Expectations, Hysteria, and Calm Objectivity
If I had not watched any of the last 21 Michigan games and judged the state of the program solely on the reaction of the majority of fans after the Illinois loss, I would need buckshot to get the taste out of my mouth. Considering how I felt while watching the game, I can certainly understand the sentiment held by the aforementioned majority. The game was brutal. A PETA ad depicting the clubbing of baby seals would have been more pleasant to watch than the implosion after Illinois' goal-line stand.
This, of course, is an emotional reaction. So let's put away the pitchforks (for the pissed off out there) and the shotguns (for the depressed out there) and take a step back, and just look at this team's progress towards its goals.
Before the season, I openly predicted that we would go 6-6 in a diary.
http://mgoblog.com/diaries/realistic-2009-prediction
Of the commenters that predicted, the breakdown went as such:
9+ wins (3)
8 wins (4)
7 wins(8)
6 wins or less (7)
Five of the seven commenters predicting 6 or less predicted 5 wins, nobody predicted 4 or less. So including myself, 8/23 or more than a 1/3 predicted a season to finish 6-6 at best. Over 2/3 predicted a best-case scenario of 7-5. Granted, 23 is a small sample size, but it's what I have.
Midway through the season we were 4-2 heading into a game against Delaware State, also known as the School for the Blind, so 5-2 was a given. It was at this point that I cautioned everyone to remain realistic about the team, and maintained that I felt 6-6 was likely. http://mgoblog.com/diaries/mid-season-analysis-how-are-we-doing
Far fewer member made predictions, but the general attitude in the comments was, "You're an idiot, Illinois is garbage, you're an idiot, we finish 8-4 at least, maybe 9-3, you're an idiot, neg-bang neg-bang neg-bang neg-bang neg-bang.... you're an idiot."
Again, this sentiment was based on emotion. Everyone was still high off the win over Notre Dame and the gutsy performance against Indiana. Nobody was taking into account that of 5 wins, two were against Michigan Directional, one was against Indiana, and the lone quality win was against Notre Dame.
'Lo and behold, after drubbing the blind kids from Delaware and losing to an Illinois team that either A.) finally played up to their potential, B) isn't very good but killed us anyway, or C) all of the above people are again reacting emotionally.
So, just for a moment, calm down everyone, and realize that our team is right where we thought we would be. If we beat Purdue next week,like I think we will, that will put us at 6-4 with two tough games against Wisconsin and Ohio State, teams that should beat us if they play well. So we end 6-6. Right about where 2/3 of us thought we would be.
As I said last June, "This [6-6] might seem bad, but considering a brand new scheme on defense and a reliance on young players, it’s not too bad. Especially when a few games could go our way (ND, Iowa, and MSU) and quickly change it to a 9-3 record. Realistic expectations are important."
Well, ND went our way, I was wrong on Penn State, and we almost pulled it off against Iowa and Michigan State. We have a new scheme on defense with limted talent, and our young players are playing like young players. 6-6 is realistic, and let's not lose our shit if that happens. The nature of college football lends itself to highly emotional reactions, and that's okay. But if we slow down enough to use calm objectivity, we see that we're living up to expectations.
This, of course, is an emotional reaction. So let's put away the pitchforks (for the pissed off out there) and the shotguns (for the depressed out there) and take a step back, and just look at this team's progress towards its goals.
Before the season, I openly predicted that we would go 6-6 in a diary.
http://mgoblog.com/diaries/realistic-2009-prediction
Of the commenters that predicted, the breakdown went as such:
9+ wins (3)
8 wins (4)
7 wins(8)
6 wins or less (7)
Five of the seven commenters predicting 6 or less predicted 5 wins, nobody predicted 4 or less. So including myself, 8/23 or more than a 1/3 predicted a season to finish 6-6 at best. Over 2/3 predicted a best-case scenario of 7-5. Granted, 23 is a small sample size, but it's what I have.
