Daily Archives: October 2, 2019

Another day, another argument for pace

So, Kirby wants George Pickens to get the ball in his hands more.  Well, so do I.  Add him to the list of Fromm, Swift, Cager, etc.

There are only so many touches to go around when you’re fully committed to manball.


Filed under Georgia Football, Strategery And Mechanics

Your 10.2.19 Playpen


You know, I get if you’re a Trump fan because you like his policies.  I even get (even though I think it’s pretty childish) if you’re a Trump fan because Own The Libs.

You know what I don’t get?  How you don’t see a cranky old dude with a screw loose when you read stuff like this:

Privately, the president had often talked about fortifying a border wall with a water-filled trench, stocked with snakes or alligators, prompting aides to seek a cost estimate. He wanted the wall electrified, with spikes on top that could pierce human flesh. After publicly suggesting that soldiers shoot migrants if they threw rocks, the president backed off when his staff told him that was illegal. But later in a meeting, aides recalled, he suggested that they shoot migrants in the legs to slow them down. That’s not allowed either, they told him…

“You are making me look like an idiot!” Mr. Trump shouted, adding in a profanity, as multiple officials in the room described it. “I ran on this. It’s my issue.”

I don’t think Grandpa Simpson needs any help in the looking like an idiot department.  Your mileage may vary, but damned if I can see why.


UPDATE:  I know this won’t make any difference to some of you, but what the hell:

Frustrated with a record number of people seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border this spring, President Donald Trump at one point asked in a private meeting with close aides whether the U.S. could shoot migrants below the waist to slow them down.

The account, first reported in a book excerpt released by the The New York Times on Tuesday, was confirmed to ABC News by a senior administration official who was in the room at the time, as well as several other sources who were later briefed on the conversation.

According to two sources familiar with the matter, Trump in private meetings raised the prospect of shooting migrant families seeking asylum at the border as early as November 2018.

At least you’ve got this going for you:  “In a tweet Wednesday, Trump denied the allegations about the trench and the electrified fence, but did not address the idea of shooting migrants.”

(h/t AuditDawg)


Filed under GTP Stuff

Style alert

In a shocking development, Nike wants to separate you from some of the contents of your wallet.




Nike React Element 55 “Georgia”

Style Code: CK4839-001
Color: Black/White/University Red
Release Date: TBA
Price: $140

You have been warned.


Filed under Georgia Football, Stylin'

Return of the Mumme Poll

Screenshot_2019-09-30 (1) Senator Blutarsky ( MummePoll) TwitterOkay, let’s do this.

I was gratified by the interest y’all showed in response to my post asking about bringing back the Mumme Poll.  It’s enough that I’m willing to take a shot at resurrecting it.

So, let’s go through the logistics first.  This week’s games mark Week 6 of the college football season and as that was the traditional start for the Mumme Poll back in the day, we’ll go at it the same way now.

The time line for ballot casting/tallying/posting/commenting will work like this:

  1. Ballots should be submitted via email to me at mbroch@gmail.com on a Sunday/Monday basis.  That gives you two full days.
  2. On Tuesday, I’ll post about my ballot and give you the chance in the comments to post yours and discuss.
  3. Also on Tuesday, I’ll compile everyone’s ballot into the weekly MP standings.  (Yes, I’ll be doing it manually, so bear with me.)
  4. On Wednesday, the weekly Mumme Poll standings will be posted.

That’s it.  I’ll conduct a poll every week of the regular season.

As far as rules for voting go, they’re pretty simple.

  • The Mumme Poll is based on approval voting.  You do not need to submit a ballot ranking the teams in some subjective order.  You do not even have to designate a particular team as your choice for number one, unless, of course, you limit your ballot to one team.
  • There are no restrictions on the number of teams you choose to place on your ballot.  If you want to choose a top 25 every week, be my guest (just realize I’m not going to pay any attention to your order).  If you want to select a potential playoff field of eight or four teams, that’s fine, too.  If you want to indulge your inner PAWWWLLL!!! and choose Alabama alone, have at it.  For a point of reference, I intend to limit my ballot to those teams I think are legitimately involved in the national title conversation, so my list will probably start out near ten and dwindle as the regular season progress.  But you do you, okay?
  • Please, don’t try to game the process.  Don’t submit more than one ballot a week.  Do not list a particular school more than once on a given ballot.
  • Also, identify yourself in your email when you sent your vote to me, just so I have a name or moniker to reference.  Place “Mumme Poll ballot” in the subject line of your email so I can easily identify it.

