "You need a center who is so quick that he can move in between people. Shorter guys can do that better than taller, rangy guys."
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: He'd take Molk for the way he treats reporters alone.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: Academics (!), football intelligence, speed and agility, compact.
What you can learn on film: Reach and combo blocks, turning back to wall off backside pursuit, covering for other guys' mistakes, upended DTs.
What could signal bust potential: A plowhorse. Some "big uglies" make it as good centers, however the odd David Baas is more rare than the misapplied Graham Pocic.
How our guys compare: The center gets help, and that's a pretty good explanation for why Mealer not Barnum ended up there last year. This year the candidates are a redshirt sophomore with Molk comparisons, a true freshman who's a coach's kid, and maybe one of the guards getting involved.
Let's start with Jack Miller, who's of a height with Molk. You don't really get to have another guy like one of the greatest Michigan centers ever, but Miller's profile reads the same way: tough as nails, competitive, athletic, smart, kinda small. Rodriguez was fine rolling with an undersized redshirt freshman but Hoke apparently wasn't last year. That's the explanation I'm going with anyhow. Miller fits the profile if he's gotten strong enough. Not being even a whisper during last year's offensive line debacle is a black mark against him.
If it's not Miller it's…well let's imagine Joe Burzynski moves here. The onetime walk-on got some play last year at guard and would be another Mealer-like option: a guy with experience in this offense who would benefit from having help on most plays. His size was a problem last year when he was the backup guard, but that should be less so at center.
If not those guys, Patrick Kugler arrives. True freshmen almost never play at OL, and haven't except that one guy. If one can, maybe it's the son of the Pittsburgh Steelers' offensive line coach. With new starters at the guard positions as well I really don't like the idea of Kugler here yet. At 6'5/280 he's a bigger option, though that's still a long way from the kind of strength it requires to hold off a Big Ten nose tackle on your own.
Wanted: facial hair. John Ayers, Steve Hutchinson, Kyle Kalis (John T. Greilick|DetNews)
Walsh Says: 6'3, 300. And here's the key position for your offense:
"Typically, you style your offense in relation to who you have at the guard positions. You have to adapt your style to your guards."
Word, Bill. --every Michigan fan since 2008. The great guards have quickness, agility, explosion and size. They can pull, trap, or crumple any manner of defender. He can be a weaker pass blocker than the tackles so long as he's strong enough to not get knocked back—the mass of bodies protects him here. Walsh doesn't care about how much he benches; he looks for a guy who can stand his ground and checks that part off. He mentions Guy McIntyre was a guy too small for the spot despite being pretty athletic while Ayers lacked that athleticism but sufficed. This is why I moved Burzynski.
Small and agile guards can survive—Nebraska's Spencer Long at 6'4/305 is probably the best guard in the conference this year and I'd take Northwestern's Brian Mulroe, 6'4/295, over any of the monsters at Wisconsin and Ohio State. Walsh judges guards by the precision of their footwork, but really he wants to know what each guy's forte is among the myriad things a guard has to do.
That's because once a guard hits that minimum size/strength threshold to not be a liability in pass pro everything else is about executing many different and complicated types of blocks. They have to be able to time a pull right but still make it through the hole, they have to be able to come inside out to pick up linebacker blitzes, and get from Point A to Point B. Finding a master of all these techniques in the NFL is next to impossible, which is defined as finding the perfect guard in college. So Walsh believes offenses ought to start with the kinds of guards they've got and what those guards are best at, then build the offense from there.
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Steve Hutchinson is the nearest it comes to guard perfection—scouts thought he was a little too slow.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: Check his size and move on.
What you can learn on film: You found film on a guard? Really? Okay what's he doing? Are these highlights of him trapping, or pulling, or bowling dudes over, or going downfield like a wrecking ball on screens?
What could signal bust potential: Small and agile. Agility is a big deal, especially with the feet, however they have to get big enough to not buckle, and there's plenty of agile guards who never develop the innate awareness of what's going on around them, where to get to, and when's the right time to arrive.
