October 23rd, 2023 at 12:25 PM ^
"Schedule This!" LOL @ 8:06
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:16 PM ^
His rant on the schedule was strong.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:30 PM ^
Disagree with Klatt on the serious nature of the accusations against Michigan.
Mike Balas and Doug Skeen gave a better take on their program.
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:52 PM ^
I’d like to know what Dennis Northfleet and Jake Ruddock think.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:02 PM ^
What about Troy Wilfolk?
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:32 PM ^
"They rely on things that are reliable" is actually an interesting way to put it really, because that's the key to the ruthless efficiency with which they've been able to hammer opponents.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:39 PM ^
That was great, but then he went on to explain it in broad platitudes that sound like he's just Joe Fan. Michigan is tough and disciplined and gives great effort . . . as if no other team does.
I expected him to talk about the impact of our dominating lines and running game in an era when flag football rules the day, as the reason for our reliability.
He does indirectly say that later and then says that we have the JJ smoke on top of all that. So it's all good I guess.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:34 PM ^
He made the same "above wins and losses" comment during the OSU PSU game. I have no idea what he's trying to say. Aren't these allegations exactly specifically related to wins and losses? I don't get why it matters otherwise.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:36 PM ^
His point is spot on. Every week, so many teams struggle. What Michigan has done on the road to Neb, Minn, and now MSU is absurd (146-17).
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:39 PM ^
Oddly enough, the best response I've heard about the "Michigan hasn't played anybody yet so we don't know how good they are" excuse came from a Buckeye fan on their Reddit board.
Their point was that "...this is nearly the exact same team as last year but better. We know how good they are. They are really good, except they have a weak schedule."
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:43 PM ^
I think a better answer is: We are hardly the first team ever to play such a lousy schedule through eight weeks. But we are about the most dominant team (score wise) since the inception of the AP poll. Lots of teams play crappy schedules; we are achieving historic results.
I think the CFP Cmte will agree
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:41 PM ^
Also of note to go along with Klatt's assessment, Michigan is now the Vegas consensus betting favorite at +220 to win it all over Georgia who is at +280. The people that know a boa constrictor when they see one is all you need to know for you dipshits that want to keep on about the schedule.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:04 PM ^
Not disagreeing - but, regarding Georgia, the question appears to be Bowers. And, what impact will Bowers being out have on their team. It will be interesting to see if Georgia's D steps up a bit - as well as how effectively their offense can game plan / execute without him.
October 23rd, 2023 at 12:57 PM ^
Squirrels probably think road pavers are weak.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:11 PM ^
I started listening to his podcast this season and so thankful that I have. Extremely insightful, very objective, but perhaps most importantly, you don't need to be an X's and O's savant to enjoy listening to it or take anything away from it, which is what I feel like I need to have sometimes when I listen to the MGoPodcast recaps.
Its not a knock on Brian and Co.'s material. They do their homework and then some, but some of their play-by-play breakdowns in the podcast are a little more "in the weeds" than I like to go as a fan. But I digress.
Klatt brings his conversations to a level where anyone with any level of knowledge surrounding the game can listen and enjoy.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:41 PM ^
Very well said. Klatt is really positive too. He doesn't take many shots and generally builds up the good rather than ripping the bad. And his love for the game comes through as well.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:13 PM ^
It's serious because it's michigan. If it's georgia, Alabama, osu it'd not serious.
October 23rd, 2023 at 1:14 PM ^
Hook that Klatt directly to my veins 💉💪🏾
October 23rd, 2023 at 2:23 PM ^
I believe the NCAA's rationale for prohibiting this was the cost associated with scouting other teams in person - which, created an unbalanced field since certain schools might be budget constrained and not afford to conduct such scouting.
However, the NCAA has "no concern" when a school like Texas spends $ 280K for the official visit of a prospect. How many colleges / universities don't have a recruiting budget greater than $ 280K? I'm not sure of the answer.
Yeah - the NCAA has definitely set a very level playing field for competition.
Yet - if a school wants to conduct a camp that's "further away" from their institution to identify prospects - increase their awareness of their program - which, perhaps, would result in more scholarship offers for talented young men and women - increasing the options available to young adults who (most likely) will not pursue a professional athletic career - the NCAA vetoes it. This reduces the options young adults might have to attend different schools.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:26 PM ^
It's an outdated rule which never should have applied to FBS football to begin with given that everyone involved is investing enough money to scout opponents. It was slightly silly in the early 90s, it borders on the absurd in the quasi-pro football world of the 2020s.
Of course, it would still be an unfair advantage for Michigan, if no-one else did it. But I wasn't born yesterday. If teams are happy to slip recruits' 'advisors' large amounts of cash in envelopes in clandestine meetings in dark parking lots or now in the NIL era pay recruits five figure sums just to visit campus then they sure as hell are going to also have people scout their opponents.
October 23rd, 2023 at 3:06 PM ^
In my 4 undergrad years (football seasons 1971-1974) Michigan football was constantly catching people viewing practices from the east side of State Street from the 2nd or 3rd floor of a house.