The Soaring Majesty! Comment Count

Brian

Editor's note: sorry this is late. I thought I'd published this around 11 AM, but evidently I didn't hit the button.

9/26/2009 – Michigan 36, Indiana 33 – 4-0, 1-0 Big Ten

boubacar-cissoko-smoked-by-indiana martavious-odoms-game-winner-indiana 

Tate Forcier dropped back to throw and Martavious Odoms broke open and Forcier lofted it. I swear to you that on an overcast, steel-gray day a sliver of light slipped through the clouds to linger on the object's parabolic, causing its rain-slicked surface to glitter as it reached its apex. It started to come back down, and Odoms slowed fractionally, allowing the Indiana safety—

Aw, hell. Indiana? No offense to a program the evidently warranted more respect than Vegas or this here blog offered in the run-up to the game, but passages of soaring majesty get ruined when a Hoosier is mentioned. Since Wangler-to-Carter, when Indiana was 8-4, moments of glory against Indiana only come in one form: oh thank God we didn't lose to Indiana.*

So, yeah: thank God we didn't lose to Indiana.

Since we didn't, we should all just breathe a sigh of relief, recalibrate expectations back down a little bit, and move on. Michigan's not at a point where any win against any Big Ten team is one to freak out about. The freshmen quarterbacks remain freshmen and it's becoming clear that the defense has about the same raw talent level that last year's offense had. The only thing keeping them from plunging off a deep, dark cliff is the fact that no position on defense is as singularly important as quarterback is on offense.

A couple may be as undermanned, though. Indiana's potentially-crushing, one-play, 85-yard riposte to Tate Forcier's first attempt at fourth quarter heroics exposed the secondary's talent deficiency in a way even starker than Michigan fans were treated to against Notre Dame. At least when Michael Floyd and Golden Tate and Jimmy Clausen were running wild you could point to torched opponents past and recruiting rankings and drooling NFL scouts. Seeing an Indiana freshman zip past not only the walk-on safety gamely pretending he doesn't run a 4.8 but the scholarship, potentially-starting cornerback not named Donovan Warren was alarming. If JT Floyd is going to play corner in the Big Ten he's going to do it ten yards off the line of scrimmage.

This is how bad it is: I'm not even mad at Floyd when a player gets vastly open or he commits a silly, unnecessary pass interference penalty. I'm mad at Tyrone Willingham, metaphorically. It's inconceivable that Michigan would find itself in this situation. There is exactly one junior and no seniors at both safety and cornerback. The 2007 class provides three of the four starters and has lost Artis Chambers. 2006 saw the only two defensive back commitments (Brown and Mouton) move to linebacker. The 2005 class was Brandon Harrison (decent but did not redshirt), Johnny Sears, and Chris Richards.  The recruiting malpractice everyone saw on the offensive line last year returned with a vengeance. Hell, even the 2008 class is looking like a disappointment: Brandon Smith is a linebacker; Cissoko and Floyd have been the weak link on a defense that's played three walk-ons extensively. Very little of that is Rodriguez's doing.**

The parallels between this year's secondary and last year's offensive line, on and off the field, are striking, and it's not like linebackers not named Stevie Brown are helping out much. Michigan's recruiting was wildly deficient in more than one area and will be an anchor going forward, basically until such time as the roster is full and the creaky last few Carr classes are no longer weighing down the top of the roster.

We should forestall complaining about Robinson and Tony Gibson and even Jay Hopson, who I've complained about personally, if somewhat obliquely, because there are excellent reasons why their units are performing poorly that have nothing to do with whether or not they can coach. Gibson was the guy who turned Ryan Mundy from a guy with an uncomplimentary stat (Yards After Mundy) named after him into an NFL draft pick. West Virginia's pass efficiency defense in the final few years of Rodriguez's time there: 28th, 63rd, 30th, 20th. There's plenty of evidence that Rodriguez isn't dealing with morons here, and plenty that suggests late-era Carr recruiting was. I'm stashing the torches and pitchforks away, hoping that the rest of the season follows a trajectory similar to that of the offense last year: baby steps towards respectability in the midst of crippling talent deficiency, followed by a second year of growth.

As always, this should be okay. It takes time to dig out from all the reasons 3-9 occurs.

*(The Hoosiers have had a few respectable teams in the intervening years, but Michigan either blew them out, lost to them (once), or missed them. Closest thing to a close win against a respectable team was '91, when Indiana was 7-4-1 and M won 24-16.)

