Michigan has more total yards, passing yards, rushing yards and they did it against the vaunted Iowa defense. They shot themselves in the foot with penalties and turnovers. This is the game that Michigan could've won. Michigan dominated statistically but the points on the scoreboard.
Michigan lost this game, not Iowa beating Michigan
Don't see how anyone can take this loss as an ominous sign.
at least we can deflect criticism that we never out yard quality opponents
Saying that you outgained other teams, but still couldn't come up with the win makes you seem like a special kind of impotent. Oh well, once we put it all together, we will be better.
If I've got to lose, I'd much rather outgain the opponent and lose on my own mistakes than just get destroyed up and down the field. You can correct your own mistakes.
unfortunately its becoming a trend
At some point, hopefully soon, this won't be the case
not one, but two, Rick Sixes. He got away with both. Our guys didn't get away with theirs.
Meanwhile we put up 522 yards on what was, coming into this game, one of the 3 or 4 best Ds in the country.
What was the second?
It's not lack of talent, it's to many mistakes.
that's Iowa's game man. They don't do anything special just wait for the other team to beat themselves. I love Denard, but man he needs to learn some patience. There was a lot of missed opportunity in the first half and I think Denard has gotten so used to the big plays that he started rushing things. If he could have calmed down and let plays develop it would have been a closer score throughout.
I think this game revealed that Denard has severe limitations right now as a passer. Brian loves to calculate downfield success rate and compare Denard's best games (against poor competition) to some of Henne's best games but few of Denard's passes early in the season were really tough ones.
I think a Tate/Denard rotation could be more productive.
Which Brian acknowledges. I think the limitations of that stat are pretty clear.
Yet, Iowa outgained Michigan on a per play basis: 6.4 to 6.1.
michigan dominated the stats. not the game.
Michigan miscues lost this game
Bad kicks that cost the team 3 points
Bad kick out of bounds after Forcier had rallied the team to within 7
Bad pick etc
That 4th quarter rally was simply amazing to watch and it was a shame it fell just short, it shows what potential there is on this team when the offense isn't making silly, stupid mistakes
was killing me. If I am the special team coach, I'd be furious at Broukezien for kicking the ball out of bound, not once but twice. Iowa KR aren't dangerous like Keshawn Martin. Both kickoff gave Iowa two outstanding field positions.
I am baffled that he did it two times in a fucking row.. seriously kicking isn't that hard. I can't believe he pulled the ball that far both times. He def needs to work on his balance when he kicks off.
That would bring our grand total to 1, since we don't have one.
We'll be alright.
and I thought we all agreed that turnovers were more or less random anyway.
Huh? What qualifies as "constant mistakes"? You mean a couple of turnovers late as the team tried to rally? Because UM had 3 turnovers against Oregon in 2007, and basically feel apart against Iowa in 2002 during homecoming, losing 34-9 in a game that wasn't even that close. This is a young team, and young teams make mistakes, especially when matched up against elite defenses and playing from behind. Just relax, and start worrying if UM doesn't improve its execution against worse defenses like the ones coming up.
At approximately 2:30pm I said these exact words to somebody:
Hah, Iowa will have to beat Iowa. Yeah, we may put up 28 points...but our "defense" (some would call it a terrorist plot against the university of michigan) will give up 38.
Neg me to death.
We had too many stupid personal fouls. We did beat ourselves today.
I don'tmind when we lose to a better team, because the better team usually DOES win. That wasn't the case today though. Mental errors, fuck they'll kill you and they sure did today. This team will be hungry when they walk into Pennsylvania in a couple weeks.
Fcuk, it's not like we're running a bunch of seniors out there game in and game out in the critical positions. Our qb's are god damned sophomores and last year at this time Stephen Hopkins was wondering what to do on Friday night after the game.
These guys are slowly maturing but they still are going to make mistakes. I hope this crap calms down when they blow up Penn State.
It's seems like basic fundamentals of football kill us each week. Bad tackling, at least 3 facemask penalties a game, and kicking out of bounds. All correctable things, but they always seem to happen. Bad luck or bad coaching? I don't know at this point.