How our guys compare: Okay so we fucked that one up. Patrick Omameh was a devastating 2nd level blocker who couldn't pull. Ricky Barnum if you go back is an effective combo blocker especially if you set his block up for him first, but when tasked with setting the table for Mealer…oh hell these complaints are so 2012. In 2013 we don't have any clue what they can do because they're all kiddies.
The not-kiddy option is Chris Bryant, who passes the "reacts well with gravity" test and we don't yet know much more. Insiders said he was on track to compete for a starting job last year, but they still won't say a word about his boo-boo. My own rule for rehabilitations is no news is bad news. If he's practicing come Spring ball, Bryant has to be the prohibitive favorite for one of the guard spots.
The top kiddy is redshirt freshman Kyle Kalis, who arrived nearly college ready last year and I think the coaches really wrestled whether to burn his shirt. Unfortunately for 2012 and possibly very fortunately for 2016 he did redshirt. As a recruit he was an offensive tackle just because he could hate the most donkeys that way, but he's guard size, guard length, and other than his size his footwork gets the most praise.
Among the other freshmen, Bars is a project recruit progressing ahead of schedule, and 2013 recruit Kyle Bosch is enrolling early. Dawson is another guy like Kalis but still kind of raw, and I expect he and Samuelson will redshirt. They're all really big—I can't say more until I see any of them in action.
Steve Wallace, Jake Long, Lewan (Upchurch|MGoBlog)
Walsh Says: 6'4, 310. And here's where you need to adjust for inflation. To whit, here's Magnus when Kalis committed:
"He's 6'5". The last time Michigan had a 6'5" starting tackle was Steve Schilling, who was a poor fit so he moved to guard for his final two seasons. Before that it was Rueben Riley, who was clearly only playing tackle in 2006 because Alex Mitchell was an all-time fatty. So the last legitimate 6'5" offensive tackle (i.e. one who wasn't playing awkwardly out of position) was Adam Stenavich in 2005, who was an All-Big Ten player."
Go around the conference and there's plenty of 6'5 tackles who do just fine—Ricky Wagner, Tyler Moore and Jeremiah Sirles are all 6'6—but still, Walsh's 6'4,310 is a 1997 anachronism, not a wish for shorter than average bookends. On the other hand he doesn't give as many damns about the weight:
Of course, you could have great ones at 330 pounds, but the reality is they play well in spite of being 330. The only value of 330 is they attract the TV cameras. Some of them are not going to be 300, they are always going to be 330 or whatever. But others could be a finely tuned, highly conditioned athlete at 300, but they play at 330 and can still play.
In a tackle Walsh wants—No. 1—foot agility in a two-yard square, foot speed to a tackle is what arm strength is to the guy whose blindside he's protecting: an innate ability that can be covered but will ultimately determine the player's ceiling. The next thing is length (here's where height comes into play) of the arms and, more importantly, how well he times his extension. "The tackle must have a knack at feeling of knowing where to intersect people."
There's also an attitude for this position, which features a lot of one-on-one battles throughout the game where one loss can spell disaster—one mistake cascading into two could be the entire margin of the game.
Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Jake Long. When he was first recruited, Long was a come-lately to football but had boom potential due to his quick feet and huge frame.
What to look for in a Scouting Report: Height. Maybe someone saying something about how his footwork and athleticism is incredible. "Nastiness" was a thing for a time but once scouts realized people took that as something to get excited about when it really means "he's mean to the guys he's blocking" it stopped being useful.
What you can learn on film: Watch his feet. Here's an example of really good footwork in a college OT.
What could signal bust potential: Big haws. People see a 6'8/340 17-year-old and go nuts. Remember it's an athletic 6'8/340 17-year-old you need.
How our guys compare: Taylor Lewan needs only to finish this year as the No. 1 draft pick to equal the career of Long. Michael Schofield (right: Bryan Fuller) isn't as strong as Lewan but he's nearly as agile; he can also play guard with those feet and did quite well there in 2011, however Schofield is 6'7 and "was pretty good" in the Big Ten last year at OT equals someone you don't move unless you really really want to.