**(Smith and Floyd did commit to Michigan after Rodriguez was named head coach but those players were widely considered locks for months before the coaching transition took place. And please note the criticism here is not necessarily of Smith (or Mouton or Brown) but the recruiting practices that failed to take their likely moves to linebacker into account. Floyd, for his part, might be a functional safety if he wasn't needed at corner.)

BULLETS

  • You know, I was sort of coming around to the piped in music but no more. I should never have said anything negative about the band, I take it all back, I believe the piped-in music to be an abomination, and curse anyone who voted in favor of said abomination during this site's earlier poll. The end of the first half was close to my idea of hell, with the evil homunculus responsible for the ear-piercing noise pollution blasting something stupid in-between every play. During the video review, I found myself so enraged at the piped in music that I fruitlessly gave the bird to the idiot playing Bob Seger at painful volume. I went to a concert later that night and the volume level there was considerably less ear-damaging.

    It's just unpleasant to hear a probably-terrible song at volume levels 130% of what the speaker system can actually handle. Turn it down. Turn it off. Stop alienating the people who really care about Michigan's traditions and stop catering to the folk who can't distinguish Michigan Stadium from an ECHL arena. It does not help anything.

    In fact, it actively stops cheers. The students were chanting "Go Blue" at each other during one point and the evil homunculus played over it. The evil homunculus plays AC/DC over what used to be a bass drum pounding out a beat to which the stadium chanted "Let's Go Blue." It has gone from somewhat tolerable to Michigan State in four weeks, and must be destroyed. I'm disappointed but not entirely surprised that the marketing wing of the Michigan athletic department would be so deaf to tradition. Mostly, I'm appalled. Piped-in music is a disaster and should be stopped immediately. (Note: MVictors mentioned it too, though Greg's not as ready to draw and quarter people. That is because he is soft. I am the Dwead Piwate Woberts, I have come for your souls.)
  • Didn't expect the official site to out a guy on the 85-yard Indiana touchdown but here you go:
    On Indiana's 85-yard touchdown run to take the lead in the fourth quarter, defensive tackle Ryan Van Bergen came off the field distraught after a blown assignment. He was taken aside by defensive coordinator Greg Robinson and then sat on the team bench with his head sagging. "You flush it and you come back and play," Robinson yelled down the line. "You don't need to be a hero."
    As I recall it I watched a 215 pound Indiana tailback outrun not only a walk-on safety (depressing that guy has to play but understandable) but a scholarship cornerback; if Van Bergen had problems he wasn't the only one. Also, Van Bergen was the backside defensive tackle… it's hard to imagine what his assignment was that could have prevented Indiana from running outside the other OT.
  • Interception or not, why the hell did Indiana throw at Donovan Warren? Why the hell would anyone throw at Donovan Warren the rest of the year? Opponents have now lost two close games because they threw at Donovan Warren. Sooner or later they will stop doing this, I think.
  • Related:
    After the game, Michigan defensive coordinator Greg Robinson confirmed that Cissoko’s absence was a coach’s decision. “Yeah, it was,” Robinson said. “I thought, J.T., at first, was a little nervous but as the game wore on he grew more and more comfortable and did a good job, really held his own.”
    I thought that Cissoko had gotten pulled because he had picked up an injury. He did come out for a play or two earlier, and when an Indiana receiver ran straight past him without so much as a head fake I figured it was a hamstring pull or something. Apparently not. Er. That's not good. I'd rather there was some explanation for Cissoko getting smoked other than… well… you know. Not being good at football.
  • Attn: Tate. Plz stop doing this plz:
    (caption) Michigan quarterback Tate Forcier throws a pass into the turf as he is sacked by Indiana defensive end Greg Middleton in the first half. Forcier was sacked on two consecutive plays by Middleton. ***  The Michigan Wolverines came from behind twice to beat the Indiana Hoosiers 36-33 at Michigan Stadium in Ann Arbor. Photos taken on Saturday, September 26, 2009.  ( John T. Greilick / The Detroit News )
 
    It reminds me of Ryan Mallett and makes me want to die a little. Please continue all of your other activities except running around in the pocket too much.

ELSEWHERE

Maize 'n' Brew has some Zapruder-quality "I took pictures of my TV" stills of the aforementioned Warren interception. They make a decent case the call was correct, if spectacularly close and improbable. I'm waiting for the HD video before I make any proclamation either way.