It's hard to blame Greg Robinson and the special teams when we give the ball away so many times, but this defense is an embarrassment. How will it get better? which players are we developing into leaders? Who is growing as the season wears on? Yes, the D is young and has no real playmakers/ game changers on it. The scheme and play calling are not helping; what the young secondary needs is a pass rush to help them. A three man front will not deliver and we rarely blitz, so we're essentially hanging our weakest unit out to dry over and over again. But even then, the play calling is terrible and we have no field leaders to recognize formations and plays and make on field adjustments. This unit, and the special teams which are an absolute disaster, are killing the team. If we had an average defense, this team would be dangerous; as it stands, we're a mess. 3rd & 14, the unguarded slant for a TD, the blitzing into screens, blown coverages, terrible tackling and tackling angles, we could all go on all day. Greg has to go, sorry, but his inability to bring this team to an average or acceptable level in the conference cannot be tolerated anymore. We have the worst defense in the Big Ten. Can't have it anymore, he has to go.
So you acknowledge that Robinson has little talent to work with, then say he needs to go because he can't make that below-average talent into an average defense? You can't really have it both ways.
Martin is a beast, and the line is going to be better once the guys behind them improve. Kovacs has been solid, and I think Demens, Black, and Avery are going to be contributors going forward.
On that third Iowa passing TD, Floyd just gave the inside to the WR - that probably wasn't what GERG called for, so that falls on execution. Sure, guys missed tackles and made bad plays, but that also made some nice plays and really could have Rick Sixed 2-3 passes with some luck. This defense is trying its best, and while I agree that GERG has playcalling issues, I'm not about ready to throw in the towel with him until we see him with a decent talent level.
where Floyd got beat by a slant route for a TD. He should've been giving up the outside where he can use the sideline as an extra defender, not giving up the inside since he's covering him one on one with no help over the top.
I do agree and think he has little talent, or just young talent, I can't tell which. But my question is, knowing what the universe knows about this defense, that the secondary is a hot mess, how can we not scheme a support for a pass rush? Why do our corners rarely contain on the edge during the run? Iowa's yardage was only in the 300's because they constantly got good field position, so I can't blame him there, but I don't think this defense is physical enough up front, with little to no pass rush or blitzing at all, to put the secondary in a position to be successful. The only rushed throw I can think of was the corner blitz on 3rd down that Stanzi floated into the end zone up 35-28, setting up the field goal. With the players we have, we need coach to be lights out on play calling, we need a stout line that can hold the run (instead of Kovacs pushing up and getting buried on the corner, for example); if this D had a DE that could attack and get sacks, these QBs wouldn't be reading 3 different options on their feet and picking the D apart. We need more beef up front. Maybe it's just me, but this system seems to be a real problem; it's like RR in 2008-- he doesn't have the personnel, but he's running the system anyway, everything else be damned. I just don't see him being successful in this league with this scheme with these recruits. In my opinion, its time for new ideas; he'll be gone at the end of the year. No way RR can keep him. Nothing personal against him, I just don't see it working.
double post. apologies.
wait until next week. we lost to 2 very good teams, next week will show us how good this team is!
you're right! we don't play next week. we can't lose!!!
I hate bye weeks.
I just can't understand the mistackling. I mean I know the D is young, but in high school ball you are taught how to tackle, and everyone on that field was great in high school. I know the competition is greater in NCAA but tackling is tackling.
I think this game shows that while Denard has grown as a passer, he still has a long way to go. I still say he is the starter, but Tate definitely needs to have a role in the offense just to keep the defenses honest and exploit his solid accuracy.
a QB rotation of Denard and Tate for the rest of the season wouldn't bother me one bit. Tate is money throwing the football. A dollar says Denard would not have hit Hemingway on that 45 yard TD pass.
and special teams gaffe on the FG that was primarily responsible for our first half deficit. The hole was just too deep to climb out of against a good defense. And it becomes extra difficult when our defense has trouble getting 3 and outs (understatement of the year). For the second week in a row, Michigan beat Michigan.
That said, Wisconsin just scored to go up 13-0. Nice!
Well, blegh. Luckily, I was expecting 7 wins this year, and as long as we can beat Purdue PSU/Illinois, I think we have an absurd amount of potential for next year. Please don't transfer Tate, we need you.
We got our ass kicked!
