Just posted that Devin Gardner took home MVP honors for the Cinci combine. 4.57 40 and not only played QB, but competed at WR and DB also. The future is looking UP!
no wonder we hired Hunter Lochmann
I like the RR-ization and Barwisization of the roster.
I know a small group of posters around here doesn't like speed discussions, but I have been whining about UM being too slow and bulky for about twenty years now, so I am really looking forward to seeing how things go when RR gets a full team of his recruits.
I am sick of seeing UM stand around with incredulous looks on their faces and their hands on their hips while teams like USC, Oregon, and Texas, to name three, run around them like they aren't even there. The beatdowns by USC are becoming embarassing to both Michigan and the Big Ten.
The year they lost to Arizona fucking State in the Rose Bowl was the year I stopped making excuses for them and realized they just got beaten by a better team. And the reason that team was better that year was because they were faster.
I just want to see UM win a game that is national in scope and counts for something big for a change. I am tired of UM being the role players in other teams' big victories.
Until the NCAA decides to have a playoff and determine a real champion on the field, the Big Ten is the path of least resistance to the title game. All OSU or UM has to do is win their one tough non-conference game, beat three cupcakes, and beat conference teams that, with the exception of PSU, should not beat either team if it plays well. In other words, all UM or OSU has to do is take care of business and turn the season into a one game, winner-take-all playoff for the right to get into the title game.
It would not only be really nice to see UM not only regain their superiority over OSU, which more often than not will get them to the title game, but it would also be nice to see UM have a chance of actually beating a USC, Texas, Florida, or Oklahoma for the National Championship. The way to do this is through speed, superior conditioning, superior coaching of individual players, and unpredictable playcalling.
It appears to me that UM is going to have all of those essential assets going forward. Hopefully, the 2009 team finally ends the losing streak to OSU, and the 2010 team is a serious contender for the National Championship.
Wow wow wee wow
Why didn't you put your name in for the head coaching search? I mean, you obviously know more then Lloyd ever did. I'm pretty sure you can't boil down only one national title in the modern era of college football only to a 'lack of team speed'. While I'll freely admit speed and conditioning are key, it's not the only thing.
I somewhat get what you are saying, but we did beat the "faster and superior" Florida team when we last played them and were a last second field goal away from beating Texas in the Rose Bowl.
First off, don't get me wrong I love the fact that RR is recruiting speed, especially if these guys can play.
However, imo, the areas that UM needs to really upgrade their speed is at LB and the dline. Offensively, I think their speed has been pretty good - although I'd love to see a running back with blazing speed. In the games you mentioned - Texas, Oregon and USC - I thought for the most part UM's offense was fine. Against Texas they scored a ton of points and moved the ball quite well. Against Oregon in the first half they moved the ball well, they just turned it over. USC they did okay, it was more the conservative game plans that hurt them. More then anything it seemed like UM's offensive philosophy kept the speed in check (and god love Mike Hart but he just didn't really have the breakaway speed).
Defensively as I mentioned above, it's the front 7 that really need to upgrade their speed. Maybe the secondary does too to some degree, but I think just really poor play in the secondary is a bigger issue then whatever lack of speed might be there.
RBs with blazing speed, at least one anyways. michael shaw
I'm not really sold on Shaw's speed; at least not breakaway speed. He's quick in the backfield, but the one or two breakaway runs he had last year, he certainly wasn't leaving the defensive backfield in dust.
The only time you can "leave the defensive backfield in the dust" is if you break a 50+ yard TD run. Just because he didn't have a long TD run doesn't mean he lacks breakaway speed.
He's got it. If he stays healthy, hopefully we can see it displayed soon.
Okay - a few things.
1. I'm not sure what that rant has to do with Gardner winning the MVP of the combine (other than maybe tangentially because he is fast?)
2. Michigan will make the National Title game more often than not by beating OSU? That means that they would have to be undefeated going into the OSU game every year (or maybe only have one loss) - those are some high expectations.
3. Like david said - don't bash on Lloyd Carr - he brought Michigan its only title in decades
4. Hoping that a team that will be mostly underclassmen the next couple of years can compete for a national championship in 2 seasons is a little optimistic. Why doesn't anybody listen to Brian - give the system time - maybe 2011 or 2012, but not when Tate (assuming he works out) is a sophomore. Not to mention that this team still have loads of defensive problems which may only get worse with the graduation of several players in teh next couple of yeras with no replacements yet (I'm thinking LB which still worries me becasue we're expecting a bunch of safeties to move down).
Anyway, the point is just relax a little bit and enjoy next season's (hopefully) improved play and then we'll start looking to the future.
Yeah, those are high expectations, but are the same kind of expectations OSU has just about every year. I know they're a bit unrealistic, but I think that we can all imagine a UM team for which this is at least a possibility, year in year out.
I agree, alot of my friends feel the season goes down the drain as soon as ohio state loses. I find it hilarious and makes my day but still they have the expectation to win every game all the time. I cant wait to have that again with michigan, and by not being a homer fan, but being a logical fan who can say yeah were gonna win this game, were going to a bcs game, were only gonna lose 1-2 a year max.
