You're an idiot.
FWIW. Michigan doesn't seem inclined to get re-involved.
You're an idiot.
How does that kool aid taste?
What kool aide? If you're implying that Greg Mattison isn't one of the best DC's in the game, you're insane. Michigan's inexperienced defensive backfield got exposed by a very good passing team. Other than "big plays" SC didn't move the ball all that well. The defense held them scoreless in the 3rd qtr. and had several chances to potentially end the game with sack on the last SC drive.
So, I'm not sure what you're implying by your pants shitting comment.
If you couldn't see the discrepancy in talent between SC's WR's and Michigan's DB, you can add blindness next to idiocy on your résumé.
As is evidenced by your steadfast (seeming) refusal to believe michigan coaches could possibly make an egregious error.
Case in point, your outrage at the implication that the coaches fucked up hard in not prepping gardner as qb and thinking bellomy was ready for action.
But in this case (mattison) i agree with you. I saw plays where the defense "had" the play contained or killed, but shaw and company managed to pull a rabbit out of their collective hats. I support mattisons aggressive approach, rather than laying back and letting shaw pick apart our backup corners and a strong safety better suited as an extra linebacker.
If you want to villify someone on D, look no further than our senior "leader" who decided to light one up, leaving us even more high and dry back there.
I think Borges called a great game for the most part. As much as I love Vincent Smith, I recently feel like anytime he is in the game nothing good happens. A couple bad throws by Gardner but wow lets talk about Gallon, I am looking forward to the Gardner/Gallon duo next year. I feel like Gallon caught 90% of the balls today
is that he helps out in pass protection. The other two guys not so much, yet. I'm not putting any blame on either of them (how much blocking has Denard done in his life?), it's just how it is when you have inexperienced guys back there.
I loved when the smallest guy on the field put the biggest guy out of the game, temporarily, of course. Clowney got him back, and then some, later.
Borges had a pretty good game. I wish he didn't have Denard/Smith in a pistol to give Clowney time to get there in the 2nd half, but Clowney was all but absent in the 1st....
1) God we need CBs. Ball-hawking free safeties would be nice as well. Prayers/candles/incense for Blake's reconstructed ACL. Wonder if JT would have been in position in one of the 4 deep balls today.
2) If LM3 wants PT...he could start next year.
3) OL did pretty well, all things considered. Wish we had a RB besides Denard, again if DG wants playing time...he could start next year.
4) Excited for Q.Washington's senior year and O.Pipkins' sophomore campaign. Our LB core will be a terror as well.
5) Really hoping Devin gets his redshirt year. We're going to need his ability out-of-the-pocket with an entirely new offensive line.
Thanks Team 133!
1. Run blocking - can't get worse.
2. QB accuracy - the deciding factor in this game. USC QBs were very accurate especially on long balls. Gardner needs to make the leap this off season.
3. Secondary talent - Countess back will help.
4. Pass rush - Jibreel makes that sack at the end there and just about game over.
5. RB talent - obvi.
6. WR size - how many balls were just off fingertips of our mighty mites today?
All six can't get much worse than this year, so the future looks bright.
Jarrod Wilson is a ballhawk-- just give him a year to grow up. Couldn't tell if he made it back onto the field after the big play in the 2nd quarter, but next year, with Countess/Taylor/Avery/Richardson/Wilson/Gordon we'll be fine.
Agree-- future is looking good. Don't worry about Gardner, with a full offseason of tweaking and repping the throwing mechanics, the muscle memory will be there in big games next year and he won't miss those open looks. He threw some deadly passes, too, and those figure to be the norm next year. We can win championships with the guy, no question in my mind.
We have plenty of young help in uniform already. They'll be all over the line next season on both sides of the ball.
Kalis will be starting on the line, Miller will be big enough to take over center duties, Darboh, Jackson, Funch, make up a nice tall recieving group for Gardner.
On the other side we'll have PeeWee making noise along with Super Mario, Countess will be back, Richardson I'm sure will make noise, and we should have decent safety depth even without Kovacs.
over Borges' second-half decision-making in the Ohio loss, and I've ripped him whenever I got the chance this season, but I have to hand it to him. I thought he had a smart, creative game plan and deserved the win.
When Devin has a whole spring/summer/fall as the No. 1 guy, with all those reps, he'll be a sight to behold and won't leave those same plays sitting on the field next year (e.g., all those throws to an open Gallon). Borges put him in a position to make plays, and that's all you can ask the OC to do. Gardner has so much natural ability, it's just a matter of polishing him up and we're in business.
Got Clowney'd at the end, but the dude is an NFL Pro Bowler playing on the wrong level, so it was bound to happen sooner or later.
Well done, Gorgeous Al. Look forward to next year.
I was pissed about the OSU game plan and was ready to call for Borges' head. I think he called a very good game today, with just a few exceptions. I do think the late play where Smith fumbled on the monster Clowney hit was a bad play call ... sending Lewan up to block a line backer and running Smith right at Clowney didn't seem like a good call. But overall, he called a good, creative game.
