While I don't care too much for the implication about the conference, it has been 4 years since the B1G had a team in the MNCG.
Also of concern was this:
For Michigan, it's a defensive line that looked this spring to be nowhere near as dominant as last year's bunch.
http://espn.go.com/ncf/notebook/_/page/BigTenspringwrap/big-ten-spring-wrap-2012
How is their notes about us
Correct. I think the
Correct. I think the coverage you get on this website is far more informed and superior to whatever ESPN will give you. And on that note:
Except for the other thing. That hurts the most. But the lack of respect hurts the second most.
Well..
we all knew D-Line was a major concern for this year. Losing Martin, RVB and Heinager makes that pretty obvious. What we didn't know for sure was whether guys were gonna step up their game to fill these holes. Looking at you BWC. This article suggests that the jury is in and the D-Line is no longer a concern but officially a problem. How much improvement can be reasonably expected between now and September 1st?
How can the jury be in? What
How can the jury be in? What has changed since the spring game? They haven't played a single game...and if you think that there won't be any improvement in fall camp, then well...you don't know much.
2011 Nebraska State Champ "We're Michigan." @tannerwooten not that funny, though.
I said the jury (ESPN)
I said the jury (ESPN) appears to be in. I also said this a bit tongue cheek since it is ESPN we're talking about. Sorry about your sarcasm meter. I then follow these comments up with a a question of how much improvement can be reasonably expected. No where did I say that "there won't be any improvement". Sorry about your reading comprehension.
Sorry I'm not sorry!!
Sorry I'm not sorry!!
Umm...
How is saying that a unit "Looks this spring to not be as good" anything like a "final decision". Also, It would be one thing if this was the conclusion of a long article; it was just a small point that was part of a larger point. Not that big of a deal.
"It was open," Toussaint said. "I can't compare this hole to any other holes because I can't remember that but it was a huge hole."
The article..
didn't say "to not be as good.", it said "nowhere near as dominant.."
Your correction
Six of one, half dozen of the other. Eihter way: 1: its true; 2: It wasn't presented as some great secret revield; 3) Its a pretty tame judgement of the team.
"It was open," Toussaint said. "I can't compare this hole to any other holes because I can't remember that but it was a huge hole."
You might have to work on your writing composition.
That previous post didn't convey sarcasm in the least.
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
So..
if I used quotation marks around the word jury or used a (/s) after the word jury that would have been acceptable compopsition!?
What might help...
Is if you don't proceed your "sarcastic" statement reasonable positions agreeing with the article, and another question afterward posting the same concerns.
we all knew D-Line was a major concern for this year. Losing Martin, RVB and Heinager makes that pretty obvious. What we didn't know for sure was whether guys were gonna step up their game to fill these holes. Looking at you BWC. <sarcasm?> This article suggests that the jury is in and the D-Line is no longer a concern but officially a problem. </sarcasm?> How much improvement can be reasonably expected between now and September 1st?
You can have legit doubts. But if you're mocking the article for having these doubts, you might want to lay it on a little thicker. Because it seems you're in lockstep with the article.
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
Well when an SEC team can
Well when an SEC team can make it in without winning their conference and no other conference can do that it kind of seems a little like I couldn't give a shit less about what they think. I seem to remember a time when we had a very good team that could have been in the MNCG, but nobody said we were deserving because we didn't win our conference. Smells like bullshit to me.
or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
Ehhh..
I won't argue with you that Alabama was the best team in football last year.
But, they lost. At home. To a team that won their league.
In 2006, we lost. On the road. By the same margin. And still got snubbed.
And we got snubbed based on the media polls and the media spin that was partly attributable to ESPN. The Media Polls have a direct impact on the BCS rankings, which directly impact the BCS rankings.
So... yeah... sometimes bullshit isn't bullshit, but if it smells like shit.. and came from a bull...
On the fifth night—possibly the sixth—a breeze arose.
It was cool and dewy.
But in 2006 we also lost in
But in 2006 we also lost in the bowl game. Do you really think that team was the best in the nation? or 2nd best?
“When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing” - Bo Schembechler
The narrative in the media
The narrative in the media was "Michigan should be #2. But since they didn't win their conference and nobody wants to see a rematch in the NC... We're going to pretend they're not". I seem to remember the rematch aspect being a bigger problem for the talking heads.
