Afternoon Games Open Thread
October 26th, 2013 at 6:03 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:03 PM ^
Ohio (yes, that Ohio) gave up 48 to Indiana last year. They're a weird team to defend.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:27 PM ^
Stop your factual arguing, dammit.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:54 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:01 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:49 PM ^
Turnovers are a huge part of that arguement. Our defense isn't great, but its not bad by any means.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:07 PM ^
29th in total defense. We are also 11th in scoring offense. This is a terrible Illinois defense. This is exactly like when they scored 42 points on Indiana and the Sparty apologists where on here trying to convince everyone that Sparty was back and we had no chance against them and then we turned around and put 63 on them.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:40 PM ^
What are you talking about? They lost six games last year and were 0-4 in the Big Ten at home. They look mediocre this year as well. They've lost to the only remotely decent team they have played, and look horrible in almost every one of their wins.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:43 PM ^
"They've lost to the only remotely decent team they have played"
1) Iowa is remotely decent
2) Who have we beat that is remotely decent? I can name one team. Notre Dame. You will bring up Minnesota probably but that is a stretch. We have likewise played nobody.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:57 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:04 PM ^
I agree with those points. I hope OSU gets to play Oregon or FSU in their bowl.
October 26th, 2013 at 7:19 PM ^
And then shrug off Minnesota? Minnesota beat NW and Nebraska. Minnesota may actually be solid. Not great, but solid. They looked pretty good today. Michigan's win against them is definitely at least "remotely decent".
October 26th, 2013 at 7:20 PM ^
And then shrug off Minnesota? Minnesota beat NW and Nebraska. Minnesota may actually be solid. Not great, but solid. They looked pretty good today. Michigan's win against them is definitely at least "remotely decent".
October 26th, 2013 at 5:45 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 7:42 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 5:40 PM ^
Yep it sucks. Its not the SOS. Going to be a dogfight and if UM loses next week MSU can afford to lose to someone else because we still have Ohio and tough games vs Iowa, NW, and Neb. And I expect Neb to lose to someone else (including us). Even if we beat MSU next week they have not stumbled against the 'patsies' like they used to do in the old days.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:44 PM ^
MSU Last 5 years:
6-7 (4-4 BIG)
11-2 (7-1)
11-3 (7-1)
7-6 (3-5)
6-1 (3-0)
Since Hoke was hired Michigan's gone
11-2 (6-2 BIG)
8-5 (6-2)
6-1 (2-1)
MSU had 2 great years (maybe 3 with this year) and two bad years.
Michigan has won more games and more conference games since Hoke was hired than MSU. So why is MSU a top 3 program and Michigan isn't?
October 26th, 2013 at 5:51 PM ^
The fact we are pulling out these comparisons is the issue. UM v MSU should not be a talking point. UM v OSU should be a talking point. We have so much more in resources and we have a legitimate chance to lose to Sparty just about every year with the 2 current regimes. Comparing us to MSU and saying "hey we could be better is not the greater point. We should be better, and it should not even be a discussion point. Our facilities, our coaching salaries, our recruiting, our money, our everything... and its still a debatable topic.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:01 PM ^
The discussion right above is about Michigan/MSU. That's why people are discussing it.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:01 PM ^
But that wasn't the point origininally. The point being argued was Magnum's glorious mustache up there saying MSU was better than Michigan and moving up, while we couldn't say that. I'm not arguing that it's wrong to say that MSU and Michigan are on par right now. I'm arguing it's stupid to say MSU is clearly better and looking likely to stay that way.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:09 PM ^
" I'm arguing it's stupid to say MSU is clearly better and looking likely to stay that way."
Yes, I dont think they are clearly better. The two are about equal right now.
Maybe the original guy commenting meant MSU is not going to fade away in 2 years but I am not in his head. The larger picture is UM is about the same as Nebraska and MSU right now, and despite OSU being highly flawed still seems to be behind, by a step or more. And even bigger picture we are light years away from what Bama is doing. But at this point I'd accept Ohio level sometime in the next 2 years.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:27 PM ^
Well, to be clear, I don't think state is "clearly" better than us, nor do I think they are moving up. I just think they've established a level of consistency and quality that we haven't.
They've been better than us the last four years. We're pretty even this year. Going into this season, I thought they were on an inevitable decline and us on an inevitable rise, but everything I've seen this fall has changed that perception.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:36 PM ^
Um. didn't we win last year?
