I wrote this as a reply within a thread below, but felt the urge to make a new thread out of it.
Regarding this story by Matt Hinton at Grantland.com (which is a great site that I recommend whole-heartedly, although I felt Hinton missed the mark with this article):
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2...egon-connor-cook-mark-dantonio-playoff-hopes/
My take on Hinton's takes:
(I'm not calling him names. He can criticize MSU and MSU players all he wants and it won't bother me. I'm merely analyzing his analysis).
1. He is trying to lump Connor Cook into the “slower than average” category of MSU and Alabama QBs? He doesn’t know Cook can run a 4.6, and sometimes faster (depending on who is timing). Judging by the rest of the article, I'm not surprised by his uninformed assessment of Cook.
2. He says MSU quarterbacks are “boring?”
Maybe this guy needs to start covering team cage fighting or something more exciting. Cook is a lot of things. His decision-making is anything but conservative. I think he led the country last year in yards per completion. Yet he's boring, according to this writer.
I'm not saying Cook is great, or underrated. I'm not trying to be a Cook cheerleader. But "boring" he definitely is not.
The writer kind of back-hand slaps a guy like Cousins for merely being an NFL interim starter. Okay. But didn’t he pretty much beat out, and outlast “non-boring” QB Robert Griffin III. If Cousins is boring, what is Griffin?
3. Hinton unsurprisingly uses completion percentage as a knock against Cook. Hasn’t it become common knowledge that spread QBs inflate their completion percentage with bubble screens and various uptempo, short, high-percentage throws? Those routes aren’t heavily used at MSU. Didn’t Hoyer dispel this notion for people?
Hinton hasn’t done enough research, and isn't in touch with the modern game.
It’s okay to be wrong. But when you’re wrong WHILE criticizing, well then that opens you up to scathing counter-criticism.
4. “By-the-book-blandness.” Again, Hinton hasn’t watched Cook very much, or he has watched Cook and lacks an educated eye. I normally wouldn’t hold these things against him. National writers don’t get a chance to watch EVERY player every week. But again, if you’re going to criticize, please know your material.
5. He’s calling MSU’s offense stodgy? Again, it looks to me like he is allowing preconceived notions and stereotypes to cloud his thinking. Is he unaware of where MSU ranked nationally in scoring offense last year?
6. I agree with this passage from the article:
“Saturday’s rematch against No. 7 Oregon has the feel of a referendum — not only on Cook’s ceiling in his final college season, but on the ceiling for the entire program Dantonio has been grooming for this opportunity for nine years. If not now, when?”
7. “Instead, they were exposed as just another plodding Big Ten outfit that ran out of gas in the face of the spread, in line with the prevailing narrative at the time.”
Again, this writer is way too prone to adhere to stereotypes and preconceived notions. He loves his "prevailing narratives" doesn't he?
MSU had plenty of speed last year. The Spartans lost at Oregon due to endurance and depth factors more so than a lack of speed (read: not willing to play enough second-stringers) more so than lack of speed.
But he wants to write about rust-belt slowness, so no one is going to stop him.
(That being said, I don’t discount the possibility that MSU might be slower at ‘star’ LB and cornerback this year than last year, even with Harris faster than a year ago. Slower due to not having a Mylan Hicks, or possibly not being willing to try Harris’ second-stringer at the ‘star.’)
8. True, MSU tapped out in the game at Oregon. But he's calling it a "flop?" Hinton is the type of guy who makes fun of a defender in a basketball game for attempting to block a shot and failing, and instead gets dunked on. Hinton would rather the defender get out of the way and let the offensive player dunk without being challenged, rather than risk getting posterized.
MSU played at Oregon. Hinton needs to write that sentence 5,000 times. MSU played at Oregon. MSU played at Oregon.
I doubt there is a long line of other programs yearning to play there.
True, MSU lost. So let’s try to embarrass MSU for even showing up and taking on a huge challenge.
Know this: No other team in the country would have beaten Oregon at Oregon that day. Not FSU, not Alabama, who were considered the top teams in America at that time.
This guy has the poison pen out and he thinks he’s creative and amusing.
True, MSU was lit up by Oregon, Ohio State and Baylor.
But how did FSU’s defense do against Oregon?