Midway through the season we were 4-2 heading into a game against Delaware State, also known as the School for the Blind, so 5-2 was a given. It was at this point that I cautioned everyone to remain realistic about the team, and maintained that I felt 6-6 was likely. http://mgoblog.com/diaries/mid-season-analysis-how-are-we-doing
Far fewer member made predictions, but the general attitude in the comments was, "You're an idiot, Illinois is garbage, you're an idiot, we finish 8-4 at least, maybe 9-3, you're an idiot, neg-bang neg-bang neg-bang neg-bang neg-bang.... you're an idiot."
Again, this sentiment was based on emotion. Everyone was still high off the win over Notre Dame and the gutsy performance against Indiana. Nobody was taking into account that of 5 wins, two were against Michigan Directional, one was against Indiana, and the lone quality win was against Notre Dame.
'Lo and behold, after drubbing the blind kids from Delaware and losing to an Illinois team that either A.) finally played up to their potential, B) isn't very good but killed us anyway, or C) all of the above people are again reacting emotionally.
So, just for a moment, calm down everyone, and realize that our team is right where we thought we would be. If we beat Purdue next week,like I think we will, that will put us at 6-4 with two tough games against Wisconsin and Ohio State, teams that should beat us if they play well. So we end 6-6. Right about where 2/3 of us thought we would be.
As I said last June, "This [6-6] might seem bad, but considering a brand new scheme on defense and a reliance on young players, it’s not too bad. Especially when a few games could go our way (ND, Iowa, and MSU) and quickly change it to a 9-3 record. Realistic expectations are important."
Well, ND went our way, I was wrong on Penn State, and we almost pulled it off against Iowa and Michigan State. We have a new scheme on defense with limted talent, and our young players are playing like young players. 6-6 is realistic, and let's not lose our shit if that happens. The nature of college football lends itself to highly emotional reactions, and that's okay. But if we slow down enough to use calm objectivity, we see that we're living up to expectations.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:57 PM ^
I agree with you that Michigan is on pace for 6-6, which is within a game of where nearly everyone thought they'd be. What's distressing is the trend. The team's two best games were against Western Michigan and Notre Dame. Since then, nearly every game (not counting Delaware State) has been worse than the one before.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:03 PM ^
That's something I didn't touch on but probably should have.
I had predicted a finish of 2-3 with a win over Penn State. In hindsight, that upset prediction was flat-out stupid. So, my realistic prediction sans stupidity means a 1-4 finish. Which looks bad, but it is (or should have been) what we expected.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:32 PM ^
Kirk Herbstreit said "Lots of Brandon Minor will power Michigan to the win at home." - three hours before kickoff.
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:59 PM ^
i agree lots of people got hyped up on TATE juice and now that the effects have worn off the predictions of 6-6 or hopeful 7-5 are still the most likely outcomes.
of course, i wouldn't be a true blue fan if i did not now have the paranoia that we did not just end up going downhill for the second half of illinois, but we have lost our sh-- for the season and slide to a disappointing 5-7.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:24 PM ^
..... legitimate questions abound. Here are a few:
Can TF recover his confidence and finish with a couple of wins behind an OL that lost an all-BT C, forcing three position changes and is getting the sh** kicked out of its tackles?
What can be done, if anything, to stop the bleeding caused by the LB and S units that may be the worst M has ever seen take the field.
If the answer to these questions is no/nothing, M will not win another game and go 5-7. I'll let you decide.
Which leads us to these questions:
Is the mix of GRob, Jay Hopson (LBs) and Tony Gibson (DBs) the best mix that RR can assemble to get the job done on defense?
..... or, maybe there is a largeer question than the defense alone. Given the current state of affairs in AA/at the U, can RR withstand the pressure he is going to be under if he does not make a bowl? Will his head explode? His personality may be his own worst enemy .... he looks uncomfortable these days.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:54 PM ^
You can't say that your prediction was based on intellect and objectivity while those of everyone who disagreed with you were based on emotion and subjectivity. That is an insult to everyone who didn't agree with you and sounds sort of Spartyish. Also, there are many things you couldn't have predicted, such as Forcier's injury or its effect on the team.
It looks like you will turn out to be right, but it isn't a guarantee yet. If it were me, I would probably wait until the end of the season to crow about it. This team could win the next three or lose the next three. You really never know.