MVictors notes that Justin Turner isn't even in the section of the bench that contains backup sorts; he's a long way from playing.

Doctor Saturday notes that Michigan and Notre Dame aren't exactly establishing themselves dominant powers in the wake of their entertaining week two matchup:

the question after Indiana's 467-yard, 33-point barrage Saturday is "Who isn't going to put up huge yards on the Wolverines?" The Hoosiers -- dead last in the Big Ten in every significant offensive aspect last year -- went on long marches and hit big plays alike (an 85-yard touchdown run and a 56-yard completion to set up another score) and might have been on their way to more points if the officials had seen Donovan Warren's clinching interception differently on IU's final drive. The Wolverines are 89th nationally in total defense and 92nd against the pass, slightly worse than last year's numbers for the year and significantly worse than their 2-2 start in September. There is no comparison between the offenses, but the progress of the Michigan D (or lack thereof) puts a real crimp in the prospective rise in the Big Ten. The fact is, resetting expectations after the first month, neither of these teams has put much separation between preseason expectations and their prospects for the season.

It's hard to dispute; even if Michigan's offense is ahead of preseason projections I don't think anyone had them giving up almost 500 yards to Indiana on defense. Michigan may be slightly ahead of what seemed like a universal 7-5 preseason consensus, but it's mostly because they've turned one coin-flip game in their favor and the Big Ten has looked slightly more moribund than even their recent standards.

Mike DiSimone has his weekly comprehensive picture roundup.

Comments

PinballPete

September 28th, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^

The Lloyd Carr Technique You make sure that every 2-4 years you get a sure-fire lockdown corner and let him develop on the job, usually into a stud (this is where I stare at Markus Curry) Conventional Wisdom* You get a few skilled players that are willing to learn every year. Since depth is strong, competition is strong and upperclassmen are at least reliable. *(by conventional wisdom I mean 'what I learned playing NCAA Football and simulating five times as many games as I played') Is there an big influx of DBs coming in? So far we have M. Robinson and two meh CBs this year and if you throw in last year it's still just Justin Turner and Thomas Gordon, a former QB. I was under the impression that if Warren leaves we are in deep doo-doo.

grandjour

September 28th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^

It's really hard to decide where the D is going to go the rest of the year. Indiana brought a lot to the table they hadn't shown earlier this year. The week earlier, they ran 42 of 44 running plays to the tight end side of the ball. Against Michigan, they ran away from the tight end side, or back cutting using counters. Again Robinson and Co made adjustments at halftime (3 pts other than the blown 85 yarder). As the season gets on, here's hoping their better prepared at the start of the game as the see more film. I'm most concerned with the poor pass rush. Not enough turn overs and negative plays. We should all be happy with this. Rich Rod said we wouldn't compete for a Big Ten title till we were 3 deep on the depth chart. At last count 87 players on the roster are freshmen or sophmores. GO BLUE!

bryemye

September 28th, 2009 at 2:06 PM ^

I don't believe we are Casey at the Bat at all... We would be if we weren't playing "bend but don't break" as much as possible. We are doing our darndest not to give up big plays (long touchdowns) schematically, really. A strikeout is a long touchdown. We're just giving up tons of singles and doubles.

bouje

September 28th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^

Our recruiting was shit the past few years especially in the Defensive Backfield. Carr really put us in a shitty position (neg me all you want I am not and will never be a big fan of Lloyd Carr as a coach. Yes he's a great guy, but he wasn't that great of a coach or a recruiter no matter what recruiting sites said *look at glaring holes everywhere)

tmiller

September 28th, 2009 at 1:31 PM ^

like medicore UM talk, Dr. Saturday made some very good points. I hope our D buttons up some things quickly. I am still optimistic though as we all should be. Go Blue!

DoubleMs

September 28th, 2009 at 1:35 PM ^

Key Matchup Next Week: Tate Forcier vs HOLD ON TO THE GODDAMN FOOTBALL and Moosman vs DON'T SNAP UNTIL YOU ARE TOLD TO SNAP But seriously, I don't know why Tate started doing that... he hasn't done that in any games to date until Saturday... and I don't know why Moosman was trying to pull off the offsides call more than once... Big Ten refs are not that attentive. I feel like Cissoko's size is catching up to him. He is a solid tackling corner, I will give him that, but I don't think he has much more than one or two deflections to his name, with a ton of receptions against him... I would love to see him excel, but maybe we should try to rotate him in at safety where ability to deflect a ball and in general be tall matters less and ability to tackle the guy with the ball and read the field matters more, just to see what happens... it is too bad that the word on Turner is that he keeps the bench warm for the guys who keep the bench warm for the starters when they get up to get a drink... I approved of only a couple of the piped in music songs (big AC/DC fan), but it is a new generation, and the student section seems a lot more fired up than it was the last few years. It does seem to get the crowd a little more involved in general, but please can we stay away from Kid Rock if we are not going to get rid of the piped in music altogether? I'd say Eminem too, but he is from Detroit, I will give them that. Also, new speakers please.