That's the seniors. Let's look at the juniors.
Okay, let's look at the sophomores.
Freshmen then. Magnuson came with the fancy footwork hype but needed to put on more weight, and Braden is a huge dude who was getting the coaching buzz as being ready to play. One answer to the guard spot is if one of these guys is really ready to be the Next-Next Jake Long, Schofield can move back inside.
Of the 2013 freshmen, neither is likely to be in the mix. Logan Tuley-Tillman is a big kid who needs to work on his technique, and Chris Fox is another kind of come-lately with quick feet.
Mouse-over tags don't work on Android with Chrome.
I can't see the scroll over tags either. Since I don't have a computer and only my phone for Internet currently this is a bummer. I love the idea though as I don't always get every single reference. And no, I'm not an old curmudgeon with no sense of current pop culture, I'm 28. Great article Seth, a very enjoyable read for football enthusiasts.
Thanks for a good read Seth
Thanks Seth
Seth exceptional write-up that educated the readers. In fact I saved it to compare the team later in the year. This is the kind of writing that has been missing since football season and I think you answered the critics with this informative piece. Great job and I look forward to more.
The mouse over tags are a good idea to help new readers keep up with some of the references. Be careful though, sometimes the old adage of "if you have to explain it, the joke isn't funny anymore" becomes true. That said, I think they were well used in this article.
The mouse-over tags are nice, but is there a way to format them so that they don't disappear until you "mouse away" from them? Right now, you mouse over and have about 5 seconds before the tag disappears.
I think that's a browser setting. Mine don't disappear until I move my cursor off them.
Did you mean "proliferated"?
I actually think he meant to use "permeated" there.
No, clearly he just was trying to use permacultured
Damn you people. I thought "perforated" was clever, since it means the thing you think it means and literally means "poked holes in" -- which is a great way to describe what the WCO did to the NFL.
It was clever.
Usually I just assume Seth has thought more moves ahead and attempt to figure it out. The internet and "search" are useful for this.
The only thing that has been perforated lately is your artsy-fartsy writing style, and I would rather listen to reruns of the Dan Dakich show on 1070 the fan than read your articles.
Funny. Fuuuunnnny.
Glad I'm not the only one who caught that one. Now I don't have to go find the "I do not think it means what you think it means" jpeg.
Damn informative. I like it.
I like it when you grace us with your presence
Dude, Third Coast Offense [roll over tag text: the Great Lakes are sometimes referred to as the Third Coast, as in Bell's "Third Coast Ale"]
This is a really good article, very well written, detailed and informative. I feel like I'll return to it in the coming years for reference, thanks Seth!
This is too conceptual for me. I do not understand the references.
I was a commenter on that post, yeah that post. I would like to say a wise man takes the negatives along with the positives and learns to be a better person in which ever way it involves that person.
Im sure Seth had hurt feelings because he's human but I would like to tip my hat to him for walking away from it with an open mind and trying to become the best Seth can be without losing himself.
I am now a more informed consumer of football. Great job.
Good article but I want to make a comment on insisting on playing a particular style. The NFL is a copycat league. Once a particular style gets popular for example Walsh style West Coast offense every team will compete for the same limited group of players. The cap guarantees you will be unable to spend your way to success. A good example in my opininon was the sudden popularity of 3-4 defenses after NE had success. All of a sudden there was competition on the draft and in FA and it became much harder for NE to sustain a great defense.
On offense I believe flexability and a willingnes to change is much more important then a style. Again looking at the best in NE, the offense seems to be remade every year. They go from a feature NFL back(Dillon) to a feature receiver(Moss), to spread & shred with role players, two spread with two TE's.