As for Illinois, they are a garbage team according to their results this year, but they pulled "their Super Bowl" out of their ass against UM, just like MSU did. All it really proved was that UM is a young team and that it will sometimes bite them in the ass, even against a garbage but inspired team like Illinois.
Anyway, I predicted 9-3 and later amended it to 9-4 including a bowl game. If it somehow happens, rest assured that I won't make an "all about me" post about how I was more intelligent and objective than everyone else. Predictions are a crapshoot; it takes a lot of luck for any of them to be right. Don't confuse luck with intellect or superiority to the other posters on this forum.
November 3rd, 2009 at 4:33 PM ^
if M finishes the season "9-4 including a bowl game" you won't have to make an "all about Tater" post; I'll make that post once a week between Thanksgiving and next Labor Day (when I'm not out grafting a limb onto every tree in Ann Arbor).
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:05 PM ^
"You can't say that your prediction was based on intellect and objectivity while those of everyone who disagreed with you were based on emotion and subjectivity."
I didn't say everyone else's was based solely on emotion and subjectiviy. Clearly you didn't fully comprehend the meaning of the post. The large swing in projections from 6-6 or worse to 9-3 or better indicates, in my opinion, a prediction based on emotion and subjectivity. Eastern Michigan, Western Michigan, Indiana, and Delaware State along with a good win over Notre Dame preseason wouldn't have made everyone say "No way we're finishing worse than 8-4." If it wasn't emotion than what was it? If the prediction of 2/3 of the board wasn't based on calm objectivity than what was it?
The majority of us (as I illustrated) predicted 6-6 or worse during the summer, when there was no emotion. When there was emotion involved, expectations flew up to 8-4 at worst and possibly 9+ wins. Based on emotion. PSU and Illinois brought us back down to Earth like Jake Brown at the XGames. We saw how painful it was going to be on the way dowm, cringed as we looked on, and lamented that we could only watch.
As far as you believing I inferred some kind of superiority to other members on the board, I don't know how anyone could feign superiority when over 2/3 of the people predicted the same thing I did. I knew nothing they didn't.
To everyone who didn't agree with me, fully 1/3 of the board, its not like they were that far off. We were very close to beating MSU and Iowa, and with a little more luck we could be 7-2. Beat the team we should beat, Purdue, and lose to Wisky and OSU and we're 8-4 and they would be right.
Don't confuse being objective and calm and making the same prediction as over 2/3 of the board as lucky.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
Is an extremely small sample size to jump up and down about.
So you predicted 6-6? Like Tater says, that stuff is all a crapshoot and bears no significance whatsoever.
The real problem is Michigan sucks ass under Rodriguez. He was quoted as saying he could "adapt" his offense to the talent at hand. He had talent--he chose to drive some of it off and he also chose to shove his offense down the throats of players not ready for it: FAIL
So this year was meant for improvement. I bet the total sample of UM fans beyond the 22 people who bothered with your prediction diary was the usual "We're Michigan, we're going 8-4 because it's Year Two of chocolate milk and Tate's been here since January! He's almost like a redshirt freshman!"
But there has been ZERO improvement beyond the Notre Dame game. You want to point to the MSU game? Uh, they're below 500 and look almost as lost as we do--except, of course, when they play us. Illinois wasn't just bad--Juice Williams was BENCHED and they were a grease fire--ZINGED by the Zooker (a-gain). A last-minute comeback against Indiana AT HOME? Well, go ask Iowa and Northwestern how tough that is.
There isn't any "trending" one way or another under The Mighty Godriguez--the program just sucks under his guidance so far, and the results bear that opinion out.
And although he'll survive the 5-7 UM is bound for this year, if he goes anything less than 10-2 next year; if he loses to Ohio State AGAIN; if he loses to MSU again (any reason to doubt that?)--uh, bye bye Coal Miner Boy.
People still rail on Lloyd Carr for losing to Tressel--if The Mighty Godriguez becomes not just Tressel's bitch, but Dantonio's bitch by the end of next year, he ought not to be fired, he ought to be exterminated.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:02 PM ^
I've never seen so much horseshit in one post. You sir, have a talent. I don't think anyone can cram so much stupidity and negativity into one post the way have done.
