hello sir [Bryan Fuller]

Spring Bits: Offense Comment Count

Brian April 15th, 2019 at 1:12 PM

Spring has spung. Let's get it:

Gattis Effect: Check

Sideline play cards: yes.

47553819272_d2a78604af_k

i'm trying to figure out if this is a Zavier Simpson reference [Patrick Barron]

Tempo: yes. Under center snaps: no. Huddles: no. Passes under 30 yards in length: yes. Harbaugh talked the talk about handing the keys to Josh Gattis upon his hire, and so far the walk is being walked.

The overall effect wasn't quite Moorhead-era Penn State, though it was reasonably close. The recent football experience Michigan's spring offense brought to mind was in fact the Frost-era UCF team that Michigan played shortly before that program ignited. That OL got absurdly whipped—Michigan's DL got a collective +67.5 in UFR—and Frost managed to chisel out 275 yards rushing all the same. 87 of those came on one play:

UCF spent the whole game running this split action where outside runs are threatened to both field and boundary. I hated it. Every play felt like one mistake from a touchdown. Several mistakes were made and UCF got chunk plays on them because half the defense was busy running the other way.

That UCF team was coming off a legendary 0-12 season and Frost did well to get that group of bunglers to 6-7, but that was largely about the defense. His offense that year was 120th because it was all smoke and mirrors trying to cover up for a dearth of talent. The next year: 6th.

Gattis did this a ton. Michigan had an extensive jet package that was paired with action the other way, often QB run action. McCaffrey's rushing touchdown has a touch of this, with McCaffrey waiting a split second, attempting to sell some flare or crossing action the other way before bursting into a gap:

Other plays were more explicitly about threatening both edges of the field simultaneously. In between Michigan hammered inside zone. The quarterback run game was frequent and diverse—that bit did remind me of Penn State—and baked into the structure of the offense that last year's arc keepers were not. Those arc keepers were really effective but seemed to have no connection to the passing game, because Pep and Warinner were coordinating different offenses. Now there will be one.

Michigan added speed option, and added the IZ-to-speed option look that the D struggled with from time to time last year. They have OZ opposite jet motion. They've got a bunch of short passing looks, and every play someone's trying to take the top off. Spring games can only be so encouraging; this was maximally so.

[After THE JUMP: position by position]

Quarterback

A clear pecking order: Patterson, then McCaffrey, then Milton, then McNamara. Patterson was the only QB to hit guys over the middle with the timing and confidence to set up yards after the catch. McCaffrey and Milton were more likely to default to the fade route down the sideline.

Shea Patterson looked more comfortable running the Gattis-ized offense than he did for most of last year. He took one sack when the pocked collapsed and Jordan Anthony got a free run at him, and even that was probably the right decision given the situation. When he was kept clean it was a lot of this:

Step up in the pocket, check one crosser, no, second guy yes:

The faith Patterson has in his interior OL to make that step up is a new thing for any Michigan QB in the last, what, ten years.

47603148211_f284c177d8_k

meep meep? [Fuller]

Dylan McCaffrey continues to make onlookers blink and look owlishly at their drinks whenever he starts moving. His family's entire raison d'être is to be inexplicably fast ostrich people, and he is the final evolution. He didn't actually do a ton of passing because he had so many called runs, and he looked exactly like he did last year.

He did not seem to have the command of the offense that Patterson does, which is in direct contradiction of various practice reports. Those should be taken with a grain of salt, as always. I expect that McCaffrey had an off day passing. He's going to be the least disastrous backup QB in a minute, and next year he'll enter as the presumed starter.

Joe Milton looked like a guy who's still a year away. He had one of the better fade attempts in the game, hitting Erik All down the sideline. He also did this:

He ran decently, but not as well as McCaffrey. His accuracy was improved, but not on Patterson's level. Milton was always going to be a multi-year project after a sub-50% completion percentage in high school, and he's still in the building phase.