The bowl results are irrelevant to what people thought at the time.
Ha.
I blame the media, because the media (mostly one organization) in this case directly skewed the public opinion to put a team (that happens to be monetarily linked to said media organization.
Your "informed writers" includes Craig James, and the daily sports editor for the Lexington Herald...
On the fifth night—possibly the sixth—a breeze arose.
It was cool and dewy.
Don't forget Gary Danielson.
But aside from the media as a whole, we have to blame Urban Meyer, the top wiener of them all, for being willing to play the whine game at the cost of cheapening CFB with the nauseating sound of self-interested faux outrage.
We owe him a major kick in the Buck nut to go with the belated one we gave him at the Cap One bowl. We will never be even with him for being the whiner that he is.
Who's to say Alabama wouldn't
Who's to say Alabama wouldn't have lost to Stanford? Or that the OSU passing attack wouldn't have shredded the LSU defense? People are using the Bowls from 2006 as examples, but when we initially were voted out, there was no telling what would happen in the Bowls
If you're doing nothing, how do you know when you're finished?
Right, and on another note...
Right, and on another note... we lost to USC in their back yard. If we had a rematch with Ohio on a neutral site, or even played USC on a TRUE "neutral stie", things might have been different. Florida was the best team that day, but what would have happened if they had to fly all the way to Southern Cal to play Southern Cal in the Rose Bowl? Not trying to make excuses, but there's a reason why USC dominates the B1G in the Rose Bowl, no matter who they play.
What..
would have happened to Florida that day if Tedd Ginn hadn't broken his foot after returning the opening kick 103 yards for a touchdown
On the fifth night—possibly the sixth—a breeze arose.
It was cool and dewy.
"Not trying to make excuses,
"Not trying to make excuses, but there's a reason why USC dominates the B1G in the Rose Bowl, no matter who they play."
Yes, there is. USC is flat out better.
Uhhh...don't forget the
Uhhh...don't forget the average penalty scores: Big Ten-15, PAC12-1. Coincidence? Maybe not as bad as it used to be, but I remember the 80's and 90's when every time a Big Ten team had a big play offensively, there would be a ghost holding penalty.
Campaign manager--Hoke 2012.
The teams in the SEC were
The teams in the SEC were clearly better than everyone else last year
That's all that's bullshit here. There's no way of telling who the better football teams were, because they didn't play Okie State or Stanford.
If you're doing nothing, how do you know when you're finished?
Exactly
All we know is that Alabama is better than LSU. The teams were pretty much dead equal the first time they played.
Since the SEC was simply handed the title without even being forced to play for it, the title means pretty much nothing. But that's why it's always been a mythical title. Even with the new 4-team event being bandied about ti will still be bogus, though it will be less bogus than it is currently.
Any "national championship" that doesn't include the champions of all the major conferences isn't really a championship. It's just an invitational tournament like the NIT.
But you know what? I'm fine with the rematch last year because I think at the minimum it killed the currrent BCS setup.
This year, I really don't see
This year, I really don't see any B1G team having a shot at the NCG. Michigan still lacks the talent to really be a contenter and their schedule is really tough. OSU is ineligible and even if there were, it's their first year in a completely new offensive system and they may also struggle along the OL having lost a few starters to the draft and having had horrible coaching on the OL for years. PSU still doesn't really have a QB, and will have a new offense this year as well. MSU doesn't have the elite talent to compete, they got crushed by both ND and Nebraska last year, and have a new QB and all new WRs. Nebraska also doesn't have a great QB and their defense wasn't great. Wisconsin is the olny team that might have a shot this year, though who knows how good their QB will be coupled with a mostly new offensive staff.
when the b1g starts beating
when the b1g starts beating sec teams it will happen. the game against bama will serve notice one way or the other.
Well said.
We are still in the early parts of the transformation. Beating Bama will be a big step forward and make everyone in the south go hmmm. But we need to focus on the big ten first and start dominating our conference before we can worry about if the big ten is better than the hated sec. We have Hoke setting the foundation for a great future. I live in sec country and fight this battle all the time.
Michigan's record
vs. the SEC is already way over .500, including the unfortunate Gator Bowl outcome.
When M starts winning out, the SEC will be no problem.
Let the rest of the B1G fend for itself.