We used to have that "the season ends with the first loss" feel at Michigan, and, honestly, it made most people miserable. We'd usually lose sometime before October, and then the only thing people posted on the boards was "Why can Carr never contend for the national title?"
Then again, it's getting easier to win a title with one loss lately.
+1 cosign. I thought we got over the "we deserve a national championship" mindset last year.
The Big Ten is a tough conference to play in. Aside from the fact that the Big Twelve had an up year last year, we are at least on average the second toughest conference to play in. It's certainly much easier to get to a national championship game by being from the Pac 10, ACC or Big East. In 2010 the Big Ten could be very tough if all the schools that recently switched coaches develop their young talent and Iowa and Penn St. are able to maintain theirs.
The Big Ten's image is taking a hit because they're the only ones that have taken on the SEC and Southern Cal teams recently aside from Oklahoma, which got its butt kicked by USC and Florida, which people keep forgetting about. The Big Ten teams have actually fared quite well vs. the SEC in non-championship bowl games... but not as many people are tuning in to see those... when people think of the Big Ten they remember watching Ohio State lose... it's as much of a tradition as us losing to them.
See OSU. 3 BCS title games in 8 years.
It's really about taking care of business and beating the teams you should beat. OSU lately rarely losses to teams in the big ten. Last year it was PSU, who was co-champs with OSU. 2007 - Illinois who made the BCS (although a lot would argue that bid was because the Rose Bowl wanted a big ten/pac 10 matchup). 2006 - undefeated in the big ten. 2005 lost to PSU, who was co-champs that year with OSU. Even their non-conference losses have been to teams that end the season ranked really high. 2005 - Texas, National Champs. 2008 - USC.
Now UM had two years where they were really hurt by injury ('05 and '07), but in 2006 and 2004 if UM beats OSU they probably play for the NC (2006 for sure, 2004 would have been a little more iffy).
Lloyd had all the talents in the WORLD! The boys that came through under Lloyd's tenure were beasts. I believe that we have put, either the second or third most people in the league and how many top three finishes have we had?
Texas and Florida were prime examples of how we could be if Lloyd would have just played to the optimum potential of his talent. He rarely, ever did that. I get what the op is saying. I may not totally agree with him becauses I feel we were talented enough to play with anybody. My gripe has always been that we squandered opportunity with the talent we had. But that is just my opinion.
You must not have watched most of those teams.
also true. Thankfully Pierre Woods and Steve Breaston were given the chance to prove themselves on the big stage - can't say the same for the athletes that Tommy Amaker failed to develop.... who knows though... maybe Courtney Sims will be the next "Birdman" in the NBA.
Is going to start carrying a parrot named "Frankie" around?
Wow..Is that Koko B. Ware?
The poster mentioned Sims becoming the next "Birdman," and Koko was "The Birdman." And he was also just inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame, so I guess Sims is on his way to stardom in the NBA. All he needs is a parrot =)
That since the 1978 season, Michigan has only been unbeaten and untied in league play a total of 4 times....1980, 1989, 1991 and 1997.
Twice, in 1988 and 1992 they had no losses, but at least one tie.
Where does this notion come from that as long as Michigan beats OSU, we'll win National Championships come from? Did we just start following UM football three years ago, or something.
Because, in a lifeimte of following this great program, I've seen more wins over OSU than losses, but only one National Championship.
Apparently, Bo squandered as much as Lloyd.
the way the bcs is set up, if Michigan builds a strong team it becomes a one game season.
Michigan has had a strong program for decades. And, still rarely wins all their Big 10 games, and its not a situation where they won them all, then lost to OSU in the closer.
Since Bo took over:
Only 5 times has UM won all their Big 10 games: 1971, 1980, 1989, 1991 and 1997. Three times, they did not have a loss, but had at least one tie: 1973, 1988 and 1992.
In those other years with at least one league loss, only 7 times did they make it the OSU game without a league loss, only to fall to the Bucks.
So, thats 12 out of 40 seasons where UM didnt lose a league game prior to playing OSU.
How does being involved in the BCS suddenly make this a one-game season and allow the program to do something its only done a quarter of the time in the last 40 years....or, more to the point, something done only twice since 1975 and thats enter the OSU undefeated overall.
I think everybody needs to ramp down their expectations a little. I swear some folks around here assume we went 10-0 every year before OSU until Lloyd took over.
You're assuming that the current Big 10 will exist in perpetuity forever, which is completely wrong.
In the last TEN years, the only programs that HAVEN'T won the Big 10 championship are Indiana, Minnesota, and Michigan State. How do you figure that year-in and year-out it's going to be a 1 game season?
Because OSU will never be bad. They will never have a year where they have a rash of injuries. That's why it's a one game season. Have you seen a OSU media guide lately, it starts with the year 2001, no football history before 2001. Something special happened at OSU in 2001, and people from Columbus just aren't able to remember anything previous to 2001.