Cade McNamara only got in during walk-on time after "halftime" and his performance must be taken in context. He was more likely than any QB other than Patterson to look between the hashes; he was particularly taken with an intermediate crossing route that he hit a couple times and had broken up a couple more. His accuracy was shaky, with a few balls well behind his man. QB runs were off the table in walk-on time so we didn't get to see his mobility.

McNamara did pass the first test, which is to look like a plausible Big Ten quarterback. A similarly-ranked, similar-stature QB in recent history didn't: Alex Malzone. Malzone's first spring appearance was a blizzard of throws behind the LOS, the last of them on a two-minute drill that went four-and-out with three or four of those passes barely downfield, if at all. McNamara was well past that. If he can clean up his accuracy he gives off a Patterson-esque vibe.

Running Back

404. With Evans suspended and Turner and Charbonnet out with injuries there were a few Tru Wilson carries before Ben VanSumeren and a bunch of walk-ons got the rest of the day. VanSumeren looked like Ben Mason. The walk-ons did not pop out. Wilson did have a trademark blitz pickup on one of his few snaps.

This concludes potentially relevant information about running backs.

Wide Receiver

33725960688_4fdd11088b_k

feet don't fail him now [Fuller]

Tarik Black didn't make anyone's highlight package but did have a shake and bake that took a short gain into the endzone. Now wrap him in cellophane.

Oliver Martin had a touchdown called back when Patterson was ruled to have been sacked:

Gray stops running when he hears the whistle but Martin torched him off the snap; Gray completely whiffs his jam there. Martin came to Michigan with that kind of release-maven, route-artisan rep but has been overshadowed by the DPJ/Collins duo during his tenure. I don't know if that's going to change this year, but if and when Michigan loses a WR or two to the draft Martin will have a couple of years to live up to his own not-inconsiderable recruiting hype.

46687374385_30f94d5c33_k

i'll take recruiting staffers crowing on twitter if Bell pans out [Fuller]

Ronnie Bell is likely in the same boat, waiting for 2020 when the top of the depth chart is a little less crowded. He added a little bit of data to his burgeoning "is going to be a hit" resume, shaking a Metellus tackle for a big gain:

He could find a niche as a slot guy, I suppose, but I'd like to see him prep for being an outside threat next year since the early returns on his deep stuff are more Manningham and less Eddie McDoom. Man, poor damn Eddie McDoom. Born two years too early.

The new McDoom: Mike Sainristil already featured in an embed above catching an angle route from Patterson. That was out of the backfield, and he was a frequent focus of Michigan's extensive jet package. That is almost by default, admittedly. There is no other plausible slot waterbug on the roster, so Sainristil gets the KJ Hamler stuff. He too dusted Metellus on a crossing route similar to the Bell embed above.

He should be fun but I'm also interested to see how Giles Jackson translates, because that kid's highlight reel is all kinds of ridiculous. Looking forward to Michigan using a slot bug as something other than a freak show for the first time since Steve Breaston.

Tight End

47603143801_b84925e2ae_k

the golden hour, football edition [Fuller]

I do not have blocking takes because I am a man, not an instant-evaluation machine. Both Nick Eubanks and Sean McKeon made deep, contested catches. In a post-Gentry world it would be nice to continue getting downfield production from the TE spot. Eubanks seems like the better bet, but McKeon was way ahead of him as a blocker—remember that McKeon's issues last year were because he got a whole new offense put on his plate and pretty much only his plate when Michigan hurriedly installed the arc stuff.

Erik All was one of the most impressive players to last into the walk-on session. He got some early time, too, and made a contested catch of his own:

Yes, that's the dreaded slot fade. All is not a tight end yet and honestly… does he have to be one? He gave off a Funchess vibe as a WR. It's possible they just let him stay at WR under Gattis. Either way it's a redshirt for him despite the impressive start. There's no room for him yet.

