I heard from my friend on the team this weekend.

If our offense can finally quit putting the D in such crappy positions so many times (or at least cut way down on it) due to turnovers, three-and-outs, and other various missed opportunities (like not scoring points!) that alone could mitigate much of the current D's issues...and make this edition look much  better statistically than last year's.

A year ago there was a poster claiming that a "friend on the team" confirmed to him that Nick Sheridan would be our starting QB.  Let's hope your "friend" is about equally reliable.

It's a game of field position. If our defense routinely has 80 yards to slow down on offense we might be able to survive. If we're routinely losing the field position battle it's going to be bad news bears (walter matthau)

team who says that pure freshman DG might start before the end of the year. On the other, we have a wide number of identified sources, some former players, some media people, who have seen all three QBs during fall drills who have pointed out — for attribution—how well DR is doing, and that freshman DG makes typical freshman mistakes. Y'all can believe what you want to, but I know which way I'm going.

This is one of RR's quotes from the Albom interview: People said, "Why don't you run the same system that they're used to (at first)?" I said, "Offensively, they haven't played in any system, because they haven't played." We had one starter back on the O-line ... no quarterbacks with any experience ..."

RR is directly lamenting the fact that he had no QBs in 2008 with any game experience, yet we're supposed to believe that just two years later he's going to start another frosh QB with no game experience. I recognize that DG is vastly more talented than Threet or Sheridan, but many around here completely disregard how critical game experience is for the most important position in RR's offense. If TF or DR were not on the team, the equation would be different, but that's the point: they are on the team, both with more than a full year of learning the system under their belts. DG's time will come, but the only way it comes this year is the dual disaster of both TF and DR getting injured or regressing horribly.

...M defenses that swarmed 6 or 8 guys to the ball and gang tackled like it was the last game they would ever play. 

Ahh... the sweet old days.

Something to consider:

The are currently numerous position battles currently still be waged on the offensive and defensive sides of the ball.  The difference is that the offense is far deeper than the defense.  I'd be willing to bet that increased depth on offense this year has likely forced 7-8 guys that are on the cusp of earning a starting role to taking reps with the 2nd team offense.  I think it'd be more accurate to say that our #1 defense is running against our #1A offense.

Or who knows, maybe I'm just telling myself that to keep my heart rate at a manageable level.

First, I don't mind you posting this b/c it is a slow day and, cliche as this may now be, we're talking about the internet here...Anyway, did you get any details?  Were all of the defensive starters playing when the 2s tore them up?  Did your friend say anything about the corners in particular?  Did he say anything good about the defense? 

I would be if, for example he said the 2's secondary was shutting out the 1 offense.

...but we score 45...

The 500 plus yards a game should be helpful in keeping the defense a bit more rested this year. Despite the somewhat quick strike nature of the RichRod attack history tells us his run centric offense controls possession reasonably. 

Interestingly, I am surprisingly confident regarding Mike Martin, Craig Roh and the defensive front and I think that GERG knows what he is doing. Seventh best defense in the Big 10 would be good; anything better I party in January.