How did Alabama’s defense do against Ohio State?
How did TCU’s defense do against Baylor?
Everyone got lit up by those teams last year.
9. MSU’s offense has “evolved.”
He’s using the 2012 season as a baseline. He must not have watched the Cousins/Treadwell seasons. Those teams got into some pretty entertaining shootouts. But I have a feeling Hinton didn’t watch any of those games.
Again, don’t let the facts stand in the way of a good story, or your favorite stereotype.
The true evolution for MSU is taking place on defense. That’s the interesting trend for MSU.
(Is this the same Matt Hinton who used to cover NASCAR? Let me guess, this guy is from the south. If not, let me know. If he is from the south, does he also rip on southern teams, or does he tend to give them the benefit of the doubt? If he is an equal-opportunity flop-caller, that’s fine. But if he’s not, he needs to get called out).
10. He seems to be channeling Norm Hitzges with his citing of stats, stats, stats. But I give him credit for this interesting one: “The rematch will mark the first time anyone on the Ducks’ roster has taken the field in a game Oregon wasn’t favored to win.”
11. As for the Michigan reference, I’m not surprised Hinton allowed himself to be duped by the agenda-driven article in the NYTimes.
The guy who wrote that article in the NYTimes seemed to show up with the intent to write a little brother-themed story. He interviewed some coaches and players in July and asked them about Michigan. The story came off as if MSU’s players walk around all off-season talking about Michigan. No they don’t. They were asked about Michigan, by a guy who set out to paint that specific picture. And Hinton bit on it. He's easily-duped. Those two writers belong in the same sewing circle.
12. “Cook will have to be at his unassuming best.”
Again, Hinton simply hasn’t spent much time watching Cook play. Cook is more ragged-edge than boring or "unassuming." This guy is simply uninformed, trying to pass himself off as some sort of expert based on his perusal of stat sheets and a nod to a shoddy NYTimes article and "prevailing narrative."
13. I completely agree with his closing passage:
“If Michigan State is going to find itself where it wants to be in December, though, it’s hard to see how it’s going to get there if it can’t outgun the Ducks.”
But everything he did to set up that conclusion was wide to the right.
Regarding this story by Matt Hinton at Grantland.com (which is a great site that I recommend whole-heartedly, although I felt Hinton missed the mark with this article):
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/2...egon-connor-cook-mark-dantonio-playoff-hopes/
My take on Hinton's takes:
(I'm not calling him names. He can criticize MSU and MSU players all he wants and it won't bother me. I'm merely analyzing his analysis).
1. He is trying to lump Connor Cook into the “slower than average” category of MSU and Alabama QBs? He doesn’t know Cook can run a 4.6, and sometimes faster (depending on who is timing). Judging by the rest of the article, I'm not surprised by his uninformed assessment of Cook.
2. He says MSU quarterbacks are “boring?”
Maybe this guy needs to start covering team cage fighting or something more exciting. Cook is a lot of things. His decision-making is anything but conservative. I think he led the country last year in yards per completion. Yet he's boring, according to this writer.
I'm not saying Cook is great, or underrated. I'm not trying to be a Cook cheerleader. But "boring" he definitely is not.
The writer kind of back-hand slaps a guy like Cousins for merely being an NFL interim starter. Okay. But didn’t he pretty much beat out, and outlast “non-boring” QB Robert Griffin III. If Cousins is boring, what is Griffin?
3. Hinton unsurprisingly uses completion percentage as a knock against Cook. Hasn’t it become common knowledge that spread QBs inflate their completion percentage with bubble screens and various uptempo, short, high-percentage throws? Those routes aren’t heavily used at MSU. Didn’t Hoyer dispel this notion for people?
Hinton hasn’t done enough research, and isn't in touch with the modern game.
It’s okay to be wrong. But when you’re wrong WHILE criticizing, well then that opens you up to scathing counter-criticism.
4. “By-the-book-blandness.” Again, Hinton hasn’t watched Cook very much, or he has watched Cook and lacks an educated eye. I normally wouldn’t hold these things against him. National writers don’t get a chance to watch EVERY player every week. But again, if you’re going to criticize, please know your material.
