I thought that myself when I read that article that talked about a Data Scientist(tm)
Time to enjoy something other than reading about the misery of others. Go Sports. OSU V Iowa, NW v Ill, Stanford v Cal amongst others.
Well, we just lost convincingly to the best team in the Big Ten. That being said, I noticed a lot of positive/neutral things in this game and I'd be curious to know what you all think as well. Please save bitching, sarcasm and FIRE RROD for other threads. This thread is meant to be a change of pace from the tsunami of negativity otherwise on the board.
That being said:
- Denard broke 2 NCAA records today: He is the first 1500/1500 NCAA QB in history, and now holds the NCAA major college single-season rushing record for a QB
- Michigan scored 28 pts in a half against Wisconsin-- perhaps we were more warmed up by then, or Denard's deep ball was finally falling? Either way, hopefully we can carry some momentum forward to next week
- The defense forced 2 turnovers against a team with 7 on the season (!)
- Drew Dileo and Darryl Stonum were returning kickoffs more so than Gallon. Following the injury to Stonum I think we see why he doesn't regularly return them, but after seeing Gallon's fumble, I think we might be seeing a turn towards the safer and more reliable Dileo.
- No disastrous picks from Denard in this game; his balls batted by Watt were unfortunate, but not dangerously thrown. The facepalm underthrown balls of the past few weeks were greatly cut down this week.
- Denard did a better job with QB draws and otherwise attempting to run when everyone was covered this week. It was a refreshing positive to see the coaching staff notice and presumably address his poor (non) running habits during designed pass plays this week.
- We were in a horrifying position at the end of the first half following Gallon's fumble inside our 30, but James Rogers baited Tolzien to throw and then picked off the pass, preventing a sure TD. Nice to see some mindgames being played by our secondary for a change; bodes well for the development. Also, way to respond! Our defense has heart/swagger this year even when things are going badly.
What else did y'all notice about the game in the positive/neutral category?
We're about to lose a game.
To all who are about to complain about RichRod, please don't be douchebags. It's a game we were supposed to lose.
Maybe I'm out of line or just on my toes because of all of the douchebag comments this year after any loss, and if that's the case then just calm down. But I'm pretty sure people are going to be saying "Harbaugh" a whole bunch after the game and if so, I think you should just sit on something pointy and shut the fuck up.
That being said, Go Blue. Beat the Buckeyes.
Edit: Mods, if you feel it necessary to take it off then fine, I'm just sick of the...douchebaggy post-loss talk.
It is simply, the fundamentals of tackling, angles, and assignments that are lacking. The biggest criticism of the coaching staff on defense has nothing to do with scheme. Youth and talent are a factor of course, but that is not where we fail. It is the simple fact that we cannot teach, for whatever reason, our players to tackle properly, pursue properly, and be disciplined. Coaches CAN teach players of mediocre talent and no experience to tackle properly. That is not a matter of opinion but fact. It happens elsewhere in the country on multiple teams. No one should have expected anything but a poor to mediocre defense this year. But we should expect players that tackle, pursue, and have proper assignments--regardless of experience and talent. I don't care what our scheme is next year, not one bit. I care that we have new defensive coaches who can teach fundamentals. Our coaches have failed miserably at that.
This is officially laughable. Not only did Broekhuizen miss yet another chip-shot, every time he (EDIT: or Gibbons) kicks an XP it is nearly blocked because it is so low. I know we want our specialists to focus on one thing (e.g. punting only or field goals only), but why haven't we heard about the possibility of Hagerup kicking some PKs? Rivals ranked him as the 3rd kicker in the nation coming out of high school. Like I said, I know it is a bit unorthodox to have one guy taking care of all 3 phases of the kicking game, but Hagerup (and nearly every kicker in the NCAA) handled these responsibilities in High School just fine. Though most of our games have not been decided by 3 points, I'm not ok with accepting that we have the equivalent of a 12 year-old girl kicking our field goals. Am I out of line here?
ESPN is reporting that Boise State will be playing vs. Georgia in 2011 & Ole Miss in 2014.
I was intrigued by the idea of Michigan scheduling Boise to come to the Big House in 2012 or 2013. The schedule in 2012 is already a killer. However, it is pretty weak in home games, with Alabama, Notre Dame, and Ohio State all being on the road. Adding Boise in 2012 would definitely be a reward for the home fans, instead of a MAC cupcake. Currently, there are three open slots in 2012, one of which I assume is a bye.
The only games I see scheduled for 2013 are home vs. ND & the return trip to UConn. Obviously there is room for Boise on the schedule.
Some on this board argue that there is no reward for Michigan in playing Boise State. I completely disagree.
- A win against Boise would be regarded highly in terms of quality.
- Boise is viewed as a high quality team, and a loss to them would be viewed very differently than a loss to Appy State, or Toledo, or the like.
- A loss early on would not be completely crippling in end of the year rankings.
- In terms of fan interest and TV interest, a Michigan - Boise State game would generate huge buzz. Be honest: would you rather see Michigan play Eastern Michigan, Delaware State, UMass and assorted Baby Seal Universities, or Boise State?
- I could even see it being a night game, early in the season when it isn't brutally cold.
- Also, Boise is completely ready to play on the road with no return date.
- By 2012, Michigan should be competitive with everyone and afraid of no-one. There is no reason to duck competition.
- Lastly, I am sick of hearing BCS league teams saying Boise doesn't play anyone. Beating Boise is a way to clearly knock them out of the MNC consideration.
For you Boise haters, I want to hear from you reasons why you'd rather play Directional U or Baby Seal U than Boise State in the 2012 or 2013 non-con schedule