November 16th, 2013 at 9:45 PM ^
I don't even think that Borges was better.
Our offense only looked competent when Gardner improvised
November 17th, 2013 at 6:47 AM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 9:26 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 9:28 PM ^
...no one should dismiss the past few weeks.
November 16th, 2013 at 9:48 PM ^
Players sure as hell won't give up, neither should we
November 16th, 2013 at 10:33 PM ^
Between wanting the team to lose and recognizing that they probably should have.
November 17th, 2013 at 12:41 AM ^
What happened to NW today basically happened to Michigan in the PSU game.
These things tend to even out in the end. They should have lost today, I am ecstatic that they didn't.
November 16th, 2013 at 9:27 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 9:31 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 9:32 PM ^
I agree these people whining all the time would be the one's who bitched about Lloyd being so conservative, "He plays to not lose never to win" Now when Hoke plays for the win he should have lost Boo Hoo. Spare me your wonderful negative angle no matter what happens win or lose.
November 16th, 2013 at 9:43 PM ^
You can't compare Lloyd's decisions to Brady's decision today. You can't even compare Brady's decision in the psu game to today. They're completely different situations.
November 16th, 2013 at 9:45 PM ^
They need to go wiki the 94-96 teams. Look at who they lost to.
Also, they were ALL ranked. We're not even close.
November 16th, 2013 at 10:04 PM ^
Most of the losses were to ranked teams, but certainly not all. They also had a couple of losses to borderline bowl teams (6-5-1 Michigan State in 1995, 7-4-1 Wisconsin in 1994).
November 16th, 2013 at 10:13 PM ^
Edit: I was referring to the Michigan teams all being ranked and this team not being close.
November 16th, 2013 at 10:12 PM ^
Just realize that you read my comment the wrong way (and rightfully so).
I was saying ALL of the Michigan teams were ranked teams. That's why I followed the comment with this team isn't close. Because they're not close to being ranked.
If they win out they will be. But right now, there's nothing that puts them on the same level as those teams.
BTW, I made the same post/comment about the 94-96 opponents a few before and said that most (not all) of the teams they lost to were ranked.
November 17th, 2013 at 7:34 AM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 9:43 PM ^
Why not to Rich Rod or another coach?
This team is NOTHING like those teams.
Also, there's WAY more "Fire Borges" than Hoke...I don't think too many knowledgeable posters actually want Hoke gone right now.
They DO want him to acknowledge the offensive weaknesses and do something about them and the coaching.
Nothing wrong with that.
November 16th, 2013 at 9:59 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 10:04 PM ^
It's going to get better dude. It's a transitional/youth/lack of depth thing. Did you notice how we actully ran the ball tonight? Your husband actually said that Green had the best run for the Michigan offense is a long time. As the OL matures with these talented RB's, this offense will really start to click. Be patient, stay the course, it's going to be fine.
November 16th, 2013 at 10:08 PM ^
There isn't much that says it's going to get better.
I'm not saying you're wrong, actually, I agree with you...but there isn't anything to prove it. Just fans having hope.
Also, the Borges bitching isn't about talent. If Borges was making the same playcalls with more talented and experiences players people would still be bitching about the calls.
He's not putting the offense in the best position to win. THATS what the complaining is about.
Everyone knows we're not as good and we're young. Most believe we'll get better as the offense matures.
However, if you make bad calls, it doesn't really matter how good you are.
November 16th, 2013 at 11:18 PM ^
The good news is that when you're starting a bunch of young and under-developed (physically and mentally) OL, they won't be as young and inexperienced next season, and they "trial by fire" they endured this season is bound to make them better. I know it's easy to think that without Lewan and Schofield (whom I think isn't very good) gone things are going to be worse, but I don't agree. The interior of the OL will be older, more eperienced, there will be more depth for competition, and we just saw the emergence of the two young RB's. Gardner is shell shocked (understandably) and his regression is due almost entirely to the OL's inability to protect him -- he too will benefit from this season.
November 16th, 2013 at 11:23 PM ^
"Everyone knows we're not as good and we're young. Most believe we'll get better as the offense matures. However, if you make bad calls, it doesn't really matter how good you are."
I don't think the calls will be "bad calls" in the future. I think they'll be good because the OL will be able to execute them. When an opposing defense has to honor Michigan's running game, and they cannot just pin their ears back and blitz and be assured of getting home, Michigan's offense is going to be very hard to stop.
November 17th, 2013 at 1:09 AM ^
youre an idiot and this make absolutely no sense. the bad calls that have been hapeneing for 3 years won't be bad calls in the future? you don't make bad calls and lose games for the sake of getting experience, that makes no sense
November 17th, 2013 at 7:40 AM ^
November 17th, 2013 at 12:03 PM ^
Hey thanks! I love you too!
The play calls that you're calling, "bad calls" are only considered such in hindsight. Similar to putting a short contract at the absolute all-time high, and then seeing the market go EVEN HIGHER. It's a "bad trade" after the fact, but before the fact, putting a short at the all time high is what you're SUPPOSED to do.
Obviously, the fact that players grow, mature, and gain experience as time goes by is TOTALLY lost on you. The reason the calls that are judged as "bad calls" today won't be in the future is because the players will be able to execute those plays and they won't be the cluster fuck that they are today.
As a matter of fact, we actually witnessed the growth and development of the OL in yesterday's game. I realize that NW's defense isn't MSU's, but did you notice that Michigan's OL actually got some push, and the RB's actually had some decent gains, especially on first down? Those EXACT first down calls are the ones that you, et. al., are so upset about. They weren't working ALL SEASON long, but they worked yesterday. Why do you think that is? Did the OL suddenly have a collective "a ha!" moment? Or, did the constant and dogged repetition finally start to give them the experience that they were lacking?