As long as the interest level stays up enough to generate a meaningful set of results, I’ll keep at it, but I make no promises if we’re looking at 15-20 participants by season’s end.  And, honestly, it’s not as if putting together a ballot like this is going to require a huge time investment on your part.  As I mentioned before, the last MP ballot I cast in 2015 took me all of about 30 seconds to put together.

So let’s have some fun with this.

Any questions or comments you may have, I’ll do my best to respond to here.


UPDATE:  Folks, quick point of order here, in case I wasn’t clear.  I’ve already had two ballots emailed to me this morning.  I appreciate the enthusiasm, but votes can’t be cast until after Week 6 games are in the books.  Sunday, Sunday, Sunday…


Filed under Mumme Poll

“To believe that amateurism is the load-bearing wall in NCAA sports is absurd.”

It’s a real pleasure to outsource to Brian Cook the skewering of all the bad takes out there in the wake of California’s Fair Pay to Play Act becoming law.  You should read the whole thing, as it’s full of examples of what I like to refer to as pseudo-economic rationalizations — just say you don’t want to pay players and leave it at that, folks — but I can’t help but zero in on what might be the dumbest rationalization referenced there.

If there is no value in an individual college athlete’s name because it’s all derived from the school’s brand, then why is anyone worried that the star quarterback might get more bank than his offensive linemen?  After all, they’re all wearing the same jersey, right?

This is totally detached from reality.  It should also help you understand how I can dismiss so many arguments in support of maintaining the status quo while respecting the underlying feelings of romance for it.  Although if you are a romantic, the NCAA’s cynical milking of those feelings and its enablers’ support of that ought to offend you.


Filed under The NCAA

When it comes to UGA and advanced stats, a picture tells a thousand words

Georgia fans bitching about the offense and style points dates back to the Richt era, if not longer, so I’ve long resigned myself to brushing aside the particular brand of frustration a portion of the fan base resorts to if the Dawgs play a game when they don’t score touchdowns as frequently as Gawd intended for them to score.

The reality is, though, that Coley’s offense has been damned productive so far this season.  I’ve posted plenty of stats to that effect, but if you’re numerically challenged, perhaps this chart of Nathan’s will help:

Screenshot_2019-10-02 What Advanced Stats Tell Us About UGA After Week 5

It’s not quite Oklahoma good, but it’s frigging good, nevertheless.

There’s plenty more of that in his post, if you’re interested.  The only minor bone I have to pick with it comes from this passage:

Instead of fretting about style points, I think the real worry for Dawg fans should be the offense’s performance when they must score on several consecutive possessions (i.e. when playing Alabama, Auburn, or Clemson). I don’t worry about the talent or the playbook, but rather the staff has the aforementioned will to win a shootout.

I was at the Rose Bowl when Georgia faced that situation and Smart’s team did just fine in a shootout.  Obviously, I don’t think it’s his preferred setting, but the talent and the drive was there to survive.  Sure, past results are no guarantee of future performance, but I think they’re capable of operating in that situation.

But, yeah, folks, quit being concerned about style points.  A Georgia team that wins the SEC East is going to be in the hunt for the natty, even if it only beat Notre Dame by six points.


Filed under Georgia Football, Stats Geek!

Today, in I don’t think that word means what you think it means

AJ-C header: “Counterintelligence a factor in Georgia-Tennessee matchup”.

I thought Chip Towers was going to discuss the opposite of intelligence in Knoxville.  Fooled me.  (I keed, I keed… sort of.)


Filed under Because Nothing Sucks Like A Big Orange