Carl Hagelin, 2007-2011
PROS: Molded from Swedish clay to be Red Berenson's platonic ideal of the student-athlete. Such an awesomely good defensive hockey player that it was immediately apparent even to novices. There was no such thing as an odd-man break with Hagelin on the ice. Fast as hell, offensively productive, and so good he leapt straight from Michigan's roster to the Rangers. If the Rangers had figured out how good he was in camp, would have been a strong Calder candidate. Four-year player with serious NHL ability, a rarity. Just really, really awesome at hockey.
Indirectly responsible for Yost's burgeoning flag tradition. Scored with a second left in overtime to win the game on senior night. I cried out "CARL?!!?!" during the devastating Miami Fort Wayne game that really needs a nickname.
CONS: Did not singlehandedly drive Michigan to national title, but you could say that about everyone on this list. Hagelin's senior year saw them get closer than any team since '98, so this is less of a con than it is for anyone else.
Shawn Hunwick, 2007-2012
PROS: Came to Michigan a 5'7" walk-on and third goalie expected to see three minutes over the course of his career. Left in the conversation for best ever; save percentages are no contest. Made me excited about the NHL again when he signed with Columbus and got in a game. Smart, funny guy on twitter. Fertile nickname ground: Tiny Jesus, Little Pimpin', etc. Lack of size gave him a distinctive style since if he stayed in or near the crease he was dead.
CONS: Did not make all CCHA first team. Occasionally lost his ish and started punching anyone who eyed his crease owlishly. Depending on personal preferences in re: 5'7" goalies giving hellacious uppercuts to skaters, this could also be filed under "pro." Failed to score on 20 minutes of power play time against Cornell. Deserved better.
Jack Johnson, 2005-2007
PROS: Johnson the younger was Loose Cannon Cop on hockey skates, a guy who doesn't have to follow your rules, man, because he doesn't need the man to catch bad guys and batter them senseless with ninja kicks while acquiring the sweet lovin' from attractive ladies.
A ludicrously talented defenseman, he loved to doodle around guys he was so much better than. He also loved to annihilate anyone with their head down.
He almost killed BC's goalie with a slap shot. He was really unbelievably good in year two. He wears his passion for Michigan on his sleeve. He probably shouldn't have even shown up after going third in the draft, but did anyway, and then stayed a second year.
…and directly responsible for creating JMFJ shirts for the entire family—including what appeared to a ten-year-old—when they found out about this. IIRC the ten-year-old was informed that it stood for something it did not stand for. "Massive fun," maybe.
CONS: Left after two years, and his first year was… uneven. Massive penalty minutes are obvious. Loose Cannon Cop rep got him suspended, sometimes warranted, sometimes not. At one point during his freshman year I yelled "you're supposed to be the third pick in the draft" at him. Was great fun, but how much impact did he have relative to the other guys on the list?
Kevin Porter, 2004-2008
PROS: Four-year player, Hobey Baker winner as a senior after I said his production would tail off without Hensick driving scoring chances next to him. Solid citizen who led some of the best Michigan teams of the period. His final year featured the Nickelback and Creed goals against Notre Dame in the Denver Frozen Four in a game that Michigan otherwise would have won. If Hagelin gets fewer minus points than anyone else for not finding a title at the end of the rainbow, Porter is second.
CONS: This might sound insane: he lacked personality as a hockey player. He was of course very, very good at hockey, but compared to the other guys on the list his career lacks color. Is this insane? Does anyone else feel this? I mean, I don't know what to say about him other than "Hobey Baker winner." The lone highlight on the tubes is a nice snap shot:
But it's not a good candidate for Most Remarkable Thing on the Tubes. When he won the Hobey it sort of felt like the committee had backed themselves in a corner after snootily denying Hensick despite his point totals the year before. That was justified as an example of the Hobey's character requirement—as if mouthing off to a ref is uncommon. As a result, the uber-talented Nathan Gerbe got passed over thanks to a couple of spearing-type incidents over the course of his career.
Porter is the opposite of Johnson. Johnson was Paul Bunyan on skates. Porter was just really good at hockey.
TJ Hensick, 2003-2007
PROS: The most recent magic midget and a guy I miss every time Michigan blows a 2 on 1… or 2 on 0. Had an amazing knack for making the unstoppable pass in that situation, and plenty others. Capable of stickhandling in a phone booth full of lime jello. This is almost painful to watch…
…because Michigan hasn't had it since he left.