The one advantage of college is unlike the NFL all teams are not treated equal. The brand teams can recruit as many great players as they have scholarships and the SEC teams more. In college if you are picking the best players of a type you will at least have success against your little brothers on talent alone. Whether your finished product really is better or your technique better will not become apparant until you play another team on equal footing. And of course if you have the misfortune of playing Alabama you will be the little brother and your technique and style will be irrevlevant.
Would love to read one on the defense. Also, mouse-over tags are a good idea. Would of helped me out a few months back when I had no clue what anyone was talking about.
[edit:] WTF is up with Steve Wallace's helmet?!
I think that's one of those old-school anti-concussion caps like Steve Tasker (I think) wore as well. That's what it looks like, anyway.
From his Wiki page. "Throughout his career, Wallace endured many concussions, and was known for wearing a styrofoam (Procap) helmet atop his normal helmet to reduce the impact."
thanks for that comprehensive look Seth. Puts a lot into perspective.
But WOW, is Kalis a beast. Can't wait to see how he does with regular reps. Love it!
Here it's arm strength—more an NFL problem than college since college QBs can learn systems and Navarre their way to great college careers with only one type of pass.
Is this a criticism of Navarre? It looks like a criticism but I don't understand it.
I cannot abide even vague, unspecified criticism of John Navarre.
This shall not stand.
Navarre threw short, medium, and long passes well. He put better touch on halfback screen passes than anyone who followed him. After Navarre, the halfback screen was basically dropped from the playbook. He threw a fine deep out--the classic arm strength pass. He was even more consistent with his deep ball than anyone who followed him. Henne threw beautiful bombs but also tended to airmail every third one even when his reciever was all alone.
At least until his senior year, Navarre regularly threw to Tacopants on medium-range passes over the middle of the field. Gave me heart palpitations every time. He also had the nearly inexplicable habit of throwing the ball directly into the turf about once a game. He was quite good as a senior, having minimized the ocurrence of these snafus, but let's not make him into something he's not.
I don't think he's criticizing as much as making a distinction between good and great college QBs. Brady = Great. Navarre = Good. In college, good can get you by in most cases and allow a team to still be competitive at an elite level.
I think the relative trajectories of both players professional careers bears this analysis out.
I'm not sure myself, but I think it lines up with my personal criticism of Navarre, which is that his passes were predictable. It was the same motion and while the throw was quick, the setup not so much. An NFL-caliber QB can do all sorts of tricky things -- throw blind to a spot, hit a receiver in stride, throw on the run, lob it, flick it, sidearm it, pitch it. It messes up the defenders' timing and allows for greater variation in routes. Navarre had a pretty throwing motion, but it was only one throwing motion. I got frustrated watching him because he was so easy to read -- he'd square up to his target, set his feet and zip it. Same speed, same trajectory, every time. Which is all fine and good (nice fundamentals) and it made his throws very catchable and accurate, but it means when it wasn't the ideal throw he'd have to do it anyway and sometimes the DB got a jump on the ball. It put a lot of pressure on the receivers to create their own separation. While I agree that he's better than many of the more recent Michigan QBs, I don't think they dropped the halfback screen because he was uniquely qualified to do it; Navarre needed the halfback screen to be there because he sure as hell wasn't going to improvise his way out of trouble. It was the best way to use his talent without overexposing his flaw. I don't remember toooo many INTs but I remember more than a few critical PBUs with the game on the line, though I'll be the first to admit my memory's fuzzy.
Henne was just as bad, except worse. He would lock into a target so bad you could hear a computerized "beep beep beep" going off in his head. Sure he could zip it but if you give the DB a half second to read the QB and know exactly where the ball's going to go, and then throw it without Navarre's accuracy. . . argh. Mgoblog liked his progression but even as a senior, Henne was teasing my inner cornerback like crazy. He put even more pressure on the wideouts to create separation than Navarre did. If he didn't have Braylon Edwards, Jason Avant and Steve Breaston to throw to, his career would've been a LOT worse. That said, having NFL-caliber receivers and a QB who could zip it to them was a successful formula.
