Illinois
I hate to remind people how badly Illinois physically whipped Michigan last season, but I've been dreading this game all year.
Illinois is not a good football team, they are not well coached, they are prone to mistakes and have generally looked awful in every game this season.
Michigan should win....but, this is the game I fear, the must win, certain win game on the road vs a team that thinks you're its biggest rival, desperate for a win themselves.
I saw the look on Rich Rodriguez's face today, it was the same exact one he had last year vs Toledo and Northwestern. I did not like the demeanor of the coaches or players today.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:54 AM ^
I kept thinking that he had the Marty Mornigweg "Deer in the headlights" look late in the game. To be perfectly honest, I would have been beyond consolation in the same position.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:36 AM ^
We will have to do well to just get to 7-5 now. However, a lot of what we are seeing is growing pains. We are better than last year and I sincerely believe next year will be better. We had a lot of self-inflicted wounds yesterday.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:55 AM ^
Comparing a frustrated look on a coach getting blown out (RR) to a bewildered coach taking the wind in OT (MM) is comparing apples to oranges.
I don't think a different look on RR's face would have made up 25 points.
And in close games, even down two scores (MSU & Iowa), this team has shown a lot of fight. Mich was just flat-out outplayed yesterday.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:54 AM ^
This is the current problem, self-inflicted wounds. We keep turning the ball over, dropping the ball, playing poor defensive overage; with respect to defense, since we keep getting burned over the top-or at the sidelines-, perhaps playing the 3-3-5 wouldn't be so bad after all.
At the beginning of the season, this was one of the games I had us losing. They are going to be up for us; they need to get off the snide even more than we do.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:41 AM ^
That Illinois is thinking this is our chance to get a big 10 win.
And the thought of Illinois licking its chops to play us makes me cringe.
Next week's game is a must to show some progress.
Go Blue!
October 25th, 2009 at 10:20 AM ^
He really needs to start figuring out how to win some Big Ten games here soon. 3 wins in two years is a no go, especially 0-2 against Sparty and two blowouts against PSU. Illinois is pretty much our last chance for a road win this season, if we go 0-4 on the road, we'll hear about it non-stop during the off season. Also not a good thing when we have ND, PSU, and OSU all on the road next year.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:22 AM ^
Yes, we looked bad against Penn State. But Ron Zook is no JoPa.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:34 PM ^
Yeah, well, who ever he is, the dude got us last year.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:27 AM ^
I don't understand why people can't see this game as what it is - an outlier.
We got our asses whipped, no doubt. But if you look, so much of it was self-inflected crap that we did to ourselves - it wasn't getting dominated by PSU, if you put that performance on the same field as Western Michigan, we would have lost. They played, bar none, their absolute worst game of the season - do you think the quality of play between, for instance, this game and @Iowa or @MSU was the same? I don't - they played especially bad.
What I'm saying is that this PSU game isn't, I don't think indicative of what this team is capable of doing - I think it's a giant, disgusting blip on the radar - they shat the bed. It's what teams do sometimes - remember when basketball almost lost to Indiana last year? Or when they DID lose at Iowa? You can't tell me that was the same team that beat Purdue on our own floor, beat Clemson, or won at Minnesota. Our team is capable of highly variant play - we can come withing 20 yards of winning @ a #6 program, or we're capable of losing to anybody.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:55 AM ^
+1 to Chitown for cutting out all of the crap:
"Why don't we run?"
"Shouldn't we look at film?"
"Why not hire Jim Zorn?"
And getting to the heart of the matter: At the present, this is not a high MEAN team, regrettably this is a high VARIANCE team.
And by the way, what evidence was there that this wouldn't be a high variance team?
October 25th, 2009 at 11:19 AM ^
It's true that this is a high variance team, but fans absolutely have a right to be frustrated by that. Calling yourself "high variance" does not make it ok to play under your potential. Nor does it excuse looking flat as can be. And being "high variance" doesn't make it ok for players to fumble, either.
Look, there are some things that do have high variance - for example, throwing a lot of deep balls. On the flip side, there are some things that are so fundamental that they should never be excusable.
There is nothing that can make up for the high rate of turn overs we've been seeing.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
I wasn't using it as an excuse - I was using it as a little bit of perspective. We need to evaluate this team based on the 8 games we've played - not only the one we played yesterday. Yesterday was, by far, the worst they've played. I don't think it tells the entire story of who this team is.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:33 AM ^
Yesterday doesn't tell the whole story, but it can't be entirely dismissed, either.
Primarily, my biggest beef is with how flat we looked yesterday. Perhaps others saw a fired up team out there, but I didn't.
Second of all, I'm annoyed by the turnovers and lack of fundamentally sound football. Those things have been happening all season, and continued to happen yesterday.
I mean, I guess I'll just chalk this one up to "young team" and "new coaches," but three of the last four games have all been disappointing in their own way.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:31 PM ^
Just be glad we're not Nebraska (8! turnovers yesterday, 4 inside the Iowa State 5 yard line). Man I'm gonna have fun at work tomorrow, cuz no matter what they say about M all I have to say is "8 turnovers, loss to Iowa frickin' state".