What exactly is your definition of an ass-kicking?
Thank you for the awful comment, i'm sure we all feel better for it.......You sir are terrible. This team is making progress.
Last year's Iowa game had Tate struggling while injured. Denard came in and led a comeback only to throw a late interception to end it. Both were winnable if not for mistakes. Will we be arguing that Denard should have been in on the last series this year like we argued that Tate should have finished the game last year?
How many of those yards are attributable to Iowa being content to work the clock? Regardless of your thoughts on that question, an L is an L, and this team looks the same as last years. Big games, big moments, against good teams, and they shit the bed...
I guess we'd be undefeated in the MAC or Big East, but there are good teams in the Big 11 and we don't measure up.
It all started with Lewan being a jackass and costing us a 2nd and 3 which turned into a 2nd and 20. Then the biggest play of the game was probably the pick 6 that Kovacs dropped. Would have been 14-0 instead they get a TD on the next play to make it 7-7. Fumble at the 14, 3 interceptions...giving up 3rd and 8 TWICE on the last drive. So many opportunities to win this game. Lots to look forward to in the future, just gotta correct a few things. GO BLUE!!!!!
From the way I saw it Kovacs made a great play to block the pass rather than it being more of a case of him having it and dropping it. Yes, an interception would have helped but it did not cause the loss.
If we stopped beating ourselves.
Please don't say that Michigan beat themselves. Iowa beat Michigan. Yes, WE lost another BigTen game folks. Please don't be like the Notre Dame and Penn St. jackasses who can never give the other team credit after a loss. It's always "the refs beats us". or "we beat ourselves" It's pathetic. If thats what being a Michigan fan has come to, I'll throw my 35 years of pulling for the maize and blue into the toilet and start cheering for my local GVSU Lakers instead. I seriously don't understand the "brighter days are just ahead" crowd. What makes anyone think this defense is going to be championship caliber in a year or two? I just don't see it. Star ratings don't mean everything, but are we really going to build a championship defense out of the 3 star recruits we get as of late?
This is the excuse we're going with. Its easy to outgain a team when we give them great field position from turnovers and kicking the ball out of bounds. When the game was on the line, we couldn't stop them. Regardless of how long the field was.
Michigan lost, but it's all right... they dominated the stat sheet.
If it weren't for the missed tackles.... Michigan would have won.
If it weren't for the turnovers.... Michigan would have won.
If it weren't for the special teams... Michigan would have won.
If Michigan weren't so young... they would have won.
Michigan would have scored 50 points, but....
By all means hug that stat sheet close to your heart. I hope that at the end of the season, that doesn't represent the only bright spot we have.
Let me guess - are you an avid Mitch Albom reader? The "one-sentence paragraph" style is a giveaway.
You and the OP are basically saying the same thing. We lost the game more than Iowa won it.
I'd rather be a team that makes an opponent earn a victory than a team that gives it away. As you know this is not a one time occurance.
Personally, I wouldn't want to be either of those things. But anyway, we've had two games this season with a negative turnover margin. By definition, it isn't a one-time occurrence, but two times in seven games isn't necessarily a trend. We'll see what happens the rest of the season.
I'll accept a "Michigan beat Michigan" every once in a while, but it is becoming a trend, and with that, I have to point at the head man.
This type of thing is becoming culture, and the identity of our team. That is on the coaches to change.
There are far less experienced and far less talented teams out that who can hold on to the ball, and tackle better than we can.
I can point to at least 7 "Michigan beat Michigan" losses in the last 3 seasons. That's waaaaay too many for it to be considered coincidence.
I agree, it's not a coincidence. I think the turnovers have a lot to do with us starting new quarterbacks three years in a row. Remember how many INTs Stanzi threw last year when he was a new QB?
I feel better now knowing we didn't get beat.
So is M now 6-2 and bowl eligible since they beat themselves
Wouldn't it be 7-2 since we beat ourselves two weeks in a row?
That's because the team is not coached well, get a new one get more wins, that simple. This is Michigan, we are suppose to win every game. SO LETS DO IT! NO MORE EXCUSES
LMAO. Give me a break. This is nauseating.
Does the Umass game even count as a win? I thought only wins over 1A teams counted toward bowl eligibility.