yes plz
Has there really been improvement from 09 to 10?
stop arguing and just go beat OSU
Your friendly neighborhood Sparty
It gives me genuine pain to +1 you, but you do have a point. Running over the Big Ten the next couple years will heal the wounds--the balance of the force will return.
Reality is an illusion created by an unsafe drop in blood alcohol levels that exposes one to the idiocy of others.
The problem with comparing our losses by point margin this year to last year is that you fail to take into consideration that the teams that we played last year will also imporive or like in Purdue's case, due to injury, will actually be a worse team. It's obvious that Wisconsin, MSU, and Iowa (to an extent) have all gained experience and are much more mature teams. I'll take those losses. So out of the 4 games we've lossed, 3 have been to teams that were (are) serious big ten contenders. I'll take that record over the one we had last year and if we can put together a servieable defense, we will have a lot more wins to add to the bunch
Michigan has improved slightly. The Wolverines have beaten most of the teams they should have beaten (Penn State being the only possible exception). And Wisconsin was really the only game that they never had a real chance to win.
The red flag is that all four of Michigan’s losses are by more than two scores, but four of Michigan’s wins are by one score or less. Michigan is, in other words, much closer to having more losses, than it is to having more wins.
The Notre Dame and Illinois wins, in particular, definitely qualify as lucky breaks, with an injury to the starting QB playing a big part in the ND win, and a freak bounce in Junior Hemingway’s favor deciding the Illinois game. There wasn’t any comparable bad luck that took away a game Michigan should have won.
Overall, improvement on offense has been somewhat canceled out by playing worse on defense and special teams than the Wolverines did a year ago.
Marc Shepherd
New York, NY
I dont think its fair or accurate to say only a freak bounce vs Illinois enabled us to win that game.
First, it wasnt the final play. Even if incomplete, we still get at least another down to convert.
Two, as much as the ball juggled in the air, it really never came close to being picked off.
Three, the defender interfered with Hemingway and the ref had actually reached for his flag, but didnt pull the trigger I assume cuz he saw Junior catch the ball. I assume Michigan gets a first down if it falls incomplete. Or, maybe the ref decided to swallow his whistle. A bad break for MICH. That got evened out right away with Hemingway not giving up on the play. I guess my point is, by not getting the PI flag, this play was also a bad break for MICH
Four, there are breaks in every game. If we take that break from us, what big break can we eliminate from the equation on Illinois side. I'm sure we can find one that gives the win to Michigan.
Help My Friend Allison Fight ALS
MSU/IU at the JCB
What happens if Michigan has any less than 5 turnovers in that game? Luck goes both ways, my friend. If one argues that one "lucky" play the other way caused us to win, why can't I say something like not turning over the ball 5 times and the game wouldn't have even gone to OT in the first place? And let's not mention the surprising QB change...granted, Tate did great filling in, but his first play from scrimmage was a yakety sax that basically gave the game to Illinois early in the 4th quarter. What happens if Denard isn't benched?
I'm not a lunatic. Seriously, i'm not.
Ok, maybe just a little bit.
Yes.
We are going bowling this year, and the team is making positive strides. The defense is another story, but they have had their moments, too.
Christ in me arise and dispel all the darkness.
If my math is correct, 7 > 5 (with two games left still to go). That is improvement.
Let's not bother with facts. Just throw everyone under the bus.
"I knew Bo Schembechler and you sir, are no Bo Schembechler!"
I think the OP minimalized the DB lack of depth that we had. DWarr, Woolfolk, Demar, etc etc. You cannot lose half your depth at ANY position and expect to be good. Especially when you already have questionable depth/skill at LB. Just too many question marks.
The one thing I think helped us last year, which I rarely see discussed is our special teams play in 09. We were very fortunate to score TDs and get great returns on special teams last year. Those don't show up in the offense or defense numbers, but they were still points we scored that were crucial in many games. We obviously haven't been that fortunate this year. You can say the special teams regressed this year, and I think it has....but last year I think we played well beyond the means...if there was a "points scored" statistic for kick returns, I would venture to guess we were well above average in 09. Those easy points have not been there for us this year. Everything has had to go through the offense.
(1)
Yes, Michigan will finish the regular season at 7-5 or 8-4 and that is indeed progress when compared to 5-7
You admit this is progress, and are still asking the question whether there has actually been improvement? How can there be progress without some measure of improvement? The only answer is luck...so you're saying the team has been THAT lucky this year? I agree there has been some luck (um, yeah, 10 turnovers in 2 games that WE WON!), but to say it was 100% luck is simply asinine.