Disappointing games happen, and young team happens along with that, but I definitely think we're on the right path.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^
Dude I am rarely out 'glass is half filled', but this is one of those times. I am DISMAYED! We shouldn't be playing 'worst games of the season', especially when they follow previous games that ran for the title. Unfortunately, the 'outlier' games are quickily becoming the good games we played at the beginning of the season.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:16 AM ^
We've really only played poorly twice this year - yesterday, and against Indiana.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:18 AM ^
So I guess you don't really watch every Michigan game, huh?
October 25th, 2009 at 11:34 AM ^
I've watched every game. The team played pretty well against Iowa, and played OK against MSU. I'm not claiming they were perfect, but if you can't see the difference between their level of play in those games and yesterday, I'd say you're the one who hasn't watched the games.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^
You literally shocked me with that last one. How many turnovers against Iowa? And for the love of God, MSU owned that game, the offense looked pathetic until the very end, and the defense gave up first downs like it was their job. The only reason it was close is because Sparty is Sparty, we all know how that works.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:51 AM ^
You're not worth talking to at this point. Hopefully, you'll set the rage aside enough to enjoy your Sunday.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:57 AM ^
Haha, yesss, the ultimate cop-out when you've lost an argument, the classic "high road" tactic. Here's the link to Mgovideo so you can download and watch the MSU game that the Wolverines apparently dominated. BTW, it was 5 turnovers against Iowa, compared to their 1. It's a little more than just bad luck at that point.
http://mgovideo.com/index.php?page=torrents&search=&category=25&active=0
October 25th, 2009 at 12:06 PM ^
he never said that we dominated MSU.
Our defense was not bad at all in that game. Our offense was inept for 3 quarters.
During the Iowa game we were very solid, we just had turnovers. Those two events are not mutually exclusive. I think if you go to hypothetical land and remove the turnovers from the Iowa game and we played a great game. Since we didn't. we played solid.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:08 PM ^
Dude, I know that, my point is that if you turn the ball over 5 times, you are NOT playing a solid game. It's like saying. "JFK had a great trip to Dallas that one time, he just got shot." Hypothetically he would have loved it, but in reality, no he did not.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:20 PM ^
Over the line with Kennedy. I would have accepted William McKinley.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:40 PM ^
Not trying to take a side here, but if you think we played okay versus Michigan State, you must have taken a pound of quaaludes and smoked an ounce of pot before that game.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:20 AM ^
Aside from Tate's 4th Q performance, I think we tried our best to get blown out at MSU, too.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:10 PM ^
I agree with nearly everything you wrote. We should think of this as an "outlier". As you put it, we are indeed capable of very much more. Which is why RR probably gets so irate, (tell me it doesn't remind you of Bo -- its a good thing).
But at what point do games we have called "outliers", (Indiana, MSU, Iowa, PSU) become part of a trend?
To whit, most of us said,:
- Indiana was an outlier because we gave up big yards (and plays)and missed tackles to a not-so-very-good team
- MSU was an outlier because we made Kirk Cousins look like Vince Young, and missed tackles
- Iowa was an outlier because of the turnovers
- PSU was an outlier because of all the above (and throw in bad Warren play)
It's all a long way around to saying that prior to Sept 5, most of us believed 7-5 would be a good finish, but hoped for better. After going to 4-0, some of us believed 9-3 or even 10-2 was possible (myself not among the more optimistic). I personally believed 8-4 was where we'd finish.
Bottom line: in the cold light of day, we're not as good as hoped, not as bad as feared.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:21 PM ^
Honestly, the only game I'd call "an outlier" is PSU. We played horrendously. We didn't play horrendously against Iowa or MSU. What we are, in my opinion, is an average team that's CAPABLE of beating any team in the big ten. Yesterday, we were much worse than that. Against Iowa and MSU, I think that's nearly exactly what we were.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:13 AM ^
Like letting their offense pass the ball down field at will? The only time we stopped them was when they either made mistakes like dropping passes, falling down, or deciding to run the ball straight up the gut three times in a row. We straight up got embarrassed, the defense makes me want to break things every time I watch them play. I think the other losses were close because 1. Sparty is Sparty, and they're always going to let a team back into the game, and 2. Iowa is just overrated/lucky on an unprecedented scale, and never blows anyone out because they aren't good enough.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:04 PM ^
If it makes you so mad then stop watching them play. Which I assume means you won't come on here and piss and scream about a bunch of young men having a bad day playing a game they love for your entertainment.
Honestly, that sounds like a win for everyone involved, including us on this board who won't have to listen to your shit anymore.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:19 AM ^
Hell Florida, Nebraska, Alabama, Texas Tech, Miami, and BYU all played their worst or close to worse games of the year yesterday. We're not the only one, but we are by far the youngest and least experienced. Losing to Iowa, where we always have had trouble playing, by two with a chance to win on last drive was not a bad game. Didn't play good in EL yet went to OT.
Yes, we stunk up the joint yesterday shit happens, but how do you figure that DSU or Iowa was in the running for the title or worst game?