22 (well actually 23, but who's counting... well... everyone but you is counting, but I digress) is a small sample size. Which is why I noted that in the original post.
Also, how is it you haven't been banned? -813 points and you're still here? Clearly you have nothing to add other than ALL CAPS and GODRIGUEZ SUCKS!! and an incredible ability to ignore all logic and fact and base what you write on hyperbole and knee-jerk reaction.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:59 PM ^
....it's the method of getting to the record.
It's not so much that the team might finish 5-7 or 6-6, it's the fact that they aren't getting better. Losing to PSU is OK. Losing to PSU by 25 at home is not OK. Losing to Illinois on the road is OK (big, big stretch). Losing to Illinois by 25 is not OK.
BTW.....Michigan scored TD's on the opening drive in each other those games and never scored another one. They also didn't score any points in the second half of either game. I'm just saying.....
Michigan has played four common opponents from last year so far. Notre Dame, Illinois, MSU and PSU. They have scored fewer points than the 2008 Sheridan/Threet teams in three of those four games (ND being the exception).
I'm pretty sure that they won't put up 42+ against Purdue or 27+ against Wisky. It might be possible to score more than seven against OSU but I certainly wouldn't bet on it. It's entirely possible that Michigan will score fewer points in 2009 than it did in 2008 against five or six of the seven common opponents. That's not progress. Obviously every annual version of a team is different but this gives you a general look at the situation.
So yeah, we all saw 5-7 to 7-5 coming before the season. It's just the way that the team is getting there that is so hard to take. It certainly doesn't instill confidence that 2010 will be much better. I think that's all fans are looking for.....some reason to be optimistic about the future.
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:19 PM ^
"Michigan has played four common opponents from last year so far. Notre Dame, Illinois, MSU and PSU. They have scored fewer points than the 2008 Sheridan/Threet teams in three of those four games (ND being the exception)." Yikes. Bad facts! Bad facts! YA YA YA I can't hear you!!
Scary thought.
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:38 PM ^
The prospects for next year are the most painful thing about how things look right now. Seeing that last years team outscored this years team in those contests really drives that home.
More whiskey please.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:28 PM ^
People need to relax about "next year." Hopefully we will pull 1 out these last three weeks which will give the squad a significant amount of extra practice time before the Applebees Riblet Bowl. Couple that with spring practice and the guys will have that much more experience.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:01 PM ^
Riblets for the holidays...
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:14 PM ^
Michigan has played four common opponents from last year so far. Notre Dame, Illinois, MSU and PSU. They have scored fewer points than the 2008 Sheridan/Threet teams in three of those four games (ND being the exception).True. But,
- M scored 20 @ East Lansing this year and 21 at home last year; this year's margin of 6 was less than last year's 14.
- M scored 17 @ Penn State against a defense which gave up just under 14 pts/game in the regular season. This year PSU is giving up less than 10 pts/game (without subtracting turnover pts), which is what M scored. This years margin of 25 was less than last years of 29.
- The Illinois game was two completely different halves: M wins the first 13-7, loses 2nd 31-0. The game can't and shouldn't be ignored, but I don't think its useful in trend analysis. This years margin of 25 was the same as last years.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:04 PM ^
OK, I don't know that it's fair to use the home-away thing for MSU, but not PSU, and while I think you're right about young teams bouncing back and all, they seemed to dwell a lot at Illinois and the streaks of 4-0 and 0-4 (DSU, really?) don't seem to be up and down as much as down and down, I thank you for making me feel mildly better. I shouldn't have to drink this much on a weekday.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:41 AM ^
Michigan has played four common opponents from last year so far. Notre Dame, Illinois, MSU and PSU. They have scored fewer points than the 2008 Sheridan/Threet teams in three of those four games (ND being the exception).
November 4th, 2009 at 11:11 AM ^
I understand that point outputs might not have varied greatly from 2008 to 2009. For example Michigan scored 21 points against MSU in 2008 and 20 points against them in 2009. The delta is only one point which seems fairly meaningless.
However, even if the offensive output was equal or slightly ahead of last year, that's wouldn't necessarily be a good thing. I think that we all expected a significant improvement over a Sheridan / Threet lead offense (even with a freshman QB). I was hoping to see an additional 7-10 points per game this year.