Should have won the Hobey Baker easily as senior since he led the nation in scoring by a wide margin. Often accused of being a glory hound but massive assist numbers suggest otherwise. Was a one-man power play setup, a skill you should appreciate more now. Was immediately awesome; accumulated more career points than anyone else in the timeframe by a wide margin.
CONS: Maybe kind of a glory hound. Once tapped in a Porter shot on an empty net that was already going in. Mouthed off in one of those dismal NCAA tourney losses to North Dakota and got a ten-minute misconduct at the worst possible time. Did not win Hobey Baker, probably because of this. It probably wasn't his fault but the teams he was most prominent on were amongst the worst Michigan's had since the Berenson era took off.
Debate in the comments; voting will be unveiled once all candidates are.
Earlier this week, Brian put forth the five things he would do if he
spearheaded Dave Brandon's governorship campaign was athletic director for a day, with a singular focus on improving the football gameday experience. Me? I'm happy to leave the branding and ticket pricing up to him; all I want is Special K's job (lofty goals, I know).
While I love the band and wish they were featured more during games, I realize it's 2012, and when gearing your program towards appealing to a younger audience—especially recruits—blasting music over the PA becomes an integral part of the gameday experience. If done right, this can actually become quite a positive. Firing up "Sweet Caroline" so the student section can pretend they're at Rick's instead of a football game, however, is not doing it right.
That's where I come in. While a certain level of universal appeal is needed when playing music for the masses, it's entirely possible to make a kick-ass playlist without spinning "We Will Rock You" and "Seven Nation Army" like every other stadium/arena on planet Earth—in fact, it's best not to do so. A few ground rules before I get into the music:
1. Local appeal is great—and actually gets its own section below—but quality trumps location. Penn State, for better or for worse (okay, definitely worse), stole "Seven Nation Army" from the heart of Michigan and made it so I can't hear that song without thinking of Beaver Stadium, of all things. Why? Because that song is amazing, and they played the living hell out of it.
2. That said, variety is important. Penn State essentially plays the same two songs on a loop during games. The stadium playlist I put together while going through my iTunes library topped 40 songs. I like being surprised.
3. No matter what you do, a certain segment of the fanbase (read: most people over 40) are going to hate whatever I put below. This is largely because they would hate any piped-in music. I'm not trying to appeal to these people. Instead, I'm aiming for the 20- and 30-somethings—people who've developed musical taste—while knowing that college students will get drunk and rowdy to just about anything (seriously, have you been to Rick's?). I'll probably swing and miss when it comes to the 30-something crowd, but I'm 24 and putting on my Deal With It shades.
Alright, enough with the talk. Let's get to the music. [EDIT: After the jump, because all the YouTube videos are making the page lag].
Obligatory Bo shot.
So. That hall of fame that we talked about. I went back and checked everyone's suggestions and have come up with this tentative structure:
Sports. This blog focuses primarily on football, basketball, and hockey, and since the end product here is going to be a career-encompassing column on the site the author of that column has to have experienced the career in question to write on it. Since that's me that unfortunately disqualifies the sports I don't get punched in the heart by.
In the event I or someone else who writes for the site does experience a sporting career outside the Big Three worthy of entry, we will play it by ear.
Eligibility. Anyone whose career finished up in 2005 or later in those three sports. There is no waiting period, but it will be tougher to get in in year one. How tough I can't exactly say. Looking over the list of candidates so far it seems like 2-4 a year across all three sports is about right.
There may be an old-timer's committee at some point to retroactively enroll folks like Charles Woodson. We'll see. Paging Craig Ross.
Entry process. Popular vote on the site. Registered users only to prevent bot spamming, but no point restrictions. Since I'm not entirely sure what the voting patterns are going to be like it's hard to set a definite threshold, but it will be a large supermajority—say 75%. People generally liked the idea of starting off higher and coming down as the player's career gets more distant.
Limits. No one has to get in any year, except this year when I'll declare the top vote-getter in each of the three sports to be an auto-entry.
Entry criteria. At this point in my internet career I know better than to tell the internet what to do, because the internet does not listen. But the end result here should provide some guidance. I can write a really swell career encomium for Zack Novak or Shawn Hunwick or Brandon Graham, but probably not Troy Woolfolk, star-crossed though he is, or Brandon Minor.