Correction: Navarre threw short, medium, and long passes HARD. He became an effective quarterback once he had 3 years in the offense, and that's the point--he wasn't a natural or an NFL talent because he didn't have that gut instinct, however he could cover a lot of flaws by throwing it hard and accurate, and Michigan built around that.
Henne could throw as good of a screen. The difference was the RBs. That RB screen was a lob, meaning it will be most effective if it's a tall guy throwing it to another tall guy. Of all M's QBs since 2000 the only guy who just couldn't throw a screen was Threet. If you lob a ball to Mike Hart versus Chris Perry, there's an extra 12 inches of drop time when time is at a premium. That also makes it a tougher pass, for the same reason it's harder for a 7-foot center to shoot a free throw.
The other factor was the offensive lines. Remember above how Walsh said let your guards dictate what you do with your offense? A Navarre to Perry screen would have a Stenavich, Lentz, and any manner of guy named Dave getting out there because doggonit our Daves could go. A Henne to Hart screen would have to wait for a Mitchell or Boren or Kraus or Morgan or Ciulla to waddle out there. After '07 we went to spread, so WR screens became more important than the standard Perry thing. Note in Brady's time we ran a great fullback screen with Shea. That play is about personnel--it wasn't just something Navarre threw well, it was something the '02-'03 teams did well. Remember if you tried the same thing with Denard there would be a play side defensive end playing contain right in the middle of it--Navarre's immobility meant that DE was free to chase the roll, and thus get him out of position. I wouldn't run the Transcontinental with Denard either.
Note: Michigan in 2011 and 2012 often deployed that rollout screen which uses Denard as a decoy, rolls Gardner the same direction, and then once the entire wet-pantsed defense was hauling ass that direction we'd flip it back to Vincent Smith.
Thanks for the reply. And please don't take this as confrontational but I think that Henne's problem was that he lacked the touch for screen passes. The bit about height differential and short running backs sounds completely made up and not something I've ever heard before.
If short running backs have issues with screen passes then why are 3rd down backs traditionally smaller quick guys when they are the main recipients of screens? Off the top of my head I can think of Darren Sproles and Ray Rice, both prolific screen catchers, are both also short. Those are just the first two I thought of. I could go on and on.
But my main point, and it is mostly schtick, is that John Navarre was a good QB and not deserving of the constant abuse he still gets. People fall all over themselves adoring Chad Henne and hating Navarre even though Navarre had a better college career. Clearly, that is just my opinion.
I also never got the impression that Denard was very good at halfback screens either. His big screen was the throwback where he was mostly just chucking the ball back to a wide open WR. Virtually no touch required.
Methinks at the NFL level, being a good target is a secondary consideration for a back. 3rd down (pretty much every NFL play, really) is literally all about whatever it takes to move the sticks, so you want to keep the defense guessing. Being short means a 3rd down back can provide lots of variation in fast-developing plays, whether it's cut-blocking a blitzer, running a tough route (rapid changes in motion like moving as if to pass block then tearing for the sideline) or literally hiding behind the offensive line. At the college level there isn't a "3rd down back" per se so I really doubt we recruit on height. I see quite a lot of height variation among Michigan backs.
Lobs may be easier when the target is taller, but what you REALLY look for in a 3rd down back are good hands; they excel at catching passes and not fumbling. The pass can be perfect and the target ideal, but the back still has to catch it and the big guys often lack upper body control. Many of them are marginal in other ways and become ball control specialists to stay employed, so that could also have something to do with it.
I've been on this blog for some many years now and feel like I am pretty savvy on all the references and jokes. Still, I find myself a little confused on occassions and the roll over text helped me. I do agree with previous poster that it would be nice if the text could stick around a little longer.
So, I got into a discussion with an ohio fan I work with over receivers. He said he read somewhere that Hoke and/or Borges said receiver speed was overrated and had a good laugh at that one. I said that it made sense to me that although speed is important, if you can't get open (through good route running) and being able to go up and get the ball, then the fastest guy isn't helping your offense. Oh, and then there's that little part about having good hands and all.