Michigan had a couple of good offensive games in the Big Ten last year. The second half against Wisconsin, the first half against Penn State and bucket loads of points scored against Minnesota and Purdue. We haven't seen anything like that in this Big Ten season.
I'm not exactly yearning for the "glory days" of Nick Sheridan but it makes you wonder a little bit, doesn't it?
November 4th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^
and tear my hair out at times. But I'm not going to bash 19-20 year-old players, many seeing significant playing time at this level for the first time, on the basis of my expectations.
The quarterback play was a huge improvement when Tate was healthy and opposing defenses didn't know what to expect. The OL has played well at times, against Iowa and first half against Illini, other times they've looked overmatched. The last two games have seen several passes dropped that should have been caught. As sad as this is for me, it must be much worse for the players and coaches.
The quarterback play was a huge improvement when Tate was healthy and opposing defenses didn't know what to expect. The OL has played well at times, against Iowa and first half against Illini, other times they've looked overmatched. The last two games have seen several passes dropped that should have been caught. As sad as this is for me, it must be much worse for the players and coaches.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^
The problem is they gave us a glimmer of hope with the way they started. Obviously, everyone adjusted their expectations based on the start of the season. The reason people are so frustrated is that this has happened in most of our games as well over the course of the season. MSU, Iowa and Illinois all seemed like games we would, could or should win at some point during the game, and then the hope disappears. Like the rest of the season, it would be easier to swallow if we just played bad the whole game rather than choking at the end. Similarly, had we started off 3-3 rather than 4-2, our current state would be easier to swallow.
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:04 PM ^
Put the 6-6 prediction in context. Most predicted 6-6 or 7-5 on the way to a huge improvement next year, like 9-3 or 10-2. I think what is upsetting is that while this year's team is better than last year's, the outlook for the 2010 team, based on the team's recent regression, is not as rosy as we had hoped/thought prior to this year. We are starting to see just how bad the defense is and the realization it won't be that much better in 2010 is scary. If 6-6 isn't a stepping stone for next year but instead a preview, that is terrifying.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:02 PM ^
Lansky is spot on - it's the combination of the regression and the prospect of a tough 2010 schedule staring us in the face that's causing all the gnashing of teeth.
It's obviously way too early to set expectations for next year but they should probably be in the 7/8 win range and top 3/4 in the Big Ten. Losses @ Notre Dame, Penn St., and OSU would basically leave us no room for error. With Wisconsin returning at least 18 starters and Iowa sitting pretty as well it's distressing to think about how far we are from where we need to be to seriously compete next year.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:07 PM ^
I agree that the outlook may not be too good from this point, but I still think it's too early to make any predictions of where we'll be at next year.
Think about the vast improvement alone that we'll have at QB and how that will affect games. Not to mention the progression at other positions (think OL). The freshman to sophmore leap described on the front page is not just pertaining to basketball; that first year off is huge for football too. Not to mention the 2nd to 3rd year development.
While there are big questions about the defense, a whole off season of training can be crucial. Remember even Ron English's defense gave up 345 ypg his first year. And we'll definitely have more depth throughout next year.
All I'm saying is that it's too early to even think about next year's team. Especially with three games left and with the knowledge that anything can happen in college football.
November 3rd, 2009 at 2:18 PM ^
My thinking going into the season (and a post I got mildly neg-banged for) was that I had NO IDEA how we'd finish and said 6 +/- 3 wins.
My point at the time was that we would have (for Michigan fans) unprecedented volatility. There would be games we should have lost that we won and games that we should have won that we lost.
Now here we are. Nobody knows what will happen. Bowl eligibility hangs in the balance at this point. Then again, we could win all three left.
I don't think starting out 4-0 was any more of a "trend" than getting several heads in a row if you flip a coin 12 times. This is a team that has been, and will be able to win only if they can dance on a knife's edge for 60 minutes in a row.
Remember, for 33 minutes against Illinois, we didn't look great, but it looked like we had things well in hand. Kind of like things were OK for 22 minutes against PSU. We weren't winning, but we hadn't yet lost the game for good.
