I support execution as well.
"Coach Mattison told me what the Ravens were about, what he thought," Beyer said. "He definitely encouraged me. I hold his opinion in high regard."
So last night I was watching the evening news here in Utah when sports came on. Of coarse the first thing they talked about was the Michigan-Utah game. The sportscaster made the comment that Michigan hasn't said anything bad about Utah and that Utah doesn't have any bulletin board material to get them pumped up. This got me thinking about how RR is preparing this team for Saturday. Just a couple of thoughts...
I think that RR has convinced the team that if they don't respect Utah, they will lose. When Utah is "on" they are a very good team and can play at a very high level. RR is mentally preparing Michigan for a tough game. I feel as if RR is trying to get them to believe in the "underdog" "us against the world" mentality that the Pistons usually have. I think this is a positive thing. How often has Michigan played with a chip on their shoulders, trying to prove to the world that they are good? Whether they are a good team or not is yet to be seen, but they are playing with a little extra motivation.
Secondly...how is Utah going to prepare for Michigan??? Listening to the Utah coach, he said they were watching WV film for offense and Stanford film for the D. Do they really know what Michigan is going to bring to the table? Yes and No. We all know that we will not be running the WV offense because we don't have a running QB. I predict our offense will only slightly resemble what WV could do with Pat White at QB. However Utah prepares for Michigan, Michigan has an advantage. Just like RR said in one of his press conferences there is no film out there of the QBs. There are no tendencies that they can pick up. How do they prepare for Michigan's passing attack??...Michigan has better WRs and passing QBs that WV has/had. All of this is an advantage for Michigan. We know exactly what Utah runs, they know very little about us. I'm not sure if this is a HUGE advantage, but any advantage right now makes a difference.
The last thing is that this team knows what it COULD accomplish. The believe in themselves. Once again it goes back to the "us against the world" mentality. The players know that they are young and inexperienced, but they also recognize that they can compensate for their lack of inexperience with their work ethic and talent. Now I know that only takes you so far and the bottom line comes down to executing, but they are going to be prepared for Saturday.
I can't wait to see how they perform on the field.
I support execution as well.
who in the fuck are you to tell braylon edwards, mike hart, chad henne, david terrell, anthony thomas, charles woodson, desmond howard, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc that they "NEVER" played to prove they were better than anyone else? mike hart is the fucking definition of "chip on a shoulder". he is literally a walking, talking chip on his own shoulder. did braylon not have enough "swagger" when he was owning the hell out of opposing defenses? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
My point is that the attitude of "We are Michigan, the winningest college football program in the world!!" doesn't get us as far as it used to. We have always been a top 25 team "powerhouse" and this year we are the underdog. I don't mean to blame the players, we all know they play the best they can. I think it has to do more with the coaching philosophy and the complacency they showed. When was the last time Michigan was expected to be bad? That is all I meant by that.
Color me confused, but after reading: "My point is that the attitude of "We are Michigan, the winningest
college football program in the world!!" doesn't get us as far as it
used to." I'm really not sure what that means. Did we start games with a 7 point advantage 15 years ago? Do people actually think that other teams were scared of us 15 years ago? If so, how come we averaged a 8-4/9-3 season from 1985 to 1995?
"I don't mean to blame the players, we all know they play the best they can." You were clearly raised in a noncompetitive household. Sometimes your best just isn't good enough and it's no one's fault except your own that you suck.
Utah is expecting to win...they aren't even saying that it is going to be close. The Michigan name doesn't carry as much "fear" to the casual football fan. Actually we are known as being...overrated (gasp!!! DID HE JUST SAY THAT??!!). Lets face it, Michigan is in a position this year that they haven't been in for a very long time. The future is bright, but outside of the Michigan fanbase, people don't expect much from this team.
"they aren't even saying that it is going to be close. The Michigan
name doesn't carry as much "fear" to the casual football fan."
Shit guys, I didn't know we got to play the games this year! I haven't been to a single practice yet! I hope I can make it to A2 and get my pads before Saturday! I hope RR lets me start! ITS ME AGAINST THE WORLD BOYZZZZZZZZ I WILL TEACH UTAH FANS TO FEAR MICHGIAN ON THE FIELD OF BATTLE
How do you know Utah expects to win? And also, doesn't everyone expect to win every game? I don't know about you, but I've never been like, fuck this I have no chance to win, I might as well just sit on my ass and not try.
Remember, winners never quit, quitters never win, and those that never win and never quit are idiots.
I'm just telling you what I hear on the radio and in the paper. Most people only expect Michigan to win 4 games.
Some Notre Dame fans expect to go undefeated, that doesn't mean I want anyone to tell me about it.
Everything I read/watch/listen to has us winning somewhere beteween six and nine games. Everyone is counting losses to Wisconsin, Penn and the Buckeys and the Utes, MSU and ND being wildcard games that could go either way. Unless things totally implode, which from what I have seen of RR, is not going to happen, our worst case scenario is 6-6.