Overall greatness is part of the equation, but only part. There's also a heavy component of how misty it gets when player X is announced on senior day, assuming he makes it that far. Time served is necessarily a consideration—Max Pacioretty was pretty great during his one year but his quick exit makes it hard me to think of anything to say about him other than "was pretty great that one year." On the other hand, if Mike Comrie was eligible, hell yes. Woodson ditto. It's about a personal impact on you.
I don't know, man. Just close your eyes and use the Force.
Inaugural class. As previously stated, at least three. To keep the gate high and the candidate pool viable, the inaugural class will be a max of six.
End results. We'll have a page on the site that will serve as a home base; each entry will get a column that will be archived there. Under no circumstances is this to be told to anyone who gets in, and if you do for the love of God please don't tell me about it.
Candidates. To make things simple I am the candidate selection committee, albeit with much input from the crowd. I'll pick ten football, five basketball, and five hockey players from the time period to put up for nomination, put their pros and cons in a few posts, and then let registered folks have at the voting. I'm assuming there will be a bright line between yes and no, but I'll make more definitive calls when I have some data to go on. For now, here's an excellent list of candidates put together by Tom From AA. I'll have hockey up later today.
Photoshoppin'. I have no skills in this department, and this is the kind of thing that seems like it needs both a logo and maybe some special career-summing image leading these posts. Interested? Let me know.
Let's get to it. If there are strenuous objections to any of this, nothing's set in stone. Let me know.
Our long regional nightmare is over, as Michigan has finally* netted commitment #18 in the class of 2013. Scout's Allen Trieu broke the news this afternoon that Harper Woods (MI) Chandler Park Academy WR Csont'e York—first name pronounced "Son-Tay", according to Sam Webb—pledged to Michigan after receiving an offer yesterday while on an unofficial visit to Ann Arbor. York becomes the second receiver in the class, joining Jaron Dukes, and his stock is on the rise after a couple standout camp performances in recent weeks.
|3*, #67 WR||NR WR||NR WR||3*, 88, #69 WR|
As you can see, York is currently flying under the radar—ESPN didn't even have him in their recruiting database until today—with only Scout and 247 even bothering to rank him. Chandler Park isn't exactly a football powerhouse, however, playing in Michigan's Class B in the Charter School Conference, so he fits the profile of a sleeper recruit. Every service but Scout lists York at 6'3", with his weight at 185-190 pounds (Scout says 6'2", 180).
As mentioned above, York really burst onto the scene in recent weeks, earning offers from Michigan, Cincinnati, and Syracuse within the last 48 hours by excelling on the camp circuit. He was #5 on Barton Simmons's list of top performers at last weekend's Columbus NFTC,
where he took home wide receiver MVP honors [EDIT: Sorry, misunderstood Sam Webb's Tweet; he said York was deserving of MVP honors, but they actually went to OH WR Gary Brown]:
The 6-2 prospect took countless reps, winning most of them and showing great ball skills, route-running and mismatch size. York has impressed us in several different settings and he deserves a lot more college interest than he is receiving.
Simmons wasn't the only scout lauding York after last weekend, as he also made Scout's Bob Lichtenfels's top ten ($):
York made everything look so easy that we started to take it for granted. By the end of the camp his circus catches were looking routine. He is very smooth in and out of his breaks. Possesses very good ball skills and gets separation from the defender. He uses his body well to shield defenders from the ball. Smooth, gliding type of runner. Not sure how good his top end speed is, but he is very tough to cover on the short to intermediate routes.
As you'll see on his film, York's ability to go up and catch the football is excellent; while it's an easy comparison to make, he's certainly reminiscent of a slightly taller, skinnier Junior Hemingway. Rivals's Josh Helmholdt scouted York at April's NLA 7-on-7 in Pittsburgh, where once again he was amongst the top prospects ($):
There were several big wide receivers making spectacular catches downfield on Sunday, and maybe none as interesting as York. At 6-foot-3 and 185 pounds, York is a great-looking, big wide receiver. His size gives him the ability to be physical with cornerbacks at the line of scrimmage, then go downfield and outmuscle them for the football. He made several spectacular grabs along the sideline and in the end zone, showing outstanding body control and a great pair of hands.