The success of this season will, I think, ultiamtely be judged by whether or not the team can get over this hump and find a way to win a game (or two or three) down the stretch.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:04 PM ^
the potential this team has. The reality has unfortunately taught all of us that predicting results with 80% of a football team being underclassmen is highly risky at best.
I went from 7-5 in July to 8-4 in August to 9-3 in Sept. I obviously drank too much of the spiked kool-aid, but now I have awoken with the hangover that is the reality of this ridiculously young team with suitable depth.
The time and pain it takes to replenish what left, failed, or quit all together is a job that takes the patience of Job.
If given the time, this will all work itself out. The growing pains will be extremely painful. The next three weeks are like playing chicken against someone you know nothing about. All you can do is hold on and hope it turns out OK.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:55 PM ^
I absolutely agree with your 6-6 or 7-5 before the season started, and that people are being too emotional now, because we have a fair shot to end up where we were going to end up generally.
However, there is one thing that I find a little dissapointing, though, and of course this will depend on the Purdue game as much as Illinois- if we had beaten Illinois and Purdue, then we could say we took a huge step forward and beaten all the teams we should have beaten, plus maybe one extra, and lost to all the teams better than us, and I would have felt pretty ok about things. It would have been really nice to be absolutely comfortable that we had progressed from last year's disaster to being a real team again. An average or below average big ten team, granted, but a real big ten team.
I think part of the reason people are so worked up is that after Illinois they are afraid that no such progress is being made. Illinois is really bad, and has been pounded by pretty much everyone- so I think the fear is that we just aren't getting any better. Is it too early to tell? Of course. Is it just one game? Of course. But, man, it was a stinker.
So, I'm not saying that's right necessarily, or that the freak out crowd is right, but at this point it's more than simply whether we hit the 6-6 target or go -1 and go 5-7 or whatever. If we lose to Purdue, and go 5-7, then depending on manner of said loss, I think you could argue- with some fairness- that we really haven't made much progress this year. Maybe 5-7 would be more preogress than it seems, because we didn't lose to a MAC team, but only 1 big ten win would kinda suck.
Now, I'm not ready to fire up the torches or anything extreme like that, but like Brian said yesterday, there is really legitimate concern at this point.
It feels like every game this year is the most important, but once again Purdue will tell us a lot. If we can beat Purdue, then maybe we did just suck against Illinois and oh, well, shake it off and whatever. But if we lose to Purdue then I think there's a real possibility that something larger is wrong with the team that goes beyond youth or game mistakes.
There is a real difference between reactionary whackos and a legitimate cause for concern, and right now I think there is legitimate cause for concern.
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:11 PM ^
OK go back and watch the 1st half of the Illinois game only ... we had them on the ropes. The defense was actually playing OK (UFRs by half may be helpful here).
When we were doing the pre-season projections, I had us loosing to Illinois, as Juice and Zook super recruiting class were of fully developed age. Frankly it was hard to pick where the sixth will come from.
So back to the game: Illinois clearly woke up (which we were afraid of). At the same time our guys (especially on defense) gave up / panicked.
My point: the second half was a stinker, not the whole game.
The risk now is Rich has lost the team for the rest of the season. Hopefully the coaches don't panic (like they did last year against Purdue last year), and are able to refocus the team this week.
Also hopefully, Pryor goes back to sucking at the pass game in the next two weeks ....
Go Blue!
November 4th, 2009 at 10:47 AM ^
We did have them on the ropes in the first half, but we didn't take advantage. To me, scoring only 13 after all the opportunities we had wasn't good either. I was extremely concerned after the first half.
November 3rd, 2009 at 4:13 PM ^
RR is not panicking right now.
why isn't RR panicking?
That worries me.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:08 PM ^
Because he hasn't seen your avatar. That would panic him. A monkey with a gun? Who wouldn't that panic?!?
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:19 PM ^
5-7 will be difficult to take, but there have already been improvements on several fronts this year. The offense is improved; the Notre Dame game was an instant classic, and a signature victory; Michigan has put away athletically inferior opponents (EMU, WMU, DSU), when they could not do it last year.
Rodriguez has had two solid recruiting classes, and the team is loaded with freshman and sophomores who are going to contribute.