What about 2006? I think the team had a chip on their shoulder after the 2005 season, hence all the extra off-season workouts and such.
I support execution and trying hard.
I'm not sure that the Michigan coaching staff knew what to expect when ND came to town last year. A spread/zone read option team?? Pro-Style attack??
What actually landed in AA was the worst abortion of a college football team to play in Michigan Stadium since I have had season tickets (1990). This is not some ND hate, but rather that ND team was worse than any MAC team that I have ever seen play in AA. We were a very bad team at that point, and we still beat them 38-0. They couldn't snap the ball, block, throw, or defend. Watch the Jimmah highlight reel to grasp the full depth of what an inability to execute implies.
My point is: Yes, knowing what the other team is going to do is helpful. A complete inability to execute trumps keeping the other team in the dark tenfold.
I don't know, the Michigan "team" that played against Oregon the week before was worse in my book.
Michigan State is habitually and brutally disrespected on a yearly basis - how come this doesn't result in them taking an "underdog" mentality and winning the MNC because of it?
Is it because they just aren't that good?
So they don't win games, because they aren't good?
So in the end, it matters how good you are, not how the media views your team?
As in, it matters if your 11 players are better at playing football than the other teams 11 players?
Like, a sport?
Get here fast Saturday.....
Didn't realize that I was writing something so controversial. My bad...
Polisci, while there are some limits to the transitive property in college football, I find it difficult to understand how a Michigan team with the starting QB that got beaten by a team that appeared to be rolling towards a NC berth (until Dixon got hurt) is worse that the team that got beaten 38-0 by the same Michigan team that no longer had its starting QB.
I know that we sucked against Oregon. (The depth of that debacle won't let that memory go away.) But apply a little logic.
Michigan also had like 7 drives end within 35 yards of the Oregon endzone due to INT, fumbles, missed FGs, and punts(!). This with an injured Henne. Compare this to ND, which had like -20 yards until the 4th quarter.
Yeah, I know. But we all know that transitivity does not apply to college football. If that were the case, one could make all kinds of rediculous arguments about X garbage team that upset Y that beat Z that beat J that beat LSU means that X should be national champs.
I'm not trying to change your opinon, but that Michigan team that was on the field agaist Oregon was the worst thing I've ever seen. That includes the Horror. Us that week and ND the next week had one thing in common, we looked like we had never seen a football in our lives.
Yes the Transitive property in CFB is garbage.
Was Michigan the worst team i have ever seen versus Oregon? No way no how. This is not ND bashing, but to say that our game was worse than the game ND played next week is ludicrous.
We got demolished by Oregon, true. but look at the Box Score before jumping to emotional conclusions:
I was there for both of these. Emotionally, Oregon was devastation at its best, but if I were an ND fan (Touchdown Jebus forbid), I would have quit watching football after the Michigan game.
Oregon took a nap the second half of the game. They could have scored 60 or 70 against us without a problem. They were running playground plays (reverse statue of liberty, anyone) and our D was the three stooges. They were nice enough to take pitty on us.
We're just arguing about the degree of ugly here. They were both horrible.
Yes, I know emotion plays a big role in how I'm ranking these two, but emotions also affects how you might feel about the ND game and team, i.e. the elation we felt pounding someone else after we looked so bad.
Perhaps it is my focus on how bad our defense was against Oregon and you all are focusing on how bad ND's offense was against us. I think they were both historically bad.
No one here disagrees both were historically bad. We disagree that ND against UM looked better overall then UM vs Oregon. ND was the worst team I've ever seen. Duke gave them a run for their money. DUKE!
Controversial would imply there was a provoking point in there, not just dribble and boilerplate speak that any ESPN talking head could spout off a teleprompter about any sports team ever.
tigersjunkie, ignore dex. His arrival usually foreshadows the degeneration of a thread into imbecility. Good post.
His arrival actually signals ths post is already in imbecility.
The guy who writes 800 words and literally says nothing (except that M didn't play with enough ATTITUDE~~!~!! under Carr) is ok, but I'm the imbecile?
His point about being unable to prepare for Michigan was a functional observation that didn't deserve your scathing dismissal. I've seen some stupid shit and this wasn't stupid.
dex your silly!
You were elated after the way we played against ND? We sucked. I left the Stadium knowing no more about our team than I did when I walked in. What I did learn is the ND was the single worst coached team I had ever seen. I honestly felt sorrow/pity for them.
We did nothing exceptional, unless you count three fumbles (lost two) as remarkable. Our passing attack went 7-16 for 90 yards. We did not execute well on offense (that is putting it mildly).
One may make an argument that our defense played well, but I find more of the credit should be given to ND. Snaps over the head. No blocking. They had six fumbles (losing two) and two INTs. Total yardage for the Irish was 79 yards. This was a defense that did nothing to slow down App State or Oregon.
They were horrible. It was fun at first, but at the end it was just pathetic and sad. Is it fun to beat a rival when you play great? Yes. But we didn't. We basically limped over and kicked a roting corpse that Saturday.