No
No
Vice.com
Oversigning
When the SEC plays be the same rules as other conferences, then I'll care. When the two teams that oversign the most just happen to be the only two teams to make it to the championship game (and have made it how many of the previous years) than you know the deck is stacked against you. This should definitely come up in the playoff talks, because it makes a huge difference.
Ghosts are scary.
Houston Nutt over-signed more
Houston Nutt over-signed more than anyone. It didn't really work out for him. I'm not defending over-signing, but maybe the impacts are overstated from time to time.
Are you a park ranger at Yellowstone? Say hi to Yogi Bear for me. - the_big_house 500th
I may not be a 70 year old man. - Herm
I'm pretty sure that
I'm pretty sure that over-signing 2 stars is not quite as effective as over-signing 4 and 5 stars.
I don't think anyone argues
I don't think anyone argues that any team that oversigns will win, the argument is that a team recruiting more players is an advantage in their recruiting tier. Alabama and LSU are in that top tier, thus they have an advantage over other top teams. This equates to MNC's.
Nutt's 2008 class was ranked number 29 by Rivals, despite having 31 members. Saban's 2008 class was ranked number one by rivals with 32 members. Average star rankings? Nutt: 2.71, Saban: 3.72. It's not a simple 31 that matters, it's 31 players with 2.71* talent.
More better players equal more wins, no question.
Go Blue!
Except if he had chosen to go
Except if he had chosen to go to Alabama 4 years ago he would have actually had some defensive coaching...
"Michigan Defense" is dominating everything, in every aspect of life. That's a rough definition.
-Craig Roh 10/29/2011
That's like arguing
if MSU and Michigan both oversigned, the expected results should be the same. When Michigan would get the better oversigned recruiting classes.
Exactly Silly Goose
Anybody who says that oversigning doesn't help gain a competitive advantage, is full of it. Of course, good coaching is necessary, but even if all other things are equal except for oversigning, then there is a significant advantage gained by oversigning over several years.
Chuck Norris wears Brady Hoke pajamas.
Yea, fuck us for giving a
Yea, fuck us for giving a crap about the kids who pledge to play for our team. Don't ask me why anyone would play for LSU or Bama after all the shit they have pulled. Kids are cray.
or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing.
This has been my feeling for
This has been my feeling for a long time. How can kids see their peers commit to these schools and get treated like cattle, and then commit there themselves, when there are institutions of equal football potential who will actually consider the whole issue with some humanity.
Possibly, many of them do not
Possibly, many of them do not really know about it. Other possibility is that many think it will not happen to them. These are kids who think the world of themselves and now have recruiting sites and numerous universities knocking down their doors. Many have no fear or even the slightest concern that they might be treated in this way as most do not even consider the possibility of failure. Probably a somewhat similar explanation for recruits who sign onto a school where the school already has too many kids signed up that play the position.
"The unexamined life is not worth living." Socrates.
Yeah, I don't think it's so
Yeah, I don't think it's so much the first possibility you suggest. Most of the kids being recruited by the big name universities have been told for years how great they are and are convinced they'll be a draft choice in the NFL. It's hard to blame 17 year olds in this situation, but sometimes the parents are just as bad. They are the ones who should be pointing out that even at the top schools 80-90% of each recruiting class usually goes undrafted. And kid who is the super star in high school can't fathom the possibility of being buried on the depth chart in college either, so in his mind there is no need to worry about being pushed out to make room for a new recruit.
I wouldn't put it that way
Just getting into college and getting it paid for is high on their list, but playing football in a high profile school likely to be in championship contention to get them to the NFL is as well.
Well, your premise that
Well, your premise that everyone plays by the same rules as the SEC ia flawed because not everyone plays the game the way the SEC does as not every team has the ability to play it that way. To oversign you have to have excessive demand to attend your school. People knock down Alabama's door because Saban has the reputation of putting kids into the NFL (which is probably true). Add the tradition Bama has and it leads to kids wanting to play there even if they have to be given the backseat when other kids with more potential come along. UConn and Arizone State cannot play that way either. Also, the other conferences to not play by the same rules that the SEC does. Some play by more similar rules than others, but none play the game like the SEC does (ironic).