While I don't expect Michigan's passing game to continue to rely so much on the jump ball post-Denard, it's good to know that York could thrive in such an offense. He's also got the size and strength to be a very solid possession receiver. Allen Trieu has a free assessment on York's Scout profile:
Long, lean receiver who does a great job of tracking the football, adjusting to passes in the area and controlling his body to make tough and acrobatic catches. Has great hands and leaping ability. He's not a 4.4 guy, but has a solid burst and can create separation both underneath and downfield. He's not one who will give you a ton after the catch, but he has all the tools to be a productive college receiver.
York's strengths are listed as Body Control, Hands and Concentration, and Size, while his areas for improvement are Elusiveness with Catch and Speed. He sounds pretty similar to Dukes in terms of style of play; this coaching staff seems to have a specific type of receiver in mind unless they're track-star fast like Devon Allen or just plain elite like Laquon Treadwell.
York only held offers from Bowling Green and Toledo before Michigan, Cincinnati, and Syracuse joined the fray this week. Again, sleeper status here.
A quick Google search didn't turn up any stats. I'll update if I come across any, though judging by his film he scored a whole bunch of touchdowns.
FAKE 40 TIME
None of the sites list a 40 time, FAKE or otherwise. ScoutingMichigan has a profile for York with a self-reported 40 time of 4.52 (thanks to ScoutExile for pointing this out). If that's a hand-time it's in the right range given the scouting reports. If it's electronic, that probably merits a three FAKEs out of five.
Jump balls and touchdowns aplenty.
PREDICTION BASED ON FLIMSY EVIDENCE
The evidence is flimsy indeed, but York appears to fall into the same general category as Dukes: solid floor given his good size and hands, limited star potential due to a lack of top-end speed. Like Dukes, York will have every opportunity to see the field when he steps on campus thanks to Michigan's depth, as the only scholarship receivers on the roster will be Jeremy Jackson, Jeremy Gallon, Jerald Robinson, Drew Dileo, and this year's freshmen, Amara Darboh and Jehu Chesson. The only remotely proven commodity among that group is Gallon, who will be a senior when York is a true freshman. Given York's current under-the-radar status, it's foolish to attempt to project beyond him having a shot to see the field. Luckily, I should be able to see him play at least once this fall and get a better feel for how he performs in a game situation.
UPSHOT FOR THE REST OF THE CLASS
Michigan now has two receivers in the class, and they'll almost certainly take one more—Treadwell is the prohibitive favorite to take that last spot. After that, Michigan should have room for 4-5 more players, and the biggest area of need is at defensive tackle. Strongside DE is also a priority, and the Wolverines could also make a push for more help in the secondary. The last couple spots will likely be filled by the best players available, as Michigan now has that luxury after filling most of their major needs very early in the process.
*Tongue-in-cheek, obviously. Michigan could take one commit per month from this point forward and have a full class before the regular season is over.
Michigan's just done their annual slight tweaks to the hockey jersey, but they fed 'em after midnight and now they're getting kind of ugly and multiplying at an alarming rate. Michigan announced no fewer than five(!) different jerseys this fall.
The white home jersey have miraculously stayed the same; the road jerseys are now blue duplicates of the home:
Still not a fan of that out-of-place looking block M, but oh well. In marked contrast to the increasingly bepatched football jerseys, these are very clean. It could be worse.
The fugly Big Chill jerseys with the rabid hamster on them are back. I blame these things for the bumblebee Michigan State uniforms, BTW, and they are dead to me.
The fourth and fifth jerseys are for the GLI and I'm not sure how I feel about them until I see them.
There's also a version of these with the colors inverted. Note the lack of wings on the helmet. UPDATE: false alarm.
The operative theory here appears to be "if we put out five jerseys everyone will want to buy at least one." Next week they'll announce special NCAA tourney editions of all of these. They're identical, but when you put them someone shoots you in the heart. No sale! I only like that once a year!
For the record, my favorite iteration is from the 2008-2009 season:
I preferred the white and maize. Very classic looking, both of them. Though the Maize is kind of a Rangers ripoff, I'm okay with that. I'm hoping they come back around to something they like soon, as my jersey is so old it's got the university crest on the shoulders and was hand-knit by twelve-year-olds. Twelve-year-old Americans! Can I get a Triangle Shirtwaist shout-out up in here? No? Oh, okay.