Borges called a good game today. It was very refreshing to see lots of new formations, shifts, and plays. Denard actually did a good job running as a tailback. The two point conversion call was really the only questionable call I can think of all game. Anybody who thinks Borges was terrible today came in with a preconcieved notion that he is terrible and is looking for reasons to back that up. We scored a decent amount of points against a very good defense, even with Gardner missing wide open recievers all day long. The defense and special teams lost this game.
Agreed. This one is definitely not on Borges. There were a handful of execution errors that kept us from winning the game (that and the freak of nature known as Jadaveon Clowney) and well, that just happens sometimes. I'm proud of the way our players played, especially the seniors.
and newtopos isn't here to lecture us on the all-important first down statistic.
Had some hiccups on Offense but that's to be expected playing South Carolina with Michigan's offense. If only he could bring this type of creativity to every game, because one or two a year isn't going to cut it.
I wasn't a fan of his play call on the last 2 point conversion though.
Let's see a show of hands of those who actually thought Michigan was going to win the game as of 1 pm today. Everybody had us losing this game. Before the season if people said, we would be 8-4 going agaisnt the #10 ranked 11-2 Gamecocks in a bowl game. That Denard could not throw because of his injury. Countess injured, Toussaint injured, Floyd and Hagerup suspended. Nobody would have guessed that SC would need 59:49 to beat us. Not to mention that SC has Clowney the best player in the country. I much rather lose this game that we were not suppose to win, than lose one in a few years that we are suppose to win.
205 picked Michigan and 57 picked South Carolina.
I looked at TTB, Tremendous and gbmwolverine and they all had SC. One of the threads yesterday most people on here were saying they want Michigan, but thought SC would take it.
but I think most promising transition was the one after, i.e. Navarre to Henne, albeit Henne was just a freshman, and was only the second to start with Leach, of course, being the first. LC really had a difficult time during that period of Brady and Henson due, I think, to trying and force a not yet ready qb into action when you had a proven winner already taking care of business and usually bailing the youngster out when Lloyd inexplicably gave him huge amounts of playing time sufficient enough to lose games for us. Thank whom or whatever you believe in that Mr. Brady was on hand to bail us out of these situations.
But you make a good point and I think your take is probably second. On that note, however, I think it will be much easier for Borges to move forward in the most efficient manner possible because he now only has to worry about building the game plan around DG and whether Shane RSs or not, his backup will have similar attributes as well. What we need and Green could be the answer is the top notch running back we haven't had since Mike departed. JMO, and in no way disagreeing with your assessment because it does have merit.
How could anyone blame this loss on Borges? The game was clearly lost by the defense (without its top two CBs) and the special teams who gave up the return TD. The offensive game plan was good and proved very effective. It scored a bunch of points, held onto the ball most of the day, converted a bunch of 3rd downs, and generally looked quite good when Gardner wasn't misfiring on some open throws. Considering that Borges accomplished that with no effective running backs other than Denard Robinson and did it against what people were saying was an NFL-caliber defensive line is impressive.
I also thought Borges called a great game. I kept thinking to myself that we would have beat Ohio with the game plan he brought today.
Sometimes things just don't go your way. We were missing some key players on D and playing some very young players (who will be great in the future). Disappointed, but looking forward with anticipation to next year.
I would have preferred Denard not be lined up as QB at all if he couldn't throw (which it looked like he couldn't) but other than that I have few complaints.
edit: don't know why this is here. it was supposed to be in response to someone who wanted denard to throw the ball more.
deanrd probably needs a fucking nerve transposition before he can throw the damn ball. if he can't fucking grip the ball and had no strength and poor feeling in his hand and forearm, how is he fucking going to be able to throw?
let's fucking cut your arm off at the elbow then ask you to play qb then complain when you can't do it.
do you know what the ulnar nerve is and how long it can take to come back from any nerve injury? a few months to a year or more is expected.
and did you see denard's one lame duck throw? it was awful. it was obvious he wasn't going to be throwing the ball. it went like 5 yards and landed in the dirt like 3 yards short. watch the damn game again.
in other words, aargh.
As a rule I try not to get too upset at kids being kids, but those three could have been the difference between winning and losing today.
I think all three not only let the team down but also are the reason we lost.
After inexplicably sitting Denard the first couple of series Borges rallied to call a fine game. This game was lost because we lacked enough playmakers on offense or defense to make that one last big play to salt the game away.
Denard had a drivers license incident a couple of weeks ago that might explain the "inexplicable".
It seemed like we lost because we got scorched deep a number of times, allowed a kick return, and didn't tackle the QB on their last drive. Borges did well.
I'll be the first to admit, I've knocked Borges a fair amount of times. I didn't have much faith before the game, and not much at the beginning of the game either. But in the end, he called a very fine game. Reminded me of OSU last year - offense bailing out the defense for once, but this time it didn't quite work.
Al Borges is a jolly good fellow.
Definitely an improvement over ohio state.
The bad news is, borges isnt going anywhere. I am sure hoke is satisfied enough with the improved play calling to stick with fatty.
If you are happy with this coordinator going forward, i recommend a lobotomy.
I am sharing my frustration at the prospect of more seasons where our offensive talent underachieves (thanks to the "braintrust") ... just for the sake of upsetting people on this board.
What the heck happened to the font in this thread?