Same question: does it mean anything?

It means more than the offensive performance, I think. Eastern had a pretty decent offense last year (21st nationally, albeit against the MAC and its matador defenses), had a returning quarterback, and were totally shut down by the Michigan defense. Eastern mounted two drives the entire game, one of which consisted of a good pass and a back-foot prayer. The other didn't even result in a field goal attempt.

The yardage numbers are slightly flattering--that disastrous punt snap ended up a 30-ish yard loss, but the defense held EMU under 200 yards and shut them out--they couldn't have performed any better. It is just Eastern, but it's a start.

Any new faces stand out?

Obviously Tim Jamison had an impressive debut (sort of... he did play a little bit his first couple of games as a freshman), drawing a holding call on what I believe was his first play of the season and notching a QED, MFer-type sack. Also of note was a running play where he drove his man into the backfield a la Watson. His shoulder's clearly still bothering him so he might not see a ton of playing time the next couple weeks, but it seems likely he'll be a contributor by midseason.

Morgan Trent has solidified the nickel spot and made a nice play on the interception. Not amazing, but efficient. Brandon Harrison also closed nicely on an overthrown ball and laid a lick on an Eagle wideout.

Give me that sweet table loving.

Note: the scale increased this week, and that combined with the dominating performance means the numbers got very high relative to last week. Comparisons between the two are probably not valid. Better to note who didn't make an impact.

What does it mean for Wisconsin?

Not sure. I'm very happy to see Branch listed as a starter. He's a star in the making. Burgess and Harris are playing well, the safeties are settling in, and the cornerbacks are at least three deep. I think the best DL for Wisconsin probably looks something like Massey-Branch-Watson-Woodley. Massey played DE in the 3-4 last year when the interior run defense was great, Watson may have motivation issues but is still like 600 pounds, and Branch and Woodley are just plain good. I'm optimistic that Calhoun will find the going tough on Saturday.

Wow that guy is smart. The inverse of the Wisconsin/Michigan guest post detente is up over at Bruce Ciskie's blog, if you're so inclined. A preview of tomorrow's Wisconsin preview.

Ditto. EDSBS proves that it's over-edumacated. If you like football and took way too many English classes in college, this is the best thing ever.

Whining continues. The Sports Economist on the ND mentality and its annoyances; Soonerfark on the Notre Dame shirt. (HT: EDSBS on the latter.)

OMG MOVING PICTURES can be found in spades over at IBFC. Vijay's putting 500 extra megs of internet space to the best use possible: spectacular Michigan highlights throughout the ages. Part one. Part two. Sweet.

Reason #2 I don't hate State as much as I used to is the RCMB, which is one of the few fan boards on the internet with a decidedly self-depreciating sense of humor. (Reason #1: last year was payback for 2001. Reason #1A: Ryan Miller is gone.) Check their thread on "things safer than a huge lead in a State football game" for evidence.

My favorite:

Saginaw point guard Tory Jackson, long thought to be signed, sealed, and delivered to Michigan, will attend Notre Dame instead, leaving Michigan without a point guard in this class. Internet rumblings claim that Michigan was the dumper here and Jackson the dumpee, but we've heard that before and the situation Michigan finds itself puts the lie to that claim. In 2006, the sole point guard on the team will be Jerrett Smith, a marginal recruit who's been reported to have problems playing defense, shooting, and passing at various times last year. While he's probably not Avery Queen 2005, it's safe to say that placing all of Michigan's point guard eggs in his basket or that of Dion Harris--who proved that he's not much of a point last year--is a risky "decision," if not an insane one.

Escape from Ann Arbor

But that's okay! The instate crop for '07 is loaded with awesome high major prospects that will fill out Michigan's scholarship allotment with pure asskicking fury. Don't get distressed about a guy who was either already committed or an inch and a half from committing who decides to go to a strange, unmentioned school after strange rumblings and implied cries of "shenanigans" from UM basketball loyalists.

Er... wasn't that supposed to be this year? Wasn't this year supposed to be the Sims/Jackson/Herzog/Lighty/Morris uberclass that vaulted us into the lofty realms of the NCAA tournament? Well, Sims is aboard, Morris is the Ray Jackson of the class, Lighty's going to OSU, Jackson's going to ND, and Herzog is still very much up in the air and if you made me guess right now I would say he's probably Not Coming Here. So now the drumbeat starts about Alex Legion, Kelvin Grady, Durrell Summers, Chris Wright, Josh Southern, and Kalin Lucas, the '07 guys who will light up scoreboards next year, be OMG Michigan LOCKZ(!), and go somewhere else.

