but can we stop the "Ohio" thing? Not only is it barely a step above "O$U" and Meatchicken, but it doesn't make a damn lick of sense.
this guy evidently hired to work for AD
but can we stop the "Ohio" thing? Not only is it barely a step above "O$U" and Meatchicken, but it doesn't make a damn lick of sense.
you dont make sense
If it's good enough for Brady Hoke, it's good enough for me. Brady Hoke poops gold.
I will probably be negged as well, but I agree. There is an Ohio University, and they are a MAC team with a Bobcat as their mascot. I hate the Buckeyes just as much as Hoke or any of you do, but they have an actual name. It's Ohio State. Calling them "Ohio" makes us sound petty, arrogant, & stupid.
wear red either except for underpants which are good for skidmarks.
I'm with you. I bothers me because it ignores/overwrites the existence of Ohio U in Athens.
I am sure I need not remind people the special love we feel for their mascot.
Brady Hoke is an ex-MAC coach. Perhaps this lets him get a shot in at two schools at once.
With you 1,000% even if it means going to Bolivian. I have connects to sneak back, looking at you, profit.
Seriously though, it's played out, IMO. Although it is better than "O$U" or Any other of the hackneyed terms.
we refer to tsio with their proper name? Because I'll never be on that program. I'm with Hoke on this one. I will never refer to tsio as anything other than tsio and I won't even give them the satisfaction of capitalizing it either. I don't like them and I don't repsect them. Maybe I did once when Woody was there but now that their officially SEC style cheaters, no way.
One of the special charms of college football that doesn't exist anywhere else, even in college basketball (they have them obviously, but most don't pay attention due to the tournament) are the top 25 lists. Fans love when their team gets in them, and love to debate them. I love them myself, and even though I don't think we are the 10th best team in the country, am happy to see us listed there.
I feel like this M team is kind of like those pre-Dantonio Aggie teams that creep up to the top 10-15 with a squeeker win over ND and solid wins over a few crappy teams. then they play M and the rest of the B10 and lose 3/5. I hope i'm wrong.
One thing that a lot of people have forgotten in the wreckage of the last three seasons is that our talent level is still immensely higher than any other Big Ten team except for OSU, Penn State and maybe Nebraska and Wisconsin. We have much better players than those MSU teams of yesteryear that you're referencing. Our guys played nowhere near their potential the past few years, so it's easy to forget that. We're still scratching the surface of what we're capable of as a team, and I think we'll only get better as the year progresses.
Saturday will determine whether Michigan is overrated.
they said the same thing last week.. 'Dan Persa will test that Michigan D'. Just saying..
He did test the D, and the D responded (eventually).
I think NW will do some damage to the rest of the division and the league. They lost to Army and to Illinois when Persa was out. If he can stay in, they will beat some teams (I'm looking at you NE and MSU).
For me, MSU is the final data point before the bye week to say if we are back or just improving. If we win, we are for real and are in the hunt for the division championship. We may not win it, but we will have a shot at it. That is a full turnaround from the last three years.
If Denard plays like he did in the second half, and with our staff, I honestly think that we can beat any team in college football. Northwestern is a good team, and we beat them soundly in their house after a shaky start. We're getting better every week. We haven't put all the pieces together yet this year, but if/when we do, it's going to be beautiful. Hopefully it happens next weekend in East Lansing.
i'm pretty sure alabama/lsu/oklahoma wouldn't have much problem with our offense even on our best day
"Any team in college football"? I definitely think we should be currently ranked Top 12 b/c, as has been pointed out, we deserve it based on resume, but have you seen Alabama/Stanford/Oklahoma/LSU? I think Alabama would literally beat Northwestern 50-7, if not by more. They have seven players on their D (all experienced) who are currently projected to be first or second round NFL picks. They have signed 73 players in the last four years who are 4 or 5 stars. I think Saban is a low-life, but the guy can recruit and coach.
You can find the other frightening stats here (e.g., one coach compared them to an NFC South team). http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1191036/1/ind...
Let's enjoy our (hopeful? likely?) march to 10 wins this season, but not get carried away - while Michigan definitely should be ranked #10 right now, there's a much larger gap btw the #1-5 teams and us, than there is btw us and the #25 team.
I'm glad Alabama has all those first or second round NFL picks. They will be gone when we play them next year.
I think Ga. Tech is underrated, Va. Tech is good (because Clemson is for real), and I think Arkansas is likely better than us, and it doesn't make sense to me that we should have a 10 next to our name right now. That said, I think a case can be made for us over every other team ranked below us.