After reading Walsh's outlook towards receivers, I'm starting to think that speed is indeed not quite as important as the aforementioned skills, along with body control. Not that speed isn't important, its just one factor of many that make a good receiver. Or a great receiver. I think I recall that even one of the (arguably) greatest receivers Walsh had in Jerry Rice wasn't the fastest guy out there, but had the other skills much more than his peers.
I would love for Jason Avant to come back through the door anytime. And The Threat kind of speaks for himself. Speed is good, but not required.
The Key ingredient for Walsh was endurance, or more specifically the ability to run at top speed through the entire route and for every route run during the game. For a receiver to be a threat on each and every play, they have to run their route at top speed for the entire length of the route, so for deep threats 20-30 yards worth each play. Jerry Rice had an insane work ethic, and even other NFL players who attempted to work out with him would admit defeat. So think about running 20 yard sprints 40-60 times during a full game and maintaining the same speed such that the timing of the QB is always on target.
Woodson made most of his interceptions because he would allow the receivers to get open a little, and then had the instinct and athletic ability to close down that opening once the QB threw the ball. A receiver who runs fast in the first part of his route and then slows down creates that same kind of dangerous interception opportunity. He burns the guys he's covering, who then sprints as fast as possible to catch up, just when the receiver is slowing down because he thinks his job is over.
My summation of what Hoke wants from every player on his team is effort and precision. Athletic ability is definitely something they want to select, but you can't coach god given talent, you can't coach height and speed. You can coach precision and technique, and given a player with slightly less talent, but a highly coachable attitude and elite work ethic, Hoke will pick the work ethic every time.
I bet that Gallon has that Jerry Rice like work ethic, and the comments from Denard and Devin indicate that he is a go to guy because you can rely on him. While it's likely that Gallon will get the #21 jersey, I really think, at least for the short term, he is the only player who has the in air dexterity that reminds you of Anthony Carter, and he should be wearing the #1 jersey. But then again, I grew up on Michigan football with my dad screaming at the TV on 3rd down, "Throw it to Carter" so I'm pretty biased.
So yeah, look for speed and height, cause duh, but those god given talents can't make up for lack of effort and precision.
It's an oversimplification. I think what Walsh is against is recruiting speed at the expense of actual receiving ability. A lot of teams think if they can find that receiver that can burn the last guy, they win. South Carolina certainly made a good argument; I loved watching Kovacs but all his skill and discpline didn't matter when he couldn't keep up with his man.
But there are also busts because speed is all they have. A simple one-deep zone where any post route will be met with a hard-hitting FS in the back of the receiver is all they need to take away the deep threat. That takes pressure off the defense and now it's like the post route isn't there at all. What's the point of a decoy if it doesn't scare the defense? (As an aside, this is why I hate receivers who don't run hard on every play.)
Speed is important, but the receiver has to reliably catch the ball even if it's off-target. Then when he races upfield you can stretch the defense vertically, opening up the middle of the field. To me, the importance of a receiver isn't what he does with the ball, but how the defense accounts for him when he doesn't have the ball. What I want in a wideout is a guy who has two DBs accounting for him on every play; that puts the run defense in a very tough spot because if any play breaks past the linebackers the 5-yard runs become 20-yard runs. But to strike that sort of fear into the secondary, the receiver MUST be able to catch anything thrown near him. Beyond that, every bitter ounce of speed you can squeeze out of the guy makes him that much more dangerous.
You want receivers to be fast, blazing fast, but a fast receiver who can't catch is like a Ferrari without a steering wheel. Sure it's fast, but you're not gonna go anywhere with it.
Well, I'mma let me finish, but I just couldn't do it until I gave written expression to the wave of incredulity that washed over me when I read this:
"Walsh's Favorite Wolverine: Tom Brady, obviously. Tate Forcier."
