Yes, this. If you were really paying attention, you could tell that they were intentionally trying to make it happen. They started the song as Michigan was teeing up to kick off after a touchdown, and they always cut music right as play starts. I noticed that and was waiting for the crowd to take it from there. They didn't disappoint.

If you watch WD's highlight video you can hear them play it at the kickoff and let the crowd take over.

 

Exactly - in the post game presser Blake mentioned slowing down a bit for blocking. Still great to see!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t15klxVQRWY

Just to add to this comment, lost in all the attention to JJ whizzing down the sideline (which was cool AF) has been Sainristil's block, which was totally devastating and was key to getting Corum from the 25 into the endzone.

I know SP+ is supposedly very predictive (or perhaps more predictive than anyone else) but aside from Cincinnati at #5, it's also got A&M at 6, Clemson at 8, and Wisconsin at 9. Those rankings seem awfully wonky to me. At some point stars matter and I think Alabama will blow them out

i thought the same thing...just one of those things, really.  the play was there but was slightly disrupted a couple different ways.  half the time it's a catch, half the time it's an interception, and the third half of the time if falls incomplete.  <shrug>

My thought was that maybe Cade thought All was going to go straight up field, but he angled in slightly. Had he run vertical, the pass would have been on point. But it's hard to tell.

OTOH, I think the outside WRs were starting to get a little separation, and a deep shot to give Anthony a chance to "go get it" may have been the way to go.

Cade had all day in that particular pocket (as he did most of the game except when Iowa had schemed an unblocked blitzer) and you could tell he was getting antsy. 

When they showed the replay, I thought Cade was throwing behind All a bit hoping All would settle or slow down so he wouldn't get lit up by the LB/S who was waiting in the end zone.  The two of them didn't see the same thing and the INT resulted.

Good point @DT76. It's good I'm not a coach, for A LOT of reasons, but I was definitely getting impatient with the offense in the second quarter not taking a shot.  I thought the rest of the game was going to go to follow along in the 'slog' fashion. So happy it didn't!!

I was at the game, and a buddy turned to me and said they needed to try to do something to move out from the goal line. I said, nope, the only way Iowa can win this game is if we give their crap offense the ball on our 25 yard line. It's going to be boring for a spell, but you just have to trade punts with them knowing our defense isn't going to give up a long drive.

How demoralizing must it be for Iowa's defensive and special teams guys to go out there consistently and pin a team inside their 10 yard line, and then have your offense *repeatedly* go three and out and get nothing to show for any of it?

We out-Iowa'd Iowa.  LOL!!!

Frustrating we couldn't move the ball on the ground and get some firsts, but yes the staff played it right. Iowa's only hope was to play field position, force turnovers and hopefully get easy points. The offense got bogged down but playing field position with Iowa up 2 scores was fine.

Great point DT -- this is one of the reasons I (usually pretty negative) thought this game wouldn't be much of a problem. Michigan knows -- and dare I say, enjoys -- how to play this way and has great special-teams play as well. It was strength-on-strength in the 2Q, and we were better at it.

That song precedes the recent string of failure vs OSU.  It was also the theme song for Bo's TV show 'Michigan Replay' when it first started back in the 1970's.  I'm pretty sure that the MGoBlog version we hear is the same recording that Brandstatter and Bo used back then.  It sure sounds that old, anyway!

Across 110th Street is from an era where beating OSU was a regular occurrence, not a generational feat.

I certainly didn't think they'd be 12-1 but I was always very high on the talent of this team and thought there was a path to getting to 12-1.  Trying to find my comments but I don't really know how to search post history.

There is this increasingly popular concept of the "Blue-Chip" ratio which is just the percentage of four and five stars on your roster.  Michigan came into the season with the 10th highest ratio in the country at 58%.

So they had the talent.  The questions were, would they now have the experience and would the coaching do the talent justice?  Happy that the answers to both were "yes".

This comment implies you don't think the Lions will be picking first next year too. I admire your optimism.

For the first time, they actually played Rutgers and Indiana with one hand tied behind their backs, to save that punch for OSU's mouth.  If the Rutgers game started slipping away, they would've just used that punch.

I mean, I and others were wrong about it, but that's because Michigan completely broke tendency from prior years.  They always had some stuff ready for OSU, but generally over-prepared for Rutgers and under-prepared for OSU.

But you're right; they weren't a super-team.  A lot of players were still raw and refined their game over the course of the season.  McNamara needed to develop his timing with the receivers.  And of course, the coaches wasted half a season with that split zone crap.

Very frustrating to watch at times, but all in all, a great learning curve for a revamped staff.

You're setting the bar too high.  No one wins every game by a ton.  The 1997 Michigan team struggled to beat a 7-6 ND and 7-5 Iowa.  Alabama, the national title favorite, lost to a so-so Texas A&M and was seconds away from losing 10-3 to a .500 Auburn team.

We opened the season with three straight 300-yard rushing performances.  We crushed a UW team that the fancystats love by three touchdowns on the road.  (Yes, at one point in the game our margin was three points, but for most of the game it wasn't.)  Beating PSU on the road, with a healthy Clifford, is not something to scoff at.

This team showed great promise from the start, although early on its passing attack needed time to gel, in part because of Ronnie Bell's injury.  When that got going - and when we also found a good use for McCarthy as a situational backup - this team became very difficult to stop.

This is flat out not true.

We dominated all three of our non-conf opponents (and the two MAC teams were actually good!), had one clunker against Rutgers, and then dominated a good Wisconsin team that was favored against us to move to #4 in ESPN's FPI.  Check out the thread about it.

This was the same metric that preseason gave M a 2% chance to win the division and a 0.7% chance to win the conference.  And yet, after 5 games they were so dominant they had moved all the way up to #4.

They really dominated all season long other than the second halves of Rutgers, Nebraska (a game that they still covered), and MSU.  Only three halves in the middle of the season that weren't dominant.

The team I follow, Crystal Palace, has "Glad All Over" by the Dave Clark Five. Hearing the entire 25,000 crowd at Selhurst Park belt that out is a rush.