21- 20 -17-14 -12 - 6
This is the descending # of points M has scored against Sparty since 2008. We have not scored a TD against Sparty since the 2011 season (3 years ago). Does the trend continue? After watching OSU destroy Rutgers yesterday I say yes, but then Sparty had trouble in Bloomington so I am cautiously optimistic. Thoughts?
GO BLUE!
October 20th, 2014 at 12:30 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 1:12 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 1:38 AM ^
The comparison between Hoke and RR is apples to oranges. The reality is there are few schools who can recruit and execute in the man ball regime. I don't think it is extreme to think Michigan will look at opening up the offense if the candidate is sucessful and well regarded. The focus on defense has to remain strong (ie the DC salary will be competitive.)
October 20th, 2014 at 7:55 AM ^
Michigan is definitely better defensively, but I don't know about recruiting. Sure they land high in the recruiting rankings, but the players they recruit don't seem to amount to much. Which leads you to wonder if they are recruiting the right players. You can really only say you're doing well at recruiting when you're recruiting players that turn into good college players.
For instance, if the head of your HR department was hiring employees with good pedigrees out of college and they all wound up being in over their heads once they got into the office, would you say the HR person is doing a good job recruiting talent?
October 20th, 2014 at 6:54 AM ^
I don't understand why everyone keeps fixating on RichRod vs. Hoke. Neither one is the right guy for the job.
October 20th, 2014 at 7:17 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 7:26 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 7:57 AM ^
We're definitely worse off now than before. The defense was a mess under RIch Rod, but at least things were moving in a good direction. Under Hoke the program is steadily moving backwards.
October 20th, 2014 at 8:03 AM ^
Also, while I think that RichRod had to go, I also think that Hoke needs to go. Hoke's failure does not suddenly retroactively make Richrod a success here. Firing Richrod was the right move - hiring hoke apparently was not.
October 20th, 2014 at 9:18 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 9:52 AM ^
Didn't mean to imply I thought things were moving in the right direction on defense, because we definitely weren't. Meant that as a program we were getting better every year.
And we agree that both coaches need to go. They are both failures in different/opposite ways.
October 20th, 2014 at 11:34 AM ^
"Things under RR were most decidedly not moving in the right direction on defense"
Things with Hoke aren't 'moving in the right direction' on offense, defense, and special teams. We still lose to teams with a pulse, now badly, and barely put up a fight in any facet of the game.
October 20th, 2014 at 1:23 PM ^
I didn't watch the bowl game because I figured RichRod was a dead man walking and the game would not be enjoyable, but...
...we moved the ball against MSU but we were either missing kicks or 4th and long conversions in opposition to a FG try.
...we also moved the ball against OSU but fumbled once near the end zone and had to go on it on 4th and field in goal range b/c of our kicking issues.
I'm not trying to say we would have won those games, but if the Gibbons of 2011 was as accurate in 2010, I think those games would have been much more competetive deep into the second half.
October 20th, 2014 at 5:28 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 7:55 AM ^
but can't we attribute some of that plus Urbs success running a spread to the fact that he had young teams? Isn't it feasible to think that if Hoke took a mature RR team to an 11-2 Sugar Bowl champ season that that would have been RR's floor? Again, just a thought, not trying to be a dick and campaign for more time for RR, just asking the question.
October 20th, 2014 at 7:58 AM ^
"Isn't it feasible to think that if Hoke took a mature RR team to an 11-2 Sugar Bowl champ season that that would have been RR's floor?"
No, its not feasible at all. In 2011 we played defense, which we didnt in years 2008 - 2010.
October 20th, 2014 at 8:04 AM ^
but that's also assuming that RR wouldn't have replaced GERG with someone more competent.
October 20th, 2014 at 10:28 AM ^
Gerg coached a pretty decent defense at texas last year. RR failed here and nothing anyone says will change that. I am soo sick of everyone trying to rewrite his history here. Yes Hoke went 11-2 with RR's players... because of what Mattison did and Borges just let them run the zone read they had been running.
October 20th, 2014 at 11:55 PM ^
And as sick as you are of attempts at rewriting history, I'm just as sick of those who completely dismiss anything remotely sympathetic to the last regime as being revisionist. Mattison did a good not great job his first year running the D while the offense flourished in spite of Borges, not because of him. If RR had stayed and been given the same financial support Fred Flintstone has for coordinators there's a better than decent chance he'd still be coaching here.