Offensive Line

40640414533_1e7a73dafe_k

coming for yoooou [Barron]

It's impossible to get anything detailed on OL live unless that's the only thing you're watching so this will be some feelingsball. That feelingsball: pretty good. Michigan frequently delivered VanSumeren three yards downfield, whereupon he was whistled down. In a bonafide tackle football game those three yard gains are 5-7. The backup line did similarly well. The obvious caveat is the DT situation, which is Not Good.

Since we're talking about four established Big Ten starters any data you get from a spring game is 1% as useful as 13 actual football games, anyway. We more or less know what the line is going to be like aside from right tackle. The backups performed about as well as the starters but the DT situation for the twos was Ben Mason and Mazi Smith, a converted fullback and a freshman. So… yeah.

The one development that does feel meaningful is the semi-frequent deployment of outside zone. To say Michigan's OL does not seem to be built for OZ is an understatement. Watching Mike Onwenu trundling behind the backside DT last year was inevitable and slightly sad.

But part of threatening the sideline is having OZ and variants thereof in your back pocket. The McCaffrey TD above is OZ for most of the line (Runyan, the exception, pulls around the TE for a kickout). Michigan ran a lot of OZ drills in the open practice. They're going to try to make it work. And despite a RG who will look like a fish out of water every time they try it it's got a real chance if Cesar Ruiz is a dude. This may be true. OZ gets a lot easier for a center if he can do this to a 330-pound draftable NT:

If they're worried about getting blown downfield that reach step outside gets a lot more effective. Ruiz is the rare player who has the power to do the above and the agility to maybe put some David Molk in his game. And if the C gets a reach block on OZ the other blocks don't matter. A lot hinges on Ruiz taking a step towards the Rimington.

40640415823_3cc0a1515f_k

Mayfield looks the part [Barron]

Meanwhile right tackle is the kind of battle where the contenders split snaps with the 1s and 2s because it's that close. Jalen Mayfield and Andrew Stueber are those contenders. If forced to pick a winner your author would go with Stueber, because he's a year older and has a couple hundred live-fire snaps under his belt. It's only good for Mayfield and Michigan that this is enough of a competition to split snaps. Mayfield looks like he belongs most of the time, though Hutchinson did get him on a spin move in some drill-work early.

The other young OL of interest, Ryan Hayes, is much bigger than last year. He is still not big enough and was deployed during the walk-ons portion of the scrimmage. He is on track to contend… in 2020.

Comments

northernmich

April 15th, 2019 at 1:35 PM ^

At first you look at the offense and you’re like “oh man this doesn’t look promising”.

then you take a second and think, throw Nico, DPJ, (hopefully) Evans, charbonnet out there and damn this could be good.

thinking of a 5 wide set with nico, dpj, tarik, bell and sainristil makes the blood rush to my gentials. even if I just see it once I’d be happy.

1201

April 15th, 2019 at 1:44 PM ^

Starting 11 on offense this year will be the best Michigan has had since 2006, and based on the recruiting rankings why wouldn't it be.

QB: Shea Patterson (#4 overall)

RB: Zach Charbonnet (#38 overall)

WR: DPJ (#12 overall), Tark Black (#116 overall) Nico Collins (#138 overall) Oliver Martin (#181 overall)

TE: Eubanks (#344 overall), McKeon (#854 overall)

OL: Runyan (#1138 overall), Bredeson (39 overall), Onwenu (#87 overall), Ruiz (#47 overall), Stueber (#365 overall)/Mayfield (#268 overall)

Everyone has pretty much developed exactly like the "experts" said they would.

1201

April 15th, 2019 at 2:48 PM ^

No I did not and I don't appreciate you putting words into my mouth. I did say in the podcast thread that there isn't enough talent and depth on defense and there isn't. The author of this site spent a half hour talking specifically about that. Ultimately it comes down to recruiting and development, one or both have to improve. Recruiting on the offensive side of the ball in 2016 and 2017 was good and UM is going to reap the benefits of that this year. On defense there has been too much attrition and too many recruiting misses and reaches the past few years. Guys UM was counting on starting or being big contributors like Solomon, Singleton, St Juste, Hudson, Irving-Bey, Mitchell, CMH, etc are all gone. It's why the staff brought in Dana from CMU and are still looking to add the DT from Rice. They know they lack talent and are (rightfully) trying plug holes. The scary thing is outside of a handful of guys the 2018 and 2019 defensive recruits are mainly projects and guys not expected to be anything more than "just guys." Going to need to hit the transfer portal hard these next few years because they aren't signing enough talent to beat the OSU's of the world.