Michigan goes into 2012 with the rarest of all birds (recently at least): a senior returning starter at quarterback. Since we can't count half a season from an injured Henne, the last time we saw this senior-type thing under center was the last time a QB wore 16: Navarre. It's been nine years!
History too has been a bit rough on senior QBs. Brady shared much of his last season with Henson. Todd Collins played almost as much as senior Grbac, who took away half of Michael Taylor's seminal season, who nabbed the bulk of Demetrius Brown's last year.
Since Bo's first year Denard is the 14th senior starter at Michigan. The other 13, by stats:
I'll save you some of the suspense: those are good efficiencies. And when that starter wasn't dinged it made for awesome seasons. Even counting '07, over these 13 seasons Michigan went 127-26-3, went to Pasadena 7 times (plus an Orange and Sugar and no bowl one year when Michigan finished 3rd overall), finished in the Top 10 of the Associated Press 11 times (avg finish: 7th), and won a National Championship. Small sample size and whatnot, but special years do seem to follow the seniors around.
Let's all shake our fists at: Chad Henne shoulder-hating god. Three shakes!
You also probably already figured that since players generally improve year to year, that senior quarterbacks are best. What I'm looking at here is whether there's maybe something about being a senior, whether its age, or whether that mythical senior tag has some weight. To the charts!
Click embiggens. The mythical senior tag didn't seem to do anything except as a function of experience. When broken up by age it wasn't any different than when broken up by how many passes he threw before coming. What age does seem to do is reduce variance. Look at the grouping of 5th year seniors (light blue). There's not enough data here to make a conclusion but I am intrigued by this concept of 5th year players producing no worse than a rating
A better way to decide if age or class means anything at all would be to use the Mathlete's database. Mathlete: you should do this some day: chart year to year improvement of quarterbacks and see what the progression curve looks like. What I'm doing here is just working with Bentley numbers for Michigan quarterbacks, since at least for these guys I can trust we know most of the exigent circumstances behind different swings. Just pulling returning starters and major contributors. In: John Navarre's 77 attempts in 2000, Tate Forcier's 84 attempts in 2010. Out: Drew Henson's 47 attempts in 1998. Show things:
|Year||Avg. Eff Change||Denard|
Denard's freshman to sophomore leap was high, not unheard of. Rick Leach leapt a ludicrous 76.1 points in efficiency between his freshman and sophomore years, a matter of going from 32% completions and 3 TDs to 12 interceptions to 47.6% completion rating and a 13/8 TD/INT ratio. Michael Taylor made a leap similar to Denard's between his Junior and Senior seasons (first and second as at least a part-time starter). Drew Henson, Jim Harbaugh and Demetrius Brown also had huge leaps forward as juniors. If you're smelling a trend, these were all guys who to varying degrees considered "mobile" quarterbacks.
The way efficiency is wired, a shift in TD/INT ratio, a shift in completion %, and a shift in yards per attempt. Big chart of returning passers (either starters or guys who got a significant amount of playing time the year before) so we can see if any one of these factors might stand out. Bolding numbers that I think made the difference:
|1976||Rick Leach, So||105||+5||+15.6%||+10/-4||+2.5||151.1||+76.1|
|2000||Drew Henson, Jr||237||+147||+9.4%||+15/+2||+3.0||159.4||+49.6|
|1985||Jim Harbaugh, Jr*||227||+116||+9.8%||+15/+1||+2.2||157.9||+49.6|
|1988||Demetrius Brown, Jr*||84||-84||+9.5%||-5/-16||+1.8||158.2||+45.5|
|1991||Elvis Grbac, Jr*||254||-12||+6.7%||+4/-4||+1.0||161.7||+24.5|
|1989||Michael Taylor, Sr*||121||-1||-1.1%||+6/-1||+1.1||161.2||+22.8|
