mad dog

My question exactly.

1) Star Trek: TNG 2) How I Met Your Mother 3) Big Bang Theory 4) Mythbusters 5) Stargate: SG1 All of these have a strong dork factor. With good reason. I have been, and always shall be, a dork. 6) Chuck 7) Arrested Development 8) The Office 9) Star Trek: Enterprise 10) Man Vs. Wild

I gotta say... i finally knuckled under and bought it. I've been nothing but impressed with it. There's an element of strategy that was totally missing from previous iterations which makes for a compelling and addictive gameplay experience. I'm in the second season of a UNT dynasty. The second game was away at Clemson (ranked #18) on a rainy afternoon. Since your players actually play to the weather (fumble more / catch worse when it is wet), I went to the "strategy" screen and told my offensive players to hang on to the ball (more ball security, fewer broken tackles), and concentrate on making the catch (higher catch chance, fewer broken tackles). On Defense, I told my guys to go for the strip (higher strip chance, higher facemask penalty chance), wrap up (fewer big hits, better tackling), and to jump the snap (better QB pressure, more offsides). Once the game started, I noticed immediately that Clemson was playing the pass. Their line was jumping the snap, their safeties were dropping deep, and using a lot of zone coverage. I countered with a healthy dose of Dunbar and Mosely. As I started marching down the field with 5 and 6 yard gains, the defense slowly started adapting. The d-line started pinching in, linebackers played closer and closer to their gaps, safeties crept up to about five yards off the line. I saw more and more blitzes. Then I hit them over the top with a 30 yard pass to Sam Roberson. This year's version of the game has a really neat "setup play" feature. This works when you run certain plays (say, an I-form HB iso) which have complimentary plays (an I-form playaction pass). The more successful you are at running the setup play, the better chance you have at pulling off the complimentary play. So, in this case, Clemson's defense completely bit on a playaction fake, and there wasn't anyone within 15 yards of Roberson when he caught the ball. Once I had the lead, I switched all my strategies to conservative and gradually built on the lead. As they got further and further behind, they were forced to throw deep into the teeth of a cover three, which resulted in a lot of pass breakups and two interceptions. When I had the ball, i switched on the "chew clock" option, which quickly runs the play clock down to about 10-12 seconds on each play. In this way, I could eat up time on each drive, and dramatically shorten the game. I ended up winning 28-17, and it was immensely satisfying.

This.

You make a great case for Nelson, and I hope you are right. I disagree with you on special teams, though. I have no faith in the kicking unit, which ranked dead last in the NCAA (78.6%) in PATs, and a full six percentage points behind the next closest team (Western Kentucky at 84%). I have significant concerns with both punt and kickoff coverage units, which ranked 110th and 120th, respectively. Punt (112) and kickoff (115) returns weren't much better. The reason I place so much emphasis on the punter was because it was far and away the brightest spot on the squad (ranked 30th nationally). Losing the one money guy on your special teams, from a simple statistics standpoint, is going to dramatically decrease the performance of the squad when viewed as a whole. The only way for me to justify ranking them any higher is to take some unknown aspect (new recruits, player development, strength of coaching) on credit, which I am unprepared to do. I keep expecting this tweak or that tweak to make the kind of impact you're talking about, and I've been disappointed year after year. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying I'm all out of faith, and I'll need to see it to believe it. (I admit I'm a little jaded at this point).

I see what you are saying, and acknowledge that not every player is going to have a bag going into their first year. Where I'm coming from is that you can probably safely bank on one or two players coming through as playmakers, but expecting every trouble spot to be fixed by unproven players is, in my opinion, somewhat naive. When most of what I see from people is that "hey we signed this guy at punter, and these guys at WR, and these guys on the DL," I just say tap the brakes a little, because you're still going to have a ton of holes. Does that make any sense?

Reading through a lot of these points, it seems that those who claim positivity across multiple categories base most of their conclusions on conjecture, at best. Recruits, even if highly touted, have a big bag of nothing until they can prove it on the field. To be honest, kids more often than not will fizzle after getting to campus. How many difference makers do we currently have on the team? Of those, how many were difference makers during their first year playing? It would be a tremendous statistical anomaly to have new guys show up and contribute at every position of need. Very few of these guys, historically speaking, turn into impact players. I used to have an easy time looking at incoming freshmen and jucos with Pollyanna eyes, thinking that we just recruiting "the class" that will turn things around. I just got tired of looking for them every year and never finding them. Likewise, there's no way you can "replace" a proven all-conference caliber punter with, frankly, some dude who at this point is nothing more than a new name. Is there a chance he might show up and become our beloved mush mouthed Coach Joe? Yes, but there is also a chance we run the Belt and show up in New Orleans again: I'm just not betting on it. Likewise spending a scholarship on a punter is nice, but that's not getting better. Speed on special teams is nice, but that doesn't make you a great returner. Even if it did, you're still dependent upon the other 10 return team guys to open holes for you, which happened with stunning irregularity last year. The only thing I'm comfortable accepting on credit alone is that the coaching staff will be improved, and that is based on specific examples from Coach Dodge on how he is tweaking his offense and Coach DeLoach's proven track record at North Texas.