This is not me being a smartass: I'm honestly not sure if you're being funny here. You might be able to argue with a straight face that Forcier was accurate, though Walsh's emphasis on "passes being caught ... by your intended receiver" would seem to put the lie to that. But something ol' Tater resolutely did not possess was the ability to "handle progressions and broken plays with grace as opposed to a sense of urgency", still less to escape from pressure in a manner that "seems calm, not rushed." Unless you think turning your back to the play and wheeling around 20 yards behind the line of scrimmage with the ball hanging out to the side like the proverbial loaf of bread was just a particularly idiosyncratic way to display calmness.
Again, maybe you were trying to be funny. Regardless, I'm confident that the rest of the piece is quite good. But unless you're saying that Forcier was the best West Coast prototype, like, since Chad Henne, I think you've been watching way, way too much of the spring practice 2009 "Weapon of Choice" hype video lately.
EDIT: Just returned to reading and saw this one: "Doesn't make you nervous." I'm now about 70% certain I just missed the joke.
The rest was indeed very good. Also, I realize now that the little burst of pissiness by those who carefully measure the amount of humor deployed on their favorite sports blog seems to have pervaded the comments to some degree. I don't care about that, I think the overall style of the blog is great, and this is just as well-written and informative as most of the things Seth writes. (I'm kind of with people in terms of ignoring 'Dear Diary,' but that's because of it's inherent nature as 'second-tier of the blog digest', which may be something of a flawed concept.)
Perhaps I missed a joke too, but I think you are wrong about Forcier.
1. Forcier had a very accurate arm. IIRC his accuracy and DSR numbers compared favorably to those of Henne as a freshman, and that doesn't even account for the fact that he played half the year with the same shoulder injury that forced Sam Bradford to miss an entire season, and that Henne was throwing to future NFL wide receovers and Forcier definitely wasn't.
2. You may not have liked the way he held the ball when he did so, but Forcier was extremely effective at buying time in and around the pocket while keeping his eyes downfield. I think that the ability for a QB to keep his eyes downfield and still make a good throw on the run is what is ultmatey desired when someone wishes for a QB who can handle broken plays with grace instead of a sense of urgency.
3. "Doesn't make you nervous" is totally subjective. You are obviously entitled to your own opinion, but I remember being much more nervous about something bad happening when Denard dropped back to pass on 3rd and 11, than I ever was when Tate was playing.
Ultimately, is Tate one of best former Michigan QB's for the West Coast Offense? I don't know, but I don't think its such a ridiculous assertion that it was intended to be a joke. The kid obviously had his flaws, but when his mind was in it, he still had the potential to be a very good football player.
Personally, I just pretend like Forcier didn't happen and it simplifies all analysis. We've only got that one season, where he was injured and being yanked in and out of the lineup all the time and the offense was so weird then.
If Michigans offense in 2011 was criticized for being "unsustainable" then 2009 was off the charts in that category. I don't think we will ever know if Forcier's apparent ability to flip the switch in the 4th quarter and run around like a headless chicken adlibbing to amazingly good effect was skill or insanely good luck. There is evidence on both sides.
1. Like I said, Forcier's accuracy may be something one could point to. But he threw a lot of picks. Hence the reference to the intended receiver catching the pass.
2. Forcier was relatively successful with his rollout schtick until he came up against better defenses, who proceeded to shut it down with relative ease. He absolutely did not have pocket presence - at the hint of a pass rush, he tended to immediately roll out to the side, rarely making the subtle moves that would allow him to keep his eyes downfield. Again, his preferred move to avoid the rush was to literally turn his back to the line as he rolled out. And the loaf of bread thing was not merely a pet peeve - he lost more than a few fumbles that way, IIRC even a couple of times on his own, without a defender having touched the ball.
3. Yeah, I guess nervousness, as an emotional state, is axiomatically subjective. The Denard comparison, though, is a slam-dunk straw man argument, since there is no suggestion at all that Denard would be Bill Walsh's pick over Tate. I actually implied this when I said that Seth must have picked Forcier as simply the most Walshian QB since Henne. Anyway, I still can't believe that someone could interpret Tate's play as exhibiting calmness in the face of duress, but hey, maybe I'm in the minority there.