|1974||Dennis Franklin, Sr||104||+37||+2.0%||+4/0||+1.0||146.9||+21.4|
|1996||Brian Griese, Jr*||61||-177||+4.0%||-10/-8||+1.8||137.7||+19.0|
|2006||Chad Henne, Jr||328||-54||+3.5%||-1/0||+1.0||143.4||+13.8|
|2003||John Navarre, Sr*||456||+8||+3.9%||+3/+3||+0.8||133.6||+11.4|
|1999||Tom Brady, Sr*||341||-9||+1.6%||+5/-6||+0.1||142.3||+10.6|
|1978||Rick Leach, Sr||158||-16||-2.4%||+2/-3||+0.4||145.5||+10.6|
|1993||Todd Collins, Jr*||296||+195||-1.5%||+10/+4||+1.6||149.3||+9.4|
|1973||Dennis Franklin, Jr||67||-56||+5.8%||-2/+3||+1.3||125.5||+8.8|
|2002||John Navarre, Jr*||448||+63||+1.6%||+2/-6||+0.2||122.2||+5.7|
|1970||Don Moorhead, Sr||190||-20||-1.4%||+2/-1||+0.1||105.0||+4.6|
|1996||Scott Dreisbach, So*||269||+163||+2.6%||+9/-6||-0.5||126.7||+2.8|
|1997||Brian Griese, Sr*||307||+246||+5.5%||+14/+4||-0.9||140.0||+2.3|
|2010||Tate Forcier, So||84||-197||+5.6%||-9/-6||-0.2||130.2||+2.0|
|1982||Steve Smith, Jr||227||+17||+5.8%||-1/+2||-0.3||125.1||-0.6|
|1983||Steve Smith, Sr||205||-22||-0.3%||-1/-5||-0.7||123.0||-2.1|
|2005||Chad Henne, So||382||-17||-1.8%||-2/-4||-0.3||129.6||-3.0|
|1990||Elvis Grbac, So*||266||+150||-4.7%||-8/+6||+0.1||137.2||-3.0|
|1994||Todd Collins, Sr*||288||-8||+0.7%||-3/+4||+0.3||146.0||-3.3|
|1986||Jim Harbaugh, Sr*||277||+50||+1.1%||-8/+5||+1.1||151.7||-6.2|
|2011||Denard Robinson, Jr||258||-33||-7.5%||+2/+4||-0.4||139.7||-9.8|
|1992||Elvis Grbac, Sr*||199||-55||-0.1%||-8/+6||+0.0||150.2||-11.5|
|2007||Chad Henne, Sr||278||-50||-3.6%||-5/+1||-0.7||130.5||-12.8|
|1977||Rick Leach, Jr||174||+69||+4.1%||+2/+1||-1.5||134.9||-16.2|
|1980||John Wangler, Sr*||212||+82||-4.8%||+8/+2||-3.8||131.9||-30.1|
|2001||John Navarre, So*||385||+308||+1.8%||+11/+12||-1.2||116.4||-30.8|
Bolded things of note: If I bolded the name or the amount of attempts you can just discount that guy since his year to year stats are thrown off by a huge difference in his role, e.g. John Navarre went from a guy who murdered MAC teams to full-time Big Ten passer who chucked things in the direction of Marquise Walker. Rick Leach basically learned how to pass a football (to his teammates). Henson and Harbaugh had matching junior leaps as they grew from leggy guy who might throw to polished passers.
Demetrius Brown had his numbers saved by Bo halving the amount of pass plays and going full-tilt option. Tom Brady stopped had a major turnaround in TD/INT as a senior, while Todd Collins and Jim Harbaugh went the other way. Johnny Wangler looks to have suffered (EDIT: was this when Carter injured? This is before my time.) his senior season, as YPA dropped terribly and completion suffered a little. I'm not sure Grbac's TD-INT ration can be explained by the similar loss of Desmond Howard—it's possible Dez's Heisman campaign simply separated itself from two similar yet pedestrian seasons.
What does this all mean for Denard? Most of the seniors touched up their games. Most had their big leaps as juniors, but I should point out of the 13 guys to make the biggest one-year leaps, 8 of them were redshirt juniors or seniors, i.e. Denard's age. Also working for him is running the same offense that he did last year. The transition ultimately came more to him than the other way around, though, so don't expect miracles. Working against him will be the loss of his favorite target, and the effective replacement of a tight end for a second back, which isn't always great for the passing game. Unless a deep threat emerges from the unknowns in the receiver corps, expect his YPA avg. to dip again, with a corresponding rise in completion % (something most seniors seemed to have done). I'd also venture Denard will cut down further on his interception and probably get his TDs up the same as Michigan's mite-y backs and receivers score more with screens. +4/-4 would be excellent. Meanwhile the team will win 10 games, place in the Top 10, and end the season in Pasadena, because that's what Michigan senior quarterbacks do.