I can see where you're coming from, and agree with you to a certain extent. I think I may have been a little too light on the hit to our receiving corps, but I think that I think the offensive line, from an experience and growth standpoint, is certainly nothing to sneeze at. If I were to re-evaluate, I might grade the passing a little lower. We'll have to agree to disagree on the defense. There are parts that are good, but one weak position in a defense will kill you. If you have one bad receiver, you don't have to throw to him, or throw at all. If you have a bad corner, teams are going to key in on them all night long. If you have have question marks at defensive end, one tackle spot, one linebacker spot, a cornerback spot, and both safety spots... That's where I'm coming from.

Exactly. I'm not saying some aspects about next year won't be better than last year. Individually, there are elements to be excited about, but, taken as a whole, I can't bring myself to be optimistic about our chances for even a .500 season. Start from the obvious: we were clearly the worst team in the FBS last year. Offense was inconsistent and struggled; defense was flat out terrible. For me to belive that our record will substantively improve next year would necessitate an overall net positive gain. The problem isn't that there aren't things that are going to be better; it is that there are several things that are going to be worse, as well. Passing game: Positive: Our offensive line is bigger, stronger, and more experienced than last year. Kelvin Drake returns. Tight end sets will give QB some added protection. Tyler Statford may be eligible. Negative: Brand new quaterback whose inexperience at the college level cannot be discounted. Quaterback is small and, based on the past two years, somewhat fragile, and will require additional protection. Even assuming terrific pass protection (which is something of a leap at this time), he will still need to work harder to find passing lanes. Overall: Push. An undersized, inexperienced QB, especially one in his first year, is almost always a liability in the passing game. Despite improved protection, it is still up to him to make plays. That remains to be seen if it can happen. Running game: Positive: See above with offensive line. Several different options at runner who offer widely varying skill sets. All are proven in game situations and can deliver if given the chance. Negative: This will require committment from the coaching staff to truly contribute to the team. Through two seasons, there has been very limited offensive adjustment in a broad sense, and so there are questions if such a commitment is possible. Overall: Push. All the talent in the world won't matter if they aren't properly used. I do not believe a coaching staff designed around the shotgun pass can suddenly and dramatically morph into a run first team, especially when the coach's son is under (several feet behind?) center. Special Teams: Positive: New coach and "emphasis" on special teams. Negative: Loss of a effective punter. No significant roster moves to address last year's woes. Overall: Loss. Everything which can be said positively is based solely on conjecture. In this case, any substantive negative factor would swing this towards loss. Gandy might be the Hayden Fry of special teams: he'll need to be just to get a pulse out of a unit that is exactly the same as last year, minus your best special teams player. Defense: Positive: Addressed size concerns along the defensive line. Still a relatively young unit, but starting to get some multi-year lettermen. Secondary has some speed. Full year for DeLoach to put his stamp on the defense. Negative: Starting a defense end at tackle, and a linebacker at defensive end. Secondary speed doesn't matter if you're going to bite on playaction or play out of position. Some question marks at OLB. Overall: Push. There is undeniably some improvement on paper, and DeLoach definitely knows what he is doing. It is just a case of getting the horse to drink now that you've led it to water. Given the past few seasons, however, I think the horse is dehydrated and leaning towards death. Coaching: Positive: Dodge has implemented several new offensive wrinkles designed to adapt to the demands of college game. Has acknowledged special teams and will try to make that more of a priority. Brought in more experienced coaching staff and added a full time strength position. DeLoach is proven and will eventually whip his guys into shape. Negative: All the potential in the world and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee. Now they must justify their potential with results. Overall: Gain. I believe the coaching staff has learned its lessons. Whether or not they can adjust and improve remains to be seen. But all the factors are in place for me to believe coaching will be better in 09. Overall, these five areas put the entire next season as a push. I do not expect them to be worse, but I do not expect them to be better, either.

Seems like an awfully Green Grenade line to me...

Probably some of the best analysis I've seen in a year.

+1?

The power of radio...

I loves me some Tina. Even if she's dead. Also Takeaknee.net > stormfront.org. Church.

What about this one?

I think you mispelled Mexians.

I think 38 is a little high. For me, I'd set the line more in the 28-31 range.

Eff the Assyrians.

+1

Patch 1.01 dropped yesterday, i think. CDJ (username) has good rosters, I'd keep an eye out for his.

How is ol' Waco these days, big spill?

Things are getting tense. Maybe an old standby bit Will lead to a hug?

I don't know, but there's this Mexian on my block who'll sell some to you real cheap.

You forgot "Kids, please don't"

Types of Cigars? Cohiba Montecristo Partagás Romeo y Julieta Hoyo de Monterrey Macanudo Don Tomas El Rey del Mundo Encanto Punch Cesars Ejecutivos El Aroma Don Chicho Glorias de España Hoja de Mexicali Camaguey Carlos Toraño Casa de Nicaragua Perdomo Troya Clasico Don Bienve Hoja Boricua Puerto Rico 965 Hoja Boricua Gran Reserva Alonzo Menendez Angelina Dannemann Le Cigar Cienfuegos Captaris