RockinLoud

April 15th, 2019 at 3:49 PM ^

...they aren't signing enough talent to beat the OSU's of the world.

This is the harsh reality that everyone needs to understand. UM has never had a talent advantage since probably 2003. I mean look at this!!:

The only year we had a coaching advantage, we won (2011), even then just barely. For nearly 2 decades now OSU is just flat out more talented, had equal or better coaching, takes the game more seriously, and this is the result. BUT THE REFS IN 2016!!!! Yeah maybe UM got hosed in the one game, whoop-dee-do, what about the other 16 games?

You are absolutely correct, the last couple years of recruiting are not near good enough to beat OSU with any consistency. Maybe Gattis is amazing and we somehow pull out a win this season, but unless UM improves recruiting - or I guess if OSU somehow miraculously gets worse at recruting, which I find very unlikely - as much as it pains me to say it, I don't see much changing as far as beating them in football.

ThePolishFalcon

April 15th, 2019 at 4:21 PM ^

This isn’t popular around here but you both are correct with recruiting.   Michigan has brought in big classes and got a boost in recruiting rankings as a result, while OSU is bringing in talented and balanced classes with much better talent all around.  

Too many inconsistencies in Harbaugh’s classes.   

Mfrank

April 15th, 2019 at 5:31 PM ^

Michigan signed the #1 class in the B1G in 2019 but on a per recruit average OSU and PSU were both higher. OSU wouldn't touch some of the guys Harbaugh brought in. Heck neither would most of the other power 5 schools. 

1201

April 15th, 2019 at 9:17 PM ^

Don't call the guy a troll just because you disagree with him. I think point about the bottom of the class is valid. Sure the top 16-18 recruits from OSU and UM are comparable, but what about the other 10-12 kids UM put on scholarship. History shows outside one or two of them they probably are going to be nothing more than "just guys." Not going to catch OSU unless you start recruiting like them. It's just a fact of life at this point that after the last 20 years it's mind boggling people still refuse to accept.

jwfsouthpaw

April 15th, 2019 at 4:23 PM ^

Michigan objectively out-recruited OSU this past cycle, but overall I think this take is correct.  The problem is that improving recruiting in the long term means that Michigan has to beat OSU on the football field with some kind of consistency.

This is the chicken-or-the-egg issue and why this argument plays out ad finitum. It is easy enough to say that Michigan needs better talent to consistently beat OSU.  But it is equally difficult to see how that talent is attracted to Michigan without demonstrating the actual ability to win honest-to-goodness marquee football games against its primary rival.

New coaches can help recruiting in the short term, but winning at recruiting over the long term requires sustained success.  The coaches and players have to find ways to win those ever-so-close games that have haunted this program since the #1 vs. #2 Game more than a decade ago.  Here's hoping.

1201

April 15th, 2019 at 4:48 PM ^

While I agree that beating OSU is going to help land better recruits I don't agree that that's the reason UM hasn't been recruiting better. There has been too much attrition and too many recruiting reaches by this staff that have nothing to do with the outcome of that game. It's pretty clear if you take the time to look back at the number highly touted recruits who have left the program and the caliber of recruits towards the bottom of the last few classes. Last year UM had commitments from Quintel Kent, Joey Velazquez, and Tyrece Woods before the season even started and none of them had other power 5 offers. If they were developing similarly rated guys into big time players I'd say ok but they aren't. Instead they're sitting at the bottom of the depth chart taking up roster spots and what's worse is guys who should be in backup roles are now being thrust into starting positions and people think that's a sign of good scouting when it's really just the byproduct of so many departures and recruiting misses.

jwfsouthpaw

April 15th, 2019 at 5:24 PM ^

"There has been too much attrition and too many reaches by this staff that has nothing to do with the outcome of that game."