A lot of the teams in the top 25 have glaring holes that they overcome. As a result, I'm pretty sure we're #10 because of coaching. Do we have holes? Yes, our play in the first half yesterday is a good indicator. However, our second half showed that our coaches know how to adjust and turn what we have into a win.
Not only that, but we have yet to give up a TD of 30 yards, and the longest play against our defense is 39 - yesterday. Our turnover margin is excellent, our scoring offense is at 38 per game.
It looks weird - and it feels WRONG - but given the state of other teams right now, it's not as far off as we might think.
Good because they lost to the only real team they have played. Miami is not good and could just as easily won against VaTech yesterday as lost. VaTech will have a great record this year yet they play nobody and will be over ranked come the end of the year. They will be favored in every game they have left unless they reach the ACC championship game.
Georgia Tech has played nobody and still has had a close couple of games.
Virginia Tech isn't good. Logan Thomas throws interceptions like it's his job and they rely heavily on their running game which isn't spectacular. They have a solid defense but it isn't great. They've had close games with some not-so-good teams in Miami, East Carolina, and Marshall and got solidly beaten at home against the only good team they've played in Clemson. I hate how people think Virginia Tech is a good team, they almost always lose to the better teams they play out of their conference (Boise State, Stanford, Alabama - beat an up-and-down Nebraska team and a 7-5 Tennessee team though).
Sorry for the rant, I'm a VT student and tired of people thinking Frank Beamer is a top 3 coach in the NCAA. VT isn't gooooooooooooooooooooooood.
I will agree with most of you, we do not look like a power house top ten team. We are not alone. It's not just the BIG 10 that is down this year. With the exception of 5-8 teams, everyone looks beat-able.
There can't be more than one unbeatable team--if there were more than one, what would happen when they played each other?
Some of you are setting a ridiculously high standard for what it means to be top-ten.
If this was November or December yes, however it's October and we have half a season left. For the current time and place being unbeaten is a solid reason for a top ten ranking. That being said we could probably coin flip for most of the spots and have as good a shot at getting it right (see FSU, Texas)
I've run out!
to get past the Northwestern Wes Welkers this week and I think the ND, WMU, and SDSU wins should look good by the end of the year. Next week should tell us a lot about the team - if they can come home with a win at Sparty it should show us where this team is headed for the rest of the season.
I don't know if we're Top 10 yet, but the signs are incredibly encouraging. Last year, if Denard throws 3 picks in the first half on the road, we lose that game. That we came out in the 2nd half and pulled it together to finish the 'Cats off with margin to spare is just so exciting. I'm tempering my irrational optimism until the conclusion of next week's contest in East Lansing, though.
On the flip side.. why is Michigan doing so poorly on fan rankings?
22?? we are definitely better than that!
OSU and MSU fans are angry that we're doing better than them and Lou Holtz is mad because ND isn't going to a BCS game this year.
I think espn keeps forgetting to reopen the poll because it currently has:
Texas A&M at #9
Florida St at #12
South Florida at #18
I'm assuming that it includes all of the votes from all season, which makes them very slow at reacting to changes. Last week was the first week we were even in the "others receiving votes" category, coming in at 26.
Everyone needs to stop complaining about how high they're ranked. First of all, that's a silly thing to complain about. Secondly, there aren't any teams that deserve to be higher. The problem is there aren't a lot of middle class teams this year to fill the 10-20 spots. Enter Michigan.
Even without OSU, the B10 has six teams ranked in the top 25. Also, the SEC remains very top heavy, with a sharp drop-off after Bama, LSU and Arkansas.
It's interesting that the voters have suddenly decided that the formerly muddled Big 10 has two distinct halves- the 6 teams in the poll and then the other 6 not even recieving votes.
will determine the TRUE character of this team. The ranking will come later...much to early to be concerned about this trival matter.
Let's allow this month to play out before being to overly concerned about being ranked...
Sorry, but once again, we're not as good as our ranking suggests.
People have the argument "well, who do you put over us?"
I don't look at it like that. I look at it from a few things...
#1 How is a top 10 teams supposed to look/play?
IMO a top 10 team looks like Oklahoma St. or Stanford...a top 5 team looks like Alabama, LSU, Wisconsin...To me we're playing at a #15-#17 level.
#2 What is the final record that spot will have?