We lost the year before but went to a BCS bowl (which, interestingly, Sparty has never been invited to...)
Just saying.
We win next week changes your opinion or still sames?
October 26th, 2013 at 6:54 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 8:10 PM ^
I think we're two years away from grinding down opponents. The young O-Line of Magnusson, Kalis, Dawson etc. will be like Wisconsin in maturity (redshirt junior/junior minimun starters), Green will be a Junior and Shane Morris will be asked to manage games.
People are naturally impatient but I'm a realist that a coach needs to have their seniors in place. Any rational look at the depth chart indicates the limited senior presence on the current group. This is not really Hoke's fault in my view.
I'm not happy about probably taking that long but I think that's probably the trajectory with continued 4-5 star recruits and you hope the generational recruits like Hand or Peppers work out.
We'll still be solid next two years and could well go 2-0 in that time against MSU or Ohio depending on circumstances/turnovers but what it looks like the "vision" Hoke is recruiting on Offense and Defense is going to take a while to implement.
I'd rather still be us then them.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:02 PM ^
Their recruting says that will change. Saying their program is in better shape is insanity.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:12 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 5:34 PM ^
I will say for MSU that they seem to generally come out of the locker room and have a good opening drive in the second half.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:36 PM ^
The UI is bad, but still the defense is solid and the offense is efficient. It is going to be tough game for the good guys
October 26th, 2013 at 5:41 PM ^
What have you people been watching this year? MSU's offense is efficient? They scored 7 last week against Purdue, and have been bailed out repeatedly today by favorable calls and tremendous luck.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:42 PM ^
the kind of game they wanted. M fans here seeing lots of liabilities are deluded.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:44 PM ^
Their offense is bad. That's a liability.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:50 PM ^
let us guess--you're the "Guestavo" from umhoops? Making friends everywhere you go?
October 26th, 2013 at 5:54 PM ^
I don't know who that is, but keep your tin foil hat nice and tight. Also, in case you aren't aware, Illinois has one of the worst defenses in the entire country. They gave up 34 to Southern Illinois.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:57 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 5:58 PM ^
Um, what? Did you read the discussion above? I was citing Illinois' poor defensive stats to suggests that you can't tell much about MSU's offense from this game. Michigan's defense has nothing to do with this conversation.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:59 PM ^
Our D was not responsible for Akron's 24 points. Only 14 at most. They scored a TD on an INT return and a FG after we turned it over inside our 30 (and forced a three and out).
October 26th, 2013 at 6:00 PM ^
The defense gave up 17 to Akron on a 4-turnover day and Indiana has a legit offense.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:14 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:19 PM ^
"Yet very few giving them any credit fir anything - it's the refs lack of calls, luck, illinois sux, schedule sux, etc. most of the conditions apply to us but ee dont blow out shitty teams, etc. yet confidence for us is sky high."
Exactly - all they have done is what they need to do. Beat up teams on their schedule. If not for a stupid brain fart by their coach they could have beaten Notre Dame as well. All this laughing at who they beat (Indiana, Illinois, Purdue Iowa) from a fan base who watched us lose to a similar type of team - i.e. a very average PSU, and then have nail biters versus Akron and Uconn, teams U-Central Florida beat by 25-30 points. Really people? From this you can make a clear distinction UM is better? No one wants to give MSU credit - they are not stumbling against the same bad to average teams that other teams stumble against and/or we did , or came close to doing. Give credit where it is due - it sucks but it is what it is. The excuse making is ridiculous.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:19 PM ^
I'm not sure what you've been reading, but clearly it's not this board. It's also clear your standards for everything discussed so far don't fall into the "reasonable" range by a long shot.
October 26th, 2013 at 7:22 PM ^
And that includes all the times the D was put in bad spots from offensive turnovers.
So.
October 26th, 2013 at 5:55 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 5:44 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:00 PM ^
I'm just calling for some objectivity about Sparty. Check my comment at the head of the line here:
http://mgoblog.com/content/weeks-obsession-brahma-defense#comment-2228379
October 26th, 2013 at 6:03 PM ^
with every passing MSU TD. All I said was that people looking for lots of liabilities were deluded. Truth.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:04 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:08 PM ^
October 26th, 2013 at 6:39 PM ^
You win the internets.
October 26th, 2013 at 6:05 PM ^
They're playing the 104th-ranked defense in the country. Insightful data points to be drawn from this game are few.