Attrition is a different issue than recruiting quality (Michigan has lost a slew of highly rated guys for one reason or another), but that aside, this is kind of the point.  If Michigan were at OSU's level the coaching staff wouldn't have to "reach"--5-star players would be coming in the door early a la OSU.  They aren't.  I will say that the coaches do need to do a better job of handing out early offers, but many of those commitments--though not all--have tended to result in "amicable" partings anyway.

What other program that hasn't won its conference in 15 years is recruiting better than Michigan is?  I doubt many, if any.  Of course it's not just the OSU game, but the idea that Michigan should be recruiting at OSU levels when looking objectively at recent on-field results is strange to me.

Michigan has enough talent to win big football games, though. Just gotta do it.

Richard75

April 16th, 2019 at 5:19 AM ^

jwfsouthpaw hit it on the head. Of course OSU has out-recruited U-M, but they’ve out-recruited everyone in the league. MSU and Penn State have won the B1G and beaten OSU head-to-head despite this.

You can build a seemingly rational argument saying Michigan is never going to win anything so long as the recruiting dynamic stays the same, but it’s belied by what other teams have done. The disconnect is such arguments don’t take into account how poorly U-M has played in that game. 

footballguy

April 15th, 2019 at 4:58 PM ^

So what? OSU isn't that much more talented than Michigan for those results to be explainable. Consistently beating them is out of question, and it most likely will always be (meaning we will never pull off what OSU has just pulled off the past 15 years).

We should be beating them a minimum of 33% of the time. The talent disparity does not explain those results

Mfrank

April 15th, 2019 at 5:22 PM ^

You must have missed the Cooper years. Michigan was 10-2-1 against OSU in the 13 years prior to Tressel. Michigan regularly signed top 5 classes back then, I know because I remember reading all about them from Tom Lemming, Max Olsen, and Super Prep. If talent disparity doesn't explain those results, how many times in that time frame has UM signed a higher ranked class than OSU? I'd say 2 or 3 times tops, if that. 

1201

April 15th, 2019 at 5:12 PM ^

Sorry but Clemson isn't having high school All Americans like Devin Asiasi, Aubrey Solomon, Drew Singleton, Ben St Juste, Deron Irving Bey, Ahmir Mitchell, Kareem Walker, Kekoa Crawford, etc. walk out the door at the clip UM is. When they do have a high profile recruit prematurely leave like say Hunter Johnson, it's because they signed someone better like Trevor Lawrence and the other guy can't get on the field. Take away the above and UM's "top 10 recruiting classes" aren't anywhere near the top 10. This is the reality people need to start facing when they bring up Clemson, who speaking of, is going to sign the #1 or #2 overall class this year. 

jwfsouthpaw

April 15th, 2019 at 5:29 PM ^

Yeah, Clemson might sign the #1 or #2 overall class this year.  Because they've won multiple national championships recently.  Until that happened, Clemson recruited well but not tremendously and was largely known as the program that couldn't get over the hump. 

Hmmmm, that sounds familiar.

SMart WolveFan

April 15th, 2019 at 7:35 PM ^

Clemson never has attrition, eh?

Let's quickly look at '12-'13

Germone Hopper #79, Chad Kelly #187, Ronald Geohaghan #297, Marty Williams #583, JayJay McCullogh #898, Tyshon Dye #165, Scott Pagano #279, Adrian Baker #369, Dane Rogers #540, Korrin Wiggins #665, Kyrin Priester #3

How will they ever keep the program afloat?

Funny thing is those are the only two years I looked at, you guys are like low hanging fruit. Yummy!

SMart WolveFan

April 15th, 2019 at 9:48 PM ^

"I just named"

Wait? What? 1201 named them ...are you .... the .......same? WOW!!!!!!

