BeatIt

October 4th, 2016 at 5:55 AM ^

everytime a tosu player is injured its immediatley up as a topic here. only hours after an TOSU coach is involved in a accident its a topic here. you may want to go look over the last couple pages here.

Joined: 06/11/2016

MGoPoints: 930

ryebreadboy

October 3rd, 2016 at 10:37 PM ^

I actually wouldn't mind at all if we had someone do an in-depth recap of all of their games. They are far and away our #1 rival and therefore of interest (and I doubt i'm alone amongst the readership). If someone with significantly more football knowledge than me wanted to do that as a diary series I'm sure it'd be well-received.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 12/02/2010

MGoPoints: 5946

Padog

October 3rd, 2016 at 10:15 PM ^

There were a few blatant errors.
Higdon is injured, he spent a paragraph talking about that.
The Special Teams were not horrible, only one phase was. Our punting was actually quite good. And the two false starts should've been penalties on Wisconsin.
Other than that it was a good article.

Joined: 08/27/2010

MGoPoints: 8510

LSAClassOf2000

October 3rd, 2016 at 10:39 PM ^

It also means that the Wolverine defense doesn’t need much statistical contribution from Jabrill Peppers to still completely dominate an opponent. We wanted to know how the Michigan defense would fare against a power running team, and now we have a bit of an idea.

A good read as it typically is - I will never understand the inability of some to at least take in a different perspective - and I tend to agree with the conclusion here. Peppers can have one of his quieter games and we can still have our way in at least one phase of the game with Wisconsin even with another phase of the game effectively non-functional. If we look at this as a moment in the progression we expect with Harbaugh, that tends to bode well. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130603

OC Alum91

October 3rd, 2016 at 11:54 PM ^

Proper perspective is that we should feel good about beating a top 10 team, but not get too excited. The score was close, and a team that had a better quarterback or passing attack could have taken advantage of coverage lapses. Or a that we could have had a few more interceptions. Also, the implication of the Badgers only putting up 178 yards vs GA State (vs the past one running for 600 yds on Nebraska) is that this Wiscy team is just an OK running team. Clearly a smug stance, but a good counterbalance to the writeups by UM fans.

Joined: 02/05/2015

MGoPoints: 1528

M-Dog

October 4th, 2016 at 9:39 AM ^

Also this:

The Wolverines were just 3-of-15 on third downs and converted just 1-for-11 when Speight dropped back to pass. He was sacked three times on those drop backs.

Yikes.  I knew it was pretty bad, but not that bad.

We have some serious work to do before we start making reservations to the CFP.

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 257385

JNQ_GOBLUE_79

October 3rd, 2016 at 11:54 PM ^

I agree that a "slightly above average performance" by a QB would have put 21 points up against us.  The only big miss was the play where Stribling fell down.  He perhaps missed some throws that would have been first downs, but what are the odds that those drives would have ended with anything other than a punt 3 plays later?

Joined: 07/09/2009

MGoPoints: 812

Hard-Baughlls

October 3rd, 2016 at 11:56 PM ^

Completely ignores the missed field goals until getting to the special teams section.

This was not the usual 14-7 game.  It should have been at least 20-7, if we hit 2 of 3 of those kicks (not an unrealistic expectation).  We outgained them in yardage 3 to 1, but the write up makes it as if Wisconsin was 1 play away from winning the game.

Sure, they were 1 missed pass from tying the game, but we were 3 missed field goals away from covering the spread comfortably.  

At the end of the day, all that matters is the final score....but this game was not nearly as close as 14-7 and the author doesn't really make that clear until late in the post

Joined: 09/28/2016

MGoPoints: 6637

Laser Wolf

October 4th, 2016 at 12:58 AM ^

This didn't work for you in the intro paragraphs?

"They only won by a touchdown, but in this game that was pretty much a two-score margin."

Joined: 07/09/2008

MGoPoints: 33415

BeatIt

October 4th, 2016 at 7:10 AM ^

he's still 2 years away imo, of being a very well balanced team. your OL is the biggest issue i se as well as the number of great skill players. by my count you have about 5-6 great skill players. osu may have 15. its a process rebuilding after a coaching change. m fans should be grateful that Hoke at least recruited well.

 

PS possibly 1 more year depending on the 17&18 classes

Joined: 06/11/2016

MGoPoints: 930

BlueMetal

October 4th, 2016 at 10:03 AM ^

The guy tries to be fair and balanced but his inner demon just won't let him. If I hadn't watched the M game and read that article I would come away feeling like Michigan was lucky to get a win. It reads as though we have a very good defense and our offense is mediocre at best. Mentions that Wisconsin could've scored 21 with above average QB play. Hornibrook has been pretty solid this season in his admittedly small sample size so it's quite likely that Michigan is the reason the QB play was below average. He missed a couple throws he could've had. Above average QBs will usually miss a couple throws they could've had, too. The fact is Michigan offense out this team in position to win this game easily and if the defense hadn't been playing lights out would've likely played things a little differently down near the red zone. Michigan's Offense isn't going to light up the scoreboard but 14 points on a good defense isn't exactly the ceiling either.

Joined: 03/15/2013

MGoPoints: 5180