also duty-free guys falling over and grabbing their shins
Here's something we can all get behind.
Last week, my cable company here in Kansas City removed the Big Ten Network from its basic cable package. This is in KC, by far the largest city near Lincoln, NE. With the 'Huskers being one of the largest fanbases/alumni bases in the U.S., you would think cable companies would be adding the B10 Network, not removing it.
(Just thought we might need to talk about ANYTHING other than, you know.)
Take a break from deciding our next coach. Enjoy a Monday Night Football game. Alan Branch is starting tonight. I would love to see him give Troy Smith a sack sandwhich a couple times.
Anyone familiar with Harbaugh's recruiting? As far as pipelines and areas where he focuses? According to Rivals, he has the #5 and #7 linebackers committed! One from NJ and one from GA. Also has commits from Texas, Washington, Colorado, New York, Lousiana, Indiana, and more. Does he really recruit that well nationwide? And if so, is this in part due to his NFL ties?
TomVH - can you shed any light on him as a recruiter and what makes him so successful (other than winning)?
So reading some of the message board responses today, I came across this comment and felt I had to respond:
....but the people on this board who are defending RR more so than their University and its fans aren't real fans in my book. "He won't have the arrogance and constant bashing by fans" etc.; this is bullshit. Why don't you guys go follow RR over to whatever school he ends up at if he is fired! (I am in no way a Rich Rod hater. I believe whatever coach is here next year needs to compete for the Big Ten Title next year considering that we have so many returning contributors.
So assuming Harbaugh is hired... he must compete for a Big 10 championship against established teams in our division such as MSU and Nebraska? This is also under the assumption that he gets ALL of his starters back (no transfers?) and no losses in the recruiting market?
You are also assuming the offense makes it back to a top 20 outfit (I'm giving you a little wiggle room) and he's as much a defensive genius as RR is on offense and he turns our D into something respectable at say around top 1/2 in the country?
Oh yeah... and assuming Denard wants to stick around to keep making plays for us (or if Harbaugh will even let him stay at QB) - let's remember that Denard is not a clean passer and a switch to an OSU-type pro offense has not done wonders for the likes of Pryor (who most have said is not meeting expectations), who has more of a pro-style frame/arm than Denard.
If Denard does stay, do we give Harbaugh flack if he DOESN'T implement a spread O? I mean, what fraction of this website's contingent constantly rides RR for not "conforming to his players' skills" in 2008? Your #1 and #3 running back recruits are also in danger because they do not fit the bill of Harbaugh's style of O. Are we willing to lose them and not suffer a drop-off in talent?
If he DOESN'T compete for a Big10 championship next year, is he then on the hot seat for not meeting this expectation? By firing RR, you then set a bar of expectation that by all accounts you MUST apply to the next person in line.
In addition, do we just ignore all of Harbaugh's past indiscretions (DUIs, comments in the media, comments about UM academics) or do we constantly give him a hard time like some have done to RR?
While I don't endorse a preference of whether to keep RR or hire Harbaugh (a case can be made for both and I don't know if I really mind either decision), comments like this are setting a major precedent for the successor. Two sets of rules cannot be applied just because you think Harbaugh is a "Michigan Man".
Reminder - Stanford has played ONE currently ranked team this year and lost handily by 21 (another spread O team similar to M's). He also wasn't a success overnight over there, going 4-8, 5-7, and finally 8-5 in year 3. This is eerily similar to what is going on now here at UM.
So I think we should be cautious at anointing Jim Harbaugh as our Savior because it becomes dangerous when you stand back and look at where our program officially stands at this point. Every transition has its speed bumps.
I have heard from every random acquaintance that wants to rub our recent history in my face (because apparently I'm the reason we haev struggeled recently) that RR's system will not work in the Big Ten. I'm not going to discusss whether or not our our offense was great (my vote is yes), but the other point that is inevitably brought up...that our players (specifically our o-line) is too small for the B10. I posted this chart in a thread I found earlier today, but it is way back on the board now, so I thought everyone who is so inclined could use some ammunition in contradicting this meme.
Below are the weights of the starting o-lines for "power" teams in the Big Ten, as well as Notre Dame:
|M||6'-8", 294 lbs||6'-5", 308 lbs||6'-2", 287 lbs||6'-4", 305 lbs||6'-7", 321 lbs||6'-5", 303 lbs|
|OSU||6'-7", 299||6'-3", 320||6'-5", 293||6'-4", 313||6'-8", 300||6'-5", 305|
|MSU||6'-5", 298||6'-4", 310||6'-5", 285||6'-5", 295||6'-5", 312||6'-5", 300|
|PSU||6'-3", 298||6'-4", 323||6'-3"286||6'-3", 306||6'-4", 310||6'-3", 305|
|Iowa||6'-6", 300||6'-3", 300||6'-2", 275||6'-2", 273||6'-5", 295||6'-3.5", 289|
|Wisc||6'-7", 327||6'-5", 323||6'-5", 313||6'-4", 315||6'-6", 322||6'-5", 320 (!)|
|ND||6'-4", 290||6'-5", 351(!)||6'-3", 301||6'-5", 295||6'-5", 297||6'-4", 307|
|Position Avg.||6'-6", 302||6'-4", 319||6'-3.5", 291||6'-4", 300||6'-6", 308|
- Our Offensive Line is not undersized; in fact if you take our ND's OG (who must make Boren look fit and trim), all of our starters are "average" size at worst
- Holy hell is Wisconsin's line huge!
- Iowa has the "smallest" OL, which I find kind of suprising (corn-fed midwesterners and all)
Info for B10 teams was taken from Rivals depth charts, except Michigan's, which I got from mgoblue.com (because that was the only team I actually knew who the starters were)