 

O and did I fail to mention Clemson had that attrition from the 15th and 20th ranked classes, of course they didn't lose a lot of top 247 guys ....THEY DIDN'T SIGN THEM!!!!!!

And yet, they under-recruited and over achieved their way to two championships.

Face it Dora, the search for estrellas is over.

Bodogblog

April 15th, 2019 at 5:18 PM ^

The statement you propose is that Michigan isn't signing enough defensive talent to beat the OSU's of the world.  

Michigan and OSU S&P ranking over the last four years: 

  • 2015: Michigan #10, OSU #6 
  • 2016: Michigan #3, OSU #8 
  • 2017: Michigan #5, OSU #7 
  • 2018: Michigan #9, OSU #26 

These are the actual results, regardless of recruiting ranking.  Michigan's defense has been good enough to beat beat top level teams. Has it, at least to the level of the team's satisfaction?  Well, the team hasn't won the biggest games obviously.  We can retread the achingly close losses to MSU 2015 (a playoff team, but not a great team), OSU 2016, FSU 2016, OSU 2017 (a below average QB wins that game).  The defense was good enough in all of them. 

Michigan won't recruit at OSU's level consistently until we beat them.  It's not going to be the other way around, as much as everyone would really enjoy that.  Michigan has the better class this year.  Win the game and you can begin to turn the ocean liner.  But they're going to have to get by with better talent identification, development, and scheme for the next several years at least.  They can do that.  Win two in a row and the whole world changes. 

Mfrank

April 15th, 2019 at 5:29 PM ^

42, 42, 42, 30, 31, 62

That's the number of points OSU has scored on Michigan the last 6 years. You can talk about S&P ratings all you want but the bottom line is that this defense gets exposed when it has to play OSU. I'm going to go ahed and assume we all agree Don Brown is a good coach, so if it's not the coaching it's the players. Excuses are over need to recruit better the 2019 class was a nice bounceback from 18 but still too many guys that shouldn't be at Michigan in both.

RockinLoud

April 15th, 2019 at 6:02 PM ^

still too many guys that shouldn't be at Michigan in both.

I think that's the crux of the issue. Top-end talent vs top-end talent, UM isn't behind by much compared to OSU, certainly enough to win in a hypothetical game where your top guys are at 100% and don't need to be subbed out. The difference I believe is in the depth of talent, OSU's backups and bottom guys are quite a bit more talented overall than UM's. Not that UM's is bad per se, but if the goal is to win a natty, the bottom talent on the depth chart needs to get better. 

I think Harbaugh realizes this, which is why he's brought in so many young coaches who are not only talented coaches, but known as solid to great recruiters as well. 

Bodogblog

April 15th, 2019 at 6:03 PM ^

Right, and the very obvious answer to this: Alabama gave up 40, 35, and 44 points to Clemson in the last 4 years, so their defense was exposed, their players aren't good enough, you can talk about their 5* recruiting rankings all you want, but dadgummit win unacceptable etc etc 

S&P rankings are the most unbiased measures of teams available.  Your eyeball test doesn't impress me.  Neither do one-off results against an excellent offensive football team in which you:

  1. include the last 2 years of the Hoke regime, because results from a guy who got fired are relevant (this is sarcasm, they are not relevant) 
  2. do not note that Michigan held OSU to 17 points in regulation in 2016, the lowest total they gained that year (in Columbus, with shit referees); this matters because, you know, they give you the ball at the opponents 25 yard line to begin OT
  3. do not note that 7 of the 17 points OSU scored in 2016 were by OSU's defense, so in fact Michigan's defense only allowed 10 points in regulation 
  4. do not recognize that in 2017 Michigan had the ball at midfield down 20-24 with 2:36 left in the game, with a wide open WR right in front of the QBs face (following the prior drive in which the exact same thing happened) for a first down.  He biffed it.  This was the last straw for a defense which finally understood it simply couldn't win the game, and allowed a meaningless TD to move the score to 31.  The defense absolutely was good enough to win that game 
  5. so two out of 4 years the defense was good enough to beat OSU, and the one of the other years was Harbaugh's first year, which no one could have reasonably expected M to win  

 

Mfrank

April 15th, 2019 at 7:19 PM ^

Enough with the excuses. UM had two score leads in 2016 and 2017 and the defense blew it. Stop caveating every damn game. We are 0-4 and not once did we hold their offense under 30 points. But hey whatever makes you feel better about the ass kickings.