So again, calls that JUST LAST WEEK were considering "bad calls" worked yesterday. How much better do you think the "bad calls" will be in 2014, 2015, and beyond?
You're right, you don't make bad calls and lose games for the sake of gaining experience. But, if you OL cannot executte ANYTHING, you've got to choose the things that you want to do as the staple of you offense, and continue to rep them until the "get it." You act like there is this alternate playbook that Borges has, one labled "What the OL does well, but we're not going to do because it's not who we are." That is a horseshit assertion.
November 17th, 2013 at 6:53 AM ^
November 17th, 2013 at 4:29 PM ^
I like how you crawled out of your hole after this game. I missed reading 5000 defensive posts about how Al Borges is a good OC from you after the Nebraska game.
November 18th, 2013 at 2:37 AM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 10:12 PM ^
Is it gonna get better? I think so. I'm glad we finally saw what Green and Smith can do.
Was there still a lot of bad things? Yes.
Is Northwestern bad? Yes. Keep in mind we put up a lot of points against IU also. That doesn't mean our offense is that great and we found that out against msu and nebraska.
I still think we need better position coaches next year if we want to go toe to toe in the future with osu.
November 16th, 2013 at 10:11 PM ^
Lloyd was good. But he lost games that we should have one by playing too conservative. One momentum play, we would be reeling & not recover on some games.
November 16th, 2013 at 10:38 PM ^
It's debatable whether they should have gone or kicked. But IF you go, that playcall is just an abomination.
November 17th, 2013 at 6:58 AM ^
November 17th, 2013 at 11:07 AM ^
i'm one of borges' biggest critics. being at the game, i didn't have benefit of replay. but i could see a few wrinkles that he added (funky pass/draw play) and they worked. i even saw some holes openend by the o-line and some RB cut backs.
however, i think borges' redzone playcalling was an abomination. he only threw ONE pass in the endzone the entire regulation. i just don't get why he seems so against it, especially given that we have 3 WRs that can go up and get the ball.
November 17th, 2013 at 4:18 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 10:05 PM ^
Just went for it on 4th and 2 and ran the exact same play as Michigan did and didn't get it either.
LOL
They were in the redzone too.
November 16th, 2013 at 10:47 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 10:43 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 10:59 PM ^
Borges was awful. PA didn't fool anyone. NW defense is not good. Zero TDs without a 3rd down conversion in regulation..."not THAT bad"?
November 16th, 2013 at 11:19 PM ^
November 16th, 2013 at 10:57 PM ^
November 17th, 2013 at 12:57 AM ^
"...youth is an excuse..."
I am not going to sit here and debate whether youth is a valid reason for this team struggling or not, it is and everyone knows it. The issue, IMO, is your inability to see that it won't stay that way forever. See, there is a short term liability to playing young interior OLinemen, but that liability turns into an asset when down the road your OL has 100 starts collectively. You cannot have that unless you play young kids from time to time. Michigan, unfortunately (or fortunately, depending how you look at it) is forced into that situation because of poor recruiting and planning a few seasons ago. Suck for today, but can really make the future exciting.
Brady is NO WHERE near being under pressure because his AD boss knows in specific detail the issues Team 134 suffers from -- but you can keep dreaming of dropping the soap in prison.
Hope you don't choke on your own puke, it would be shame to lose such a positive and friendly member of the site.
November 17th, 2013 at 10:17 AM ^
The 1934 UM team was 1-7. They were shut out five times, and scored a grand total of 21 points for the entire season.
The 1-7 1936 team was shut out three times and scored 36 points all season.
The 4-4 1937 team was shut out twice and scored 54 points all season.
The 4-4 1935 team was shut out three times and scored 68 points for the season.
The 2-7 1962 team was shut out four times and scored 70 points for the entire season.
But do go on and impress us with your extensive knowledge of Michigan football history.
November 17th, 2013 at 11:14 AM ^
borges' grandpa was the OC of that Mich team in the mid 30s.
November 17th, 2013 at 11:19 AM ^
/and it does highlight the silliness of the original comment.
But you don't have to back that far. This offense ranks #57 in the country in FEI; Rodriguez's first offense ranked 81st.
Even Carr's last offense in '07, with Henne and Hart hurt for much of the year, was statistically a bit worse than this one (though that might have changed this week).
November 17th, 2013 at 12:26 AM ^
that everyone was so quick to praise Bill O'Brien going for it on 4th down in 4OT while saying "Hoke was playing not to lose". Ignoring that had BOB not gotten teh 4th down, they lose. Even though they got it, it didn't guarantee anything. A FG would have tied it and dent it to 5OT.
And yet, Hoke does the gutsy thing playing to win, it doesn't work, and SO MANY of you are saying it was "reckless" and "the most terrible coaching decision they've ever seen", etc.
You can't have it both ways, folks. Sometimes gutsy calls don't work. Don't let hindsight cloud your judgment.
I, for one, think it's nice to have a coach willing to go for it in that situation. I would have been OK if he settled for the field goal too. I don't know what game theory says, but it wasn't as bad a decision as some of you are making it out to be.
November 17th, 2013 at 12:57 AM ^
What BlueinLansing said. Bad weather was a huge factor. Also Penn State didn't have much to lose as they're only playing for a record and not for a conference title or bowl game.
November 17th, 2013 at 4:00 PM ^
Well they would still bitch about it or something else.
November 17th, 2013 at 7:32 AM ^