Leaving aside on-field performance, Rodriguez's task will be to bring in another good class in the spring, and keep the kids we have. Talented defections in the last two years have hurt, and have played a large role in the thinning of the talent pool. In the grand scheme of things, this task is far more important than whatever happens in the next few weeks.
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:53 PM ^
We looked like shit. But that is the only game where we have "gotten worse". PSU is a good team. If we collapse and look lost the next three games, then I'll panic.
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:07 PM ^
I pretty much agree with those who are disappointed with the trends more than the results. I have some concerns as a Richrod supporter noticing some worrying patterns. Keep in mind these are obviously opinions and that I hope the ship gets righted as we move into the unknown.
My first concern is that Michigan has become predictable based on how teams have played us recently. I know we've done a little differently here and there, but I get the feeling that the opposition knows what's coming for the most part.
Speaking of adjustments, it seems as if when the games are moving on we become more inept. Our opponents adjust there game plans and sometimes it seems as if we have no answer.
There could be reasonable explanations for all of this, and in the long run we'll probably be fine, but I am now of the opinion that our coaches need certain types of players to succeed rather than adjusting the system a bit to fit the players. That comment is not a spread vs. pro style argument, it's a comment about the specificity of the offense we run.
November 3rd, 2009 at 7:55 PM ^
Not only are we playing better teams but teams now have more film to scout, which makes it tougher as the season progresses. It doesn't necessarily follow that we will do better for having played more games. The inexperience is showing. Let's just win the damn Purdue game.
November 3rd, 2009 at 7:57 PM ^
Speaking of Calm Objectivity, if you haven't had the chance to listen to Brian when he is on WTKA, you really need to find the time to do so. Find them (www.wtka.com) online and listen to the podcasts. Brian has been fending off the tinfoil hat folks, the conspiracy theorists, and the RR bashers with such calm and grace it is amazing.
I have never met Brian and I wouldn't recognize him if I were standing next to him on the street, but the Wolverine faithful need a large dose of his calming, rational voice. I'm sure he's brought some folks down from the ledges. Thanks, man.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:27 PM ^
Win it, and we're in (very, very likely).
That's important.
I'm not ruling out winning @Wiscy or vs tOSU, but let's take care of business this week.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:06 PM ^
When do we as Michigan fans have to argue with each other about what blowout is worse? The beat downs in 08 or the same team beating us down in 09?
All is forgiving if RR can pull the team together and beat OSU. Another loss to them and we are in serious trouble!
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:23 PM ^
I agree with the idea that ~6-6 was a reasonable expectation for this year.
Why does the potential of 5-7 feel so bad?
Because of the schedule (three wins from directional schools and I-AA) combined with the ugly Illinois loss, we now have to consider the possibility that we could be the WORST team in the conference this year.
We have been outscored by 11 ppg in conference play (11th in the BT) and are currently in last place - with three games left to play against teams much better than Illinois.
Last year, we had two conference wins without playing Indiana, who finished in last place.
It is hard to consider a 1-7 in conference as significant progress.
I'm not bringing out pitchforks. RR needs time, and I think he will get at least four years to return to the 9-win norm of the past.
However, this most recent loss brings to life a scenario that most of us did not think was possible - WORST IN THE BIG TEN?
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:46 PM ^
is an improvement over last year but a few things that bother me are: 1.) We would end up 2-6 in the Conference (same as last year), 2.) The beatings in the past two games were unexpected to the extent that the players are in the second half of the season, where we might have expected at least some improvement, 3.) I'm still upset about the Illinois loss. It should never have happened. I'm still a staunch supporter of RR but now I think he needs more time than I originally thought.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:55 AM ^
He does need more time, and he'll get it too. The majority of our problems can only be addressed with recruiting and, unfortunately, that takes time.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:40 PM ^
Floating head +1.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:14 PM ^
Calm, rational, intelligent and clearly written. Kudos to you, sir.
November 6th, 2009 at 9:47 PM ^
The 2nd part of the season has certainly been a disappointment but this is an entirely new system. There has been some improvement from year 1 to 2, and it'll hopefully only get better!
Comments