(2)
That, of course, brings us to the defense. It's hard to believe, but it's actually worse than last year. I know there are excuses including Woolfolk's injuries, but they're just excuses.
It's actually not hard at all to believe. Quite the opposite, really. Many here were PANIC when Woolfolk went down before the season even started, and of course let's not forget the littany of attrition due to transfers or other reasons (which, while RR has some part of, certainly cannot be entirely put on him) I had false delusions that, hey, the defense is a year older and this = better. Ha, yeah right...not necessarily. And now we learn that GERG is really not the right coach for the job, despite the youth. And they're not "just" excuses, it's reality. RR keeps saying it, and it may not make you feel any better (it doesn't make me feel any better), but there's only so much you can do when your entire secondary is freshman and one senior whose been switched back and forth between corner and WR year-to-year (so, he's really got limited experience at corner as well, and it wasn't his primary position)..
Certainly RR should take some heat for how he's handled the defense, but when you look at the bigger picture you see Michigan's most dynamic offense in about 50 years, which can only get better with some actual experience (as in, his players actually become upper classmen). The defense is bad, but why not give him one last shot to get it better?
I'm not a lunatic. Seriously, i'm not.
Ok, maybe just a little bit.
by saying RR has proven nothing. If you want to have a rational discussion, fine, but you blatantly ignore the good by saying that.
Also, if 2 of 3 phases of the game are really that bad, how does Michigan have 7 wins? And regarding ST: we have an awesome budding punter, our kick returns are better than 2 years ago (although still not good enough). Our problem lies within the kinda-randomly bad placekicking...but it is not a problem unique to Michigan. ST isn't as bad as you think it is....we haven't given up a punt/kick return TD yet, which you can't even say about some of the best Big 10 teams in teh conference.
Like I said, if you want to have a rational discussion, I recommend you start by NOT generalizing the "pro-RR" crowd as blind and avid supporters. Then maybe you won't get negged into oblivion.
I'm not a lunatic. Seriously, i'm not.
Ok, maybe just a little bit.
The fact that non-Michigan fans want to get rid of RR so bad tells me he is doing something right. He hasnt even gotten the ball rolling yet and the fear levels are nearing critical mass.
Reality is an illusion created by an unsafe drop in blood alcohol levels that exposes one to the idiocy of others.
Our special teams play stinking up the room is a function of all of our would be special teams players having to start and/or play significant amounts and thus less time can be spent on special teams. When you have 9-10 defensive backs less on the team at this point than you thought you would have in June, that is a serious problem--especially on a team that had depth issues to begin with. Special teams will absolutely suffer
Reality is an illusion created by an unsafe drop in blood alcohol levels that exposes one to the idiocy of others.
Basically the Offense has gotten a LOT better and the defense has gotten a LOT worse. lol
Charles Woodson, down the sideline, he's gonna go all the way, TOUCHDOWN MICHIGAN!!!!!
Wow! This post was epic lunacy today.
"Don't stop your feet on contact!"
-Brady Hoke
Newsflash, if we don't win Rose Bowl '13 we will have little choice but to lay the blame on Kate Upton. That is all!
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3



I was just thinking this morning, how the past two years we've limped into The Game in whipped / beaten puppy state. The team seemed to have given up three or four games before.
This year, the team has not given up. They may have lost games convincingly, but I can't point to a single moment of them rolling over.
Yes our defense is riddled with injuries, and talent that didn't make it to, or is no longer on campus, BUT they haven't given up. Molk has gone down, Odoms, any given running back, Denard here and there, etc., AND our offense has stepped up and continued to compete.
This is a huge difference than the past two years, and say a Weisian-coached ND team.
So, I don't like where our defense is, and I don't like the turnovers, and the kicking is really a disaster, but this team is young, AND they are still fighting.
For that reason I am entering The Game with at least the view that we should see a competitive offensive game. With a few breaks, good things are possible. (This is in contrast to quarterbacks with their arms hanging in pain in '07 and '09, and good 'ole Sheridan (not even Threet) in '08.)
They're moving in the right direction. The real question is whether Rich is capable of making the changes necessary to field a competitive defense. (Hint: Loyalty is an admirable quality, but maybe some ex-WVU coaches need to go ...)