Bodogblog

April 15th, 2019 at 8:30 PM ^

After they lose the arguments, reversion to internet tough guy.  Always. 

You are not recruiting enough brain cells or developing them well enough to allow you to win an argument with me.  Both your defense and offense need work, bottom of the blog. Unacceptable. 

jwfsouthpaw

April 15th, 2019 at 6:23 PM ^

Even Alabama's defenses that were riddled with 5-stars and All-Americans got torched by Clemson. Twice. It happens.

"Excuses are over need to recruit better."  I'd love to believe recruiting will magically improve without better on-field results, but the longer Harbaugh is here without delivering even a division title, the less likely it becomes.  Harbaugh has re-established the team's floor at a much higher level, but the program is still digging out from the RR and Hoke trainwrecks. 

Current recruits probably have no memory of the last time Michigan won a Big Ten title, and the program's best win of the past decade is... I don't even know. The Sugar Bowl against VT? The Florida Capital One bowl from a few years ago, or whatever it was? Certainly it's not the last win over an OSU team that didn't play in a bowl.

The current talent level is still plenty good enough to win the biggest games; the coaches and team need to find a way to do it.

Bodogblog

April 15th, 2019 at 8:42 PM ^

This of course has nothing to do with him dismantling your argument. 

But you would like Michigan to get better, and fast.  Really great analysis of what they need to do.  In order to get better, they need to... get better.  Look at the big brain on brad. 

Mfrank

April 15th, 2019 at 9:24 PM ^

I laid out multiple times in other posts what they need to do blowdog, or should I call you blowhard? You'd think 1-14 in the last 15 against OSU would smarten blowhard like you up, but nope. Keep on hoping against hope guy. I'll live in reality.

Bodogblog

April 15th, 2019 at 10:46 PM ^

You're a turd.  You say they need to recruit better.  It's so dumb.  And you keep mentioning 1-14 like it's a weapon.  Which means you've been hurt by the arguments I've turned against you, don't have a response, and are lashing out trying to hurt me.  This is child-like. 

You and Maizen (I assume the shitbird above is another Maizen account because he got ridiculed out of the last one), you keep saying Michigan needs to recruit better.  As if everyone in the world wouldn't like that. 

It's like a meeting at work, and the CEO asks what can we do to be more profitable as a company.  You would stand up and say, "we need to make more money."  You must have some sense of how dumb this sounds. 

Mfrank

April 15th, 2019 at 11:27 PM ^

You launch into personal attacks, call other posters "shitbirds", call me a turd because you don't like my sports opinion, then have the nerve to call me an "internet tough guy?" Seriously shut the fuck you dumbass bitch up I'll slap the fuck out you if you ever had the nerve to say these things to my face instead of hiding behind your fucking keyboard. Oh and you have no idea what a CEO would say because you're too busy mopping the fucking floors. Go take the trash out janitor and be thankful I didn't put you through a wall tonight.

jwfsouthpaw

April 15th, 2019 at 10:05 PM ^

I've always wondered:  Or what? When people say things like this, does it really mean you will not live with the current results? Or that you'll take your fandom ball and go home? What happens in your world if the team doesn't suddenly start recruiting better?

And only five national titles in 8 years?  Why don't you really shoot for the moon, eh?

 

Mgoeffoff

April 16th, 2019 at 7:13 AM ^

UM has never had a talent advantage since probably 2003. 

Please go back and check 2019's recruiting team rankings.  I get your point, but don't use the word never, and certainly don't italicize it, when you are in fact wrong.