IMO, the #10 team in the country will have 2 MAYBE 3 losses. I can't say for sure that we meet that quite yet. A win over MSU? Yes. But not yet. We have to beat someone noteworthy for me to feel like we're elite or close to elite. So far, ND at home in a magical comeback is our best win. Beat MSU and you've got something. Beat MSU and we should clearly get to 10-0 IMO.
#3 Consistencies and Efficiency
Last night we were neither. In the first half we played like the #30 ranked team, in the second half we played like the #3 ranked team (oddly enough, average that out and you get 16.5...which falls in that #15-#17 range I said in point #1). Also efficiency...3 picks in 1 half is unacceptable, we're still beating ourself too much. If you punt on those 3 drives rather than throw INTs...you likely take points off the board for N'Western. I'm not saying we have to score every drive. But the turnovers cannot be as excessive.
In short, I think we're around the #15 team this week, beat MSU and #10 is warranted. Beat Purdue and Iowa, #7. Beat Illinois, #5. Beat Nebraska, #3. Beat OSU, #1-2.
So in the end, you get the same result. But I just think there is a ways to go before we can say we're a top 10 team. Beat someone real first and then let's talk.
So you don't think we look like a Top Ten team, but don't want to name teams that are better, do you only have 6 teams in your Top Ten or something?
I don't know why, but he's confusing "top ten" with "MNC contender/favorite". The two are nothing alike.
Not only that, but somehow beating an unranked Iowa and OSU should propel us above LSU/Alabama, Oklahoma, Stanford and Wisconsin.
That's the thinking/mindset that I don't agree with...
I don't think "what teams should be ranked higher"....I think, "is this team playing like a top 10 team."
Question, yes or no. Was Texas the eleventh best team in the country up until last week?
That is my point, I don't care if I can't named 11 teams better than Texas going into that game with OU. The point is, they are not even a top 20 team this year. Period. And it showed.
They hadn't beaten anyone of substance and hadn't faced any legit comp until they ran up against the Sooners and got SMACKED.
Michigan's first legit comp is MSU. I'm not saying they're going to lose, I think we'll win a close one. But we don't know if Michigan is a top 10 calibur team until they play someone noteworthy.
All of the LEGIT top teams have beaten someone. Not just ND and Northwestern. But Florida, Oregon, Georgia, Nebraska, etc. The only team that hasn't is Stanford. (However I'd still make the case for them because of last season, returning players, and what they've done this year to the comp in terms of consistency and execution that we've shown in spurts, but not 4 qtrs outside of Minny).
it doesn't mean very good or excellent... it just means exactly that. by the way, stanford, is top 5.
Just because you think top 10 means excellent team, doesn't make it so. an excellent team is an excellent team. the #10 rank team means just that, whether it's playing worse than high-schoolers or better than NFL teams.
In regards to #2, the polls have something of a predictive nature to them. By ranking us 10th, that shows that many people think that we will finish with 2-ish losses. If you don't think that is the case, then if you were a voter you could've slotted us lower, as I'm sure some voters did. It is not a guarantee that we will finish with 2-ish losses, that is just what the general consensus among the voters is.
Also, as maquih mentioned, 10th has no implication for quality of play, it simply means that they believe we are the 10th best team in the country, however good or bad that is varies from year to year.
And in sports, and particularly college football, that's not the case. Some years a number ten team might have the talent level of a team that would finish much lower if there were more great teams. Other years the number ten team could be really good if there are a lot of great teams. This year you have LSU & Bama, then Stanford and Wisconsin and Oklahoma, then pretty much everybody else. There aren't ten great teams. So your "look" test has to be on a sliding scale.
Some of you guys make me sick. You fucking pussies.
Yeah, I'm sick of people saying, "wait until next game". If you wait until we beat State to get on the bandwagon, what kind of fan are you? We just came through the gut check moment. Down ten on the road, our defense looking like last year's, and with Denard off his game, throwing three interceptions, we just came out and made a huge 28-0 statement that this is not 2010, that this team has flaws and problems, but our coaches and players can find ways to overcome them. If you are waiting until after next week to decide if this team is good, until after we win what will be quite possibly our toughest game of the season, then you really are completely unwilling to get invested in this team until it has already paid out. That's no fun. Heck, there are people still projecting 8-4 when we're 6-0 and still have Purdue to play.
What a bunch of cowards.
Nobody's saying wait until next week to be excited and supportive. They're saying wait until next week to determine whether a high ranking is justified. Given the past three seasons, the sentiment is a reasonable one. So chill on the Adderall, dude.