October 25th, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
My argument is that so many people try to sugar coat what happened with "Oh, if we didn't fumble those two or three times, we would have dominated." That attitude raises expectations and gets everyone so pissed when we lose. I like to be optimistic too, but Jesus, at a certain point just accept that we're a below average team that had no business being in the game with PSU yesterday. If the coaches took that attitude, would the players snap back to reality and work hard, or just feel like they can keep doing the same things and just wait for luck to go their way?
October 25th, 2009 at 12:00 PM ^
For me at least, if we hadn't had those turnovers we wouldn't have been dominated. We'd still probably lose, but at least it wouldn't be so ugly. That is also the one beef I have RR right now. How hard is it to hold onto the football? Are the guys just trying to make plays rather than holding onto the ball? I guess same goes with the our receivers inability to get open or catch the ball.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:03 PM ^
I agree that without the turnovers, we aren't getting blown out, but that's a lot like the Pittsburgh Penguins' argument last year that they would have dominated the cup finals if they didn't have so many shots hit the goal post instead of go in. It's really not luck, it just means you weren't good enough to put the puck in the net, and we just aren't good enough to hold on to the football at this point. If it's sugarcoated too much, it'll mask the real problem that needs to be worked on and fixed.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:59 PM ^
should be telling the players "we have no business being in the game with PSU." WTF?
I agree with you that Penn State was the superior team in all facets of the game and proved it on the field. However, and while I am not a sports psychologist, it seems to me that if you go into a game believing you are the inferior team and expecting to be dominated, then that's exactly what will happen.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:30 AM ^
I think we have less than a 50% shot of winning. Ill. should be extremely confident. They have their backs against the wall. UM is their biggest game every year. Juice is due for a huge game. Unless this team has absolutely packed it in, look out.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
Think back to last season for a minute. At this point last season, would you have said: "Michigan should be extremely confident. They have their backs to the wall"?
As for Juice being due, he doesn't even see the field much these days.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:07 PM ^
Illinois has done absolutely nothing but pack it in all year long. They haven't even threatened to beat anyone who plays in the FBS. This should, and will, be our largest Big Ten win of the year.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
C'mon, it's Illinois. We zip in, we beat 'em up, we zip right out again. We're not going to Moscow. It's Illinois. It's like going into Wisconsin.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:24 PM ^
yessssssss
October 25th, 2009 at 11:35 AM ^
Illinois should be extremely confident?? Their record is 1-6!! Yeah, that makes a team really confident
October 25th, 2009 at 12:18 PM ^
A 1-5 Purdue beat the crap out of Ohio State last week. It's not beyond the realm of possibility. Illinois was pretty bad last year, too, came into Ann Arbor and pantsed us.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:34 PM ^
Last year isn't a great comparison. Illinois was a better team than us last year. They underperformed, but they never mailed it in the way they have this year.
As for Purdue, they have been unbelievably snakebitten this year. All, or almost all, of their losses have been nailbiters where the breaks went against them. They could well be a tough opponent for us. Illinois worries me considerably less.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:45 AM ^
Yeah dude, Camp Randall is a notoriously easy place to play. Especially for a young, mistake-prone team. Easy money.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:06 PM ^
I guess what I was getting at was it really doesn't matter how good or bad Illinois is this year. Football at its very basic core is the physical matches and mismatches and Illinois absolutely thumped Michigan in that department last year. I mean thumped with a capital 'T'. I haven't seen anything from Michigan that makes me think that physical difference has been closed.
Michigan State beat them 24-14, remember how badly we were getting outplayed by Sparty for 3 1/2 quarters?
No one should be shocked if this game isn't tight for 4 quarters and a dog fight.
I mean I hope we go in there and beat them handily but I just can't expect that with this Michigan team.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:37 PM ^
MSU played Illinois without Kirk Cousins. They went the whole game with their backup QB and still won comfortably (Illinois scored a meaningless TD in the final minute to make the score look more competitive than it was).
Besides, you can't play the transitive game. College football isn't that straightforward. The fact that we beat ND, and ND nearly beat USC, does not necessarily mean that we can go toe-to-toe with SC.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:52 PM ^
Wait...this thread isn't a general overview about the state of Illinois? It had a specific topic?
October 25th, 2009 at 8:42 PM ^
I'll tell you one thing, Joliet is a shithole.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:35 PM ^
I have no idea what's going on with the Illini, as I've only watched a handful of their games this year. But, they scare the hell out of me, and I think we are in for a tough game. Tate has been bothered by his shoulder injury since Eastern, and I believe it will continue to hamper him this week of practice. That said, who knows the status of Molk, so we will have a patchwork OL again. It's a road game, with a hostile crowd that absolutely hates us. And I just get this feeling Juice Williams, who has struggled all year, will run rampant on our defense. I pray I'm worng. I don't want to drop this one. We can't.
October 26th, 2009 at 1:13 AM ^
And they rot. They kill themselves with mistakes, then once they get down, they quit.
They do still have a good amount of talent on their roster--that point is a good one. But if they couldn't stay motivated early in the year when they still had something to play for, then I don't see how they get motivated now, when they're playing out the string.