5. He’s calling MSU’s offense stodgy? Again, it looks to me like he is allowing preconceived notions and stereotypes to cloud his thinking. Is he unaware of where MSU ranked nationally in scoring offense last year?
6. I agree with this passage from the article:
“Saturday’s rematch against No. 7 Oregon has the feel of a referendum — not only on Cook’s ceiling in his final college season, but on the ceiling for the entire program Dantonio has been grooming for this opportunity for nine years. If not now, when?”
7. “Instead, they were exposed as just another plodding Big Ten outfit that ran out of gas in the face of the spread, in line with the prevailing narrative at the time.”
Again, this writer is way too prone to adhere to stereotypes and preconceived notions. He loves his "prevailing narratives" doesn't he?
MSU had plenty of speed last year. The Spartans lost at Oregon due to endurance and depth factors more so than a lack of speed (read: not willing to play enough second-stringers) more so than lack of speed.
But he wants to write about rust-belt slowness, so no one is going to stop him.
(That being said, I don’t discount the possibility that MSU might be slower at ‘star’ LB and cornerback this year than last year, even with Harris faster than a year ago. Slower due to not having a Mylan Hicks, or possibly not being willing to try Harris’ second-stringer at the ‘star.’)
8. True, MSU tapped out in the game at Oregon. But he's calling it a "flop?" Hinton is the type of guy who makes fun of a defender in a basketball game for attempting to block a shot and failing, and instead gets dunked on. Hinton would rather the defender get out of the way and let the offensive player dunk without being challenged, rather than risk getting posterized.
MSU played at Oregon. Hinton needs to write that sentence 5,000 times. MSU played at Oregon. MSU played at Oregon.
I doubt there is a long line of other programs yearning to play there.
True, MSU lost. So let’s try to embarrass MSU for even showing up and taking on a huge challenge.
Know this: No other team in the country would have beaten Oregon at Oregon that day. Not FSU, not Alabama, who were considered the top teams in America at that time.
This guy has the poison pen out and he thinks he’s creative and amusing.
True, MSU was lit up by Oregon, Ohio State and Baylor.
But how did FSU’s defense do against Oregon?
How did Alabama’s defense do against Ohio State?
How did TCU’s defense do against Baylor?
Everyone got lit up by those teams last year.
9. MSU’s offense has “evolved.”
He’s using the 2012 season as a baseline. He must not have watched the Cousins/Treadwell seasons. Those teams got into some pretty entertaining shootouts. But I have a feeling Hinton didn’t watch any of those games.
Again, don’t let the facts stand in the way of a good story, or your favorite stereotype.
The true evolution for MSU is taking place on defense. That’s the interesting trend for MSU.
(Is this the same Matt Hinton who used to cover NASCAR? Let me guess, this guy is from the south. If not, let me know. If he is from the south, does he also rip on southern teams, or does he tend to give them the benefit of the doubt? If he is an equal-opportunity flop-caller, that’s fine. But if he’s not, he needs to get called out).
10. He seems to be channeling Norm Hitzges with his citing of stats, stats, stats. But I give him credit for this interesting one: “The rematch will mark the first time anyone on the Ducks’ roster has taken the field in a game Oregon wasn’t favored to win.”
11. As for the Michigan reference, I’m not surprised Hinton allowed himself to be duped by the agenda-driven article in the NYTimes.
The guy who wrote that article in the NYTimes seemed to show up with the intent to write a little brother-themed story. He interviewed some coaches and players in July and asked them about Michigan. The story came off as if MSU’s players walk around all off-season talking about Michigan. No they don’t. They were asked about Michigan, by a guy who set out to paint that specific picture. And Hinton bit on it. He's easily-duped. Those two writers belong in the same sewing circle.
12. “Cook will have to be at his unassuming best.”
Again, Hinton simply hasn’t spent much time watching Cook play. Cook is more ragged-edge than boring or "unassuming." This guy is simply uninformed, trying to pass himself off as some sort of expert based on his perusal of stat sheets and a nod to a shoddy NYTimes article and "prevailing narrative."
13. I completely agree with his closing passage:
“If Michigan State is going to find itself where it wants to be in December, though, it’s hard to see how it’s going to get there if it can’t outgun the Ducks.”
But everything he did to set up that conclusion was wide to the right.