stubob

September 28th, 2009 at 2:51 PM ^

I can just hear the athletic department meetings: "Well, the crowd has shown interest in the loudspeaker music, so we can just move that band out of those prime seats and put a smaller portion of them on the field to play "Victors" after touchdowns." That's your extra revenue. That's what, a couple hundred seats at $100 a pop? Screw the maize-out, I want an earmuff-out. Have the student section put them on any time they play artificial music. Turn around, sit down, read the newspaper.

KTChicago

September 28th, 2009 at 3:18 PM ^

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they piped in "House is Rockin'" at one point. If they are trying to appeal to the students, shouldn't they play more current music? Or do they think they'll win over the older fans/alumni by playing older music?

RHammer - SNRE 98

September 28th, 2009 at 1:36 PM ^

From today's Daily: http://www.michigandaily.com/content/notebook-moosmans-botched-snaps-ce… Warren’s “willed” pick: With just over two minutes remaining in the game, Indiana quarterback Ben Chappell and the Hoosier offense took the field needing a 75-yard comeback drive. To start, Indiana went with a five-yard in-route that, according to Chappell, “really had been open all game." Michigan junior cornerback Donovan Warren wasn’t about to let that drive get started. “When the ball came, we both actually had our hands on it,” Warren said. “But I tugged it, tugged it from the get-go and so we were both wrestling for it, and — Barwis, Mike Barwis.”

helloheisman.com

September 28th, 2009 at 1:37 PM ^

Haven't we recruited well relative to our Big Ten opponents, anyway? We've still added 3 and 4 stars on defense, which is about as good or better than anyone else in the league besides Ohio State. Brian, sometimes you forget that this is college football, and not every position is going to be incredible in any year. Every team faces these issues, and we face them less.

tvaduva

September 28th, 2009 at 1:38 PM ^

No bullets on the bad snaps? I'd be interested to know if the blame is on Moosman, Forcier/Robinson, or the officials. FWIW, I reviewed the bad snap that lost 20 yards and killed the drive: it should have been a offside on the Indiana defense. I was at the game but I also re-watched. The commentators said the DE got back onside, but that wasn't the case, Moosman snapped it before he was back from the neutral zone. So smart play for Moosman that didn't payoff. I'd be interesting in hearing some thoughts on the risk/rewards to snapping the ball when the D is offside. It seems that the officials are going to miss the call you would lose 10-20 yards, to only gain 5 yards if they catch it. Is this something that the coaching staff is telling the players to do?

oakapple

September 28th, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^

First of all, on the replay it appeared to me that the Indiana defender did get back onside. But whether he did or didn't, the risk-reward ratio of this play is poor. It's worth only five yards when it works, but is a disaster when it fails. I think it's better for the offense to just play its game, and make the defense try to stop it.

tvaduva

September 28th, 2009 at 2:09 PM ^

But it might just go down to how often the officials call offside in these situation, if they call it 90% of the time: 5 yards * .9 = 4.5 yards expected gain greater than 20 yards * .1 = 2 yards expected loss Poker theory says in this case you should make the gamble. *** I did slow it down and freeze it when I reviewed the snap, to see if the announcers were correct. It was close, but pretty clear that the DE's foot was still in the neutral zone when Moosman snapped it.

oakapple

September 28th, 2009 at 2:43 PM ^

You're headed in the right direction, but omitting a crucial fact: the expected value of the play they would have run. In your analysis, the expected value of Mooseman's hasty snap is positive 2.5 yards. But he also has the option of running the play the offense had planned. Unless Michigan is averaging less than 2.5 yards per offensive play (and I doubt this), it's better to run what the coaches called.