Besides that flawed premise, your arguments reads: we're fucked for having a moral compass and playing by the rules. It is not really sour grapes to bitch about others breaking the rules. You could say it detracts from our moral superiority by complaining. You would have been better served by arguing that oversigning isn't the only reason the Big Ten loses out, but it loses because it spends less on coordinators or there is more talent in the south etc. However, you would be overlooking the fact oversigning is incrediblely useful in the hands of Saban and Miles. Saban is a great coach but one has to wonder if so much of his success comes from his ability stockpile reinforcements where other programs fall off. It's like a duel where one side loads two bullets into his gun and Saban loads three bullets. Statistically Saban will have more succes regardless of his skill with the gun. For example, even though Nutt at Ole Miss was never as nationally successful as Miles or Saban, he was still better than most of the mid-range and bottom teams in the Big Ten. If he had the ability to coach that Saban has, then he could have combined that with his signing of 37 player classes to win championships.
Also, your analogy is flawed in that I would not be friends with someone who felt the need to "bang hotty after hotty on the side" so I wouldn't even be complaining about him. If you have problems with the complaints then find better replies or start associating more with the guy ignoring his marriage.
"The unexamined life is not worth living." Socrates.
That last sentence
May be the stupidest thing ever to be written on MGoBlog.
"I love him, he's a great coach, he's a great mentor, he's a great friend. He's every single thing you want a college coach to be, and he does it flawlessly." -David Molk
Patience
Given the coaching and recruiting now happening in Ann Arbor and Columbus, I suspect we will be seeing National Championship caliber teams in the next 3-5 years.
But the irritating thing about the article is that it was clearly written by someone unfamiliar with Michigan Football. Analyzing a current player's statement that this year's goal is to win the Big Ten is silly. First, I don't think anyone in their right mind thinks that Michigan will be National Championship contending this year, given the team and the schedule. But more importantly, the Big Ten Championship has traditionally been Michigan's first and foremost goal, and Brady Hoke is a disciple of that thinking, so I wouldn't expect his players to say anything different.
Having grown up watching Bo led teams, I too am a disciple of that thinking. The Big Ten Championship is Goal #1. Anything beyond that is icing on the cake.
It's even more irritating
It's even more irritating than you think, because Brian Bennett IS familiar with Michigan football and knows exactly how Brady Hoke feels about the BTC. He's intentionally trying to make something out of nothing. Very bad practice among sports reporters. Oh wait... That's all they do.
"Michigan Defense" is dominating everything, in every aspect of life. That's a rough definition.
-Craig Roh 10/29/2011
Yoikes...
I am pretty sure its you who is making something out of nothing. He simply is pointing out that from this perspective, its hard to see that Michigan is better that we were last year, because we don't know how good this defensive line -and because of this, the entire defense-- will be. How is that unfair? Why is BWC suddenly "the Fridge" because Hoke seems like he likes him?
"It was open," Toussaint said. "I can't compare this hole to any other holes because I can't remember that but it was a huge hole."
"If we don't go anywhere
"If we don't go anywhere else, as long as we go to that Big Ten [championship] game and win that, I think that will be a good season," Michigan running back Fitz Toussaint said.
Interesting quote by Fitz. Some would criticize this attitude as a reason why the BT has not won many NCs lately... however in this case, it appears that Fitz is simply echoing the single minded approach that Coach Hoke and staff are emphazizing.
Since Michigan has not won a BT title in 9 years...its best to focus on that first.
Nebraska players, on the other hand, are talking "National Championship" as their goal. Big talk for a team that has never won a BT title.
BTW Rittenberg is one funny looking guy on camera....and he is pretty sure of himself as well. Interesting dude to watch.
It's going to take going
It's going to take going undefeated in the regular season for a Big 10 team to be part of the NC discussion. Otherwise, it's the SEC champion against whoever else is undefeated from another major conference (Big 12, Pac 12, or possibly ACC).
I'm like others ... at this point I really don't care. I just want Michigan to play well, win the Big 10 and let whatever other chips fall where they may.
Midwestern born and raised ... now living in the heat of the Arizona desert
Well...
If Michigan starts winning the Big Ten again, then we're always going to want that next thing. Start winning the Big Ten, then you want titles. Start winning titles, then you want more titles than everyone else. So on and so forth...
Personally, I could really do with beating all of our rivals this coming season.
How is their notes about us something to be concerned about? We all know depth on the D-Line is a major problem for this year, that's not exactly breaking news
If you're doing nothing, how do you know when you're finished?
StraightDave owes me a steak dinner