Here's a sampling of stats against decent defenses in 2009 (note that the inclusion of Notre Dame and Illinois are rather generous.) To my mind, they don't demonstrate much Walshian mojo at all. Now you might say that, indeed, Forcier was but a freshman that year. Great - but that's the only real year we've got. So maybe the mythical, clear-headed and experienced Senior Forcier looks like Joe Montana - but that is a figment of the imagination and nothing more.
It was kind of a joke and totally serious. The effect I was going for was exactly the "What What What" Mrs. Broflovski you gave me.
Forcier was exactly what you look for in a perfect WCO quarterback. He throws a very catchable ball accurately whether on the run or stationary (preferably on the run) but more importantly he had that cocksurity and innance presence to make a play out of something.
He took apart some good defenses, in fact he was the secret reason the 2010 was so good. He was also a freshman for his starting career, and he exacerbated his freshman-ity by never watching film or studying the playbook or doing all the things that Brady/Montana/Favre did like madmen to get to where they are. As per Three & Out, Denard winning the job in Spring 2010 was basically Denard going from freshman who didn't study to sophomore who studied the normal amount, while Forcier was out fuckdaddling his way out of football.
Acting purely with intuition (because lord knows it wasn't hard work), Forcier as a true freshman was nearly as effective a passer as Henne as a junior. Think back to Henne as a freshman, and how reigned in he had to be to avoid making mistakes. With Forcier there was no holding him back--you rolled with it and sometimes you got true freshman and sometimes you got true greatness. You can beat Notre Dame on moxie alone, but nobody's ever beaten Ohio State without working his ass off, and Tate's two awful outings against OSU stand as a testament to what happens to those who don't respect either the game, or The Game.
All that running around like a chicken was because he wasn't willing to do what it takes to translate his innate abilities into a great quarterback. But I don't think it's even a question whether those innate abilities were there.
My remaining point of disagreement is that the ability to stay calm and read defenses is, to some degree, innate. He was so quick to resort to scrambling, and so consistent in the ways in which he did so, that I think it's sort of inappropriate to assume that if he'd worked a bit harder at learning the offense he would've looked something like the prototypical WCQB. From what I recall, he did the same shit in high school, too.
In other words, Forcier to me is very much more early-vintage, gun-slangin' Brett Favre than Brady or Montana. He was fairly accurate, but I still don't think he ever showed any evidence that he could be calm and composed when protection broke down. At least in 2009, I didn't really see any examples of good defenses that he really excelled against, as I remember ND's outfit being pretty mediocre. What I remember is that his rollout move was quickly accounted for by well-coached defenses like Iowa's and Ohio's, and nigh completely shut down. I've already spent way too much time looking at old stats to try my hand at 2010, though, so I'll take your word for that. Finally, since it seems to be the consensus that Rodriguez's offense can make QBs look much more efficient than they would under a WCO system, this might skew results a bit.
The final point I'd make is that I don't think you're accounting for height nearly enough. Having watched Rex Grossman and then Denard over the past several years, I've come to believe that there's a damn good reason NFL GMs treasure QBs 6'4" and taller. It's much easier to look calm and composed when you don't have to nimbly duck between Land Yacht linemen or vacate the pocket entirely in order to see downfield. There are the exceptional cases, of course - see: Brees, Drew. But Montana was 6'2" in an era when linemen were, as you point out, not as tall as they are today, and Brady is obviously a pretty tall dude. Forcier's height would be a major mark against prototype status, IME. I might go with (Sexiest Man Alive) Grbac, of whom I have admittedly fuzzy memories as being accurate, and who had a career completion percentage of 62.5% according to Wikipedia.
Calmness under pressure can completely be learned. 10000 hours makes an expert. Any operational specialist. If you put in your time doing something, you'll be an expert. You may not have the talent someone else has, but you'll have the knowledge. The knowledge will give you the calmness.