Gene

September 28th, 2009 at 3:22 PM ^

Exactly right. Also, you have to consider that 20 yards isn't necessarily 4 times as valuable as 5 yards. A 20 yard loss will in most cases stop a drive dead. A 5 yard gain is nice, but usually not critical. Edit: Oh, but it gets more complicated. On success (off sides is called) the 5 yard gain doesn't eat a down, so can't be compared against the expected return on a normal down. Failure does expend a down in addition to the yard loss however. There's also the free-play aspect, which isn't likely to be a significant factor... unless Denard is back there :)

M-Go-Bleu

September 28th, 2009 at 1:39 PM ^

I probably am not informed enought to even comment here, but I just can't help but defend Carr's recruiting. Our recruiting classes were always decently rated and our defense under Carr (although they had lapses) certainly weren't horrible. Since Carr left at the end of 2007, that means the 2008 recruiting class is basically his, 2007, and 2006. I don't think you can blame Carr for any busts in those classes since he didn't get to coach them. Part of it is recruiting ranking coming in, the other is player development. We always seemed to reload on defense under Carr. I think it is at least to me a nature versus nurture argument and for whatever reason our guys are not being nurtured on defense. Maybe it is the coaching changes, maybe it's the new focus on the offensive side of the ball etc., but for whatever reason our highly rated players are not playing to their expected capability on defense. For example, Cissoko had awesome raw talent and great hype. Why hasn't he been trained into a great corner, there is no excuse here for anyone but the defensive coaching.

M-Go-Bleu

September 28th, 2009 at 2:08 PM ^

I guess my overall point, to keep succinct, is that Carr's recruiting classes were generally highly rated. We never had a horrible defense under Carr. We should be able to transition the athletes recruited to fit our schemes. Can't you take a highly recruited athlete at another position and teach him to be a saftey. I only have the one example, but I really don't understand why the coaches haven't made Cissoko into a decent player, he has too much talent to turn so horrible, I think it is coaching transition/techniques (to some extent; certainly not all) that has contributed to an underdeveoped incohesive defense that is the worst I've seen at Michigan.

bouje

September 28th, 2009 at 2:24 PM ^

It's the trickle down effect. Safeties move to LB LB move to DL No one moves to Safety. Safeties are generally the best athletes on the field and thus you can't really just throw someone from the DL line there. Just because a recruiting class is highly rated doesn't mean that it fills the needs of a recruiting class. You can keep stockpiling RB'S, QB's and DT and still have a "good" recruiting class but that doesn't mean that it was a good recruiting class for the needs that you have. Coach Carr left the Defensive Back recruiting slack for several years (as he did with pretty much everywhere but the DT position). This was inexcusable.

Number 7

September 28th, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^

Hasn't Will Campbell lost 30+ pounds from his tubbo HS days? Maybe the plan is to stick him in the backfield. (For comedy value alone I'd pay to see it; I'd also probably pay to see (and possibly wager on) a Floyd-Campbell footrace.

CRex

September 28th, 2009 at 2:40 PM ^

I beg to differ. Aside from the glory years when Marlin Jackson and Shazor killed anything that moved in the secondary, we didn't have a glorious secondary. After that we had Leon Hall, but teams just threw to the other side of the field. We used to have people like Morgan Trent, whose idea of pass coverage was standing there and watching Hall run across the field to tackle the guy Trent was supposed to be covering. What we did have was an insanely talented defensive line and good LBs behind it. People like Branch, Woodley, Taylor and Graham that put pressure on the quarterback and forced bad throws. This year we lack a defensive line of that caliber, we have Graham but we lack a Branch-esque kind of tackle to seal up the inside. So quarterbacks have all day to pass and it exposes the lack of talent we have in the secondary. Carr typically recruited good CB (Jackson, Hall, Warren) and then the rest of the secondary was average at best.

bouje

September 28th, 2009 at 2:43 PM ^

These new guys on here that think that they know about Michigan recruiting and just look and say "oh look we finished in the top 15 we should be able to wipe the floor with anyone" are idiots. You sir on the other hand are not an idiot.

aleng

September 28th, 2009 at 3:00 PM ^

No one seems to remember how painful it was to watch dump after dump to the flat consistently gain 10+ yards on 3rd and long against our "good" defenses of the past. Yes we are giving up a lot of yards but going into this season it was expected and we've tightened when we've needed to. Hopefully in a few years it will be a mute point and we'll have great athletes in a great system but until then I'd rather have young players playing above themselves when needed than what we had the last few years of Lloyd... please admit it was freakin frustrating!