October 20th, 2014 at 1:27 PM ^
Maybe if DB would've opened up the checkbook to bring Casteel over from WVA, our defense would've been fine. I think the 3-3-5 would've worked fine in the B1G, but you needed people who know it to coach it. Why not have one of the best in the biz?
October 20th, 2014 at 6:42 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2014 at 7:44 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 12:16 AM ^
4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42
October 20th, 2014 at 12:18 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 12:23 AM ^
Totally non-OT, too, because of a certain campus in Ann Arbor that housed the Dharma Initiative.
October 20th, 2014 at 12:22 AM ^
What a great show although I still don't get the deal with the polar bears.
In addition MIB was a bad mofo.
Jack was my favorite character either that or Sawyer actually probably Sawyer even if he may have been an FSU fan.
October 20th, 2014 at 9:08 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2014 at 4:29 PM ^
I normally stay out of your threads, but Evangeline Lilly had a fine butt.
October 20th, 2014 at 6:46 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 7:38 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 9:11 AM ^
I'd wager DF's number has been scrawled on a few men's bathroom stalls.
October 20th, 2014 at 9:18 AM ^
777-9311.
October 20th, 2014 at 12:37 AM ^
This weekend's final score
MSU 24
Michigan -3
This actually sounds about right.
October 20th, 2014 at 1:33 AM ^
Devin is playing injured and is turnover prone even when healthy. Shane probably injured as well, and he is ineffective even when healthy. The WRs cant get separation on anyone, other than Funchess. The starting RB is injured, and the Backup RB is dinged. The best RB on the roster didnt get the NCAA waiver. The OL is poorly coached and has major holes in it.
Nussmeier and Hoke run a slow-tempo, disorganized offensive scheme.
Expect MSU to exploit the middle and crush Michigan's offense. I doubt there will be more than one offensive TD, if that.
Im just stating facts, it is what it is right now.
October 20th, 2014 at 1:54 AM ^
Michigan won their last game. Their backs are to the wall. Redemption is an absolutely huge component in the game. Michigan has talent. This roster is full of players who have shown potential at some stage in their careers.
I agree with your assessment, but I didn't see the 31-0 ass kicking at ND coming. Maybe there is something else in this team we haven't seen yet. We are a long ways from Funchess taking in his TD catch on the jumbotron vs. App State. It's time to butt heads....
Then again...maybe not. All I'm saying is I'm nto throwing in the towel against Sparty- ever.
October 20th, 2014 at 8:04 AM ^
The intangibles here don't outweigh the facts that this has been a really poor team on the road and that they've failed in numerous back-to-the-wall situations. They have had their backs to the wall so many times over the last couple of seasons, that its just the norm for them. So there's no extra boost by being in a "no one believes in us" situation because no one has believed in them for a couple of seasons.
And I don't even know if you can say Michigan has talent on the roster. They have players that used to be thought of as talented, but expecting both sides of the ball to suddenly emerge as competent, let alone look like they are talented, is crazy.
Michigan's defense is vulnerable to smart and balanced offenses. MSU has that. Langford and Lippett will tear them up. And while MSU's defense isn't the force they were last season, they are still really good. And Michigan doesn't have the offensive firepower or competence to match them score for score.
October 20th, 2014 at 1:43 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 1:48 AM ^
281-330-8004
October 20th, 2014 at 7:46 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 5:08 AM ^
Shades of 2002, only in reverse.
On a different but related topic, I'm surprised nobody's started a thread celebrating SF's beatdown at the hands of the Broncos last night as proof that JH has "lost" the locker room.
October 20th, 2014 at 6:15 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 7:19 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 7:36 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 6:23 AM ^
Michigan-3
Too much will go wrong in this one. I'd like to say this will be the beginning of the end for hoke, but then again, Dave Brandon is our ad, so who the hell knows. Either way, Go blue
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2014 at 6:37 AM ^
We beat MSU in '12 w/o "only" 12 points. Just win the game.
October 20th, 2014 at 6:40 AM ^
Well, if nothing else, the projection over at Massey has us scoring a couple times anyway despite giving us an estimated 8% probability of winning this game. They are going with the 35-14 median projected score based on their simulation. I think the Sagarin ratings might have painted a similar picture of a potential 3 TD underdog too.
October 20th, 2014 at 6:56 AM ^
October 20th, 2014 at 6:57 AM ^
Hey, either they’re the winning PowerBall numbers,
or that’s what Peyton Manning says when he's calling an audible, right before he says . . .
OMAHA!