Let's be serious: no matter the devious machinations behind the scenes here, Amaker screwed up again. The near-exclusive focus on Jackson in this class, like the focus on Crawford and Hairston in 2003, leaves Michigan grasping at kids in next year's class that may or may not come. "Not" is a 3-2 favorite. Maybe by this point we would be wise to the fact that basketball recruiting is a shady and infuriating business full of dubious advisors who mainly seem to advise players to avoid Ann Arbor and plan accordingly. (That is, if you buy this shady business at all, which I don't: Jackson is heading to ND, not Florida or Missouri. Unless Holtz has decided to channel his inner Bobby Knight, the ND program is about as rogue as a bunny rabbit.) I don't pretend to know the inner workings of basketball recruiting, but this is the second time in three years Michigan has been left in the lurch by assuming someone was in the bag when he was not.

All you have to do is watch a single disjointed offensive possession that involves 30 seconds of passing it around the perimeter and one off-balance, contested three-pointer to realize that Amaker was brought here to recruit. Unfortunately, the wages of his recruiting appear to consist largely of sleepers who are role-players at best (Smith, Coleman, Brown, Petway), soft guys from Boston, and guys that not even Amaker could screw up (Abram, D. Sims). The future bodes unwell. I do have it on good authority that Michigan is in on some kickass sixth graders, though.

Hurray we're different. Sort of. Struggling Joe has been tracking the BlogPoll in relation to the AP poll for the last few weeks. This week we've managed to put different teams in 19 of the 25 spots, but in general the differences are just transpositions. The biggest disagreements are about Cal (AP 13, BP 16), Arizona State (AP 18, BP 15), and UCLA (AP 25, BP 22). These similarities will probably only increase as the season shakes itself out and things get more and more obvious.

Strange that 45-50 bloggers with obviously different voting philosophies--Eagle In Atlanta pounds teams for every loss (not to pick on EIA--it's not wrong, just different) where I've moved teams like NC State and Arizona State up after tough losses against excellent competition--and ballots that range from staid to flapjack nuts would produce a result so similar to the AP poll... unless you assume that they're just flying blind, too, which I do.

Readers and bloggers are hereby invited to ponder and respond to the following queries:

Is being different even desirable?

I assume so, since a poll that's exactly the same as the existing polls isn't very interesting to anyone.

Is achieving difference via "wacky" ideas a terrible idea?

I had an idea that you could pick a team or two and your ranking of that team would be counted double or triple. So you pick a team you feel very strongly about that seems under/overrated to you and your opinion there carries more weight. This could be another poll auxilary at first maybe become more official at a later date if everyone likes it.

Is being different even feasible?

To some extent the results towards the beginning of the year are total speculation and thus not really subject to callouts--I said that the Enlightened Spartan's ballot preseason was terrible and look how that turned out. Results towards the end of the year are largely dictated by results. So, early in the year our ability to analytically do something different is limited and late in the year our ability to move teams around without looking ridiculous is likewise limited.

Should we agree on a set of guidelines for all voters?

Right now we're definitely voting at cross purposes; what's reflected in the poll is not only a difference of opinion but a difference of methodology. I have to believe that if people were voting strictly based on how good a team appears to be Arizona State would be much higher after losing to LSU on a couple of very fluky special teams touchdowns. If people were voting strictly on results, Michigan would be behind ND. But because people voting with 100% of A or 100% of B or 50/50 or whatever combination you desire and strictly on a whim in some cases, we get the poll as it is, which looks an awful lot like the AP poll and has the exact same incoherencies.

So, then, what should those be?

And, finally: How can we communicate better?

I don't get the feeling that we're really absorbing information from other pollers and adjusting our polls accordingly, which is, like, the primary goal here. Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

So... what does it all mean?

Probably not a whole lot. It was interesting to see the running game completely change with Martin in the game--runs between the tackles were few and far between, zone stretches as far as the eye can see, etc.--but the only thing we really learned is that we really need Kolodziej back as soon as possible, because Riley just isn't a tackle.

New guys who impressed?

Alex Mitchell got extensive playing time and did all right, though he missed a couple blocks, one of which got Henne killed. Manningham and Bass... well, I wish one was redshirting, but it looks like both are the kind of guys that when they say "I want to play as a freshman" you nod and say "yessir," Manningham in particular. It might be next year when they come to the forefront--both had some freshman issues with their routes (mostly Bass, though)--but the kids are all right.

Max Martin also counts as new, since I'd never really seen him with an opportunity for extensive playing time. You can see why the coaching staff likes him. He does have a very high top speed and has good vision when it comes to picking a hole at the line of scrimmage. He's big enough that he can deliver a whack at the end of the play, too. But he's not much for making guys miss and Michigan didn't even attempt a pass to him--either they're k eeping it under wraps (certainly possible) or the whole Martin's-like-Reggie-Bush thing was just a private joke the coaches were playing on us.

And Henne?

Impossible to tell. Eastern rarely got pressure and what they did get was all due to Riley or Mitchell. The results were a sack, an incompletion, and a 26 yard touchdown to Avant. A lot of his completions were long handoffs to receivers and he badly missed a couple passes. The chart looks good, though:

The competition was so soft it's meaningless, though, and a large portion of those throws were very short and easy. He gets an incomplete for the day.