FrankMurphy

September 28th, 2009 at 1:41 PM ^

There were points at which I was just as annoyed at the offense. At times, I wondered aloud whether we could bring Lloyd Carr back for just the second half so that he would have our two senior tailbacks continue to pound the ball behind a solid offensive line rather than relying on our 180 lb. true freshman QB to run around and make ridiculous plays. The running game was the only thing that worked with some degree of consistency in the first half; I don't know why we didn't stick with it. Does that make me a bad person? In any case though, I'm glad it all worked out. Let's just hope we didn't sacrifice Forcier's shoulder for the win.

wishitwas97

September 28th, 2009 at 1:52 PM ^

that we complained about running too much with Carr as a coach and now we are complaining about not running as much with RR as a coach. I just find the irony of it too funny and amusing at the same time.

Greg McMurtry

September 28th, 2009 at 2:26 PM ^

was wondering why UM seemed to keep throwing the ball when the running game was working so well (in the first half.) I understand that some of the throws were option screen passes, but it seemed that it was just throw after throw. I was also getting very angry a la Costanza (George is gettin' upset!) with Moosman's snaps. Sure, he's not a center, but the bad snaps were drive killers.

SysMark

September 28th, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^

I have always detested piped-in music at sporting events and loved the fact that is was absent at Michigan stadium. I haven't been there yet this year but can hear it loud and clear on TV, and it is depressing. For the life of me I simply can't see the value of it - I like to be able to talk to the person next to me when there is a lull - let the band and the game itself generate whatever energy you need - the increased noise level owing to the new structures is enough. I wonder if this is crossing the Rubicon, or is there any chance someone will relent. IMHO it cheapens the experience. Nevertheless I will be driving there from Connecticut for my annual visit in a few weeks. Loyalty trumps all!

jamiemac

September 28th, 2009 at 1:50 PM ^

Well, I have a lot of thoughts here. Saturday was the best game I have seen Indiana play in at least two years. Its definetly one of the top 5 games they have played this decade. They played awesome. Michigan did not. Yet, the Wolverines won. Let me ask everyone this: How is this any different that the 2006 near vomit job against the Ball State Cardinals? I'll answer that. It's better. That was a program at a peak and still messing around with Ball Freaking State. Today the program is building with obvious better days ahead. And, make no mistake, Saturday was a good win. If anyone is embarassed or sad about beating Indiana with a touchdown at the end, well then I hope somehow, someway, you get to live in 2008 forever. And that your new reality plays out in an ECHL Arena.

bouje

September 28th, 2009 at 1:54 PM ^

This is a young team that is going to take it's lumps. Every win is not going to be easy but it's not like Indiana isn't in a BCS conference. It's not they are a MAC team, or a I-AA team. Yes expectations need to be tempered but every team no matter how good you are will have an off week and will need guts and glory to win a game here and there. Just ask USC who gacks a game every year to some terrible team.

tn wolverine

September 28th, 2009 at 2:58 PM ^

As I watched the game and grumbled aloud about it's Indiana it shouldn't be this close. My wife made me realize that is only the past talking. She has watched all the games with me this year and has no preconceived notions about who's good and who's bad. She looked at me and said, that's the best team Michigan has played this year. I looked at her like she's from Mars and said but it's Indiana. She said it's still the best team Michigan has played this year. After being dumbstruck and considering what she said, I was shocked into the reality that she's right. Indiana IS better than Notre Dame, and EMU and WMU. So instead of griping about it realize this was the best team Michigan has faced so far. Whether that bodes well or is a very bad thing is yet to be determined. She also said that defense (Michigans) really scares me. Hey maybe she's getting pretty good at figuring out this football thing. Also please don't tell her I said she's right that might make living with her really tough.

Gene

September 28th, 2009 at 3:08 PM ^

Indiana could end up being better than ND, but right now I have to disagree. Wins over Nevada, MSU, and Purdue is much more respectable than wins over WMU, Akron, and some I-AA team. No question Michigan played a worse game vs Indiana though, particularly on O.

NJWolverine

September 29th, 2009 at 10:15 AM ^

They executed very well. Their players are fundamentally sound and they didn't make any mistakes. Their QB played a mistake free game and was very accurate when the receivers were open. A veteran team, I think IU is going to surprise some people this year. Fundamentally sound but physically inferior teams will beat physically superior teams who make mistakes. Should they be competitive with OSU this week, I don't think we can feel all that bad about the game being close.