Did anything really change?
I’ve largely avoided the board since the Penn State game, so please forgive me for the fact that what I’m asking has probably been answered in many ways. That out of the way, here is my question for the board: Why did the Penn State game change your mind about anything? I understand that Michigan gave up 41 points to a team that had struggled offensively and that had a walk-on quarterback. Remember two things, though: First, not every former-walk-on QB is Nick Sheridan. Brian Griese also walked on and he wasn’t so bad. Second, Michigan gave up 37 points at home (rather than on the road at night) to UMass.
So, I don’t understand why people are any more or less on the RR bandwagon than they were on Friday. It seems to me that the patience of a lot of people has run out, but that only means that those people have changed, not that RR has changed or that we have any new information about whether he will succeed at Michigan. The defense is still very young, Greg Robinson’s resume is still checkered, and the offense still suffers from the inconsistency of a unit led by a sophomore.
I very much wish that Michigan had won on Saturday. But was I disappointed? No, that would imply that I was surprised by what happened. So long as our defensive backfield is largely manned by a bunch of guys who hadn’t gone to their prom at this time last year, I won’t be surprised by the opposing team scoring a bunch of points.
November 1st, 2010 at 11:18 PM ^
Although Penn State was winnable, it also was a game we would win with a minimal amount of errors. That didn't happen, and we didn't put enough pressure on the PSU QB to force mistakes. The season all boils down to the Illinois & Purdue games...
November 1st, 2010 at 11:22 PM ^
You do know that Illinois is a better offense than Penn state, 20 teams higher in the offensive rankings and putting up almost 200 a game on the ground right? And with a less than healthy Mike Martin this is going to be an issue. Oh, and their defense is 12th in the nation in points given up...
Purdue on the other hand is not good.
November 1st, 2010 at 11:14 PM ^
I was looking optimistic that maybe this defense was getting better through the weeks. Every week I would think "this is where they pull it together, somehow." There were some performances where it was difficult to gauge if the other team's offense was just really good, or if our D was just really bad (like Indiana). My expectation going into the game was that PSU's offense was simply not good (and lets face it, they're not). If all those other offenses were just good, then we would find out if we stopped PSU. Well we didn't. Our D is just plain bad. If anything changed, it was my hope that we could improve over the season. I guess not.
November 1st, 2010 at 11:41 PM ^
Nothing changed that is the problem, we are in year three and the defense and special teams continue to regress that is why everyone is pissed off.
November 1st, 2010 at 11:54 PM ^
A terrible offense that lost its starting QB tore us apart like we were a mediocre FCS team. Even with injuries, that is unacceptable at any BCS conference school, never mind what is supposed to be one of the college football elites.
November 2nd, 2010 at 1:09 AM ^
Just like with Purdue's walk-on QB last year. "What has changed?" Indeed.
November 2nd, 2010 at 4:12 AM ^
"Did anything really change?"
I think part of the problem that a lot of people are having is that, with regards to the defense, in year 3 of the Rich Rod era, the answer is still no. The defense has gotten considerably worse during Rich Rod's tenure, and yet we're all supposed to say that it's not a big deal. It is, and I have no idea why our expectations have gotten lower and lower. It has become readily apparent that Rich Rod doesn't know how to manage a defense, and while I don't think he should be fired as a result, I don't think he deserves a say in how our defense is run from here on out, or by whom.
November 2nd, 2010 at 7:04 AM ^
That was a near-unanimous opinion around these parts about Illinois in 2009, Penn State this year, and Purdue the last two years. I should think that by now nobody would resort to this argument, since it's been proven that it doesn't matter when it comes to these not very good teams playing Michigan.
November 2nd, 2010 at 8:20 AM ^
Bye week + former walkon/First time starter+ mass amount of injuries on OLine and D+Denard back+down year overall for PSU+did I say Bye week = a game that should have been won.
People are freaking out because the rest of the games except maybe Purdue are going to be really, really tough to win. And if we don't get to a bowl the chances of starting over in the coaching staff go up significantly. Which will not be good for recruiting or for the O. So we needed that victory at the very least to get bowl eligible. We lost, it was a disaster on D and SP teams in front of a national audience. Not to mention when most of us were asked about this game we probably told whoever asked that we had this one for the reasons listed above.
Why people can't figure out why the rest of us are pissed about this one boggles the mind.
November 2nd, 2010 at 10:05 AM ^
was that I truly believe a change HAS to be made to the WHOLE defensive staff, not just the DC.