What does it mean for Wisconsin?

We'll probably see Martin start and a lot of Manningham.

Grade: B+.

Wisconsin BlogPoller and King of All Duluth, Minnesota Media Bruce Ciskie was kind enough to answer some questions about this year's version of the Badgers, which seems a lot like every year's version of the Badgers. He'll have the inverse up sometime in the near future. In the meantime, enjoy some insight from the badger's mouth, as it were:

1. Michigan's offensive line has been wracked with injuries, but so has the Wisconsin defensive line. Who's out, who's questionable, and who replaces the absent? What kind of effect will it have on the game?

Ostrowski is out. He's a big DT who is a monster on NCAA '06. Jamal Cooper (the 220-pound DE) is out for the year (ACL). Nick Hayden plays one DT position and Jason Chapman starts at the other. Hayden is going to be a very good player. The line isn't nearly as good as last year's, mainly because they don't have that one unblockable player (Erasmus James was that last year). DE Kurt Ware has chicken pox and might be out. But don't sell this defense short. Come hell or high water, Bielema appears prepared to get these guys to make some plays. One of the guys he may call on is future NFL OT Joe Thomas, who might volunteer to play DE...regardless of Ware's status. Redshirt frosh DE Mike Newkirk might see some action, too.

[No offense to Bruce, but if Thomas ends up at DE that seems more like a Terrell-at-CB move than a Woodson-at-WR move. Sounds like they're scrambling. -ed]

2. The pass defense has given up a ton of yards so far. What's the problem there? Coverage? No pressure? Just general Omar Jacobs being awesome?

Baker (UNC QB) got lucky and unlucky on Saturday. He was peppered, but the Badgers didn't do a consistent job of finishing plays, leaving him upright to make some throws. Baker could have thrown for 350 if his receivers knew how to catch. The Badgers' problem is that their safeties aren't nearly as good as they've been in the past (they really miss Jim Leonhard). They can run with people, but they look to be a bit short on technique at this point. Their success against Jacobs in the opener came when they blitzed the living crap out of him in the second half. I'm a TMQ believer...you can't make a living out of blitzing people. Eventually, you're going to get burned. Badly. Up front, the line has been good, as I will mention later when I answer question 1, but they really don't have THAT GUY that can get pressure on his own. Jamal Cooper could have been THAT GUY, but he is only 220 pounds and now has a blown-out knee.

3. What do you think Wisconsin will do to try to limit the Michigan offense?

Hopefully, they'll go against my beliefs on defense and blitz. If they leave Henne alone, he'll find open people...unless the light comes on for this secondary this week. If they get some heat on Henne, they at least present the opportunity for some sacks and turnovers. The interior of the Badger defensive line is very solid, so I'm not too terribly concerned about Michigan running at will.

[I think that's probably what the Badgers will do given the problems Michigan had against the blitz versus ND. My guess is Martin starts since he's had a year of pass protection already and seems better suited to attack the outside of the UW defense. -ed]

4. Wisconsin's main tactic this year has been to pound the ball constantly, which worked well against MAC foes and UNC. Calhoun's off to a huge start. Do you think he'll duplicate his performance against Michigan?

Calhoun will be solid. He'll go over 100 yards, but it might take him 25 carries to do it. Obviously, numbers posted against the BGSU and Temple defenses are null and void. That said, I think Michigan is a bit vulnerable against the run, and the Badgers should be able to rack up some yards.

5. Calhoun reminds me a lot of Anthony Davis. How are they similar/different?

Calhoun is somewhat like Davis. He is a little bit bigger, and he strikes me as being a bit stronger on his feet. He runs low to the ground and delivers the shots more consistently than Davis did. Not only that, but a wet paper towel is more durable than Davis was. Hopefully, so is Calhoun.

6. Stocco hasn't been impressive when asked to throw. Is he just limited? Are the receivers not getting open?

Stocco looks more comfortable this year than last. His numbers haven't reflected it because, frankly, he hasn't had to throw at all. He had a few drops in the UNC game on Saturday, and he was largely effective when asked to throw against BGSU and Temple.

7. Who's the player Michigan fans haven't heard of that they should know about?

You may have heard of Brandon Williams, but most Michigan fans probably haven't. He wears #1, plays WR, and is a very good kick/punt returner. While he's deadly on runbacks, he's developed into a pretty good receiver. Outside of Owen Daniels, Williams has clearly become Stocco's favorite target.

8. Finally: what's your prediction?

There's no way I'm picking Wisconsin to win this game. I don't trust this defense yet, and I don't trust Stocco to play well enough to keep Michigan from using eight-man fronts to stop Calhoun. What really sucks is that I'm going to be on a bus home from Iowa during the game. Luckily, the VCR still works. Michigan wins, but it won't be easy...17-10.

[VCR? What, do you still have a player piano, too? OMG JOKING Bruce(!). -ed]

So, there you have it. Thanks much to Bruce for his input.